Canucks & NHL News, Rumours, and & Fantasy GM | Summer Doldrums

[SopelFanThe3rd]

Where does Nate Smith get off taking a legends number like that. Disrespect.

He also took the legend Nathan Smiths name.

What's taking so long on Silovs?

What's taking so long on Silovs?

 

[lawrence]

It really is that bad...

In the last 20 years the Canucks have drafted 19 players (out of 126 picks) who have since played more than 100 games in the NHL. These 19 players are:

Podkolzin
Hoglander
Hughes
Pettersson
Gadjovich
Boeser
Gaudette
Virtanen
McCann
Demko
Forsling
Horvat
Gaunce
Hutton
Schroeder
Connauton
Hodgson
Grabner
Raymond

Now it's fair to say that 2 to 4 players out of the last 3 drafts should go on to play more than 100. But it's also fair to say that 4 to 5 of the 19 were/are fringe NHLers at best. In other words, in the last 20 years the team has a hit rate of a little over 10% over all rounds. And that comes while drafting 7 times in the top 10 (excluding 2005).

To assure myself that I wasn't just being overly negative I compared with 10 teams at random.

Edmonton 33 drafted players played more than 100 games in NHL
Pittsburgh 30
Washington 32
Montreal 28
Toronto 33
Carolina 36
Florida 29
Los Angeles 43
Anaheim 37
Dallas 31

This is an average of 33 over a range of 28 to 43.

To be clear, I am really hopeful that the current management is committed to drafting and developing players, even though it does feel like draft picks still get traded too easily. As others have said, drafting and developing is the most effective way to have sustained success. Even if that means trading younger players from a position of strength when the team is in a position to win now. But also with a mindset to have a minimum number of roster spots allocated to players on elcs so they can afford to pay and retain more established higher end players on contracts close to market value.

Edmonton not a good comparison since they had TON of high picks, A TON, meanwhile in the last 20 years, we went from, the WCE era, to the Gillis era so we had a bunch lower picks.

 

[rypper]

He also took the legend Nathan Smiths name.

What's taking so long on Silovs?

What's taking so long on Silovs?

No kidding it's not like he has a ton of leverage or anything.

 

[VanillaCoke]

He also took the legend Nathan Smiths name.

What's taking so long on Silovs?

What's taking so long on Silovs?

xl low key hoping askarov for silovs+pod+? is a possibility, I like Tolopilo & Patera more than enough to roll the dice.

No idea about Nashville needs or contract statuses (thx alot & f u capitals), just wondering what the chefs cooking.

 

[Peen]

No kidding it's not like he has a ton of leverage or anything.

Drance said a few days ago that the agent is probably long shot hoping for an offer sheet but that the team always just wins these negotiations essentially exactly on their terms after the dust settles

 

[Lindgren]

He also took the legend Nathan Smiths name.

What's taking so long on Silovs?

What's taking so long on Silovs?

I'm hoping that they're working on dumping the Poolman contract first.

 

[LordBacon]

No kidding it's not like he has a ton of leverage or anything.

They're trying to give him a 1.9mil x 7yr contract.

 

[iceburg]

Edmonton not a good comparison since they had TON of high picks, A TON, meanwhile in the last 20 years, we went from, the WCE era, to the Gillis era so we had a bunch lower picks.

As I said, it was random, some good some bad. The average of those 10 teams isn’t far off double.
I also totally get they had some good years and lower picks. That said, they made the playoffs less than half of those years.
The issue was mainly a combination of not holding on to picks and poor drafting.

 

[biturbo19]

And if Hoglander's development stagnates then i'm board with moving on from a contract that will likely be an over-pay; However, if Hoglander keeps improving his 2 way play along with his excellent hands and board work, we have ourselves a very effective and toolsy bottom 6 fwd that can move up the line up. This is a player that was in Tocchet's doghouse because of his poor positional play to start the year but worked his way up the line-up as the year progressed.

I'm open minded about Hoglander. If he keeps improving maybe we think about a top 4 dman - that would be a huge leap for him at that value. If he stagnates people are dreaming that he will have enough value to extract anything.

The thing is...Hoglander isn't really a "toolsy" guy at all. He's small. Good balance that makes him tough "for his size" and he's gritty, but he's not physically imposing in the slightest. He's very quick, but hits the "rev limiter" in a hurry so he's not very fast at all. I'd say almost downright slow in terms of long speed (he's not appreciably better at covering ice in space than say...Boeser who is definitely not fast). He's got an okay shot, but it's far from a laserbeam that is going to routinely cash in from range. He's got quick hands in a phonebooth but very little real large area puck carrying ability. Honestly...his "tools" are probably the thing that holds him back or pigeonholes him into his role more than anything. More than his lack of vision/feel for space/passing ability even.


I just really don't know how much more "headroom" there is for a player like Hoggy. He's a ton of fun to watch when he's in the right situations, but super frustrating when he's not. He's also at that age and experience level where most players are pretty much, "what you see is what you get". And the tools aren't going to change.

And that plays into latter part of the bolded. He's really not that well suited to moving up the lineup. That's really the problem. He's one of those players who doesn't become more effective when you move them up the lineup. Doesn't become less effective when you move him down the lineup either. But just sort of stuck in limbo...


Obviously radically different players, but it's the same deal as guys like Brandon Sutter or Kasperi Kapanen. Sutter for all the hate he took here...was the same way. Didn't matter if you played him with the Sedin Twins or some Schmo from the Sea Of Granlunds on their way out of the league forever. 10-20G, 30-35Pts either way. No matter what. Makes no difference.

Hoglander is the same. Scores predominantly the same type of "individual goals". Off the rush, broken plays off a forecheck or failed clear, loitering around the "home base" area or behind the net and banging in garbage goals.

It's a really underrated skillset. I argued extensively at the time that Sutter's skillset kinda sucked, but was also kind of valuable in that you can just throw him out there with nobodies and still get your expected ~15G plus or minus a few. Hoggy is the same way. But you do still have to be careful with these types. If you start paying them like real "Top-6 Scorers" when they don't really jive that well in the actual Top-6 where all the major "headroom" for more points production exists, it can really brick your flexibility in the lineup as a whole.



To needlessly expand further...

I think Hoggy is broadly a better player than Heinen. Hoglander can create his own ~15G +/-. Heinen is purely reliant on others to do the "creating". But simultaneously...i think Heinen is a vastly better fit in a Top-6 role, because he's far more able to play "in sync" with much better, more skilled and creative linemates. That gives him a higher "ceiling" that he can be carried to.

 

[ameselare]

Edmonton not a good comparison since they had TON of high picks, A TON, meanwhile in the last 20 years, we went from, the WCE era, to the Gillis era so we had a bunch lower picks.

This draft scoring chart is interesting to look at (found here)

 

[GranvilleIsland]

This draft scoring chart is interesting to look at (found here)

No it's not. We suck.

 

[ameselare]

No it's not. We suck.

Lol it is pretty bad

 

[Just A Bit Outside]

This draft scoring chart is interesting to look at (found here)

Hawk Tuah and spit on that thang.

 

[Wry n Ginger]

All we can do is take his body of work in his career as a coach to draw from. He’s a systems guy that demands hard work and an adherence to structure of play.

His stints in Arizona and in Vancouver have had his players play a dump and chase offensive system. He cinched away offensive production for the sake of defense.

There’s always rumblings of Tocchet getting into heated matches with players everywhere he’s gone, whether that’s with Pittsburgh or Arizona. It’s no Burger King up in here, it’s his way, or no way.

I’m going to be wary and not assume we’ll have a good season based on what we did the last. We ourselves were embracing the PDO merchant stuff.

Our eggs cannot all be in one basket if Tocchet doesn’t work out. Roster and coaching malleability is important. Hopefully Tocchet’s learnt something from his previous experiences.

Vancouver does not play a dump and chase system. Why do you say that? They're as often having Quinn button curl and the offensive blue than too straight up dump in. Are you just making shit up? Prove they do that...show your math.

Tocchets "heating rumblings", ok..provide evidence, show your math. HEATED MATCHES WITH PLAYERS EVERYWHERE, BAH GOHD JIM...EVERYWHARE!!!

Our eggs in one basket if Tocchet doesn't work out = bad...got it.

Ok, what the F are you trying to say in hockey terms. How do we know about the egg basket placement?

SIDE NOTE:=>☆☆☆ MOST PEOPLE HAVE LEARNT FROM PAST EXPERIENCES.

 

[alternate]

Hoglander does 2 things well in the offensive zone. He can create turnovers, and he can finish around the net. But he's not good at connecting these. He'll earn a takeaway, but if he doesn't have a direct path to goal, he's going to make a bad touch more likely than not.

This is keeping him from being a top 6 player. He needs to be able to create extended possession for his line through using his linemates better. Get the puck, quickly give it to a teammate, go to the net, prosper.

Trading him only makes sense imo if you have Hoglander penciled into the top 6. Maybe the added experience allows play to slow down a half step in the OZ, and he becomes a viable top 6 option. But simply put, he's not there yet, so getting an established upgrade for Hoglander+ is an opportunity you take if offered.

I don't see him as a top 6 player to start camp, and as a bottom 6 player he's about as efficient a producer at 5v5 that you can find. As such, I don't want to deal him.

However he's realistically one of the few forwards that could be traded, so he has to be on the table. You're not dealing any forward that just signed a contract (including EP). Aman and PDG have no value. Miller, nope. Boeser or Garland are much bigger deals. So really, unless it's a block busterish deal, it's Hogs or Pods that Allvin has available as a "roster forward".

 

[jd22]

View attachment 893952

Quoted for truth.

 

[sandwichbird2023]

I'm not sure what people are really expecting here. Hoglander turns 24 this December, and while there are exceptions usually by this age with players what you see is what you get. Right now he's a good guy to have in the bottom/middle six at $1M, but at best you likely end up with someone like Garland and not a legit top six scoring winger.

Hoglander's development hasn't been linear, he struggled mightily in his 2nd season and demoted to the AHL in his 22 years old season, only to rebuilt himself and scored 24 even strength goals in his 23 years old season. I'm not ready to say he is the finished product yet. He might or might not provide more offense going forward (nobody can say for sure at this point), but he can and should improve his overall game under Tocchet.

The thing is...Hoglander isn't really a "toolsy" guy at all. He's small. Good balance that makes him tough "for his size" and he's gritty, but he's not physically imposing in the slightest. He's very quick, but hits the "rev limiter" in a hurry so he's not very fast at all. I'd say almost downright slow in terms of long speed (he's not appreciably better at covering ice in space than say...Boeser who is definitely not fast). He's got an okay shot, but it's far from a laserbeam that is going to routinely cash in from range. He's got quick hands in a phonebooth but very little real large area puck carrying ability. Honestly...his "tools" are probably the thing that holds him back or pigeonholes him into his role more than anything. More than his lack of vision/feel for space/passing ability even.


I just really don't know how much more "headroom" there is for a player like Hoggy. He's a ton of fun to watch when he's in the right situations, but super frustrating when he's not. He's also at that age and experience level where most players are pretty much, "what you see is what you get". And the tools aren't going to change.

And that plays into latter part of the bolded. He's really not that well suited to moving up the lineup. That's really the problem. He's one of those players who doesn't become more effective when you move them up the lineup. Doesn't become less effective when you move him down the lineup either. But just sort of stuck in limbo...


Obviously radically different players, but it's the same deal as guys like Brandon Sutter or Kasperi Kapanen. Sutter for all the hate he took here...was the same way. Didn't matter if you played him with the Sedin Twins or some Schmo from the Sea Of Granlunds on their way out of the league forever. 10-20G, 30-35Pts either way. No matter what. Makes no difference.

Hoglander is the same. Scores predominantly the same type of "individual goals". Off the rush, broken plays off a forecheck or failed clear, loitering around the "home base" area or behind the net and banging in garbage goals.

It's a really underrated skillset. I argued extensively at the time that Sutter's skillset kinda sucked, but was also kind of valuable in that you can just throw him out there with nobodies and still get your expected ~15G plus or minus a few. Hoggy is the same way. But you do still have to be careful with these types. If you start paying them like real "Top-6 Scorers" when they don't really jive that well in the actual Top-6 where all the major "headroom" for more points production exists, it can really brick your flexibility in the lineup as a whole.



To needlessly expand further...

I think Hoggy is broadly a better player than Heinen. Hoglander can create his own ~15G +/-. Heinen is purely reliant on others to do the "creating". But simultaneously...i think Heinen is a vastly better fit in a Top-6 role, because he's far more able to play "in sync" with much better, more skilled and creative linemates. That gives him a higher "ceiling" that he can be carried to.

I don't know, maybe I count "tools" differently, but his ability to forecheck hard, taking time and space away from the D, creating turnovers, win some board battles, and ability to hold on to pucks down low are all very valuable tools to creating offense. Especially when you look at our D going into next season, with Myers, Forbort and Desharnais, there will be a lot of cycling because when those 3 guys get the puck in the offensive zone, they are most likely going to just dump it back down low. That is one area where Hoggy shines.

He also has very slick hands, scoring 2 of the nicest goals of the season against Lundqvist and Markstrom. Aside from Petey, I'm not sure anybody else on the team can pull that off.

I think maybe the trouble in the Hoggy conversation is the difference in starting point. It feels like one side is picking apart all of his flaws and deciding that, at 23 years old, Hoggy is a bad fit in the top 6. And since he doesn't play special team and isn't "toolsy", he doesn't have much more value than a guy like Sprong, who remains un-sign and can be had for cheap.

I feel like Hoggy is a valuable piece to this coming season for the offense he provide at his cap hit. Also, as your said, he is able to provide offense no matter who he plays with. This is very helpful for a contending team, as Hoggy is a player that can score with bottom six'ers but can also move up if/when needed. This type of depth scoring and versatilities are vital to Cup winning teams. Like Florida for example, they had 5 guys locked into the top 2 lines, and E-Rod, Luostarinen and Tarasenko rotating onto the top 6 depending on whos going. After years of dressing guys like Schaller, Roussel, Granlund, Highmore, Motte, MacEwen, Beagle, etc and watching them providing zero offense from the bottom 6, I honestly thought Hoglander would be more appreciated. I don't think people realize how hard it is to score 24 even strength goals playing mostly with 4th liners/Mikheyev and getting no useful PP time. I'm not saying Hoggy is a core player, but I think he provide more than what some are giving him credit for.

 

[TruGr1t]

Hoglander does 2 things well in the offensive zone. He can create turnovers, and he can finish around the net. But he's not good at connecting these. He'll earn a takeaway, but if he doesn't have a direct path to goal, he's going to make a bad touch more likely than not.

This is keeping him from being a top 6 player. He needs to be able to create extended possession for his line through using his linemates better. Get the puck, quickly give it to a teammate, go to the net, prosper.

Trading him only makes sense imo if you have Hoglander penciled into the top 6. Maybe the added experience allows play to slow down a half step in the OZ, and he becomes a viable top 6 option. But simply put, he's not there yet, so getting an established upgrade for Hoglander+ is an opportunity you take if offered.

I don't see him as a top 6 player to start camp, and as a bottom 6 player he's about as efficient a producer at 5v5 that you can find. As such, I don't want to deal him.

However he's realistically one of the few forwards that could be traded, so he has to be on the table. You're not dealing any forward that just signed a contract (including EP). Aman and PDG have no value. Miller, nope. Boeser or Garland are much bigger deals. So really, unless it's a block busterish deal, it's Hogs or Pods that Allvin has available as a "roster forward".

I'd agree, but the issue is I don't see much flexibility not to have Hoglander in the top six, unless you bump Garland or Joshua up the line-up. Heinen will be on one of the top two lines in all likelihood, so that leaves you one last spot. I think we're all done with any of the fourth-line wingers in the top six, and while Sherwood may get some time there, I don't think they'll throw him there off the hop.

Hoglander would look fine on the third line, in my opinion, but how do you get him there with the current roster is the question. Given his cap hit and 2023-2024 production, he's a pretty tempting trade chip since you could move him out for either an upgrade on winger or defense, without overly impacting the rest of the line-up.

 

[TruGr1t]

Defensive trade targets this season from Drance today:

Rasmus Andersson
MacKenzie Weegar
Adam Larsson
Neal Pionk
Colton Parayko

 

[Just A Bit Outside]

Defensive trade targets this season from Drance today:

Rasmus Andersson
MacKenzie Weegar
Adam Larsson
Neal Pionk
Colton Parayko

1. Andersson
2. Larsson
3. Weegar
4. Pionk

Zero interest in Colton.

 

[Szechwan]

Hard to see how we get Andersson without one of Lekk or Willander going the other way. Maybe that's worth it, I dunno.

Larsson would be a great get as well, hopefully Seattle faceplants.

 

[Vector]

1. Andersson
2. Larsson
3. Weegar
4. Pionk

Zero interest in Colton.

I could be convinced on Parayko as he's being played as a #1 and reducing his minutes would probably increase his effectiveness. Would need to come at a heavily reduced acquisition cost. Could probably attach Poolman to the deal, as an example.

He doesn't list any left-side options (says Weegar is better on his off-hand) in his article but given the Canucks signings this off-season, I think the Canucks are more likely to target a left-handed defenceman.

 

[PavelBure10]

I wonder what it would take to pry Rasmus from the Flames? I'm guessing an arm and a leg.

I don't want to trade Hoglander but Calgary had been rumored to be asking for him in the Lindholm trade. They've been interested in the Hog for awhile now.

Our 1st rounder would obviously have to be included.

Hoglander, 1st, prospect, and some salary going the other way.

Other teams could probably easily top this though.

 

[Szechwan]

I could be convinced on Parayko as he's being played as a #1 and reducing his minutes would probably increase his effectiveness. Would need to come at a heavily reduced acquisition cost. Could probably attach Poolman to the deal, as an example.

He doesn't list any left-side options (says Weegar is better on his off-hand) in his article but given the Canucks signings this off-season, I think the Canucks are more likely to target a left-handed defenceman.

Really? I think they should be more comfortable with Soucy on the 2nd pair than Myers.

Assuming they roll:
Hughes - Hronek
Soucy - Myers
Forbert - VD

Bringing Andersson to play with Soucy, or Larsson to play with Hughes and bump Hronek down makes more sense to me than running with Myers in bigger minutes.

 

[TruGr1t]

I could be convinced on Parayko as he's being played as a #1 and reducing his minutes would probably increase his effectiveness. Would need to come at a heavily reduced acquisition cost. Could probably attach Poolman to the deal, as an example.

He doesn't list any left-side options (says Weegar is better on his off-hand) in his article but given the Canucks signings this off-season, I think the Canucks are more likely to target a left-handed defenceman.

I think it comes mostly down to acquisition cost and fit, but they could probably go either way and make it work. Some of these guys would be good partners with Hughes, for instance, giving the option to move Hronek off the top pair. Yes, having Forbort as your fixture bottom-pair left-side guy isn't ideal, but what you really need is another top-four defenseman, and I think Drance is looking at some of these guys as potential rentals, so it would be a shorter-term fix. Longer term, yes they need to add left-side depth as well.