c00kies Posted June 25 Share Posted June 25 On 6/24/2024 at 12:38 AM, Hogs and Podz said: I think Anthony Cirelli would be the perfect replacement for Lindolm. 6.5 million. True 3rd line center and could play up with Petey. 26 yrs old and no trade kicks in July 1st. TB needs cap relief ASAP! I would love this! Even more so than Guentzel. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertKBD Posted June 25 Share Posted June 25 22 hours ago, Jayinblack said: He's right-handed but listed as both lw/rw. But tbh have no idea what his splits are, i just think he's smart enough and crafty enough to excel with Miller and set up Boeser like crazy. TBH, I think the whole "left handed vs right handed" thing is a tad overblown. Yeah, it's handy (no pun intended) but anyone who's made it to the NHL has likely spent a ton of time playing on his off wing, whether they're a forward, or a defender.... For example, one of the greatest 5 man units of all time was made up entirely of lefties. I'll leave it for people here to figure out who I'm talking about, but as a hint I'll say that two of them were Canucks at one point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
testycal Posted June 25 Share Posted June 25 Never thought Lindholm was committed to anyone or thing except money and team..which is ok but I never had a good feeling about him as good a hockey player that he is and I do not begrudge him..a very expensive rental but if it pays dividends to have given younger players playoff experience then so be it. We move on. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ngoway Posted June 25 Share Posted June 25 9 minutes ago, RupertKBD said: TBH, I think the whole "left handed vs right handed" thing is a tad overblown. Yeah, it's handy (no pun intended) but anyone who's made it to the NHL has likely spent a ton of time playing on his off wing, whether they're a forward, or a defender.... For example, one of the greatest 5 man units of all time was made up entirely of lefties. I'll leave it for people here to figure out who I'm talking about, but as a hint I'll say that two of them were Canucks at one point. I think it's less about comfort on playing on their off side as you mentioned probably most players in the NHL are likely comfortable with it. It's more the handedness and the differences in the offensive and defensive zone. The easy example is taking faceoffs as a right handed C is more favorable on the right side of the ice as opposed to the left side. Another example there is if you're a right handed RW in the defensive zone, you can more easily receive and clear the puck on your forehand as opposed to backhand. I think that's also why Tocchet has said he prefers to not play players on their off side on both forward and defense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandmaster Posted June 25 Share Posted June 25 3 minutes ago, testycal said: Never thought Lindholm was committed to anyone or thing except money and team..which is ok but I never had a good feeling about him as good a hockey player that he is and I do not begrudge him..a very expensive rental but if it pays dividends to have given younger players playoff experience then so be it. We move on. We did get what we needed out of him. He was a playoff beast. We would have made it to the Finals if Petey wasn’t asleep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RupertKBD Posted June 25 Share Posted June 25 4 minutes ago, ngoway said: I think it's less about comfort on playing on their off side as you mentioned probably most players in the NHL are likely comfortable with it. It's more the handedness and the differences in the offensive and defensive zone. The easy example is taking faceoffs as a right handed C is more favorable on the right side of the ice as opposed to the left side. Another example there is if you're a right handed RW in the defensive zone, you can more easily receive and clear the puck on your forehand as opposed to backhand. I think that's also why Tocchet has said he prefers to not play players on their off side on both forward and defense. Again, it's a "nice to have", rather than the "essential" that some folks on these boards make it out to be.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ngoway Posted June 25 Share Posted June 25 3 minutes ago, RupertKBD said: Again, it's a "nice to have", rather than the "essential" that some folks on these boards make it out to be.... Yup, agreed that it's definitely better to have. I also think Tocchet/the coaches seem to prefer that as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWMc1 Posted June 25 Share Posted June 25 I thought that they would give Lindholm the exact same offer that they gave to Bo. 7.5 million per. The only advantage we have over other teams is that 8th year. I'm still hoping but not confident. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzle Posted June 25 Share Posted June 25 10 minutes ago, RWMc1 said: I thought that they would give Lindholm the exact same offer that they gave to Bo. 7.5 million per. The only advantage we have over other teams is that 8th year. I'm still hoping but not confident. personally I'd let lindholm walk, forego JG and resign Zad and try and nab Pesce, then grab a cheapish winger who can hopefully play in the top 6 somewhere. Hughes Pesce/hronek Soucy/Z pesce/Hronek Soucy/Z Myers That'd be a pretty nasty defence 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N4ZZY Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 10 hours ago, Dizzle said: personally I'd let lindholm walk, forego JG and resign Zad and try and nab Pesce, then grab a cheapish winger who can hopefully play in the top 6 somewhere. Hughes Pesce/hronek Soucy/Z pesce/Hronek Soucy/Z Myers That'd be a pretty nasty defence Need to be able to score as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 6 hours ago, N4ZZY said: Need to be able to score as well. Build the D this off season, add what you can up front and then focus on the fwd group over the season or next off season 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 16 minutes ago, stawns said: Build the D this off season, add what you can up front and then focus on the fwd group over the season or next off season From the net out like a team is supposed to. 2 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 Just now, PhillipBlunt said: From the net out like a team is supposed to. I'm definitely starting to lean that way, but I also don't think they're one big time fwd away from a Cup either. Id like to see them keep Zad and Myers and add another solid dman on the right side and then trust their pro scouts and go bargain hunting for a top 6 fwd on a short term deal. 2 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 On 6/24/2024 at 9:05 AM, stawns said: We dont know he doesn't work, he's never been left their long enough to find out. He makes every player he spends time with better. I've got no reason to believe he wouldn't have the same effect on Petey. Give him 3-4 months up the lineup Who's shooting more in the Petey Garland experiment line? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 Just now, Bob Long said: Who's shooting more in the Petey Garland experiment line? Petey then bargain hunt for a lw and move hogz to Millers line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 2 minutes ago, stawns said: I'm definitely starting to lean that way, but I also don't think they're one big time fwd away from a Cup either. I do think that the Canucks could go far this coming season. I think if EVERYONE on the team is engaged and driven to win, they can go far. 2 minutes ago, stawns said: Id like to see them keep Zad and Myers and add another solid dman on the right side and then trust their pro scouts and go bargain hunting for a top 6 fwd on a short term deal. Same. That talented size on the defense became a staple of Canucks hockey. A staple that had been missing for far, far too long. I think the forward corps could use more size as well. Better to stabilize the defense to support the goaltending. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 Just now, stawns said: Petey then bargain hunt for a lw and move hogz to Millers line. I think this is where the concept falls down. Petey has been remarkably consistent in how he shoots, lower shots/high percentage. Over the last 5 years the range is only 15.2-16.7%. He's not going to change that imo. Petey needs a legit shooter on his wing. He even made Kuzy look like a superstar. Someone like Guentzel should do very very well with Petey. Garland has a muffin. It'll be on him to shoot more and I just don't see it working. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 3 minutes ago, Bob Long said: I think this is where the concept falls down. Petey has been remarkably consistent in how he shoots, lower shots/high percentage. Over the last 5 years the range is only 15.2-16.7%. He's not going to change that imo. Petey needs a legit shooter on his wing. He even made Kuzy look like a superstar. Someone like Guentzel should do very very well with Petey. Garland has a muffin. It'll be on him to shoot more and I just don't see it working. Garland is an excellent set up guy, and an excellent retriever. I think he puts the puck on Peteys stick in a lot of high danger areas You don't think Petey has the ability to continue developing and rounding out his game? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 12 minutes ago, stawns said: Petey then bargain hunt for a lw and move hogz to Millers line. That LW better have some serious size and truculence. Petey and Garland would get manhandled by bigger defense cores. Any thoughts on who the LW target would be in that scenario? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 4 minutes ago, stawns said: Garland is an excellent set up guy, and an excellent retriever. I think he puts the puck on Peteys stick in a lot of high danger areas You don't think Petey has the ability to continue developing and rounding out his game? They looked really solid when they were on the same line. Give Garland and Pettersson a bigger, more physical player with some offensive flair, and that's a good line. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 2 minutes ago, stawns said: Garland is an excellent set up guy, and an excellent retriever. I think he puts the puck on Peteys stick in a lot of high danger areas You don't think Petey has the ability to continue developing and rounding out his game? I don't know that he's going to increase his shooting by enough to make the pair really hum. I guess he could try to fire off more shots but I don't know if thats actually going to lead to more production. I'd rather not try to change Petey's style to make Garly fit, vs finding a legit top line winger. If Garly is suited for the top 6, why not put him with Miller? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 3 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said: They looked really solid when they were on the same line. Give Garland and Pettersson a bigger, more physical player with some offensive flair, and that's a good line. they tried that with Joshua, it was bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 2 minutes ago, HKSR said: That LW better have some serious size and truculence. Petey and Garland would get manhandled by bigger defense cores. Any thoughts on who the LW target would be in that scenario? Garland doesn't get manhandled by anyone, really. I honestly don't understand why he continually gets disrespected on this board. I do wonder what petey between garland and Joshua would be like Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 3 minutes ago, stawns said: Garland doesn't get manhandled by anyone, really. I honestly don't understand why he continually gets disrespected on this board. I do wonder what petey between garland and Joshua would be like bad. Petey and Joshua were terrible together. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 2 minutes ago, Bob Long said: I don't know that he's going to increase his shooting by enough to make the pair really hum. I guess he could try to fire off more shots but I don't know if thats actually going to lead to more production. I'd rather not try to change Petey's style to make Garly fit, vs finding a legit top line winger. If Garly is suited for the top 6, why not put him with Miller? That's certainly an option, he's played well with Miller in the past. Garland goes to all the dirty areas that Petey doesn't and more often than not, he comes out with the puck. He'll find Petey in the slot when he does. I'm not sure why you wouldn't want Petey shooting more, he's a sniper, not a set up guy. And garland has great hands in close around the net as well. He's probably a 25 goal guy playing with Petey 1 1 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.