Canucks News, Rumours, and & Fantasy GM | Off-Season Edition | Not satisfied, so now what?
- Thread starter Mr. Canucklehead
- Start date
- Status
sandwichbird2023
Registered User
- Aug 4, 2004
- 3,985
- 2,089
Chinakhov was a buy-low candidate for me mid-season. But it sounds like they patched things up and are on better terms now. All 3 are good targets but I don't see the Jackets letting them go without a big "now-piece" going back.
We really didn't gave up too much in value. A low 1st, a B prospect, and a couple mid round picks, are well worth the value we got out of those guys for a quarter of a season and 2 rounds of playoff. It's a clear win in my book even if they walk (especially if they are overpaid on their next contracts).Oh man, all of these assets given up for Lindholm and Zadorov just to make it far in the playoffs. We could very well lose them both
The picks might not pan out and potentially provide no value at all. Lindholm and Z played great for us. I do that trade again 10/10 times.
StickShift
In a pickle 🥒
Hang with me for a moment:
Then maybe Rasmus Ristolainen is for you.
- …if, Tocchet’s system limits the amount turnovers and pressure on transition defense
- …and if, Foote and Gonchar have turned questionable players like Myers and Zadorov into legitimate defensemen
- …and if, management is prioritizing big and heavy defensemen (besides QH)
- …and if, the team’s biggest hole is on right defense
Then maybe Rasmus Ristolainen is for you.
Just A Bit Outside
Playoffs??!
- Mar 6, 2010
- 17,441
- 17,054
StickShift
In a pickle 🥒
He had a Zadorov/Myers like resurgence—perhaps to an even larger extreme.
I don’t think Ristolainen is a cap dump anymore. Honestly I have no idea what his trade value may or may not be.
But I wonder how he would profile riding shotgun to Hughes.
oceanchild
Registered User
I do that trade, would prefer Hoglander to Silovs however. With Demko struggling to stay healthy, I think that is a better option.
I would be very interested by this trade and feel it would include a couple more pieces l, but don’t know what that would look like. We would have to know that we can sign Lindholm as a 2C long term for a reasonable rate.Pettersson for Tkachuk and Pinto?
Montour and Pesce are literally my most worrisome targets of the UFA RD. Big stay-far-away energy.
Tocc essentially deployed him as a bottom-pairing guy for pretty much the whole season prior to the playoffs. Of the Canucks top-six defensemen, he was last in his % of icetime spent against "Elite" competition, and averaged the 5th most ES TOI per game.
He had 11 or 12 excellent games in the playoffs. But massively overweighting that sample compared to the entire rest of his career (in which he's only ever been a 4/5D) is how you make bad decisions.
Nick Lang
Registered User
- May 14, 2015
- 2,292
- 776
You can't play two players at LD though. We already have 2 LD's and no RD's under contract, and we're close to broke. Soucy and Hughes play 42 minutes a night. We just need someone to play 15-17. A third pairing guy. I know Tocchet doesn't like it and I agree it's 3 steps forward and two steps back playing a player on his wrong side all year.
Exactly. If we needed a 2LD he'd be totally alright at that price. Need to concentrate on the 1RD and 2RD spots before filling in the fringes.
No exaggeration at all, Risto has really turned it around under Torts. I listened to a podcast with Charlie O'Connor (beat writer for the Flyers) and he talked about how it seemed that under Torts, Risto has really simplified his game, for the better. Just using his size and athleticism to get to puck battles in the DZ, and make a clear. Not chasing hits. Not trying to be an offensive hero (which he can't be).
I actually do think he would be a good fit under Tocc's system. The problem is Risto's contract is still not good. He's basically improved to the level of a 4/5 defenseman, but his AAV is still too big for the somewhat limited utility he provides.
TruGr1t
Proper Villain
- Jun 26, 2003
- 24,411
- 8,900
At least Brenden Dillon is like on local radio begging to come here, sign him for the bottom left-side, and then get another right-side guy like Walker, DeMelo or Roy.
Baby Pettersson
Moderator
I want to resign Zadorov as much as anyone but I also feel like if you can replace him with Dillon for half the cost you do it. #1 goal this offseason is getting a legit top 6 winger for Pettersson.
The more I think about it the more I believe Necas is coming to Vancouver.
The more I think about it the more I believe Necas is coming to Vancouver.
I think management is pushing for Guentzel hard and Necas is backup plan…
Baby Pettersson
Moderator
Guentzel would be an absolute game changer. But at 9M we would be losing alot of our depth.
TruGr1t
Proper Villain
- Jun 26, 2003
- 24,411
- 8,900
If they get a line on an impact forward I expect them to basically be willing to let all the free agents go, if needed, and figure the defense out later.
StickShift
In a pickle 🥒
I wouldn’t be shocked if they decide to reallocate their third line dollars (Garland, Joshua, Lindholm) to load up the top-six.
Worth it, more deadly top6> better depth. It’s easier to shore depth around TDL if you have a good top6 and good top4.
Allvin and JR are most definitely “reviewing” our recipe of 3 top centers with weak wingers in the top 6. I 100% agree - wouldn’t be surprised if we reallocate that recipe to a Guentzel type player and go with a weaker third line.
Also I am the biggest Zadorov fan and will get his jersey if he stays, but I am trying to be logical and wouldn’t be mad at all if they get Dillon for like 2.75m for 2 years and use the rest of the Zadorov savings for a winger or Tanev.
Also I am the biggest Zadorov fan and will get his jersey if he stays, but I am trying to be logical and wouldn’t be mad at all if they get Dillon for like 2.75m for 2 years and use the rest of the Zadorov savings for a winger or Tanev.
Hope term may help he played very well trade Hronek to keep him if that's possible he would bring a decent return
Dallas woke up coils hanging on now
Baby Pettersson
Moderator
Random thought. Is there a reason Garland never seems to play with Pete? Something like Guentzel Pettersson Garland I feel like would be the makings of a real good line. Then you can put budget players in the bottom 6.
Tocchet this past season had an obsession with keeping Garland down there for a deep team (fair - that third line basically made our team this year). He mentioned it indirectly and directly about keeping the deep 3 centers lines structure.
If Lindholm, Joshua or both aren’t back, I could see the case of Garland moving up to play with that line you just mentioned. Blueger-Mikheyev isn’t the worst third line if you can find the next Joshua to put beside them.
- Status
