Canucks News, Rumours, and & Fantasy GM | Will they stay or will they go, now?
- Thread starter Mr. Canucklehead
- Start date
- Status
Mr. Canucklehead
Kitimat Canuck
His performance up to his surgery last season, and his first half performance this season were both pretty good - he was tracking for around 15-20 goals and 40-ish points in each, which - while not amazing value - wasn’t terrible either.
But the way his confidence and game just fell right off a cliff was insane.
I think this regime has proved ruthless enough to move on from players that don’t work - but it’s a bit different trading a guy in a value for value swap vs. buying out a contract you signed and wearing that cap hit for a few years. One allows a bit of face saving, and the other is just a “well, we screwed this one”. I think the Canucks will do whatever they can to avoid having to buy him out, but I also think that if it comes right down to it, they’ll be ruthless enough to execute a buyout if they see that as the best option for the roster.
TruGr1t
Proper Villain
- Jun 26, 2003
- 24,420
- 8,912
It was somewhat par for his course, honestly. He's been an up-and-down player since he was in Toronto (which is why the Leafs weren't offering him near what the Canucks ended up signing him for) that was basically infamous for missing on breakaways (shocker). I never liked the fact they tried to project he'd become consistent for some reason when he'd never been in the past.
Given the surgery obviously had an impact, and this recent slump has been probably one of the worst in his career, but he's always sort of been that guy. I never thought he'd magically become effectively a $5M AAV player. The downturn has obviously made it worse, but I don't think he's really a guy you'd ever want consistently in your top six.
Nucker101
Foundational Poster
- Apr 2, 2013
- 21,782
- 17,734
I really don't buy this narrative, in my opinion what demoralized the team back then was the way that Tanev and Toffoli were treated by management. They both said that they kept waiting to hear from the Canucks and never did. You don't think they also told this to their former teammates and that left a sour taste in the dressing room's mouth?
If the players know that management offered all 3 of the bigger UFA's reasonable deals then I doubt they'll be nearly as pissed/demoralized as hearing that Tanev/Toffoli were just left waiting, especially since the players know that this management group has done pretty well with brining in new faces.
Tanev:
Toffoli:
Meanwhile we've already heard that the Canucks offered Lindholm a 7x7 deal, offered Hronek a long term deal, offered Zadorov a deal, maybe multiple deals. We've only heard of Joshua potentially being lowballed, but even he got a contract offer at least.
If this locker room is going to get upset that management didn't overpay to keep players and mope about it even if quality replacement players are brought in then we have bigger issues at hand.
vadim sharifijanov
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2007
- 29,498
- 17,588
i’m not saying i love that this is the vibe but from how the 2021 season and fall of 2022 went, yeah i absolutely think this is the issue at hand
Nucker101
Foundational Poster
- Apr 2, 2013
- 21,782
- 17,734
If it’s true then that sucks. Look at who Florida and Vegas has shipped out or let walk, in a hard cap league you have to lose some quality players and beloved teammates sometimes. You’d hope the players would be mature enough to understand that.
I actually understand their frustrations from Tanev/Toffoli, but if they’re frustrated this time around then this front office is in tough.
It's the "even if quality replacement players are brought in" part where this breaks from 2020.
Yep. Players do have the right to feel frustrated or sad if a beloved teammate leaves. The key here is the circumstances. These players are professionals first and foremost, they should know that team comes first, period, no ifs or buts. A move makes no sense if bringing a friendly face means crippling the team's cap space. Tanev and Toffoli were situations where management f***ed up SPECTACULARLY.
Trading a guy you signed for positive/neutral value is not even remotely the same thing as eating shit and paying a high draft pick to unload your first big signing.
You missed the point completely.
Will Mikheyev be better next year? Probably, although that's not guaranteed.
Will he be better than Joshua or Zadorov? Almost certainly not.
And will the dressing room be stoked if Mikheyev is back and better players walk? Hell no.
And yes, I've learned lessons. I've learned what happened in 2007 and 2020 when the players lost faith after management didn't back them up and keep moving forward after a good season. I learned what happened in 2011 when we chose 'hopefully Ballard rebounds!' over getting him the hell out and keeping Ehrhoff (or signing a quality winger with that money).
krutovsdonut
eeyore
- Sep 25, 2016
- 17,413
- 10,138
i have wondered about mikheyev's shot or lack thereof this year. a lot of the time on chances he has had it lacks nhl quality not just on accuracy. is that a confidence thing? you don't see players lose their shot in their 20s much anymore as used to be more common, i think due to better sticks as well as conditioning and medical treatment. it's one thing to shoot wide or into the crest but to get mediocre velocity as he seems to do on a lot of his chances worries me a little.
krutovsdonut
eeyore
- Sep 25, 2016
- 17,413
- 10,138
i did not know tanev got an offer on ufa day. thanks for the quotes.
Bojack Horvatman
IAMGROOT
- Jun 15, 2016
- 4,444
- 8,030
I was messing around with NHL 24 yesterday (first time in months) for about 40 mins, just trying to acquire Guentzel.
Made it happen and a few other moves, then a thunderstorm blew the power out
Me too because I am recovering from a minor operation. Had to let Joshua go though because he wanted 7.5m x4
GranvilleIsland
Registered User
If the price to move Mikheyev is too high just keep him and hope be bounces back a bit. If his hands of stone scored on the few chances he had in game 7 against Edmonton then the conversation would be different right now. I believe his underlying numbers are good too, just no finish? Doesn't seem like a player worth paying and arm and a leg for to get rid of especially since he has had chemistry with Petey in the past and makes the team faster overall when 100%. Moving Mikheyyev so you can spend more on this UFA crop will be a mistake since all the GM's are going to be throwing money around stupidly until they're all capped out again. Feels like it'll be 2016 except for maybe Reinhart and Guentzel but they could age poorly quickly depending on how they play. I'd rather see Allvin bet on his players developing in the AHL then overpay guys and slam our window shut with the two OEL buy out years coming up, after that Miller is probably declining too.
krutovsdonut
eeyore
- Sep 25, 2016
- 17,413
- 10,138
disagree with this. the principle if not only justification for losing tanev given what he signed for was making room for schmidt. schmidt was supposed to help us play a more offensive game and spend less time in our own zone. it was a big gamble because that meant losing two beloved veterans in one off season, along with tanev's defence, and along with the further ruthlessness of letting troy "i bleed blue" stecher, and the super popular toffoli new guy walk.
i was ok with the theory, but schmidt in practice was a massive disaster. it seems as if not only did the room hate losing marky/tanev but they also hated schmidt. i've said before, the irony is that benning's worst screw up happened because he messed up on intangibles. in one weekend he took all the momentum out of the team he had been trying to build and never got it back.
Jerry the great
Registered User
- Jul 8, 2022
- 827
- 828
Why is it Joshua or Mikeyev? there is no reason they can't keep both guys...and Zadorov....and upgrade the top 6.
They just can't keep all those guys AND pull Guentzel out of the UFA pool. which, if past is prologue, is probably a blessing in disguise.
Do you think keeping Joshua, Zadorov, signing a lower profile UFA (Arvidsson for example), keeping Mikheyev and retaining our 1st is going to be viewed as not enough forward progress by the players? That seems like a stretch to me. I think it's entirely possible that paying an absurd price to get rid of a useful players cap hit, because he got hurt, will not be well received.
When healthy (maybe never, maybe next season,; nobody here can say), Mikheyev is a 95th percentile skater in the league who's an incredibly useful es producer with penalty killing utility. since the injury he's like a 60th percentile skater and without the burst he's lost the PK utility.
If his knee isn't right next year, they can probably move him at the TDL as they did last year with Kuzmenko at a substantially lower cost than right now....at a time there is likely far lower risk to moving the first as well.
StickShift
In a pickle 🥒
One thing I've been thinking about is the size of our forward corps—especially if they are able to sign Guentzel.
That feels awfully light. Especially if they aren't able to re-sign Joshua.
Even if some of those players "play bigger than they are" we have seen their effectiveness diminish in the playoffs. Hoglander struggled and Suter had only one secondary assist in the 2nd round. Garland was the only productive small player.
If they are able to sign Guentzel—I wonder if they will proactively try and get some bigger bodies in the line-up to help with the forecheck and net front battles. Especially in the top-six. Hoglander in particular feels like an awkward fit. But I also wonder if the team feels like they have enough size in the Pius Suter role or the Di Giuseppe role.
| Player | Height | Weight |
| Garland | 5'9" | 165 lb |
| Hoglander | 5'10" | 185 lb |
| Guentzel | 5'11" | 180 lb |
| Suter | 5'11" | 180 lb |
| Di Giuseppe | 6'0" | 193 lb |
| Podkolzin | 6'1" | 190 lb |
| Boeser | 6'1" | 208 lb |
| Raty | 6'2" | 190 lb |
| Mikheyev | 6'2" | 192 lb |
| Joshua | 6'3" | 206 lb |
That feels awfully light. Especially if they aren't able to re-sign Joshua.
Even if some of those players "play bigger than they are" we have seen their effectiveness diminish in the playoffs. Hoglander struggled and Suter had only one secondary assist in the 2nd round. Garland was the only productive small player.
If they are able to sign Guentzel—I wonder if they will proactively try and get some bigger bodies in the line-up to help with the forecheck and net front battles. Especially in the top-six. Hoglander in particular feels like an awkward fit. But I also wonder if the team feels like they have enough size in the Pius Suter role or the Di Giuseppe role.
Last edited:
Nona Di Giuseppe
Registered User
yep. Lindholm is quite overrated even after a garbage regular season. idk how ppl forget this
Last edited:
sting101
Registered User
- Feb 8, 2012
- 16,475
- 15,607
The issue with Guentzel and Lindholm is you are looking at both playing their first seasons as Canucks as 30yr olds. How many would even want the greatest player of the 2008 draft Steven Stamkos 33/34 this year for 3 more years at 8-9 million? And if they sign Guentzel Joshua is as good as gone.
In DeBrusk at 5.5-6ish your getting 4 yrs before the dreaded 32yr old drop off that happens for most players. As a plus skater and with size and the type of complimentary game we need it's probable you could retain Joshua as well and Debrusk + Joshua > Guentzel given our needs
Also what is more important goals or points. With Miller Pettersson Hughes Garland the need is as important or more for finishers than set up guys is it not.
Last 3 yrs all situations
Debrusk 27g/p82; Guentzel 40g/p82
Last 3yrs 5v5
Debrusk 1.08g/p60 Guentzel 1.07g/p60
In DeBrusk at 5.5-6ish your getting 4 yrs before the dreaded 32yr old drop off that happens for most players. As a plus skater and with size and the type of complimentary game we need it's probable you could retain Joshua as well and Debrusk + Joshua > Guentzel given our needs
Also what is more important goals or points. With Miller Pettersson Hughes Garland the need is as important or more for finishers than set up guys is it not.
Last 3 yrs all situations
Debrusk 27g/p82; Guentzel 40g/p82
Last 3yrs 5v5
Debrusk 1.08g/p60 Guentzel 1.07g/p60
Last edited:
Jake Debrusk is an inconsistent 40 point winger, a middle six winger at best. No one should be paying him any more than he is currently getting paid.
The thing with not signing Tanev, Toffoli, and Markstrom was that management was chasing OEL that off-season and when that fell through jumped to acquiring Schmidt. It was disastrously unsuccessful and killed any momentum the team had. That they didn’t even bother to communicate with Tanev and Toffoli made it even worse.
It would be analogous if everyone walks(and it sounds like at least Myers and Blueger are staying so the comparison isn’t a clean one) while not signing Guentzel then pivoting to a single substandard replacement. Now re-signing our own guys isn’t the important part but replacing them and upgrading the roster is.
Personally, I believe in organizational momentum. I find it very important when your franchise is stuck as a doormat. Blue Jackets are a great example of this. They finally made the playoffs after years of failure but couldn’t build anything off it and are still circling the drain. Canucks aren’t losing anyone as vital as Panarin but they still need to hit on their plan As or Bs or it will feel like the post-Tanev Canucks or Panarin-less Blue Jackets.
It would be analogous if everyone walks(and it sounds like at least Myers and Blueger are staying so the comparison isn’t a clean one) while not signing Guentzel then pivoting to a single substandard replacement. Now re-signing our own guys isn’t the important part but replacing them and upgrading the roster is.
Personally, I believe in organizational momentum. I find it very important when your franchise is stuck as a doormat. Blue Jackets are a great example of this. They finally made the playoffs after years of failure but couldn’t build anything off it and are still circling the drain. Canucks aren’t losing anyone as vital as Panarin but they still need to hit on their plan As or Bs or it will feel like the post-Tanev Canucks or Panarin-less Blue Jackets.
Last edited:
PavelBure10
The Russian Rocket
I keep refreshing to page in hopes to see Zadorov being resigned by the Canucks at a reasonable price from both parties. Zadorov made way too big of a impact to just let him walk. A team leader who is well liked in the dressing room. Zads is amazing with the press, and he steps it up in the playoffs. The big Z was everything you could've hoped for and more. Missing out on Zadorov will leave a huge hole that will be hard to fill. Team chemistry might be affected if we miss out on this player, much like Tanev when he was forced to look elsewhere.
why did they hate schmidt he was one of the most talkative guys out there trying to help the younger guys.
sting101
Registered User
- Feb 8, 2012
- 16,475
- 15,607
My theory was the Caps - NYR TB rivalries that existed between Miller and them. Also get the feeling Holtby was not well liked and then the 2 of them with their struggles became the ire of the players as they replaced such popular figures and then sucked.
I think a lot was going on though and it's where the Horvat leadership started to crumble as well as Covid
RobertKron
Registered User
- Sep 1, 2007
- 15,843
- 9,341
IIRC, a lot of shit went haywire surrounding the huge covid outbreak they had. Could understandably cause and/or exacerbate underlying issues in the room.
Although, I don't even know if I remember hearing about Schmidt being unpopular. That said, I basically forgot he was a Canuck entirely, so there's that.
- Status
