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

Cu Cu Cu Country Club Cleanup [Proposal]


Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, hammertime said:

Sure I don't hate Highmore he's a beauty so is Biega. But if he's your 12th forward/6D you've got problems.  

 

To be fair to Highmore he played above what I would have as reasonable expectations for him. That being said I can think of a bunch of players playing below expectations on similar contracts who would be better options. 

 

Realistically Highmore as a 4th line winger is just plain wrong roster assembly. The same thought process as Gaudette as your 3c. He's a fine player but it's the wrong role. Is he a top 6? where does he fit? Would be great if we could get a pick for him?

Honestly, if the Canucks were able to construct/get some chemistry going w/ the Motto line (without Motte of course) Id have zero problems rolling that out as your third line. That was a very good match up line that wore teams down.  That gives you options w/ your fourth line to address different needs, and frees up your first two lines to be more offensive. 

 

IMO Highmore is a good player that should have a spit in this team. His work ethic is second to none and his hands are pretty good. He just lacks the size/nasty component.   Canucks cant afford Motte now but I would 100% try to get Highmore locked up on a 3 year deal.  Lammikko too at a lower cap hit in exchange for security.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Angry Goose said:

Honestly, if the Canucks were able to construct/get some chemistry going w/ the Motto line (without Motte of course) Id have zero problems rolling that out as your third line. That was a very good match up line that wore teams down.  That gives you options w/ your fourth line to address different needs, and frees up your first two lines to be more offensive. 

 

IMO Highmore is a good player that should have a spit in this team. His work ethic is second to none and his hands are pretty good. He just lacks the size/nasty component.   Canucks cant afford Motte now but I would 100% try to get Highmore locked up on a 3 year deal.  Lammikko too at a lower cap hit in exchange for security.

fair enough I don't think I would argue if we addressed other needs where he is deficient in other areas. If we run a pure shut down 3rd and a utility 4th maybe it works? 

 

Is that the most efficient roster layout? Thats for JR to decide. A lot more goes into making him fit than assembling the team differently. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Angry Goose said:

IMO move 2/3 (Miller, Boeser, Horvat), and Meyers to reload on young talent. 4/4 if you can negotiate some high upside returns.

 

Ive changed my tune on Poolman. I really liked his game and maybe with Boudreau’s better overall style of play he could fit very well. Someone I keep if Meyers is moved. 

 

Dickinson moveable but not absolutely necessary. 

I would consider this to be the JB plan. Is it a bad plan? A tweak here a tweak there maybe JB was fundamentally on the right track?

 

For the record I'm not a JB supporter or hater he had his strengths and weaknesses. I see him and have seen him from the beginning as somewhat of a Brian Burke.... He did good things and created a core but was ham fisted and wanted too much autonomy without recognizing his weaknesses and submitting himself to needing help in areas he didn't have a handle on. In contrast MG was ahead of his time in terms of refining a built product but had no clue when it comes to cultivation. 

 

I think Beagle Roussel Ferland Sutter. Were signed with the right mindset. They each embody a mindset faults part and parcel with the building blocks of winning. Regardless of the team being ready at that time. JB paying to drop them then doubling down with Dickinson Poolman was just digging his grave.  

  • Cheers 2
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, hammertime said:

I would consider this to be the JB plan. Is it a bad plan? A tweak here a tweak there maybe JB was fundamentally on the right track?

 

For the record I'm not a JB supporter or hater he had his strengths and weaknesses. I see him and have seen him from the beginning as somewhat of a Brian Burke.... He did good things and created a core but was ham fisted and wanted too much autonomy without recognizing his weaknesses and submitting himself to needing help in areas he didn't have a handle on. In contrast MG was ahead of his time in terms of refining a built product but had no clue when it comes to cultivation. 

 

I think Beagle Roussel Ferland Sutter. Were signed with the right mindset. They each embody a mindset faults part and parcel with the building blocks of winning. Regardless of the team being ready at that time. JB paying to drop them then doubling down with Dickinson Poolman was just digging his grave.  

I think the risk in JBs approach (similar to Burke) is that you have to hit your transactions out of the park. Like you say there are + & - you can definitely discuss.

 

My own view is to re focus on building from within. Avoid high priced UFAs or trade targets.  Pay the guys who have already proven themselves in your system that you know make your team competitive e.g the Hughes, Demkos, EPs.  Then like you say, tweak and reload.

 

I think trading Meyers/Boeser is a must to build a secondary layer of cheaper/developing talent. IF the Canucks wernt as thin as they are in prospects ready to push you could gamble on a Miller.  

 

The JB reference to having veteran role players is interesting to me.  He tried to address those needs on the fly (a lot of it being due to a lack of prospect depth he also inherited). Given this and PA’s comments about having AHL prospects marinate and ready to play quality NHL mins, I would guess the current plan is to fill those needs from (mostly) within (if possible). 

 

Hard part that this is going to take time. 

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Angry Goose said:

I think the risk in JBs approach (similar to Burke) is that you have to hit your transactions out of the park. Like you say there are + & - you can definitely discuss.

 

My own view is to re focus on building from within. Avoid high priced UFAs or trade targets.  Pay the guys who have already proven themselves in your system that you know make your team competitive e.g the Hughes, Demkos, EPs.  Then like you say, tweak and reload.

 

I think trading Meyers/Boeser is a must to build a secondary layer of cheaper/developing talent. IF the Canucks wernt as thin as they are in prospects ready to push you could gamble on a Miller.  

 

The JB reference to having veteran role players is interesting to me.  He tried to address those needs on the fly (a lot of it being due to a lack of prospect depth he also inherited). Given this and PA’s comments about having AHL prospects marinate and ready to play quality NHL mins, I would guess the current plan is to fill those needs from (mostly) within (if possible). 

 

Hard part that this is going to take time. 

100% agree. Frankie also called.

donald trump GIF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, hammertime said:

Simple this teams slow charmin. Cut out the fat. If you're not playing with a mean streak you better be playing fast or better yet both.   

 

- Brock's gotta go he's by definition country club player. He's got negative Jam get's all the best ice time does nothing to earn it. First team to offer a 2nd take it.

- Dickinson had a better 2nd half but why are we paying him 3c money to play like a 4th line winger? Toss him on waivers and see if anyone takes the bait if he clears fine Baby nux could use him. 

- Poolman locked up through his prime Big RHD for 2.5M shouldn't be impossible to move.

 

Chaisson, Highmore, Hunt can walk or float whatever marshmallows do....

 

Re Sign Lammiko + Richardson(Keep him around good cheep mentorship)

 

Rathbone + Hoglander to Vegas for Roy + Hague or go the offer sheet route. 

 

Sign:

Val Nichushkin 6x6M

Shoot LA a 6 pack for Brendan Lemieux rights 1,650,000 To qualify a lil steep. Probably just wait for him not to be qualified and sign him for less. 

Brendan Gaunce league min always liked that guy. As a 13th fw he's a good PKer plays heavy still putting in work to carve out an NHL career gotta respect that

 

 

Roster

Left Wing Centre Right Wing
Vancouver Canucks
Miller, J.T.
$5,250,000
LW, C
UFA - 1
Vancouver Canucks
Pettersson, Elias
$7,350,000
C, LW
RFA - 2
Vancouver Canucks
Podkolzin, Vasily
$925,000
LW, RW
RFA - 2
Nichushkin, Valeri
$6,000,000
LW, RW
UFA
Vancouver Canucks
Horvat, Bo
$5,500,000
C
UFA - 1
Vancouver Canucks
Garland, Conor
$4,950,000
RW, LW
UFA - 4
Vancouver Canucks
Pearson, Tanner
$3,250,000
LW
M-NTC
UFA - 2
Roy, Nicolas
$4,200,000
C, RW
RFA
Vancouver Canucks
Karlsson, Linus
$883,750
C
RFA - 2
Lemieux, Brendan
$1,650,000
LW, RW
RFA
Vancouver Canucks
Lammikko, Juho
$925,000
C, LW
RFA
Vancouver Canucks
Lockwood, William
$925,000
RW
RFA
Gaunce, Brendan
$750,000
LW, C
UFA
Vancouver Canucks
Richardson, Brad
$750,000
C
UFA
 
 
 
 
Roster created at CapFriendly.com | Follow on Twitter @CapFriendly
Left Defense Right Defense Goaltender
Vancouver Canucks
Hughes, Quinn
$7,850,000
LD
UFA - 5
Vancouver Canucks
Schenn, Luke
$850,000
RD
UFA - 1
Vancouver Canucks
Demko, Thatcher
$5,000,000
G
UFA - 4
Vancouver Canucks
Ekman-Larsson, Oliver
$7,260,000
LD
NMC
UFA - 5
Vancouver Canucks
Myers, Tyler
$6,000,000
RD
M-NTC
UFA - 2
Vancouver Canucks
Martin, Spencer
$762,500
G
UFA - 2
Hague, Nicolas
$4,200,000
LD
RFA
Vancouver Canucks
Dermott, Travis
$1,500,000
LD/RD
RFA - 1
 
Vancouver Canucks
Burroughs, Kyle
$750,000
LD/RD
UFA - 1
 

Rather have Highmore over Gaunce...Gaunce is slow minor league player... Highmore much more talent and speed..

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

1 minute ago, wildcam said:

Rather have Highmore over Gaunce...Gaunce is slow minor league player... Highmore much more talent and speed..

I can't argue this. Sure! My thinking is I'd take Gaunce based on ability to relieve Bo of some D zone FO duty.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Angry Goose said:

Could Guance play a role similar to Motte? 

 

Hmmm

He doesn't have that motor. Gaunce is much more calm the play comes to him it dies he killed it the play is dead. 

beating a dead horse wtf GIF

League min sometimes that's all you need.

 

Edited by hammertime
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, hammertime said:

He doesn't have that motor. Gaunce is much more calm the play comes to him it dies he killed it the play is dead. 

beating a dead horse wtf GIF

 

He looked pretty good speed wise and was aggressive in CBJ tho. Had a bit of an offensive outburst too. 

 

Just pondering it though if Lockwood isnt quite ready.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Angry Goose said:

He looked pretty good speed wise and was aggressive in CBJ tho. Had a bit of an offensive outburst too. 

 

Just pondering it though if Lockwood isnt quite ready.  

Seriously I'd like to see him back. He wasn't a 1st round pick for no reason the fact that he has been able to adapt and become a journeyman is a huge indicating factor for me in terms of dedication. Would be a great Cinderella story if he were to put it together here and become an influential member of our bottom 6. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hammertime said:

I can't argue this. Sure! My thinking is I'd take Gaunce based on ability to relieve Bo of some D zone FO duty.  

Another option for 4LW instead of Lemieux (and also as C cover instead of Gaunce) would be Johan Larsson.

 

He's a 29 year old UFA, 5'11", 200 lb, can play LW/C, 21 pts in 43 games this past season, he's gritty and he fights, plays PK.

 

Current contract is $1.4m I reckon we could get him for $1.2m x 3 years.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also...like the ideas in your OP but do you really think Roy and Hague are going to get $4.2m each?

 

I reckon on about $3.5m for Roy and maybe $2.75m for Hague. Perhaps if someone is offer sheeting them they go for higher...

Edited by BigTramFan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, BigTramFan said:

Also...like the ideas in your OP but do you really think Roy and Hague are going to get $4.2m each?

 

I reckon on about $3.5m for Roy and maybe $2.75m for Hague. Perhaps is someone is offer sheeting them they go for higher...

I penciled them in at the max in terms of offer sheet threat. hopefully we make the trade instead and sign them for less. but if you're gonna make the threat put your money where your mouth is. anything over 4.2 and we pay a 1st and a 3rd anything under and someone probably offers up the 4.2. The hope is Hog and Rathbone would be more enticing than the compensation, we'd acquire their rights and go from there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, hammertime said:

I penciled them in at the max in terms of offer sheet threat. hopefully we make the trade instead and sign them for less. but if you're gonna make the threat put your money where your mouth is. anything over 4.2 and we pay a 1st and a 3rd anything under and someone probably offers up the 4.2. The hope is Hog and Rathbone would be more enticing than the compensation, we'd acquire their rights and go from there.

OK I get it. So this assumes that VGK accepts the trade and we have to sign Roy and Hague to $4.2m each to stop other teams from offer sheeting them and taking them from us.

 

If VGK doesn't accept that trade deal, then we can only offer sheet one of them at $4.2m because you can only use the 2023 2nd round pick once as compensation. Plus I don't think it is worth going over $4.2m for either guy, as you say that is a 1st + 3rd pick, plus the salary cost makes it not worth it.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BigTramFan said:

OK I get it. So this assumes that VGK accepts the trade and we have to sign Roy and Hague to $4.2m each to stop other teams from offer sheeting them and taking them from us.

 

If VGK doesn't accept that trade deal, then we can only offer sheet one of them at $4.2m because you can only use the 2023 2nd round pick once as compensation. Plus I don't think it is worth going over $4.2m for either guy, as you say that is a 1st + 3rd pick, plus the salary cost makes it not worth it.

Yes. Ideally we have more cap space to work with. But I'd be willing to do a Canes Kotkaniemi deal sign them for more now with a handshake for less later if it forces VGK's hand to take the deal. I think Hog Rathbone should be a very competitive offer for the luxury of working out better deals with Hague Roy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Angry Goose said:

Could Guance play a role similar to Motte? 

 

Hmmm

42 hits in 30 games

8m ice time per game

He still hits the same

5 goals

A cheaper Dickinson that actually hits

52% face off

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Hairy Kneel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, hammertime said:

Yes. Ideally we have more cap space to work with. But I'd be willing to do a Canes Kotkaniemi deal sign them for more now with a handshake for less later if it forces VGK's hand to take the deal. I think Hog Rathbone should be a very competitive offer for the luxury of working out better deals with Hague Roy.

I think Rathbone + Hogs is a pretty decent offer. But those guys are not really proven NHL roster players yet. When you think about what VGK would want in any deal for Roy + Hague, rather than futures (which is kinda what Bone + Hogs are), I think they would be looking for two things:

 

1. Some really cheap proven NHL players for their 2022/23 roster

2. Some cap relief by taking on contracts that they can't afford to keep

 

I wonder if we might be better off trading them something other than Hogs + Rathbone, and they might actually be more interested since they are in 100% win now mode.

 

In terms of the 1st point, we have a couple of players that they might be interested in such as Highmore, Dermott (retained), Burroughs. Cheap guys that can actually perform at NHL level.

 

On the second point, I think VGK would be keen to trade away Dadonov, Martinez, Brossoit if they can manage it. We don't have a lot of cap space to take these guys on, but maybe if we are trading Miller we might have the space to take on Dadonov, for example.

 

So other possible trade options for the rights to Roy + Hague might be:

 

Highmore (rights) + Dermott (50% retained) + Burroughs + 2nd round pick (which VGK can use to trade for more cheap NHLers or as sweetener to clear cap)

 

Hoglander + Ferland + (VAN take back Dadonov if we have traded Miller)

 

I think both of those deals would be better for VAN as both Hoglander and Rathbone have some serious potential upside in the next few years.

 

Or maybe I'm completely wrong and VGK can sign a bunch of cheap UFAs and they prefer Hogs + Rathbone! haha

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Angry Goose said:

I think the risk in JBs approach (similar to Burke) is that you have to hit your transactions out of the park. Like you say there are + & - you can definitely discuss.

 

My own view is to re focus on building from within. Avoid high priced UFAs or trade targets.  Pay the guys who have already proven themselves in your system that you know make your team competitive e.g the Hughes, Demkos, EPs.  Then like you say, tweak and reload.

 

I think trading Meyers/Boeser is a must to build a secondary layer of cheaper/developing talent. IF the Canucks wernt as thin as they are in prospects ready to push you could gamble on a Miller.  

 

The JB reference to having veteran role players is interesting to me.  He tried to address those needs on the fly (a lot of it being due to a lack of prospect depth he also inherited). Given this and PA’s comments about having AHL prospects marinate and ready to play quality NHL mins, I would guess the current plan is to fill those needs from (mostly) within (if possible). 

 

Hard part that this is going to take time. 

JB definitely dug his grave by timing things wrong as far as making a contender.   Creating a team just to make the playoffs?   Well maybe he accomplished that.   Not allowing our team to bottom out properly (well five years ago we were second worst) and always spending to the cap ... those things ruined it to a degree.   Fortunately, at least for a year or two, this team has a fair amount of assets other teams would love to get their hands on.   Whether Allvin has the balls to let this club go back and finish the job or not is totally up in the air.    Has to weigh one year (next season) going again with mostly JB team, against trading one or two core guys or a core guy and a key support player like Myers or Garland won't be an easy decision. 

 

Having watched this team since the Smyl era, have to say it's hard not to like.   It's got a totally different flavour, loved how they came together down the stretch.   IF they can play like that from start to finish, the excitement level going into the playoffs as a number one or two seed in our division will be off the charts.  

  • Cheers 1
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...