2C or 3C

[UKNuck96]

So there is a lot of talk about how we need a 3c going forward and a lot of trade proposals or ways we could acquire one;

 

The way I look at it is we have a perfect 3C in Horvat if we want to run three strong lines. 1st becomes more offence orientated, 2nd balances 3rd more defensive but all three would still be able to score and play. 
 

We would still use BH on the PP and PK and on matchups so even though he would be ‘3C’ he would still probably clock up more time than 1st line. 
 

based on what we need I would prefer to look for a player that has offensive upsides than looking to find someone to plug the 3rd line option?

 

what are people’s thoughts on this? 

[tas]

4 minutes ago, UKNuck96 said:

So there is a lot of talk about how we need a 3c going forward and a lot of trade proposals or ways we could acquire one;

 

The way I look at it is we have a perfect 3C in Horvat if we want to run three strong lines. 1st becomes more offence orientated, 2nd balances 3rd more defensive but all three would still be able to score and play. 
 

We would still use BH on the PP and PK and on matchups so even though he would be ‘3C’ he would still probably clock up more time than 1st line. 
 

based on what we need I would prefer to look for a player that has offensive upsides than looking to find someone to plug the 3rd line option?

 

what are people’s thoughts on this? 

benning's thoughts are he wants to add middle six speed and offensive depth, so the labels don't really matter imo. 

[J-P]

2 minutes ago, UKNuck96 said:

So there is a lot of talk about how we need a 3c going forward and a lot of trade proposals or ways we could acquire one;

 

The way I look at it is we have a perfect 3C in Horvat if we want to run three strong lines. 1st becomes more offence orientated, 2nd balances 3rd more defensive but all three would still be able to score and play. 
 

We would still use BH on the PP and PK and on matchups so even though he would be ‘3C’ he would still probably clock up more time than 1st line. 
 

based on what we need I would prefer to look for a player that has offensive upsides than looking to find someone to plug the 3rd line option?

 

what are people’s thoughts on this? 

I like the idea and have always thought Horvat is the perfect 3C on a contender.

Questions though:

1) Is he good defensively? Both eye test and stats paint a torn picture imo... I would say yes though if not being relied upon to score

 

2) Who does he play with? He's not a playmaker so needs a player like hogs or baertschi to set him up (good shooter though so should be on PP)

 

3) Who is the 2C? Miller? Need at least one more winger to make that work

 

But yeah, overall I love the idea and you could argue Bo is too good for 3C, but if you want to win these days I think that's what you need to get three scoring lines.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[EmilyM]

10 minutes ago, UKNuck96 said:

So there is a lot of talk about how we need a 3c going forward and a lot of trade proposals or ways we could acquire one;

 

The way I look at it is we have a perfect 3C in Horvat if we want to run three strong lines. 1st becomes more offence orientated, 2nd balances 3rd more defensive but all three would still be able to score and play. 
 

We would still use BH on the PP and PK and on matchups so even though he would be ‘3C’ he would still probably clock up more time than 1st line. 
 

based on what we need I would prefer to look for a player that has offensive upsides than looking to find someone to plug the 3rd line option?

 

what are people’s thoughts on this? 

Of course anyone would prefer a scoring C over a plug, but the issues are: What scorer is available? What do we have to give up to get him? How much is he going to cost against the cap?

[King Heffy]

Could draft Johnson if he's still available and get a cheaper bandaid for a year or two .

[Fanuck]

Many people believe the organization needs defence depth and are suggesting JB target the highest rated d-man at the upcoming draft.

I would argue that we need center depth even more than defence depth and should probably be looking at that position at the draft. 

Other than Petey and BoHo we literally have no 'natural' NHL quality centermen on the roster or in the system other than Beagle who may/may not be able to continue his career. 

[tas]

24 minutes ago, J-P said:

I like the idea and have always thought Horvat is the perfect 3C on a contender.

Questions though:

1) Is he good defensively? Both eye test and stats paint a torn picture imo... I would say yes though if not being relied upon to score

 

2) Who does he play with? He's not a playmaker so needs a player like hogs or baertschi to set him up (good shooter though so should be on PP)

 

3) Who is the 2C? Miller? Need at least one more winger to make that work

 

But yeah, overall I love the idea and you could argue Bo is too good for 3C, but if you want to win these days I think that's what you need to get three scoring lines.

 

 

 

 

 

 

yeah. I think it's interesting that we still underrated Bo this way. he's averaged 26 goals and 58 points per 82 games over the last 5 seasons while taking most of the hardest matchups. 

 

I think he's closer to a 1c than a 3c. 

[J-P]

1 minute ago, tas said:

yeah. I think it's interesting that we still underrated Bo this way. he's averaged 26 goals and 58 points per 82 games over the last 5 seasons while taking most of the hardest matchups. 

 

I think he's closer to a 1c than a 3c. 

Yeah he's a 2C on an average team. And he could be 1C on a great team if 2C and 3C are almost as good. That's not the point though...

[PunjabiCanucks]

We have quality centres imo if we roll 3 lines

 

____ Pettersson Boeser

____ Miller Hoglander

Pearson Horvat Poldkozin - sick shut down line imo 

 

Our biggest concern on forwards is lack of depth on LW (Ovi anyone :P)

 

 

[VegasCanuck]

We need to roll 3 lines. If you don't find a way to do that, you wind up with your best players, exhausted when you really need them in the playoffs.

 

See Edmonton as an example. I said in their last game against us, in the game thread, that I would be really concerned if I'm the GM of Edmonton, that the team can't seem to score and win unless McDavid is on the ice and playing 30+ minutes a night. It's not a good recipe for long-term success.

[J.I.A.H.N]

I think you have to have 4 #3 or better centers on the team for your teams top 3 lines

So to me, that means signing another 1 short term ...aka 3 years

 

At #9 at the draft..........one of Johnson, McTavish, Sillinger or Svechkov would be my prospect choices, with the first 3 being touted as offensive, and Svechkov being touted as more defensive, although lately I have been reading that he has solid offensive skills.

 

So if we are drafting a center......that is my list where we are.

 

But short term.......I am signing Wennberg 4 years @ 3.5 to 4 Million

[dm_ranger]

20 minutes ago, PunjabiCanucks said:

We have quality centres imo if we roll 3 lines

 

____ Pettersson Boeser

____ Miller Hoglander

Pearson Horvat Poldkozin - sick shut down line imo 

 

Our biggest concern on forwards is lack of depth on LW (Ovi anyone :P)

 

 

completely agree on the issue.  I think the best we can hope for with cap issues is something like:

 

Boeser - Petey -- Hog

_____  -- Miller - Podz

Pearson - Horvat - Highmore

Motte - Boyd -- MacEwen

 

[aGENT]

40 minutes ago, Fanuck said:

.Other than Petey and BoHo we literally have no 'natural' NHL quality centermen on the roster or in the system other than Beagle who may/may not be able to continue his career. 

 

While we likely won't know for a few years if any are 'NHL level' (name of the game with prospects), we do have Kunz, Zlodoyev, Karlsson, Costmar and Zhukenov. As well as both Lind and Jasek trending well as C converted W'ers.

 

No, we don't have any 'blue chip' guys there, and as such, I too would be perfectly happy to add one with our first but we're also not completely barren either.

[GB5]

This is worth consideration but I think Bo is capable of 70 points if the team had a genuine 3c who could stay healthy for 80 games and take that roll away from Bo. 

 

I'd hate to lock that scoring up in a checking role.

[aGENT]

I'd really like to see us get through this year, whether that's playing Petey, Horvat and Miller at C, bringing back Sutter cheaper short term, a cheaper UFA, simply going with some mix of Graovac/Boyd/Jasek/Lind etc.

 

Then target Boone Jenner next offseason when we have cap opening up.

[Schmautzie]

57 minutes ago, PunjabiCanucks said:

We have quality centres imo if we roll 3 lines

 

____ Pettersson Boeser

____ Miller Hoglander

Pearson Horvat Poldkozin - sick shut down line imo 

 

Our biggest concern on forwards is lack of depth on LW (Ovi anyone :P)

 

 

 

54 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said:

We need to roll 3 lines. If you don't find a way to do that, you wind up with your best players, exhausted when you really need them in the playoffs.

 

See Edmonton as an example. I said in their last game against us, in the game thread, that I would be really concerned if I'm the GM of Edmonton, that the team can't seem to score and win unless McDavid is on the ice and playing 30+ minutes a night. It's not a good recipe for long-term success.

I agree with both of you guys. Three balanced scoring lines with Miller playing centre is the way to go. The sad thing is that keeping Toffoli would have given us the depth to do it if Benning hadn’t “run out of time”.

[PunjabiCanucks]

22 minutes ago, GarthButcher5 said:

This is worth consideration but I think Bo is capable of 70 points if the team had a genuine 3c who could stay healthy for 80 games and take that roll away from Bo. 

 

I'd hate to lock that scoring up in a checking role.

Just for sake or arguement we don't go the offensive route and dont have Miller centering his own line. If we can find a good shutdown centre. Horvat could definetly score more goals / points.

 

One of the reasons we sucked away is because top teams didn't match themselves against Horvat due to his shutdown capabilities and would play against the lotto line instead.

 

Horvat could be a 70 p guy, and still shutdown top lines if need be depending on the match up.

 

Imagine if teams had to decide between Horvat or a Horvat 2.0 to match up against. 

 

WE NEED TO CLONE HORVATS 

[4petesake]

1 hour ago, VegasCanuck said:

We need to roll 3 lines. If you don't find a way to do that, you wind up with your best players, exhausted when you really need them in the playoffs.

 

See Edmonton as an example. I said in their last game against us, in the game thread, that I would be really concerned if I'm the GM of Edmonton, that the team can't seem to score and win unless McDavid is on the ice and playing 30+ minutes a night. It's not a good recipe for long-term success.

I like the trio of Petey, Miller and Horvat for the top three and would be looking to poach someone with entry draft protection issues like Jason Dickinson in Dallas or Andrew Copp in Winnipeg. Both have good size and decent skating with a little bit of offensive upside. The downside is both will be RFA and Copp could get pricey so Dickinson would be my first choice.

[Ghostsof1915]

I'm always in favour of nabbing Boone for the Canucks. 

It's just could we afford him? 

[oldnews]

call it what you want - 2/3C semantics

 

Horvat was second among all forwards in ice time.

 

He won 648 faceoffs - 2nd on the team was 279.

 

He's the "2C" on this team - and that's extremely unlikely to change.

 

If people want a more secondary scoring oriented 3rd line - that may become increasingly more possible/likely -as the youth develop and the team 'shelters' or tilts the ice less for them. 

 

But Horvat a "3C" I think would misrepresent his role - how weighted his role is.  It sounds like the idea is the he 'should' play a more exclusively defensive "3C" type roll.

 

But perhaps a good analogy here - is Kesler. He may be a prototypical '3C' type - but he was undoubtedly the 2C.