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

2021 Training Camp Thread

Rate this topic


-Vintage Canuck-

Recommended Posts

44 minutes ago, kenhodgejr said:

If Hamonics value is 0 because he refuses to be vaccinated but insists on playing in USA, and we need to make a trade for a top 4 RD but we dont have cap why not make a trade to a rebuilding team with Myers and picks. Next years draft will be a right off but that will be the cost of business. 

 

Myers + Hamonic + 2022 1st overall (non lottery) 2022 4th overall + maybe Dipietro 

 

for 

 

Josh Manson + Kevin Shattenkirk 

 

This will keep our defense competitive for a few more years

 

Hughes Manson

OEL Pulliot 

Rathbone Shattenkirk

Juolevi Schenn 

 

I think it’s a decent trade but personally  I feel we’ve traded enough 1st round picks. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Locke Lamora said:

Broke his tibia and fibula. Very long recovery.

 

Based on the way his leg was bent in a way that was not natural, looked to a compound fractures as well. Poor kid. Was getting better and better as camp went on.

It was a direct impact not a twisting injury so interosseous membrane is probably okay. IM nail in tibia, fibula can be plated or left alone depending on situation. Probably a couple months till back on skates. Shouldn’t be out all season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Smashian Kassian said:

 

Drance brought up a good point on 650 that by sending Podkolzin down his cap hit would double if you brought him back up; 925k now up to like 1.7M or something, essentially the cost of an extra player.

 

Not sure we have the wiggle room for that.

 

I don't think we should send him down regardless, but if so that might be a decision of either NHL or AHL for the whole year. 

Ahhhh, rookie bonuses and the cap.

 

Just to be clear, I have no problem with Podkolzin making the team.  The larger question to me was who goes to the AHL however.  With Motte and Sutter out, there's a good chance that at least one of Gadjovich and Di Giuseppe make the opening night roster even with Podkolzin making it too.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, kenhodgejr said:

If Hamonics value is 0 because he refuses to be vaccinated but insists on playing in USA, and we need to make a trade for a top 4 RD but we dont have cap why not make a trade to a rebuilding team with Myers and picks. Next years draft will be a right off but that will be the cost of business. 

 

Myers + Hamonic + 2022 1st overall (non lottery) 2022 4th overall + maybe Dipietro 

 

for 

 

Josh Manson + Kevin Shattenkirk 

 

This will keep our defense competitive for a few more years

 

Hughes Manson

OEL Pulliot 

Rathbone Shattenkirk

Juolevi Schenn 

 

No one, outside of fans and a couple of idiots in the media, fishing for clicks, have said anything at all about him not being vaccinated. Considering his daughter has a problem with her lungs, its highly likely that he is fully vaccinated.

  • Thanks 1
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, VegasCanuck said:

Okay, here's how I see us starting the season, subject to tweaking in combinations:

 

22 man roster of:

 

Forwards

Miller Pettersson Boeser

Pearson Horvat Garland

Hoglander Dickinson Podlolzin

Highmore / Gadjovich Petan Lockwood (I think Petan being able to play LW / C / RW, wins this for hiim)

 

Defense

OEL Poolman (Yes, I think this is the top pairing)

Hughes Myers

Juolevi Schenn

Hunt

 

Goal

Demko

Halak

 

IR: Hamonic / Motte (I'm not sure how Hamonic gets handled, does he get suspended until his personal issues are resolved?)

LTIR: Ferland / Sutter / Keeper

 

Cap Hit of $80,711,492

Space $788,508

 

I think Rathbone starts in Abbotsford to play top minutes for a month or two, I think Podkolzin has shown that he is defensively responsible enough that he starts with the Canucks. I think Klimovich starts in Abbotsford. 

 

I think this lineup gives us a lot of ability to move guys around on forward positions, including the ability to put Miller at center and push Petan to the wing for a game or two when we are playing a team where we need more size down the middle. It's possible that we add one more guy either on defense or forward to stay with the team for the first 6 games, considering we are on a long road trip, mainly on the east coast and our farm team isn't out there any longer for fast call up.

 

This should be a playoff lineup.

 

Thoughts?

This is what i think TG will have for opening night.  I'd swap Pearson and Hogs to get a legit 2nd scoring line and the 3rd can get shut down duties (though to your point, TG will probably keep Pearson and Horvat together). I'd put Gadjovich in for Highmore. Though we haven't seen a lot of Highmore so far and iirc he does kill penalties.

 

the 3rd pair on defence really intrigues me.  I do think OJ is in over Rathbone but who fills the 3rd RHD spot.  I liked Bowey's game last night, more mobile than Schenn, brings toughness as well but is a question mark defensively.  Had the nice play setting up a goal after skating around the net and was used on the PK for a couple shifts.  I'd have him over Hunt to see if he can take that next step and be an everyday NHL player on the bottom pair but that's unlikely.  That being said, will the play with the idea of an OJ - Rathbone bottom pair?  Most likely not but it's an interesting take none the less.

I'd pass on Burroughs just because hearing his name in game is weird lol

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, -AJ- said:

The thing is, Horvat has chemistry with almost everyone. He's just very easy to play with.

which is why it took 5 years to find him a single consistent linemate? he had a revolving door of wingers for the first half decade of his career. let the guy have some stability. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, tas said:

which is why it took 5 years to find him a single consistent linemate? he had a revolving door of wingers for the first half decade of his career. let the guy have some stability. 

I suspect coaches use Horvat to try to get other guys going, but I don't think it's coincidence that we've seen so many guys thrive with Horvat. Ronalds Kenins comes to mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

I suspect coaches use Horvat to try to get other guys going, but I don't think it's coincidence that we've seen so many guys thrive with Horvat. Ronalds Kenins comes to mind.

even if horvat is easy to develop chemistry with (which I don't necessarily agree with you on), it's not fair to expect him to carry that burden all the time. he should be allowed to thrive too, and before they got pearson, it was very clear that bo was frustrated with the revolving door. 

Edited by tas
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, tas said:

even horvat is easy to develop chemistry with (which I don't necessarily agree on), it's not fair to expect him to carry that burden all the time. he should be allowed to thrive too, and before they got pearson, it was very clear that bo was frustrated with the revolving door. 

Might be true. He does have good chemistry with Pearson, but I think he could also mesh very well with Hoglander and Garland too. I wouldn't be crushed if Hoglander is on the third line, but I do think that he's probably a better offensive player than Pearson and would probably do better in that role.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, tas said:

sedins and burrows never would have happened with that closed-minded ideology. 

 

chemistry is more important than who's better on paper. bo and pearse have chemistry, bo wants pearse on his wing, so keep pearse on his wing. 

 

The last time we had a quality top 6 the sedins played with Anson Carter. 
The sedins had so many wingers, and when Burrows ended up with them we were almost a one line team.

Regarding « ideology », 50+ years and counting with no cup should have show people that we may do things differently. 
Pearson is dragging down Horvat who could take off and shine with more skilled guys. It’s time to surround him with that because we have a tremendous depth this year. 

keep the sit next to Bo on plane to his buddy Pearson, but on ice he s not the right guy to let Horvat reach his potential.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

Might be true. He does have good chemistry with Pearson, but I think he could also mesh very well with Hoglander and Garland too. I wouldn't be crushed if Hoglander is on the third line, but I do think that he's probably a better offensive player than Pearson and would probably do better in that role.

don't discount pearson's opportunistic scoring touch and the value he brings playing heavy along the wall and at the front of the net. somebody's gotta dig pucks loose and get them in play, and if the center on the line is the only guy who can do it, it's not going to work because positionally he's required to be mostly on open space rather than along the boards. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, deus.ex.makina said:

The last time we had a quality top 6 the sedins played with Anson Carter. 
The sedins had so many wingers, and when Burrows ended up with them we were almost a one line team.

Regarding « ideology », 50+ years and counting with no cup should have show people that we may do things differently. 
Pearson is dragging down Horvat who could take off and shine with more skilled guys. It’s time to surround him with that because we have a tremendous depth this year. 

keep the sit next to Bo on plane to his buddy Pearson, but on ice he s not the right guy to let Horvat reach his potential.

 

yeah the 2009-12 teams had a brutal top 6 ...

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, deus.ex.makina said:

The last time we had a quality top 6 the sedins played with Anson Carter. 
The sedins had so many wingers, and when Burrows ended up with them we were almost a one line team.

Regarding « ideology », 50+ years and counting with no cup should have show people that we may do things differently. 
Pearson is dragging down Horvat who could take off and shine with more skilled guys. It’s time to surround him with that because we have a tremendous depth this year. 

keep the sit next to Bo on plane to his buddy Pearson, but on ice he s not the right guy to let Horvat reach his potential.

 

bo is a straight-line, north south, heavy player. putting perimeter finesse players on his wings will result in absolutely no offensive possession for the line. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, tas said:

don't discount pearson's opportunistic scoring touch and the value he brings playing heavy along the wall and at the front of the net. somebody's gotta dig pucks loose and get them in play, and if the center on the line is the only guy who can do it, it's not going to work because positionally he's required to be mostly on open space rather than along the boards. 

Pearson brings a size that Hoglander can't but Hoglander doesn't at all shy away from dirty work in the boards. He plays like he's 6'3" and is built surprisingly well and does well in board battles. In the end, I'd be okay with either guy on the line, but I can see a good case for Hoglander.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, tas said:

bo is a straight-line, north south, heavy player. putting perimeter finesse players on his wings will result in absolutely no offensive possession for the line. 

And which perimeter players are you referring to? Certainly couldn't be Hoglander or Garland. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said:

No one, outside of fans and a couple of idiots in the media, fishing for clicks, have said anything at all about him not being vaccinated. Considering his daughter has a problem with her lungs, its highly likely that he is fully vaccinated.

While I agree with you, I do wonder who is not vaccinated then as JB has stated that the team is not yet fully vaccinated but will be. 

I can see that all the players are playing (Hughes and Petterson soon) 

Could it be staff he's referring to? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

Pearson brings a size that Hoglander can't but Hoglander doesn't at all shy away from dirty work in the boards. He plays like he's 6'3" and is built surprisingly well and does well in board battles. In the end, I'd be okay with either guy on the line, but I can see a good case for Hoglander.

for an undersized guy you're definitely right, I just don't like the idea of offloading the heavy lifting on hoglander, especially this early in his career. 

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...