[Rumour] All Canucks FOR SALE except EP40 who is "Untouchable".

[Phil_314]

35 minutes ago, eeeeergh said:

One thing I’ve noticed the past few games is Myers seems to be the only defenseman that joins the rush as a scoring threat 

forwards enter the zone with speed, Myers plows into the Center-middle.

 

even though it hasn’t led to a goal, I honestly think it’s led to some of the best scoring chances we’ve had.

 

curious why OEL or Bear don’t really do that. I get why Hughes doesn’t - he prefers to carry the puck in himself and set up the cycle (can’t fault him for that, it’s nice we have a guy that can do it) but it’d be nice to see OEL jump up into the rush a bit more as a scoring threat. He’s got a really accurate shot and has in the past scored a ton. 

OEL's more of the walk the line and fire a slapshot from the point kind of PP QB defenseman.  It's really rare for a methodical perimeter with a bomb of the shot who's not the most explosive skater or aggressive type (think Makar as an example of this) to take that approach of rushing way up ice.  Bear's more of a defensive defender, not going to place too many offensive expectations on him at all.

[BlakeQuinnAndEggs]

1 hour ago, King Heffy said:

Liljegren is still absolute trash and has no place on an actual NHL team.

An nhl player is trash .... while you clean potato chip crumbs off your keyboard.

 

The worst poster on these boards.

[King Heffy]

3 minutes ago, BlakeQuinnAndEggs said:

An nhl player is trash .... while you clean potato chip crumbs off your keyboard.

 

The worst poster on these boards.

Wasn't aware I was the subject of this thread, but not going to stoop down to your level.

[Gawdzukes]

3 hours ago, Coconuts said:

Honestly, Chytil is well on his way to smash his career highs. He's 23 and his point per game has increased three seasons in a row prior to last season, he looks like he's figuring it out.

 

Career high of 23 points, up to 17 in 25 thus far and the game isn't even over yet. 

 

Lundqvist is 22 going on 23 and has 9 points in 29 games for a top team in Dallas. If he keeps his pace up he'll hit roughly 25ish points in his first full NHL season. Some whine about him defensively but how many D step into the league as polished products? Dude is young with lots of room to improve.

 

Sure could use another 1st going into this year's draft or last year's draft. 

Of course you preferably want a player with solid defence like King Hef says but the reality is they are scarce in the NHL and rarely come ready made. These are the types of players that I see can grow into good NHLers. He has speed, skill, the ability to read plays, and skating.

 

Not every player who steps into the NHL is a prolific defender or has attributes like Owen Power but many can figure out how to be effective. You can have guys like Poolman and Burroughs who are playable but these younger players have more upside. Players do develop. Nils has 9 points in 29 games and is a -2 with 17:22 in ice time. His 3 goals would lead our defence. He's 22. 

 

And lets be honest Hef only thinks 17 dmen total in the NHL are not utter garbage.

Edited December 19, 2022 by Gawdzukes

[BlakeQuinnAndEggs]

I'm just glad Aqua man has finally come to his senses and is obviously allowing JR and PA to build their team.

[Coconuts]

15 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

Of course you preferably want a player with solid defence like King Hef says but the reality is they are scarce in the NHL and rarely come ready made. These are the types of players that I see can grow into good NHLers. He has speed, skill, the ability to read plays, and skating.

 

Not every player who steps into the NHL is a prolific defender or has attributes like Owen Power but many can figure out how to be effective. You can have guys like Poolman and Burroughs who are playable but these younger players have more upside. Players do develop. Nils has 9 points in 29 games and is a -2 with 17:22 in ice time. His 3 goals would lead our defence. He's 22. 

 

And lets be honest Hef only thinks 17 dmen total in the NHL are not utter garbage.

Almost every player has weaknesses but we're not in a position as an organization where we can be overly picky. Lundqvist would have immediately been our best RD prospect. Chytil would have made someone like Pearson potentially redundant as a cost controlled RFA. A 1st could be have been used to bolster our rather shallow prospect pool or flipped for help on D. 

 

Most prospects aren't perfect, most prospects stepping into the NHL have growing pains. Especially on D because a mistake by a D is more likely to be highlighted if it results in a goal against. Some folks need to give their head a shake and recognize the quality of team they're rooting for and the lack of organizational depth as far as blue chip prospects go. Especially at RD. 

 

Trades are rarely perfect, if we ship players like Horvat or Miller out the returns likely won't be perfect. 

 

The only center prospect of note we have is Karlsson for example, and I wouldn't call him a blue chip guy despite being a good prospect. We've got a few on the wing in Podz, Klimovich, and Lekkerimaki but all three likely need more time. Podz should at least be an NHL'er, there's no guarantee he's a top six guy. 

 

The only RD of note we have is Johansson, are folks gonna jump on his back when he inevitably steps in and likely isn't flawless defensively? After that we've got what, maybe Woo as far as D who may be closer to making the jump? If he ever does? Our best goalie prospect is Silovs, we could definitely use another tender or two. 

 

We could use prospects at all positions and people wanna gripe that the players we may get back aren't perfect? Give me a break. 

Edited December 19, 2022 by Coconuts

[Ilunga]

10 hours ago, Maginator said:

I agree. He's sub-par defensively. No where close to Cale Makar and the comparison is laughable. Makar will probably go down as the best defenseman to ever play the game, surpassing Bobby Orr's legacy. He can truly do it all.

 

I think Hughes is better than someone like Tyson Barrie because he is great as possessing the puck and smart-decision making, keeping the puck on our sticks, which limits goal scoring against in itself. However, when he's without the puck he really struggles. He just doesn't have the body to beat guys and unfortunately I don't think he ever will.

As much as I admire Cake Makars game he has not and will not change the way how the game of hockey is played.

 

Bobby Orr is a one and only type of athlete to his sport.

 

https://thehockeywriters.com/bobby-orrs-landmark-season/

 

[Gawdzukes]

16 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

Almost every player has weaknesses but we're not in a position as an organization where we can be overly picky. Lundqvist would have immediately been our best RD prospect. Chytil would have made someone like Pearson potentially redundant as a cost controlled RFA. A 1st could be have been used to bolster our rather shallow prospect pool or flipped for help on D. 

 

Most prospects aren't perfect, most prospects stepping into the NHL have growing pains. Especially on D because a mistake by a D is more likely to be highlighted if it results in a goal against. Some folks need to give their head a shake and recognize the quality of team they're rooting for and the lack of organizational depth as far as blue chip prospects go. Especially at RD. 

 

Trades are rarely perfect, if we ship players like Horvat or Miller out the returns likely won't be perfect. 

 

The only center prospect of note we have is Karlsson for example, and I wouldn't call him a blue chip guy despite being a good prospect. We've got a few on the wing in Podz, Klimovich, and Lekkerimaki but all three likely need more time. Podz should at least be an NHL'er, there's no guarantee he's a top six guy. 

 

The only RD of note we have is Johansson, are folks gonna jump on his back when he inevitably steps in and likely isn't flawless defensively? After that we've got what, maybe Woo as far as D who may be closer to making the jump? If he ever does? Our best goalie prospect is Silovs, we could definitely use another tender or two. 

 

We could use prospects at all positions and people wanna gripe that the players we may get back aren't perfect? Give me a break. 

Was just going to post the same thing when I came to your post. Completely on the mark. You can't be picky when A, you have no quality RD on your team, B, no RD signed past next year, and C, haven't bothered to put any thought whatsoever into stocking and developing prospects in that position. Same thing with Center. Like honestly what do you people expect?

 

I guess one could just head downtown to Ekblad and Makar and pick a couple up.

[eeeeergh]

58 minutes ago, Phil_314 said:

OEL's more of the walk the line and fire a slapshot from the point kind of PP QB defenseman.  It's really rare for a methodical perimeter with a bomb of the shot who's not the most explosive skater or aggressive type (think Makar as an example of this) to take that approach of rushing way up ice.  Bear's more of a defensive defender, not going to place too many offensive expectations on him at all.

OEL definitely could do it though, he did in Arizona during those years where he would score 15+ goals a season

That end to end rush against vancouver was... epic...

[jyu]

4 hours ago, Coconuts said:

Nobody on this team should be untouchable for the right price, nobody.

 

This isn't to say teams will be willing to pay the right price, but we should be willing to listen and pull the trigger if they are.

 

I'd take a haul from Jersey for Hughes for example.

 

Disagree, I'd be willing to move Demko. He's on a value deal if he shows he can bounce back, and if we are willing to pull the trigger on guys like Horvat, Miller, ect there's no guarantee he'll fit our competitive timeline over the remainder of his deal. He's 27 now, we get him til he's 30, but how long will it takes us to become a playoff regular let alone a contender?

 

Canucks should be looking for another top flight goalie prospect or two sooner than later.

 

I'm not opposed to keeping Demko by any means, but I am open to moving him if a team is willing to pay a good price. 

 

Yupppp, all aboard the Miller trade train! My conductor's seat has never cooled! 

 

As for Demko, yeah, I'd move him as mentioned above. 

I wouldn't approach the goalies the same way as the position players. They are weird and their performances depend on so many factors that makes it hard to predict success/failure of a new goalie on a new team/system.

 

So once you have a reliable starter, you don't let him go because finding the next one could take eternity. At least that's the lesson I learned from the goalie graveyard era -- if you can call it an era. 

 

Even when you are rebuilding, it's important to have a goalie that gives you a chance to win. If the players are approaching the game thinking they are going to lose because the goalie sucks, it's going to lead to wrong habits and loser mentality, which might be impossible to recover from (i.e., the pre-McDavid Oilers and their glorious first round picks). You try so hard to score a goal and the other team scores on you so easily, that's deflating. If that repeats over and over again throughout the season and over a few seasons? Even the most mentally strong ones will be wrecked.

 

The idea that we can sign a decent starter to hold the fort from UFA market is a dangerous one too. A recent example of this is Holtby. A cup winner and a veteran that was to shoulder the load with Demko. Well, we all know how that went. Even Halak who had over 200 wins and high profile, underperformed here. 

 

Of course, sometimes you get luck like the Flames. A division rival lets the starting goalie with unreal high danger save percentage walk to UFA, so you just nab him and problem solved.

 

Ryan Miller is another example where a UFA worked out well. He helped to develop Marky and Marky helped develop Demko, setting off a positive chain of event. But note that he is one of the best American goalies of all time and his professionalism was off the chart. Those guys don't come around very often.

 

I understand your logic in trying to trade everyone not in the same age group, but when it comes to the goalies, the age group is not the primary question. The primary question is, whether they are reliable. The goalies are weird like that. If they are 35 years old but are reliable, then you keep them.

 

[Coconuts]

5 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

Was just going to post the same thing when I came to your post. Completely on the mark. You can't be picky when A, you have no quality RD on your team, B, no RD signed past next year, and C, haven't bothered to put any thought whatsoever into stocking and developing prospects in that position. Same thing with Center. Like honestly what do you people expect?

 

I guess one could just head downtown to Ekblad and Makar and pick a couple up.

Any blue chip prospects are a great start towards integrating more talented youth onto the roster, which we need, particularly on D. Hughes is on an island, we need to bring more of our own guys along instead of coveting the players others have put time into developing. The fewer top end prospects we've got the smaller our odds of doing that. 

 

We need high end youth period, and have for a while. Hughes and Pettersson aren't young guns anymore, they're approaching their mid 20's, we need to start building that next wave. 

[Coconuts]

4 minutes ago, jyu said:

I wouldn't approach the goalies the same way as the position players. They are weird and their performances depend on so many factors that makes it hard to predict success/failure of a new goalie on a new team/system.

 

So once you have a reliable starter, you don't let him go because finding the next one could take eternity. At least that's the lesson I learned from the goalie graveyard era -- if you can call it an era. 

 

Even when you are rebuilding, it's important to have a goalie that gives you a chance to win. If the players are approaching the game thinking they are going to lose because the goalie sucks, it's going to lead to wrong habits and loser mentality, which might be impossible to recover from (i.e., the pre-McDavid Oilers and their glorious first round picks). You try so hard to score a goal and the other team scores on you so easily, that's deflating. If that repeats over and over again throughout the season and over a few seasons? Even the most mentally strong ones will be wrecked.

 

The idea that we can sign a decent starter to hold the fort from UFA market is a dangerous one too. A recent example of this is Holtby. A cup winner and a veteran that was to shoulder the load with Demko. Well, we all know how that went. Even Halak who had over 200 wins and high profile, underperformed here. 

 

Of course, sometimes you get luck like the Flames. A division rival lets the starting goalie with unreal high danger save percentage walk to UFA, so you just nab him and problem solved.

 

Ryan Miller is another example where a UFA worked out well. He helped to develop Marky and Marky helped develop Demko, setting off a positive chain of event. But note that he is one of the best American goalies of all time and his professionalism was off the chart. Those guys don't come around very often.

 

I understand your logic in trying to trade everyone not in the same age group, but when it comes to the goalies, the age group is not the primary question. The primary question is, whether they are reliable. The goalies are weird like that. If they are 35 years old but are reliable, then you keep them.

 

Your arguments are sound, but I'd still be willing depending on what folks were willing to pay. 

 

That being said, I'm not hellbent on moving Demko for the reasons you've mentioned. But yes, I'd listen to calls on him. 

[jyu]

2 hours ago, flickyoursedin said:

Yes Chytil is producing nicely this year. They’re giving him good minutes. However his already bad FO % from last year got even worse sitting at a 36% on the year. The guy is still trending towards a middle 6 winger career. Then you have an offensive dman who is small and can’t play good enough defence but doesn’t even provide enough offence to make up for his lack of defensive play. The fact they were able to trade him for a 1rst is pretty hilarious. It was a bad package and I’m happy we didn’t take that.

I was watching a bit of Rangers vs Blackhawks game. They call them the "kid" line, Lafreniere-Chytil-Kakko.

 

Yes, it's the bottom feeding Blackhawaks but Chytil was facilitating the play between the two. I wouldn't put him off as a middle 6 winger just yet.

 

I agree that package looks enticing in hindsight, but it was a bit underwhelming at the time.

 

If it was Schneider instead of Lundqvist, then I think we should have pulled the trigger.

 

[Gawdzukes]

6 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

Any blue chip prospects are a great start towards integrating more talented youth onto the roster, which we need, particularly on D. Hughes is on an island, we need to bring more of our own guys along instead of coveting the players others have put time into developing. The fewer top end prospects we've got the smaller our odds of doing that. 

 

We need high end youth period, and have for a while. Hughes and Pettersson aren't young guns anymore, they're approaching their mid 20's, we need to start building that next wave. 

Exactly, we are in a tight spot and probably have to gamble on one or two in short order here to move the team forward. At that point you have to make the best possible move or just do nothing forever. If not Nils then someone else but they actually have to offered in a trade. There will be some risk involved because we've painted ourselves in a corner. It sure would be nice to have a couple draft picks and get these guys in our system consistently so this doesn't happen again.

[Rick_theRyper]

1 hour ago, Canucks Curse said:

you know what I think is hilarious...

 

We turned down Chytil Lundqyist and a late 2022 1st for Miller

Lundqvist was traded for a first...

Marino was traded for Ty smith and a pick

Lundqvist > Ty smith...

 

Who says no to Miller for Chytil and two 1sts

or Chytil, Marino and a 1st for Miller and pick...

Hey wait, are we not trying to get a young 2/3C and a young right shot d man and a pick for Bo???

 

I mean, to me, this tells me they did nit understand the market and the puzzle pieces of who needed what and how they could maximize returns...

They did not anticipate the trade market, what other teams needed and how to capitalize on that...

Your sir hit the nail on the hammer! We should have sold Miller, especially more so if that's the plan now to sell sell sell... I think selling just Miller for help that ended with a better D core would have made this team competitive. Now rebuild a bit and hope it works out better(this time)  while we are told Petey wants to sign long term. Im not drinking that Kool aid. cheers brother good to see others not blind 

[jyu]

1 hour ago, Canucks Curse said:

you know what I think is hilarious...

 

We turned down Chytil Lundqyist and a late 2022 1st for Miller

Lundqvist was traded for a first...

Marino was traded for Ty smith and a pick

Lundqvist > Ty smith...

 

Who says no to Miller for Chytil and two 1sts

or Chytil, Marino and a 1st for Miller and pick...

Hey wait, are we not trying to get a young 2/3C and a young right shot d man and a pick for Bo???

 

I mean, to me, this tells me they did nit understand the market and the puzzle pieces of who needed what and how they could maximize returns...

They did not anticipate the trade market, what other teams needed and how to capitalize on that...

I wouldn't regret too much about the missed deals.

 

Those deals may have made us slightly better set up for the future. Getting Marino may have made us better now and for the future (if it ever was a possibility). 

 

But I don't think those deals make us a cup contender anyways. There is a serious flaw with the roster that it needs a major surgery to correct not a simple cosmetic job.

 

Getting those players (Marino, Chytil, and Lundqvist) for Miller, we might be in a dog fight for the wild card spot, and give a false illusion to the management and the owner that this team is close.

 

The fact that we are falling flat this season is a great thing in that regard. As this thread indicates, the owner and the management is finally convinced that this situation can't be salvaged and that all players are on the market as a result (minus EP and QH).

 

Now Horvat is likely getting shipped out. I am a fan of Horvat but I am a bigger fan of this team and I know that this team needs a caliber of player surpassing that of Bo Horvat to succeed.

 

Miller in the right situation could be a good player to have. He's one of those rare physical scoring winger and I believe he is coachable so his bad habits may be corrected.

 

[Coconuts]

1 minute ago, Gawdzukes said:

Exactly, we are in a tight spot and probably have to gamble on one or two in short order here to move the team forward. At that point you have to make the best possible move or just do nothing forever. If not Nils then someone else but they actually have to offered in a trade. There will be some risk involved because we've painted ourselves in a corner. It sure would be nice to have a couple draft picks and get these guys in our system consistently so this doesn't happen again.

Bottom line is we can only get what teams are willing to pay, for a guy like Horvat that's likely still a good return but perhaps not the grand slam return some folks are hoping for. Same goes for a Miller trade, which I still think we should do. That isn't to say we shouldn't get good pieces but I certainly don't expect us to rob another GM blind. 

 

Prospects are always a bit of a gamble, that's sports though. If a player were a sure bet they probably wouldn't be traded. We've just got to take the best deals we can, with Horvat being a pending UFA we don't exactly have a ton of wiggle room unless we want to risk losing him for nothing. 

 

We need to be holding on to our picks going forward, and actually finding a way to develop the players we draft in house because our track record of doing that is abysmal. 

[jyu]

10 hours ago, Phil_314 said:

OEL's more of the walk the line and fire a slapshot from the point kind of PP QB defenseman.  It's really rare for a methodical perimeter with a bomb of the shot who's not the most explosive skater or aggressive type (think Makar as an example of this) to take that approach of rushing way up ice.  Bear's more of a defensive defender, not going to place too many offensive expectations on him at all.

Yes. But I think the main reason as to why OEL doesn't join the rush is because of his skating and how it has deteriorated over time. He is being very conservative as he knows this and that he won't be able to skate fast enough to catch up to the play if the puck goes the wrong way.

 

Edited December 19, 2022 by jyu

[Gawdzukes]

1 minute ago, Coconuts said:

Bottom line is we can only get what teams are willing to pay, for a guy like Horvat that's likely still a good return but perhaps not the grand slam return some folks are hoping for. Same goes for a Miller trade, which I still think we should do. That isn't to say we shouldn't get good pieces but I certainly don't expect us to rob another GM blind. 

 

Prospects are always a bit of a gamble, that's sports though. If a player were a sure bet they probably wouldn't be traded. We've just got to take the best deals we can, with Horvat being a pending UFA we don't exactly have a ton of wiggle room unless we want to risk losing him for nothing. 

 

We need to be holding on to our picks going forward, and actually finding a way to develop the players we draft in house because our track record of doing that is abysmal. 

People need to be realistic and realize that a young kid playing his way onto and positively contributing as a 2nd RD on an ELC would be a big win. Just for kicks I went over to HF to check out the Stars board. Here is the last page:

 

[Phil_314]

37 minutes ago, eeeeergh said:

OEL definitely could do it though, he did in Arizona during those years where he would score 15+ goals a season

That end to end rush against vancouver was... epic...

True, anyone could feasibly go on rushes (heck, remember when Edler did it against Columbus?).  It's more likely a choice for why they don't.