[Signing] Zadorov to Boston

[Coryberg]

8 minutes ago, EdgarM said:

 

So why did we get 2 more bottom pairing defenseman after him then? I am confused.

Depth? What is so confusing about that?

[EdgarM]

6 minutes ago, GrammaInTheTub said:

It was pretty widely reported that our coaches were wanting Myers back. To play in what spot is irrelevant. No need to go for ad hominems when someone who has a different opinion than you might know something factually that you didn’t. 

I believe this management group has a great vision as to how this team is supposed to look like that is why its odd that they would prioritize Myers. Like what piece of the puzzle does he fit? 2nd pairing? 3rd pairing? 

Yes it does matter, because as we have seen with Petey, sometimes what we have does not always fit. 

My opinion is that I don't think he is going to fit in our plans , you have your own opinion, that's fine.

[EdgarM]

2 minutes ago, Coryberg said:

Depth? What is so confusing about that?

 

3 million bucks for "Depth? Yeah OK. 

[Coryberg]

3 hours ago, Grandmaster said:

Wow, look at the “projected lineup” for the Bruins next season. Big Z on the first pair! Lol

 

 

I actually like those pairings, a puck mover and a people mover on each pair. 

[Coconuts]

15 minutes ago, EdgarM said:

 

So why did we get 2 more bottom pairing defenseman after him then? I am confused.

 

Because while it may not be best case scenario, Myers is an RD with an extensive history of playing top 4 minutes and did so as recently as last season. He was third in ATOI for Canucks D last season only behind Hughes and Hronek, averaging just under 19 minutes a game. 

 

Across the league his ice time ranked 125th for D with 18:56, it's worth noting that Carlo sat at 93 when averaging 19:54; the rankings jump quite a bit for D within the span of a minute's worth of ice time. Considering there were only 128 top 4 slots, he made the cut. 

 

Also worth noting is that he averaged 2:13 in shorthanded ice-time per game, which ranked 79th amongst D. Ian Cole was the only Canuck D who saw more time shorthanded, he ranked 41st across the league with an average of 2:39. 

 

All things considered, given what he did for us last season at a 6M cap hit, he should continue to be pretty good value at 3M even if he's a borderline top 4 guy at this point in his career. Considering we were facing a bit of a cap crunch heading into UFA we probably would have been hard pressed to find an RD willing to do more than Myers did for us last season for 3M; he'd have certainly gotten more via UFA if he'd wanted to go that route. 

 

Worth noting is that Desjardins averaged 2:02 in PK time a game last season, which had him ranked 89th. He'll likely be called on to eat Cole's ice time.  

Edited July 11 by Coconuts

[EdgarM]

6 minutes ago, Coryberg said:

Yep a "bottom pairing" defenseman who was #3 in ice time for our team last season. I'd say signing him to less than our #5 (3.25) and #6 (3.75) from last year should most definitely have been a priority.

 

Ok I would have given him a chance to repeat what he did last year with a 1 year deal, then, and only then, commit to him long term. Lets just agree to disagree, we will see how he performs next season and then the next 2 seasons after that and where the team end up putting him.

[Coryberg]

15 minutes ago, EdgarM said:

 

So why did we get 2 more bottom pairing defenseman after him then? I am confused.

 

6 minutes ago, Coryberg said:

Depth? What is so confusing about that?

 

3 minutes ago, EdgarM said:

 

3 million bucks for "Depth? Yeah OK. 

1.5 for forbert and 2 for Deharnais. 

[canuck73_3]

24 minutes ago, EdgarM said:

 

Ok so they wanted him back but to play where? 2nd pairing? 3rd pairing? You kind of act like you are in the room with them during their discussions. 

He had 1 good season with all the years he has been with us so far, lets just see if he can put 2 good years together before we walk around thinking we know everything, K? 

What’s with the condescension? Did you not read any articles or watch any interviews that discussed this? How the fuck does me paying attention to what was widely reported acting like I’m in the room? If you did even a 3 second google search you would know about the coaches valuing Myers. 

[EdgarM]

6 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

 

Because while it may not be best case scenario, Myers is an RD with an extensive history of playing top 4 minutes and did so as recently as last season. He was third in ATOI for Canucks D last season only behind Hughes and Hronek, averaging just under 19 minutes a game. 

 

Across the league his ice time ranked 125th for D with 18:56, it's worth noting that Carlo sat at 93 when averaging 19:54; the rankings jump quite a bit for D within the span of a minute's worth of ice time. Considering there were only 128 top 4 slots, he made the cut. 

 

Also worth noting is that he averaged 2:13 in shorthanded ice-time per game, which ranked 79th amongst D. Ian Cole was the only Canuck D who saw more time shorthanded, he ranked 41st across the league with an average of 2:39. 

 

All things considered, given what he did for us last season at a 6M cap hit, he should continue to be pretty good value at 3M even if he's a borderline top 4 guy at this point in his career. Considering we were facing a bit of a cap crunch heading into UFA we probably would have been hard pressed to find an RD willing to do more than Myers did for us last season for 3M; he'd have certainly gotten more via UFA if he'd wanted to go that route. 

 

Worth noting is that Desjardins averaged 2:02 in PK time a game last season, which had him ranked 89th. He'll likely be called on to eat Cole's ice time.  

 

So, given his age, and where he is at in his career. Do you think he can remain there for the next 3 years? His minutes have been declining for years now and I don't see them staying the same or increasing.

[canuck73_3]

2 minutes ago, EdgarM said:

 

So, given his age, and where he is at in his career. Do you think he can remain there for the next 3 years? His minutes have been declining for years now and I don't see them staying the same or increasing.

Of course you don’t cause you sandbag the player because you don’t like him.

[EdgarM]

9 minutes ago, Coryberg said:

 

 

1.5 for forbert and 2 for Deharnais. 

I get that and that's what i fully expect for bottom pairing defenseman, it really looks like we don't know if Myers can remain a top 4 pairing dman or relegate him to the bottom and maybe his salary also dictates that, in the middle. 

[EdgarM]

6 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

What’s with the condescension? Did you not read any articles or watch any interviews that discussed this? How the fuck does me paying attention to what was widely reported acting like I’m in the room? If you did even a 3 second google search you would know about the coaches valuing Myers. 

 

Yeah sorry i don't watch and read everything that goes on with him, I am not that devoted then I guess. 

[Coconuts]

1 minute ago, EdgarM said:

 

So, given his age, and where he is at in his career. Do you think he can remain there for the next 3 years? His minutes have been declining for years now and I don't see them staying the same or increasing.

 

I don't think he'll need to be a top 4D the next three seasons, and at a 3M cap hit he won't be paid to as the cap continues to jump. Could he be a 4-5 tweener the next couple seasons? I think so. I think there's a solid chance Myers is a surplus value contract next season, he could very well provide value above his 3M cap hit. What we really need is for him to be able to hold his own playing top 4 minutes again this coming season, but that doesn't mean he'll be called on to do so all three years of his deal.

 

The way the Canucks D is structured capwise they've actually got a bit of flex going forward, only Hughes, Hronek, and Myers are signed for more than a couple seasons. Soucy's got two seasons, so does Desjardins. They'll be replaceable sooner than later, and probably tradeable if the Canucks want to change direction. 

 

Ideally he settles into a 5-6D role at some point, but for the time being he'll probably continue to play a top 4 role. Not ideal, but probably not the end of the world either. He's looked better under this coaching staff, I don't see why that couldn't continue. 

 

[EdgarM]

3 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

Of course you don’t cause you sandbag the player because you don’t like him.

 

I actually do like him , he did a great job for us last season, and as you can see in my pic, he took out Duncan Keith for which I am forever grateful for. 

However, i look at the big picture for our team to be successful and I don't see him fitting in as one of our key players. 

We have 2 great puck movers in our top 4 and I would like to see them get protected and shielded a bit with some big , physical stay at home defenseman. 

I don't see that in Myers. I don't really see it in Soucy either but he does play a good defensive game.

I am looking at the team as a whole and not play favorites to any one member of the team because he has been with us for awhile.

[Gawdzukes]

2 hours ago, EdgarM said:

 

So why did we get 2 more bottom pairing defenseman after him then? I am confused.

 

Yes you are Edgar  It's because we are broke and have no cap space. That was the place management decided to sacrifice spending on. Looks like they preferred DeBrusk to the 2nd pairing dmen available to them, if any even considered us. They will either look to upgrade in the future, hope this top heavy configuration holds water, or they are confident in Willander's arrival.

 

  

2 hours ago, Coryberg said:

Yep a "bottom pairing" defenseman who was #3 in ice time for our team last season. I'd say signing him to less than our #5 (3.25) and #6 (3.75) from last year should most definitely have been a priority.

 

Yes, it was obviously strategic. With only one NHL starting RD just recently signed  it allowed us to focus on improving the rest of the team without playing some losing version of musical chairs. I'd say it worked splendidly.

Edited July 11 by Gawdzukes

[Western Red]

24 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

 

Yes you are Edgar  It's because we are broke and have no cap space. That was the place management decided to sacrifice spending on. Looks like they preferred DeBrusk to the 2nd pairing dmen available to them, if any even considered us. They will either look to upgrade in the future, hope this top heavy configuration holds water, or they are confident in Willander's arrival.

 

  

 

Yes, it was obviously strategic. With only one NHL starting RD just recently signed  it allowed us to focus on improving the rest of the team without playing some losing version of musical chairs. I'd say it worked splendidly.

2 VERY refreshing posts! Thanks..

[GrammaInTheTub]

[Lemon Face]

4 hours ago, Gawdzukes said:

 

Yes you are Edgar  It's because we are broke and have no cap space. That was the place management decided to sacrifice spending on. Looks like they preferred DeBrusk to the 2nd pairing dmen available to them, if any even considered us. They will either look to upgrade in the future, hope this top heavy configuration holds water, or they are confident in Willander's arrival.

 

  

 

Yes, it was obviously strategic. With only one NHL starting RD just recently signed  it allowed us to focus on improving the rest of the team without playing some losing version of musical chairs. I'd say it worked splendidly.

We just need to teach our bottom defence guys,how to talk big,handle van media,be likeable.There... you have one bigger Zadorov and one, regular size Zadorov.

[canucks curse]

18 hours ago, Coryberg said:

I actually like those pairings, a puck mover and a people mover on each pair. 

Zads has never played 20+ min a night for a long stretch of games …

he’s not a top pair guy 

 

good luck with that Boston 

[NewbieCanuckFan]

8 minutes ago, canucks curse said:

Zads has never played 20+ min a night for a long stretch of games …

he’s not a top pair guy 

 

good luck with that Boston 

He wouldn't look out of place with a legit #1 as his partner though.  I just don't think, at this point, he can carry a top pairing.  Maybe he could develop into one that can carry a 2nd pairing (seems to be the more likely possibility).  

[JeremyCuddles]

9 hours ago, canucks curse said:

Zads has never played 20+ min a night for a long stretch of games …

he’s not a top pair guy 

 

good luck with that Boston 

He wouldn't have to average 20 minutes a game. We had multiple people play with Hughes and they weren't getting 20+ minutes a game. Namely Tanev, Juulsen for a bit, and Schenn. That blueline is legit. Zads will probably hover around his normal 18 minutes. And even if they do ask for 20 minutes, he averaged that in the playoffs and was arguably our one of our 3-5 best players. I think he can handle it in the right system. I think our system would have allowed it as well. But we'll never really know beyond those 13 playoff games.

[Elias Pettersson]

On 7/11/2024 at 1:56 PM, EdgarM said:

I get that and that's what i fully expect for bottom pairing defenseman, it really looks like we don't know if Myers can remain a top 4 pairing dman or relegate him to the bottom and maybe his salary also dictates that, in the middle. 

Myers is a borderline top 4 guy at this point. If he was legit top 4 he’d be getting paid $5 million+. 
 

He’s a big body who played alot better under Foote and Gonchar. We didn’t have anyone else to fill that role. He’s basically a filler until Willander is ready which could be as early as 2025.  
 

He’s fine playing 18:50 per night as they are expecting more contribution from Desharnais. We also have Juulsen on the right side who can take on minutes. 

[Elias Pettersson]

1 hour ago, JeremyCuddles said:

He wouldn't have to average 20 minutes a game. We had multiple people play with Hughes and they weren't getting 20+ minutes a game. Namely Tanev, Juulsen for a bit, and Schenn. That blueline is legit. Zads will probably hover around his normal 18 minutes. And even if they do ask for 20 minutes, he averaged that in the playoffs and was arguably our one of our 3-5 best players. I think he can handle it in the right system. I think our system would have allowed it as well. But we'll never really know beyond those 13 playoff games.

Zadorov played over 20 minutes per night in 20 games last year including playoffs. That’s a pretty decent sample size. At 19 minutes he’s probably totally fine for every game. Lindholm averages 23 minutes so that means their 3rd pairing guy has to pitch in with 17-18 minutes per night. Either that or Lindholm plays a little more. Or they are getting Zadorov at 20 minutes every game. 
 

I guess we will find out how he does next season. Playing with McAvoy should elevate his game. 

[Madskillz]

On 7/11/2024 at 1:42 PM, Coconuts said:

 

Because while it may not be best case scenario, Myers is an RD with an extensive history of playing top 4 minutes and did so as recently as last season. He was third in ATOI for Canucks D last season only behind Hughes and Hronek, averaging just under 19 minutes a game. 

 

Across the league his ice time ranked 125th for D with 18:56, it's worth noting that Carlo sat at 93 when averaging 19:54; the rankings jump quite a bit for D within the span of a minute's worth of ice time. Considering there were only 128 top 4 slots, he made the cut. 

 

Also worth noting is that he averaged 2:13 in shorthanded ice-time per game, which ranked 79th amongst D. Ian Cole was the only Canuck D who saw more time shorthanded, he ranked 41st across the league with an average of 2:39. 

 

All things considered, given what he did for us last season at a 6M cap hit, he should continue to be pretty good value at 3M even if he's a borderline top 4 guy at this point in his career. Considering we were facing a bit of a cap crunch heading into UFA we probably would have been hard pressed to find an RD willing to do more than Myers did for us last season for 3M; he'd have certainly gotten more via UFA if he'd wanted to go that route. 

 

Worth noting is that Desjardins averaged 2:02 in PK time a game last season, which had him ranked 89th. He'll likely be called on to eat Cole's ice time.  

I believe he will be just as good as last year and that will be a steal for his contract, previous years he was actually being played and paid to be a 1st pairing RD, but now we have Hronek I really believe helped along with the new coaches all Stanley cup champs as players he will be in better position to do good.  We have Willander he’s gonna be exciting to watch and will probably join the team once his season is over in college and if he can handle himself he can take the 3rd pairing RD by playoffs or be an extra get some experience with the team will help his growth even if he’s not playing he’s gotta practice hard and be ready.  Our forward lines look good and Our D lines will need work, but for now our lineup is set and allow some kids to show if they can push someone out of their spot. 

[NoCupSyndrome]

Logically speaking, mgmt made the correct decision in not signing Z. He is not a right shot dman, they have four (#5 - #8) NHL dmen for the same cap hit, and up until the end of last year/playoffs he had been a bottom pairing type dman.

 

However, like with the OEL buyout (which again, was the right thing to do), we'll get a good sense of whether a Canucks curse exists should freaking Boston make the finals next season. Best case scenario, Canucks meet Boston in the finals and the Cup finally comes home to Van/BC