Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Are the Canucks too much of a Featherweight team to push through the playoffs?

Rate this topic


RU SERIOUS

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Junkyard Dog said:

Roussel would try but I am not sure he’d succeed as much as Mac in that regard. 

Roussel might get bought out...  those injuries have just completely cut his career down. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/12/2021 at 1:20 PM, RU SERIOUS said:

Interesting Fact that came out during yesterdays Donnie & Dahli Talk show, that the three heaviest teams (NYI, Tampa and LV) are in the final four (again) this year with Montreal being seventh heaviest team.   Meanwhile the Canucks are almost the Featherweight champions, being the second lightest team in the league.

 

Question becomes; Is this truly a factor in playoff success or can the Canucks actually push all the way thru the playoffs with a pack of tiny framed speed demons and regular season type finesse players, or will JB finally realize that they need to  "Bulk-up" with some size & grit to be able to move onto the promised land?

This honestly is the biggest hurdle for me getting pumped for next season. This combined with the fact 

that THEY, not Tryamkin, but the Canucks, essentially put a laughable offer forward so much so that 

Tryamkin would not negotiate further and the rest is history. 

 

HOW is that possible? How can we be that shortsighted as to not take negotiations with this guy seriously

ESPECIALLY the way the NHL is now trending!?!? HOW??? 

 

Tod Diamond did not mince words he was clear that Tryamkin put forward a very fair deal and agreed 

to a 1yr deal!?!? HOW?? How is this player NOT signed. 

 

This WILL bite us in the ass if he signs somewhere like ohhh lets say Edmonton would LOVE him, 

Vegas??? Yep they would give him a shot. Seattle???? LOL He walked for nothing and IF yes I realise

its an IF not a when, if he comes back to the NHL he will be an impact player and it will bite us in the

ass and he walked. for. nothing. 

 

Someone help me get over this colossal blunder because it SOUNDS like they went to try and

sign him and tried to hardball him and it backfired. 

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Shirotashi said:

This honestly is the biggest hurdle for me getting pumped for next season. This combined with the fact 

that THEY, not Tryamkin, but the Canucks, essentially put a laughable offer forward so much so that 

Tryamkin would not negotiate further and the rest is history. 

 

HOW is that possible? How can we be that shortsighted as to not take negotiations with this guy seriously

ESPECIALLY the way the NHL is now trending!?!? HOW??? 

 

Tod Diamond did not mince words he was clear that Tryamkin put forward a very fair deal and agreed 

to a 1yr deal!?!? HOW?? How is this player NOT signed. 

 

This WILL bite us in the ass if he signs somewhere like ohhh lets say Edmonton would LOVE him, 

Vegas??? Yep they would give him a shot. Seattle???? LOL He walked for nothing and IF yes I realise

its an IF not a when, if he comes back to the NHL he will be an impact player and it will bite us in the

ass and he walked. for. nothing. 

 

Someone help me get over this colossal blunder because it SOUNDS like they went to try and

sign him and tried to hardball him and it backfired. 

yikes.

 

a borderline nhl player used the canucks as leverage for a better khl deal. that's all. he wants to stay in russia. he will never come over. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, tas said:

yikes.

 

a borderline nhl player used the canucks as leverage for a better khl deal. that's all. he wants to stay in russia. he will never come over. 

You have to allow your eyes to do the judging. I thought he was solid, not inspirational difference make but one that did have a lot of physical impact on games, that's what i saw and to be honest JB did make him an offer at the end of his first season so all in all he wasn't THAT bad. Now either Tryamkin or his agent thought better of him than JB because they changed their minds, but it wasn't their initial assessment for sure 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Me_ said:

The Canucks should be dismantled almost completely. No way does everyone play the same after contacting so much Covid.

 

One or two players on a team, fine. But 90% hit, unrecoverable.

So, keep Eriksson, Roussel, Myers and Holtby?

 

                                 regards,  G.

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Shirotashi said:

This honestly is the biggest hurdle for me getting pumped for next season. This combined with the fact 

that THEY, not Tryamkin, but the Canucks, essentially put a laughable offer forward so much so that 

Tryamkin would not negotiate further and the rest is history. 

 

HOW is that possible? How can we be that shortsighted as to not take negotiations with this guy seriously

ESPECIALLY the way the NHL is now trending!?!? HOW??? 

 

Tod Diamond did not mince words he was clear that Tryamkin put forward a very fair deal and agreed 

to a 1yr deal!?!? HOW?? How is this player NOT signed. 

 

This WILL bite us in the ass if he signs somewhere like ohhh lets say Edmonton would LOVE him, 

Vegas??? Yep they would give him a shot. Seattle???? LOL He walked for nothing and IF yes I realise

its an IF not a when, if he comes back to the NHL he will be an impact player and it will bite us in the

ass and he walked. for. nothing. 

 

Someone help me get over this colossal blunder because it SOUNDS like they went to try and

sign him and tried to hardball him and it backfired. 

Tod Diamond (Tryamkins agent) said it was a fair 1 year deal….? 
Was Tryamkin a free agent after a year? And what was the numbers?

You may be right that they tried to hard ball him, and it back fired, but before going off on management, maybe we should see some numbers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, spook007 said:

Tod Diamond (Tryamkins agent) said it was a fair 1 year deal….? 
Was Tryamkin a free agent after a year? And what was the numbers?

You may be right that they tried to hard ball him, and it back fired, but before going off on management, maybe we should see some numbers?

He made it sound like they lowballed him so low that he was insulted and shut the door. 

He said they made a "very fair" offer for a 1 year deal. My problem is that even its 1.5 million 

ITS 1 YEAR BRO! Diamond literally said that they looked at the deal and after escrow and 

taxes it wasnt worth his time. How could we have botched this? I just cant get my head around it.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, tas said:

yikes.

 

a borderline nhl player used the canucks as leverage for a better khl deal. that's all. he wants to stay in russia. he will never come over. 

i actually hope your right tbh it would go a long way to healing my broken heart I man crushed

pretty hard on him i cant handle these swings haha.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Shirotashi said:

He made it sound like they lowballed him so low that he was insulted and shut the door. 

He said they made a "very fair" offer for a 1 year deal. My problem is that even its 1.5 million 

ITS 1 YEAR BRO! Diamond literally said that they looked at the deal and after escrow and 

taxes it wasnt worth his time. How could we have botched this? I just cant get my head around it.

My guess is they wanted more term… In one year Trym would be a free agent, and basically  use Canucks as a show room window. 
Imagine him leaving Canucks after 1 year, should he be having a decent showing… who knows. Point being, what the agent say is fair, doesn’t normally look fair to the other side… after all, he’s got the players interest in mind. 
I wanted Trym back as well, but that has gone, and hopefully they find another solution to our defence instead. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, spook007 said:

My guess is they wanted more term… In one year Trym would be a free agent, and basically  use Canucks as a show room window. 
Imagine him leaving Canucks after 1 year, should he be having a decent showing… who knows. Point being, what the agent say is fair, doesn’t normally look fair to the other side… after all, he’s got the players interest in mind. 
I wanted Trym back as well, but that has gone, and hopefully they find another solution to our defence instead. 

I wonder if the Covid season and the whole Virtanen thing made him wanna circle back around

to it later. If he wanted to just come back to the NHL just not the Canucks he could have waited 

for the contract to expire and sign somewhere else. I wonder if its ever happened that a player

refuses an offer but signs with the team later on down the road. Fyck I just cant quit him lol.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shirotashi said:

He made it sound like they lowballed him so low that he was insulted and shut the door. 

He said they made a "very fair" offer for a 1 year deal. My problem is that even its 1.5 million 

ITS 1 YEAR BRO! Diamond literally said that they looked at the deal and after escrow and 

taxes it wasnt worth his time. How could we have botched this? I just cant get my head around it.

I think someone on the tryamkin thread did the calculation of what he would need to earn just to have the same pay due to escrow and taxes and if I remember correctly it would need to be a minimum of 2.5m and that’s to remain the same. 

 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Tom Sestito said:

Up front, not at all.

 

On defense? Yes.

 

Hughes is tiny, Rathbone is tiny, Myers plays tiny and bleeds goals, Edler isn’t overly physical at his age. 
 

 

I would say up front in the top 6 not at all.

 

But bottom 6 could serve to have a lot more bite. Just 1-2 physical veterans that help address it and lead our youngsters(Gadjo/LInd/Mac) that could potentially help address it too.

 

On Defense yeah I think we should be surrounding our puck-movers in Rathbone/Hughes/Schmidt with more defensive/physical defenseman in order to have more balance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/16/2021 at 11:08 PM, Shirotashi said:

This honestly is the biggest hurdle for me getting pumped for next season. This combined with the fact 

that THEY, not Tryamkin, but the Canucks, essentially put a laughable offer forward so much so that 

Tryamkin would not negotiate further and the rest is history. 

 

HOW is that possible? How can we be that shortsighted as to not take negotiations with this guy seriously

ESPECIALLY the way the NHL is now trending!?!? HOW??? 

 

Tod Diamond did not mince words he was clear that Tryamkin put forward a very fair deal and agreed 

to a 1yr deal!?!? HOW?? How is this player NOT signed. 

 

This WILL bite us in the ass if he signs somewhere like ohhh lets say Edmonton would LOVE him, 

Vegas??? Yep they would give him a shot. Seattle???? LOL He walked for nothing and IF yes I realise

its an IF not a when, if he comes back to the NHL he will be an impact player and it will bite us in the

ass and he walked. for. nothing. 

 

Someone help me get over this colossal blunder because it SOUNDS like they went to try and

sign him and tried to hardball him and it backfired. 

 

Good post.

But ultimately now redundant, unfortunately.  Just another blunder that gets lost in all the more major blunders of this management group. That's one advantage of making so many I guess. And now its way too late. And all we can do is vent about it.

 

I love how folks here project how Tryamkin would've been a big disappointment if he'd have played for us again.  Or somehow that he didn't look very good when he was here etc ....lol.  From my eye test, he was very impactful. Ask Getzlaf. Or Richardson. 

 

To qualify Stecher it would have been 2.3 mill.  If that was around the top end Tryamkin wanted.....isn't he and his size worth as much as Stecher for a 5/6 D?  I am so burned about JB hardballing him with a joke of an offer.  So many times over the last two years Diamond indicated how Tram wanted to come back and followed the Canucks closely.  And every time JB would make excuses.  How he really was working to get him here but......COVID....the flat cap....etc etc etc... Somehow other contracts here and around the league did, and are, getting done.   I 'd run out of patience if I were Nikita too.

 

We are one of the smallest teams in the league.  Even IF Tryamkin is not the second coming of Chara, or Pronger, he is a valuable piece because of his size.  Even a moderately good D's value goes up with size,  and reach...and intimidation, especially during the playoffs.  So sick of JB's incompetence. This one is going to sting for awhile.

 

I guess we'll find out if Tram was just positioning himself for a raise in the KHL or not if he never comes over to NA again.  But I too wonder if he'll come back, like Toffoli, and rub it in our faces playing for a different team.  And yeah, probably Seattle or Calgary with any Canuck Luck.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said:

I would say up front in the top 6 not at all.

 

But bottom 6 could serve to have a lot more bite. Just 1-2 physical veterans that help address it and lead our youngsters(Gadjo/LInd/Mac) that could potentially help address it too.

 

On Defense yeah I think we should be surrounding our puck-movers in Rathbone/Hughes/Schmidt with more defensive/physical defenseman in order to have more balance.

Agree on defense.

 

I don’t see a strong correlation between size with forwards in your top nine and winning like with defense. Like I’m looking at all of the top scorers and there isn’t many big guys left nor were there many left in the previous round either. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Tom Sestito said:

Agree on defense.

 

I don’t see a strong correlation between size with forwards in your top nine and winning like with defense. Like I’m looking at all of the top scorers and there isn’t many big guys left nor were there many left in the previous round either. 

 

 

I think the top 6 is fine. The bottom 6 could use a guy or two that'll keep other teams D checking their shoulders and help lead the youngsters that bring these qualities.

 

A Ferland-type.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/16/2021 at 1:48 PM, lmm said:

 guess it is a matter of where you want to start and where you want to end

I do not really believe in intangibles

Intangibles is really the same thing we are discussing

intangibles are actually tangible, but the list is long, so for brevity a long list of qualities you do or do not want in a player is called intanibles.

I'll give you a short list but it could probably go on for 1000 points

we are talking defensemen

tangible intangibles

can they skate backward?

do crossovers :left"

 "right?

turn Left?

Right?

do they get mad ?

or wither against tough opposition?

is their shot hard?

Accurate?

make bad decisions under pressure?

 

there is 10,

we could go on for a long time

so it is called Intangibles.

 

but do you really want to go through this whole list every time we talk about needing more size?

because it is all relevant,

but 

at some point you have to assume that the people you are talkiing to have a grasp of  what is required

 

the same is true of any business or trade

if you are hiring a cook you hope htey know the difference between chop, slice , julienne and mince

if you hire a carpenter you expect them to know how to make stairs

if you hire a scout and you ask can player x skate, you don't expect to find out later that he can only turn left

 

 understand that not all things can be assumed, but some things do need to be, otherwise we spend all of our time going over what should be understood

 

Just because you don't believe in intangibles, it doesn't mean they're not there. You can believe/not believe in anything. It doesn't really matter as it doesn't change if they exist or not. lol

 

The thing is, not everyone here does have a grasp of what they're talking about; therefore it's not safe to assume. The only reason why you want me to assume this stuff is because it's convenient for you. It fits with your agenda. If it didn't you wouldn't bring it up.

 

Sure that some things "need to be assumed". This isn't one of those things though. It's just lazy debating is all it is.

 

Question for you: are you assuming size is the correct course of action? If so, then this thread wouldn't exist in the first place if it were that "obvious". ;)

Edited by The Lock
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...