NewbieCanuckFan Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 2 minutes ago, NHL97OneTimer said: Don't jinx us Grandmaster! This reminds me of the allegations that the Bruins made about the Canucks practicing lifting the cup. let's not be that city. Horsh*t story made up by the Ruins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 2 minutes ago, HKSR said: No, 40 goal scorers don't grow on trees, but remember, we just got a centre that has scored 42 goals in this league (one year before Kuzmenko did it). Jared McCann shouldn't said Bartman's mom was hot. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NHL97OneTimer Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 3 minutes ago, NewbieCanuckFan said: Napoleon Bonaparte was rumored to have said upon being shown a candidate for a General (he was told by his officers he was good)..I know about that but is he lucky? He went from being dropped from the Canucks during a lousy decade to hoisting the cup. I know a lot can happen to a player when changing teams but I never saw "cup team member" when watching him over all of those years. Not lucky to make the NHL, but lucky to be on the winning team I would say yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Rekker Posted February 1 Popular Post Share Posted February 1 1 minute ago, Coconuts said: I'm generally more pragmatic when it comes to contention, as you've said, it's the toughest trophy to win. This is a very valid point. I read posts saying "if we win the cup, then it's a good trade" Doesn't work that way, one team wins. There are windows of time to go for it. This is a very good team with some holes, and big one was addressed with this trade. Win or lose, I am happy to go for it and the results will be ecstacy, or deep sadness. In the end though I can rest easier knowing they went for it while the team sits tops in the NHL with elite players at important positions. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NHL97OneTimer Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 2 minutes ago, NewbieCanuckFan said: Horsh*t story made up by the Ruins. Fair.....but fans getting cocky only validates false rumours. Besides, can anyone in this city suggest that it would be beyond Kesler to do that? I loved Kesler but he was a dirtbag to other teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 1 minute ago, HKSR said: We can afford it though. We need to move Mikheyev. That 3rd line produces at a 0.6 PPG clip. That's about 40 to 50 points for all 3 of them. I'd expect to spend about $12M on that line and It'll likely only cost $11M to keep them all together ($4.95 + $3M + $3M). That's a line providing positive value. Unlike Garland, Mik can play in the top 6 and is needed. If anything, we need a second Mik-like player so we have a speedy, complementary, 2 way guy with size on BOTH top 6 lines. (A guy which likely requires some of Garland's cap.) He's not going anywhere. Again, nobody is arguing that he (or the line) aren't performing (though again, career years due for regression). You can post all the stats you like, it entirely misses the point. If PA can somehow miraculously give raises to Petey, Hronek, Blueger, Joshua, Lafferty, Zadorov, DeSmith and Lindholm (or replace him), replace expiring Myers with a Tanev or similar, while retaining Garland...great. I don't see it. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 4 minutes ago, RupertKBD said: Yep. And as I pointed out, I would have been okay with a straight up swap, but we gave up a lot more.... That's because Lindholm is a centre that plays more physical, can win more than 50% of his faceoffs, plays PP and PK, and the truth is Lindholm's best season is better than Kuzmenko. So yes, he would cost more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Hairy Kneel Posted February 1 Popular Post Share Posted February 1 7 minutes ago, NHL97OneTimer said: Garland has more value than Mikheyev right now. Agree with HKSR above. Pre knee surgery Mik was great. Now he looks like a great 4th line checker. Reminds me of a few scorers that turned into checkers. Not all bad but that's not the contract we signed him for. A few games ago, I seen him just straight up crash into the boards, me thinks he couldn't turn at that exact moment. Like he used to. Definitely switch him and Hogs. Hogs is devilishly quick. Like Mik was when he got here before his injury. 4 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksJay Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 17 minutes ago, HKSR said: Moving Garland would be terrible. We have arguably the best 3rd line in the league because of how Garland drives that line. Garland is all over the top of the leaderboard in all the advanced key metrics on the Canucks. Don't believe me, have a look yourself: https://www.naturalstattrick.com/playerteams.php?fromseason=20232024&thruseason=20232024&stype=2&sit=5v5&score=all&stdoi=oi&rate=y&team=VAN&pos=S&loc=B&toi=0&gpfilt=none&fd=&td=&tgp=410&lines=single&draftteam=ALL 1st in CF% 1st in FF% 1st in SF% 3rd in GF% 1st in xGF% 1st in SCF% 1st in HDCF% 1st in HDGF% He literally dominates the advanced stats for pretty much every metric. It'd be absolute idiotic to move Garland ahead of Mikheyev. That'd be one of the stupidest moves Allvin could make. Agreed At this point, every player on this team is playing up to their contracts except maybe Myers (but his size and toughness will be valuable in the playoffs). If we are constantly looking at the roster and figuring out how to make it better, I agree with you assessment. Mik would be the next guy to move (if we were going to move someone) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NHL97OneTimer Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 (edited) 8 minutes ago, RupertKBD said: Yep. And as I pointed out, I would have been okay with a straight up swap, but we gave up a lot more.... Lindholm brings a lot more than his offensive play. He's also more proven over the years. As others have pointed out, Conroy seemed more excited about the picks and Hunter. I hope Kuz lights it up again because he's likeable.....but Lindholm is exactly the player that Tocchet wanted and who's to argue with PA, JR and RT at this point? The Canucks had to present the best package given the intra-division trade, not to mention that the Canucks fleeced the Flames for Zadorov. We can only say that we overpaid if Hunter truly turns into a top 4 D. With his size and offensive ability, it's possible, but still a longshot. Edited February 1 by NHL97OneTimer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertKBD Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 1 minute ago, HKSR said: That's because Lindholm is a centre that plays more physical, can win more than 50% of his faceoffs, plays PP and PK, and the truth is Lindholm's best season is better than Kuzmenko. So yes, he would cost more. I would agree if he had a couple more years on his contract at a decent price. As it is, we paid "more" (a lot more) for less than a half a year of EL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 2 minutes ago, Rekker said: This is a very valid point. I read posts saying "if we win the cup, then it's a good trade" Doesn't work that way, one team wins. There are windows of time to go for it. This is a very good team with some holes, and big one was addressed with this trade. Win or lose, I am happy to go for it and the results will be ecstacy, or deep sadness. In the end though I can rest easier knowing they went for it while the team sits tops in the NHL with elite players at important positions. It will smart a bit if we get knocked out and he walks, but I do understand that this is as good a year to go for it as any. I do hope Lindholm is retained, but I also think there's a solid chance he is. If it takes management having to pay to ship out Garland to retain him they'll do it. Could see Lindholm wanting to stay too. But as exciting as it all is, I could very easily see us going out in the first or second round. There are no guarantees come playoff time regardless of how stacked your team may seem. That being said, my bar for success for the season is simply making the playoffs. If they do that they'll have taken the first step. Most teams don't walk straight to a final, they have to hang around in the playoffs for a while before getting so much as a sniff at a conference final. Cinderella runs are rare, I'm not going to pretend otherwise. But after most of a decade of missing, the first part of becoming a playoff regular is actually making it, we'll probably do that. The important part is showing we can do is consistently going forward, that puts us in the mix. Some might see that as being negative, but I've seen many hyped teams get booted over the years, including us. 1 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteyBOI Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 why Sissons.... 0.51 PPG at 2.9m per year... 5.5 hits /60 or about the same as JT miller... as big and mobile as JT... positive 5/4 takeaway/giveaway ratio... solid 2.6 BS/60 scores more goals than assists meaning he can replace alot of wingers on our team... he'sjust a better Digisuippe which is what we need right now... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertKBD Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 1 minute ago, NHL97OneTimer said: Lindholm brings a lot more than his offensive play. He's also more proven over the years. As others have pointed out, Conroy seemed more excited about the picks and Hunter. I hope Kuz lights it up again because he's likeable.....but Lindholm is exactly the player that Tocchet wanted and who's to argue with PA, JR and RT at this point? Yeah, I get it. There's a lot to like about him as a player, but as I've pointed out multiple times, he's a pending UFA and as such, I think we gave up too much for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 2 minutes ago, aGENT said: Unlike Garland, Mik can play in the top 6 and is needed. If anything, we need a second Mik-like player so we have a speedy, complementary, 2 way guy with size on BOTH top 6 lines. (A guy which likely requires some of Garland's cap.) He's not going anywhere. Again, nobody is arguing that he (or the line) aren't performing (though again, career years due for regression). You can post all the stats you like, it entirely misses the point. If PA can somehow miraculously give raises to Petey, Hronek, Blueger, Joshua, Lafferty, Zadorov, DeSmith and Lindholm (or replace him), replace expiring Myers with a Tanev or similar, while retaining Garland...great. I don't see it. I can see it, because Mikheyev is being overpaid. What he brings to the table in terms of production and on-ice advanced stats doesn't justify his cap hit. Like you said, Mikheyev has been in a top 6 role all season and has 10 goals and 23 points with a +4 rating. Garland has been in a bottom 6 role all season and has 8 goals and 24 points with a +13 rating. Not even going into the domination by Garland of advanced stats, and it's pretty easy to see who should be moved out. The argument before was that we need Mikheyev's PK ability. I'd argue Lindholm replaces that in spades. Lastly, I argue Garland could totally play top 6 minutes if needed. in fact Garland's best season is 19 goals and 52 points. More than adequate as a 2nd line winger. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 4 minutes ago, RupertKBD said: I would agree if he had a couple more years on his contract at a decent price. As it is, we paid "more" (a lot more) for less than a half a year of EL. We can re-sign him. I have no doubts about it. Moving Mikheyev would do it. In terms of forwards playing to their contract cost, Mikheyev is probably the worst of the bunch now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck73_3 Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 8 minutes ago, NHL97OneTimer said: Fair.....but fans getting cocky only validates false rumours. Besides, can anyone in this city suggest that it would be beyond Kesler to do that? I loved Kesler but he was a dirtbag to other teams. Kesler was a lot of things but any player practicing lifting the cup is a stretch at best... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.B Cooper Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 1 hour ago, MidKnight Ego said: i watched a video he said a whole bunch of words... he is 29 after all... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 33 minutes ago, Integra250 said: I don't think his name is on the cup though It is, fifth line up from the bottom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GasThomas Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 I think that they just talked about new contract. How long did it take between the transfer and the signing of the new contract of Horvat? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertKBD Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 2 minutes ago, HKSR said: We can re-sign him. I have no doubts about it. Moving Mikheyev would do it. In terms of forwards playing to their contract cost, Mikheyev is probably the worst of the bunch now. Yeah, if only that sort of thing was so easy.... Don't get me wrong. I'm hoping to be proven dead wrong on this.....I just don't believe that I will be.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 Just now, RupertKBD said: Yeah, if only that sort of thing was so easy.... Don't get me wrong. I'm hoping to be proven dead wrong on this.....I just don't believe that I will be.... Fair enough. I just believe it isn't that hard to re-sign Lindholm assuming he would be willing to accept $7M AAV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integra250 Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 3 minutes ago, Coconuts said: It is, fifth line up from the bottom Crazy, even though he didn't meet the requirements. Good for him. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gawdzukes Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 1 hour ago, highandinside said: I'm okay with selling high on Hunter Brzustewicz. There has been plenty of times where guys have put massive points up in juniour and never amounted to anything. I also like the fit of the player we got. It's not all about points and I think Lindholm was one of the best all around players we could of got. He'll balance our top 6, a right shot center who is very strong on faceoffs, excellent on the pk. We can use him in a match up role in the playoffs. Kuzmenko did none of all that. It's going to get brutally tough in the playoffs going head to head against guys like Mackinnon, Eichel, Mcd/Drai. We need all the help we can aquire. Another defenceman would be nice in case of injuries. Maybe Tanev. Yeah, I'm totally fine with selling high on him. He wants to be a broadcaster more than anything if I recall correctly. I don't think his defensive game translates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 7 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said: Kesler was a lot of things but any player practicing lifting the cup is a stretch at best... Kesler hated losing more than pretty much any other Canuck I've watched play, he absolutely loathed it. I reckon he'd be too superstitious to count his chickens during the championship round. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Posted by Jaimito,
Official Trade Announcement
Recommended by Roger Neilsons Towel
10 reactions
Go to this post
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.