tas Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 11 minutes ago, MeanSeanBean said: Yes. If Podkolzin benefits the Oilers I would have rather let him go for nothing to a team that is no threat to us. A 4th round pick does not hold a higher value to me then helping out the current front runner to exit victorious in the West Conference. I want the Canucks to win the cup. This trade as it stands does more to jeopardize that, however minimally, then increase our chances. It's entirely possible Podkolzin is a bust and the 4th rounder ends up being the best asset in the trade. But I think there is a higher chance that Podkolzin is a serviceable player for the Oilers and helps them more then the 4th rounder helps us. he has to make their team first, and if he manages to, it's a condemnation of their depth. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 2 minutes ago, Hogs and Podz said: that's such a load of shit Alf. Gaunce was a slow skater, shooter and passer.... sssslllooooowww! Podz has a great shot, good skater, decent passer.... not Gaunce for the love of God. We were all pretty high on Gaunce for a minute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 19 minutes ago, The Lock said: You're fixated on the past. He's not the same as he was when he was 10th overall. The guy wasn't 13th overall on our forward list and if we're to force him onto the roster otherwise when there are better players?.... no thanks. Great rookie year, has shown solid progression in Abbotsford, and has not looked out of place in the NHL at sll ........all before his 22nd bday. Why so quick to write off a 22 year old player who has played a good, responsible game at both the AHL and NHL? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gawdzukes Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 23 minutes ago, stawns said: Of course it matters. If you have a 21-22 year old former 10th overall, you find a way to keep him in the lineup and continue to develop him do that you have both a cheap, young player in the lineup and some kind of succession plan so you can move on from high priced, older players Should the Kings be forcing Turcotte into their team as well? So you have to keep high draft picks on the team regardless of how good they are? This seems like a very poor plan. Why isn't Juolevi still on the team, he's an even higher pick? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 5 minutes ago, RJCF96 said: He isn't 21-22, he is 23 and he is waiver eligible. His value isn't simply based on age and draft position, but also what he has shown at the NHL level and what GMs across the league believes his potential to be. Waiver status matters more when it comes to a young player. To develop a player, the team needs the flexibility to be able to send him to the minors without going through waivers. At this point of Podkolzin's career, his biggest barrier is his waiver status, which means the team can lose him for nothing if he doesn't make the team out of camp as one of the top 13 forwards named to the opening night roster. We could lose this player for nothing in a little over a month and we just got back a draft pick. As of now here is what our forward group looks like going into next season (if everyone is healthy): Heinen - Miller - Boeser Debrusk - Pettersson - Sprong Joshua - Blueger - Garland Hoglander - Suter - Sherwood Aman/PDG/Karlsson I don't see Podkolzin beatitng out any of the top 12 forwards listed. Podkolzin's best chance is the 13th forward position. I personally believe this would likely go to Aman. Aman can play both centre and wing and coaches likes the versatility in a player like him. Karlsson has better AHL stats than Podkolzin last season. The coach trust PDG enough that he even got some top 6 minutes with the team at the start of the season. The point is, Podkolzin's value is not high and that's likely the best we can get back for him at this time. I personally don't think he moves the needle for this team if he remains here. Gone are the days that he is highly touted top prospect, he is now seen as a replaceable player who can be a contributor at the bottom 6 level. We can find players like him across the league. Sorry, 23. My mistake, but it doesn't change anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tas Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 9 minutes ago, aGENT said: Would we lose him on waivers? A 4th 2 years from now is nice and all but it's hardly enough value that I'd lose any sleep on the very low chance of him being claimed during the flood of preseason waivers. Clearly this is about the contract slot, but for whom? I maintain it makes little sense to move him for barely more than nothing, unless you have a follow up move to use that contract slot for someone else. There has to be another move here. I've been saying since like July 2nd the canucks need to lose wingers. they had at least 14-15 nhl wingers. podkolzin was always the most obvious name to go, with hoglander next up. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devron Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 1 minute ago, tas said: I've been saying since like July 2nd the canucks need to lose wingers. they had at least 14-15 nhl wingers. podkolzin was always the most obvious name to go, with hoglander next up. Hoglander hey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 2 minutes ago, tas said: I've been saying since like July 2nd the canucks need to lose wingers. they had at least 14-15 nhl wingers. podkolzin was always the most obvious name to go, with hoglander next up. Garland? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tas Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Devron said: Hoglander hey. yeah I think training camp and the first part of the year are make or break for him. he's great when he's driving a bottom line but he disappears and makes pettersson worse when he's in the top 6. there's no room for guys who only provide offense if they don't also play special teams. Edited August 19 by tas 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wai_lai416 Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 8 minutes ago, The Lock said: So you've identified that we are not the only team who doesn't have the greatest draft record in the past 10 years. It feels like you are answering your own question. lol lol so again which team in the last 10 years drafting in the top 10 had a worse rate? Edmonton drafted bad in terms of value but they are all nhl players. We drafted players that can’t even crack the nhl 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hogs and Podz Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 1 minute ago, Bob Long said: We were all pretty high on Gaunce for a minute. I agree we were optomistic on Gaunce, Jensen, Shinkarik, etc... but Gaunce was slow with his skills through and through... high hockey iq maybe. But it looks like the reverse for Podz. Possibly low hockey iq did him in? 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 (edited) Just now, Hogs and Podz said: I agree we were optomistic on Gaunce, Jensen, Shinkarik, etc... but Gaunce was slow with his skills through and through... high hockey iq maybe. But it looks like the reverse for Podz. Possibly low hockey iq did him in? "All the tools but no toolbox" it seems unfortunately. Edited August 19 by NewbieCanuckFan 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lock Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 Just now, stawns said: Great rookie year, has shown solid progression in Abbotsford, and has not looked out of place in the NHL at sll ........all before his 22nd bday. Why so quick to write off a 22 year old player who has played a good, responsible game at both the AHL and NHL? Because he was not going to be here by October given how many good players we have on this team. We're actually a good team now and in a similar siatuation to 12-15 years ago when it was hard for rookies like Grabner to make the team. Also, I honestly have yet to see his game fully translate to the NHL. After that 1st season, he struggled and hasn't really shown much outside of the AHL. Don't get me wrong. He's changed his game to hopefully get a spot in the NHL as a bottom 6, but he still has yet to fully crack the NHL. He's an unknown and that's the issue since we're in a situation where it's expected that we have a good team this year. If we base things on what a player was like 3 or 4 years ago, that's the very definition of living in the past. If anything, he's shown he's not that same player and it's unfortunate, but it's the reality. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 2 minutes ago, wai_lai416 said: lol so again which team in the last 10 years drafting in the top 10 had a worse rate? Edmonton drafted bad in terms of value but they are all nhl players. We drafted players that can’t even crack the nhl We’ve also had a very poor farm system up until recently. So we can blame drafting but it’s not always that simple. I believe at least some of those players could have been NHLer with the proper coaching, trainers, systems, and progression plans in place. It seems to me like a lot of our prospects were left lost in the woods trying to find their way. We also spent many years under Benning valuing older players in an attempt to squeak into the playoffs. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 2 minutes ago, The Lock said: Because he was not going to be here by October given how many good players we have on this team. We're actually a good team now and in a similar siatuation to 12-15 years ago when it was hard for rookies like Grabner to make the team. Also, I honestly have yet to see his game fully translate to the NHL. After that 1st season, he struggled and hasn't really shown much outside of the AHL. Don't get me wrong. He's changed his game to hopefully get a spot in the NHL as a bottom 6, but he still has yet to fully crack the NHL. He's an unknown and that's the issue since we're in a situation where it's expected that we have a good team this year. If we base things on what a player was like 3 or 4 years ago, that's the very definition of living in the past. If anything, he's shown he's not that same player and it's unfortunate, but it's the reality. How do you know he wasn't going to be here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devron Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 5 minutes ago, tas said: yeah I think training camp and the first part of the year are make or break for him. he's great when he's driving a bottom line but he disappears and makes pettersson worse when he's in the top 6. there's no room for guys who only provide offense if they don't also play special teams. Hmm interesting take. You might not be wrong. Wonder what happens there 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tas Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 also, keep in mind, it's probably 50/50 at best that the canucks draft a player with that 4th instead of using it as trade capital. sam lafferty was far from spectacular but he was a serviceable player who helped the team win games, and he was acquired for a 5th. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tas Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 (edited) 1 minute ago, stawns said: How do you know he wasn't going to be here? which wingers do you see being waived or traded instead of him? Edited August 19 by tas 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 1 minute ago, tas said: also, keep in mind, it's probably 50/50 at best that the canucks draft a player with that 4th instead of using it as trade capital. sam lafferty was far from spectacular but he was a serviceable player who helped the team win games, and he was acquired for a 5th. Yea and Zadorov for a 3rd which is close to the value of the pick we got. I think people would be quite happy with another trade like that. 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRAZY_4_NAZZY Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 Its time to start evaluating Ryan Johnson's ability as the development director for the team with a bit more scrutiny. Under his direction, Jake Virtanen, Olli Juolevi and now Vasili Podkolzin have gone through the development system for the Canucks and being high pedigree picks, yet failing to develop. We have had some successes like Hoglander and Demko...but other than that, not many of our prospects have graduated through his system and have become successful NHL players, let alone impactful players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 3 minutes ago, stawns said: How do you know he wasn't going to be here? Because traded him. Allvin and the coaching staff clearly didn’t believe Podz could win a roster spot. The trade is the evidence. Smart by Allvin to make a deal now. After camp, during cuts, Podz value would be even less. IMHAO we see the Coilers putting Podz on waivers come the season. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 1 minute ago, DeNiro said: Yea and Zadorov for a 3rd which is close to the value of the pick we got. I think people would be quite happy with another trade like that. And that's exactly the type of "step 2" I'm waiting for. 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Dr. Crossbar Posted August 19 Popular Post Share Posted August 19 This just forces people who were so emotionally invested in and attached to the player for so long to look in the mirror and admit the the fact that they may have been wrong and that the team no longer feels the same investment in that player. It's hard for some to accept and let go. 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lock Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 10 minutes ago, stawns said: How do you know he wasn't going to be here? The likelihood of him not making the team and having to go through waivers (and ultimately being claimed) seems much higher than the likelihood of him beating out another player on the team for a roster spot. No one can predict the future. Not me. Not you. Therefore, what we have to go on is what's likely to happen. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted August 19 Share Posted August 19 16 minutes ago, Hogs and Podz said: I agree we were optomistic on Gaunce, Jensen, Shinkarik, etc... but Gaunce was slow with his skills through and through... high hockey iq maybe. But it looks like the reverse for Podz. Possibly low hockey iq did him in? Yep that's likely. No comp is perfect, never meant it to be. Just another development story gone wrong. I hope he does find his game somewhere, seemed like a hard worker. 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.