Pearson's days could be numbered?

[86Viking]

11 hours ago, D.B Cooper said:

Seeing as he is in the first year of a new contract with a full NTC…….   I’m gonna guess he ain’t leaving. 

probably true, but that was signed by a previous GM...

[aGENT]

21 minutes ago, JM_ said:

the thread title should really add "as a Canuck".

 

the one thing I see in the last 4 games is Pearson has been a little slow at times and made a couple of questionable passes, but I could be nitpicking on those.

 

He's OK. I would be a bit surprised if Rutherford could move him tbh with the extra two years on his deal but he's not a problem issue to keep either.

 

Its really Boeser's next deal thats going to drive the need, or not, to move someone like this.

Even then, we've got the cap to extend Boeser. The real problem is that we can likely only keep 2 out of Miller, Horvat and Boeser a year later.

[PhillipBlunt]

Trade him to Calgary for Gudbranson. 

[JM_]

40 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Even then, we've got the cap to extend Boeser. The real problem is that we can likely only keep 2 out of Miller, Horvat and Boeser a year later.

we do. Its just if the deal ends up in the mid-8's then we might need to move on from Dickie or Pearson  or Hamonic to fill in with two guys like Lockwood and Rathbone.

 

We should be able to pretty much field this roster next year tho. After that yeah it gets interesting.

[guntrix]

Pearson’s by far the most replaceable forward. In fact, with trying to retain as many of our younger forwards as their pay goes up, our short-term priority should be offloading Pearson’s cap hit. 

[JeremyCuddles]

15 hours ago, VancouverHabitant said:

Guys that have the same playstyle/skillset as Tanner Pearson are criminally underrated by fans. It's why you see fans craping on Alex Chiasson all the time.  

 

Standing in front of the net is necessary, and someone has to do it.  It doesn't look pretty and 91 out of 100 times it results into nothing, but you still have to keep on doing it. It's one of the toughest and most thankless jobs in hockey.  

 

I constantly see people suggesting that we swap out Pearson and Chiasson for different net-front guys and it just doesn't work in real life.  I can't tell you how many times you see guys like Boeser, Hoggy and others either late to get to the front of the net or else just doing a fly-by.  

 

 

Don't compare Chiasson to Pearson. It's disrespectful to Pearson.

[Guest]

18 minutes ago, N7Nucks said:

Don't compare Chiasson to Pearson. It's disrespectful to Pearson.

Pearson's offensive game is very similar to Chiasson's except that Pearson has a deadly shot as well.  

 

Screen the goalie, try to get a tip, puck goes in the corner and Chiasson/Pearson go in there to retrieve it and get it back to the point / half-wall.  

[Guest]

2 hours ago, guntrix said:

Pearson’s by far the most replaceable forward. In fact, with trying to retain as many of our younger forwards as their pay goes up, our short-term priority should be offloading Pearson’s cap hit. 

Just wondering who's going to be our net-front presence?  We've already seen Boeser fail at it multiple times, he's best in the bumper position.  

All our other forwards just can't do it.  They either don't want to take the cross checks or risk getting hit with the puck.  

 

Pearson is far from our most replaceable forward.  He'll end up with 20 goals and do the heavy defensive lifting on his line.  

The only way that we ship him out any time soon is if someone like Aidan McDonaugh keeps up his crazy scoring pace in NCAA and we feel like he can make the jump directly to the Show. 

[D.B Cooper]

3 hours ago, Canuckster86 said:

probably true, but that was signed by a previous GM...

Oh geez.  I’m sorry.  I forgot that voids his contract……..

OR,

as I said, first year of his deal with full NTC. He bargained for that contract and I’m guessing doesn’t want to leave.  

[CanucksJay]

18 hours ago, VancouverHabitant said:

Guys that have the same playstyle/skillset as Tanner Pearson are criminally underrated by fans. It's why you see fans craping on Alex Chiasson all the time.  

 

Standing in front of the net is necessary, and someone has to do it.  It doesn't look pretty and 91 out of 100 times it results into nothing, but you still have to keep on doing it. It's one of the toughest and most thankless jobs in hockey.  

 

I constantly see people suggesting that we swap out Pearson and Chiasson for different net-front guys and it just doesn't work in real life.  I can't tell you how many times you see guys like Boeser, Hoggy and others either late to get to the front of the net or else just doing a fly-by.  

 

 

It was great seeing a 4th line of Motte Lammikko Dowling instead of Chiasson no?

Im ok with CHiasson if he can play better but as of now, he is not good enough

[cdgraham]

I will say that Pearson with Miller and boeser looks like a pretty good fit. I agree with everyone saying players like Pearson are good to have and he is not really a problem at all. 

 

Will be interesting to see what Rutherford does 

[cdgraham]

8 hours ago, vannuck59 said:

We are winning and your already bitching about players . Come on , just be happy. 

At what point was I bitching? I like Pearson. I'm simply pointing out he might be traded lol 

[cdgraham]

12 hours ago, iceman64 said:

If it was a trade for a forward or a D, hopefully he's 6'2-3-4, mean tough fast and skilled..  not soft.. not saying he's particularly soft BUT we need to get bigger so we don't get pushed around by bigger physical teams.

I would agree just not gudbranson haha

[sockeye]

19 hours ago, eeeeergh said:

Probably doesn't have any trade value imo. 10-15 goal guy, not a penalty killer, pretty expensive contract.

Pearson is a penalty killer (one of the main ones).  The way he's played for the Canucks and how TG and BB have used him, he does have trade value (not huge but there is value there).  He is also one of the more physical players on a team that lacks physical players.

[PhillipBlunt]

3 minutes ago, cdgraham said:

I would agree just not gudbranson haha

He's doing well under Sutter in Calgary. That being said, I'd prefer Rutherford going for Chiarot or Edmundson out of Montreal.

[eeeeergh]

Just now, sockeye said:

Pearson is a penalty killer (one of the main ones).  The way he's played for the Canucks and how TG and BB have used him, he does have trade value (not huge but there is value there).  He is also one of the more physical players on a team that lacks physical players.

I could be wrong, but I dont think TG was using him as a penalty killer. Boudreau is now, but thats along with 7 other players. I just meant to say that Pearson isn't a PK specialist.

He is physical and a good net front presence - I'm not saying hes not a good player, but due to his contract, he has negative trade value. 

Kind of like OEL - hes an incredibly valuable player but in terms of trade value it became almost 0 because of the contract (hence why we managed to fleece them for Garland too haha). 

[Junkyard Dog]

After Rutherford's presser he could be moved at some point in the near future. Sounds like a good chance we will be sellers at some point.

 

In the same breath Rutherford mentioned that even though he wants more younger players that he'll add a short-term veteran presence if it makes sense.

[RolexSub]

17 hours ago, Junkyard Dog said:

He isn't a priority to deal with right now.

Exactly....this is low priority in my mind. Plus if you trade him, we won't get much for him anyways. 

[kloubek]

I appreciate the desire of some fans to jettison our guys who are underperforming. 

 

But there's *always* someone who underperforms. This year, we happened to have a half dozen guys who have played like a shell of their former selves. Some of them seem to be starting to put it back together. Some... well... not so much. Pearson is a member of the latter group.

 

But you can't just get rid of guys because they are going through a lull. Pearson has been a solid performer for us since arriving from the Penguins, and I wouldn't be surprised to see him pick it up again at some point. At least give him the opportunity to play alongside players who are clicking, and if he still can't put it all back together, then trade him at the deadline. It isn't like we're going to get much of a return for him (if any) at this point anyway...

[guntrix]

6 hours ago, VancouverHabitant said:

Just wondering who's going to be our net-front presence?  We've already seen Boeser fail at it multiple times, he's best in the bumper position.  

All our other forwards just can't do it.  They either don't want to take the cross checks or risk getting hit with the puck.  

 

Pearson is far from our most replaceable forward.  He'll end up with 20 goals and do the heavy defensive lifting on his line.  

The only way that we ship him out any time soon is if someone like Aidan McDonaugh keeps up his crazy scoring pace in NCAA and we feel like he can make the jump directly to the Show. 

I mean, it’s going to get to the point where we won’t be able to fit all of Pearson, Miller, Horvat, Boeser, Garland and Pettersson with Hoglander’s and Podkolzin’s ELCs set to run out in 1-2 years time. Which of those top-6 players would you trade away to keep Pearson?  In fact, there’s a chance even trading Pearson won’t give us enough cap to retain all those guys. In a cap world, we simply can’t have it all. 
 

#ThankYouDimJim for wasting all those precious ELC years.