Coconuts

Maybe, I think they're content with Garland on the third line for now, but I could see them explore moving him during the summer. I think Mikheyev stays. I think Kuzmenko would probably be the odd guy out, he just doesn't seem to fit with Tochett hockey, regardless of what's been said in the media. I don't think it's that he's underperforming in a big way, I think he's just come back down to earth and we're seeing a player closer to what we should probably expect. He was always due for regression based on an inflated shooting percentage, the same way Boeser likely is this year. But the biggest difference between the two is that Boeser shoots a helluva lot more, his overall game is also better than Kuzmenko's imo. Boeser has 27 goals on 116 shots through 42, which amounts to a 23.3 shooting percentage. Kuzmenko has 8 goals on 55 shots through 36 games, which amounts to a 14.5 shooting percentage. Brock has more than doubled Kuzmenko's shots which works in his favour, even if he regresses he's more likely to maintain a higher scoring pace if only because he shoots more. Maybe Miller could get more out of Kuzmenko, but I wouldn't expect a "return to form" that resembles last season's totals. I think there's a good chance Kuzmenko simply had a career season right off the hop.

stop committing war

One line or two, that doesn't change the fact that our second line wingers have roughly the same number of points as our third line wingers. Our forward depth has been better this season, which reflects in point totals across the board, but that doesn't mean the lack of production from the second line isn't problematic. Pettersson hasn't been able to get more out of Mikheyev and Kuzmenko, we've seen Di Gueseppe line up with Miller at times this season, the Canucks need more from their top six and that's likely why management views it as an area of need. If they stack their talent their depth is left wanting, if they don't their depth is still left wanting.

On a line or not, that doesn't change the fact our offense has been top heavy.

Not this season, Monahan edges them both in points and plays a more valuable position. 24 points in 41 games on a lousy Montreal team.

Maybe, but if the Canucks fancy themselves as being contenders sooner than later Pettersson is likely integral to their plan and Pettersson and his agent likely know it. He'd be a very hard player to replace. Pettersson, if viewed as a center, plays a more valuable position. He's on pace for his second consecutive 100 point season in his 24-25 season. His first two seasons were slightly under point per game, his third season saw his point per game dip but then he exploded last season. Nylander's never hit 90 points, his past two seasons were 87 in 82 and 80 in 81. Before that it was 42 in 51, 59 in 58, and 27 in 54. Pettersson has the edge when it comes to production, regardless as to whether Toronto paid Nylander too much or not. But at the end of the day the Nylander deal set a comparable, which is probably what the Pettersson camp was waiting for, I don't think Nylander's signing will help the Canucks because deals signed around the league impact future signings around the league. Nylander will also be 28 in May, he's doing what he has been at an older age than Pettersson.

Probably, Kuzmenko was due for regression from last season (inflated shooting percentage, not a high frequency shooter), but it also just seems like he hasn't been as good a fit under Tochett. Could see both sides being willing to move on. Mikheyev is a middle six tweener but he also brings speed and a defensive conscience, I think he's more likely to stay.

Garland or Kuzmenko would be my guess, unless they're interested in Montreal's Monahan, who carries just shy of a 2M cap hit.

I think it'll definitely be more than Nylander. Dunno, what I'd say to this is that in a 32 (likely a bigger number sooner than later) team league the odds of winning a cup aren't all that great even if you take less. It's the hardest championship to win in sports, and it's only going to get harder as more teams enter the league imo. I think this contributes to guys getting going for their bag. Guys who've been around longer, who've secured their bag, likely take less later on to increase the small odds of winning a cup because they've already cashed in.

Yes, but it goes deeper than that imo, I don't think management wants to ice one top line, two third lines, and a fourth line. Our second liners have produced as much as our third liners, which can be looked at as encouraging, problematic, or both. https://www.capfriendly.com/depth-charts/canucks The problem with icing the lotto line come playoff time is that other teams, particularly teams who get further into the playoffs, will probably have quality forward depth as well, which is when having a super line could be a problem. It's easier to shut down a single, very effective top six line than two quality top six lines imo. Canucks have gotten good showings from depth forwards this season but their offense is undeniably top heavy, from the defense as well.

Maybe, but I think this year's Kuzmenko is closer to the real Kuzmenko than last season's Kuzmenko. He was always due for regression based on an inflated shooting percentage, the same way Boeser likely is this year. But the biggest difference between the two is that Boeser shoots a helluva lot more, his overall game is also better than Kuzmenko's imo. Boeser has 27 goals on 116 shots through 42, which amounts to a 23.3 shooting percentage. Kuzmenko has 8 goals on 55 shots through 36 games, which amounts to a 14.5 shooting percentage. Brock has more than doubled Kuzmenko's shots which works in his favour, even if he regresses he's more likely to maintain a higher scoring pace if only because he shoots more. Kuzmenko just hasn't looked as effective under Tochett and his taking Boeser's spot doesn't exactly encourage me. The problem with bumping Garland up is that hurts the third line, and our overall depth. He's been an engine on that line. The Canucks attack is undeniably very top heavy, their defense is as well but it arguably features better depth than our forward group. What the Canucks would have to give up for a 2C is anyone's guess, but my guess is Kuzmenko would probably be part of said trade. The wingers would change a bit, sure, but the whole point of acquiring a 2C who can produce is freeing up the top line, or being able to stack that top line so to speak. At the end of the day the Canucks are going to have to give up something good for a 2C or a 3D, gotta give to get, I simply believe they'd be better suited addressing their top heavy offense.

I view the Miller bit as being different, I don't believe Miller was as willing to bet on his ability to replicate his success as Pettersson is. Miller's also a little older, which matters imo. Miller was also signed under a flat cap in what were arguably still Covid times, he signed on September 2nd, 2022, whereas Pettersson's extension will kick in as the league is beginning to see cap jumps again. It's been said Miller left money on the table, and maybe he did, but he also gave up his opportunity to chase a larger bag for surefire financial security and that was his choice.

I know there's all sorts of chatter about this and saying the Canucks need help up front is as easy as saying the team that scores more goals wins, but I figured it deserved a thread considering this came from Rutherford himself https://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/2820310/rutherford-top-6-forward-on-canucks-deadline-radar Vancouver Canucks president of hockey operations Jim Rutherford identified the top of the club's forward group as a potential area of need leading up to the March 8 trade deadline. "I think as we speak, if we were able to add another top-six forward, that would give us a better chance," Rutherford told The Athletic's Pierre LeBrun earlier this week. "And you know, we'll watch the defense as we go along here. But you know, for the most part, our defense has done a pretty good job." The Canucks lead the Pacific Division and are second in the league standings at 28-11-3 midway through the campaign. Vancouver's surge under head coach Rick Tocchet has put it in a position to buy ahead of the trade deadline, as a trip to the playoffs for the first time in a full season since 2015 appears inevitable. Although the Canucks lead the NHL in goals (164), their success has come from a top-heavy attack. Elias Pettersson, J.T. Miller, and Brock Boeser dominate the top line and operate at better than a point-per-game pace for the season. However, Vancouver's next most productive forward is Ilya Mikheyev at 22 points. Blue-liners Quinn Hughes and Filip Hronek rank third and fifth, respectively, in team scoring. The Canucks have already made a handful of trades since training camp opened in September. In four different deals, the club shipped out Tanner Pearson and Anthony Beauvillier and acquired Sam Lafferty and Nikita Zadorov. The wheeling and dealing from general manager Patrik Allvin has left the Canucks with approximately $332,000 in cap space, according to Cap Friendly.

I hear what you're saying, but the flip side of this is what do folks expect Pettersson to say that doesn't involve canned answers? Particularly in a rabid Canadian market where anything a player says or doesn't say can be run with and turned into a story?

That first bit is leverage, that can't be understated. It's not an agent's job to care about the cap structure of NHL organizations beyond how it impacts their clients. Not being able to hammer out other deals places pressure on Allvin and co to get something done. Management get paid to sort out that puzzle, agents get paid to get players as much as they can. Having a hardball agent also dampens the possibility of the Canucks getting much of a discount from either Pettersson or Hughes imo, and their sitting out in the past is worth highlighting because I think some folks have forgotten that bit. The stakes are higher now than they were when Pettersson and Hughes were negotiating their last deals, the numbers will be much bigger. The Canucks will likely end up paying market value for Pettersson imo, most stars don't take discounts. Wouldn't be surprised if Hughes ends up being paid more than Pettersson when it's all said and done.

I disagree, if only because I don't believe teams can't be over the top prepared for injuries to key players. Injuries happen, sometimes it's top players who get banged up and it sucks. But on some level it is what it is, injuries are part of the game. Canucks D depth is solid despite offense from the D being top heavy (Hughes and Hronek), but our forward group is also top heavy and I view that as being more of a problem imo. The Canucks have gotten good showings from depth players this season but our second line is undeniably left wanting. Folks like to poke fun at the Oilers for their top heavy forward group, but if we're stacking Miller, Pettersson, and Boeser more often than not that also gives the opponents one big line to try and shut down. The Canucks would be much better equipped having more top six talent in their top six, two effective top six lines are much better than one. One could argue that our depth makes up for it, but the reality is that most teams who get further into the playoffs will also have some pretty solid depth themselves. Building a team with top notch depth at all positions just likely isn't doable more often than not under the constraints of a salary cap. At the end of the day if Hughes goes down that cripples us regardless of who else we have on the back end, losing any of Boeser, Pettersson, and Miller would hurt a lot too but not as much as losing Hughes. If Demko goes down we'd be in a tough spot as well, regardless of how well DeSmith has performed as a backup.

Monahan without retention probably goes for at least a 2nd if not more, 1st for retainment isn't unrealistic at all If he's truly over his injuries he could be a sleeper acquisition, he had 17 points in 25 games last season and has 24 in 41 thus far Place him on a more competitive team with skilled linemates and I don't see why he couldn't be a 50 point player The appeal to playoff bound teams is being able to fit in such a player at a slightly less than a 1M cap hit, teams have given up what have wound up being later 1st's for less

, which was uncomfortable

Is that the alias of your hitman?

It's the least Montreal could do after torching us with Toffoli

Cowards down south, it was -40 this morning

Still think it's a joke how he got raked over the coals when the NHL promotes gambling every chance it gets

I get what you're saying, but the difference between Elvis and Markstrom is that Markstrom has a longer track record of maintaining some qualify stats over the course of larger sample sizes Considering Calgary's been a bit of a mess this season his numbers don't actually look too shabby, put him behind a better defensive team and his stats likely improve Older or not, he's also a shorter commitment given he has two years left on his deal after this season instead of Elvis's three, a team would just need him to age well over the next couple seasons which I think is doable That single year could mean a lot to a team like Carolina, who doesn't like older guys on big term, it also frees up cap sooner than later https://www.capfriendly.com/players/jacob-markstrom https://www.capfriendly.com/players/elvis-merzlikins