[Trade] Canucks Acquire Elias Lindholm from Calgary for Andrei Kuzmenko, Hunter Brzustewicz, Joni Jurmo, 2024 1st and Conditional 2024 4th

[Bob Long]

9 minutes ago, tas said:

I feel like judging any incoming player's impact before we get to see them within tocc's system is a premature evaluation. 

 

Ouch, no one wants projectile dysfunction.

[PistolPete13]

1 hour ago, Maniwaki Canuck said:

We need to be realistic about Lindholm:  he's a defense-first player whose offensive ceiling is lot closer to Phillip Danault than Pavel Datsyuk.  Don't expect him to provide strong secondary scoring on a line with Petterson, especially if Mik is their winger.  Petey needs another shooter to maximize his value.  Lindholm is not that guy: we're waiting for Lekerimakki.   Maybe Hogs Lindholm Petey can generate some offence together but Mik doesn't have the passing or shooting skills to drive a second line: he's Jannik Hansen overpaid by $2 mil, manos de piedra and I'm not talking the Roberto Duran skillset.  

The most likely outcome is that Lindholm forms a shut-down line with Mik and Suter.  They would be really good in that role.   We'd get our scoring from the Lotto line and the 3rd line.   We need to win the President's Trophy for this to work:  home ice and last change would allow hard-matching this shut-down line against whoever we're targeting.  On the road, such a line would be a lot less effective.

I don't expect us to re-up Lindholm after the season. Allvin and co can't and won't overpay for him given their other priorities.  There's no way he's getting JT Miller money on this team.  So he's a rental and I'm cool with that.  Would love to be wrong about any of this but I doubt I am. 

Well said. I don’t agree with some of what you are saying, but your points are valid. I’m hoping for the best, but preparing for the worst.
 

In the words of the immortal Juice:

Canuck fans, temper your expectations.

 

[Fan Abroad]

15 hours ago, HKSR said:

https://www.milehighhockey.com/2022/6/15/23169593/game-1-preview-stanley-cup-final-colorado-avalanche-tampa-bay-lightning

 

Tampa Bay Lightning had Brayden Point on their "3rd Line"... see?  This is the problem, that's not a 3rd line.  That's a 2B Line at worst.  Stanley Cup finalist with a $9.5M player on the 3rd line?  NO WAY!  WTF?!  

 

We just haven't had this kinda strong depth in a LONG time... so it's weird to see this in our lineup.  Top teams have this kinda situation all the time.  In fact, when the Blues won their Cup, they had Stastny making $6M or $7M something like that on their "4th Line".

 

Edit:  Sorry it was Steen, not Stastny -- $5.75M on their 4th line:

https://www.nbcsportsboston.com/nhl/boston-bruins/2019-stanley-cup-final-projected-lines-pairings-for-bruins-vs-blues-game-1/327083/

 

 

The problem with Vancouver fans is that they get a price in their head and if the contract exceeds that, then they find reasons to make him less important. 

[DrJockitch]

59 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

We still need a few bobbles around the edges maybe (4th like grit, d depth) but I love what this deal does for making us a tougher road team. Now teams have to face both Miller and Lindholm for matchups. 

A more experienced right shot 4th line C would be ideal.  Another PF on top 6 a dream but impossible from cap perspective. A depth RHD wouldn’t be bad idea, a second pairing guy would be pretty much impossible. PA seems to do the impossible frequently though. 
Not sure when PDG comes back, would be nice add to 4th line, Podz will likely come up for playoffs as well. 
But really I think most important thing is not to mess with team chemistry too much. 

[HKSR]

3 minutes ago, Fan Abroad said:

The problem with Vancouver fans is that they get a price in their head and if the contract exceeds that, then they find reasons to make him less important. 

Exactly.  People have just gotten used to the fact we've had absolute crap bottom 6 players in years, so they don't realize how much depth costs.  Regularly we see guys in the bottom 6 on Stanley Cup finalists being paid WAY more than expected because the skill and talent is usually spread across the lineup to be able to roll 4 lines consistently.  I provided 2 examples above, and they're just being ignored and excuses are given instead... so I don't wanna go around in circles with people about it.

[Coconuts]

10 hours ago, Jeremy Hronek said:

Good arguments but I think it’s kind of a double-edged sword with Hughes. 
 

If Hughes were to go down with injuries long term, this Canuck team would *immediately* go from being an elite team to a 10-13 calibre team since one of Myers, Zadorov, Cole, or Soucy would need to form a new top pairing with Hronek (which as a whole, would be a sub-par top pairing for an elite team).

 

With the addition of Lindholm, the Canucks *might* now have two potentially elite scoring lines but we will have to see how it plays out. 
 

Back in 2011, the Canucks had two elite scoring lines, the best PP, AND the best PK.  Our current time, while good, does not have this accolade (as of right now).  
 

In 2011, we also had two legit PP lines that we could throw out.  We don’t have that at current.

 

Lastly, in 2011, almost every single hockey pundit picked us as the cup favorites whereas with the current environment, I don’t think most hockey pundits would label us as the odds on cup favorites despite our #1 rank.

 

In 2011, you are correct that we didn’t have a defensemen of the calibre of Hughes, but we basically had 6 dmen of Hronek’s calibre (Edler, Tanev, Hamhuis, Bieksa, Erhoff, Salo).  
 

In other words, the Canucks wouldn’t be sunk if any one of these guys got injured.  In 2024 however, we would be significantly hampered if Hughes were to go down with injury.

 

Thats why I still believe that….

-acquiring Tanev = same level as 2011

-acquiring Andersson = our team becomes better than our 2011 team.

 

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

Edited February 2 by Coconuts

[The Duke]

46 minutes ago, AnthonyG said:

Injuries and Tim Thomas is why we lost. We had more powerplays in the series, we had 8 in game 3 and gave up 2 shorties and we had 2 PPs to Bostons 1 in game 7. Enough with the reff bullshit, we lost because of health and poor goaltending.

 

I hope Demko never has Luongo’s career, I hope its better and he doesnt fall a part like Luongo in the playoffs. 

We got more power plays because we deserved more power plays - but that doesn’t mean Boston didn’t get away with a ton of shit. 

Edited February 2 by The Duke

[PhillipBlunt]

10 hours ago, Jeremy Hronek said:

In 2011, you are correct that we didn’t have a defensemen of the calibre of Hughes, but we basically had 6 dmen of Hronek’s calibre (Edler, Tanev, Hamhuis, Bieksa, Erhoff, Salo).  
 

In other words, the Canucks wouldn’t be sunk if any one of these guys got injured.  In 2024 however, we would be significantly hampered if Hughes were to go down with injury.

 

Thats why I still believe that….

-acquiring Tanev = same level as 2011

-acquiring Andersson = our team becomes better than our 2011 team.

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. 

[Canuck You]

[Jeremy Hronek]

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.

[HKSR]

6 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

I agree.  Except I place Hronek as a 2.  He'd be top pair pretty much on any team in this league. 

 

That 2011 Defence group was very strong down to #5.  Even with that said, once Hamhuis went down, it was game over.  He was our main shut down guy. 

 

I think what this current Defence group has is that Soucy, Myers, Zadorov, Cole, and arguably Juulsen are big, shut down type defencemen, while Hughes and Hronek are the offensive threats.  Hughes production is so insane that he basically covers off 2 to 3 of the 2011 guys' offensive output lol.  Hronek fills in the rest.  What I like more about this current group is they are huge and they are mean.  They're likely the ones that are gonna be dishing out the hits rather than absorbing them, which should hopefully mean more durability in the playoffs.

 

If we can find one more offensive threat on our back end, I'd take the 2024 defence group over the 2011 simply because I think they're built for playoff hockey a la 1994 Canucks.

[The Arrogant Worms]

Elias Lindholm: 'Loved my time' in Calgary, 'excited' for Canucks

https://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/39438461/loved-my-calgary-excited-canucks

[Jeremy Hronek]

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.

[spook007]

2 hours ago, tas said:

I think we all need to wrap our heads around the fairly elementary concept that the other team being happy with a trade doesn't mean we have to be unhappy with it. it's not a zero sum game. 

 

the canucks got the best piece in exchange for pieces they were comfortable giving up. the flames are happy they got some potential pieces back.

 

everybody wins. 

Thank you... Both teams gained in this trade. Calgary got various parts that may be usable going forward for an UFA, that likely was going to leave.

And Canucks got a player they feel can help them during play offs. Long term they may have acquired a 2C or at worst they've gained some cap space for next season....

 

If Flames fans are happy good for them.... One thing is for certain, they'd much rather be in our shoes than their, if they had the choice... happy or not.

[PhillipBlunt]

7 minutes ago, Jeremy Hronek said:

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

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. 

Edited February 2 by PhillipBlunt

[AnthonyG]

11 minutes ago, The Duke said:

We got more power plays because we deserved more power plays - but that doesn’t mean Boston didn’t get away with a ton of shit. 

Doesnt mean we couldnt have done it back. To blame the reffs on why we got shut out at home in game 7, stomped in every single game on the road with more power plays, its a bit of an odd statement to make if we “got more power plays because we deserved more power plays” so were the reffs calling shit or not? Let it go, move on, the true issues were health as you mentioned and ultimately the biggest factor was Tim Thomas who had a legendary performance the entire playoff run. He had like 23GSAA and in the finals i believe he had 8GSAA in a 7 game series and Luongo had like a -6 or -7GSAA. Thomas stole 8 goals from us, Luongo handed them 6 or 7 weak ones. Luongo sucked. Health was secondary to Luongo as to why we lost. Even with our banged up roster we out hit, out shot, out won draws, literally everything except goals.

[Fan Abroad]

10 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Exactly.  People have just gotten used to the fact we've had absolute crap bottom 6 players in years, so they don't realize how much depth costs.  Regularly we see guys in the bottom 6 on Stanley Cup finalists being paid WAY more than expected because the skill and talent is usually spread across the lineup to be able to roll 4 lines consistently.  I provided 2 examples above, and they're just being ignored and excuses are given instead... so I don't wanna go around in circles with people about it.

When Agent said that Kuz was dead weight and the line was Mik, he forgot that Tocc likes to work in pairs and the pairs were;

Miller - BB

Petty - Kuz

Gar - Josh

Hogz - Suter (but he has been moved and that is why we need a winger)

 

Mik is the extra / digger on the line whereas Garland carries the line

Mik is also a defensive forward but is less needed now with Lindholm and possibly the next forward that we get. 

There are D players that can replace the little that he has done on this team which lowers his value considerably. 

[Jeremy Hronek]

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.

[HKSR]

7 minutes ago, Jeremy Hronek said:

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.

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.

[stawns]

8 hours ago, WHL rocks said:

Raty has fallen off in Abby. He's not doing great. He was recently playing bottom 6 in Abby...

 

It's best to try get something of value for him and use it towards a Cup run this year..  

 

I would do 2nd and Raty for Tanev without a 2md thought. 

What makes you think raty has fallen off?

[spook007]

1 hour ago, AnthonyG said:

Injuries and Tim Thomas is why we lost. We had more powerplays in the series, we had 8 in game 3 and gave up 2 shorties and we had 2 PPs to Bostons 1 in game 7. Enough with the reff bullshit, we lost because of health and poor goaltending.

 

I hope Demko never has Luongo’s career, I hope its better and he doesnt fall a part like Luongo in the playoffs. 

Didn't score enough... like 8 goals in 7 games... 

 

Tim Thomas, Roberto Luongo, Injuries, weird NHL rulings, diving, Marchand etc etc etc... In the end we just didn't score enough goals. 

 

Still hurts to think about...

[Alflives]

1 hour ago, BPA said:

Your hate is showing.  Horvat is a near ppg.  He’s doing his part.

Horfat Wallet is helping the islanders to a higher draft pick. That’s what he does. And Alf will “tell you that for free”. 

[Gawdzukes]

12 hours ago, Coryberg said:

Sounds to me like you hated the contract more than the player. And rightfully so.

 

I think if he comes back it's on a 1 or 2 year deal, can't see us signing a 34 year old to a 3 year deal. The number should be around  3-3.5 on a hometown discount.

 

Yeah, the contract is really bad but Myers has also been really bad the last couple of years. The only reason he's been good this year is great coaching and being surrounded by good players. Really no reason except blind hope that it continues. I imagine once he's signed a new deal next year he stops listening to the coaches again. He'll also be a year older, he's playing for his hockey life right now.

 

It would be a very poor move, like signing Bear who is sucking out in Washington right now. I simply can't fathom why people would want to sign Myers when the club actually can sign anyone they want. He can't be the third best 3RD in the world can he? If I were the one making the decision he'd be the absolute last I failed to do anything else fallback. Just wait until he makes one of his gaffes that blow a playoff game and then people will come to their senses.

 

[Fanuck]

49 minutes ago, HKSR said:

  Regularly we see guys in the bottom 6 on Stanley Cup finalists being paid WAY more than expected because the skill and talent is usually spread across the lineup to be able to roll 4 lines consistently.

This is true,  and we're seeing it already with Garland for example.  

 

The other thing we consistently see with contending teams in the modern NHL era,  is guys in the bottom 6 outperforming their contracts/pay scales and then getting grossly overpaid for salary/term in subsequent seasons - Allvin needs to carefully and astutely avoid this trap as we have several contracts ending as everyone knows already.  Allvin said he's aware of the potential for a 'one-and-done' season so I'm confident he has a plan and will allocate his money appropriately. 

[Gawdzukes]

53 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Exactly.  People have just gotten used to the fact we've had absolute crap bottom 6 players in years, so they don't realize how much depth costs.  Regularly we see guys in the bottom 6 on Stanley Cup finalists being paid WAY more than expected because the skill and talent is usually spread across the lineup to be able to roll 4 lines consistently.  I provided 2 examples above, and they're just being ignored and excuses are given instead... so I don't wanna go around in circles with people about it.

 

While this is certainly true, the problem is we don't have elite depth like those teams you mention. We only have 3 top players in Petey, Miller, and Boeser. We should be looking at upgrading the top 6 before spending money on depth 3rd liners. Unfortunately former management blew our cap situation to hell so it's just a reality we're dealing with. Most teams don't sign these players to big money to purposely play down the line-up. They just end up there.

 

I assume you're still arguing about Garland here. If he can be fit in fine but it will be hard without sacrificing elsewhere. I have no problem moving Mik first actually but I think both might need to go in order to ice a team management wants. Which would include Petey, Hronek, maybe Lindholm, getting pay raises and an upgrade in the top 6.

 

I honestly don't really care either way and we'll see what they do but there is a distinct possibility that his name would be one of the first to go due to his role and salary. This management group should have a better read than anyone here ... and I actually trust this group.