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

Canuck D Pairings -- Some Surprises

Rate this topic


JamesB
 Share

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, DS4quality said:

Imagine having neither?  Remember the rotating cast. Again the defense got much better after TG and Co left. And statistically speaking our defense wasn't our problem 5 on 5, we couldn't score goals, so I don't know why you're throwing shade at Poolman +2 when it was the forwards dragging the team down. 

We largely did have neither. Including when we played better post-coach change. Clearly the two combined to making a huge difference to our fortunes :rolleyes:

 

And again, I'm not throwing shade at Poolman, at all. Perfectly decent, bottom pair D. I'm throwing shade at Benning for signing him when he already had Hamonic. And if he signed him because he knew Hamonic was going to be MIA, WTF reason did he sign Hamonic?!?! All those resources, cap space and term, tied up in redundant, bottom pair D. THAT is the issue.

Edited by aGENT
  • Cheers 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Baggins said:

Given it was a new team and his injuries/health problems limiting him to just under half a season I'm willing to give him a mulligan. But I think he was signed to be the steady 3rd on the right side with the 3rd left side being a huge question mark. Juolevi was the guy expected to be in that 3rd left spot. Being an inexperienced question mark it made sense to have a steady guy to pair with him whether it was Hamonic or Poolman. That fell apart quickly with Juolevi failing to impress at all in preseason. 

 

The best thing about signing Schenn for depth is he can play either side. Good depth signing but he really exceeded my expection. 

Poolman has never played a full season in NHL. At the time of the signing he was 28 years old and only played 120 games in his career. Giving this type of player a 4 year contract was plain insanity. 

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

6 minutes ago, whysoserious said:

Poolman has never played a full season in NHL. At the time of the signing he was 28 years old and only played 120 games in his career. Giving this type of player a 4 year contract was plain insanity. 

Like "throwing macaroni on a board and seeing if it would stick when others were playing 4d chess" ... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

Sorry, which one is "fringe"? Is it the guy we had playing on our top pair with Hughes? The guy we had playing largely with OEL as our matchup pair? Or the guy we sent to Ottawa because we had redundant bottom pair D (and he was also an ill fit)?

 

We didn't need ANOTHER, redundant, bottom pair D man. Full stop.

We didn't have the cap space for a top four d-man without moving a high cap forward. Full stop. Schenn was signed as a 7/8 guy. Fringe. That he surprised is hindsight. Full stop.  For these reasons a player above 7/8 was signed to pair with a left side rookie. It made sense at the time. Burroughs wasn't even signed as a 7/8 guy. He was signed for depth. That he surprised is also hindsight. 

 

We'll simply have to agree to disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Baggins said:

We didn't have the cap space for a top four d-man without moving a high cap forward.

Really? Hamonic $3m + Poolman $2.5m = Top 4 D man. Zero forwards need moving.

 

8 minutes ago, Baggins said:

Full stop. Schenn was signed as a 7/8 guy. Fringe. That he surprised is hindsight. Full stop.  For these reasons a player above 7/8 was signed to pair with a left side rookie. It made sense at the time. Burroughs wasn't even signed as a 7/8 guy. He was signed for depth. That he surprised is also hindsight. 

 

We'll simply have to agree to disagree.

No it didn't make sense at the time. It would have made sense if we'd never extended Hamonic (oh how I wish!). 

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, aGENT said:

Really? Hamonic $3m + Poolman $2.5m = Top 4 D man. Zero forwards need moving.

 

No it didn't make sense at the time. It would have made sense if we'd never extended Hamonic (oh how I wish!). 

We had no money for a top four d-man in free agency plus a decent guy to go with the rookie. $6m got us Myers two years ago. Less money and term than many analysts had predicted. What would $5.5 gut us on the open market with two spots to fill? Got magic beans? Last year wasn't a particularly great year for D free agents let alone RHD. Do try to keep in mind Schenn and Burroughs performance is pure hindsight and they played well above expectations. Both were signed for depth not regular spots. 

 

You're not going to convince me. Just agree to disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Baggins said:

We had no money for a top four d-man in free agency plus a decent guy to go with the rookie. $6m got us Myers two years ago. Less money and term than many analysts had predicted. What would $5.5 gut us on the open market with two spots to fill? Got magic beans? Last year wasn't a particularly great year for D free agents let alone RHD. Do try to keep in mind Schenn and Burroughs performance is pure hindsight and they played well above expectations. Both were signed for depth not regular spots. 

 

You're not going to convince me. Just agree to disagree.

Could have done a better job putting word out to Larson before SEA signed him. Could have signed Savard. Could have signed Goligoski (plays both sides)

 

Hell, we could have just kept it simple and just extended Edler and moved one of Hughes/OEL to the right.

 

That's just off the top of my head, I'm sure an actual management group could probably have sorted out more and/or potentially better options.

 

And with a better top 4, you don't "need" a $2.5m 3rd pair guy. You can rely on lower dollar guys like Schenn to come in and play 10'ish sheltered minutes a night, while sheltering a rookie.

 

Sorry, "cornering the market on bottom pair D" wasn't, and isn't, the way to go. In no way, shape or form should we have signed both Hamonic AND Poolman. If you want to argue it shouldn't have been Hamonic instead, I've got all sorts of time for ya. But if you're going to continue to claim we needed both, I'll continue pointing out how dumb and wasteful it was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, aGENT said:

Could have done a better job putting word out to Larson before SEA signed him. Could have signed Savard. Could have signed Goligoski (plays both sides)

 

Hell, we could have just kept it simple and just extended Edler and moved one of Hughes/OEL to the right.

 

That's just off the top of my head, I'm sure an actual management group could probably have sorted out more and/or potentially better options.

 

And with a better top 4, you don't "need" a $2.5m 3rd pair guy. You can rely on lower dollar guys like Schenn to come in and play 10'ish sheltered minutes a night, while sheltering a rookie.

 

Sorry, "cornering the market on bottom pair D" wasn't, and isn't, the way to go. In no way, shape or form should we have signed both Hamonic AND Poolman. If you want to argue it shouldn't have been Hamonic instead, I've got all sorts of time for ya. But if you're going to continue to claim we needed both, I'll continue pointing out how dumb and wasteful it was.

No we definitely wouldn't have been able to sign Savard.  He took a "hometeam" discount since that was his childhood team growing up.  Goligoski?  No thanks, he's not a good fit for our D core.  And who knows about Larson, maybe the canucks did, and he turned them down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, aGENT said:

We largely did have neither. Including when we played better post-coach change. Clearly the two combined to making a huge difference to our fortunes :rolleyes:

 

And again, I'm not throwing shade at Poolman, at all. Perfectly decent, bottom pair D. I'm throwing shade at Benning for signing him when he already had Hamonic. And if he signed him because he knew Hamonic was going to be MIA, WTF reason did he sign Hamonic?!?! All those resources, cap space and term, tied up in redundant, bottom pair D. THAT is the issue.

It's funny because my brother and i were texting  about how if only JB just re-signed Edler for a year (same deal) and let Hamonic walk they'd have made the playoffs.     No way would our PK have suffered quite as much ... the only thing is maybe JB and Green would have lasted longer so let's just call it a wash.   But i absolutely agree that JB was too eager and overplayed his hand.    I certainly hope it came from a good place and not a desperate act to keep his job. JB was like a fat kid walking by the candy store every UFA season and knowing he should only get a bag of chips and a pop ... but then added the jaw breakers, the jolly ranchers, and then once at the till bought ancient rice krispee squares and old licorace just in case his Mom didn't feed him enough when he got home. 

Edited by IBatch
  • Like 1
  • Cheers 2
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, IBatch said:

It's funny because my brother and i were texting  about how if only JB just re-signed Edler for a year (same deal) and let Hamonic walk they'd have made the playoffs.     No way would our PK have suffered quite as much ... the only thing is maybe JB and Green would have lasted longer so let's just call it a wash.  

Yeah imagine if we'd just given Edler Hamonic's $3m lol.

 

Could have had:

 

Hughes, OEL

Edler, Myers

 

...as our top 4. Just a bit better and yes, our PK likely isn't as atrocious.

 

2 hours ago, IBatch said:

 

But i absolutely agree that JB was too eager and overplayed his hand.    I certainly hope it came from a good place and not a desperate act to keep his job. JB was like a fat kid walking by the candy store every UFA season and knowing he should only get a bag of chips and a pop ... but then added the jaw breakers, the jolly ranchers, and then once at the till bought ancient rice krispee squares and old licorace just in case his Mom didn't feed him enough when he got home. 

 

Not even sure it's that. I think he genuinely struggled to put cohesive pieces together.

 

Individually, most of the guys he brought in were good enough players (in their given roles), on their own, "in a vacuum". But NHL teams aren't a vacuum. You have pairings and lines and chemistry and skill sets to mesh to create a greater, cohesive "team".

 

Gudbranson is probably one of the earlier examples in that he brought him in but then didn't follow that up by bringing in pieces that would complement him. We've seen Gudbranson have success, in a reasonable, complimentary role, with intangibles both before in Florida, and recently in Calgary. Those teams had, or brought, in players to complement him, and put him in a position and role to succeed.

 

Myers is probably our latest example. Perfectly fine player but he doesn't fit with either of our other two top 4 guys.

 

Benning had a square peg, round hole issue. Not a kid in a candy store issue IMO.

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

Posted (edited)
57 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Yeah imagine if we'd just given Edler Hamonic's $3m lol.

 

Could have had:

 

Hughes, OEL

Edler, Myers

 

...as our top 4. Just a bit better and yes, our PK likely isn't as atrocious.

 

 

Not even sure it's that. I think he genuinely struggled to put cohesive pieces together.

 

Individually, most of the guys he brought in were good enough players (in their given roles), on their own, "in a vacuum". But NHL teams aren't a vacuum. You have pairings and lines and chemistry and skill sets to mesh to create a greater, cohesive "team".

 

Gudbranson is probably one of the earlier examples in that he brought him in but then didn't follow that up by bringing in pieces that would complement him. We've seen Gudbranson have success, in a reasonable, complimentary role, with intangibles both before in Florida, and recently in Calgary. Those teams had our brought in players to complement him and put him in a position and role to succeed.

 

Myers is probably our latest example. Perfectly fine player but he doesn't fit with either of our other two top 4 guys.

 

Benning had a square peg, round hole issue. Not a kid in a candy store issue IMO.

Exactly. Had Hamonic actually showed up on time and vaccinated, or D lineup would have been good on paper. The problem is, as you stated, they were not fits. As the data on the first page showed, when you put Schenn (shutdown RHD) with Hughes or OEL, their production soars....no doubt! Myers is a good Dman, but he is NOT a shutdown guy; he is more Offensive then Defensive if you let him roll.

 

Not a popular position on here, but along the above lines, I think we should keep Myers for another year given 2023/24 is when we need the cap space. Then, go out and sign a Mason type Dman to a 4.5-5m contract. 2022/23 Lineup

 

OEL-Schenn

Hughes-Mason

Rathbone/Burroughs/Dermott-Myers

 

IF we could somehow get rid of Poolman, the $$ in this proposition are not even bad. Sure wish we had that 1.5m we blew on Dermott back

Edited by BC_Hawk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, BC_Hawk said:

Exactly. Had Hamonic actually showed up on time and vaccinated, or D lineup would have been good on paper. The problem is, as you stated, they were not fits. As the data on the first page showed, when you put Schenn (shutdown RHD) with Hughes or OEL, their production soars....no doubt! Myers is a good Dman, but he is NOT a shutdown guy; he is more Offensive then Defensive if you let him roll.

No he's not a shut down guy, he's basically a poor man's (and RH'd) OEL.

 

IMO, when we got OEL, it (should have) spelled the end of Myers time here. Good enough player, but if he doesn't mesh with either of your two, better top 4 D... You can't be paying him $6m to play third pair/not play in your top 4. Good player "in a vacuum" or not.

 

 

12 hours ago, BC_Hawk said:

 

Not a popular position on here, but along the above lines, I think we should keep Myers for another year given 2023/24 is when we need the cap space. Then, go out and sign a Mason type Dman to a 4.5-5m contract. 2022/23 Lineup

 

It may happen that way depending on the level of interest this summer. But IMO, after a decent season, with only two years of term remaining... now may be the best time to move him. Not only is his value high, league wide demand evidently high etc, but it also let's the Canucks start moving forward.

 

12 hours ago, BC_Hawk said:

 

OEL-Schenn

Hughes-Mason

Rathbone/Burroughs/Dermott-Myers

 

IF we could somehow get rid of Poolman, the $$ in this proposition are not even bad. Sure wish we had that 1.5m we blew on Dermott back

If you want Manson, it's this summer or likely not at all as he's UFA. As much as I'd love him, I think he's going to be in huge demand and cost too much, have better options, or both.

 

My "under the radar" alternative would be Lyubushkin. Less of a fighter but good skating, solid D game and physical.

 

I also hope we see something like Miller to PIT for Marino+ (or similar). Marino plays a lot like a young Tanev and would fit well IMO.

 

Hughes, Marino

OEL, Lyubushkin

Rathbone, Schenn

 

Dermott, Burroughs (Poolman on IR?)

 

Poolman being moveable likely depends a lot on his health. That said, we can do worse than Schenn/Poolman tag teaming that 3RD slot.

 

Same with Dermott. He's cheap enough that him as a 6/7 guy to swap in for Rathbone (who will likely need the rest and or watch from the press box throughout the year, plus injuries etc) is fine.

Edited by aGENT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/1/2022 at 4:47 AM, Dazzle said:

But it's not overrating players. This analysis was an internal look at our own players, and there wasn't any reference to other teams. OEL is a decent piece to this team, but we need more depth, that's for sure.

OEL - 29 Points in 79 GP, +5 - $8.25 cap hit, 22:19 avg. time on ice - now let's do a quick random comparison..

 

Nikita Zadorov - 22 Points in 74 GP, +11, 16:55 avg. time on ice- $3.75 cap hit

 

I can make about another 25 similar comparisons of defenseman who performed very similarly to OEL but get paid less than half as much while playing far less minutes.

 

People need to realize it's not that OEL isn't a decent option in our top 4 - the the cap number he carries that's an issue and is likely a sore point for JR and PA. There are dozens and dozens of DMEN in the league with stat lines and numbers very similar to OEL's who make half as much or less. The league is a numbers game from a management and team building perspective, nobody is going to like the number OEL carries with his production the last few seasons. He's a good option back here but if it comes down to creating cap room and getting younger don't be surprised if he get's moved either - there will be many guys available who have similar numbers available for $4-5 million. This team is further away from contending than most fans think...and JR knows that.

 

OEL was traded because JB was hoping he would resurrect his career and find his game again...well this was his second lowest point total of his career. OEL get's paid like he's a 40-60 point Dman, problem is he hasn't done that since 2018....

Edited by Harold Drunken
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Harold Drunken said:

OEL - 29 Points in 79 GP, +5 - $8.25 cap hit, 22:19 avg. time on ice - now let's do a quick random comparison..

 

Nikita Zadorov - 22 Points in 74 GP, +11, 16:55 avg. time on ice- $3.75 cap hit

 

I can make about another 25 similar comparisons of defenseman who performed very similarly to OEL but get paid less than half as much while playing far less minutes.

 

People need to realize it's not that OEL isn't a decent option in our top 4 - the the cap number he carries that's an issue and is likely a sore point for JR and PA. There are dozens and dozens of DMEN in the league with stat lines and numbers very similar to OEL's who make half as much or less. The league is a numbers game from a management and team building perspective, nobody is going to like the number OEL carries with his production the last few seasons. He's a good option back here but if it comes down to creating cap room and getting younger don't be surprised if he get's moved either - there will be many guys available who have similar numbers available for $4-5 million. This team is further away from contending than most fans think...and JR knows that.

 

OEL was traded because JB was hoping he would resurrect his career and find his game again...well this was his second lowest point total of his career. OEL get's paid like he's a 40-60 point Dman, problem is he hasn't done that since 2018....

I don't think any hockey person would compare what OEL brought last season to what Zadorov does.  Two completely different roles.  

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/7/2022 at 6:29 PM, aGENT said:

Could have done a better job putting word out to Larson before SEA signed him. Could have signed Savard. Could have signed Goligoski (plays both sides)

 

Hell, we could have just kept it simple and just extended Edler and moved one of Hughes/OEL to the right.

 

That's just off the top of my head, I'm sure an actual management group could probably have sorted out more and/or potentially better options.

 

I don't disagree that we could've done without one of Hamonic or Poolman (although Hamonic got us a 3rd round pick), however I have a problem with this way of thinking that says that we could've signed one of the other guys. 

 

We couldn't. 

 

Savard was only going to sign in Montreal. 

 

Larsson got bigger offers elsewhere but specifically chose the expansion team Seattle.  

 

Another important detail is that every team needs 8-9 NHL capable dmen. You've seen many teams that have 3-4 dmen injured at the same time, especially with Covid absences. So I don't have as much of an issue with the fact that we cornered the market on the bottom pairing dmen. Very happy with Schenn, Burroughs, and Hunt signings. Hoping that we resign Juulsen to a 2-3 year cheap contract as I really liked what I saw in him this year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Harold Drunken said:

OEL - 29 Points in 79 GP, +5 - $8.25 cap hit, 22:19 avg. time on ice - now let's do a quick random comparison..

 

Nikita Zadorov - 22 Points in 74 GP, +11, 16:55 avg. time on ice- $3.75 cap hit

 

I can make about another 25 similar comparisons of defenseman who performed very similarly to OEL but get paid less than half as much while playing far less minutes.

 

People need to realize it's not that OEL isn't a decent option in our top 4 - the the cap number he carries that's an issue and is likely a sore point for JR and PA. There are dozens and dozens of DMEN in the league with stat lines and numbers very similar to OEL's who make half as much or less. The league is a numbers game from a management and team building perspective, nobody is going to like the number OEL carries with his production the last few seasons. He's a good option back here but if it comes down to creating cap room and getting younger don't be surprised if he get's moved either - there will be many guys available who have similar numbers available for $4-5 million. This team is further away from contending than most fans think...and JR knows that.

 

OEL was traded because JB was hoping he would resurrect his career and find his game again...well this was his second lowest point total of his career. OEL get's paid like he's a 40-60 point Dman, problem is he hasn't done that since 2018....

OEL has never been even close to a 60pt dman in the NHL.  Just once he had 55pts (2015 season), but overall, he

should be considered a 40-45pt player.  Still, he is a very good dman, that brings a lot more than just his offensive

to his game.  Unfortunately, he has had to partner with a defenseman that requires a degree of supervision, which

makes it difficult to put up the offensive #s.  He also plays on the 2nd PP, which gets fewer opportunities for points.

 

Give him a partner that is defensively responsible and we will see and increase to his usual pt production.  With

those pts, his physical game, overall skills and minute munching operative, his value would be $6.5m.  That's

not a far cry to what he is being paid by the Canucks.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Harold Drunken said:

OEL - 29 Points in 79 GP, +5 - $8.25 cap hit, 22:19 avg. time on ice - now let's do a quick random comparison..

 

Nikita Zadorov - 22 Points in 74 GP, +11, 16:55 avg. time on ice- $3.75 cap hit

 

I can make about another 25 similar comparisons of defenseman who performed very similarly to OEL but get paid less than half as much while playing far less minutes.

 

People need to realize it's not that OEL isn't a decent option in our top 4 - the the cap number he carries that's an issue and is likely a sore point for JR and PA. There are dozens and dozens of DMEN in the league with stat lines and numbers very similar to OEL's who make half as much or less. The league is a numbers game from a management and team building perspective, nobody is going to like the number OEL carries with his production the last few seasons. He's a good option back here but if it comes down to creating cap room and getting younger don't be surprised if he get's moved either - there will be many guys available who have similar numbers available for $4-5 million. This team is further away from contending than most fans think...and JR knows that.

 

OEL was traded because JB was hoping he would resurrect his career and find his game again...well this was his second lowest point total of his career. OEL get's paid like he's a 40-60 point Dman, problem is he hasn't done that since 2018....

This tells me that you either didn't watch the Canucks or the Flames... Or maybe neither team. 

 

Zadorov was one of the most sheltered dmen on Calgary, playing on their 3rd pairing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, VancouverHabitant said:

I don't disagree that we could've done without one of Hamonic or Poolman (although Hamonic got us a 3rd round pick), however I have a problem with this way of thinking that says that we could've signed one of the other guys. 

 

We couldn't. 

 

Savard was only going to sign in Montreal. 

 

Larsson got bigger offers elsewhere but specifically chose the expansion team Seattle.  

 

Another important detail is that every team needs 8-9 NHL capable dmen. You've seen many teams that have 3-4 dmen injured at the same time, especially with Covid absences. So I don't have as much of an issue with the fact that we cornered the market on the bottom pairing dmen. Very happy with Schenn, Burroughs, and Hunt signings. Hoping that we resign Juulsen to a 2-3 year cheap contract as I really liked what I saw in him this year. 

Again, simply keeping Edler would have been a better option. And I'm sure there were other options than the few guys I listed. Either by free agency or trade. NHL management is well paid to figure those things out.

 

And again, I have zero issue with at/near league minimum depth like Schenn, Burroughs etc. Those are EXACTLY the types of players we should have targeted instead for depth. Spending a combined $5.5m of cap on Hamonic and Poolman was just dumb. Not because they're poor players or not worth those cap hits individually, but because it's dumb to allocate that much cap to redundant pieces.

 

 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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