Canucks 2024-2025 Line Combinations and Roster Discussion

[TruGr1t]

I noticed we're getting potential line combination posts in a bunch of different threads, at this point, so I thought it would be good to centralize roster and line-up posts in one place for ease of discussion. I don't believe we'll see another meaningful addition to the roster outside of an exceptional circumstance occurring, so it seems a good time to start this thread as any. The next move I expect is to shrink the roster as we're running at max, at the moment, I believe.

I think loosely you can see a top-nine, in some combination, of Miller, Pettersson, Boeser, DeBrusk, Heinen, Garland, Joshua, Hoglander, and one of Suter/Blueger depending on setup. The fourth line is likely some combination of Blueger/Suter and your preference for Sherwood, PDG, Aman and Podkolzin.

On defense, the consensus seems to be:

Hughes-Hronek
Soucy-Myers
Forbort-Desharnais
Juulsen

But I think there are some opportunities to move that around. I would post a poll as well, but there are some many different potential combinations it would run pretty long.

Click to read more...

 

[Tact]

DeBrusk - Miller - Boeser
Joshua - Pettersson - Garland
Hoglander - Suter - Heinen
PDG - Blueger - Sherwood
*Aman

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

I noticed we're getting potential line combination posts in a bunch of different threads, at this point, so I thought it would be good to centralize roster and line-up posts in one place for ease of discussion. I don't believe we'll see another meaningful addition to the roster outside of an exceptional circumstance occurring, so it seems a good time to start this thread as any. The next move I expect is to shrink the roster as we're running at max, at the moment, I believe.

I think loosely you can see a top-nine, in some combination, of Miller, Pettersson, Boeser, DeBrusk, Heinen, Garland, Joshua, Hoglander, and one of Suter/Blueger depending on setup. The fourth line is likely some combination of Blueger/Suter and your preference for Sherwood, PDG, Aman and Podkolzin.

On defense, the consensus seems to be:

Hughes-Hronek
Soucy-Myers
Forbort-Desharnais
Juulsen

But I think there are some opportunities to move that around. I would post a poll as well, but there are some many different potential combinations it would run pretty long.

I think your defense is exactly how I would have it based on the current roster. I think/hope they have a plan to add a puck moving defensemen, which ideally would push Forbort to No. 7 and Juulsen to No. 8, but as of now, that's it.

My wholescale lineup at the moment would be -

Heinen - Miller - Boeser
Hoglander - Pettersson - DeBrusk
Joshua - Blueger - Garland
Sherwood - Suter - Podkolzin
PDG/Aman

Hughes - Hronek
Soucy - Myers
Forbort - Desharnais
Juulsen/Friedman

Demko
Silovs

I think that before the off-season is over and done, we will see a trade or two. Hoglander seems like a high possibility of being moved, and I could also see the Canucks trying to move Podkolzin in a deal.

 

[VanJack]

Tom Wilander and Jonathan Lekkerimaki are clearly 1-2 on the Canucks prospect depth chart, and a cut above anyone else right now.

But when do they arrive in the NHL as permanent players--maybe as early as next season?

 

[TruGr1t]

Tom Wilander and Jonathan Lekkerimaki are clearly 1-2 on the Canucks prospect depth chart, and a cut above anyone else right now.

But when do they arrive in the NHL as permanent players--maybe as early as next season?

Depending on timing, they could both get some spot duty later this season, but in terms of actually making the line-up ... I'd say, yeah, earliest next 2025-2026 training camp.

 

[EpochLink]

I'm quite pleased with our forward group, they should have a great upcoming season.

 

[Josepho]

Best guess for the most common starting 18 is:

Debrusk - Pettersson - Sherwood*
Heinen* - Miller - Boeser
Joshua - Blueger - Garland
Hoglander* - Suter* - Di Giuseppe

Hughes - Hronek
Soucy - Myers
Forbort - Desharnais

* denotes players who will get shuffled around during cold streaks.

Don't think Willander will be a regular before the end of the season, but it probably depends on whether or not the Desharnais experiment flops.

 

[VanJack]

In J-Pat's latest piece in Canucks Army, he takes a run at comparing the team that started the season last year; and compared to it to the team that finished the playoffs in the spring; and to the team now built after July 1st free agency.

His assessment.....The current team is better on paper than the team that started the season a year ago. But probably not quite as good as the team that bowed out to the Oilers in seven games. The big caveat of course, is that the Canucks didn't have their Vezina-quality goalie for almost the entire playoffs.

Of course we'll never know how Lindholm and Zadorov would have performed over a full season if they'd re-signed in Vancouver. The Bruins are about to find out.

So 'out' are Cole, Lindholm, Zadorov and Lafferty; and 'in' are DeBrusk, Heinen, Sherwood, Desharnais and Forbort. And I suppose that as of right now, they've swapped out Casey DeSmith for Arturs Silovs in the backup goalie position.

So are they much worse off than the playoff version of the Canucks? I'm actually not so sure. There's the potential to get far more scoring out of the bottom of their roster. And on the blueline, it's hard to say how much of a 'fall-off' there will be, changing out Zadorov and Cole for Forbort and Desharnais.

 

[Orca Smash]

I don't usually do lines and there are a few combinations I like but I did this one for balance.

Debrusk-Pettersson-Garland
Hoglander-Miller-Boeser
Joshua-Blueger-Heinen
Podkolzin/PDG-Suter-Sherwood

 

[TruGr1t]

I’m still sticking to this on defense:

Hughes-Hronek
Soucy-Desharnais
Forbort-Myers

I like the balance of puck-movers and defense-first guys in the bottom four, and I don’t see why you’d handicap the puck moving on your bottom pair with Forbort-Desharnais and make that some sort of limited-minute PK pairing.

Myers is an underrated puck mover and Soucy has a good first pass.

I think you want to put together a second and third pair that can handle around 17-18 mins per game like last year.

 

[Shareefruck]

I’m still sticking to this on defense:

Hughes-Hronek
Soucy-Desharnais
Forbort-Myers

I like the balance of puck-movers and defense-first guys in the bottom four, and I don’t see why you’d handicap the puck moving on your bottom pair with Forbort-Desharnais and make that some sort of limited-minute PK pairing.

Myers is an underrated puck mover and Soucy has a good first pass.

I think you want to put together a second and third pair that can handle around 17-18 mins per game like last year.

I'd agree that this adjustment is ideal. Forbort - Desharnais together would be horrifying.

 

[sting101]

I think your defense is exactly how I would have it based on the current roster. I think/hope they have a plan to add a puck moving defensemen, which ideally would push Forbort to No. 7 and Juulsen to No. 8, but as of now, that's it.

My wholescale lineup at the moment would be -

Heinen - Miller - Boeser
Hoglander - Pettersson - DeBrusk
Joshua - Blueger - Garland
Sherwood - Suter - Podkolzin
PDG/Aman

Hughes - Hronek
Soucy - Myers
Forbort - Desharnais
Juulsen/Friedman

Demko
Silovs

I think that before the off-season is over and done, we will see a trade or two. Hoglander seems like a high possibility of being moved, and I could also see the Canucks trying to move Podkolzin in a deal.

this for me too

Keep thinking something will drop for a D.

VGK with their cap situation and new Hanifin Hague deals makes McNabb and Theodore possibilities

BUF has a lot of offensive guys and 2 free agents in RFA Byram and UFA Jokiharju pending. That Joki contract was a weird one.

NJ is also in a weird spot with Hamilton Pesce Dillon Segenthaler none of which are aligned for Hughes and Nemec to get big money.

SEA signing Montour makes Larsson a likely exodus this year if they fall out of the race and chose the younger Borgen

Olli Maatta is a LD linked to Pittsburgh and their cup days that wouldn't surprise me if they go after that could be platooned with Soucy and Forbort at LD after xmas depending on Edvinsson and Wallinder/Buium's growth

 

[SopelFanThe3rd]

Hoglander-Pettersson-DeBrusk
Heinen-Miller-Boeser
Joshua-Blueger-Garland
Sherwood-Suter-Podkolzin

Hughes-Hronek
Soucy-Myers
Forbort-Desharnais

Demko
Silovs

 

[biturbo19]

For me, the general framework i'd approach it with first would look like:


GroupA - Pettersson - DeBrusk

GroupA - Miller - Boeser

Joshua - Bluegers - Garland

Hoggy - GroupB - Sherwood



With Group A = Heinen, Suter, Podkolzin, PDG, (and Karlsson as a call-up option).

With Group B = Aman and Suter if he doesn't land one of the Group A spots.


Really just a chemistry experiment, figuring out who among GroupA meshes best with Pettersson. Then figure out who works best with the Miller line. And the "4th line" Center is basically just Aman by default, unless Suter shakes loose from both of those Top-6 Winger spots (which is possible).

Also leaning on the Pettersson+DeBrusk thing to work out. But i'd definitely go to that first and i'd have some patience with it even if it isn't instant. At some point, if it's clearly just not gonna click, you just move him to the JT+Boeser line and start throwing stuff at the wall with the Pettersson line. But i'd have a lot of patience in waiting for that to gel, because it's so important to get Pettersson some functional wingers and DeBrusk was a substantial investment in that, and brings a bundle of the qualities that should be able to help Petey out there.

Ideally, Podkolzin comes in like a wrecking ball and we can roll out something like:

Podkolzin - Pettersson - DeBrusk
Heinen - Miller - Boeser
Joshua - Bluegers - Garland
Hoglander - Suter - Sherwood


But more likely, he dabbles at the edges of the roster in and out in different spots as required, and we get something more like:

Heinen - Pettersson - DeBrusk
Suter - Miller - Boeser
Joshua - Bluegers - Garland
Hoglander - Aman - Sherwood



But that's just what looks best to me on paper right now. A lot can change through camp, as things start to change or chemistry emerges or certain players look like oil and water. That'll change the outlook and realistic combinations available...but you never really know until you try some of it on the ice and see how it goes.

 

[TruGr1t]

Found this interesting from Drance today:

 

[VanillaCoke]

@bossram line combos >> @biturbo19 combos.

 

[bossram]

I’m still sticking to this on defense:

Hughes-Hronek
Soucy-Desharnais
Forbort-Myers

I like the balance of puck-movers and defense-first guys in the bottom four, and I don’t see why you’d handicap the puck moving on your bottom pair with Forbort-Desharnais and make that some sort of limited-minute PK pairing.

Myers is an underrated puck mover and Soucy has a good first pass.

I think you want to put together a second and third pair that can handle around 17-18 mins per game like last year.

I would prefer this as well, but I expect they'll go to their familiar pairs to start with.

 

[TruGr1t]

I would prefer this as well, but I expect they'll go to their familiar pairs to start with.

I dunno, they seem pretty high on Desharnais from everything I'm reading, but maybe they work up to it? Hopefully they're as uncomfortable with a Forbort-Desharnais bottom pairing as the fans. It seems unbalanced to me and you'll end up overplaying the top four rather quickly.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

Think we see an upgrade to the D group at some point and ideally it’s a second pairing D to push Myers to the third pair and have Forbort as the extra guy. Not sure though if Desharnai can switch sides.

 

[bossram]

I dunno, they seem pretty high on Desharnais from everything I'm reading, but maybe they work up to it? Hopefully they're as uncomfortable with a Forbort-Desharnais bottom pairing as the fans. It seems unbalanced to me and you'll end up overplaying the top four rather quickly.

Myers somehow always ends up being their 3D by icetime and was the primary matchup with Soucy last playoffs, so I think that's just how they'll start, especially given the salaries and veteran status of the pecking order on D.

 

[biturbo19]

Found this interesting from Drance today:

View attachment 893831

This idea of trying to extend the Garland+Dakota chemistry to Pettersson doesn't make any logical sense to me whatsoever. In fact, it seems downright obtuse and wasteful tbh. Not the first time Drance has had a completely stupid idea that he won't stop trying to run with though.

"These two wingers get stellar results no matter who their Center is" doesn't lend itself even remotely to, "let's stick them with our eleven million dollar man". It's just wasting the utility of what Garland + Joshua can do.

ie. When they're getting as good or better results with a "cheap" Center like Bluegers (who is eminently incapable of driving offense on his own line), why would you not just press that advantage to the maximum?

And in turn...let Pettersson drive the offense on his own separate line. Which is what he's being paid to do. The whole idea just reeks of lack of faith in Pettersson to actually drive offense commensurate with his new salary...needing a "crutch" basically. Which is bogus.

It also completely bypasses the context of what that would do to the matchups they and other lines face. If you concentrate things that way, they're going to draw tougher defensive matchups and focus, which is going to hurt a lot of that little niche where Garland+Joshua tend to exploit secondary/tertiary matchups defensively. But more than what it does to their matchups...it then leaves a hole in who is left to exploit those other matchups. If you put your line driving winger duo AND your line driving $11M Center on the same line...you've then got the Miller+Boeser line, and then what? Who is driving the offense on Line3 if it's not Garland+Dak?


And finally...Garland and Pettersson play like shit together. They don't mesh. At all. It doesn't work. Their modes of production just are not very compatible. So at best, you're basically neutering Pettersson into a "passenger" role...that could be just as effectively (or more effectively) filled by a cheap checker like Bluegers.


It's just stupid. I cannot wrap my head around why people think this would be a remotely worthwhile idea to even explore seriously. I don't know where the idea even came from, and i'm not sure if it's catastrophic statbrain or what. But i kinda hate it.


You've got this amazing duo with Garland + Joshua who can carry a cheap guy like Bluegers or Suter. Why would you not just leave well enough alone? Focus on making the other parts of the Top-6 fit together somehow. There's enough parts and pieces to find something that should click...and plenty more options to even rotate guys like Sherwood through for a spark every now and then.

 

[TruGr1t]

This idea of trying to extend the Garland+Dakota chemistry to Pettersson doesn't make any logical sense to me whatsoever. In fact, it seems downright obtuse and wasteful tbh. Not the first time Drance has had a completely stupid idea that he won't stop trying to run with though.

"These two wingers get stellar results no matter who their Center is" doesn't lend itself even remotely to, "let's stick them with our eleven million dollar man". It's just wasting the utility of what Garland + Joshua can do.

ie. When they're getting as good or better results with a "cheap" Center like Bluegers (who is eminently incapable of driving offense on his own line), why would you not just press that advantage to the maximum?

And in turn...let Pettersson drive the offense on his own separate line. Which is what he's being paid to do. The whole idea just reeks of lack of faith in Pettersson to actually drive offense commensurate with his new salary...needing a "crutch" basically. Which is bogus.

It also completely bypasses the context of what that would do to the matchups they and other lines face. If you concentrate things that way, they're going to draw tougher defensive matchups and focus, which is going to hurt a lot of that little niche where Garland+Joshua tend to exploit secondary/tertiary matchups defensively. But more than what it does to their matchups...it then leaves a hole in who is left to exploit those other matchups. If you put your line driving winger duo AND your line driving $11M Center on the same line...you've then got the Miller+Boeser line, and then what? Who is driving the offense on Line3 if it's not Garland+Dak?


And finally...Garland and Pettersson play like shit together. They don't mesh. At all. It doesn't work. Their modes of production just are not very compatible. So at best, you're basically neutering Pettersson into a "passenger" role...that could be just as effectively (or more effectively) filled by a cheap checker like Bluegers.


It's just stupid. I cannot wrap my head around why people think this would be a remotely worthwhile idea to even explore seriously. I don't know where the idea even came from, and i'm not sure if it's catastrophic statbrain or what. But i kinda hate it.


You've got this amazing duo with Garland + Joshua who can carry a cheap guy like Bluegers or Suter. Why would you not just leave well enough alone? Focus on making the other parts of the Top-6 fit together somehow. There's enough parts and pieces to find something that should click...and plenty more options to even rotate guys like Sherwood through for a spark every now and then.

The point is to try and get Garland and Joshua more ice time, I doubt that comes at the expense of the Miller line and as you say, you're now paying Pettersson over $11M so hopefully it doesn't come from him. I am hoping we are beyond the period of bottom-six guys being elevated into the top six due to a lack of options. Garland and Joshua have produced good 5-on-5 results with pretty much anyone they've played with, so it isn't the craziest idea I've heard. Pettersson and Garland also had a briefly productive period together later in the year when Lindholm and Joshua were both injured and Tocchet was forced to blender the lines. Do I think they'll do it? No probably not, I think they are probably going to go Miller-Boeser and Pettersson-DeBrusk to start. I expect Heinen will get one of the top-six wing spots off the hop, but have no idea who the other winger will be. If you stick with Joshua-Garland-Blueger, that winger is almost by default ... Hoglander. Suter will be back at centre.

 

[biturbo19]

The point is to try and get Garland and Joshua more ice time, I doubt that comes at the expense of the Miller line and as you say, you're now paying Pettersson over $11M so hopefully it doesn't come from him. I am hoping we are beyond the period of bottom-six guys being elevated into the top six due to a lack of options. Garland and Joshua have produced good 5-on-5 results with pretty much anyone they've played with, so it isn't the craziest idea I've heard. Pettersson and Garland also had a briefly productive period together later in the year when Lindholm and Joshua were both injured and Tocchet was forced to blender the lines. Do I think they'll do it? No probably not, I think they are probably going to go Miller-Boeser and Pettersson-DeBrusk to start. I expect Heinen will get one of the top-six wing spots off the hop, but have no idea who the other winger will be. If you stick with Joshua-Garland-Blueger, that winger is almost by default ... Hoglander. Suter will be back at centre.

So just give Joshua - Bluegers - Garland more icetime then. Why would you mess with it?

The reality is more...that production isn't linearly scalable. But they're already playing more or less as much as Pettersson at 5v5 which is what is relevant here anyway. By the playoffs, Garland was playing like 1 minute less per game at even strength compared to Pettersson (which is basically just Petey double-shifting when trailing - which is always still an option).

You don't have to actually directly put Garland with Pettersson to get him his even strength minutes. You can dole things out so they both get their minutes, separately, where they can each be more beneficial and maximize their contributions in those minutes.


The whole "Top-6 / Bottom-6" thing doesn't really apply when you have a guy like Garland driving a "3rd line" offensively. Just look at it as a "Top-9" with a 2a/2b lines or whatever. Where the Pettersson line and the Garland line probably see fairly close even strength minutes in volume. No need to shoehorn Pettersson into that, and substantially weaken the overall depth of the roster and tie one hand behind Pettersson's back in the process. It's just goofy, if you step back for even a second to look objectively at all the elements in play there in a holistic sense.

 

[TruGr1t]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1811158480553951712

New numbers:

Heinen - #20
Sherwood - #44
Forbort - #27
Desharnais - #73
Patera - #30
Nate Smith - #83

 

[ihaveyuidonttouchme]

Sherwood taking Todd Bertuzzi