2C or 3C

[HockeyHarry]

I agree Canucks need a 3rd line center....but i think Canucks really really need a top6 highend Scoring Winger.
But thats just opinion.

[Elias Pettersson]

8 hours ago, Schmautzie said:

 

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”.

Toffoli has 2 assists in the playoffs. He’s not exactly lighting it up when it counts. He’s one of the main reasons Toronto is on the verge of getting to the 2nd round. His scoring has completely dried up along with the rest of his team. 

[Elias Pettersson]

21 minutes ago, HockeyHarry said:

I agree Canucks need a 3rd line center....but i think Canucks really really need a top6 highend Scoring Winger.
But thats just opinion.

I would agree. It’s easier to find a winger than a centre. The Canucks will have to draft a centre unless they want to overpay in free agency. 
 

Beniers would be a dream if we end up top 2. If not I’m hoping McTavish is there at 9 or 10. 
 

Pearson  Horvat  Podkolzin  would be a great shutdown line. If Miller plays centre we would need a winger for Petey and Brock and also a winger for Miller and Hoglander. I’m not sure Kole Lind is that guy. I think we need more speed on the wing. A player like Virtanen without the baggage would be ideal. Too bad he didn’t work out. Ideally he would have been the perfect winger for Miller and Hoglander. 

[deus.ex.makina]

meh i dont like the idea to spread talent all over the top 9. i would stack up the 2 first lines, and play with 1A and 1B. When those line are on the ice, you have to be sure the will generate some scoring threat.

 

my roster and our needs :

 

Miller Petersson Podkolzin

Hoglander Horvat Boeser

Pearson 3C Lockwood

Motte Beagle Highmore

Graovac if Beagle is out.

 

so we need 3C from trade/signing.

even if you draft Kent Johnson (which is ok for me) he will join in 2 years.

 

 

[qwijibo]

2 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Toffoli has 2 assists in the playoffs. He’s not exactly lighting it up when it counts. He’s one of the main reasons Toronto is on the verge of getting to the 2nd round. His scoring has completely dried up along with the rest of his team. 

Your point? You’re judging his value on a 5 game segment? It’s entirely possible he’s battling an injury. Montreal played 5 games every 8 days for the last 5 weeks of the season. They’re nursing a lot of injuries. He scored 28 goals in 52 games this season.  I’d think that’s the more important thing to look at 

[86Viking]

On 5/28/2021 at 10:38 AM, 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? 

Horvat is better than a #3C tho and his salary already reflects that, let alone in 2 years when he is going to want a big raise. In a no cap world I totally agree play Bo #3 and give him PP and PK time still given him 15-20 regular minutes a night.

 

I also don't mind just having Petey as a winger, he is lanky and looks like will always be undersized weight wise for his frame. Which to me is only going to be a glaring problem when he gets tough playoff matchups down the road.

 

JT and Bo as the top 2 C's with petey being able to slot into the middle if injuries occured. I like how Tampa has built their team, tons of C who have shifted to play wing to make room for them all on the roster.

 

That is also another big reason why a C to me is a far better choice than a LHD with our 1st round pick this year

[kloubek]

On 5/28/2021 at 2:09 PM, oldnews said:

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.

This. I understand the thought with him typically going up against the other teams best line, but he needs to be in 2c for optics if nothing else.

 

Miller, on the other hand, said he loves playing C.

 

We do have options. 

[DownUndaCanuck]

Horvat is too good for a 3C spot, he needs to play more minutes than just 15 a night and it's quite tricky to balance lines if he's out there against opposing team's top lines (who play 18-20 minutes a night). If anything, having a 2C shutdown/scoring line is best because we can match them up against top lines and he can shut them down, score opportunistic offence and also kill penalties and rack up minutes on the PP. Putting him at 3C, he'll hardly get any time against top lines. 

 

Usually the 3rd and 4th lines just play against each other, very rarely do you have a 3rd line match up against a 1st line (or if that is the case all game long, they'll play similar minutes). Putting Bo on a 3rd line is a waste of his talents and it means someone like Miller or Petey will have to defend against top lines which would get ugly.

 

Miller was fairly rubbish last season so could be a case for him to drop to the 3C but then we waste his offence because he'll only get around 15 mins a night (albeit against very weak defences), but that is the other option if we have someone else to play on our top line.

 

With Beagle possibly out all season, the logical move is to have Sutter as our main cornerstone bottom-6 center (likely 3C based on minutes) and replace the 4C with someone like Highmore, Graovac etc. but Sutter is only getting older and we have no decent 3rd line center solution (which a lot of teams are struggling with at the moment).

[Arrow 1983]

On 5/28/2021 at 10:38 AM, 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? 

A third line C will be a third line C because he will not make as much as Horvat otherwise the label doesn't matter. 

 

The truth is Horvat produces at a 2nd line center rate. 

 The Canucks  literally can not afford to pay more to another center then they are to Horvat it isn't in the cap space budget. Therefore unless they can fill the spot with a cheap younger guy who ends up producing more then Horvat, Horvat is the 2nd line center. The can pay a Vet 4mill but the likelihood of him getting more points then Horvat is slim otherwise he would have probably signed elsewhere for more.

 

My pick is Michael Grandland at 4-4.5mill for 4 years. Give him term and he might come here

[Arrow 1983]

On 5/28/2021 at 10:50 AM, EmilyM said:

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?

Michael Grandlund is a UFA he is my pick 

 

sign him for 4-4.5mill for 4 years give him term and he will come. Everyone should check him out

[Disgruntler]

I love Miller on the boards. Keep him on the wing.

[aGENT]

7 hours ago, Arrow 1983 said:

My pick is Michael Grandland at 4-4.5mill for 4 years. Give him term and he might come here

You spell Boone Jenner funny.

[Guest]

On 5/28/2021 at 10:38 AM, 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? 

Good question OP.  

 

You can label Horvat's matchup line whatever you'd like but the fact is that they will get A LOT of minutes because they'll be out on the ice whenever the other team's top line is playing.  

 

I do agree with you though that we should look to get a center with some more offensive upside.  

 

One more detail that I've been harping on for a while, but for me Highmore has been found money and I really liked seeing him on a line with Horvat and Pearson.  For me that's a good matchup line that can chip in with a goal.  

 

[Sedinyoureyesontheprize]

On 5/28/2021 at 10:48 AM, 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.

 

 

 

 

 

 

not to pigeonhole Bo into this role cuz I think he has more offence in his game yet.. to answer your questions 
 

1)let’s debunk this myth right here.  offence comes from commitment to playing good defence, and Bo does that well considering the matchups he’s been getting and he’s managed to score goals at a 20+ clip while doing getting 40+ points 6 of the last 7 seasons. Of course he’s also gotten beat on some plays defensively while he’s playing against the toughest matchups every night but that’s the nature of the game, he’s improved on the +\- side too which is a reflection of goals for/goals against. In a 3C shutdown role (if that’s what you are suggesting) Bo would be doing exactly what he’s been doing and the results about the same or better

 

 

2) Like you mention he needs play makers, that can get him the puck in spots where either he can break into the o zone with speed dangle and shoot or play down low cycling and set Bo up in the slot. playing this way plays to Bos strength. There are several candidates to play with Bo IMO. Hoglander, Pearson, Poldkozin, Lockwood, Hughes, Juolevi to name a few
 

He’s also not a slouch as a passer himself. In each of the 7 years he’s played half of his point totals have been from assists. 
 

3) the idea behind this move would be to give us 3 legitimate lines that are offensive every shift, and responsible defensively. As you suggest We need 1 legitimate winger top 6 material that is sure to contribute  at a first or second line winger rate. But I also think we need another winger who produces at 2nd or 3rd line clip. 

 

? -EP- BB

 

? -JTM-VP

 

TP-BH-NH

JB-MT-TM/WL/ZM/JVE