Confirmed with Link: Canucks sign D Derek Forbort to 1-Year, $1.5M AAV Contract

  • Xenforo Cloud has scheduled an upgrade to XenForo version 2.2.16. This will take place on or shortly after the following date and time: Jul 05, 2024 at 05:00 PM (PT) There shouldn't be any downtime, as it's just a maintenance release. More info here

F A N

Registered User
Aug 12, 2005
19,019
6,085
Haven't had a chance to weigh in on this one yet with all of the other chaos from the day but I'm not a really big fan of this signing. I view him as a borderline 6/7 who'll be in and out of the lineup depending on the matchup likely subbing with Juulsen. If he can kill penalties though at least he'll serve some use for a limited period of time but I think we definitely need to upgrade the 6th D spot before the playoffs. I'm fine with Desharnais as our every night #5

Agreed. And what's the projected 2nd pairing? Soucy and Myers? Forbort and Myers? Desharnais instead of Myers?

There needs to be another move here. Take a run at Kylington and hope his personal issues are behind him? Would be a good environment for Boqvist, but he would be a project you develop.
 

VanJack

Registered User
Jul 11, 2014
21,779
15,209
Derek Forbort is younger and a lot cheaper, coming in at half the AAV of Ian Cole. He's a solid, veteran signing who can slot into a five-six role on the blueline.......and if it doesn't work out, he can always be trade bait at next spring's TDL.

Really not a lot of negative arguments to be made here.
 

Shareefruck

Registered User
Apr 2, 2005
29,066
3,810
Vancouver, BC
Hmm... I'm seeing people say they're "not be done on defense" yet, but I'm struggling to see what path is still possible.

They just signed:
Hronek
Myers
Descharnais
Forbort
Friedman

They have:
Hughes
Soucey
Juulsen

That's 8 defenseman already, most of which are fresh signings that won't be moved, they're unlikely to go with 9 guys, and there's no chance/point in moving Hughes or Soucey.

I guess you could move Juulsen down or trade him (leaving Forbot as the #7 guy, which seems unlikely), leaving room for another (hopefully better-skating) #5?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: F A N

kanucks25

Chris Tanev #1 Fan
Nov 29, 2013
6,919
3,748
Surrey, BC
Derek Forbort is younger and a lot cheaper, coming in at half the AAV of Ian Cole. He's a solid, veteran signing who can slot into a five-six role on the blueline.......and if it doesn't work out, he can always be trade bait at next spring's TDL.

Really not a lot of negative arguments to be made here.

He's closer to a 7 than 5/6.

And I think management feels the same way; I doubt they project him to be in the top-6 come playoff time.
 

kanucks25

Chris Tanev #1 Fan
Nov 29, 2013
6,919
3,748
Surrey, BC
Feels like he’s a placeholder for D Petey, i think D Petey will replace him by mid season.

I'm not sure about D Petey being ready that fast, but he's definitely a placeholder.

They'll see how the season goes and then find an upgrade either via trade or Abby.
 

arttk

Registered User
Feb 16, 2006
18,379
10,321
Los Angeles
I'm not sure about D Petey being ready that fast, but he's definitely a placeholder.

They'll see how the season goes and then find an upgrade either via trade or Abby.
There is a reason for going after a cheap LD with no term.
VD got 2 because they know Willander is 1.5 years away.
 

F A N

Registered User
Aug 12, 2005
19,019
6,085
Hmm... I'm seeing people say they're "not be done on defense" yet, but I'm struggling to see what path is still possible.

They just signed:
Hronek
Myers
Descharnais
Forbort
Friedman

They have:
Hughes
Soucey
Juulsen

That's 8 defenseman already, most of which are fresh signings that won't be moved, they're unlikely to go with 9 guys, and there's no chance/point in moving Hughes or Soucey.

I guess you could move Juulsen down or trade him (leaving Forbot as the #7 guy, which seems unlikely), leaving room for another (hopefully better-skating) #5?

I think the idea is that the defense as it currently stands isn't very good. So further moves are anticipated. After Hughes and Hronek, who do we have? Soucy and Forbort on the left side and Myers and Descharnais on the right with Juulsen/Friedman as extras (or replacements?)

But ya... not sure what we're going to do here...
 

arttk

Registered User
Feb 16, 2006
18,379
10,321
Los Angeles
I think the idea is that the defense as it currently stands isn't very good. So further moves are anticipated. After Hughes and Hronek, who do we have? Soucy and Forbort on the left side and Myers and Descharnais on the right with Juulsen/Friedman as extras (or replacements?)

But ya... not sure what we're going to do here...
5/6 D are locked up for 2 years + so while I would like to think that we would do an upgrade mid season, it’s likely that we end up running this in the playoffs.
Hughes Hronek
Soucy Myers
Petey Desharnais
Forbot Juulsen

I think any assets we use for trades close to the TDL will be for top6 and 3C upgrades. Not sure if upgrading the top6 and 3C will help with our breakout considering how much we struggled against a 2 man forecheck.
 

TruGr1t

Proper Villain
Jun 26, 2003
24,110
8,435
This is a bet on his health, more than anything. He is described as an "elite PKer" and physical stay-at-home guy. Obviously struggled with injury last season, but if he's back to full health it's a relatively cheap option versus some of the contracts yesterday like Edmunson.
 

pitseleh

Registered User
Jul 30, 2005
19,269
2,999
Vancouver
Hmm... I'm seeing people say they're "not be done on defense" yet, but I'm struggling to see what path is still possible.

They just signed:
Hronek
Myers
Descharnais
Forbort
Friedman

They have:
Hughes
Soucey
Juulsen

That's 8 defenseman already, most of which are fresh signings that won't be moved, they're unlikely to go with 9 guys, and there's no chance/point in moving Hughes or Soucey.

I guess you could move Juulsen down or trade him (leaving Forbot as the #7 guy, which seems unlikely), leaving room for another (hopefully better-skating) #5?
Have to think they’ll add another left shot D for when one of Soucy or Forbort inevitably get hurt. There’s no LD depth on the farm ready to step in, and while Friedman could sub in there, Tocchet seems to have a strong preference for left shots on the left side.

My guess is they wait to see if they can pull a Suter/Blueger with someone by waiting them out.

Given how the team views Juulsen, I’d assume Friedman gets waived in that scenario.
 

HairyKneel

Registered User
Jun 5, 2023
1,224
1,116
Find a hobby.
Or someone needs to hose him off. What a weird move to bitch about. Its called a depth signing.
there’s going to be a point in the dog days of january when our third pair is forbort - juulsen and it’s going to feel like the early-2000s when burke would dumpster dive old first round picks.

scott lachance and drake berehowsky anyone?
Lachance played very well with Jovanovski.

The Drake was a waste of skin.
 

Spectrefire

Registered User
Jan 3, 2013
1,194
1,180
Have to think they’ll add another left shot D for when one of Soucy or Forbort inevitably get hurt. There’s no LD depth on the farm ready to step in, and while Friedman could sub in there, Tocchet seems to have a strong preference for left shots on the left side.

My guess is they wait to see if they can pull a Suter/Blueger with someone by waiting them out.

Given how the team views Juulsen, I’d assume Friedman gets waived in that scenario.
My hope is still out for Kylington deal. He'd be a perfect fit on that 2nd pair LD.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wildcarder

Bleach Clean

Registered User
Aug 9, 2006
27,378
7,061
Have to think they’ll add another left shot D for when one of Soucy or Forbort inevitably get hurt. There’s no LD depth on the farm ready to step in, and while Friedman could sub in there, Tocchet seems to have a strong preference for left shots on the left side.

My guess is they wait to see if they can pull a Suter/Blueger with someone by waiting them out.

Given how the team views Juulsen, I’d assume Friedman gets waived in that scenario.


This, or they do a minor deal including Juulsen and push Forbort down. The target has to be an upgrade on Forbort, who is just a placeholder imo.

I think Desharnais signals the end of Juulsen here.

My guess is that they're eyeing Marcus Pettersson later in the year, just like the Oilers would be, or looking at what happens to Matthias Samuelsson in BUF.

Forbort was their worst signing of the day, but he's also the one with the least term.
 

TruGr1t

Proper Villain
Jun 26, 2003
24,110
8,435
Defensively and on the PK, sure. I think Cole is a better with the puck so I'd say a 1-for-1 replacement is a stretch, like if Cole said I'll sign back for 1 year at $2M, I bet Canucks management probably prefers him.

Yeah, I think they tried with Cole, but no way they were paying him that AAV. Pre-injury Forbort was regularly playing effectively as a #5 for Boston, logging well over 17 minutes per night. Some games he actually logged 18-19 minutes. His health is the big question, but if he reverts to that form I don't really have an issue with him plugging in for Cole.

Desharnais also interestingly played some top-four minutes for Edmonton in the playoffs, and his trajectory is intriguing.
 

cc

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
9,791
1,693
Canucks org maybe too fixated on shot blocking because it seems like the other thing Forbort does well
 

TruGr1t

Proper Villain
Jun 26, 2003
24,110
8,435
Canucks org maybe too fixated on shot blocking because it seems like the other thing Forbort does well

Forbort has regularly logged 18-20 mins for the perennial 100+ point Bruins team, so no, I don’t think that’s all he does well.
 

F A N

Registered User
Aug 12, 2005
19,019
6,085
I think Forbort is a downgrade from Cole. of course, Cole is aging and his play deteriorates towards the second half of the season. The concern with Forbort is that he'll get injured and then he'll suck after that.

Interestingly, both DeBrusk and Forbort say out games for missing/being late to a team meeting. Does Montgomery post meeting notices on bulletin boards or something?
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad