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 Closure

[GDT] Around the NHL | April (17-23) 2022

Rate this topic

-Vintage Canuck-
 Share

Recommended Posts

DeNiro Canucks Hall-of-Famer

DeNiro

Posted
Posted
56 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

Gustav Forsling with his ninth goal and 35th point, which'd be good enough for sixth in scoring for the Canucks and better numbers than any D not named Hughes. He sure found his way in Florida. 

But how is Juolevi playing??

 

Thats what fans really wanna know!

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JM_ Canucks Hall-of-Famer

JM_

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Coconuts said:

Gustav Forsling with his ninth goal and 35th point, which'd be good enough for sixth in scoring for the Canucks and better numbers than any D not named Hughes. He sure found his way in Florida. 

it would be nice if we could find a pickup like this. He needed to bounce to 3 other teams to find his game. 

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Coconuts Canucks Hall-of-Famer

Coconuts

Posted
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, JM_ said:

it would be nice if we could find a pickup like this. He needed to bounce to 3 other teams to find his game. 

Oh for sure, it was a process for him it just sucks to see the end result happening somewhere else when we've struggled to develop much of anything in the way of homegrown D, or D who've made the jump to the big and stuck as Canucks. If you don't count Hughes you've basically gotta go back to Hutton or Stecher to note anyone significant. Prior to that you're probably looking at Tanev. 

 

Our inability to bring our own D along has been a huge problem and contributes to the mess that is our defense. 

Edited by Coconuts
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alflives Canucks Hall-of-Famer

Alflives

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

Oh for sure, it was a process for him it just sucks to see the end result happening somewhere else when we've struggled to develop much of anything in the way of homegrown D, or D who've made the jump to the big and stuck as Canucks. If you don't count Hughes you've basically gotta go back to Hutton or Stecher to note anyone significant. Prior to that you're probably looking at Tanev. 

 

Our inability to bring our own D along has been a huge problem and contributes to the mess that is our defense. 

Only D on the two TBay cup teams they drafted was Hedman.  Smart trades and UFA signings filled out the other guys.  

 

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

Coconuts

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

Only D on the two TBay cup teams they drafted was Hedman.  Smart trades and UFA signings filled out the other guys.  

 

Maybe, but they've also had D like Sustr, Koekkoek, Nesterov, Sergachev, Cernak, and Foote play games for them since 16-17. Sergachev played all of 4 games for Montreal, he broke in with Tampa. All the others were drafted and brought along by Tampa. Nesterov is the only one of that group that hasn't played an NHL game this season. Even Nesterov played 100 games for them. We've had Hutton, Stecher, and Hughes. 

 

Our track record of bringing along D who even reach 100 games has been abysmal, and Hutton and Stecher never amounted to anything more than third pairing D. Tampa's got top 4 guys out of Cernak and Sergachev, Foote could be something yet. The others were serviceable third pairing D or depth guys. 

 

Vancouver's had a problem drafting and developing D and it's resulted in having to overpay via UFA or bring in players via trade.

Edited by Coconuts
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alflives Canucks Hall-of-Famer

Alflives

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

Maybe, but they've also had D like Sustr, Koekkoek, Nesterov, Sergachev, Cernak, and Foote play games for them since 16-17. Sergachev played all of 4 games for Montreal, he broke in with Tampa. All the others were drafted and brought along by Tampa. Nesterov is the only one of that group that hasn't played an NHL game this season. Even Nesterov played 100 games for them. We've had Hutton, Stecher, and Hughes. 

 

Our track record of bringing along D who even reach 100 games has been abysmal, and Hutton and Stecher never amounted to anything more than third pairing D. Tampa's got top 4 guys out of Cernak and Sergachev, Foote could be something yet. The others were serviceable third pairing D or depth guys. 

 

Vancouver's had a problem drafting and developing D and it's resulted in having to overpay via UFA or bring in players via trade.

TBay drafted Hedman.  There other D (who were playoff guys) were all traded for or signed as UFAs.  

We drafted Hughes.  We can definitely build a great D around him.  But it will take smart moves to do like TBay did.

 

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

Coconuts

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

TBay drafted Hedman.  There other D (who were playoff guys) were all traded for or signed as UFAs.  

We drafted Hughes.  We can definitely build a great D around him.  But it will take smart moves to do like TBay did.

 

Tampa drafted Hedman, Cernak, and were responsible for bringing Sergachev along. All three featured on those cup winning teams. 

 

But that's not even my gripe, it's easy to look back on cup winning teams as the end result, but my entire point is we haven't been able to draft and develop our own D. You brought up Tampa and I pointed out other D who they've drafted or brought along during the same time period. A team that's been as bad as we have over the last eight or ten years should have been able to bring along and integrate more players than a team that's been consistently competitive and yet we've got three D of note and two of them now play for other teams. 

 

Our inability to draft and develop D is, and has been, a problem. It means we don't have cost controlled RFA D of our own on the roster. It means we've had to sign guys like Myers, Benn, Schenn, Hamonic, and Poolman because we haven't had players of our own to fill those roles, it means we've brought in placeholders like Hunt, Del Zotto, Burroughs, and Fantenburg because we haven't had prospects who can stick and play a depth role. I like Burroughs, but let's be real, I doubt anyone saw him being much of anything at the beginning of the season, he was always going to be depth. 

 

Not being able to draft and develop your own players means you're having to compete with other teams in UFA in order to plug roster holes, or that you're trading assets to plug roster holes. It also means we've got a lack of young D on the roster, because we're either signing UFA vets or taking flyers on players that haven't done much elsewhere. 

Edited by Coconuts
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alflives Canucks Hall-of-Famer

Alflives

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

Tampa drafted Hedman, Cernak, and were responsible for bringing Sergachev along. All three featured on those cup winning teams. 

 

But that's not even my gripe, it's easy to look back on cup winning teams as the end result, but my entire point is we haven't been able to draft and develop our own D. You brought up Tampa and I pointed out other D who they've drafted or brought along during the same time period. A team that's been as bad as we have over the last eight or ten years should have been able to bring along and integrate more players than a team that's been consistently competitive and yet we've got three D of note and two of them now play for other teams. 

 

Our inability to draft and develop D is, and has been, a problem. It means we don't have cost controlled RFA D of our own on the roster. It means we've had to sign guys like Myers, Benn, Schenn, Hamonic, and Poolman because we haven't had players of our own to fill those roles, it means we've brought in placeholders like Hunt, Del Zotto, Burroughs, and Fantenburg because we haven't had prospects who can stick and play a depth role. I like Burroughs, but let's be real, I doubt anyone saw him being much of anything at the beginning of the season, he was always going to be depth. 

 

Not being able to draft and develop your own players means you're having to compete with other teams in UFA in order to plug roster holes, or that you're trading assets to plug roster holes. It also means we've got a lack of young D on the roster, because we're either signing UFA vets or taking flyers on players that haven't done much elsewhere. 

Cernak was drafted by LA and traded for.

We can build a great D with smart trades and signings, but we need to be smart about it, like TBay.

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

Coconuts

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Cernak was drafted by LA and traded for.

We can build a great D with smart trades and signings, but we need to be smart about it, like TBay.

So he was, but he didn't play a single game for them. So he may as well have been drafted by them because they were responsible for him becoming the player he's developed into. They did the same with Sergachev, who I view the same way. 

 

We haven't been able to do that, let alone draft our own depth guys. Build a great D? I'm talking about drafting or having guys break in with us, you keep circling back to the opposite of what I'm talking about. We haven't traded for other team's young D like Tampa has, we haven't had much draft success as far as D go aside from Hughes in forever. 

 

If we could draft/acquire young D we wouldn't have to go looking to sign players via UFA or trade for more established D in the first place, and we'd have players more likely to be cost controlled RFA's which is important in a cap world. We haven't been able to do so and that's been an ongoing issue for years. 

 

 

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

JM_

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Coconuts said:

Our inability to bring our own D along has been a huge problem and contributes to the mess that is our defense. 

its a bit odd, but it also shows how crushing of a pick Juolevi was, and I wasn't upset with the pick at the time, seemed like a decent bet. Rathbone might turn into something interesting tho, and I'm curious what Persson can become. 

 

Edited by JM_
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...