[Rumor] Canucks linked to Victor Soderstrom

[The Lock]

8 hours ago, Boudrias said:

How do we accurately evaluate Desharnais potential? The Oiler d-game was a disaster for most of the season. The Rutherford caveat of ' no structure' applied in spades. If Van coaches think there is a upside for him I am all for the attempt. 

 

Well, was the Oilers D-game a disaster because of him or would any downside of Desharnais' game be because of that overall team disaster?

 

Remember, this was this guy's 1st full season as a 27 year old. He only played 36 games prior to that. This means he's been developing. We obviously don't know this guy's ceiling, but based on this trend, it's easy to come to a conclusion that he's likely to have an even better season this year. This may especially be the case if he's given a larger role.

 

But to answer your question: we can't accurately evaluate potential because trying to accurately evaluate anyone's potential is rather impossible. We only know the path he's taken and his current trend which looks good. If you want something accurate you're not going to find it, not with anyone.

[NorthWestNuck]

5 hours ago, The Lock said:

 

Well, was the Oilers D-game a disaster because of him or would any downside of Desharnais' game be because of that overall team disaster?

 

Remember, this was this guy's 1st full season as a 27 year old. He only played 36 games prior to that. This means he's been developing. We obviously don't know this guy's ceiling, but based on this trend, it's easy to come to a conclusion that he's likely to have an even better season this year. This may especially be the case if he's given a larger role.

 

But to answer your question: we can't accurately evaluate potential because trying to accurately evaluate anyone's potential is rather impossible. We only know the path he's taken and his current trend which looks good. If you want something accurate you're not going to find it, not with anyone.

He’s 27 years old, I would say he’s not developing, he’s fully developed. What he is is what he will be for the most part. With greater opportunities he may show a little more then he has, but I would argue that hoping for “untapped potential” at this point is dreaming more then anything.

[Bob Long]

52 minutes ago, NorthWestNuck said:

He’s 27 years old, I would say he’s not developing, he’s fully developed. What he is is what he will be for the most part. With greater opportunities he may show a little more then he has, but I would argue that hoping for “untapped potential” at this point is dreaming more then anything.

 

True. Forsling needed 4 teams and to get to 27 before he found his game, but he's rare.

 

What I'm hoping for is a Myers type refinement of his game to where he's a good #5, maybe 4 with injury fill in duty.

 

[Hammertime]

14 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

True. Forsling needed 4 teams and to get to 27 before he found his game, but he's rare.

 

What I'm hoping for is a Myers type refinement of his game to where he's a good #5, maybe 4 with injury fill in duty.

 

Except Vinnie doesn't or at least hasn't shown yet that he has nearly the skill of Myers. Who won a calder and had multipul 30-40 pt seasons by age 28. VD Stats:

Edited August 10 by Hammertime

[Bob Long]

14 minutes ago, Hammertime said:

Except Vinnie doesn't or at least hasn't shown yet that he has nearly the skill of Myers. Who won a calder and had multipul 30-40 pt seasons by age 28. VD Stats:

 

thats why I used Forsling, he was unimpressive until he wasn't as well. 

 

I'm not expecting anything like this to happen, but a solid bottom pair, maybe injury fill-in #4? sure why not. 

 

[The Lock]

2 hours ago, NorthWestNuck said:

He’s 27 years old, I would say he’s not developing, he’s fully developed. What he is is what he will be for the most part. With greater opportunities he may show a little more then he has, but I would argue that hoping for “untapped potential” at this point is dreaming more then anything.

 

Would you have also said, 2 years ago, that he'll never play an NHL game since he'd be 25 or 26 at that time? You're stereotyping a player who has taken a completely different path to get to the NHL than most NHLers have had to take.

 

Besides, what's wrong with hoping for the best? Should we just not hope our players do well? Are we really supposed to be all depressed and miserable? lol Keep in mind too, there's a difference between hoping and expecting. Perhaps expecting was the word you're trying to use?

 

...unless if you truly mean hoping, then I hope you one day learn to have a better outlook on life...

Edited August 10 by The Lock

[EastCoastExpress]

3 hours ago, NorthWestNuck said:

He’s 27 years old, I would say he’s not developing, he’s fully developed. What he is is what he will be for the most part. With greater opportunities he may show a little more then he has, but I would argue that hoping for “untapped potential” at this point is dreaming more then anything.

Personally I dont think JT Miller was anything special till he came to Canucks (26, 27 years old?) 

All these guys wanting youth are the same guys giving up on Podkolzin and thinking Hoglander are trading material.

GeezUZ

Joshua as older than Boeser. You all his fanboy now and he got less than half the goals Brock did. And you think he is going to get better..... Yeah, I think he will. 

So how much better will Brock get? JT?

How good was Edler when he was under 30? he sucked... look it up. Sami Salo? Yeah, peaked way after 30. And you all LOVE Tanev even though he is older than your dad.

Let our legend players grow into Legends.

[PureQuickness]

37 minutes ago, EastCoastExpress said:

Personally I dont think JT Miller was anything special till he came to Canucks (26, 27 years old?) 

All these guys wanting youth are the same guys giving up on Podkolzin and thinking Hoglander are trading material.

GeezUZ

Joshua as older than Boeser. You all his fanboy now and he got less than half the goals Brock did. And you think he is going to get better..... Yeah, I think he will. 

So how much better will Brock get? JT?

How good was Edler when he was under 30? he sucked... look it up. Sami Salo? Yeah, peaked way after 30. And you all LOVE Tanev even though he is older than your dad.

Let our legend players grow into Legends.

 

I wouldn't say he sucked. Stats may be looking bad because the Canucks used him as a number 1 D. He was a workhorse FOR SURE.

[tas]

11 hours ago, PureQuickness said:

 

I wouldn't say he sucked. Stats may be looking bad because the Canucks used him as a number 1 D. He was a workhorse FOR SURE.

edler was terrific immediately, as a rookie. that guy is out to lunch. 

[fuzzy]

14 hours ago, Bob Long said:

 

True. Forsling needed 4 teams and to get to 27 before he found his game, but he's rare.

 

What I'm hoping for is a Myers type refinement of his game to where he's a good #5, maybe 4 with injury fill in duty.

 

Myers had to learn how to play in his own end and understand that he wasn't an offensive defensemen (Bobby Orr Syndrome). Desharnais, by all accounts, is a solid defensive player and with coaching and confidence can develop more offense. But we don't need him to produce offensively for him to be a valuable player, we need him to be solid defensively and be a support player. Anything he does on offense is a bonus imo

[The Lock]

12 hours ago, EastCoastExpress said:

Personally I dont think JT Miller was anything special till he came to Canucks (26, 27 years old?) 

All these guys wanting youth are the same guys giving up on Podkolzin and thinking Hoglander are trading material.

GeezUZ

Joshua as older than Boeser. You all his fanboy now and he got less than half the goals Brock did. And you think he is going to get better..... Yeah, I think he will. 

So how much better will Brock get? JT?

How good was Edler when he was under 30? he sucked... look it up. Sami Salo? Yeah, peaked way after 30. And you all LOVE Tanev even though he is older than your dad.

Let our legend players grow into Legends.

 

To say Edler was not good before 30 is to say he wasn't an integral part of the run of 2011 since he would have been in his mid to late 20s at the time. I don't know about you, but that's not the Edler I saw at that time.

 

Did he grow later? Sure, but to say he sucked before 30 is nothing more than revisionist history and being disrespectful to Edler in my opinion.

 

I remember the one comment Gillis made about Edler thinking he could become the next Lidstrom. Obviously Gillis overhyped it, but he wouldn't have said that if Edler wasn't already viewed as a good player at that time.

Edited August 10 by The Lock

[EastCoastExpress]

2 hours ago, The Lock said:

 

To say Edler was not good before 30 is to say he wasn't an integral part of the run of 2011 since he would have been in his mid to late 20s at the time. I don't know about you, but that's not the Edler I saw at that time.

 

Did he grow later? Sure, but to say he sucked before 30 is nothing more than revisionist history and being disrespectful to Edler in my opinion.

 

I remember the one comment Gillis made about Edler thinking he could become the next Lidstrom. Obviously Gillis overhyped it, but he wouldn't have said that if Edler wasn't already viewed as a good player at that time.

 

3 hours ago, tas said:

edler was terrific immediately, as a rookie. that guy is out to lunch. 

 

14 hours ago, PureQuickness said:

 

I wouldn't say he sucked. Stats may be looking bad because the Canucks used him as a number 1 D. He was a workhorse FOR SURE.

Ok, yes I admit I over-exaggerated a bit. My point was many players best years are when they mature and have the experience.

[The Lock]

2 minutes ago, EastCoastExpress said:

 

 

Ok, yes I admit I over-exaggerated a bit. My point was many players best years are when they mature and have the experience.

 

And I realise you're technically defending what I said about Desharnais. I agree with your premise at least.

 

Perhaps an example that would have been better would have been Pavelski who doesn't seem to know what getting older means. lol

[Bob Long]

3 hours ago, fuzzy said:

Myers had to learn how to play in his own end and understand that he wasn't an offensive defensemen (Bobby Orr Syndrome). Desharnais, by all accounts, is a solid defensive player and with coaching and confidence can develop more offense. But we don't need him to produce offensively for him to be a valuable player, we need him to be solid defensively and be a support player. Anything he does on offense is a bonus imo

 

exactly. I have a lot of faith in the coaches and pro scouts now, they clearly think they see something here. 

[Viking]

Canucks should trade for Rasmus Andersson or Artem Zub!?

 

We really could use an upgrade to our Right side D!!!

 

A Stanley Cup contending team does NOT ice T. Myers in their top 4D imo!!!

 

wouldn’t be cheap but this Mangaement group seems intent on being very aggressive. Please this time get a player with a bit of term… get a RHD who can fit for 2-3yrs. Giving us a top 4 RHD side of Hronek, Andersson/Zub 
 

allowing us to see what T. Willander can do development wise for his 3yr ELC.
 

AND…we ride out the Myers 3yr contract

 

 

[Singing Chef]

What do you propose as a trade for Andersson ?

 

ditto Zub ?

 

I agree that an upgrade to RD is warranted and am seriously interested in what you propose to give up to accomplish that but would also be of interest to the teams trading those players.  i.e. is what you propose in trade realistic enough to intrigue the GM of the other team.

[Viking]

12 hours ago, Singing Chef said:

What do you propose as a trade for Andersson ?

 

ditto Zub ?

 

I agree that an upgrade to RD is warranted and am seriously interested in what you propose to give up to accomplish that but would also be of interest to the teams trading those players.  i.e. is what you propose in trade realistic enough to intrigue the GM of the other team.

Wouldn’t be cheap probably but Hoglander would be something the other team would ask for. I would try to send P. Suter , Poolman contract and a pick and or prospect.

 

i just really hope we keep our 1st rd pick in 2025, we giving away far too many picks and the Lindholm trade was very short sighted by GM Alvin… that offer we gave up should’ve been for a top 4 Rhd not a pending ufa C the team planned to use as a 3C, there was never a chance Lindholm was sticking around when we all knew a team like Boston could offer a top talent like Pastrnak to play with Lindholm.

 

we should’ve stood pat last year and just seen how our team did, was all for Zadorov and he should’ve be kept instead of signing Myers and Forbort… Another poor decision by GM imo .

 

let’s hope we can win a. cup in. A few years otherwise we will just be a middle pack team once again with minimal youth on elc’s to help the team when we will need it most.

 

hopefully I am wrong and we stop giving up tons of picks and prospects and we get lucky with some players and we put it all together and win the Stanley Cup in 2026!

[N4ZZY]

On 8/9/2024 at 9:09 PM, Hammertime said:

Except Vinnie doesn't or at least hasn't shown yet that he has nearly the skill of Myers. Who won a calder and had multipul 30-40 pt seasons by age 28. VD Stats:

Comparing Desharnais to Myers is an unfair comparison. Myers was a first round pick. Desharnais is a seventh round pick. The expectations of both players vastly different as well. Myers was expected to be a top four defenseman. Desharnais was not. I don’t think management thinks he should be playing a top four role. I think they signed him to be a penalty killer and a solid bottom pairing defenseman. If he’s anything more than that. We’ve struck gold. 

[Snoop Hogg]

16 hours ago, Viking said:

Canucks should trade for Rasmus Andersson or Artem Zub!?

 

We really could use an upgrade to our Right side D!!!

 

A Stanley Cup contending team does NOT ice T. Myers in their top 4D imo!!!

 

wouldn’t be cheap but this Mangaement group seems intent on being very aggressive. Please this time get a player with a bit of term… get a RHD who can fit for 2-3yrs. Giving us a top 4 RHD side of Hronek, Andersson/Zub 
 

allowing us to see what T. Willander can do development wise for his 3yr ELC.
 

AND…we ride out the Myers 3yr contract

 

 

With it without Andersson or Zub, there’s no way Myers slots into the top 4. 
 

He was very good for a bottom pairing defenceman last season and shall continue to do so and thankfully at a much lower cap hit.

[N4ZZY]

On 8/12/2024 at 9:58 PM, Viking said:

Canucks should trade for Rasmus Andersson or Artem Zub!?

 

We really could use an upgrade to our Right side D!!!

 

A Stanley Cup contending team does NOT ice T. Myers in their top 4D imo!!!

 

wouldn’t be cheap but this Mangaement group seems intent on being very aggressive. Please this time get a player with a bit of term… get a RHD who can fit for 2-3yrs. Giving us a top 4 RHD side of Hronek, Andersson/Zub 
 

allowing us to see what T. Willander can do development wise for his 3yr ELC.
 

AND…we ride out the Myers 3yr contract

 

 

Who do we give up for Zub? Andersson would cost us way too much to acquire. More than Lindholm, I think, simply because he is a RHD. No thanks. 

 

[N4ZZY]

8 hours ago, Snoop Hogg said:

With it without Andersson or Zub, there’s no way Myers slots into the top 4. 
 

He was very good for a bottom pairing defenceman last season and shall continue to do so and thankfully at a much lower cap hit.

so we're missing out on a top RHD. 

 

[N4ZZY]

11 hours ago, Viking said:

I would try to send P. Suter , Poolman contract and a pick and or prospect.

 

For Rasmus Andersson? 

 

Calgary laughs at you.  There's no way that they accept that offer. Suter is a useful player, but he's no way Calgary accepts him, Poolman, a pick and a prospect. I guess it depends on what the pick is, and who the prospect is. If it's not a 1st, don't think it's going to work. 

 

[canucks curse]

On 8/12/2024 at 10:25 PM, Singing Chef said:

What do you propose as a trade for Andersson ?

 

ditto Zub ?

 

I agree that an upgrade to RD is warranted and am seriously interested in what you propose to give up to accomplish that but would also be of interest to the teams trading those players.  i.e. is what you propose in trade realistic enough to intrigue the GM of the other team.

To CGY:

Willander

Podkolzin

Juulsen

Raty

 

To VAN:

Andersson

 

[RetroCanuck]

9 minutes ago, canucks curse said:

To CGY:

Willander

Podkolzin

Juulsen

Raty

 

To VAN:

Andersson

 

Absolutely no

[DeNiro]

18 minutes ago, canucks curse said:

To CGY:

Willander

Podkolzin

Juulsen

Raty

 

To VAN:

Andersson