Grandmaster Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 4 hours ago, VintageActualCanuckfan said: Thats why they call it "Fantasy" hockey. If you can make it real by explaining how to get the 3.25 million in cap space you can post again. They do have an extra 2M in Cap space at the comment and they can put in the lineup one less player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownUndaCanuck Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 Tocchet just said that Mikheyev has to produce in this road trip playing with Petey and Lindholm. Allvin is very reactive and quick to trade and there's plenty of time for more lateral trades so if Mikheyev doesn't contribute playing with two superstars I wonder if he'll be on the out as well. Allvin doesn't seem patient and he doesn't want any weak-links in this team going into the playoffs. I think Mikheyev has contributed bits here and there but if he's asked to be a top-6 winger, he's going to have to score a bit more or at least grind hard and open up space for the other guys. Mikheyev for Tanev straight up sure would be interesting though...but surely we have to add (2025 2nd?) We lose two 5M wingers who were under-performing and gain a top center and top-4 RD in one off-season all from the same team. Then we just hope that depth wingers can contribute. I think Mikheyev will do well in the playoffs, that's my only reservation with trading him so early on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandmaster Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 1 hour ago, DownUndaCanuck said: Tocchet just said that Mikheyev has to produce in this road trip playing with Petey and Lindholm. Allvin is very reactive and quick to trade and there's plenty of time for more lateral trades so if Mikheyev doesn't contribute playing with two superstars I wonder if he'll be on the out as well. Allvin doesn't seem patient and he doesn't want any weak-links in this team going into the playoffs. I think Mikheyev has contributed bits here and there but if he's asked to be a top-6 winger, he's going to have to score a bit more or at least grind hard and open up space for the other guys. Mikheyev for Tanev straight up sure would be interesting though...but surely we have to add (2025 2nd?) We lose two 5M wingers who were under-performing and gain a top center and top-4 RD in one off-season all from the same team. Then we just hope that depth wingers can contribute. I think Mikheyev will do well in the playoffs, that's my only reservation with trading him so early on. Now that Kuzy is out. Mik is under the spotlight for underperforming. He had an excuse with the recovery from ACL surgery but at the end of the day he needs to perform. RT needs to first explore options on that second line before having management pull a trade like that. Someone needs to gel well with Petey and Lindholm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeanSeanBean Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 Likely not, add some depth. This is our first attempt at the cup, I don't want to go all in to the point we close the window that's open over the next few years. I'm glad they rewarded the team for good play, but now just add some depth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Hronek Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BPA Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 19 minutes ago, Jeremy Hronek said: 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. So which D should the Canucks target and what should they give up? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BPA Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 Apparently CAL trying to extend Noah Hanifin but talks seemed to have stalled and may be traded. Hanafin is 27yr 6’3” LD making $4.95M and is UFA at the end of the season. Maybe Mik + 1st 2025 + Woo for Hanifin? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 40 minutes ago, Jeremy Hronek said: 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. I think it's because: 1. You can never replace Hughes. IF he goes down, we're screwed regardless of who we bring in. A Tanev isn't gonna make up the loss of losing Hughes. 2. Hughes has shown he can elevate his D partner to make a very competent top pair -- see Luke Schenn, Ethan Bear, Noah Juulsen... they all looked perfectly fine and competent on that pair with Hughes. 3. Hughes with a lesser RHD (see above) may not be an elite top pair, but it will hold its own against tough competition. If we lose Hronek, the biggest loss would be his offensive ability. That's why we need to stack our forwards so we have so much offence coming from the forwards that all we need our defencemen to do is defend. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Hronek Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 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?” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.