Canucks News, Rumours, & Fantasy GM | Winter is Coming

[Lindgren]

My honest answer is it’s too early too tell. The immediate need is apparent but if he fits long term will take a while to discern.

I understand the "immediate need" idea, but it seems significantly vague to me if it isn't expressed in relation to a goal:

immediate need in order not to slip below second in the division?
Immediate need in order to remain in a playoff spot?
immediate need in order to have a genuine shot at advancing past the first round?

I hope that management is clear about this, even if we're not.

I don't much like the deal. I'd rather that the Canucks had tried to clear even more cap-space , even if it cost a significant future to get out from another inefficient contract, and then gone after something more significant.

 

[Vector]

I understand the "immediate need" idea, but it seems significantly vague to me if it isn't expressed in relation to a goal:

immediate need in order not to slip below second in the division?
Immediate need in order to remain in a playoff spot?
immediate need in order to have a genuine shot at advancing past the first round?

I hope that management is clear about this, even if we're not.

I don't much like the deal. I'd rather that the Canucks had tried to clear even more cap-space , even if it cost a significant future to get out from another inefficient contract, and then gone after something more significant.

Immediate need on multiple fronts: for additional depth and toughness for this season and the playoffs but also to bring down everyone else’s minutes do they don’t get run into the ground.

 

[SopelFanThe3rd]

I think I prefer Friedman over Bear

 

[oceanchild]

I understand the "immediate need" idea, but it seems significantly vague to me if it isn't expressed in relation to a goal:

immediate need in order not to slip below second in the division?
Immediate need in order to remain in a playoff spot?
immediate need in order to have a genuine shot at advancing past the first round?

I hope that management is clear about this, even if we're not.

I don't much like the deal. I'd rather that the Canucks had tried to clear even more cap-space , even if it cost a significant future to get out from another inefficient contract, and then gone after something more significant.

How is it not clear that as of immediately our defensive group needed help. With the injury to Soucey and the quality of the backfill we needed help. We have not been great as of late, and with the schedule being so compact it was a necessity imo.

 

[VanillaCoke]

Do people actually do simple research? Minnesota, ottowa and Buffalo aren't trading those players. Minnesota would ask for Hughes in return for Faber. Minnesota wouldn't trade Jacob Middleton barring overpayment as they aren't selling

Yes they do Joseph nathan, my post consists of literally nothing but simple research

 

[Vector]

I think I prefer Friedman over Bear

Get both. Bear at 1m is a good bargain and not someone you always need in the line-up. Going to need depth for the season and playoffs.

 

[Lindgren]

Immediate need on multiple fronts: for additional depth and toughness for this season and the playoffs but also to bring down everyone else’s minutes do they don’t get run into the ground.

How is it not clear that as of immediately our defensive group needed help. With the injury to Soucey and the quality of the backfill we needed help. We have not been great as of late, and with the schedule being so compact it was a necessity imo.

Both answers are question-begging. My question is, what is management hoping to accomplish with this trade?

If the answer is merely, "it makes the defense better," that begs the question. What does making the defense better with Zadorov accomplish?

I know that Zadarov helps the defense. To accomplish what? (Vector's "depth and toughness for the playoffs" gets part-way there, but only part-way.)

The trade will look good to me if management follows it up by using futures to create more cap space, and then acquires something very significant, so we can reasonably imagine the team getting out of the first round. If that happens, then the Zadarov acquisition looks like a small but significant part of that plan.

In the absence of further moves, Zadarov's acquisition looks likely to help the team to finish third in the division, after which they'll lose to LA or Vegas in the first round. If you disagree (and that would seem perfectly reasonable to me), if you think that the team now has a decent shot at a first-round win, then it makes sense that you'd like the Zadarov acquisition. But nobody seems willing to say that—to say something positive about the Canucks' chances in the playoffs.

 

[kanucks25]

I understand the "immediate need" idea, but it seems significantly vague to me if it isn't expressed in relation to a goal:

immediate need in order not to slip below second in the division?
Immediate need in order to remain in a playoff spot?
immediate need in order to have a genuine shot at advancing past the first round?

I hope that management is clear about this, even if we're not.

I don't much like the deal. I'd rather that the Canucks had tried to clear even more cap-space , even if it cost a significant future to get out from another inefficient contract, and then gone after something more significant.

1. The Canucks want to remain high in the standings to secure themselves a playoff spot (for the experience, revenue, vibes, fan engagement, etc.)
2. The Canucks are weak on defense right now, so Zadorov will help in that respect (which will support point #1 above).
3. The Canucks want to make noise in the playoffs, and size on the backend (which Zad provides) has proven to be valuable in the playoffs.
4. The Canucks still need to figure out how they want their defense to look in the mid and long-term, this trade gives them a good look at a player they've allegedly been interested in for a while to decide if they want to keep him around past this season.
5. The Canucks (I hope) don't feel like this acquisition makes them a contender, but could be a good building block and doesn't mean they can't improve on their D even further before the trade deadline.

 

[Vector]

Both answers are question-begging. My question is, what is management hoping to accomplish with this trade?

If the answer is merely, "it makes the defense better," that begs the question. What does making the defense better with Zadorov accomplish?

I know that Zadarov helps the defense. To accomplish what? (Vector's "depth and toughness for the playoffs" gets part-way there, but only part-way.)

The trade will look good to me if management follows it up by using futures to create more cap space, and then acquires something very significant, so we can reasonably imagine the team getting out of the first round. If that happens, then the Zadarov acquisition looks like a small but significant part of that plan.

In the absence of further moves, Zadarov's acquisition looks likely to help the team to finish third in the division, after which they'll lose to LA or Vegas in the first round. If you disagree (and that would seem perfectly reasonable to me), if you think that the team now has a decent shot at a first-round win, then it makes sense that you'd like the Zadarov acquisition. But nobody seems willing to say that—to say something positive about the Canucks' chances in the playoffs.

No the biggest factor is you add a guy who can play 15-20 when they don’t have reinforcements coming for another month. So you aren’t running Cole, Hronek, and Hughes into the ground and can keep Myers’ minutes at a number he can handle. That’s the biggest goal of the trade.

Trying to infer further is shaking a magic 8-ball and taking it as providence.

 

[SelltheTeamFrancesco]

Do people actually do simple research? Minnesota, ottowa and Buffalo aren't trading those players. Minnesota would ask for Hughes in return for Faber. Minnesota wouldn't trade Jacob Middleton barring overpayment as they aren't selling

What. I get its hyperbole but that's still wild.

 

[Vector]

What. I get its hyperbole but that's still wild.

Minnesota technically.

 

[Peter Griffin]

Get both. Bear at 1m is a good bargain and not someone you always need in the line-up. Going to need depth for the season and playoffs.

Ya, if Bear is willing to sign for the rumoured 1 year, $1M~ salary it’s really a no brainer to add him to the roster. Only downside is potentially losing some depth in a guy like Juulsen if he’s lost on waivers but I doubt that happens.

 

[Vector]

Ya, if Bear is willing to sign for the rumoured 1 year, $1M~ salary it’s really a no brainer to add him to the roster. Only downside is potentially losing some depth in a guy like Juulsen if he’s lost on waivers but I doubt that happens.

Oh no…not Juulsen…

 

[Lindgren]

No the biggest factor is you add a guy who can play 15-20 when they don’t have reinforcements coming for another month. So you aren’t running Cole, Hronek, and Hughes into the ground and can keep Myers’ minutes at a number he can handle. That’s the biggest goal of the trade.

Trying to infer further is shaking a magic 8-ball and taking it as providence.

I sure hope that management sees it differently. If they don't think that all the stuff you mention likely adds up to something with respect to the standings and the playoffs, even if that's in the future after a re-signing, then they're incompetent.

 

[Burke's Evil Spirit]

Oh no…not Juulsen…

Losing Juulsen would free up a contract slot next season, we should be so lucky.

 

[oceanchild]

The defence gets better when we add players with a high positive contribution and personal capacity. Z meets this threshold and I would argue is better than Meyers. I think they play him with Cole but I would like to see him with Soucey. I also feel like your talking in circles, it’s clear what an improved defence looks like, as for the longer term outlook, would show Pettersson your commitment to winning and give us time to negotiate a contract with Z before free agency. For all we know they plan on using Soucey as the # 4 Dman and Cole was always intended to be the #5 and maybe now Z is #6 and they look for a #2/3 as we all think they need. This is a better option than waiting until free agency IMO to see if he fits. This gives the coaching staff and management a significant sample to see how well he fits the system.

 

[Joseph Nathan]

Yes they do Joseph nathan, my post consists of literally nothing but simple research

If you did you especially wouldn't have put brock Faber, a top rookie stud right next to luke Hughes here on the list. Wild aren't trading him as he's untouchable. Middleton is also unavailable as Minnesota is trying to win & in cap hell. Most other players aren't available

No one on Minnesota is good enough to have Hughes mentioned in the same breach. Get my boys name outta you god damn mouth.

Lol you should do some research. Kaprizov is better than him. Brock Faber is one of the most untouchable players in the league right there with luke Hughes. Lol oh yeah rookie stud homeborn kid are traded. Most other players were never getting traded

 

[rypper]

Brock Faber was already traded...

 

[Ryomen Sukuna]

The Zadorov trade is great, but I am more interested in who PA and co target on RD. My personal favorite would be someone like dante fabbro.

 

[VanillaCoke]

If you did you especially wouldn't have put brock Faber, a top rookie stud right next to luke Hughes here on the list. Wild aren't trading him as he's untouchable. Middleton is also unavailable as Minnesota is trying to win & in cap hell. Most other players aren't available


Lol you should do some research. Kaprizov is better than him. Brock Faber is one of the most untouchable players in the league right there with luke Hughes. Lol oh yeah rookie stud homeborn kid are traded. Most other players were never getting traded

Good thing its just a list of players on teams previously mentioned, also known as the simplest of research, very astute of you pointing it out.

No other implications were made, but thanks for letting us know who exactly is available right now dregs.

 

[David71]

if they sign bear and or possibly move out myers for top 6/another top 4 defenseman, maybe beef up the forwards a little more. they could go far past the 1st round.

 

[kanucks25]

With Mikheyev struggling (possibly for the remainder of the season) and PDG flaming out (no hate, he had a good run), top-6 forward has become just as big of a hole as top-4 D.

Miller needs help, especially if Pettersson is going to make his Jekyll & Hyde act a regular thing going forward.

 

[oceanchild]

If you did you especially wouldn't have put brock Faber, a top rookie stud right next to luke Hughes here on the list. Wild aren't trading him as he's untouchable. Middleton is also unavailable as Minnesota is trying to win & in cap hell. Most other players aren't available


Lol you should do some research. Kaprizov is better than him. Brock Faber is one of the most untouchable players in the league right there with luke Hughes. Lol oh yeah rookie stud homeborn kid are traded. Most other players were never getting traded

Ok kid, it’s your bed time. Kaprizov is good no doubt, he ain’t worth even close to Hughes and Faber is a nice piece but not that nice.

 

[Bobby9]

Bear does nothing. He is a warm body.

Second pairing right D is needed. Zub or Larsson if the Kraken are out of the playoff run.

 

[Vector]

-knew the Canucks were looking for D but didn’t think it would come together this quick
-Canucks were the only team involved that didn’t ask the Flames to retain
-price is around a 3rd but paid an extra 5th because of being in the same division
-Canucks still favourite much in on Bear; he likes them or he wouldn’t be practicing in their colours
-Canucks still looking for another defensemen; mentions Tanev but says also looking at names we haven’t heard out there
-Flames made the trade to get out of an awkward situation
-talks about Rutherford’s history of making trades early and setting the market; brings up Doug Wright and Trevor Daley