[Trade] Canucks trade Adam Gaudette to Blackhawks for Matthew Highmore

[Gurn]

22 minutes ago, Me_ said:

Throwing your mom under the bus.

 

Class.

 

[oldnews]

1 hour ago, iinatcc said:

 

The thing about Highmore is that he ceiling seems to be at being a 4th line player. Which is fine but trading away a potential Top 9 (or even Top 6) forward for a 4th line player is not good asset management in management's part. Ok one might say Benning had to sell low because Gaudatte probably asked for a trade and the looming expansion draft, then again we need to ask why did Gaudette ask for a trade? Why was he unhappy in Vancouver? 

 

the bolded part is oversimplified - armchair conceptions of "asset management" rarely line up with what actual franchises do - how NHL teams make their decisions (ie they don't obsess over fantasy asset bank accounts)

 

I have no idea where you get the 'probably asked for a trade speculation' - or why that would be more relevent than Gaudette simply not really fitting anywhere in the lineup - and probably even less so moving forward.

 

it's the usual CDC trade thread dynamic imo - over-rate the asset we traded, under-rate the return - protest to overblown proportions, prematurely  - rarely bother to even scratch the surface - let alone wait to see how the players work out = call it a loss instantly, in typical knee jerk fashion. 

Hodgson, Shinkaruk....Vanek, Miller........rinse and repeat.

[Elias Pettersson]

13 hours ago, Drakrami said:

lol whenever you guys cant respond to a valid point you change the subject. Reminds me of my mom. Points addressed to Highmore/Gaudette, bottom 6 - all ignored. Except, let's comment on where and how I watch hockey? 

 

Yeah, learn more about the NHL if you think Highmore/Motte/MacEwen is a good bottom six and fit to win the Stanley Cup (which is what we are after).  

On which planet is Motte not a 4th line player on a Stanley Cup Champion team?  And what about Beagle?  Didn't he actually win a Cup playing on the 4th line?

[Attila Umbrus]

1 hour ago, iinatcc said:

A lot to take in here but let me just say I will not compare Gaudette with Virtanen ... at least not yet. Gaudette's 2nd full season got him 33 points so there is still a lot of room to grow, I think Jake Virtanen is going to be who he is right now.

 

The thing about Highmore is that he ceiling seems to be at being a 4th line player. Which is fine but trading away a potential Top 9 (or even Top 6) forward for a 4th line player is not good asset management in management's part. Ok one might say Benning had to sell low because Gaudatte probably asked for a trade and the looming expansion draft, then again we need to ask why did Gaudette ask for a trade? Why was he unhappy in Vancouver? 

 

I guess it all boils down to asset management ... remember this is the player that Pierre Maguire told Canucks fans we should be excited about during a TSN interview. Going from that to this point just feel demoralizing as a Canucks fan. 

For sure, jury is still out on Gaudette, but he is getting close to that territory. I honestly do hope he does break out there. I never wish any player ill will...unless it's Brad Marchand 

[iinatcc]

1 hour ago, oldnews said:

the bolded part is oversimplified - armchair conceptions of "asset management" rarely line up with what actual franchises do - how NHL teams make their decisions (ie they don't obsess over fantasy asset bank accounts)

 

I have no idea where you get the 'probably asked for a trade speculation' - or why that would be more relevent than Gaudette simply not really fitting anywhere in the lineup - and probably even less so moving forward.

 

it's the usual CDC trade thread dynamic imo - over-rate the asset we traded, under-rate the return - protest to overblown proportions, prematurely  - rarely bother to even scratch the surface - let alone wait to see how the players work out = call it a loss instantly, in typical knee jerk fashion. 

Hodgson, Shinkaruk....Vanek, Miller........rinse and repeat.

Actually I think a lot of people here are under valuing Adam Gaudette. The jury is still out but 33 pts last season and 4 pts in 6 games after getting traded to Chicago feels like another Jared McCann situation (another player that management gave up on only to end up being a 0.5 to 0.7 PPG player with the Pens).

 

The other factor of course is that Gaudette is a Hobey Baker award winner. You look at the history of the winners recently Makar, Eichel, Gaudreau, and now Cole Caufield looks to be something special for the Habs. So the winners of this award are an elite group. 

Edited May 9, 2021 by iinatcc

[MeanSeanBean]

27 minutes ago, iinatcc said:

Actually I think a lot of people here are under valuing Adam Gaudette. The jury is still out but 33 pts last season and 4 pts in 6 games after getting traded to Chicago feels like another Jared McCann situation (another player that management gave up on only to end up being a 0.5 to 0.7 PPG player with the Pens).

 

The other factor of course is that Gaudette is a Hobey Baker award winner. You look at the history of the winners recently Makar, Eichel, Gaudreau, and now Cole Caufield looks to be something special for the Habs. So the winners of this award are an elite group. 

I just had this discussion with my buddy about McCann the other day. He didn't figure it out until 2 teams had traded him. Good for him for figuring out what he needed to do in the league to be successful, but without being let go by 2 teams early in his career I don't think he would have ever figured it out in the way he has now.

 

I don't think Gaudette is currently a good comparison, because it interviews from him even since the trade I believe he overvalues himself and sees himself as a top 6 player. I agree with management in the conclusion he is not. Unless Gaudette comes to terms with his actual skill level and starts putting in much more work on other aspects of his game he won't achieve what McCann did.

 

The standout to me was his faceoffs. He was well aware of the chance he was going to receive playing the 3rd line center on the Canucks this season. He had an entire summer to focus on improving that aspect of his game and barely improved at all. I honestly think he improved each year just enough that the practice in games was the factor. Based off his rough 1% improvement each year, I find it hard to believe he was dedicating any time to faceoffs in the off season. That's an important part of play without the puck, and something he needs to focus on being a bottom 6 player. 

[Butters Stoch]

Highmore has been gifted 13-16mins/game and has been invisible with just 1 assist in 11 games so far. Very disappointing, even with the low expectations we had.

[iinatcc]

1 hour ago, shayster007 said:

I just had this discussion with my buddy about McCann the other day. He didn't figure it out until 2 teams had traded him. Good for him for figuring out what he needed to do in the league to be successful, but without being let go by 2 teams early in his career I don't think he would have ever figured it out in the way he has now.

.

There is some truth to that but then again it all goes back to player development. We talk about drafting and developing as Benning's strength but we sometimes forget that development is a totally different thing from drafting.

 

McCann not being able to develop within the Canucks organization is more an indictment on the organization's inability to develop their prospects more so on it being on the players. 

 

If anything isn't this why Benning brought in and overpaid these bottom 6 players in the organization? To create a culture for the young players? For McCann it was supposed to be from Suter, Dorsett, and Prust.

 

For Gaudette, Benning brought in Beagle, Roussel and also Suter. 

 

If there was a time these bottom 6 overpaid players "Intangibles" mattered with the development of guys like Gaudette and McCann.

[MeanSeanBean]

21 minutes ago, iinatcc said:

There is some truth to that but then again it all goes back to player development. We talk about drafting and developing as Benning's strength but we sometimes forget that development is a totally different thing from drafting.

 

McCann not being able to develop within the Canucks organization is more an indictment on the organization's inability to develop their prospects more so on it being on the players. 

 

If anything isn't this why Benning brought in and overpaid these bottom 6 players in the organization? To create a culture for the young players? For McCann it was supposed to be from Suter, Dorsett, and Prust.

 

For Gaudette, Benning brought in Beagle, Roussel and also Suter. 

 

If there was a time these bottom 6 overpaid players "Intangibles" mattered with the development of guys like Gaudette and McCann.

I think Benning is average at best at developing talent, personally. I think he's very good at scouting raw talent. Players like Petey developed themselves through sheer force of will. That kid doesn't have the mentality to fail. As does Hughes, it's a different mentality, but it's a self confidence to get better. The majority of our home runs picks like Rathbone, Hogs, ect, did they primary chunk of their development outside of the organization. Demko is honestly one of the few players on our team I would say the origination has done a hell of a job with developing. I would also say Lind so far and even Jasek, but still a lot of unknowns with those players.

[guntrix]

Many of the people who are being overly harsh on Gaudette after 2 seasons and who were willing to throw McCann under the bus after 1 season with the team were preaching patience with Virtanen after 7 years of disappointment. 
 

It’s a double standard luxury that comes with the benefits of being a home town boy I guess. 

[tas]

13 minutes ago, shayster007 said:

I think Benning is average at best at developing talent, personally. I think he's very good at scouting raw talent. Players like Petey developed themselves through sheer force of will. That kid doesn't have the mentality to fail. As does Hughes, it's a different mentality, but it's a self confidence to get better. The majority of our home runs picks like Rathbone, Hogs, ect, did they primary chunk of their development outside of the organization. Demko is honestly one of the few players on our team I would say the origination has done a hell of a job with developing. I would also say Lind so far and even Jasek, but still a lot of unknowns with those players.

bo? brock? stecher? markstrom? 

[Sedintwinpowersactivate]

1 hour ago, Butters Stoch said:

Highmore has been gifted 13-16mins/game and has been invisible with just 1 assist in 11 games so far. Very disappointing, even with the low expectations we had.

I like Highmores skating and compete level, but even your 4th line has to contribute some offensive in the 8-10 goals and 15-20 assist range.  Good teams like Tampa get production from every line.  Highmore has shown no offensive potential in the NHL thus far.  
 

I’m ok with JB giving up on Gaudette, because this had to be a big year for him and he disappointed badly.  I think JB put a lot of trust on Gaudette and Jake to continue to improve and fill the loss of Toffoli offensively.  I would say that those 2 players offered nothing in the first half of the season.  Talk about not seizing the opportunity.  The coaches and management spend countless hours with the players that we are not privy to.  Adam went and Jake would be gone as well if he wasn’t signed for too much smack for another season.

 

 I just expected a little more return than Highmore, perhaps more a player with some offensive upside.  The return not the timing was weird for me.

 

 

 

 

[oldnews]

2 hours ago, iinatcc said:

The other factor of course is that Gaudette is a Hobey Baker award winner. You look at the history of the winners recently Makar, Eichel, Gaudreau, and now Cole Caufield looks to be something special for the Habs. So the winners of this award are an elite group. 

funny you 'forgot' to mention Jimmy Vesey - another guy that's being complained about in this thread for producing nothing...

being in an "elite" group - means something - until it doesn't....ie. how does that 'membership' translate at the NHL level.

 

unfortunately that status is worth nothing in the real world market - or Vesey wouldn't have found himself on waivers.

 

The difference between McCann and Gaudette - is that McCann always had the makings of a two-way player - a natural center that could actually handle himself without the puck on his stick.   Gaudette needs to get on his horse in that sense, or as others have noted, risk becoming another Goldobin/Boucher (to use a few immediate examples).  Yeah - he has upside, but if you give it all back in vacancy without the puck, it aint worth much.

 

[oldnews]

6 minutes ago, guntrix said:

Many of the people who are being overly harsh on Gaudette after 2 seasons and who were willing to throw McCann under the bus after 1 season with the team were preaching patience with Virtanen after 7 years of disappointment. 
 

It’s a double standard luxury that comes with the benefits of being a home town boy I guess. 

cool stories - but just quote someone throwing McCann under the bus - or all you're doing is creating imaginary "many of the peoples" lol...

if you can correlate just two to fit your storyline that would be a start

otherwise, cool stories guntrix.

I don't see much "harshness" regarding Gaudette in here either - I see some questions of where he was supposed to fit in this group - do you have an answer for that?

[CBH1926]

Getting close to 100 pages about Gaudette and Highmore, couple of peripheral NHL players.

Neither of these two will make or break either one of the two teams.

[oldnews]

2 hours ago, iinatcc said:

For Gaudette, Benning brought in Beagle, Roussel and also Suter.

 

Those players were brought in "for Gaudette"?

That's an odd claim - a real overestimation imo of the importance of Gaudette.

I think those players were brought in for the entire young group - particularly young top 6 forwards - and young D.  Those guys eat hard minutes so that there are better conditions for the young players to be successful - to play to their strengths - without being in over their heads excessively.

 

Gaudette didn't command a top 6 spot - showed no signs of being able to be a succession plan at center - never evidenced an ability to play that role on the defensive side of the puck - and wasn't a particularly good fit on any shutdown unit.

 

People can fishbowl 4 points in Chicago - but as is always the case, it's the larger context, as a whole, that really matters when it comes to winning and losing games.

 

If those 4 pts are so significant - then so are his horrible goal metrics in those 6 games.

 

4.4 on ice goals against per 60 = the worst numbers of any Blackhawks forward. 

46.5% corsi - not exactly glowing 'possession' numbers either.

 

How many teams win NHL hockey games giving up 4.4 goals a game?  Not many.  3.5 for.  Bottom line = in spite of some production, they're getting beaten with him on the ice (goals for are only half the simple equation for winning - goals against the other).

 

Btw  - Highmore's numbers at 1.7 for, 2.1 against - with less than half the ozone starts of Gaudette (24.3%) - playing a shutdown role without NHL centers in the bottom six - giving up less than half the opposition scoring, less than half the negative gap in goal metrics...

Edited May 10, 2021 by oldnews

[MeanSeanBean]

2 hours ago, tas said:

bo? brock? stecher? markstrom? 

Sure, I'd give ya Bo, Brock and Marky. I wouldn't say Stretcher is part of that list. stilll average to me personally.

[wallstreetamigo]

2 hours ago, oldnews said:

Those players were brought in "for Gaudette"?

That's an odd claim - a real overestimation imo of the importance of Gaudette.

I think those players were brought in for the entire young group - particularly young top 6 forwards - and young D.  Those guys eat hard minutes so that there are better conditions for the young players to be successful - to play to their strengths - without being in over their heads excessively.

 

Gaudette didn't command a top 6 spot - showed no signs of being able to be a succession plan at center - never evidenced an ability to play that role on the defensive side of the puck - and wasn't a particularly good fit on any shutdown unit.

 

People can fishbowl 4 points in Chicago - but as is always the case, it's the larger context, as a whole, that really matters when it comes to winning and losing games.

 

If those 4 pts are so significant - then so are his horrible goal metrics in those 6 games.

 

4.4 on ice goals against per 60 = the worst numbers of any Blackhawks forward. 

46.5% corsi - not exactly glowing 'possession' numbers either.

 

How many teams win NHL hockey games giving up 4.4 goals a game?  Not many.  3.5 for.  Bottom line = in spite of some production, they're getting beaten with him on the ice (goals for are only half the simple equation for winning - goals against the other).

 

Btw  - Highmore's numbers at 1.7 for, 2.1 against - with less than half the ozone starts of Gaudette (24.3%) - playing a shutdown role without NHL centers in the bottom six - giving up less than half the opposition scoring, less than half the negative gap in goal metrics...

Isnt that a bit of a small sample size for either player?

[coryberg]

8 hours ago, iinatcc said:

The other factor of course is that Gaudette is a Hobey Baker award winner. You look at the history of the winners recently Makar, Eichel, Gaudreau, and now Cole Caufield looks to be something special for the Habs. So the winners of this award are an elite group. 

Move over Wayne Gretzky!

[Junkyard Dog]

0 points -3 in the last 4 games.