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

[Proposal] Balanced Offseason Moves


Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, DrJockitch said:

Haven’t paid much attention to the prospects this year. Is number 2 really worth it this year?

The guys I mentioned are I think, especially as a fit for our team.  In Slafkovsky think of a bigger, meaner, more skilled Podkolzin… in his prime a guy like Bertuzzi.  I personally think a long term plan of gradually getting bigger and heavier skill guys makes our team way better and complements less physical skill guys like Petterson and Hughes which makes them better as well.

 

In the two D, Nemec and Jiricek… you get an almost sure fire top 4D which are almost impossible to find.  Their development would probably be right in line with moving on from Severson, and we have a young cheap D.

 

All three of those guys are going to go in the #2-7 spots.  If we are in the #2 spot and a team covers Cooley for example… we could pick up a really nice asset to move down a couple slots.  Maybe even as high as a lottery protected 1st next year… or more likely a 2nd and a 3rd or a really good more NHL ready prospect.
 

An ideal world lets us make that same move twice while still getting one of the guys we like.

Edited by Provost
  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Provost said:

As everyone is starting to give their offseason plans… here is mine, a few moves that could let the new regime put their stamp on the team and let us not take a step back while helping the future.

 

1.  Trade Miller to Jersey

Miller, Myers, Pearson, 15th OA for 2nd OA, Zacha, Severson

 - we get an elite prospect with the pick who will be a cheap ELC contributor.  We drop some cap while also taking back useful pieces.  Jersey gets the impact player they want and a couple of veterans without much term left to help ease the load and support their great crop of young players .

2.  Sign Klingberg as a UFA

- he is friends with OEL, we have history with Swedish players and a front office staff in Allvin and the Sedins to help convince him.  https://www.bardown.com/oliver-ekman-larsson-pranked-john-klingberg-by-filling-his-hotel-room-with-1400-balloons-1.1305742

 

3.  Find a 4th line winger with grit.  Brendan Smith could be a target as he plays both D and wing so can provide a lot of versatility

 

4.   Sign Kuzmenko… free middle six player, no brainer if we can do it. 
 

5.  Bring Stecher back.  A feel good story for the room, he was wel loved by his team mates.  New regime doesn’t have bad history with him.  He will bring more value than the contract he would cost.

 

6.  Use Rathbone to dump cap and to add a pick.  Poolman needs to go, Dickenson seems like a candidate for a bounce back, but if you can move him you do it.

 

7.  Consider trading down in the draft to restock prospect cupboards.  Ideal fits for us at the top of the draft are Slafvosky, Nemec, or Jiricek.  If we have the #2 pick, we could move down a couple slots and add other high end picks/prospects and still end up with a guy we want.  Another team behind us could love one player and be willing to pay a premium to get them.  We could maybe even do this a couple of times until there are just two of those guys available

 

Podkolzin-Petterson-Boeser

Kuzmenko-Horvat-Garland

Zacha-Dickenson-Hoglander

Brendan Smith-Lammikko-Lockwood

Highmore

 

Hughes-Severson

OEL-Klingberg

Schenn-Stecher 

Burroughs

 

We lose some high end talent in Miller for the short term, but gain in in the long term.  Our defence is completely revamped and much deeper. 

 

this might be my favourite proposals of the entire year. Can't argue with any of these moves. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said:

I like most of your proposed transactions, but there's no way NJ trades the #2. They want Slafkovsky on Hughes' wing. 

All the reporting is that the pick is in play for an immediate impact player.  Can’t get more immediate than Miller.  Hughes gets a winger still, but just one that happens to have just been top ten in league scoring and not a guy that is a ways away from being a reliable top line player.

 

You are right that those picks rarely move, but this might well be a situation where Jersey is more interested in supplementing an elite young core with veteran help.

Edited by Provost
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Provost said:

All the reporting is that the pick is in play for an immediate impact player.  Can’t get more immediate than Miller.  Hughes gets a winger still, but just one that happens to have just been top ten in league scoring and it is a guy that is a ways away from being a reliable top line player.

 

You are right that those picks rarely move, but this might well be a situation where Jersey is more interested in supplementing an elite young core with veteran help.

They should hire Benning. He is good at bringing in vets.  Over-rated, Overpriced and for longer than should but brings a lot in. 

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Shayster007 said:

I mean... Yeah. I'd be down with all these moves for the most part. Not down with loosing Rathbone since I think he has legit upside, but gotta spend money to make money.

Yeah my sentiments exactly............just no way I want Rathbone traded

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, J.I.A.H.N said:

Yeah my sentiments exactly............just no way I want Rathbone traded

It's really tough. I think he has a very high ceiling and could be a legit top 4 force in the NHL. His skating alone is a benefit to any NHL team. The problem is... Where does he fit with the Canucks. We already have the top 2 spots filled in the left with offense first D. Both Hughes and OEL have clearly rounded out their games this last year, but they are still offense first D men. Can a team really run 3 offense first D on the left side, and if so where does Rathbone slide in on special teams?

 

I'm hoping OEL can transition to the R side and play with Hughes or Rathbone long term as more of a anchor type player, but not sure if that's a square peg round hole situation. 

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

28 minutes ago, Shayster007 said:

It's really tough. I think he has a very high ceiling and could be a legit top 4 force in the NHL. His skating alone is a benefit to any NHL team. The problem is... Where does he fit with the Canucks. We already have the top 2 spots filled in the left with offense first D. Both Hughes and OEL have clearly rounded out their games this last year, but they are still offense first D men. Can a team really run 3 offense first D on the left side, and if so where does Rathbone slide in on special teams?

 

I'm hoping OEL can transition to the R side and play with Hughes or Rathbone long term as more of a anchor type player, but not sure if that's a square peg round hole situation. 

That is the issue exactly… right now he still has a lot of potential, he hasn’t proven it but is a good bet to be NHLer of “some” level.

 

There is effectively no chance he will be better than Hughes.  They play the same game and need the same minutes.

 

We also have OEL as a roadblock, even if we moved away from him somehow… Rathbone at best is going to be a poor man’s version of Hughes.  Maybe more akin to Tyson Barrie as a ceiling.

 

Just like Hodgson didn’t have a path to develop on our team with Henrik and Kesler signed long term… Rathbone just doesn’t have a path either.  I also predicted Hodgson was going to get traded WAY before any rumblings of such came up.

 

Rathbone is just mainly an asset in my eyes.  Whether we think it is now or after a little more NHL time under his belt… it is just about maximizing his value.  There is risk to waiting longer as maybe he won’t be as good as his potential suggests.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Provost said:

That is the issue exactly… right now he still has a lot of potential, he hasn’t proven it but is a good bet to be NHLer of “some” level.

 

There is effectively no chance he will be better than Hughes.  They play the same game and need the same minutes.

 

We also have OEL as a roadblock, even if we moved away from him somehow… Rathbone at best is going to be a poor man’s version of Hughes.  Maybe more akin to Tyson Barrie as a ceiling.

 

Just like Hodgson didn’t have a path to develop on our team with Henrik and Kesler signed long term… Rathbone just doesn’t have a path either.  I also predicted Hodgson was going to get traded WAY before any rumblings of such came up.

 

Rathbone is just mainly an asset in my eyes.  Whether we think it is now or after a little more NHL time under his belt… it is just about maximizing his value.  There is risk to waiting longer as maybe he won’t be as good as his potential suggests.

Hopefully, if we do trade Rathbone it's done after his childhood friend (McDonough) has signed with us.  Don't want to trade Rathbone and his long time friend, who already is close to becoming a UFA, decides another team is a better option. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Shayster007 said:

It's really tough. I think he has a very high ceiling and could be a legit top 4 force in the NHL. His skating alone is a benefit to any NHL team. The problem is... Where does he fit with the Canucks. We already have the top 2 spots filled in the left with offense first D. Both Hughes and OEL have clearly rounded out their games this last year, but they are still offense first D men. Can a team really run 3 offense first D on the left side, and if so where does Rathbone slide in on special teams?

 

I'm hoping OEL can transition to the R side and play with Hughes or Rathbone long term as more of a anchor type player, but not sure if that's a square peg round hole situation.

Yeah good points. 

 

I think you keep Rathbone for now (unless a great deal comes along). He is still young and fairly unproven, but signs are looking good for him. 

 

Ideally he'll play on our 3rd pair LD with Schenn or Dermott on the right side. Maybe he'll be on PP2 with OEL also and get a little time there. 

 

You're right though that he is behind Hughes and OEL on the left. That should be fine for at least a couple more years as Rathbone gets better. OEL might not be a moveable piece for us so we'll have him for a while. Perhaps as you said he can play on the right side, but eventually as he declines maybe he slides down a spot and Rathbone up (cap could be tricky here if Rath starts looking like he'll get a big raise). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just played with the armchair GM and the 23 man roster including Dermott as a 7th D came to a little between $78.5-$79 million so around $80 million with the pushed bonuses from this year added in.

That was with:
Boeser $6.5
Klingberg $8.0
Zacha $3.5
Stecher $1.1 (with a 3 year term to give him stability)
Lammikko/Highmore/Lockwood all between $850-950k

Ferland on LTIR of course.

Some leeway if the costs are higher and still fit under the cap.  We could also easily run with a 21 or 22 man roster with Abbotsford so close and Smith being able to play both D and wing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not wild about the Klingberg signing. Those are two offensive dmen and we've already tried that experiment with OEL-Myers and we lose Myer's size. I think we can get a less expensive dman that is a better fit with OEL.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really like that first trade, I think it works nicely for both teams. Jersey's a young team with some great talent and this would give them Miller (with an extension negotiated beforehand I'm sure) and a few short term vets who make the team better now in Pearson and Myers. Pearson has positive value in your middle six, Myers likely also has positive value in a trade (how much is up for debate, but I still view him as a top 4 guy who'd look better with a more defensive minded partner). And they get another 1st on top of it. Jersey's a team that'll want to start taking steps forward, this helps them do that. 

 

Obviously the return is nice or us too. 

 

Mixed feelings about Klingberg, but I wouldn't be shocked to see him and Dallas get a deal done. 

 

I'm on board with a fourth liner with grit, I feel that line needs someone who brings more size. 

 

Kuzmenko would be a great add, low risk signing with the potential to be a top six player. 

 

I question whether Stecher would come back to be a depth piece if he's able to get regular 5-6D minutes elsewhere. It'd be a nice story. 

 

Rathbone could very well be a cap casualty but I'd personally like to see what he brings at the NHL level under competent coaching staff. He could be found money.

 

Dropping to #3 would be interesting but I dunno if I'd wanna drop out of the top 3. But yeah, it's an option worth exploring if there are multiple players we like at say.. #5. 

 

I dig your proposal. 

 

 

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...