Canucks News, Rumours, and & Fantasy GM | Let the negotiations through the media begin!

[Mr. Canucklehead]

Last one was over 1,000. Continue here.

Vector's Transaction Tracker, UFA & RFA Projections, & Cap Space Spreadsheet

Click to read more...

 

[F A N]

Garland is a tough one. He was a huge part in the 3rd line being so effective but as others have noted has little special teams utility and consequently averages 14 minutes a night. That being said 42 ES points is pretty damn impressive given those minutes / usage.

For me it’s why care about his special teams utility? I mean on this team's PP, there's not a whole lot of spots available on PP1 with Miller, Petey, and Hughes being locks and we're not likely to "upgrade" Boeser if Boeser is as effective next season as this season.

It's not an easy analysis but the perfect player doesn't exist. We're not paying Garland $8M+ a year. If Garland was good on the PP he would be a 70+ point player. I think we should slow down our thinking and really think things through here (not that our thoughts influence anything). Remember in past years where the team relied on elite goaltending and PP to win games? What would be the need? Add players who can produce at ES? Want to build a team that can play against any team? Well don't fill your team with similar players. Team has trouble scoring in the playoffs? Solution can't be to get rid of the guy who scored some big unassisted goals this past playoffs.

I don’t disagree in principle. But this team is lacking in play drivers - basically Hughes is the only other player on the team that consistently drives play in the right direction. Lindholm has never really been that type of player.

Dumping Garland to get Pettersson help is robbing Peter to pay Paul. Pettersson’s line might go from good to great at ES, and he might get a few more PP points, but the team is going to have trouble constructing a third line that can keep its head above water and be a competitive advantage like it is when Garland is on it.

We can reasonably argue about which scenario leads to a better team, but in either direction I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect more than a marginal benefit. And I don’t think Garland’s skill set is an easy one to replace on a team who needs more players like that, not fewer.

I don't disagree with your post. I would say that there is typically greater value finding players who can play with your star players vs a 3rd line player who can drive his own line (unless it's an elite shutdown 3C type). A winger to play with Petey should be a priority.

 

[credulous]

That they ponied up significant futures for Geuntzal is uncharacteristic for them. They have typically avoided rentals. That nothing came from getting Guentzal and that they may not be able to extend him is going to make them thrice shy.

they didn't give up anything much of value for guentzel. it was basically bunting, a 2nd and some stuff not in their long term plans for guentzel and ty smith

 

[JT Milker]

Would only sign Lindholm if they’ll actually play him with Miller or Pettersson. If they want him at 3C, would rather they sign Joshua and Blueger.

 

[Canucks LB]

I still don't understand the Lindholm signing unless you are making EP40 a Winger permanently.

Because you are not moving JT Miller to wing after absolutely dominating against Mcdavid, no chance

 

[credulous]

I still don't understand the Lindholm signing unless you are making EP40 a Winger permanently.

Because you are not moving JT Miller to wing after absolutely dominating against Mcdavid, no chance

the 3 center plan was silly when it was miller, horvat and pettersson and is even sillier with lindholm instead of horvat. they need very good to elite wingers for miller and pettersson more than they need lindholm pivoting podkolzin and garland or whatever

 

[Wisp]

I still don't understand the Lindholm signing unless you are making EP40 a Winger permanently.

you don't understand how having three top six fowards who can play center is a huge tactical advantage?

if there's an injury at center, you have depth.

you can go 3 lines deep to exploit a team with weak depth.

or you can move a center to wing to exploit a weak match matchup.

edit: apparently I have to explain the advantages because having great center depth is 'silly.'

 

[ziploc]

Would only sign Lindholm if they’ll actually play him with Miller or Pettersson. If they want him at 3C, would rather they sign Joshua and Blueger.

I would definitely move EP to wing and have Lindholm centre a line with him and Hoglander.

Keep the 3rd line intact if possible.

1st line is Miller Boeser and I'm really not sure. I don't think there is cap space for Guentzel even if we jettison Mikheyev for no return, which I don't think is possible. Maybe if Hronek is moved as well and replaced with a cheaper option, but that is also playing with fire.

 

[krutovsdonut]

I did just start a twitter account purely for my summaries.



No idea if I'll have the energy to keep it up there but I'll always be posting here first and not linking to a summarized tweet.

i like this but i am not sure if you can just closely summarize what other content providers say. for a fair use exception to their copyright i think you need to be providing your own editorial content. maybe summarizing / paraphrasing and pulling out canuck content is enough.

 

[arttk]

I still don't understand the Lindholm signing unless you are making EP40 a Winger permanently.

Because you are not moving JT Miller to wing after absolutely dominating against Mcdavid, no chance

Playoff matchups. I think ideally you would want Lindholm to be the matchup guy so MIller and Petey can go put up points. Also if you have any injury, you can slide Lindholm into the top 6. When Miller ages a bit more, you can slide Miller to the wing and pair him with Lindholm.

With Lindholm on the 3rd line, not sure how possible it is, you can run 2 cheaper wingers and have Lindholm carry them. It's easier for a center to carry 2 wingers than to have 1 winger(Garland) carry another winger and center.

 

[Diamonddog01]

DeBrusk (5) – Miller (8) – Boeser (6.65)
Suter (1.6) – Petterson (11.6) – Lindholm (6.75)
Kostin (2) – Sturm (2) – Garland (4.95)
Hoglander (1.1) – Aman (0.825 – Podkolzin (1)
PDG (0.775)

Hughes (7.85) –DeMelo (5)
Zadorov (4.75) – Liljegren (2.75)
Soucy (3.25) – Myers (2.75)
Juulsen (0.775)

Demko (5)
Silovs (1.25)

OEL (2.34)

SJ

Mikheyev,
Poolman LITR contract
Canucks 2025 2nd round pick
Perhaps some of the assets returned in moving Hronek?

Van

Sturm
Kostin

 

[theguardianII]

I thought the purpose of fantasy trades was to make the team better?

After reading some of these that is questionable.
sign players into the late 30's.
Sign players to get smaller
Reduce size of the defence, make them small again.
Don't trade players because they are cute or have a sob story or because "I like him".
Cap, What cap?
There is no such thing as the future why worry?
Who cares what players want.
Chemistry? What's that? A science course isn't it?
All players get better every year.
Totally ignoring the past.

So many ideas without a lot of thought.
Suggestions by emotions.

 

[Vector]

The thing about Carolina is they're terrified of what happens to their market if they're a bottom feeder for an extended period. Their goal is to stay competitive for as long as possible. So they don't like rentals, they don't make short term moves.

That they ponied up significant futures for Geuntzal is uncharacteristic for them. They have typically avoided rentals. That nothing came from getting Guentzal and that they may not be able to extend him is going to make them thrice shy.

I actually think this was completely in-line with how they usually work. They gave up some good-not-great older prospects, a protected 1st and 5th (that turned into a 2nd and the 5th didn't convey), and a guy they didn't want anymore with years left. Didn't give up a single premium asset. That he was a rental does go against how they usually work, though.

 

[Vector]

i like this but i am not sure if you can just closely summarize what other content providers say. for a fair use exception to their copyright i think you need to be providing your own editorial content. maybe summarizing / paraphrasing and pulling out canuck content is enough.

Then someone can file a complaint, get the twitter account shut down, and I'll just continue posting summaries here.

 

[credulous]

I actually think this was completely in-line with how they usually work. They gave up some good-not-great older prospects, a protected 1st and 5th (that turned into a 2nd and the 5th didn't convey), and a guy they didn't want anymore with years left. Didn't give up a single premium asset. That he was a rental does go against how they usually work, though.

yeah. ponomarev, lucius and koivunen are all marginal prospects. i guess people confused cruz lucius for chaz lucius (the winnipeg first rounder)

 

[MS]

they didn't give up anything much of value for guentzel. it was basically bunting, a 2nd and some stuff not in their long term plans for guentzel and ty smith

I actually think this was completely in-line with how they usually work. They gave up some good-not-great older prospects, a protected 1st and 5th (that turned into a 2nd and the 5th didn't convey), and a guy they didn't want anymore with years left. Didn't give up a single premium asset. That he was a rental does go against how they usually work, though.

Yeah, it was basically the definition of a quantity-over-quality package where they put together a whole bunch of B/C prospects and a protected 1st that turned into a 2nd. And a cap dump.

It was classic Carolina cheapness but they managed to win out in a weak market somehow.

Horrific deal for Pittsburgh where Dubas seemed to overvalue one of his pet guys in Bunting.

 

[TruGr1t]

Playoff matchups. I think ideally you would want Lindholm to be the matchup guy so MIller and Petey can go put up points. Also if you have any injury, you can slide Lindholm into the top 6. When Miller ages a bit more, you can slide Miller to the wing and pair him with Lindholm.

With Lindholm on the 3rd line, not sure how possible it is, you can run 2 cheaper wingers and have Lindholm carry them. It's easier for a center to carry 2 wingers than to have 1 winger(Garland) carry another winger and center.

You bascially end up running two "second lines". For example, in the playoffs Pettersson and Lindholm both averaged around 19 mins per game. Lindholm is good because he's used in multiple different alignments and situations.

I do agree with the above, though, this will continue to leave you with a wing deficit and at least one or two suboptimal wingers in the top-nine.

I think signing Lindholm is a pretty good indicator the Canucks are not optimistic about their ability to get another true top-six winger. They will likely be left chasing guys like Toffoli, Zucker and Duclair.

 

[BoHorvat 53]

Paying Lindholm 7+ with that term is going to really hinder this team's outlook long term, nothing about his underlying numbers suggest that there's bounce back potential with him, he isn't a play driver. There's literally 0 chance he outperforms this next contract, and I wouldn't consider him a core piece that we need to have any chance the next few years. I'd rather put Suter back as 3rd line center, as him, Garland and Joshua were dominant together.

Use that money to bring in a winger instead.

 

[Canucks LB]

you don't understand how having three top six fowards who can play center is a huge tactical advantage?

if there's an injury at center, you have depth.

you can go 3 lines deep to exploit a team with weak depth.

or you can move a center to wing to exploit a weak match matchup.

edit: apparently I have to explain the advantages because having great center depth is 'silly.'

depth is fine, 7m for to pay a guy to play on the third line is ridiculous

 

[TruGr1t]

depth is fine, 7m for to pay a guy to play on the third line is ridiculous

He'll be on the "third line" playing ~19-20mins per game.

 

[wonton15]

He'll be on the "third line" playing ~19-20mins per game.

Sure, but not sure if this recipe is what management thinks will work in the playoffs as we saw the top 6 scoring dry up with a very shallow winger core. Boeser went down for one game and he was essentially our only bonafide top 6 winger. Tocchet can’t help himself and will put Lindholm down the middle as we’ve seen, and while he had a strong playoffs, we needed at least one or two impact top 6 wingers on top of what we had. Allocating 7x7+ to Lindholm doesn’t seem like the best option if we can somehow get a Guentzel-tier top 6 scorer.

 

[strattonius]

I'll say it again. I think because we flamed out in the 2nd rd people are now looking at our roster composition as some sort of case study of 'what not to do'. People are going as far as to questioning Center depth. Lindholm at 7M is fantastic and they'd still have room to getting another quality winger (which is the great need).

There's also the element of the rising CAP. A 7M dollar player isnt the same as it was even five years ago. Really you have to consider the % of CAP as far as analyzing allocation.

We need forwards that can score and we know Lindholm is a Tocchet wet dream. Keep Lindholm and insulate the roster with some better wingers.

 

[racerjoe]

I did just start a twitter account purely for my summaries.



No idea if I'll have the energy to keep it up there but I'll always be posting here first and not linking to a summarized tweet.

I would follow but I got rid of twitter a long time ago, because its such a crap now. I don't need to be there.

I don't mind a 7x7 for Lindholm... It does depend on what else you are doing if I were to make that deal though. I don't think Petey needs an Elite winger. Offensively we have seen Petey work with just good forwards... so I would probably cheap out there a bit. Maybe really push for like Duclair.

I also don't mind re-signing Zaddy at 5... by whatever... I like the idea of wither running him on his offside with Hughes, and then doing Hronek and Soucy, or just loading up a strong Left side and match them with cheaper right side guys. I think this is what Tamp use to do if I remember.

 

[credulous]

a lot of people are forgetting that if the canucks cap out this offseason with long term deals they most likely can't extend/resign boeser next offseason. they currently only have suter, pdg and juulsen expiring alongside boeser. that's not even enough expiring to cover the oel caphit so you'd need a huge cap increase just to keep boeser near his current number

are you willing to sign lindholm to 7x7 if it means boeser walks next offseason?

 

[Canucks LB]

He'll be on the "third line" playing ~19-20mins per game.

Look at the oilers and Florida’s third liners

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

a lot of people are forgetting that if the canucks cap out this offseason with long term deals they most likely can't extend/resign boeser next offseason. they currently only have suter, pdg and juulsen expiring alongside boeser. that's not even enough expiring to cover the oel caphit so you'd need a huge cap increase just to keep boeser near his current number

are you willing to sign lindholm to 7x7 if it means boeser walks next offseason?

I think they would find a way to make space for Boeser, which might involve dumping Mikheyev or trading Garland. A lot will hinge on Boeser’s health and production next season and if he wants to take a small discount, but I’d think he’d be up for a contract around $7.5-8 mill?