Young RD Targets (Crowd Sourced haha)

[Coconuts]

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

I'm OK with penciling some mix of Poolman, Woo and Juulsen in as right side, bottom pair/spare guys for a year or two from now personally. I think we're reasonably covered there. And we do have Persson and Myrenberg as potential lotto tickets on the right. Not much else though and nothing with concrete, top 4, replace Myers minutes, capability though. Therein lies the problem IMO. The very one I'm suggesting we need to solve. I don't see Rutherford just ignoring and crossing his fingers that, that hole fills itself.

 

Weegar is defintely the 'player type' I'd love to see (though bigger/meaner would be nice)...thinking he's just a touch on the older than preferred side (25 max IMO)  and as MLL noted, the Panthers aren't exactly struggling to score. Not sure they 'need' Boeser enough to warrant moving Weegar...?

 

Good outside the box suggestions. Not sure either have the ultimate ceiling we'd prefer but would be decent, low risk, low cost gambles that could at least play in your bottom 4 likely, if not ultimately the guy I think we're looking for.

I'd be looking at it as having to replace Myers and Hamonic because I'm not sure Hamonic falls into our longer term plans 

 

Arguments can be made as to whether he's top 4 caliber or not, but it could potentially be 2/3 of our RD we've got to replace sooner than later 

 

I think it probably will be, though it's hard to say what Myers will be at 34 or whether we wish to retain him or not 

[Ballisticsports.]

3 hours ago, Coconuts said:

I disagree, I really do. I don't believe losing Miller would be as devastating as some folks make it out to be. I have strong doubts regarding whether his play can hold up well enough to be worth what he's going to cost, and I seriously question whether he'll want to remain in Vancouver at all. 

 

As for value? How do you know? "We would never" is a bit of an absolute ain't it? Realistically you, like the rest of us, have no idea. Players move, that's hockey, I don't see why we couldn't get fair value. Rutherford has a reputation for making fair trades which is why he's been able to make so many. And "currently brings" is worth pondering. 

 

Miller will be 29 in March, and as a pending UFA he'll command a 6-8 year deal likely starting higher than 7M. Miller right now likely isn't the player you see halfway through a lengthy deal, and as a UFA why would he take less? This is his last chance to cash in on a big deal. Loyalty to the team? We're already the third team he's played for, we aren't getting a large discount. 

 

I think a lot of folks are getting too hung up on the player Miller is right now. Could he be an effective player into his 30's? Possibly. Would he be worth a large retirement style contract? I sure as hell wouldn't put money on it. 

 

I don't care if we take a step back offensively by trading Miller closer to the deadline, straight up. Rutherford said there were holes coming in when he got here, we're currently a capped out team. Several players will need re-signing or replacing in the coming years. Keeping the band together ain't all that realistic without negatively impacting other areas of the roster. You can only allocate so much to your top six. 

 

Miller and Horvat will need deals, we'll need to make a decision on Boeser soon. Pettersson needs a new deal the year after Miller and Horvat expire. Hoglander needs a new deal the same year as Miller and Horvat. Myers will be 32 in February, he'll be 34 before his deal is up, we'll have to find a viable replacement and than may very well cost more than his current 6M. We aren't getting a top 4D to replace Hamonic at 3M or less. Podz will need a new deal the same year as Pettersson. And all the aforementioned feature only D or guys who are/should be top six guys. We're still missing a legitimate 3c, I don't see Miller/Pettersson/Horvat being a long term thing, they'll all be making too much. 

 

 

 

I personally wouldn't sign Miller to a retirement deal, I figure he'll be too expensive and the term will be too long. 

 

The defense is def concerning. Myers has looked great, but he'll be 32 soon and he'll be 34 by the time his deal is up. Is he a top 4D at 34? Probably not. Is Hamonic still a top 4D? Tough to say, haven't seen enough of him this season. But we sure as hell aren't getting a top 4D for the 3M he's currently making. Poolman's the only guy who's not a question mark on our right side going forward given his deal. Aside from Woo we really don't have much in the system right now, at least as far as guys who might be close go. And given how in demand RD are a legit top 4 guy won't come cheap via free agency, assuming we manage to lure him to Vancouver in the first place. The downside of trading for RD is it'll cost you assets, the downside to pursuing guys via UFA is you pay a premium and you've got to compete with several other teams. 

 

Bolstering our D ain't likely to be a cut and dry process.

This is the reason that Canucks Never sell high on Canucks

Owners Management and fans get too attached

Yes he has been good for us and why another team will give a good return for him

His age/contract and what we could get in return instead will strengthen this team more in the long run than resigning him long term

[flickyoursedin]

Adam Boqvist out of Columbus since he’s been there for the start of this season he’s been hurt twice. Has had his fair share of injuries in Chicago as well. However I think the kid has 50+ point potential as a puck moving RHD. Got to think if they don’t like his injury history and made him available his price tag would never be lower than right now.

[Maniwaki Canuck]

Some of the crazy overpayments proposed here show that the cure can be worse than the illness.  I'm not arguing that our RD are great or that trading for good young ones will come cheap.  But if you overpay so much, you better have a clear idea of what problem you are fixing.  Is it Hughes Norris-level play this year?  He seems to be doing pretty well without a great partner.  That's one measure of an outstanding player.  It allows you to have strength in other areas, like we do at forward.  And gives us the identity of an attacking team that we got away from under Green latterly.  It's true that we don't have a particularly balanced lineup so I understand where the idea of rebalancing comes from, but it gets us away from playing to our strengths, just like Green's system did. 

[Coconuts]

18 minutes ago, ba;;isticsports said:

This is the reason that Canucks Never sell high on Canucks

Owners Management and fans get too attached

Yes he has been good for us and why another team will give a good return for him

His age/contract and what we could get in return instead will strengthen this team more in the long run than resigning him long term

Agreed, Rutherford being brought in encourages me though 

 

He's been ruthless in the past and made plenty of trades, those in hockey management can't afford to get too attached 

[Ballisticsports.]

1 minute ago, Coconuts said:

Agreed, Rutherford being brought in encourages me though 

 

He's been ruthless in the past and made plenty of trades, those in hockey management can't afford to get too attached 

While Miller has been real good

He is also playing for a new high long contract

Not many UFA contracts are good bargains for the term

As you mentioned we could get great value and move him at a high return for someone and picks who will help us in a weak position that is younger, cheaper 

Too bad we couldn't have this Miller with current age and contract on the team in 2-3 yrs from now

[BigTramFan]

 

3 hours ago, IBatch said:

I think you might be have me confused for someone else.   We do in fact, have the best D we've had in some time, Myers OEL is a legit first pairing.   And QHs is one of or maybe the leagues best Rover.    But just because you brought it up, yes i'd consider our team D middling despite our record suggesting it's worse then that.   As it is right now.    First time since the early 2010's it's not mediocre to bottom dwelling.   I haven't seen this years rankings for mid or late season, but do get them every season from THN anyways, and it hasn't been flattering for some time.   Edler led the league in minus one year .. Sbisa, Hutton, Del Zotto etc ...   Glad those days are gone.   And your absolutely right - one of PIT cups they didn't have Letang at all, Shultz did the heavy lifting lol...but they did have Crosby.   WSH cup teams were better. 

 

Bruce Bump could change some minds and i hope so.  OEL/Myers have been 10/11 most of the season 5 x 5 as far as possession goes, pretty darn good.   And the effect it's had on QHs for sure helps as well.    Aside from our below average record, i'd rank our D middle of the row yes.    Adding Manson for sure would be an upgrade, been pining for him for a couple seasons now with ANA cycle, he's a good trade and sign proposition.   He has to want to come here though.    

Yeah sorry. Got two separate replies mixed together there!

 

You asked about the cap space, and @aGENT said this about upgrading Hamonic with Manson: "As above, JR doesn't sound like he's planning to band-aid solutions to continue along as a middling team. He wants to build a contender. A continuing middling D with no real top 4 succession plan for losing Myers/Hamonic over the next two years doesn't sound like it fits that."

[aGENT]

56 minutes ago, BigTramFan said:

 

Yeah sorry. Got two separate replies mixed together there!

 

You asked about the cap space, and @aGENT said this about upgrading Hamonic with Manson: "As above, JR doesn't sound like he's planning to band-aid solutions to continue along as a middling team. He wants to build a contender. A continuing middling D with no real top 4 succession plan for losing Myers/Hamonic over the next two years doesn't sound like it fits that."

I'm all for adding a Manson or a Mayfield or a younger Mayo et al. But none are likely to solve our longer term, replacing (upgrading?) Myers, top 4 slot, when he's gone or slowing down in two years.

 

Replacing/upgrading on Hamonic?  Sure.

 

And yes, without a Crosby/Malkin duo, it's a pretty safe bet of defense winning championships. Current, competitively deep forward group or not, it's not enough. Hughes is GREAT but he's one guy. He needs support around him and better support than he has today, with a succession plan  post-Myers, through Hughes' prime (2-7) years.

[Junkyard Dog]

Best way to acquire young top 4 RD is to draft them unfortunately.

 

This next draft is very forward heavy in the first round and we don't have our own 2nd/3rd round picks(We have WPG 3rd round pick).

 

Nobody will trade young top 4 RD on their NHL roster unless they have an excess which no one really does. You could trade for prospects with that sort of potential.

 

Not many people here are keen on trading significant pieces like a Miller or a Boeser though but they aren't Rutherford. Who knows what decisions he makes in regard to the roster.

[wildcam]

On 12/20/2021 at 7:17 PM, BPA said:

LA is probably the only one that we could pry the young RHD prospect (Clarke).  I don't think they are rebuilding or retooling.  I think they are looking for one last chance with their old core (Kopitar, etc).

 

So it would have to a be a good player to pry a top prospect.  Unfortunately, I can only think of the big 3 contracts that will be expiring soon (Boeser, Miller, and Horvat).

 

Won't be a 1 for 1 deal cuz Canucks would be giving up a proven top 6 forward on very good contracts.  Would most likely get Clarke + player + 2nd (a 1st if it's Miller or Horvat).

 

But that's just my opinion. 

Young team building up young group under 24...I don't think they target Miller or Horvat...Miller will attract team close to cup run and return could be a jackpot 1st rounder and young prospect...

[BigTramFan]

9 hours ago, aGENT said:

I'm all for adding a Manson or a Mayfield or a younger Mayo et al. But none are likely to solve our longer term, replacing (upgrading?) Myers, top 4 slot, when he's gone or slowing down in two years.

 

Replacing/upgrading on Hamonic?  Sure.

 

And yes, without a Crosby/Malkin duo, it's a pretty safe bet of defense winning championships. Current, competitively deep forward group or not, it's not enough. Hughes is GREAT but he's one guy. He needs support around him and better support than he has today, with a succession plan  post-Myers, through Hughes' prime (2-7) years.

Well Poolman hasn't been embarrassed when playing a top 4 role alongside either of our puckmoving LHD, but if you're looking for someone younger that looks to have a very promising future I think of Ethan Bear (RHD, 24 years old, currently in CAR, RFA next season) plays in all situations, I like his game. With DeAngelo doing so well in CAR this season, they likely resign him which makes Bear their 3RD behind DeAngelo and Pesce. He could be available for the right price. Don't know what that would be though...CAR will have a bunch of forwards leaving during the off season and a decent amount of cap space (can't see them resigning Neiderreiter, Trocheck or Stepan). Could they be interested in Boeser in exchange for Bear + Drury + ?...or something similar? (Drury is a 21 y/o C prospect)...

Edited December 22, 2021 by BigTramFan

[86Viking]

17 hours ago, higgyfan said:

 

 

Cole Schwindt is a gem, who will end up on the team's top 6 at some point. Right now he is tearing it up the AHL.  I think he would start as a 3C; shooting right.

 

This is where we need a big change...we need Canuck Scouts to find players like this outside of round 1/2. We have made so many misses with picks and lacked picks for 8 years there is NO reason why we should still have a lack of prospects like we do now. This player is in the AHL now so lets see if he can translate his game to the NHL but you need your scouts to find NHL players in all rounds in every draft possible to continue to succeed. 

 

Those cheap ELC come in handy when you become a legit playoff team and those salaries are near league minimum yet you have effective NHL players who help contribute

[aGENT]

6 hours ago, BigTramFan said:

Well Poolman hasn't been embarrassed when playing a top 4 role alongside either of our puckmoving LHD, but if you're looking for someone younger that looks to have a very promising future I think of Ethan Bear (RHD, 24 years old, currently in CAR, RFA next season) plays in all situations, I like his game. With DeAngelo doing so well in CAR this season, they likely resign him which makes Bear their 3RD behind DeAngelo and Pesce. He could be available for the right price. Don't know what that would be though...CAR will have a bunch of forwards leaving during the off season and a decent amount of cap space (can't see them resigning Neiderreiter, Trocheck or Stepan). Could they be interested in Boeser in exchange for Bear + Drury + ?...or something similar? (Drury is a 21 y/o C prospect)...

Yes Poolman can occasionally fill in the top 4.

 

And again, nothing against the Manson's, Bear's, Mayo's etc... Happy for JR to bring one of them in over the next year or so.

 

But if that's our bar for right side D in our top 4, we're not getting to contender status.

 

Are we really okay with Bear, Poolman, Woo/Juulsen as our right side in 2 years with the rest of the team in their prime and attempting to contend...?

[J.I.A.H.N]

18 hours ago, Maniwaki Canuck said:

Some of the crazy overpayments proposed here show that the cure can be worse than the illness.  I'm not arguing that our RD are great or that trading for good young ones will come cheap.  But if you overpay so much, you better have a clear idea of what problem you are fixing.  Is it Hughes Norris-level play this year?  He seems to be doing pretty well without a great partner.  That's one measure of an outstanding player.  It allows you to have strength in other areas, like we do at forward.  And gives us the identity of an attacking team that we got away from under Green latterly.  It's true that we don't have a particularly balanced lineup so I understand where the idea of rebalancing comes from, but it gets us away from playing to our strengths, just like Green's system did. 

I see what you mean, but we have a problem with a lack of talent on the RHD. Myers is doing a decent job, but I think we need someone of a higher pedigree over there, whether it is be to play with Hughes or not. The problem is, he is not in our system yet, and any draft pick is 2/3 years away, and then you are still counting on him turning out as high as his ranking said he was, and you and I both know there is no guarantees to that, so what do we do?

 

Don't get me wrong, I absolutely hate the idea of moving Miller, as I would Horvat , Boeser, or Pettersson. But that fact is we are competing against time, Cap, and player progression. I for one, have not the foggiest idea, how to do that, without robbing Peter to pay Paul.

 

I think one of the questions is do we give up asset today to be competitive tomorrow, or do we put in the time to draft and develop and play with what we have. What I think complicates the last idea, is Cap, and how we balance it. IMO, it is a multi-facetted issue, where there is no, one right answer. I keep asking myself, as you have, what does our team look like without Miller or any of the other fore-mentioned players. Then I immediately slip into who is easiest to replace? Answer......Boeser...........Then I ask, who gives us the least amount of return........again, Boeser.

 

If Boeser can get us that young, potentially 1/2 RHD, then I say go for it, but I am not sure he does, he probably gets us a 2/3, but is that enough, and is it really alot  more than what we already have? I am not sure. I am not sure any other team is going to cough up a 1/2 Dman for Miller either. So then it comes down to who we keep, plus who we add, is it better if it's Miller or Boeser that we trade..............and what is more important, our long term goals or our short term goals?

 

LOL, so that takes me to an entirely different thought process, where if the short term goals are more important, then maybe Pettersson is the one to go, as I am pretty sure, we could get more for him than Boeser, and probably Miller, also. ( I think Pettersson gets you a young NHL proven #1/2 Dman and a 1st), but do we give up the future for that return?

 

For me, it is really hard to drive a 1/4 mile, without driving off the road on this one. So many variables!

 

It all comes down to, who gives us the best return, and is that return sufficient enough to trade that player........................like I say, I am all over the road on this one!

 

 

 

 

[J.I.A.H.N]

@Maniwaki Canuck

 

Pettersson

 

for

 

Soderstrom, Montreal's 2022-1st* (conditional) and Keller

 

 

Do you do it? Do they?

 

 

 

Edited December 22, 2021 by J.I.A.H.N

[BigTramFan]

Three way trade...

 

To ARI: Pettersson

To NYI: Chychrun

To VAN: Pulock

 

[Canuck Surfer]

On 12/21/2021 at 5:07 PM, hammertime said:

Helenius + Clarke please and we let them drop a Brown in our backyard. 

I sh!t myself laughing... 

[Hairy Kneel]

On 12/20/2021 at 8:42 PM, aGENT said:

Miller is a top 20 F in the league and Rathbone is a fairly highly touted, young, dynamic, offensive D.

 

They may very well have no desire to move us Clarke, but that's far from an inferior package.

I believe that the Canucks can cultivate Rathbone into a gfeat trade asset. But Coach B has to be in on his development to get the most out of the player and Coach Cull. 

With Hughes we can afford to trade Rathbone. Or package him with someone. 

[Guest]

On 12/21/2021 at 3:41 PM, Maniwaki Canuck said:

Some of the crazy overpayments proposed here show that the cure can be worse than the illness.  I'm not arguing that our RD are great or that trading for good young ones will come cheap.  But if you overpay so much, you better have a clear idea of what problem you are fixing.  Is it Hughes Norris-level play this year?  He seems to be doing pretty well without a great partner.  That's one measure of an outstanding player.  It allows you to have strength in other areas, like we do at forward.  And gives us the identity of an attacking team that we got away from under Green latterly.  It's true that we don't have a particularly balanced lineup so I understand where the idea of rebalancing comes from, but it gets us away from playing to our strengths, just like Green's system did. 

I agree to a point...  

 

I don't think that we can upgrade enough over guys like Schenn, Poolman, and Hamonic to justify making a move with the sole intention of improving our RD.  

On the other hand, I do feel that we have one forward too many and that making room for an Aiden McDonaugh or Danila Klimovich one or two years down the line wouldn't be the worst thing.  

Brock Boeser's agent priced his client out of Vancouver unfortunately, so I do see a fit for a trade there. 

[aGENT]

7 hours ago, J.I.A.H.N said:

LOL, so that takes me to an entirely different thought process, where if the short term goals are more important, then maybe Pettersson is the one to go, as I am pretty sure, we could get more for him than Boeser, and probably Miller, also. ( I think Pettersson gets you a young NHL proven #1/2 Dman and a 1st), but do we give up the future for that return?

 

 

Sounds like the opposite of Rutherford's stated plan.