Canucks LB
My Favourite, Gone too soon, RIP Luc, We miss you
- Oct 12, 2008
- 77,862
- 32,112
Canucks News, Rumours, and & Fantasy GM | The Final Countdown
- Thread starter Canucks LB
- Start date
- Status
Graves sucks. Derek Forbort is 80% the player he is and will probably come in at the league minimum.
If the Canucks can't re-up Zadorov, and whiff on Dillon, then my preferences are one of Cole, Haydn Fleury, or Forbort on a one-year deal. I'd also be all over Pierre-Olivier Joseph if Pittsburgh doesn't qualify him.
If the Canucks can't re-up Zadorov, and whiff on Dillon, then my preferences are one of Cole, Haydn Fleury, or Forbort on a one-year deal. I'd also be all over Pierre-Olivier Joseph if Pittsburgh doesn't qualify him.
I am convinced you've never seen him.
TruGr1t
Proper Villain
- Jun 26, 2003
- 23,853
- 8,051
Yeah, you only look in Walker and some of the other UFAs direction if Hronek goes sideways. Not sure they can afford those players on the right side otherwise. The good news is outside of Montour, they should generally be a good bit cheaper. I'm not convinced they aren't looking at a fairly extensive renovation on the blue line to make it more cap-friendly. I'm sure they aren't totally enthused with the prospect of paying Hronek and Zadorov a combined $12M-$13M AAV.
StickShift
In a pickle 🥒
I don’t think the team should be looking at Walker (or any of the other RDs) only as an alternative if Hronek is traded.
I agree with the Drance take that the team could benefit be having a second pairing that can drive offense.
Which will be especially critical if they cannot re-sign Zadorov on LD.
I agree with the Drance take that the team could benefit be having a second pairing that can drive offense.
Which will be especially critical if they cannot re-sign Zadorov on LD.
MarkusNaslund19
Registered User
- Dec 28, 2005
- 5,565
- 8,121
I'm amazed by the people in this thread who don't understand the sunk-cost fallacy and also don't understand linear, psychological growth in a team.
Acquiring Lindholm was a good move at the time, and it gave our team a taste of stacking up at the deadline, showed the players that management has their backs and will believe in them when they give reasons for optimism.
It was a good move.
Also, we shouldn't bring him back unless he wants like 6.5 per for 5 years (hint: he won't).
Cap space is valuable too.
I'm getting out in front of it. There is going to be a lot of whining next year from some of the less cerebral posters because we are likely going to take a small step back during the regular season. Our cup swing years are actually 2 and 3 years from now when we have Willander and Lekkerimaki contributing on ELCs. We're not going to blow our wad on this season.
With that said, we should (and I believe will) add some assets this off season that will contribute long term.
Here's what I think we should do:
1. Re-sign Hronek for anything less than 8.
2. Re-sign Joshua for anything less than 3.6
3. Let Lindholm walk.
4. Let Zadorov walk unless he's willing to sign for like 5.25 or less.
5. Take a big swing at Guentzel. Failing him, make a move for Ehlers or potentially sign DeBrusk.
6. Bring back Myers and Blueger.
7. Sign Dillon. He will bring a lot of what Zadorov does 75% of the time (he won't go supernova like Zadorov occasionally does).
-
It's so funny how many fans on these boards were so disparaging of those of us who dared to actually enjoy hockey or like some of our players even when our team was struggling because we were deemed 'emotional' and not 'analytical' like these deeply thoughtful posters.
But now, we had some success and many of these posters are obsessed with the players who filled the depth roles on the team to get us there like a 13 year old convinced he's gonna marry the first girl he danced with at a school dance.
The team we build was special, but it was also built within a bunch of uncomfortable parameters where our brain trust was working around a lot of moves by the past executives. This team will only come to be shaped more and more by the vision of the GM an president we have now and I, for one, am excited to see it.
Seeing people panicking that we need to bring back Lindholm (or else we lost the trade!) is akin to watching someone pour water from a wide cylinder into a tall cylinder and thinking you just got a bunch of extra water. It shows a troubling lack of critical faculties.
Acquiring Lindholm was a good move at the time, and it gave our team a taste of stacking up at the deadline, showed the players that management has their backs and will believe in them when they give reasons for optimism.
It was a good move.
Also, we shouldn't bring him back unless he wants like 6.5 per for 5 years (hint: he won't).
Cap space is valuable too.
I'm getting out in front of it. There is going to be a lot of whining next year from some of the less cerebral posters because we are likely going to take a small step back during the regular season. Our cup swing years are actually 2 and 3 years from now when we have Willander and Lekkerimaki contributing on ELCs. We're not going to blow our wad on this season.
With that said, we should (and I believe will) add some assets this off season that will contribute long term.
Here's what I think we should do:
1. Re-sign Hronek for anything less than 8.
2. Re-sign Joshua for anything less than 3.6
3. Let Lindholm walk.
4. Let Zadorov walk unless he's willing to sign for like 5.25 or less.
5. Take a big swing at Guentzel. Failing him, make a move for Ehlers or potentially sign DeBrusk.
6. Bring back Myers and Blueger.
7. Sign Dillon. He will bring a lot of what Zadorov does 75% of the time (he won't go supernova like Zadorov occasionally does).
-
It's so funny how many fans on these boards were so disparaging of those of us who dared to actually enjoy hockey or like some of our players even when our team was struggling because we were deemed 'emotional' and not 'analytical' like these deeply thoughtful posters.
But now, we had some success and many of these posters are obsessed with the players who filled the depth roles on the team to get us there like a 13 year old convinced he's gonna marry the first girl he danced with at a school dance.
The team we build was special, but it was also built within a bunch of uncomfortable parameters where our brain trust was working around a lot of moves by the past executives. This team will only come to be shaped more and more by the vision of the GM an president we have now and I, for one, am excited to see it.
Seeing people panicking that we need to bring back Lindholm (or else we lost the trade!) is akin to watching someone pour water from a wide cylinder into a tall cylinder and thinking you just got a bunch of extra water. It shows a troubling lack of critical faculties.
biturbo19
Registered User
- Jul 13, 2010
- 26,552
- 11,682
The thing is though, Tyson Jost's tools are pretty sad and not going to get any better at his age. They're really the biggest thing holding him back from being a more effective actual NHLer. He's just got a collection of "decent but not good" tools and traits basically. From size to skating to hockey IQ and vision to puck skills.
I haven't played an EA NHL game in eternity...but i feel like Jost is a player who should probably have a rating of ~55 in literally every category.
Probably way out to lunch on what ratings in the game are actually like. But that's the sort of player he is to me in a more generalized sense.
Yeah. I suppose if Hronek is moved and they can't find an alternative replacement with some mobility and offensive chops, maybe circling back to Walker is more feasible. Still don't really love it though.
As far as Graves, i do understand the reticence. It's a "juggling knives" type idea to even throw around.
I think a large part of it is just that i don't view Graves nearly as negatively as others do, despite being aware of his shortcomings and stylistic peculiarity.
The thing that i think could potentially work in his favour and make it workable, is that what you're describing there, is very much in the same mold as guys like Zadorov, Myers, et al throughout most of their careers. They're in that same vein as Graves with very similar tendencies. And we've seen both of them play some of their absolute best hockey under Tocchet+Foote.
I think their system and simplification of the game tends to really mesh with that type of physically talented and aggressive but somewhat erratic skillset defencemen, and calm them down to be far more effective overall.But no doubt, it's a huge risk proposition if it somehow doesn't work out. It's just risk that we're inherently going to be dabbling in with some form, where there's certainly no guarantee that 5+ Years of Zadorov @ $5M+ isn't going to go sour at times if he falls back to some more erratic habits.
Stephenson still had a better rancid year than Lindholm...and is very likely going to get a decent amount less, at effectively the same age.
At the end of the day, it came out that Stone had still specifically requested to play with Stephenson because of what he adds to Stone's game with his speed, two-way play, puck distributing ability, etc.
Yeah. This is the big entangled question with Joshua. How much of his success is Conor Garland? And how much do you want to commit to basically a "3rd line" and "2nd line money"?
I can see arguments either way. Garland + Joshua are basically a "2b" sort of line at even strength, and can seemingly do it with different Centers who don't even need to be expensive or all that offensively creative.
But at the same time...it's a bit weird to potentially have a $4M + ??? + $5M "3rd line", at the expense of having to cut corners for the Pettersson line and a filler like PDG/Suter/etc. with JT+Boeser line. Spending premiums on a tremendous #2b Line instead of the actual "Top-6 Lines".
I think it works with the way Tocchet coaches...but it's weird. I'm also just not sure if Joshua is worth what he might be lining up to get as a UFA. But that's almost a separate issue than the whole Garland entanglement...which has much deeper implications for "roster construction" and balance.
They're certainly "buy low" candidates. But I also wouldn't expect anything more than low-upside performance.
StickShift
In a pickle 🥒
The roster construction with Garland making $5m on the third line wing will always be compromised.
That contract was not signed at the time nor would it be signed today with the expectation that the player is on the third line.
It’s why I still think there is a real chance that Garland could be moved. It’s so much cap tied up in your third line for a player that doesn’t get PK or PP1 time.
It’s a weird dynamic to compromise your two scoring lines just to have an elite third line.
And yes, I recognize those among us who will say “But Garland and his line carried play and produced like a scoring line!”
That to me actually reflects more so just how constrained our scoring lines were with the lackluster winger options we had last season. What could they have accomplished with more than one legitimate top-six winger?
sandwichbird2023
Registered User
- Aug 4, 2004
- 3,949
- 2,028
I think the difference for me is Zadorov proved that he was an effective, at times dominant, player for us. He has proven that he works in our system, which mitigate a lot of the risk. Graves might fit on paper, but until he plays on the team, we just never know. Also, I'm not 100% commit to bring Z back "at all cost". I would definitely not give Z too much bonuses and make him buyout-proof, which is a problem with Graves' contract.The thing is...Graves is literally a month older than Zadorov, who is clearly going to come with at least 5 years of term, if not more. So we're already talking about big risk anyway. Zadorov was obviously awesome for us in the playoffs and really brought everything...but if anything, i'd say Graves actually has the bigger track record of playing Top-4 minutes to "turn it around" to. Whereas Zadorov could entirely turn back into a pumpkin...or the #4/5 "tweener" that he's been for pretty much his entire career.
Even Dillon is going to be 34 this season. Is he signing a 1-year deal? Doubtful. So if you're potentially spending $3.5-4M on a guy through his 34, 35, 36 year old seasons...is that really that much "safer"?
Graves would obviously be a huge risk that could blow up in your face. I just sort of look at it like...the deal has already blown up in Dubas face. The grenade went off already. So if you take it on, you're doing it already seeing and understanding the carnage. And by that, i mean dumping the Mikheyev grenade that already went off, back the other way...without giving up the assets it would otherwise take to unload his bad deal.
Ultimately, all of these UFA options are super risky as well. Entirely liable to turn into the Graves contract or worse in short order. That happens a lot.
idk. I'm not married to it. It's just an idea that i toss around in my head from time to time, as a way to somewhat kill two birds with one stone. If the Zadorov ask really is as insane as it sounds, and dumping Mikheyev is pretty necessary to creating any kind of flexibility.
I probably also just like Graves more as a player than most.
I assume Dillon comes in at a shorter term (2 years or less) at a low cap hit ($2.5m or less), so while he is older than Grave, Dillon would be much less risky at the preferred contract. If Dillon wants more, we can look elsewhere.
The only upside in the Graves deal is dumping Mik without attaching a sweetener. But to exchange a 2 years cap dump for a 5 years cap dump is just not enticing at all.
To be clear, my preference is to re-sign Hronek. Something in the mid-7s AAV long-term is in line with the market, and I hope they get there.
If they are forced to move Hronek, they will need to find two defensemen that can play in the top-four on the right-side, one of which who also needs to have some mobility and offensive upside. That's the situation I would look at Walker.
Zadorov is gone (or should be). Contract demands are just too crazy.
There isn't really anyone else on the UFA market that is RHD with some offense + mobility. There's Montour, but that contract will be an absolute disaster from Day 1.Yeah. I suppose if Hronek is moved and they can't find an alternative replacement with some mobility and offensive chops, maybe circling back to Walker is more feasible. Still don't really love it though.
As far as Graves, i do understand the reticence. It's a "juggling knives" type idea to even throw around.
I think a large part of it is just that i don't view Graves nearly as negatively as others do, despite being aware of his shortcomings and stylistic peculiarity.
The thing that i think could potentially work in his favour and make it workable, is that what you're describing there, is very much in the same mold as guys like Zadorov, Myers, et al throughout most of their careers. They're in that same vein as Graves with very similar tendencies. And we've seen both of them play some of their absolute best hockey under Tocchet+Foote.
But no doubt, it's a huge risk proposition if it somehow doesn't work out. It's just risk that we're inherently going to be dabbling in with some form, where there's certainly no guarantee that 5+ Years of Zadorov @ $5M+ isn't going to go sour at times if he falls back to some more erratic habits.
I get what you're saying with the similarities between Graves and some other guys that Foote/Tocchet have managed to rehabilitate, but taking on the Graves contract willingly is just a massive risk. I don't think the risk/reward calculation is really worth it here. My evaluation of Graves is also likely lower than anyone on this board. I've never rated him in COL, NJ, or PIT obviously.
I don't want Zadorov back either, at any of the projected prices. It's being telegraphed that Dillon is coming to Vancouver and if he wants to take a team-friendly deal, I'd much rather go that route.
Before this season, Stephenson is someone I would have been interested in. But his play-driving numbers took a massive nosedive. And yes, so much of his game is built on his speed meshing with Stone, but per the NHL Edge data, his skating speed, speed bursts, and distance travelled took a step back this season...A guy like him that starts to lose a step becomes a far less valuable player.Stephenson still had a better rancid year than Lindholm...and is very likely going to get a decent amount less, at effectively the same age.
At the end of the day, it came out that Stone had still specifically requested to play with Stephenson because of what he adds to Stone's game with his speed, two-way play, puck distributing ability, etc.
I think it is telling VGK went out and got his replacement at the TDL and have no intentions of re-signing him.
Red flags to me.
Too much speculation, not enough action. I'm having withdrawal. Alvin set expectations way too high. Now we NEED to have things happen to stay sane.
not that I disagree with the notion but this management group went out and handed a similar contract to Mikheyev. So the management group reinforced the expectation the player could be on the third line. Patrik even called him a middle 6 winger at the end of season availability.
I do think the fact that the top 6 was compromised because they have 10million tied up on the third line is a PROBLEM. The Oilers offer a painful reminder that no matter how badly you construct the fringes of your lineup, if your top of the line-up are better than everybody else can throw at you, you'll go far.
The discussion of whether to resign Zadorov, Lidholm or Joshua continues here:
forums.hfboards.com
Keep Tanev or Toffoli?
Markstrom looks like he will be re-signed. Depending on how the cap changes for next season, it's likely we will only be able to keep one of Toffoli or Tanev (there's a chance we let both walk, or keep both, depending on the cap and moves Benning makes, but I think only keeping one of them is...
PavelBure10
The Russian Rocket
Just A Bit Outside
Playoffs??!
- Mar 6, 2010
- 17,092
- 16,539
StickShift
In a pickle 🥒
Yep—they sure did call Mikheyev a middle-six winger when they signed him.
But you better believe they aren’t offering him that money or role if they don’t believe he can be a winger on the 2nd line.
If they thought his ceiling was a third liner they probably don’t make that contract offer.
This management group is not infallible. The evaluation and handling of Mikheyev has been handled incorrectly from the start.
That being said—a strength of this management group seems to be fixing mistakes. Admitting they were wrong has been a theme with Rutherford’s teams. They did that here with mistakes they inherited (Boudreau, OEL, Dickinson, Pearson, Beauviller) and with a mistake they’ve created themselves (Kuzmenko).
Let’s see what they can do with the Mikheyev mistake.
PavelBure10
The Russian Rocket
You just know they are going all in for Jake Guentzel again. I'm just worried that the infatuation will cause them to miss out on other players "just like the trade deadline" again. I'll be mighty pissed if we lose out on Zadorov and Joshua who are rumored to be willing to take a bit of a home team discount to play on the Canucks, for a player that we aren't even guaranteed to get. Guentzel would be a huge addition if he signs with the Canucks on July 1st, but it seems as if Allvin is putting all of his eggs in one basket again with the infatuation of Guentzel. Zadorov and Joshua are very important players to this team, losing them both and the team chemistry and toughness go down the drain.
Dillon and Duhaime are fine replacements but both are a notch below these players imo.
Dillon and Duhaime are fine replacements but both are a notch below these players imo.
Hertl’s term detracted from his value, that trade sucks for Vegas.
PavelBure10
The Russian Rocket
Also, Allvin needs to get over giving up a asset up in order to get rid of Mikheyev's contract. No one wants him, Allvin needs to add a pick to get rid of him, and quit thinking that he has any value. We are at risk of losing 4 very good players that all need new contracts Lindholm, Hronek, Zadorov and Joshua. Freeing up Mikheyev's blunder of a contract will help out in resigning atleast one of them.
Hansen
tyler motte simp
Quiet is good IMO, this management has kept a seal on most leaks for contract stuff (public facing negotiations aside, actual leaks are nil). To me it means talks are happening
StickShift
In a pickle 🥒
“Mikheyev has value” is the same bluster that this management espoused about OEL before they bought him out.
They are just turning over every rock before they do what they have to do.
They shouldn’t be afraid of giving up an asset if it means acquiring a star player either. The trade acquisition cost of a signed-Guentzel would be far higher than a 1st round pick.
probably only 20 times over the last 5 years. but skating data is tracked and his numbers have been awful over the last 2 season. Zadorov is a far better skater....it isn't close.
- Status
