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

[Signing] Rangers re-sign Kaapo Kakko


Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

There are plenty of guys his age who understand how to play defence.  If he hasn't learned how to avoid being a complete liability at lower levels, it's unlikely that he'll ever get to a point where his defensive play meets an acceptable standard for an NHLer.

There are plenty of guys who have improved as they got older and Lundqvist is clearly smart enough to do so. He’s not unteachable at all especially now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, canuck73_3 said:

There are plenty of guys who have improved as they got older and Lundqvist is clearly smart enough to do so. He’s not unteachable at all especially now. 

He's also bad enough where he can improve a fair amount and still be a liability.  It's not worth the risk, and it sure as hell isn't worth trying to teach while he's in the NHL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, King Heffy said:

He's also bad enough where he can improve a fair amount and still be a liability.  It's not worth the risk, and it sure as hell isn't worth trying to teach while he's in the NHL.

He’s simply not that bad. At all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

He's also bad enough where he can improve a fair amount and still be a liability.  It's not worth the risk, and it sure as hell isn't worth trying to teach while he's in the NHL.

 

1 minute ago, canuck73_3 said:

He’s simply not that bad. At all. 

It's pretty clear that Young Lund has been given more and trusted with defensive play at every level since he was drafted. His possession #s have been fine in pretty much random deployment. I think he could be a top-4 defenseman if given the chance and a decent (or elite like Quinn...) partner.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, canuck73_3 said:

He’s simply not that bad. At all. 

He's as bad as guys like Barrie and Rielly.  You simply can't have a guy like that in your lineup if you want to succeed.  It makes it harder to hold the rest of your D accountable when you tolerate a guy like this playing like complete trash.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

He's as bad as guys like Barrie and Rielly.  You simply can't have a guy like that in your lineup if you want to succeed.  It makes it harder to hold the rest of your D accountable when you tolerate a guy like this playing like complete trash.

 

I’d take Rielly or Barrie on my team no problem, i wouldn’t make them shut down dmen but they have a valuable skill set. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

He's as bad as guys like Barrie and Rielly.  You simply can't have a guy like that in your lineup if you want to succeed.  It makes it harder to hold the rest of your D accountable when you tolerate a guy like this playing like complete trash.

 

If it’s a swap of Myers for Klingberg it’s an upgrade.


Any intelligent hockey mind knows that.

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

34 minutes ago, Ilya Mikheyev said:

 

It's pretty clear that Young Lund has been given more and trusted with defensive play at every level since he was drafted. His possession #s have been fine in pretty much random deployment. I think he could be a top-4 defenseman if given the chance and a decent (or elite like Quinn...) partner.

I'd be hesitant to run a D pair where both guys are under 6' and neither are great defensively. Although, Lundkvist is listed at 5'11 which is usually the draft day listing. He could be 6 foot for all I know. I'd still rather see a true 2 way guy. Rather than an offensive minded guy we hope isn't a liability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DeNiro said:

If it’s a swap of Myers for Klingberg it’s an upgrade.


Any intelligent hockey mind knows that.

I really can't believe this is a debate on CDC. You trade Myers for Klingberg all day long

 

25 minutes ago, N7Nucks said:

I'd be hesitant to run a D pair where both guys are under 6' and neither are great defensively. Although, Lundkvist is listed at 5'11 which is usually the draft day listing. He could be 6 foot for all I know. I'd still rather see a true 2 way guy. Rather than an offensive minded guy we hope isn't a liability.

There's definitely more 'perfect' fits out there, but also being mindful of not letting seeking perfection lead to inaction. I'd give Lundkvist a chance to reach his ceiling than play Schenn there all year, but of course I'd rather have Braden Schneider, Noah Dobson types there, but it doesn't seem like any will be available.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ilya Mikheyev said:

exactly

 

at the same time it's kind of nice that @King Heffy has a shtick. It's predictable and comforting. I can name any PMD and he'll call him trash in his own end

I don't know if he was warned to tone it down, but I feel like he has been going easy on players for a while now. I miss the old blast- them-to-no-end-and-take-no-prisoners shtick.

 

#free@King Heffy

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, ForzaTikare said:

Miller for Kaapo? Would you? 

JT and Dermott 

 

For 

 

Kakko and Lindgren (not Lundkvist) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Jester13 said:

I propose we make one day of the year: Heffy Says What He Wants To Say Day. But instead of blasting hockey players, you get to blast any of us here on CDC. We'll make it during the offseason, and the rule is that no one is allowed to take it seriously - it's all in good fun, like a roast.

 

Do me first! Do me first!  

100% on board with this. 

  • Cheers 1
  • Haha 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...