Jeremy Hronek

6 hours ago, BPA said:

So which D should the Canucks target and what should they give up?

That’s a really good question. Unfortunately, the type of defenseman that I’d want would likely cost us one of Myers + Lekker/Willander and so I’m not sure if that would be worth it.

An upgrade from someone like Myers+ to Tanev could be interesting and certainly something I’d be interested in as long as the “plus” didn’t involve Lekker, Willander, Podkolzin, or Raty.  
 

To @HKSR’s point, while an injury to Hughes would be devastating, I’d atleast be more comfortable with a Tanev-Hronek top pairing than I would with a [Cole/Myers/Zadorov/Soucy]-Hronek top pairing.

Overall though, I’m not sure.

”To what extent could Hronek carry the Canucks’ defense as the new designated PMD if Hughes were to get injured?” 

I still don’t understand how anyone can be fully content with Cole and Myers as your 2nd pairing.  If one of Hughes or Hronek gets hurt, you’re gonna have even more of our dmen playing above their weight class.  
 

I’ll say it until I’m blue in the face but this team needs a #2A/#3 guy.  Too big a drop off in talent between Hronek and whoever is our 3rd best defenseman.

If we’re thinking Seattle, I’d rather target Adam Larsson.

1 hour ago, HKSR said:

All good. 

 

I just look back at year's past, and teams with defence cores built like this year's Canucks D core have won it all with the focus on 2 top tier defencemen and then a deep roster of solid NHL capable defencemen to back them up.  Usually a group built with some size. 

 

VGK - Pietrangelo and Theodore.  The rest:  Martinez, Whitecloud, McNabb, Hague (not really a #3 guy in this list)

 

COL - Makar and Toews.  The rest:  Manson, Byram, Johnson, Johnson, Girard (Manson or Byram MAYBE as a #3 guy? Manson isn't much different than Zadorov though, and Byram was still very young)

 

TBL - Hedman and Cernak.  The rest: Mcdonagh, Sergachev, Savard, Ruuta, Schenn (this D group was pretty stacked. They arguably had 5 top 4 guys in this roster).

 

TBL - Hedman and Shattenkirk.  The rest:  Cernak, Mcdonagh, Sergachev, Bogosian, Schenn, Ruuta (again, a stacked D core of several top 4 guys).

 

Blues - Pietrangelo and Parayko.  The rest:  Edmundson, Dunn, Bouwmeester, Gunnarson, Bortuzzo (Canucks are built like this IMO)

 

Capitals - Carlson and Orlov.  The rest:  Niskanen, Kempny, Orpik, Djoos (pretty bland D group, but solid defensive ability).

 

Penguins - Letang and Schultz.  The rest:  Cole, Hainsey, Maata, Dumoulin, Daley (also think the Canucks are built like this.  No surprise given our Penguins connection).

 

Penguins - Letang and ???.  The rest:  Dumoulin, Maata, Lovejoy, Daley, Schultz, Cole (have no idea how they won with this group, but they did lol).

 

Most of these Cup winning teams don't have a true #3.  TBL were absolutely stacked, so we can't compare with them at all. 

 

All of them have a true #1D, a very solid #2, and then several solid defensive capable defencemen.  The Penguins were the extreme end of things, and TBL was the other end.  I think the Canucks are somewhere in between:

 

Canucks - Hughes and Hronek.  The rest:  Zadorov, Soucy, Myers, Cole, Juulsen. 

 

I think this works when you have top tier goaltending.  That's the X-factor that makes up for any slight shortcomings on the back end.  There's nothing that can compensate for a forward group that doesn't generate offence though.

 

I don't see this as much different than VGK, Blues, Capitals, or Penguins.

This is a really good post and thank you for creating this.  

Perhaps I’m being overly critical of our current Canucks but I still think our team is overly reliant on Quinn Hughes, and that we’ll need one more Hronek calibre dman.  Time will tell however.

If Chris Tanev could be had for Tyler Myers + a prospect NOT named Willander, Podkolzin, or Lekkerimaki, then I’d probably do it.

On 1/20/2024 at 2:46 PM, Junkyard Dog said:

I'd pass on Chychrun. 

 

We need a #3D but rather go after a different sort of playstyle. 

I suggested Chychrun for the following reasons:

1. It would give our 2nd pairing another PMD (right now, our two PMD’s play on the same pairing).

2. Chyrchrun could step up to the top pair if one of Hughes or Hronek went down with injury.

3. Chych has a sweetheart cap hit for this season and next.  
 

4.  Chych has played under Rick Tocchet before.

On 2/3/2024 at 7:35 AM, Rypien-Punch said:

To Sharks - Aatu Raty, 2024 7th

To Vancouver - Nico Sturm 

 

Sturm 28 -6'3 210 pounds. He gives us size, experience and face off wins. He can be moved up and down the line up and gives the coach a bunch more options.  He will stand up for teamates even if he doesnt win the fight.  Aman can be called upon during injuries. Sturm only costs 2m on the cap for another 2 years. 

 

Raty is not ready yet but will be probably next year and the Sharks will like that about him. Canucks make another serious move to bolster their forward group

 

Pettersson Lindholm Mikheyev

Suter Miller Boeser 

Joshua Blueger Garland

Hoglander Sturm Lafferty 

Aman 

 

Hughes Hronek

Cole Myers

Zedorov Juulsen 

 

Demko

Desmith

 

 

 

 

 

Off the top of my head, this trade just seems like an unnecessary way of pissing away a decent prospect in Raty.

Hard pass.

7 hours ago, HKSR said:

I think the Canucks are REALLY close to finalizing a Stanley Cup winning roster.

 

My thoughts are we are missing one more middle 6 (not really a top 6) hard nosed winger that can take the wing spot next to Miller/Boeser so that Suter can get back to dominating on the 4th line with Hoglander and Lafferty.

 

Targets:

Ryan Hartman

Colton Sissons

Mathieu Joseph

Nick Bjugstad

Marcus Johansson

 

Would be happy with any of the above.  Johansson would be cheapest, but could be good value considering his playoff experience.  The other 4 guys would cost more, but would look fantastic on our roster.  I'd give up a Klimovich or Hirose or Mcward or Mcdonough + 2nd here... not sure which guy we could land for that, but it'd be an excellent addition to the forward group.  Would pretty much need 50% retention on any of the above.

 

The last piece is a depth defenceman.  Name your guy.  My choice would be another RHD with size and snarl, like Bogosian.

 

???-Miller-Boeser

Mikheyev-Lindholm-Petey

Garland-Blueger-Joshua

Hoglander-Suter-Lafferty

 

Hughes-Hronek

Cole-Zadorov

Soucy-Myers

Bogosian

Juulsen

 

I think Aman has done enough to secure a spot on the 4th line with Hoglander and Lafferty and so I’d like to keep him in the line-up.  
 

Neither Cole nor Zadorov should be the teams’ 3rd best defenseman and so I highly suggest an upgrade here (Myers+)

I don’t see a need for another depth defenseman seeing as how we already have both Juulsen and Friedman (Juulsen has looked good whenever he’s been in the line-up).

While Suter and Mikheyev aren’t significant offensive threats, I think their presence on the top 6 gives each line a very strong defensive presence (which could allow their more offensive linemates to cheat a bit more).  Hence - I don’t mind one of Suter or Mikheyev playing with Pettersson/Lindholm or Miller/Boeser.

With respect @HKSR - I think you and I have very different beliefs on what this team’s “final piece” (or pieces) are.

1.   2024 Trade Deadline:  Make a strong pitch involving Myers + Top prospect to bring in another Filip Hronek calibre defenseman.

2.  Conclusion of 2023-2024 season:  Sign Elias Lindholm to a long term deal.

3. NHL 2024 draft: Trade Elias Pettersson to Columbus for Kent Johnson, David Jiriceck, 2024 1st round pick, etc.

4 hours ago, mmkk said:

That's right. Hughes is like our future HOF quarterback. 

What does our team and defense look like if Hughes gets injured long term?

Hence, why I still believe that this Canucks team needs another defenseman that is at or close to Hronek’s level.  If Hughes goes down with injury, we will still need to have the ability to form an elite defensive pairing that can log big minutes. 
 

Myers + Lekker for Chychrun = 4 inch boner

On 2/2/2024 at 5:43 PM, wai_lai416 said:

not really offensively this might be a better squad.. defensively it's not even close.

Can you please further elaborate if possible.

On 2/4/2024 at 4:45 AM, The Lock said:

I'm starting to hate these comparisons to 2011. We're not even in the playoffs yet. We haven't even had a run yet.

 

I refuse to compare at this point. I understand the passion but this is stupid.

I understand where you’re coming from but it’s not like I’m the only one doing it.  Many hockey pundits within the city have started to make comparisons given our current point total, rank in the overall league standings, and our roster top to bottom (with the addition of Lindholm).    
 

My personal opinion is that the 2011 team is/was still superior since a long term injury to any one person wouldn’t sink us, while a long term injury to Quinn Hughes would immediately make us middle of the road.  I still think we need another 2A/3 calibre defenseman.

50 minutes ago, TopChed said:

If we pay the price and add Tanev and I do love Tanev then one of Cole Soucy goes to the press box and one of Juuls Fried get waiverooni'd. The cost benefit doesn't look good. 

Not necessarily.  Just do Myers+ for the upgrade to Tanev.

Hughes-Tanev

Soucy-Hronek

Cole-Zadorov

Juulsen

Unless I’m missing something?

19 hours ago, TopChed said:

 

No we don't.

 

Our D >> Pitt when they won. 

 

We need some starch. A Dorsett Burroughs type we don't need to get fancy w it. 

We already have guys like Zadorov and Cole for that type of “starch.”  For 4-7 options, we already have Zadorov, Myers, Cole, Soucy, and Juulsen (and then Friedman).  
 

My biggest concern with our current team is that there’s too big a gap between Hronek and whoever currently qualifies as our 3rd best defenseman.  We don’t have a true #3 calibre dman.

If Hughes were to get injured, we would have a non elite top pairing (ie one of the aforementioned guys would have to step above his weight class and play with Hronek on the top pairing).

Hence, I’d rather bring in a Chris Tanev type guy instead of bottom pairing depth.

5 hours ago, TopChed said:

Marginal upgrade for huge cost. I can't see trading for Anderson being a wise move. Realistically I'd be happy if we added another 5/6 guy like Burroughs he's played quite well in SJ.

Why would we need another 5-6 guy?  We already stacked with 4’s through 7’s. 
 

We clearly need another 2A/3 guy even if it’s not Andersson (who I had assumed was that guy).

Is it messed up that a part of me is expecting Alvin to make a trade with Calgary for a new team dog?  

In all seriousness, my thoughts and prayers to Ryp and anyone else that was saddened by this event. 

4 hours ago, Sergiomomesso said:

Andersson is not that good. And yes I’d rather have this years Myers than Rasmus Andersson atm. Like I said. We aren’t a top 5 Defence in the league just because of Huggy and Hronek. And the cost to acquire RA will not be cheap. It’s not like we have a bunch of draft picks this summer to give away. 

I looked at NHL line combos and it looks like Andersson is currently playing on the 3rd pairing there and so you’re likely right.

Might be better to go after Tanev or someone else.

7 hours ago, Miss Korea said:

This is awful news to hear.  I think he was only two years old or something like that.  Shit.

 

 

doggone it.

5 hours ago, HKSR said:

Problem is you'll never be able to replace a Hughes... it's like if Tampa lost Hedman, or VGK lost Pietrangelo, or Avs lost Makar.  No matter what you do, there's no way the Canucks or any team would be able to recover from it.  Even the 2011 team couldn't recover defensively when Hamhuis went down. 

 

What I do like about adding another high quality defenceman though is more depth.  Can never have enough top 4 type defencemen when it comes to a playoff push.  Losing Hronek shouldn't be the end of the world.  Losing Hughes would be no matter what we do.  No different than losing Demko.

You can’t fully replace him but you could mitigate damage atleast to some degree.  For example, Vegas has Theodore and Tampa has Sergachev.

While the Canucks do have Hronek, they currently would not be able to throw out a legit top pairing if Hughes were to go down with injury.  Hronek wouldn’t be able to carry Soucy, Zadorov, Cole, or Myers to play at that level.

So - while trading for a guy like Andersson (and giving up Lekkerimaki or Willander in the process) likely would be overkill, I think a deal in which the Canucks acquire someone like Tanev might make sense.

2 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Once Hamhuis was done, the wheels fell off the apple cart. It's indisputable. Losing Raymond to that scumbag Boychuk sucked as well, but losing your top LHD is too much to recover from. 

Kesler was also playing with a torn labrum from the San Jose series onwards.

1 hour ago, IBatch said:

That's probably incorrect, but one thing that Myers has been good at, is amping his physical game up and that's not a bad intangible to have.   Especially the way our blue line is currently constructed.   Cole, Zadorov, Soucy and even Juulsen, make guys pay.   Plus Zadorov and Soucy can crush guys with legal hits.    Last years Myers 100% on board.   Really given the cost,  think we are better off adding a veteran depth D (think Luke Schenn from last year, if something like that is even available but don't suspect it is) and save some for next season too.     Myers also had some good postseasons with WNP. 

From my vantage point, Juulsen has proven worthy of being a depth guy.  We already have a lot of 4-7 calibre dmen.  What we are missing in my opinion is a 2A/3 guy (ie too big a drop off between Hronek and whoever would qualify as being our 3rd best dman).  We have a legit #1 and #2 in Hughes and Hronek respectively but are missing the next guy in line.

12 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

 

This year's team had a better top end (Hughes), the 2011 team didn't have a true 1D

 

What it did have was a bunch of 2-4's in Salo, Ehrhoff, Edler, Hamhuis, and Bieksa, with most of those guys probably being 2-3 caliber

 

Tanev was a rookie, tougher to gauge 

 

But overall I like that defense better, even if our current D is larger, overall I think the group was more talented and well rounded 

 

I view our D as being a 1 in Hughes, a 3 in Hronek, and a some 4-5 guys in Soucy, Myers, Zadorov, and Cole

Agree to a large extent although I do believe that Hronek is a true #2.  There is too big of a drop off in talent between Hronek and whoever is our #3 dman.

By comparison, although the 2011 team didn’t have a true #1, we had about 5-6 #2 calibre dmen (basically 5-6 Hronek calibre dmen imo).  Edler, Tanev, Bieksa, Hamhuis, Salo, and Erhoff.

With our 2024 team, if Hughes goes out long term, we become a 10-13 calibre team overnight (ie 1st round upset loss or 2nd round fodder).  We need to bring in a guy that could realistically form a semi-elite top pairing with Hronek incase Hughes gets injured.

5 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Yet when Hamhuis was injured because he thought it was a good idea to hipcheck Lucic, that's exactly what happened. The team was sunk. 

It wasn’t just Hamhuis that was significantly hampered/injured against the Bruins in that series.

4 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

We aren't going to trade any more high value assets this year.  Not worth it.  We already pushed the limit with Lindholm.  I can see us getting a depth right shot dman at the deadline and maybe a bottom 6 forward for insurance...

If we could somehow upgrade Myers to Tanev without having to give up any of Podkolzin, Willander, or Lekkerimaki, then I think it could be worth it.

11 hours ago, Sergiomomesso said:

Why give up more assets to barely upgrade the RD with Anderson or Tanev? Especially if Willander is going the other way. Look at our team goals against. We aren’t top 5 because of Huggy and Hronek by themselves. 

Upgrading from Myers to Andersson is “barely?”