Reznor Posted July 8 Share Posted July 8 1 hour ago, Bobby James said: It is a fair question, but I think people don't appreciate a lot of these UFA Dmen get a ton of offers from teams. I'm sure the Canucks reached out/offered contracts to many notable free agent defensemen and unfortunately none agreed. At that point they pivoted and looked at what else is available for the cost and so they take a risk (a small one, but still a risk) on big Vinny and I wouldn't be surprised if he had many other similar offers available to him. Fair enough - though if our D in general is lacking puck-moving players, then I'd sooner have seen a trade to acquire one. He does check the boxes otherwise as a bottom pairing D, and as mentioned by another reply, management seems to think he has more to give. But unless they plan on moving Hronek off to the top pairing, that gives us only ONE pairing that can actually move the puck properly. That's just not enough, imo - even in the context of the PP, where the 2nd unit will be lacking... let alone 35-38 minutes of game time overall. At least it's only for 2 years. Forbort is only 1 year. Both of which may well be replaced by better puck movers joining the club after those contracts expire. But for the upcoming season, I do hope Allvin finds a way to get 1 more puck mover or I feel it will end up a deficiency we can ill afford to have, imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook007 Posted July 8 Share Posted July 8 31 minutes ago, King Heffy said: Personally, I want a defencemen who can play defence. None of the UFA "puck movers" have shown any sign that they're capable of playing like NHLers in their own zone. Agree 100%... especially bottom pairing D men.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fantomex Posted July 8 Share Posted July 8 9 minutes ago, Reznor said: Fair enough - though if our D in general is lacking puck-moving players, then I'd sooner have seen a trade to acquire one. He does check the boxes otherwise as a bottom pairing D, and as mentioned by another reply, management seems to think he has more to give. But unless they plan on moving Hronek off to the top pairing, that gives us only ONE pairing that can actually move the puck properly. That's just not enough, imo - even in the context of the PP, where the 2nd unit will be lacking... let alone 35-38 minutes of game time overall. At least it's only for 2 years. Forbort is only 1 year. Both of which may well be replaced by better puck movers joining the club after those contracts expire. But for the upcoming season, I do hope Allvin finds a way to get 1 more puck mover or I feel it will end up a deficiency we can ill afford to have, imo. I would suggest Forbort needs to be viewed as a temp piece until some of the younger defensive prospects can make the big team. As for Desharnais, I believe they see him as more of a project, hence the 2-year deal. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook007 Posted July 8 Share Posted July 8 3 minutes ago, Reznor said: Fair enough - though if our D in general is lacking puck-moving players, then I'd sooner have seen a trade to acquire one. He does check the boxes otherwise as a bottom pairing D, and as mentioned by another reply, management seems to think he has more to give. But unless they plan on moving Hronek off to the top pairing, that gives us only ONE pairing that can actually move the puck properly. That's just not enough, imo - even in the context of the PP, where the 2nd unit will be lacking... let alone 35-38 minutes of game time overall. At least it's only for 2 years. Forbort is only 1 year. Both of which may well be replaced by better puck movers joining the club after those contracts expire. But for the upcoming season, I do hope Allvin finds a way to get 1 more puck mover or I feel it will end up a deficiency we can ill afford to have, imo. Do we not have a player or two amongst the prospects, that has the potential to be a puck mover? Not suggesting they are there yet, or ever will get there, but if they are looking for bottom pairing D men at low cost, wouldn't they be just as well trying McWard or Hirose or similar? Wolanin is still there as well.... Personally still just want bottom pairing Dmen that can defend first and foremost... Still remember 'Hughes replacement" Rathbone, who was great going forward, but couldn't defend a fish supper if his life depended on it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jester13 Posted July 8 Share Posted July 8 18 minutes ago, Reznor said: Fair enough - though if our D in general is lacking puck-moving players, then I'd sooner have seen a trade to acquire one. He does check the boxes otherwise as a bottom pairing D, and as mentioned by another reply, management seems to think he has more to give. But unless they plan on moving Hronek off to the top pairing, that gives us only ONE pairing that can actually move the puck properly. That's just not enough, imo - even in the context of the PP, where the 2nd unit will be lacking... let alone 35-38 minutes of game time overall. At least it's only for 2 years. Forbort is only 1 year. Both of which may well be replaced by better puck movers joining the club after those contracts expire. But for the upcoming season, I do hope Allvin finds a way to get 1 more puck mover or I feel it will end up a deficiency we can ill afford to have, imo. 4 minutes ago, spook007 said: Do we not have a player or two amongst the prospects, that has the potential to be a puck mover? Not suggesting they are there yet, or ever will get there, but if they are looking for bottom pairing D men at low cost, wouldn't they be just as well trying McWard or Hirose or similar? Wolanin is still there as well.... Personally still just want bottom pairing Dmen that can defend first and foremost... Still remember 'Hughes replacement" Rathbone, who was great going forward, but couldn't defend a fish supper if his life depended on it... I think Juulsen, Friedman, and even McWard will see plenty games this year, as they can all move the puck. We'll see Big V out of the lineup from time to time against stiff competition where puck movers are needed, and he'll continue to learn and get games against weaker competition and/or teams where we need more muscle. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sophomore Jinx Posted July 8 Share Posted July 8 Canucks’ Vincent Desharnais among Daily Faceoff’s top contracts in NHL free agency Good article on Desharnais 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WillisD Posted July 8 Share Posted July 8 I didn't know too much about Vinny but am warming up to the signing. Really well liked in the room, big guy, snarly and focused on improving. I have a hunch he's going to have a big year with the help of the coaching staff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dannyboy88 Posted July 8 Share Posted July 8 1 hour ago, Sophomore Jinx said: Canucks’ Vincent Desharnais among Daily Faceoff’s top contracts in NHL free agency Good article on Desharnais The article literally says his contract is a fair deal at best, kind of a misleading title. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gawdzukes Posted July 8 Share Posted July 8 32 minutes ago, Dannyboy88 said: The article literally says his contract is a fair deal at best, kind of a misleading title. It also says next to nothing. Has a couple stats i guess one could use to measure his play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gawdzukes Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 3 hours ago, spook007 said: Do we not have a player or two amongst the prospects, that has the potential to be a puck mover? Not suggesting they are there yet, or ever will get there, but if they are looking for bottom pairing D men at low cost, wouldn't they be just as well trying McWard or Hirose or similar? Wolanin is still there as well.... Personally still just want bottom pairing Dmen that can defend first and foremost... Still remember 'Hughes replacement" Rathbone, who was great going forward, but couldn't defend a fish supper if his life depended on it... Not really anyone besides Willander who is attempting to grow his ability to provide offence from defence. There is Kudryavtsev, who is pretty good in those respects but a longshot for making the NHL. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 7 hours ago, HarbularyBattery said: this is pretty interesting with conor mcdavid, dominates without, 7 goals for, 7 goals against I love that line tool, it really helps to shed some light on questions like this. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iceman1964 Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 On 7/6/2024 at 2:02 AM, N4ZZY said: Hronek is not short at 6 feet either. Ooops I just noticed I put 6'4 instead of 6'.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.AM.THE.WALRUS Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 I’ve got a really good feeling about this season… I think the Canucks are going to be a great team… I’m feeling pretty stoked… We got some good acquisitions… Plus some upcoming youngsters… That kid from Sweden… With the crazy name 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sophomore Jinx Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 8 hours ago, Dannyboy88 said: The article literally says his contract is a fair deal at best, kind of a misleading title. Thx for your solid input It actually isn't misleading at all, it's an opinion, that I happen to agree with, and it literally says other things too that correspond to the title, like his good Corsi-For score, and being a RHD, and the RT/Foote factor that has him stoked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook007 Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 8 hours ago, Gawdzukes said: Not really anyone besides Willander who is attempting to grow his ability to provide offence from defence. There is Kudryavtsev, who is pretty good in those respects but a longshot for making the NHL. Cheers bud. I'm just thinking, if it worth usung the linited amount of money left on a reclemation project. Normally I'm up for it, but this coming season I feel they need to make a proper push. The following 2 seasons, they need to add some youth for someone, to make the numbers work, but don't want to piss this season up against the wind. The time is now. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LillStrimma Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 12 hours ago, Reznor said: Fair enough - though if our D in general is lacking puck-moving players, then I'd sooner have seen a trade to acquire one. He does check the boxes otherwise as a bottom pairing D, and as mentioned by another reply, management seems to think he has more to give. But unless they plan on moving Hronek off to the top pairing, that gives us only ONE pairing that can actually move the puck properly. That's just not enough, imo - even in the context of the PP, where the 2nd unit will be lacking... let alone 35-38 minutes of game time overall. At least it's only for 2 years. Forbort is only 1 year. Both of which may well be replaced by better puck movers joining the club after those contracts expire. But for the upcoming season, I do hope Allvin finds a way to get 1 more puck mover or I feel it will end up a deficiency we can ill afford to have, imo. PAs problem is that he has that puck mover coming in Willander. So he can’t splash cash on a player that is just temporary. So he plans for the future. Willander is here in 1-2 year. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.AM.THE.WALRUS Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 4 hours ago, iceman1964 said: Ooops I just noticed I put 6'4 instead of 6'.. We will let it go this time… But we have our eyes on you… don’t let that happen again… no more slip ups you hear me? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 10 hours ago, Dannyboy88 said: The article literally says his contract is a fair deal at best, kind of a misleading title. We could have signed an old crippled up guy of similar size like the Leafs did? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kettlevalley Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 3 hours ago, Alflives said: We could have signed an old crippled up guy of similar size like the Leafs did? Or traded Garland for one? Lol 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gawdzukes Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 (edited) 8 hours ago, spook007 said: Cheers bud. I'm just thinking, if it worth usung the linited amount of money left on a reclemation project. Normally I'm up for it, but this coming season I feel they need to make a proper push. The following 2 seasons, they need to add some youth for someone, to make the numbers work, but don't want to piss this season up against the wind. The time is now. I don't know brother ... I'm kind of torn. I feel at some time we really need to make a prudent stand in a season and get control of the cap once and for all. We're finally in a position this year where we could operate without being in LITR, which is going in the right direction. For that reason I think it's best to wait perhaps until the TDL ... I don't know if there are any projects worthwhile out there who would even fit our system any better than what we've currently got. I agree 100% on the youth angle. It would go a long way the next two years, I would probably wait and use that money at the deadline and put Poolman on LITR then to free up more space. We could probably afford up to a $9 - $10 million dollar rental player, with only 22% of the season left at that point. Possibly make that deal for youth in the summer. Either way a player with term can't have a big salary moving forward. I would also probably entertain using our first, maybe Boeser, possibly Garland, and definitely Hoglander, in trade for an younger impact player on a value contract, either a prospect, or RFA. I'm not advocating trading Boeser just acknowledging a decision will have to be made there sooner then later as well. Edited July 9 by Gawdzukes 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook007 Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 (edited) 23 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said: I don't know brother ... I'm kind of torn. I feel at some time we really need to make a prudent stand in a season and get control of the cap once and for all. We're finally in a position this year where we could operate without being in LITR, which is going in the right direction. For that reason I think it's best to wait perhaps until he TDL ... I don't know if they are any projects worthwhile out there who would even fit our system any better than what we've currently got. I agree 100% on the youth angle. It would go a long way the next two years, I would probably wait and use that money at the deadline and put Poolman on LITR then to free up more space. We could probably afford up to a $9 - $10 million dollar rental player, with only 22% of the season left at that point. Possibly make that deal for youth in the summer. Either way a player with term can't have a big salary moving forward. I would also probably entertain using our first, maybe Boeser, possibly Garland, and definitely Hoglander, in trade for an younger impact player on a value contract, either a prospect, or RFA. I'm not advocating trading Boeser just acknowledging a decision will have to be made there sooner then later as well. The youth will be a must, and it'll be great for the club going forward with a natural rolling change of personal... I have said before, I can easily see a scenario, where both Brock and Garland will be plying their trades elsewhere next season... as you say, this is nothing to do with opinion of either as I like both, but thing cost money, and we only have so much to go around... Also agree on trying to accumulate money and make a splash at TDL.... The only thing I don't see a point in doing just now, is bringing a reclamation player in, hoping he'll turn his season around... The deals made this year, has to help us this year (and maybe later as well) but definitely this year. Miller won't be getting younger, and I hope, we don't waste him in search of something better... Edited July 9 by spook007 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gawdzukes Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 (edited) 5 hours ago, spook007 said: The youth will be a must, and it'll be great for the club going forward with a natural rolling change of personal... I have said before, I can easily see a scenario, where both Brock and Garland will be plying their trades elsewhere next season... as you say, this is nothing to do with opinion of either as I like both, but thing cost money, and we only have so much to go around... Also agree on trying to accumulate money and make a splash at TDL.... The only thing I don't see a point in doing just now, is bringing a reclamation player in, hoping he'll turn his season around... The deals made this year, has to help us this year (and maybe later as well) but definitely this year. Miller won't be getting younger, and I hope, we don't waste him in search of something better... Aye, yeah I see. Agreed. We're in the bind that Miller is in his absolute prime but we're also heading into that OEL penalty for 2 years + this one. We definitely don't need to waste our few remaining bucks and our non-LTIR leverage on a project. I think that's why we won't see a PMD like Boqvist, brought in until it becomes necessary, or a more long-term legitimate target is acquired. Edited July 9 by Gawdzukes 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Crossbar Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 Guaranteed if we get a "puck mover" fans will say we should have gotten a "defensive" dman ... and vice versa. One temp solution is to wait and see what we have to start the season and bring Wolanin up to move the puck when needed. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diamonds Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 29 minutes ago, Dr. Crossbar said: Guaranteed if we get a "puck mover" fans will say we should have gotten a "defensive" dman ... and vice versa. One temp solution is to wait and see what we have to start the season and bring Wolanin up to move the puck when needed. I'm starting to wonder if our plan is to just sit on our cap space and wait to see who ends up on waivers. That or see what teams are desperate to dump a little cap in September. If we consider Hoglander or Podkolzin as potential trade chips, we have roughly $3.8M in cap space which is enough for a Sean Walker/Alexandre Carrier level defenseman. With Nashville being over the cap right now, I wonder if they would consider something like Höglander for Carrier + Svechkov/Schaefer? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Crossbar Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Diamonds said: I'm starting to wonder if our plan is to just sit on our cap space and wait to see who ends up on waivers. That or see what teams are desperate to dump a little cap in September. If we consider Hoglander or Podkolzin as potential trade chips, we have roughly $3.8M in cap space which is enough for a Sean Walker/Alexandre Carrier level defenseman. With Nashville being over the cap right now, I wonder if they would consider something like Höglander for Carrier + Svechkov/Schaefer? That's most definitely part of the plan, imo. Rutherford has been talking about freeing up cap space ever since he got here. He's also talked about being able to take advantage of cap crunched teams. It's been their priority since day one. I wouldn't be surprised if that happens at all. Although I'm more inclined to keep Hoglander and possibly use him at the deadline. His salary is just too good of value. Edited July 9 by Dr. Crossbar 2 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.