Oliver Ekman-Larsson | #23 | D

[-AJ-]

16 minutes ago, kloubek said:

Am I the only one who thinks this looks quite inadequate?

 

Solid top pairing. But Myers is just passable as a 2nd pairing guy and Dermott has shown little to warrant the spot. That's a weak 2nd.

 

Rathbone and Schenn I'm actually ok with for the bottom pairing.

 

I'd sooner see us lose a little forward depth to get a true top pairing guy for Hughes. Keep OEL in the 2nd pairing where he probably belongs best, and the rest plays out to the bottom, with Rathbone and Dermott left to fight out 3LD.

 

Management really only needs that one Tanev-like guy to make it all work.

 

Brodin, Carlo, Siegenthaler, K'Andre Miller, Mikey Anderson, Grzelyk (?) kind of guy. Myers is the closest thing we have to a guy like that, but he isn't at all to the level we need for Hughes.

It's woefully inadequate to me for a playoff team unless guys seriously overperform. If Dermott has a career year, he's probably a #4 guy, but it's probably very optimistic to assume he'll do that well. Myers is an acceptable 3/4 I think and Schenn was a solid #5 last year, but I'm not sure if we can expect him to continue playing so well. Rathbone is a huge wildcard and might not even be NHL-level yet. All AHL indications say he should be, but we've seen guys get stuck at the AHL  superstar level before.

 

If we get career years around the board from our bottom four, it's a pretty good d-core, but I think that would be unreasonably optimistic.

[Boudrias]

18 hours ago, Kobayashi Maru said:

Now that the values of contracts have taken a large leap up, OEL's contract is actually a good one.  I think the time is now to convert either OEL or Hughes to the right side and just make them our top pair.  We would get maximum value from both of them being paired together.  Opens up some options for Dermott and Rathbone to battle for 2nd pair LD minutes as well.  If no additional upgrades come in:

 

OEL Hughes

Dermott Myers

Rathbone Schenn

I like the idea of giving this a try if a RD doesn't materialize. 

[UFCanuck]

I'm thinking he puts up 20 goals this year. 

[Smashian Kassian]

On 8/22/2022 at 10:27 PM, kloubek said:

Am I the only one who thinks this looks quite inadequate?

 

Solid top pairing. But Myers is just passable as a 2nd pairing guy and Dermott has shown little to warrant the spot. That's a weak 2nd.

 

Rathbone and Schenn I'm actually ok with for the bottom pairing.

 

I'd sooner see us lose a little forward depth to get a true top pairing guy for Hughes. Keep OEL in the 2nd pairing where he probably belongs best, and the rest plays out to the bottom, with Rathbone and Dermott left to fight out 3LD.

 

Management really only needs that one Tanev-like guy to make it all work.

 

Brodin, Carlo, Siegenthaler, K'Andre Miller, Mikey Anderson, Grzelyk (?) kind of guy. Myers is the closest thing we have to a guy like that, but he isn't at all to the level we need for Hughes.

 

 

I agree. OEL really helped Myers alot last year, I feel like breaking them up could be throwing Myers to the Wolves.

 

Hughes & OEL are the best 1-2D combo we've had in awhile - maybe since Edler/Hamhuis primes - but the supporting cast has gotten worse every year.

 

Dermott/Myers does intrigue me, as does playing OEL with Hughes, but I have a hard time seeing it working for a long stretch unless Dermott takes a step.

 

[-Vintage Canuck-]

 

[kloubek]

10 hours ago, Smashian Kassian said:

 

 

I agree. OEL really helped Myers alot last year, I feel like breaking them up could be throwing Myers to the Wolves.

 

Hughes & OEL are the best 1-2D combo we've had in awhile - maybe since Edler/Hamhuis primes - but the supporting cast has gotten worse every year.

 

Dermott/Myers does intrigue me, as does playing OEL with Hughes, but I have a hard time seeing it working for a long stretch unless Dermott takes a step.

 

Honestly, I just haven't seen anything from Dermott that intrigues me. He seems to be an ok 2-way player, but hasn't shown anything (to me anyway) which positions him as a role player. His defense is generally ok, but he's not a stud shutdown guy. He's pretty mobile, but generally doesn't put up any significant points. He has some size, but doesn't really use it to his advantage. In my mind, he's a 3rd pairing guy or perhaps or even depth with a bit of upside at this point.

 

I like the idea of OEL and Hughes together if Hughes moves to the right side. I think OEL has enough defensive smarts and 2-way acumen that he could be a good compliment. However, doing so means we blow our load on the 1st pairing, leaving Rathbone as the only remaining defenseman who may be capable of being an offensive threat. Like I said in my prior post, I think ideally we were to get a defensive RD with good mobility to compliment Hughes, which allows us to keep OEL in the 2nd pairing so it's still a threat. Then if Rathbone develops, we have all 3 pairings capable of scoring from the blueline.

 

In any event, despite management's recent comments I don't think our blueline is good enough. No matter what the pairings are, we are clearly missing one key piece and everything as a result is really only a workaround until he arrives.

[-Vintage Canuck-]

OEL at today’s scrimmage.

 

[-Vintage Canuck-]

OEL at today's skate.

 

[Smashian Kassian]

 

 

A trip to OEL's house in Sweden (English subtitles).

 

Funny guy, surprised he has a roommate. 

 

 

[wildcam]

On 8/22/2022 at 10:44 PM, -AJ- said:

It's woefully inadequate to me for a playoff team unless guys seriously overperform. If Dermott has a career year, he's probably a #4 guy, but it's probably very optimistic to assume he'll do that well. Myers is an acceptable 3/4 I think and Schenn was a solid #5 last year, but I'm not sure if we can expect him to continue playing so well. Rathbone is a huge wildcard and might not even be NHL-level yet. All AHL indications say he should be, but we've seen guys get stuck at the AHL  superstar level before.

 

If we get career years around the board from our bottom four, it's a pretty good d-core, but I think that would be unreasonably optimistic.

Great post I agree with you. The wild card Rathbone is so talented with elite skating he will become a #4 D man this season. That being said starting out as the # 6 for the first 45 games is great..

[Forsy]

On 9/13/2022 at 10:41 AM, kloubek said:

Honestly, I just haven't seen anything from Dermott that intrigues me. He seems to be an ok 2-way player, but hasn't shown anything (to me anyway) which positions him as a role player. His defense is generally ok, but he's not a stud shutdown guy. He's pretty mobile, but generally doesn't put up any significant points. He has some size, but doesn't really use it to his advantage. In my mind, he's a 3rd pairing guy or perhaps or even depth with a bit of upside at this point.

 

I like the idea of OEL and Hughes together if Hughes moves to the right side. I think OEL has enough defensive smarts and 2-way acumen that he could be a good compliment. However, doing so means we blow our load on the 1st pairing, leaving Rathbone as the only remaining defenseman who may be capable of being an offensive threat. Like I said in my prior post, I think ideally we were to get a defensive RD with good mobility to compliment Hughes, which allows us to keep OEL in the 2nd pairing so it's still a threat. Then if Rathbone develops, we have all 3 pairings capable of scoring from the blueline.

 

In any event, despite management's recent comments I don't think our blueline is good enough. No matter what the pairings are, we are clearly missing one key piece and everything as a result is really only a workaround until he arrives.

Why couldn't we be down two key defensemen and only need 1 more?

 

The key is the game sense of these dmen to prevent chances, retrieve pucks/takeaways and d-zone exits. You don't need superstar dmen to do that, especially when our goal isn't to win the cup this year, but simply to make the playoffs.

This group can already do that, the key is that the systems, the forward support and the ability to read the play by these dmen. Whoever cannot read the play to this required level should be traded, regardless of "how good in defense they are". The points from Hughes/OEL/Others will be sufficient anyway, what we don't want are blind, guessing about the play "defensive dmen".

[kloubek]

11 hours ago, Forsy said:

Why couldn't we be down two key defensemen and only need 1 more?

 

The key is the game sense of these dmen to prevent chances, retrieve pucks/takeaways and d-zone exits. You don't need superstar dmen to do that, especially when our goal isn't to win the cup this year, but simply to make the playoffs.

This group can already do that, the key is that the systems, the forward support and the ability to read the play by these dmen. Whoever cannot read the play to this required level should be traded, regardless of "how good in defense they are". The points from Hughes/OEL/Others will be sufficient anyway, what we don't want are blind, guessing about the play "defensive dmen".

The days of a defenseman who can only shut down the opposition without keeping the play going is over. Just like the day is over where 4th liners no longer have to contribute on the scoresheet. But having a defensive defenseman doesn't negate our need for that same guy to be able to move the puck and read the play. This is why Tanev was so effective - he didn't score much and was great at limiting chances, but he wasn't a liability to our offense either. That's the kind of guy we need.

[Forsy]

On 9/22/2022 at 9:37 AM, kloubek said:

The days of a defenseman who can only shut down the opposition without keeping the play going is over. Just like the day is over where 4th liners no longer have to contribute on the scoresheet. But having a defensive defenseman doesn't negate our need for that same guy to be able to move the puck and read the play. This is why Tanev was so effective - he didn't score much and was great at limiting chances, but he wasn't a liability to our offense either. That's the kind of guy we need.

yep losing Tanev to gain only 1M of cap space for Hamonic was idiotic

[King Loui]

5 hours ago, Forsy said:

yep losing Tanev to gain only 1M of cap space for Hamonic was idiotic

Hold my beer. 

 

Signing Virtanen and Holtby instead, then losing Tanev

[eeeeergh]

1 hour ago, King Loui said:

Hold my beer. 

 

Signing Virtanen and Holtby instead, then losing Tanev

Hello me, its me

[Alflives]

13 hours ago, King Loui said:

Hold my beer. 

 

Signing Virtanen and Holtby instead, then losing Tanev

And trading (a third) for Schmidt, who cost 2 mil more on the cap and had longer term than re-signing Tanev. 

[lmm]

3 hours ago, Alflives said:

And trading (a third) for Schmidt, who cost 2 mil more on the cap and had longer term than re-signing Tanev. 

let it go, boys

the old regime got themselves fired nearly 10 months ago for being incompetent

no use reliving every mistake

I am sure there are a few classic threads that enthused support and acclaim for the wonderful job they were doing

but now it's time to move on and concern ourselves with this group, players and management

[DownUndaCanuck]

I know OEL was a bit of a whipping boy when he came over with such a high price tag but got to say he looked like a number 1 defenceman against Edmonton, all over them defensively and moved the puck well. I'm hoping he gets better as he gets older as we see more defencemen play in to their mid to late 30s. Very under-rated in my opinion under Hughes, he's very similar to the all-around Edler.

[Wilbur]

OEL moves into 216th in all-time Canuck scoring with his assist tonight

 

215.  Luca Sbisa	D	199	7	25	32
216.  Oliver Ekman-Larsson	D	84	5	27	32
217.  Peter Zezel	C	66	11	20	31
218.  Craig Coxe	C	177	10	21	31

[Hairy Kneel]

 

Edited October 30, 2022 by Hairy Kneel