[Trade] Canucks acquire Nikita Zadorov from the Flames

[Grinch]

2 hours ago, Chon derry said:

Kyle wellwood says hi

[Grinch]

5 hours ago, Rip The Mesh said:

I bet he'll get a chance to be 2nd paring at times here. / Who doesn't struggle at 4 freakin minutes?

High risk / high reward? Hell; He'll fit fantastic with the Canucks. Open ice hitter? (fist pump) Bring it, love it!

We've had some crappy fighters before but it can serve a valuable message when need be.

Hire bieska as a part time fighting coach - off days of Sportsnet broadcasting!

[Ballisticsports]

7 minutes ago, Alflives said:

That’s it. Garland will cost us to dumperoo. He’s huge negative value. Benning sure screwed us over with that horrid trade. 

Alf I'm getting the impression you don't think much of Garland

 

He has been ok on the 3rd ( problem is you cannot afford 3rd liners paid like that, without losing elsewhere)

 

When you compare what VGK spend on their 3rd line it hurts

 

Braden Howden  $1.9

Chandler Stephenson $2.75

Michael Amadio $762

 

We have been spending far too much on 3rd and 4th liners for far too many years

and their 4th line players paid even less is good team building

We are in a rock and a hard place of "living for what we have today" and balancing the now and future We were so far down the hole and slowly crawling out of it JR said they had a lot of work to do, and he wasn't wrong

s

[Hairy Kneel]

52 minutes ago, EdgarM said:

I said that before we acquired Hronek too, many thought we were resigning Bear. We have two smaller offensive dmen, thats enough. If they get injured, then he becomes relevant, other then that , he is just a depth player, period.

Bear doesn't have any offense really. I like McWards offensive upside better. If that's what we're looking for.

[flickyoursedin]

44 minutes ago, Mac said:

Ridiculous lol.

 

Garland is the guy creating all the chances in the bottom six. 

Imagine how many more points he’d have if instead of creating for the bottom 6 guys if he was given the chance to create for the top 6 guys. Garland looks good out there! He’s very creative offensively and I think he could hang with the guys in the top 6 and doing so he’d produce at a rate where his salary doesn’t look too bad. We just have too much depth on the wing that he’s been resorted to playing 3rd line and it’s a lot harder to pickup points setting up Beauvillier and Blueger instead of Miller and Boeser.

[NoCupSyndrome]

9 minutes ago, flickyoursedin said:

Imagine how many more points he’d have if instead of creating for the bottom 6 guys if he was given the chance to create for the top 6 guys. Garland looks good out there! He’s very creative offensively and I think he could hang with the guys in the top 6 and doing so he’d produce at a rate where his salary doesn’t look too bad. We just have too much depth on the wing that he’s been resorted to playing 3rd line and it’s a lot harder to pickup points setting up Beauvillier and Blueger instead of Miller and Boeser.

 

The challenge with him and Hogs is that they appear to need the puck to be effective. They haven't figured out how to play with top level players who have the puck most of the time. 

 

IMHO Garland and Hogs are great on their lines because they can be play drivers for blue collar players like DJ, Laff, etc.

[NoCupSyndrome]

16 minutes ago, Ballisticsports said:

Alf I'm getting the impression you don't think much of Garland

 

He has been ok on the 3rd ( problem is you cannot afford 3rd liners paid like that, without losing elsewhere)

 

When you compare what VGK spend on their 3rd line it hurts

 

Braden Howden  $1.9

Chandler Stephenson $2.75

Michael Amadio $762

 

We have been spending far too much on 3rd and 4th liners for far too many years

and their 4th line players paid even less is good team building

We are in a rock and a hard place of "living for what we have today" and balancing the now and future We were so far down the hole and slowly crawling out of it JR said they had a lot of work to do, and he wasn't wrong

s

 

I agree, Garland has played well but his best spot on this team appears to be on the third line. As a result, mgmt likely trades him at some point to allocate cap space into the top six...especially as Abby players develop

[RWJC]

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

Garland must go. He’s craperolla. Eat a pick or even salary retention. But get him gone! 

Yo Melmacian, if you are rooting for this team then you should give Garland some credit for what he has contributed to its success thus far, and him also being a reason why you have wins to celebrate. Can’t deny it if you’re being fair and objective. 

[Tank]

small guys like Garland will be easily get crushed in playoff. sad but fact.

[Coryberg]

3 hours ago, DeNiro said:

I find it crazy that we’re still second…

 

I guess Hughes really brings that number down. 

And Friedman... he is only 1 inch taller and 5 lbs heavier than Quinn 

[The Lock]

2 minutes ago, NoCupSyndrome said:

I agree, Garland has played well but his best spot on this team appears to be on the third line. As a result, mgmt likely trades him at some point to allocate cap space into the top six...especially as Abby players develop

 

To be fair, I think the Beau trade shows that Garland wouldn't be impossible to trade. The real question to me is when does it make sense? Sure, we could do it now, but do we lose skill needlessly as a result?

[The Lock]

1 minute ago, Tank said:

small guys like Garland will be easily get crushed in playoff. sad but fact.

 

I'm sure a lot of people said the same thing about Marchand at one point. Just saying.

[Tank]

6 minutes ago, NoCupSyndrome said:

 

I agree, Garland has played well but his best spot on this team appears to be on the third line. As a result, mgmt likely trades him at some point to allocate cap space into the top six...especially as Abby players develop

yes, Abby has some good kids waiting for a spot at bottom six.

[puckstopper]

On 11/30/2023 at 5:34 PM, Chronic.Canuck said:

 

 

Has anyone shared the don't touch my goalie clip 0:45 in? This is the kind of guy you know will not take any shit while he's on the ice.

So pleased we got this guy! Demko is smiling for sure! I'll call him Zad's till a better name comes along! I loved guys like him when i was playing, you could count on them to clear your crease and keep the other team honest around you. He's a loose canon to, so here comes the boom!

[PeteyBoeser]

Canucks and Vegas have same amount of wins. They have more looser points. That’s what we need. If we lose we need to get at least a point!

[Nucker67]

What are the odds Cassie Campbell says it was a good trade for Calgary? (but doesn't mention it was good for the Canucks)

[Elias Pettersson]

Fun fact:

 

In 2018/2019 and 2019/2020, both Nikita Zadorov and Ian Cole played for the Colorado Avalanche. 
 

According to Sportsnet 650, they played together on the same pairing for over a year. 

[Rick_theRyper]

27 minutes ago, puckstopper said:

So pleased we got this guy! Demko is smiling for sure! I'll call him Zad's till a better name comes along! I loved guys like him when i was playing, you could count on them to clear your crease and keep the other team honest around you. He's a loose canon to, so here comes the boom!

How about "general Zod"

[Sativika]

1 hour ago, Hairy Kneel said:

Zad makes Bear unnecessary. Juulsen and Wolanin can bring up 7-8

Save that money toward a power forward. A good power forward would be an upgrade on PDG. 

 

Not so. Zad's a LHD. Bear's RHD. Possible 3rd Canuck pairing? It could work. It's a scenario not un-common in hockey; big physical dude paired with smaller offensive puck mover type.  I won't list any, but there's many examples of such throughout the NHL, past and present. Even Huggy's past partners; Schenn, Tanev!

 

Had Bear not been injured in the worlds, he'd've been part of the roster automatically, (As touched on by Mike Vanderhoek below.) and Juulsen/Wolanin still as depth call ups; as they still are.

 

1 hour ago, Mike Vanderhoek said:

 

Thing is Bear could very well be a two year deal, someone who has a future with the team and he very well did until he got injured. One addition at one position doesn't have to mean another is off the table. Contrary to what some people are saying the team is not at the level where they need to push for one or two more pieces to be contenders. Long way to go with this group still but should get into the Playoffs this season and have some good pieces that could equal Playoff success.

 

Is it because of his shoulder injury from playing for Canada in last years Worlds that we devalue him? I mean, dudes cap was $2.2mil before his unfortunate injury. So because of such, not getting resigned, let go by us and mired in a scenario of an uncertain future? It's not his fault he got injured.  Be that as it may, if he's okay with a pay cut of that magnitude, then so be it. Seems unfair though. Especially when it appeared he was to be part of our future by the management.

 

Yea. I'm sure management knows this and are keeping phone lines open. Truthfully I don't think we're in a position to go all in for Stanley Cup contention yet. I seem to recall Management's plan for this season was to get in the playoffs and maybe do some damage to opposing playoff teams; win a round or two. Definitely looking as if that'll come to fruition for sure.

 

54 minutes ago, WHL rocks said:

 

3rd pair Zadorov  Bear would be good. That's what we need. Legit NHLers not AHL bubble guys. 

 

Lots of teams will make offers on him. If we can sign him to a $1 mill deal it's a no brainer we should sign him.. 

 

As mentioned above; sure. Why not! Bear's age fits the age profile set by management's plans. What is he...25? 26? 

Sure. a mil is a no brainer, but sh*t. Dude's not on a PTO! I guess your all thinking a show me type contract after injury. But jeez! How unfair, man!

 

1 hour ago, Mike Vanderhoek said:

I like Garland's game, he has good bite and doesn't back down from anyone.

 

Garland good. We keep.

 

51 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Garland must go. He’s craperolla. Eat a pick or even salary retention. But get him gone! 

 

Garland no go. We keep. Much money. Hard we move no can do. 

Go Canuck Go.

[aGENT]

3 hours ago, WHL rocks said:

We'll have to wait and see what happens. 

 

I don't think we want to down grade from a Myers to another "Friedman" and pay assets in order to move Myers out and another "Friedman" in..

 

We're attempting to upgrade not downgrade our D especially the RD. 

 

I think we add Bear and the D is set for this year.

 

We work on getting a top 6 forward by trying to move Garland + +

 

Instead of paying to move Myers cap then paying for a 6/7 D its better to add those assets to a Garland package for a top 6 forward and really make a legit offer...

 

 

 

And I doubt we have to add much for Myers in that scenario. May even return a mid pick or something.

Edited December 2, 2023 by aGENT

[Ghostsof1915]

47 minutes ago, The Lock said:

 

I'm sure a lot of people said the same thing about Marchand at one point. Just saying.

Show me a time when Garland played like Marchand?

Hoglander is playing more like Marchand than Garland is.

[PhillipBlunt]

 

[Rekker]

2 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

 

Tank.

[Goose]

2 hours ago, WHL rocks said:

 

3rd pair Zadorov  Bear would be good. That's what we need. Legit NHLers not AHL bubble guys. 

 

Lots of teams will make offers on him. If we can sign him to a $1 mill deal it's a no brainer we should sign him.. 

 

My one concern about Bear is that he has to be in tip top shape to be effective.  

 

But I liked his game last year and he could be a reliable partner for any of the LHD.

[Hairy Kneel]

11 minutes ago, Sativika said:

 

Not so. Zad's a LHD. Bear's RHD. Possible 3rd Canuck pairing? It could work. It's a scenario not un-common in hockey; big physical dude paired with smaller offensive puck mover type.  I won't list any, but there's many examples of such throughout the NHL, past and present. Even Huggy's past partners; Schenn, Tanev!

 

Had Bear not been injured in the worlds, he'd've been part of the roster automatically, (As touched on by Mike Vanderhoek below.) and Juulsen/Wolanin still as depth call ups; as they still are.

 

 

Is it because of his shoulder injury from playing for Canada in last years Worlds that we devalue him? I mean, dudes cap was $2.2mil before his unfortunate injury. So because of such, not getting resigned, let go by us and mired in a scenario of an uncertain future? It's not his fault he got injured.  Be that as it may, if he's okay with a pay cut of that magnitude, then so be it. Seems unfair though. Especially when it appeared he was to be part of our future by the management.

 

Yea. I'm sure management knows this and are keeping phone lines open. Truthfully I don't think we're in a position to go all in for Stanley Cup contention yet. I seem to recall Management's plan for this season was to get in the playoffs and maybe do some damage to opposing playoff teams; win a round or two. Definitely looking as if that'll come to fruition for sure.

 

 

As mentioned above; sure. Why not! Bear's age fits the age profile set by management's plans. What is he...25? 26? 

Sure. a mil is a no brainer, but sh*t. Dude's not on a PTO! I guess your all thinking a show me type contract after injury. But jeez! How unfair, man!

 

 

Garland good. We keep.

 

 

Garland no go. We keep. Much money. Hard we move no can do. 

Go Canuck Go.

Bear might not even be game ready with that type of shoulder injury. You couldn't say he's an automatic for a roster spot. He's no way an offensive defenseman. 3 goals in 61 games last year. He's a middling type. I'd rather have Juulsen's physicality at 6-7. Plus Bear might want the same 2.2M which he's not worth anymore.

He's back to square one and has to prove he's game ready. And maybe not with us.