Canucks News, Rumours, and & Fantasy GM | Off-Season Edition | Not satisfied, so now what?

Status
Not open for further replies.

sandwichbird2023

Registered User
Aug 4, 2004
4,057
2,182
I'd be thrilled with any of Marchenko, Voronkov, of Chinakhov.

I think Provorov would get eaten alive by this market given his public stance against Pride jerseys.
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.

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 :(
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).

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 🥒
Feb 29, 2004
7,458
6,396
New York
Hang with me for a moment:
  • …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.

IMG_3392.jpegIMG_3393.jpegIMG_3391.jpeg
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: Flik and arttk

Just A Bit Outside

Playoffs??!
Mar 6, 2010
17,723
17,447
Hang with me for a moment:
  • …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.

View attachment 876361View attachment 876362View attachment 876364
Mik for Risto.

It is the (only) way.
 

StickShift

In a pickle 🥒
Feb 29, 2004
7,458
6,396
New York
Mik for Risto.

It is the (only) way.
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
Jul 5, 2009
3,760
1,799
Whitehorse, YT
Who wouldn't take Brady Tkachuk on the Canucks but I wouldn't be willing to pay the price that some have mentioned. I don't think Ottawa would want a bunch of futures either.

I'd say Garland, Hronek and Silovs gets it done for Tkachuk and Anton Forsberg.

Sounds as if Ottawa will move on from one of their LHD most likely Chychrun. They will probably get some futures for that.
I do that trade, would prefer Hoglander to Silovs however. With Demko struggling to stay healthy, I think that is a better option.

Pettersson for Tkachuk and Pinto? :popcorn:
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: theguardianII

bossram

Registered User
Sep 25, 2013
16,670
17,105
Victoria
He played 20-22 min/game in the playoffs, I don't think they consider him a bottom pairing guy.
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nick Lang

Nick Lang

Registered User
May 14, 2015
2,403
881
He played 20-22 min/game in the playoffs, I don't think they consider him a bottom pairing guy.

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.

probably resources better spent on guy like Montour or Pesce, especially with uncertainty around Hronek. Hughes partner should be an attractive job.

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.
 

bossram

Registered User
Sep 25, 2013
16,670
17,105
Victoria
Hang with me for a moment:
  • …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.

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.
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.
 

arttk

Registered User
Feb 16, 2006
19,315
11,227
Los Angeles
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.
I think management is pushing for Guentzel hard and Necas is backup plan…
 

DFAC

Registered User
Jan 19, 2008
7,751
5,812
Vancouver
Brendan Dillon would fit management and Tocchet's goal of having a big defense. I could see him being a target

How's his skating like? What would he be looking at contract wise?
 
  • Like
Reactions: bbud

wonton15

Höglander
Dec 13, 2009
20,513
30,311
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.
 

bbud

Registered User
Sep 10, 2008
11,530
3,946
BC
Ugh, hate to lose Zaddy, but no to anything over 5.25m-5.5m/yr (that's already inflated imo)

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
 

bbud

Registered User
Sep 10, 2008
11,530
3,946
BC
Lol here we go playing way better in 2nd Dallas back to looking legit from full bums in 1st
 

bbud

Registered User
Sep 10, 2008
11,530
3,946
BC
Lmao linesman told crysaitl to shut his mouth on faceoff during that pp
 

Baby Pettersson

Moderator
Mar 8, 2014
9,371
10,000
Saskatoon
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.
 

wonton15

Höglander
Dec 13, 2009
20,513
30,311
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
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad