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

[Proposal] Revamping the 3rd line, sign Tampa's Grind Line wingers


Recommended Posts

To Tampa Bay: a pick or two (5ths?)

To Canucks: early negotiating rights to Coleman & Goodrow if they know they can't sign them

 

Sign Blake Coleman for 4 years @ 4.25

Sign Barclay Goodrow for 4 years @ 3

 

Let the mishmash bottom sixers all walk: Sutter (unless <950k), Graovac, Boyd, Hawryluk, Vesey, Michaelis. Buy out or cap dump Roussel. Terminate Jake. Beagle and Ferland remain LTIR for now.

 

  • As much as I cheered for the Canucks' bottom sixers last year to make it (..and will likely have to this year, too), this suddenly gives the Canucks an elite, super high energy 3rd line whether Miller centers (cap wise most likely!) it or they acquire a decent 3C by UFA or trade (Kerfoot, Gourde (!!), Nic Roy, Logan Brown, etc.)
  • These two players are unlikely to be able to be retained by Tampa due to salary cap concerns
  • They've just won back-to-back cups with each other, and I wonder if they would be willing to come to Van if they got to stay together
  • Bonus: if Schmidt is moved, maybe a Brad Shaw-David Savard reunion could be had too.

 

Some analysis from Darren McCarty

 

Quote

 

When Darren McCarty watches the Lightning’s Yanni Gourde line, it brings him back. It reminds the retired Red Wing of the “Grind Line” he played on with Kris Draper and Kirk Maltby, with the tenaciously tough trio becoming the unsung stars of their Stanley Cup-winning teams in the late 1990s and early 2000s.

 

McCarty sees the same type of synergy with Gourde, Barclay Goodrow and Blake Coleman, believing they’re on the “same wavelength.” They have similar nonstop motors but are built more for the speed of the modern game as opposed to the snarl McCarty (and fourth “Grind Line” member Joey Kocur) had.

 

 

Edited by Teemu Selänne
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the idea of signing Goodrow as a 3C target. We can't afford both and we need a C much more. He's going to have a lot of choices tho and I have no idea if he'd be willing to come to the west coast.

 

I suspect the Leafs are going to make a strong pitch for him since they will be losing Hyman. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

I like the idea of signing Goodrow as a 3C target. We can't afford both and we need a C much more. He's going to have a lot of choices tho and I have no idea if he'd be willing to come to the west coast.

 

I suspect the Leafs are going to make a strong pitch for him since they will be losing Hyman. 

I think Goodrow plays on the wing and Gourde is the C on that line.

 

I'm wondering about Brassard as the the 3C.  He is still playing well and could be picked up for a relatively low cost contract.  He's been bounced around to many teams, so he likely would jump at a $1.5 X 2 yr contract.

 

Podz (.925)    Brassard (1.5)   Motte(1.25)  

 

Having an effective, but inexpensive 3rd line would allow JB to beef up the 4th.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You saw what Benning did last season.  He brought in all those mishmash bottom 6 players as you call them because it was a tryout for next year.  Benning wants to drastically reduce the salaries on the bottom 6.  He made a mistake bringing in Roussel, Beagle, Sutter etc because you can get a very similar result for much less money.

 

People want aggressive?  How about this.....

 

Roussel, Beagle and Eriksson all save $1M or less if they get bought out (over 2 years) so they all get buried if they play hockey and save the Canucks $1.125 this year.  

Virtanen works for a buyout and saves the team $2M over 2 years so if Benning can't trade him, bye bye

 

So what does that leave?

 

Keepers.....Motte, Highmore

Prospects......Podkolzin (plays), Lockwood, Lind, Gadjovich

Maybes......Graovac, Hawryluk, MacEwen, Boyd, Sutter

Bye bye......Vessey, Michaelis

 

Questions

 

Is it easier to find a top LW or a 3C?  These positions they could spend money only if value is strong so Goodrow is possible at $3M.  If they can find the winger, then Miller at 3C (pricey) is a possibility

Sutter at 3C for $2M would be an option but he's not much of a play maker and Benning himself says he wants offense out of the 3rd line so a likely pass. 

Sutter at 4C if he would sign really low (1.25) (he is a PK option)  Maybe

 

Podkolzin Goodrow (or Miller) Motte

Highmore Sutter(1.25?) Hawryluk

 

Podz needs to learn the left side because that's where the left hander will fit in the top 6 long term

 

Spare parts  Graovac, Boyd, MacEwen

 

Edited by Crabcakes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

Goodrow's been pretty capable on face offs over his career: https://www.hockey-reference.com/players/g/goodrba01.html

 

Decent size as well. 

Goodrow would be a great addition to the team, especially if he can play as a natural C.

 

If Beagle is not going to play, he will be on LITR or bought out.  Brassard would be a great replacement at half B's price.

 

Highmore   Brassard   MacEwan (I'd actually prefer Jake, but I doubt that will happen). 

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Teemu Selänne said:

To Tampa Bay: a pick or two (5ths?)

To Canucks: early negotiating rights to Coleman & Goodrow if they know they can't sign them

 

Sign Blake Coleman for 4 years @ 4.25

Sign Barclay Goodrow for 4 years @ 3

 

Let the mishmash bottom sixers all walk: Sutter (unless <950k), Graovac, Boyd, Hawryluk, Vesey, Michaelis. Buy out or cap dump Roussel. Terminate Jake. Beagle and Ferland remain LTIR for now.

 

  • As much as I cheered for the Canucks' bottom sixers last year to make it (..and will likely have to this year, too), this suddenly gives the Canucks an elite, super high energy 3rd line whether Miller centers (cap wise most likely!) it or they acquire a decent 3C by UFA or trade (Kerfoot, Gourde (!!), Nic Roy, Logan Brown, etc.)
  • These two players are unlikely to be able to be retained by Tampa due to salary cap concerns
  • They've just won back-to-back cups with each other, and I wonder if they would be willing to come to Van if they got to stay together
  • Bonus: if Schmidt is moved, maybe a Brad Shaw-David Savard reunion could be had too.

 

Some analysis from Darren McCarty

 

 

IMHO, Coleman is a player who can move easily between the second and third lines.  Though 29 years old he's had three consecutive seasons of 20+ goals per season (2020-21 prorated - 0.25 Goals per game) and doesn't seem to be trending down in his regular season production (his production/value in the past two playoffs have been very good as well).  He reminds me of Alex Burrows, who when given the chance to play higher up the lineup, flourished and had his best production seasons between the ages of 27 to 31.  It's conceivable that the Canucks could get three seasons of decent production from Coleman.  He's a player who is definitely worth a 4 year $4.0M to $4.5M cap hit. 

 

Barclay Goodrow would be my target if I'm JB for the third line LW position.  He's got size, great motor, good wheels, etc.  Have liked him since his days with the Sharks.  28 years old and probably has a ton left in the tank.  IMO, 3 years at $2.5M could get the deal sealed with Goodrow.  Love Jon Cooper's comment about Goodrow:

 

 
I asked Jon Cooper today why Barclay Goodrow is such an effective player for the Lightning. This quote is A+: "You can't have all Ferraris, sometimes you need a good old-fashioned four-wheel drive Jeep to get you through the mud and that's what Barclay Goodrow can do for you."
 
 
If Benning is able to get BOTH Coleman and Goodrow to sign UFA contracts, I would consider that an enormous win...if only Coleman can get signed, I would consider that a huge win...if only Goodrow can get sign, I would consider that a big win.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe Benning is able to take advantage of Tampa's cap situation? That would be great.

 

Saw The Hockey Writers (July 9) list 11 possible players that Benning may target:

 

Warren Foegele

Mason Appleton

Derek Ryan

Derick Brassard

Derek Stepan

Tyler Ennis

Ryan Dzingel

Vinnie Hinostroza

Ondrej Kase

Danton Heinen

Michael Bunting

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, higgyfan said:

Goodrow would be a great addition to the team, especially if he can play as a natural C.

 

If Beagle is not going to play, he will be on LITR or bought out.  Brassard would be a great replacement at half B's price.

 

Highmore   Brassard   MacEwan (I'd actually prefer Jake, but I doubt that will happen). 

that works too. But do yourself a favour and forget about Jake, he's done here. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

that works too. But do yourself a favour and forget about Jake, he's done here. 

Yeah, I know.  Just not really confident in Mac's game.  Like his size and toughness, but the other skills are a bit lacking.  Maybe Gadj gets a tryout or Brett Richie ufa.

 

There's a lot of options out there.  I would really like to see the bottom 6 upgraded before spending $ on the top 6. 

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Teemu Selänne said:

To Tampa Bay: a pick or two (5ths?)

To Canucks: early negotiating rights to Coleman & Goodrow if they know they can't sign them

 

Sign Blake Coleman for 4 years @ 4.25

Sign Barclay Goodrow for 4 years @ 3

 

Let the mishmash bottom sixers all walk: Sutter (unless <950k), Graovac, Boyd, Hawryluk, Vesey, Michaelis. Buy out or cap dump Roussel. Terminate Jake. Beagle and Ferland remain LTIR for now.

 

  • As much as I cheered for the Canucks' bottom sixers last year to make it (..and will likely have to this year, too), this suddenly gives the Canucks an elite, super high energy 3rd line whether Miller centers (cap wise most likely!) it or they acquire a decent 3C by UFA or trade (Kerfoot, Gourde (!!), Nic Roy, Logan Brown, etc.)
  • These two players are unlikely to be able to be retained by Tampa due to salary cap concerns
  • They've just won back-to-back cups with each other, and I wonder if they would be willing to come to Van if they got to stay together
  • Bonus: if Schmidt is moved, maybe a Brad Shaw-David Savard reunion could be had too.

 

Some analysis from Darren McCarty

 

 

I love Coleman and Barclay but.....

 

1) What would it cost to acquire them?  
2) Given that we need to re-up Petey and Hughes, combined with the fact that we need an Edler replacement on the back-end, would we be able to afford those guys?


If Goodrow can play center that I’d definitely be interested in looking at him since he appears to have pretty good playmaking ability.  With Podkolzin coming here and likely to be slated on the 3rd line, we will need someone that can pass Podkolzin the puck and help him develop his offensive game at the NHL level.  The worst thing that you can do to a a guy like Podkolzin is put him with a plug like Sutter or Beagle (neither have playmaking ability) and hinder Podz’ development.  
 

Depending on the acquisition cost, I’d definitely be interested in looking at both Goodrow and Barclay.  I’m just not sure if it would work from a cap space perspective however.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, bigbadcanucks said:

IMHO, Coleman is a player who can move easily between the second and third lines.  Though 29 years old he's had three consecutive seasons of 20+ goals per season (2020-21 prorated - 0.25 Goals per game) and doesn't seem to be trending down in his regular season production (his production/value in the past two playoffs have been very good as well).  He reminds me of Alex Burrows, who when given the chance to play higher up the lineup, flourished and had his best production seasons between the ages of 27 to 31.  It's conceivable that the Canucks could get three seasons of decent production from Coleman.  He's a player who is definitely worth a 4 year $4.0M to $4.5M cap hit. 

 

Barclay Goodrow would be my target if I'm JB for the third line LW position.  He's got size, great motor, good wheels, etc.  Have liked him since his days with the Sharks.  28 years old and probably has a ton left in the tank.  IMO, 3 years at $2.5M could get the deal sealed with Goodrow.  Love Jon Cooper's comment about Goodrow:

 

 
I asked Jon Cooper today why Barclay Goodrow is such an effective player for the Lightning. This quote is A+: "You can't have all Ferraris, sometimes you need a good old-fashioned four-wheel drive Jeep to get you through the mud and that's what Barclay Goodrow can do for you."
 
 
If Benning is able to get BOTH Coleman and Goodrow to sign UFA contracts, I would consider that an enormous win...if only Coleman can get signed, I would consider that a huge win...if only Goodrow can get sign, I would consider that a big win.

Yea, my thoughts as well generally (and more realistically).

 

Giving up some low level picks to get in early would give Benning the time to propose/present keeping them together in the line-up...probably one of the few ways Vancouver would be a tempting destination for the pair of UFAs.

 

2 hours ago, Devron44 said:

Any Tampa Bay UFA is going to get over paid imo. Would love to have one or 2 but it’s just feels Cup = pay raise 

They're defs getting raises - esp. since they're both underpaid right now. I think the #s I've proposed are pretty close to what they'll get with the combined facts that they deserve a raise but it's also a flat cap

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Patel Bure said:

I love Coleman and Barclay but.....

 

1) What would it cost to acquire them?  
2) Given that we need to re-up Petey and Hughes, combined with the fact that we need an Edler replacement on the back-end, would we be able to afford those guys?


If Goodrow can play center that I’d definitely be interested in looking at him since he appears to have pretty good playmaking ability.  With Podkolzin coming here and likely to be slated on the 3rd line, we will need someone that can pass Podkolzin the puck and help him develop his offensive game at the NHL level.  The worst thing that you can do to a a guy like Podkolzin is put him with a plug like Sutter or Beagle (neither have playmaking ability) and hinder Podz’ development.  
 

Depending on the acquisition cost, I’d definitely be interested in looking at both Goodrow and Barclay.  I’m just not sure if it would work from a cap space perspective however.

Ya, signing Petey and Hughes, getting that cost certainty would really make Bennings life easier in every way.

 

He would know whether he needed to make buyouts and could freely make deals leading up to the expansion draft and all other things there after

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Teemu Selänne said:

They're defs getting raises - esp. since they're both underpaid right now. I think the #s I've proposed are pretty close to what they'll get with the combined facts that they deserve a raise but it's also a flat cap

Yeah I must have missed that in the OP. I think you are pretty bang on there. I’d take them if cap worked. Just prepare for “Theres Jim overpaying bottom 6 players again” lol not that i care what people say. I think these guys would be tremendous players for us.

 

Gotta get that RH Dman though. That’s a must imo 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Teemu Selänne said:

Yea, my thoughts as well generally (and more realistically).

 

Giving up some low level picks to get in early would give Benning the time to propose/present keeping them together in the line-up...probably one of the few ways Vancouver would be a tempting destination for the pair of UFAs.

 

They're defs getting raises - esp. since they're both underpaid right now. I think the #s I've proposed are pretty close to what they'll get with the combined facts that they deserve a raise but it's also a flat cap

Coleman had 36, 32 and 31 points the last 3 seasons and is making $1.8, he's 30 in November

Goodrow had 17, 26, 20 and made $925, he's 29 in Feb

 

both wingers

 

what I said above about Goodrow being 3C......say's who?  When did he last play centre?

 

These guys aren't saving the Canucks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They're good players, no question, but I'm wary of bringing in players from a team that just won the cup. They were important players, and they're part of the reason Tampa won, but Tampa's still a juggernaut without them and you've gotta pay up to bring in winners. 

 

With our cap scenario up in the air, I dunno. We'll have to see what JB does with Quinn and Elias first probs. 

  • Huggy Bear 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Crabcakes said:

You saw what Benning did last season.  He brought in all those mishmash bottom 6 players as you call them because it was a tryout for next year.  Benning wants to drastically reduce the salaries on the bottom 6.  He made a mistake bringing in Roussel, Beagle, Sutter etc because you can get a very similar result for much less money.

 

People want aggressive?  How about this.....

 

Roussel, Beagle and Eriksson all save $1M or less if they get bought out (over 2 years) so they all get buried if they play hockey and save the Canucks $1.125 this year.  

Virtanen works for a buyout and saves the team $2M over 2 years so if Benning can't trade him, bye bye

 

So what does that leave?

 

Keepers.....Motte, Highmore

Prospects......Podkolzin (plays), Lockwood, Lind, Gadjovich

Maybes......Graovac, Hawryluk, MacEwen, Boyd, Sutter

Bye bye......Vessey, Michaelis

 

Questions

 

Is it easier to find a top LW or a 3C?  These positions they could spend money only if value is strong so Goodrow is possible at $3M.  If they can find the winger, then Miller at 3C (pricey) is a possibility

Sutter at 3C for $2M would be an option but he's not much of a play maker and Benning himself says he wants offense out of the 3rd line so a likely pass. 

Sutter at 4C if he would sign really low (1.25) (he is a PK option)  Maybe

 

Podkolzin Goodrow (or Miller) Motte

Highmore Sutter(1.25?) Hawryluk

 

Podz needs to learn the left side because that's where the left hander will fit in the top 6 long term

 

Spare parts  Graovac, Boyd, MacEwen

 

Hogs plays the L side too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Coconuts said:

They're good players, no question, but I'm wary of bringing in players from a team that just won the cup. They were important players, and they're part of the reason Tampa won, but Tampa's still a juggernaut without them and you've gotta pay up to bring in winners. 

 

With our cap scenario up in the air, I dunno. We'll have to see what JB does with Quinn and Elias first probs. 

Me too.   Any player coming from a great team,  has a massive benifit.  What would Myers look like playing in TB?   Or Motte for that matter?   A lot better.   Hartman would too.   Or Soucy.    

 

JB didn't wait long before spending to the cap when BB wasn't signed but i don't think he has that luxury this time with two players.   At least one of them needs to be signed before he goes out and spends more unless he's got some approved buyouts in his back pocket.   Guess we will have to wait and see.  

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/11/2021 at 10:23 AM, Teemu Selänne said:

To Tampa Bay: a pick or two (5ths?)

To Canucks: early negotiating rights to Coleman & Goodrow if they know they can't sign them

 

Sign Blake Coleman for 4 years @ 4.25

Sign Barclay Goodrow for 4 years @ 3

 

Let the mishmash bottom sixers all walk: Sutter (unless <950k), Graovac, Boyd, Hawryluk, Vesey, Michaelis. Buy out or cap dump Roussel. Terminate Jake. Beagle and Ferland remain LTIR for now.

 

  • As much as I cheered for the Canucks' bottom sixers last year to make it (..and will likely have to this year, too), this suddenly gives the Canucks an elite, super high energy 3rd line whether Miller centers (cap wise most likely!) it or they acquire a decent 3C by UFA or trade (Kerfoot, Gourde (!!), Nic Roy, Logan Brown, etc.)
  • These two players are unlikely to be able to be retained by Tampa due to salary cap concerns
  • They've just won back-to-back cups with each other, and I wonder if they would be willing to come to Van if they got to stay together
  • Bonus: if Schmidt is moved, maybe a Brad Shaw-David Savard reunion could be had too.

 

Some analysis from Darren McCarty

 

 

Isn't that what we did when we signed Beagle after the Caps Stanley Cup win?  

 

These players always look more attractive when they are making 1-2M$/per, but not sure they have proven they are worth that money.  These kind of players are usually homegrown or acquired because they are cheap.   

 

I don't think it's a must we go that route right now...maybe once we have proven we can contend.

  • Like 1
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...