(Trade) Podkolzin to Edmonton

[Gawdzukes]

2 hours ago, CRAZY_4_NAZZY said:

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.

 

In all fairness the structure has been completely revamped now. Not sure how much of that was reflective of Johnson and more so shite work from the parent club.

 

2 hours ago, Viking said:

Mikheyev should've been the F going to Calgary not Kuzmenko. Especially with the draft picks and highly touted RHD prospect Hunter B. that we also included. Then we pay to rid ourselves from Mik by including a 2nd rd pick in 2027(sure we got a 4th back but come on...)The team already knew Pod had no future as a Canuck, so why not send him to Chicago instead of that 2027 2nd rd pick? Fans would have been disappointed with Podkolzin going to Chicago I think too, but not nearly as upset as trading him to Edm a team you just lost too in the playoffs...

 

 

This line of thinking is so wrong. You can't just tell the other team they're talking Mikheyev instead of Kuz. That's not how trades work. This is not EA sports. What a hairbrained thought.

 

1 hour ago, higgyfan said:

I was hoping that management would put together a trade for another underachiever, like Krebs.

They would have to add something with Podz, but the return would be for a player that is NHL

ready, but still struggling to find his game.

 

I don't see any point in bringing in more project wingers. We are trying to shed these players like Podkolzin, not add them. We're trying to win this year.

 

1 hour ago, 4petesake said:

I keep seeing the argument that this doesn’t help the Oilers but I don’t agree with this. Whether they’re better than last year can be debated and they still have to worry about what to do when Kane comes off LTIR but for now they found a way to keep both Broberg and Holloway if they choose. That helps them and their fans are surprised Bowman was able to pull it off.

 

 

 

Once again, this doesn't help them at all. They could simply bring up a cheaper player from their own system, or pluck any number of players of the waiver list. All this does is flesh out a thin roster for them, but it's nothing they couldn't have doe without Podkolzin.

 

1 hour ago, HKSR said:

I think what I and other posters here are upset with is that he is still a very young player.  22yo as of 2 months ago.  There's still plenty of time for him to develop.  If we did the same with Hoglander last year because he had 3 mediocre seasons in the NHL, would we not be kicking ourselves now?

 

They were both drafted the same year. Hoglander proved his worth last year and Podkolzin didn't. What more can you say?

[HKSR]

6 minutes ago, The Lock said:

 

An observation here, but I sense an attachment given your stance. You just might not realise it. The very fact that you're calling a 23 year old a 22 year old and skewing other numbers... you're thinking with your heart and I get it.

I'd do the same with any of our better prospects.  It's just being patient with development IMO.

[tas]

40 minutes ago, rmok said:

? Is this a serious question. 

 

They just got a 23yr old 10th overall for a 4th round pick. 

 

Do you think the Oilers made the trade to not help themselves? Please do explain that logic. 

do you think the canucks made the trade to not help themselves?

[HKSR]

6 minutes ago, tas said:

maybe we should go after one of them instead then?

If we have the cap space to do so

[HKSR]

3 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

 

In all fairness the structure has been completely revamped now. Not sure how much of that was reflective of Johnson and more so shite work from the parent club.

 

 

This line of thinking is so wrong. You can't just tell the other team they're talking Mikheyev instead of Kuz. That's not how trades work. This is not EA sports. What a hairbrained thought.

 

 

I don't see any point in bringing in more project wingers. We are trying to shed these players like Podkolzin, not add them. We're trying to win this year.

 

 

Once again, this doesn't help them at all. They could simply bring up a cheaper player from their own system, or pluck any number of players of the waiver list. All this does is flesh out a thin roster for them, but it's nothing they couldn't have doe without Podkolzin.

 

 

They were both drafted the same year. Hoglander proved his worth last year and Podkolzin didn't. What more can you say?

Years of experience in the NHL.  Same 3 years for both.  One we are giving up on.  The other we didn't.  Turned out pretty well for not giving up on said player, no?

[tas]

1 minute ago, HKSR said:

If we have the cap space to do so

even with the cap space, the canucks have too many bodies.

 

[tas]

Just now, HKSR said:

Years of experience in the NHL.  Same 3 years for both.  One we are giving up on.  The other we didn't.  Turned out pretty well for not giving up on said player, no?

not yet, really, and I wouldn't recommend getting all that attached to hoglander, either. 

[The Lock]

1 minute ago, HKSR said:

I'd do the same with any of our better prospects.  It's just being patient with development IMO.

 

Like I said, there's nothing wrong with attachment and it's easy to become attached to our better prospects.

 

Given how last season went, who am I to judge if management pulls the plug on a prospect? If our team does well again next season, none of this is going to matter. lol

[Mr Wrong]

He was a bad pick in the first place. 

[The Lock]

4 minutes ago, tas said:

not yet, really, and I wouldn't recommend getting all that attached to hoglander, either. 

 

This actually. I could see a scenario where we trade Hogs.

[Pure961089]

2 hours ago, Viking said:

It was the typical over aggressive Rutherford type moves this past season to pay a ransom for Lindholm then not keep the player. Clearly we have an impatient coach in Tocchet, have to give some offensive players like Kuz more of a leash imo. He had great chemistry and nearly 40g playing with EP, Kuz gets dealt and EP falls off drastically...coincedence or was that minor injury to EP the only reason for him to suck to end the season and playoffs?

 

Mikheyev should've been the F going to Calgary not Kuzmenko. Especially with the draft picks and highly touted RHD prospect Hunter B. that we also included. Then we pay to rid ourselves from Mik by including a 2nd rd pick in 2027(sure we got a 4th back but come on...)The team already knew Pod had no future as a Canuck, so why not send him to Chicago instead of that 2027 2nd rd pick? Fans would have been disappointed with Podkolzin going to Chicago I think too, but not nearly as upset as trading him to Edm a team you just lost too in the playoffs...

 

If Canucks wanted to clear some cap/roster space they should've walked away from Myers & just signed Desharnais. Could have signed Schultz/Barrie/Shattenkirk for 1m to fill the void on D. Also, why not waive PDG, Aman and let there be a competitive training cap for Podkolzin to show to the Canucks or 31 other NHL teams that he might be worth a taking a chance on!? I also would onsider moving P.Suter after all these F FA additions, clearing another 1.6m.

 

If we walked from away from Myers thats 3m in cap, trade Suter to a bottom feeder thats another 1.6m. Have Aman and PDG maybe Juulsen on waivers if they clear great for AHL depth thats another near 3m in cap room. Adds up to us being able to have kept Lindholm, I also would seriously consider moving 4.95m 3rd line winger Garland, either use him in a top 6 role with EP or JT or move on from that high salary...

 

Poor drafting, trading so many picks and lack of patient in prospect development is going to bite this team big time over the next few years all while we deal with larger OEL dead cap buyout and will also have to extend or trade: Demko, Hughes, Boeser in the next 3 years & JT Miller may start to slow down when nearing his mid 30s...it catches up too 99% of players, hoping JT can hold off father time for as long as possible, we will need him too!!!

 

Miky wouldn't have landed us Lindholm. 

[tas]

3 minutes ago, The Lock said:

 

This actually. I could see a scenario where we trade Hogs.

yeah when I see a guy who plays good in the bottom 6 but completely changes his game in the top 6, who scores 24 goals but still less than 40 points, I feel like regression is more likely than progression. 

[Pure961089]

40 minutes ago, HKSR said:

He was 22yo just 2 months ago Alf.  Giving up on players that young, especially powerforward types is not a solid strategy IMO.

Dakota Joshua is everything management wanted Podkolzin to develop in to.  He made the Russian expendable. 

[Dr. Crossbar]

Attachment > Podz

[HKSR]

12 minutes ago, tas said:

not yet, really, and I wouldn't recommend getting all that attached to hoglander, either. 

We shall see.  Putting up 24 goals playing most of the season on the 4th line is a heckuva accomplishment.

[HKSR]

13 minutes ago, The Lock said:

 

Like I said, there's nothing wrong with attachment and it's easy to become attached to our better prospects.

 

Given how last season went, who am I to judge if management pulls the plug on a prospect? If our team does well again next season, none of this is going to matter. lol

We are hockey fans.  It's what we do.  Especially in the summer lol

[HKSR]

3 minutes ago, Pure961089 said:

Dakota Joshua is everything management wanted Podkolzin to develop in to.  He made the Russian expendable. 

And how old was Joshua when he finally found his game?

[The Lock]

5 minutes ago, tas said:

yeah when I see a guy who plays good in the bottom 6 but completely changes his game in the top 6, who scores 24 goals but still less than 40 points, I feel like regression is more likely than progression. 

 

Well I'm not really willing to go that far in thinking. lol

 

I think it'd be more a matter of his situation on the team. The classic "stuck in the middle" not bottom 6 but not top 6 sort of scenario.

[GrammaInTheTub]

2 minutes ago, HKSR said:

And how old was Joshua when he finally found his game?

I doubt Edmonton hangs onto Podz for four years to find out if he can do the same 

[The Lock]

2 minutes ago, HKSR said:

And how old was Joshua when he finally found his game?

 

There's always exceptions.

 

Unfortunately, that in itself is also the problem, they're exceptions, meaning unlikely events.

[HKSR]

Just now, The Lock said:

 

There's always exceptions.

 

Unfortunately, that in itself is also the problem, they're exceptions, meaning unlikely events.

It's an exception that a player finds his game in his mid to late 20s?

[HKSR]

1 minute ago, GrammaInTheTub said:

I doubt Edmonton hangs onto Podz for four years to find out if he can do the same 

We'll see.  This place is gonna be a shit show if Podz becomes a regular in that Edmonton roster.

[Pure961089]

2 minutes ago, HKSR said:

And how old was Joshua when he finally found his game?

28,  its not about age it's whether you can develop or not.  Bertuzzi did nothing for the Islanders, Naslund did nothing for the Pens.  The Canucks will be on both sides of the giving and taking of young players for many years to come.  This is part of the business, it's nothing new. 

[tas]

9 minutes ago, HKSR said:

We shall see.  Putting up 24 goals playing most of the season on the 4th line is a heckuva accomplishment.

one due for a step back if he can't make serious improvements. 

[HKSR]

Just now, Pure961089 said:

28,  its not about age it's whether you can develop or not.  Bertuzzi did nothing for the Islanders, Naslund did nothing for the Pens.  The Canucks will be on both sides of the giving and taking of young players for many years to come.  This is part of the business, it's nothing new. 

22yo is a bit young to make that call IMO.  That's the issue I have with this move.