Canucks News, Rumours, & Fantasy GM | The Russians are Going!?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Luck 6

\\_______
Oct 17, 2008
10,302
2,008
Vancouver
If we move Mikheyev, I think it should be in the offseason.

I agree with biturbo19 in many ways, but I still think Mik is overpaid relative to his contributions, and as such, he may be a cap casualty in the offseason. If we have any intention of re-signing Lindholm, I would say one of Garland or Mikheyev will have to be traded.

With that said, these are offseason problems. I don't think we need to think about this right now.
 

Tact

Registered User
Jul 9, 2006
2,877
1,831
The only upgrade on Mikheyev at the deadline would be Guentzel. But he might not even be available and too expensive to acquire. So you may as well not disrupt chemistry and keep Mikheyev around because he does have a two-way game and makes the safe play.
 

Bojack Horvatman

IAMGROOT
Jun 15, 2016
4,605
8,494
The only way I could see this happening is if they are happy flipping someone from the roster (and I don't think they actually are) or Soucy gets LTIRed.

Plus I don’t think we have the assets to get another prime, U25 player with some team control like Hronek. Without trading Lekkerimaki or Willander. That Islander first in a deep draft is a lot more valuable than any first we can give. Don’t really have any tradeable prospects that have a lot of value now that Brz was traded. I just don’t see it but would love to be proven wrong. Unless we take someone that has struggled on another team and are able to develop them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vector

sxvnert

Registered User
Nov 23, 2015
12,812
7,998
Canucks should add Guentzel (and Kerfoot as a 12/13th forward)

Guentzel (1.5m) double retention) for Suter (1.6m) + 2025 1st + B prospect

Guentzel Miller Boeser
Mikheyev Pettersson Lindholm
Joshua Blueger Garland
Hoglander Aman Lafferty
Kerfoot
 

andora

Registered User
Apr 23, 2002
24,501
7,585
Victoria
so does anyone know where to find out the time the canucks have spent leading, tied, within 1 or trailing and how we rank against other teams?

also are there stats comparing shots for and against by team when leading, tied or trailing?

i'd ideally like to compare our shooting for and against rates in different situations to other good teams to see how much score effect is influencing our outlier stats, including the fact we allow more shots against and more high danger chances than other good teams. it does not take much imagination to conclude that score effect when leading will result in more shots against and will also increase team shooting% because of shot selection when leading.
You can probably find that in the Oilers around the league thread
 

ziploc

Registered User
Aug 29, 2003
7,466
6,438
Vancouver
You can probably find that in the Oilers around the league thread
Someone put up a stat yesterday that showed we are tied for most goals off the rush, but also last in the league for chances off the rush. The point I think was to show that we are getting some unsustainable production in spite of not generating many chances.

I can see how we would have the fewest rush chances when we are playing a tight, conservative game protecting the lead in the third period, which has been the case in most games. Being tied for first in the league for goals off the rush is surprising in that case, except for when you factor in the extremely high end offensive talent we have that are making those chances count. The numbers would even out more, I would guess, if we were playing a loose, back and forth style. I suspect we'd have even more goals on more chances off the rush, but a lower shooting percentage, and likely a higher rate of goals against.
 
  • Like
Reactions: andora

andora

Registered User
Apr 23, 2002
24,501
7,585
Victoria
Someone put up a stat yesterday that showed we are tied for most goals off the rush, but also last in the league for chances off the rush. The point I think was to show that we are getting some unsustainable production in spite of not generating many chances.

I can see how we would have the fewest rush chances when we are playing a tight, conservative game protecting the lead in the third period, which has been the case in most games. Being tied for first in the league for goals off the rush is surprising in that case, except for when you factor in the extremely high end offensive talent we have that are making those chances count. The numbers would even out more, I would guess, if we were playing a loose, back and forth style. I suspect we'd have even more goals on more chances off the rush, but a lower shooting percentage, and likely a higher rate of goals against.
agreed - i said this on the main board thread, just incase you don't venture out into the badlands

Oh i bet you couldnt wait to throw this in here.. but people be like umm ok

They dont focus on rush chances, and that is by design. They take a high percentage rush in the same method they wait for a high percentage shot

For anyone who actually cares about figuring out what is going on instead of screaming unsustainable in the middle of the street - the canucks manage their play to mitigate the oppositions attack options.

Tocchet said it early and then it was forgotten - be better at eliminating rush chances against. They do a bunch of things that explicitly take away transitional offence from other teams
- they do not take or go for generic rush plays with passes or shots that can be turned
- they do not aimlessly take shots from all side angles or d corners that can be turned
- they hold the puck until a high percentage pass can be made

This is all by design, and in actual form showing defence leads to offence. So by posting little snapshots with stats and saying story of their season is so obtuse. I mean its fine if you dont watch the team play, but if you dont watch the team play, take a breath jesus
 
  • Like
Reactions: ziploc

krutovsdonut

eeyore
Sep 25, 2016
17,611
10,349
Someone put up a stat yesterday that showed we are tied for most goals off the rush, but also last in the league for chances off the rush. The point I think was to show that we are getting some unsustainable production in spite of not generating many chances.

I can see how we would have the fewest rush chances when we are playing a tight, conservative game protecting the lead in the third period, which has been the case in most games. Being tied for first in the league for goals off the rush is surprising in that case, except for when you factor in the extremely high end offensive talent we have that are making those chances count. The numbers would even out more, I would guess, if we were playing a loose, back and forth style. I suspect we'd have even more goals on more chances off the rush, but a lower shooting percentage, and likely a higher rate of goals against.

one simple explanation is that we don't try to score off the rush unless it's a good scoring opportunity. if it is not, we don't force the play and we hold onto possession so without a shot they don't count it as a scoring opportunity off the rush.

still an extraordinary stat that we could be that selective. it means our forwards are playing a smart game all the time.

i have mentioned before that we are doing as a team the things the sedins used to do. we play first and foremost for sustained ozone possession waiting for a mistake in all situations and not forcing shots or passes. that's why kuzmenko got in trouble and stood out. nobody is taking low percentage shots or passes that risk losing possession and if they do they hear about it from their teammates and coaches.

we also play for shot passes and deflections a lot, which means we intentionally pursue a strategy that generates less shots and less shot attempts credited and gives us a better chance at recovering possession than direct shots on net since the goalie can't freeze the puck as easily.
 

ziploc

Registered User
Aug 29, 2003
7,466
6,438
Vancouver
agreed - i said this on the main board thread, just incase you don't venture out into the badlands
Good stuff. It's all out there if people want to see what's actually going on. And they don't have to - I am no expert on the playing styles of other teams in the league. But I also don't make it my life's mission to use contextless stats to create a narrative about other teams either. That's the problem.

Also, your explanation there is a great example of why Kuzmenko wasn't working on the team, and why Lindholm will fit so much better. Kuz is a great scorer, but he wasn't on board with the overall system, and his style would lead to the kind of chances against that Tocchet is trying to eliminate.
 
  • Love
  • Like
Reactions: quat and andora

andora

Registered User
Apr 23, 2002
24,501
7,585
Victoria
Good stuff. It's all out there if people want to see what's actually going on. And they don't have to - I am no expert on the playing styles of other teams in the league. But I also don't make it my life's mission to use contextless stats to create a narrative about other teams either. That's the problem.

Also, your explanation there is a great example of why Kuzmenko wasn't working on the team, and why Lindholm will fit so much better. Kuz is a great scorer, but he wasn't on board with the overall system, and his style would lead to the kind of chances against that Tocchet is trying to eliminate.
The truth is out there do do do
 

ziploc

Registered User
Aug 29, 2003
7,466
6,438
Vancouver
The truth is out there do do do
This could actually be a decent playoff avatar theme as well: The PDO Truth is Out There...or PDO: I Want to Believe. It's Vancouver-based as well!
1707335247866.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: CanuckCity

wonton15

Kiefer Sherwood
Dec 13, 2009
20,734
30,746
Have to wonder if the fallback option upfront is Bains or someone else in Abby once the TDL has passed.
I’d think Podkolzin is primed for some practices and games on the 4th line. He should look good in Tocchet’s system. Bains should get a look in practice too but not sure he’s ready for games
 
  • Like
Reactions: ziploc

ziploc

Registered User
Aug 29, 2003
7,466
6,438
Vancouver
I’d think Podkolzin is primed for some practices and games on the 4th line. He should look good in Tocchet’s system. Bains should get a look in practice too but not sure he’s ready for games
He and Bains would be good call-ups, but I'm not sure if the team is improved by them replacing anyone currently on the roster. I suppose they could move some pieces around, put Lafferty at Centre and Podz on the wing on the 4th, or move Suter down to centre the 4th and put Hog or Bains up with Miller, but that sort of seems like tinkering. I still think a move for a depth 4th line guy and a depth Dman is coming.
 
Last edited:

biturbo19

Registered User
Jul 13, 2010
27,291
12,420
Because if you don't worry about the future you end up like Jim Benning with Loui Eriksson and Tyler Myers being a hinderence to your roster for 6 years. Most people understand Petterson, Hughes, Hronek, Miller, Boeser and Demko all taking steps has caused us to be good this year.

Everything you described Mikheyev to be, other teams are getting the same value from players that cost 50% less.

This is just completely, objectively untrue. You're imagining a huge wealth of cheap depth players who are scoring at a Top-6 even strength rate for pennies, that doesn't really exist. While failing to acknowledge that Mikheyev has contributed at a Top-6 Level at even strength. Along with ignoring his strong defensive positional game and PK contributions.


This is the list of Non-ELC Forwards IN THE ENTIRE LEAGUE who have contributed as many or more Even Strength Points this season for equal to or less than Mikheyev's contract AAV. Not even talking about "half the price" which hacks the list down the barely anything:


-Brandon Hagel ($1.9M but has an extension kicking in next year @ $6.5M).
-Carter Verhaeghe ($4.2M one year remaining).
-Casey Mittelstadt ($2.5M expiring RFA and Top-10 pick of the team).
-Matt Duchene ($3M but collecting a boatload of buyout pay from Preds on top of that).
-Joe Pavelski ($3.5M expiring and a hundred and fifty-eight years old).
-Trevor Moore ($4.2M long term).
-Trent Frederic ($2.5M one year remaining).
-Alexis Lafreniere ($2.5M one year remaining and a 1st overall pick of the team).
-Matias Maccelli ($3.4M with a couple years remaining and one of the biggest steals in the league).
-Owen Tippett ($1.5M but has an extension kicking in next year @ $6.2M).
-Alex Tuch ($4.75M so exactly the same as Mikheyev and crazy outlier value).
-Tyler Toffoli ($4.25M expiring UFA).
-Eeli Tolvanen ($1.45M expiring Arb eligible RFA).
-Daniel Sprong ($2M expiring UFA).
-Warren Foegle ($2.75M expiring UFA and viewed as a cap dump pre-season).
-Jason Dickinson ($2.65M and with a $4.25M extension kicking in next year also lol).
-Gustav Nyquist ($3.2M with one year remaining).
-Dakota Joshua ($825k expiring UFA).


So...18 guys who even offer the same caliber even strength production as Mikheyev this year at the same or less AAV. In the league. Riddled with caveats. And not even starting to factor in overall defensive value and PK utility, nor size, speed, or anything else.



Mikheyev @ $4.75M isn't a "bargain" by any stretch. But it really is pretty close to the mark on general "UFA Market Value" for a player like him. All things considered. He's a good player, even if you don't like him.

If we move Mikheyev, I think it should be in the offseason.

I agree with biturbo19 in many ways, but I still think Mik is overpaid relative to his contributions, and as such, he may be a cap casualty in the offseason. If we have any intention of re-signing Lindholm, I would say one of Garland or Mikheyev will have to be traded.

With that said, these are offseason problems. I don't think we need to think about this right now.

This is a conversation i'd be a lot more willing to have. If things shape up in the offseason, maybe that becomes a pressure point. One of Mikheyev or Garland becomes a "luxury" we can't afford, or takes a lower priority than an impact Forward like trying to re-sign Lindholm.

But it's asinine to me to even be looking at the idea of moving a player like Mikheyev right in the middle of loading up for a playoff run this year. When he's doing exactly what he's being paid to do, at a very respectably high level. He also, unlike Garland...actually can play somewhat effectively with other skilled Top-6 Forwards.


We're just so far down the road from a point where we should be evaluating whether or not to keep Mikheyev though. It's goofy. Especially when the suggested replacements are guys who aren't as productive, and aren't as good at literally anything else either. You don't deliberately downgrade your team going into a playoff push. :laugh:
 

Ernie

Registered User
Aug 3, 2004
13,175
2,971
I wonder if PDG will be put back into the lineup. I could see Suter coming off of Miller's line and being moved down to the 4th line, with Aman to the press box.
 
  • Like
Reactions: biturbo19

Vector

Moderator
Feb 2, 2007
28,058
48,047
Junktown
I wonder if PDG will be put back into the lineup. I could see Suter coming off of Miller's line and being moved down to the 4th line, with Aman to the press box.

Yeah, there's a few configurations. Another is Aman is scratched and Lafferty plays centre. Or Lafferty is scratched. Could just be they don't want Karlsson sitting in the press box anymore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ernie

Mr. Canucklehead

Kitimat Canuck
Dec 14, 2002
42,668
38,396
Kitimat, BC
Yeah, there's a few configurations. Another is Aman is scratched and Lafferty plays centre. Or Lafferty is scratched. Could just be they don't want Karlsson sitting in the press box anymore.

I think they want to bank the cap savings, too - no sense having two healthy forwards in the press box.

I could see Tocchet throwing PDG back in pretty quick. When he's on his game, he forechecks the exact way Tocchet likes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: biturbo19
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad