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

Benning on Sportsnet 650 with Halford & Brough - June 24, 2021

Rate this topic


CRAZY_4_NAZZY

Recommended Posts

On 6/27/2021 at 4:11 PM, appleboy said:

Picks ,yes. Not a 9th or even a 40th.

 

There are some very interesting defenseman in this years draft. Even the third round looks interesting.

 

Teams like Tampa just keep developing. We need to learn from that. We keep feeding them high picks. 

While I agree with you about the picks, I do believe this is a good year to move our first. Is there a good player at 9th? Yes, likely. But we need to give to get. I think this team needs to get a piece to the puzzle this year then look for something in the UFA column next year. It keeps the team moving forward.

 

Start about the 1 minute mark. As he has a few interesting points before he talks about the Leafs again.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/27/2021 at 5:46 PM, Crabcakes said:

Based on what Benning has said in his interviews, I think that he is thinking just like most on here are, that the Canucks essentially have a core group drafted, some pretty good support pieces but they need more

 

So, what exactly?

  • forwards who can score
  • 3C
  • defense with some size who can also move the puck

We are all hoping that Podkolzin and Hoglander stick in the top 6 eventually and that may leave them with a decent top 6.  Pearson, I would rather see on the 3rd line

 

Benning was asked in the H & B interview about Miller as 3C.  This is a possibility but on the other hand, Green really likes him on Petey's line.  And Benning alluded that what actually gets done depends on the opportunities that present themselves.  It's generally easier to pick up a winger than a centre.  Will Lind develop into that 3C?

 

Defence needs some size but I think that they also have to be able to move the puck and skate like what Montreal has done.  He would like Edler back because he brings leadership but he has to play for a lot less money and probably in a 3rd pair role.  He'll get PK time as well.  Either way, Edler will need to be replaced within a couple of years.  Benning didn't mention Hamonic.  We'll see what he does there.  

 

I really don't know what Benning meant by being aggressive.  He has stirred up the coaching staff (Brown out, Shaw in).  What exactly to we want him to do on the ice?   Buyouts?  Ya, Eriksson, Virtanen maybe.  Roussel, Ferland, Beagle could all disappear if by remaining on LTIR or bury them in the minors.  And after that there's free agency but please, no big money players. But all this I think comes after the expansion draft because there may be bargains to be had there.  There is a lot going on this year and like Benning said it all depends on the opportunities.

 

 

 

I really like Miller on the 1st line with Petty but I would love to have a guy like E. Kane on there as well. I know everyone says Kane is Toxic but as the Grizzlies GM said as he took the team away from the city, "You cannot win with nice guys".

Secondly, I would love a Sutter like 3c again with Podkolzin and Pearson on his wings. Podkolzin can play the D side of the ice as well as score so I think will give other teams nightmares.

Horvat - Hogs - Boes could be a great line 

Highmore - Beags - Motte

 

needs a little work but not too much. Then a key piece on D and I think we can win a round or two in the playoffs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jimmy McGill said:

was he strong enough to win face offs? 

Lind too face offs with his left hand low on his stick, which was strange to see for a right shot guy.  He certainly needs to get physically stronger though.  He’s one of those baby faced late developing guys.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Lind too face offs with his left hand low on his stick, which was strange to see for a right shot guy.  He certainly needs to get physically stronger though.  He’s one of those baby faced late developing guys.  

maybe that stance helps compensate for a bit less strength for him? 

 

If we don't trade him I'd like to see him with Beagle to begin the year, learn from him for a bit 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, aGENT said:

I could entertain this but I think we'd see:

 

Pettersson, Horvat, Boeser

Hoglander, Miller, Podkolzin

Pearson, ????, Lind?/Lockwood?/UFA?

Highmore, Beagle, Motte

You have to like the top 6, but I don't see any secondary scoring from the bottom 6 .?

Thats a problem that needs to be resolved..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Honky Cat said:

You have to like the top 6, but I don't see any secondary scoring from the bottom 6 .?

Thats a problem that needs to be resolved..

I believe that's where the question marks come in ;)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FaninMex said:

I really like Miller on the 1st line with Petty but I would love to have a guy like E. Kane on there as well. I know everyone says Kane is Toxic but as the Grizzlies GM said as he took the team away from the city, "You cannot win with nice guys".

Secondly, I would love a Sutter like 3c again with Podkolzin and Pearson on his wings. Podkolzin can play the D side of the ice as well as score so I think will give other teams nightmares.

Horvat - Hogs - Boes could be a great line 

Highmore - Beags - Motte

 

needs a little work but not too much. Then a key piece on D and I think we can win a round or two in the playoffs.

if we have a sutter type as 3c, we have 2 checking lines. the idea is to have 3 scoring lines. miller would drive the 3rd line and help pods progress.  sutter at  4 c would be good.

  • Like 1
  • Cheers 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, smithers joe said:

if we have a sutter type as 3c, we have 2 checking lines. the idea is to have 3 scoring lines. miller would drive the 3rd line and help pods progress.  sutter at  4 c would be good.

 

People are making far too much of that comment IMO.That third 'scoring' line still needs to be able to also play D and have a couple guys who can at least play PK2 on it as well.

 

You can't just have 3/4 of a team be offense-only focused. You'll note the team's that do that, may have good regular seasons, but are now golfing.

 

Sutter pretty much scores at a 30+ point pace... Though he does require a play making winger to get more out of that line (Podkolzin?). His biggest problem is staying healthy. He's certainly not a long term answer there. Short term and eventually sliding down to 4C after Beagle is gone ... Maybe. A similar (but younger and healthier) guy? Maybe.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, aGENT said:

 

People are making far too much of that comment IMO.That third 'scoring' line still needs to be able to also play D and have a couple guys who can at least play PK2 on it as well.

 

You can't just have 3/4 of a team be offense-only focused. You'll note the team's that do that, may have good regular seasons, but are now golfing.

 

Sutter pretty much scores at a 30+ point pace... Though he does require a play making winger to get more out of that line (Podkolzin?). His biggest problem is staying healthy. He's certainly not a long term answer there. Short term and eventually sliding down to 4C after Beagle is gone ... Maybe. A similar (but younger and healthier) guy? Maybe.

think, three balanced scoring lines, where on any given night any line can be #1 petey, bo and jt centering the three lines. we need two in your face wingers. we shouldn't be settling for less.

  • Like 1
  • Cheers 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, aGENT said:

I could entertain this but I think we'd see:

 

Pettersson, Horvat, Boeser

Hoglander, Miller, Podkolzin

Pearson, ????, Lind?/Lockwood?/UFA?

Highmore, Beagle, Motte

If we are bumping Pettersson to wing anyway, might as well just have Miller center the top unit to keep the chemistry? Unless there's a rift of some sort.

 

Pettersson - Miller - Boeser

Pearson - Horvat - Hoglander

Lind? - 3C - Podkolzin

Gadjovich/MacEwen - Beagle (if healthy)/4C - Motte

 

Would like to see someone like Philip Danault as the 3C or maybe Wennberg. If Beagle is out long term, sign someone like Martinook. If we are in a real pinch cap-wise, then Graovac is fine in a minimum wage 4th line role.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, smithers joe said:

think, three balanced scoring lines, where on any given night any line can be #1 petey, bo and jt centering the three lines. we need two in your face wingers. we shouldn't be settling for less.

I see this as the ideal outcome assuming we can’t land a 3C on the market… we’ll see how Petey and Miller hold up at C and we do need to find at least one more winger that fits the bill.  (I think Motte can be the other.) 

 

Something like:

 

Hoglander-Pettersson-Boeser

Pearson-Horvat-Motte

??-Miller-Podkolzin

Although something like:

 

Miller-Pettersson-Podkolzin

Hoglander-Horvat-Boeser

 

Would be a pretty slick top 6.

 

Pearson-???-Motte

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

If we are bumping Pettersson to wing anyway, might as well just have Miller center the top unit to keep the chemistry? Unless there's a rift of some sort.

 

Pettersson - Miller - Boeser

Pearson - Horvat - Hoglander

Lind? - 3C - Podkolzin

Gadjovich/MacEwen - Beagle (if healthy)/4C - Motte

 

Would like to see someone like Philip Danault as the 3C or maybe Wennberg. If Beagle is out long term, sign someone like Martinook. If we are in a real pinch cap-wise, then Graovac is fine in a minimum wage 4th line role.

Philip Danault is way to expensive for us plus could you imagine us canuck fans being comfortable paying this guy 5-6 mill to not score? 

  • Cheers 2
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Sutter pretty much scores at a 30+ point pace... Though he does require a play making winger to get more out of that line (Podkolzin?). His biggest problem is staying healthy. He's certainly not a long term answer there. Short term and eventually sliding down to 4C after Beagle is gone ... Maybe. A similar (but younger and healthier) guy? Maybe.

Very few guys who play that role can stay healthy.  Blocking shots will inevitably lead to injury.

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Bertuzzipunch said:

Philip Danault is way to expensive for us plus could you imagine us canuck fans being comfortable paying this guy 5-6 mill to not score? 

Where is it rumoured that he would get 5-6 million?

 

But obviously if he's overpriced, then we go for someone else (Eg Wennberg as I suggested). It would be nice to get a player like Danault though at the right cap hit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The issue with the forward group, as I see it, is we need 1 more top 6 RW. I would love to see Miller center a line, but if he does it make the need for a winger even more prominent.

 

Assuming we somehow manage to move on from Roussel and Virtanen:

 

Hoglander Pettersson Boeser

Schwartz? Horvat Pearson

Highmore Miller Podkolzin

Motte Beagle Sutter

Graovac, Lind, Gadjovich

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, theo5789 said:

Where is it rumoured that he would get 5-6 million?

 

But obviously if he's overpriced, then we go for someone else (Eg Wennberg as I suggested). It would be nice to get a player like Danault though at the right cap hit.

He turned down a 5 year 30 mill deal before the season started. Not sure why it would be less now after the playoffs hes had.

  • Vintage 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, kloubek said:

The issue with the forward group, as I see it, is we need 1 more top 6 RW. I would love to see Miller center a line, but if he does it make the need for a winger even more prominent.

 

Assuming we somehow manage to move on from Roussel and Virtanen:

 

Hoglander Pettersson Boeser

Schwartz? Horvat Pearson

Highmore Miller Podkolzin

Motte Beagle Sutter

Graovac, Lind, Gadjovich

 

 

Is Schwartz a UFA?  

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...