Jump to content

[PGT] Canucks vs Oilers - Oct 11


Jess

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, CRAZY_4_NAZZY said:

 

I suspect that Blueger might have a bone bruise

 

 

 

 

38 minutes ago, canucks curse said:

what's happened to Bluegger? more than a bone bruise ? hairline fracture? F balls!

 

I was worried it was broken ... it could be hairline like you said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, CRAZY_4_NAZZY said:

Looks like Ekholm will likely draw in tomorrow for the Oilers. Their defence significantly improves with him in it. 

 

I'd imagine that Pettersson's line will see a lot of them. 

 

lucky for Petey Bouchard is still on that pair. 

 

I wonder if RT will put Joshua up with Petey and Kuzy? Joshua should be able to give that pairing more of a tough time than with Garland.

 

 

  • Vintage 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Inkidu said:

If he's in it gives us added incentive to show the last game was no fluke. So, good. 

 

Pretty much. And I think the Canucks will come prepared.

Just now, Bob Long said:

 

lucky for Petey Bouchard is still on that pair. 

 

I wonder if RT will put Joshua up with Petey and Kuzy? Joshua should be able to give that pairing more of a tough time than with Garland.

 

 

And Bouchie was clearly getting overwhelmed at times during the last game. 

  • Like 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Mordekai said:

They do have Ekholm!! I have heard excuses that he was the reason why they got demolished 8-1 🤣

 

It should help them... However, they MIGHT be rushing him back after last game's blowout.

He also hasn't played in any preseason games this year... So he could be a little rusty.

Just a thought.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Outside of a first round pick, or maybe Lekkerimaki what would Anaheim take for Noah Warren?

 

That's a tough one.  He is undoubtedly the kind of physical defensive dman

(if he develops as projected)that the Canucks need, but it may take him

2-3yrs to get there. 

 

The Ducks have a solid grouping of L + R dmen coming up through their

ranks, so if the price is right, they might do something.  It would be a bit

risky trading Lekker for him, as he is looking like a good bet for top 6.

 

Warren is projected to become a top 4 dman that adds speed, massive

physicality and great defensive coverage.  He doesn't have much offence

in his game, but that could still be developed over time. 

 

It might be worth the gamble, but he may have to compete with Hronek

and Wallander by then.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

lucky for Petey Bouchard is still on that pair. 

 

I wonder if RT will put Joshua up with Petey and Kuzy? Joshua should be able to give that pairing more of a tough time than with Garland.

 

 

I am looking forward to what Tocchet will do with Lafferty.

I'd like to see him up with Petey, good speed, physicality, spare faceoff guy.

 

If Garland was being showcased on 1RW, is it worth it to leave him up there again?

We've gotta win, Baby.  And Petey deserves the best wingers we can get him.

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Gawdzukes said:

 

Well I would say you are the straw man absolving it right here in this very post and laughing it off at the same time. Your statement makes it seem like it will be easy to pay Hronek and improve our team to the necessary levels when the reality is far from it, and history supports that. It's not impossible but it will be a huge problem like it has been the last 5 years.

 

I think it's totally reasonable to acknowledge that as a reality and still support the team. I'am not sure why you keep pretending it's not an issue whatsoever. It simply is. It's not the end of the world either but it will take some serious work. It's not as simple as you're making it out to be.


People aren’t straw men. It’s a mistake made by arguing against a a statement you have created, but that hasn’t actually been made. Here’s more information if you’re interested.
 

In this case its either of the bolded above. How my statement about Hronek makes it seem isn’t my position. I didn’t say, or imply, that we’d be at the ‘necessary levels.’ I’m sorry, that’s your misunderstanding.
 

I’m also not saying (or pretending) our cap isn’t an issue, as you can see below:

 

1 hour ago, Huggy Bear said:

Our cap situation is horrible, our depth is mediocre (but improving) and we’re a coin flip to make the playoffs this season. PA has been pretty candid and realistic about this.

 

JRPA aren’t in ‘win now’ mode, and are improving the team to be competitive a couple years. There is zero chance we won’t be able to ‘squeeze Hronek in,’ lol. It also looks like we’ll have $7-8M to upgrade the team, more if we trade Garland. 

 

You did the same thing awhile back arguing that Jett Woo wouldn’t change position to goalie (lol) when discussing if he might get tried as a forward again, barring NHL success as a dman.

 

Not sure if you’re doing this on purpose, but you’re misrepresenting what I’m saying, and inevitably arguing with yourself.
 

I prefer not to resort to ignoring people, so my intention here is to point this out, respectfully.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, higgyfan said:

 

That's a tough one.  He is undoubtedly the kind of physical defensive dman

(if he develops as projected)that the Canucks need, but it may take him

2-3yrs to get there. 

 

The Ducks have a solid grouping of L + R dmen coming up through their

ranks, so if the price is right, they might do something.  It would be a bit

risky trading Lekker for him, as he is looking like a good bet for top 6.

 

Warren is projected to become a top 4 dman that adds speed, massive

physicality and great defensive coverage.  He doesn't have much offence

in his game, but that could still be developed over time. 

 

It might be worth the gamble, but he may have to compete with Hronek

and Wallander by then.

 

Defence wins cups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Goal_thecup said:

I am looking forward to what Tocchet will do with Lafferty.

I'd like to see him up with Petey, good speed, physicality, spare faceoff guy.

 

If Garland was being showcased on 1RW, is it worth it to leave him up there again?

We've gotta win, Baby.  And Petey deserves the best wingers we can get him.

 

yea that could work as well for sure. Just think bulking up on Petey's wing will be a necessary change for Saturday.

 

Maybe put Garland back in a spot situation if it makes sense? otherwise I think we'll need the beefier presence with Petey, this game is going to be very physical.

 

Plus Garland can be a super pest against Nugget-Hophead. 

 

 

Edited by Bob Long
  • ThereItIs 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

yea that could work as well for sure. Just think bulking up on Petey's wing will be a necessary change for Saturday.

 

Maybe put Garland back in a spot situation if it makes sense? otherwise I think we'll need the beefier presence with Petey, this game is going to be very physical.

 

Plus Garland can be a super pest against Nugget-Hophead. 

 

 

they won 8-1. Why change anything?

  • Haha 1
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Huggy Bear said:


People aren’t straw men. It’s a mistake made by arguing against a a statement you have created, but that hasn’t actually been made. Here’s more information if you’re interested.
 

In this case its either of the bolded above. How my statement about Hronek makes it seem isn’t my position. I didn’t say, or imply, that we’d be at the ‘necessary levels.’ I’m sorry, that’s your misunderstanding.
 

I’m also not saying (or pretending) our cap isn’t an issue, as you can see below:

 

 

You did the same thing awhile back arguing that Jett Woo wouldn’t change position to goalie (lol) when discussing if he might get tried as a forward again, barring NHL success as a dman.

 

Not sure if you’re doing this on purpose, but you’re misrepresenting what I’m saying, and inevitably arguing with yourself.
 

I prefer not to resort to ignoring people, so my intention here is to point this out, respectfully.

 

Okay you got me. I don't really know what you're saying here by straw men/straw man and I still don't quite get it. Excuse my ignorance I come by it honestly lol. I must be misinterpreting your words stated here: "There is zero chance we won’t be able to ‘squeeze Hronek in,’ lol."

 

It seems to me you are implying we'll have plenty of money to fit his salary in and that the poster who suggested an ELC contract would be financially better is out to lunch.

 

All I am saying is that I believe we will have cap concerns going forward and Hronek is part of that. I appreciate you not ignoring me though as I try very hard not to do that to others either, and I apologize for the misunderstanding. I am not doing it on purpose and I will refrain from responding in the future. Cheers.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DeNiro said:


5 mil for a top 6 player

3 mil to re-sign or replace Cole

5 depth guys making around 1 mil

 

Plenty of space and that’s without a Garland trade.

 

Looks good at a glance, but this doesn't replace Blueger or Myers, both of which are better than $1M players, so they can't be the depth bits. Only way that works out is if we have ELCs breaking into the NHL like Raty or McWard.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Gawdzukes said:

 

Okay you got me. I don't really know what you're saying here by straw men/straw man and I still don't quite get it. Excuse my ignorance I come by it honestly lol. I must be misinterpreting your words stated here: "There is zero chance we won’t be able to ‘squeeze Hronek in,’ lol."

 

It seems to me you are implying we'll have plenty of money to fit his salary in and that the poster who suggested an ELC contract would be financially better is out to lunch.

 

All I am saying is that I believe we will have cap concerns going forward and Hronek is part of that. I appreciate you not ignoring me though as I try very hard not to do that to others either, and I apologize for the misunderstanding. I am not doing it on purpose and I will refrain from responding in the future. Cheers.


Thanks for clarifying its not on purpose, and please don’t refrain from responding.

 

As for the point on Hronek, we have enough cap space to resign him next year at $6-7M. I don’t see how that’s even debatable. 
 

I’m not implying anyone’s out to lunch and ELC contracts are always better, lol.
 

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

 

Looks good at a glance, but this doesn't replace Blueger or Myers, both of which are better than $1M players, so they can't be the depth bits. Only way that works out is if we have ELCs breaking into the NHL like Raty or McWard.


That’s true. Blueger has had a great showing so far in preseason, and replacing him (or Suter) with Räty could be a downgrade next year.

 

 It’s also yet to be seen what level of contribution we’ll be replacing with Myers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Blitz-Pix said:

 

It should help them... However, they MIGHT be rushing him back after last game's blowout.

He also hasn't played in any preseason games this year... So he could be a little rusty.

Just a thought.

I don't think Ekholm is playing tomorrow. I thought he was out for another few weeks. Might be a Soucy like situation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, KingRaj91 said:

I don't think Ekholm is playing tomorrow. I thought he was out for another few weeks. Might be a Soucy like situation?

 

Can't recall the source, but there was some speculation that he'd be back tomorrow. Wouldn't be surprised to see it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

 

Looks good at a glance, but this doesn't replace Blueger or Myers, both of which are better than $1M players, so they can't be the depth bits. Only way that works out is if we have ELCs breaking into the NHL like Raty or McWard.

 

I think we spend the ~$5m on a D personally, not a F. If we spend money on a F, it's after moving Garland (or as the trade return). We can survive with Mik, Petey, Kuz and PDG, Miller, Boeser as our top 6 (though I'd happily take an upgrade on PDG and slide him down in the noted Garland/his salary move). And there's still some chance any of Hog, Podz, Klim, Lekkerimaki etc take a step, if not next year, after that in to the top 6 as well.

 

Is the cap still work? Yup...but we have enough wiggle room to extend all our UFA/RFA's and to keep improving next year, just like we did this year. So I'm not sure where all the cap angst is coming from? Would more room be better? Sure. But this is hardly unmanageable. And I'm pleased to see current management seems to actually have a blueprint to actually build a cohesive TEAM of complementary pieces. 

 

And this is from a guy that was hoping for a deeper retool around selling Miller for pieces, age alignment and cap space to take advantage of a cap strapped league. I get some of the concern over the greater prospect pool/organizational depth (that said deeper retool would have contributed to), but new management is even doing a pretty good job there, backfilling that "loss" with solid college/unsigned free agents, better development etc. So even if this isn't the exact route I'd have taken, I have to give them credit for that as well and at least reducing some of my concerns there.

Edited by aGENT
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, aGENT said:

 

I think we spend the ~$5m on a D personally, not a F. If we spend money on a F, it's after moving Garland (or as the trade return). We can survive with Mik, Petey, Kuz and PDG, Miller Boeser as our top 6 (though I'd happily take an upgrade on PDG and slide him down in the noted Garland/his salary move). And there's still some chance any of Hog, Podz, Klim, Lekkerimaki etc take a step, if not next year, after that in to the top 6 as well.

 

Is the cap still work? Yup...but we have enough wiggle room to extend all our UFA/RFA's and to keep improving next year, just like we did this year. So I'm not sure where all the cap angst is coming from? Would more room be better? Sure. But this is hardly unmanageable. And I'm pleased to see current management seems to actually have a blueprint to actually build a cohesive TEAM of complementary pieces. 

 

And this is from a guy that was hoping for a deeper retool around selling Miller for pieces, age alignment and cap space to take advantage of a cap strapped league. I get some of the concern over the greater prospect pool/organizational depth (that said deeper retool would have contributed to), but new management is even doing a pretty good job there, backfilling that "loss" with solid college/unsigned free agents, better development etc. So even if this isn't the exact route I'd have taken, I have to give them credit for that as well and at least reducing some of my concerns there.


Great post.

 

Agree the cap flexibility gets spent primarily on defence.
 

Cole has looked so good early, I wouldn’t mind resigning him. I think I forgot what it was like to have an effective shutdown dman. He was easily handling bigger forwards like Kane, and stopping plays along the boards. 

 

 

  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Huggy Bear said:


Great post.

 

Agree the cap flexibility gets spent primarily on defence.
 

Cole has looked so good early, I wouldn’t mind resigning him. I think I forgot what it was like to have an effective shutdown dman. He was easily handling bigger forwards like Kane, and stopping plays along the boards. 

 

 

 

It's been a huge need for so many years....

 

Yeah, I'd bring him back on decreasing $, 1 year deals if he's open to it (and remains able). Next year $2.5'ish, then $2...then hopefully one of Hirose, D-Petey etc is ready to take over.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Huggy Bear said:


Great post.

 

Agree the cap flexibility gets spent primarily on defence.
 

Cole has looked so good early, I wouldn’t mind resigning him. I think I forgot what it was like to have an effective shutdown dman. He was easily handling bigger forwards like Kane, and stopping plays along the boards. 

 

 

Agreed. Not saying he's Ohlund. But his strong, inside body positioning on opponents remnds me of Ohlund. 

  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Rekker said:

Agreed. Not saying he's Ohlund. But his strong, inside body positioning on opponents remnds me of Ohlund. 

Can't wait until we have him AND Soucy on the ice in the same game! 😍

 

We've been missing that element for years.

 

If we add a Pesce or similar this summer, my head might explode.

Edited by aGENT
  • Haha 1
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...