Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Enter Search Term. Use arrows to navigate between autocomplete results. If no results appear, use Enter to do a full site search.
Forum Closure ×
Canucks Community
Forum-specific Rules
Forum Closure

[Waivers] Blake Comeau, Tanner Kero, Rocco Grimaldi

-Vintage Canuck-
 Share

Recommended Posts

DrJockitch Canucks First-Line

DrJockitch

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, RWJC said:

We are likely going to need to replace Sutter. Do you really want to do that with a 36 year old on the decline who may have existing injury issues? 
I’d rather us find a younger, solid long term replacement if possible, and put whatever cap we have towards that. 

 

Any money spent is still real to FA.
 

Sounds like Sutter except he is playing now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JM_ Canucks Hall-of-Famer

JM_

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, DrJockitch said:

I would take chance on Comeau. Big hitter, PKer which clearly we could use. Chemistry with Dickinson. Contract is can be buried if doesn’t work out. 

seems like a free gift to try to improve the PK. Sure beats trading a real asset.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
on the cycle Canucks Rookie

on the cycle

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Quantum said:

He's 5'6".

 

He could be useful but the crowd screaming "WE NEED TO GET BIGGER" will lose their minds if he got claimed by the Canucks. He's not a bad bottom six player and plays a lot like another short player (Nathan Gerbe).

 

Blake Comeau seems like the most likely pick if the Canucks are gonna grab anyone off waivers here.

 

That said, the Canucks need a right shot center badly and none of these players fit that need.

Höglander and Garland (listed at 5'10" but says he's 5'9") are both 5'9" and are 2 of the grittiest guys on our team.

 

Size doesn't mean tough. Stan Smyl proved that decades ago. I think size is important but not at the expense of speed, skill, and competency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
aGENT Canucks Hall-of-Famer

aGENT

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, RWJC said:

We are likely going to need to replace Sutter. Do you really want to do that with a 36 year old on the decline who may have existing injury issues? 
I’d rather us find a younger, solid long term replacement if possible, and put whatever cap we have towards that. 

 

Any money spent is still real to FA.
 

That sounds great!

 

Unfortunately, the player you're describing isn't found for free on waivers or for a $1m cap hit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcam Canucks Third-Line

wildcam

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Alflives said:

Is Rocco an upgrade for us?  Isn't he a PK guy and energy fourth line guy?  

I would say big no to Comeau 35 yrs old..We have Motte coming back soon to play with Dickinson , Pearson, Lammikko and Highmore there are 5 players.

We must remember Motte is key PK guy and all these other PK guys have not played together...We will get it together soon and Motte will be so good to have back..

 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RWJC Canucks First-Line

RWJC

Posted
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, aGENT said:

That sounds great!

 

Unfortunately, the player you're describing isn't found for free on waivers or for a $1m cap hit.

Right, and that’s why I’m saying we would have to explore through trade and acquire a piece that will actually be “foundational” for years to come rather than a continual IR/waiver candidate.

 

A guy like Sean Kuraly would be the kind of fit I’m thinking of. I’m not saying we can acquire him, but hopefully someone of the same ilk and even a bit younger 

Edited by RWJC
Link to comment
Share on other sites
aGENT Canucks Hall-of-Famer

aGENT

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, RWJC said:

Right, and that’s why I’m saying we would have to explore through trade and acquire a piece that will actually be “foundational” for years to come rather than a continual IR/waiver candidate.

Chances are, that player is going to be in Dickinson-esque $2.5m+ territory cap wise though. So how?

 

Edit:

IMO we need to develop that player. Perhaps we eventually get Jasek back in that role or a guy like Focht develops there but trading for one... Non starter IMO.

Edited by aGENT
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RWJC Canucks First-Line

RWJC

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Chances are, that player is going to be in Dickinson-esque $2.5m+ territory cap wise though. So how?

 

Edit:

IMO we need to develop that player. Perhaps we eventually get Jasek back in that role or a guy like Focht develops there but trading for one... Non starter IMO.

Well, once we know Sutter is not coming back we start to make preparations for another acquisition that can fill his skates.  Yeah, I would love for us to develop that talent, but how many have we developed to fit that role in the last few years. Lind? Gone. Who else? 
 

Hate to say it, but if we want to solidify the bottom 6, it might take eventually moving an in-betweener like Pearson and his cap hit, once his spot in the top 6 is overtaken.
 

 But if we could find that younger, definitive 3rd line C we would be in much better shape. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
aGENT Canucks Hall-of-Famer

aGENT

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, RWJC said:

Well, once we know Sutter is not coming back we start to make preparations for another acquisition that can fill his skates.  Yeah, I would love for us to develop that talent, but how many have we developed to fit that role in the last few years. Lind? Gone. Who else? 
 

Hate to say it, but if we want to solidify the bottom 6, it might take eventually moving an in-betweener like Pearson and his cap hit, once his spot in the top 6 is overtaken.
 

 But if we could find that younger, definitive 3rd line C we would be in much better shape. 

Sutter is on a 1 year deal, they were likely already 'planning' to replace him. 

 

Good, young, 3C unfortunately don't grow on trees. (Part of why we haven't magically developed one).

 

Pearson could be moveable in another year or so, doubt that's a move we make this year though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RWJC Canucks First-Line

RWJC

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Sutter is on a 1 year deal, they were likely already 'planning' to replace him. 

 

Good, young, 3C unfortunately don't grow on trees. (Part of why we haven't magically developed one).

 

Pearson could be moveable in another year or so, doubt that's a move we make this year though.

Yeah, like I said planning to replace Sutter. Maybe sooner than later. Why we signed him for a single year. Obviously hoped to get some value from him this season but that may be a wash. We absolutely need a face off man who can PK, besides Motte.

 

You want us to develop one but then admit that is hard to do so, all the while knowing our development system is relatively weak.

 

This is why we would have to rely on acquiring said asset from another team. Or perhaps through FA, but I’m talking about options for trying to salvage this season. 
 

I’m with you, I’d rather wait but not sure JB can afford to do that. 

 

If we’re out of contention, I can envision Pearson being dealt by deadline. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
aGENT Canucks Hall-of-Famer

aGENT

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, RWJC said:

Yeah, like I said planning to replace Sutter. Maybe sooner than later. Why we signed him for a single year. Obviously hoped to get some value from him this season but that may be a wash. We absolutely need a face off man who can PK, besides Motte.

 

You want us to develop one but then admit that is hard to do so, all the while knowing our development system is relatively weak.

 

This is why we would have to rely on acquiring said asset from another team. Or perhaps through FA, but I’m talking about options for trying to salvage this season. 
 

I’m with you, I’d rather wait but not sure JB can afford to do that. 

 

If we’re out of contention, I can envision Pearson being dealt by deadline. 

I'm actually baffled we let Jasek go to Finland so easily for that reason. Here's hoping that sorts itself out.

 

Personally though, if we're using our scant cap space later this season, I'd prefer it be filling our 3rd LD hole by trading for expiring McNabb once Vegas needs to clear cap. Worry more about replacing Sutter in the summer.

  • Like 1
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcam Canucks Third-Line

wildcam

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, aGENT said:

I'm actually baffled we let Jasek go to Finland so easily for that reason. Here's hoping that sorts itself out.

 

Personally though, if we're using our scant cap space later this season, I'd prefer it be filling our 3rd LD hole by trading for expiring McNabb once Vegas needs to clear cap. Worry more about replacing Sutter in the summer.

Yes yes like his size and toughness..Like this kind of thinking..McNabb 30, 6'4, 220, playing 20 mins a game... Like make this happen before season is over 2.5 million UFA this summer...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
aGENT Canucks Hall-of-Famer

aGENT

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, wildcam said:

Yes yes like his size and toughness..Like this kind of thinking..McNabb 30, 6'4, 220, playing 20 mins a game... Like make this happen before season is over 2.5 million UFA this summer...

Unfortunately, if they can't start actually playing and winning games, we may not be 'buying' anyone. But if they can, he's the perfect fit for what we need. Big, tough, defensive/PK capable D to play behind Hughes and OEL.

 

Edit:

McNabb/Hamonic would give us a legit, pk1 capable pair.

 

 

Edited by aGENT
  • 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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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