As was already said, Blais was cut and you're missing Blueger.
GDT: Canucks Training Camp Thread | FINISHED
- Thread starter Vector
- Start date
As was already said, Blais was cut and you're missing Blueger.
SopelFanThe3rd
Cock of the Walk
Tocchet loves Bains. Apparently more than he loved PDG.
I'm surprised they have Aman in Suter's spot over Raty. What exactly does Aman have on Tocchet?
Blue and Green
Out to lunch
- Dec 17, 2017
- 3,987
- 4,194
This is almost the precise opposite of reality. Bains' mind is his best asset. He gets in trouble because he doesn't quite have the skill (passing aside), strength and skating and therefore is sometimes forced to choose from a palate of not very good options.
krutovsdonut
eeyore
- Sep 25, 2016
- 17,596
- 10,340
cool beans.
very surprised to see bains make this cut over pdg. it shows you what i know. my best rationalizing is he is waivers exempt so is a stand in for suter. they eventually want to carry 13 forwards and are trying to get pdg through early.
ever so slightly curious about suter. obvious easy inference is he got dinged last night but overall he has played a lot this preseason and not that well. they are carrying six centres when he is healthy.
very surprised to see bains make this cut over pdg. it shows you what i know. my best rationalizing is he is waivers exempt so is a stand in for suter. they eventually want to carry 13 forwards and are trying to get pdg through early.
ever so slightly curious about suter. obvious easy inference is he got dinged last night but overall he has played a lot this preseason and not that well. they are carrying six centres when he is healthy.
i agree with this. he has a top 6 brain and bottom 6 skills.
i can't believe people think this team is strong at forward looking at debrusk as probably the second best winger and heinen and sprong both in the top six
SopelFanThe3rd
Cock of the Walk
Remember this line up doesn't have Joshua or Suter in it so Bains and Aman aren't regulars. But Raty should be in before either.
DeBrusk - Pettersson - Sprong/Hoglander
Heinen - Miller - Boeser
Joshua - Blueger - Garland
Sherwood - Suter - Hoglander/Sprong
(Raty)
That is what it should be...
DeBrusk - Pettersson - Sprong/Hoglander
Heinen - Miller - Boeser
Joshua - Blueger - Garland
Sherwood - Suter - Hoglander/Sprong
(Raty)
That is what it should be...
thecupismine
Registered User
- Apr 1, 2007
- 2,664
- 1,986
The team has great forward depth.
It doesn't matter if Heinen/Sprong are in the top 6 if Garland/Joshua are "on the third line" and producing like top 6 players.
Which is interesting because Tocchet specifically praised Raty's ability to win face-offs on the PK and that alone has killed a bunch of time.
I'm actually only really concerned about 3rd pairing LD (Forbort). Generally happy with the rest of the top 6D and even Friedman/Wolanin as 7/8D. Juulsen I think should be 9D.
VanillaCoke
Registered User
- Oct 30, 2013
- 26,280
- 12,989
i can't believe you don't
Garland is the second best winger and the rare type who is capable of driving a line. The team has 2 star centers, a top line wing, another 2 top 6 wings, and strong bottom 6 depth. The only thing they really lack is one more true skilled top 6 winger/PP option, but every team is lacking something in the cap era. As long as Pettersson isn’t the Pettersson from February onward, it’s a top 10 forward group.
This what I've been saying since after July 1st. The 2nd/3rd LD spot is the weakest part of the entire team. It seems like Forbort was signed as defensive depth now rather than acquire someone later in the season and use that asset in part of a package for a more substantial solution.
I've been staring at Vlad Gavrikov pretty hard...well for the last several seasons.
i like garland okay and he's probably a decent top six winger but unless he's playing with pettersson or miller i don't see how he's going to get top six minutes
the depth is good and their 3rd and 4th lines will be above average but i don't believe you can substitute quantity for quality when it comes to nhl minutes and offensive production
maybe i'm sleeping on heinen, debrusk and sprong but those are flawed players that were available for a reason. i just don't see how a team relying on those 3 to be productive is in a good spot
The nice thing about that forward roster is that there is no player that needs to show more than he’s already proven in order to be competitive. There’s no “if so and so can do x…”. They are highly competitive even if no one takes a step. Now, if one or two players do raise their level and EP is EP then…
sting101
Registered User
- Feb 8, 2012
- 16,788
- 16,114
What is your definition of a strong forward group?
3 PPG scorers (Miller Pettersson Boeser) 2 of which are top25 NHL players followed by a top50 5v5 scorer in (Garland) and then 6 forwards (Debrusk Heinen Hoglander Sprong Joshua Sherwood) who were in the top190 which by very definition puts them into the top6 of NHL forwards last season in 5v5 production. Even Suter Blueger offer proven top9 production and quality utility and Raty has shown quality upside.
Weird take
I get credulous' point. Elite talent always trumps depth. Canucks have Boeser, and he's coming off a health scare, and DeBrusk, who has been nothing more than an adequate top-6 producer, then a bunch of guys who are good complimentary players but aren't threats. Like last season, I don't think this is a deep forward group but a wide one. Granted, part of that is you expect the two-top six centres to buoy most of the offense (and obviously that comes with concerns over Pettersson) and be two legitimate #1 centres.
I'm also not concerned since offensive players are usually pretty easy to add during the trade deadline.
I'm also not concerned since offensive players are usually pretty easy to add during the trade deadline.
i mean dallas, florida, toronto, vegas and colorado (if they get one or both of nicushkin and landeskog back) all look way better up front to me, right?
vancouver are in the next tier down with a ton of teams like jersey, the rangers, ottawa, carolina, boston, tampa, winnipeg, blah blah blah
vancouver might look better on paper because they have ringers like hoglander and suter on the 4th line but all that means is some of the forwards on the roster are going to underwhelm because they won't get opportunity. meanwhile they're going to have to give high leverage minutes to someone like debrusk or heinen or sherwood because they have such a steep drop off from miller, boeser and pettersson to their next best forward
i fully recognize it's not this easy but wouldn't you prefer to see guentzel and insert-min-salary-guy-here over garland and debrusk on this roster? that'd give them two very good centers and two very good wingers. lindholm was underwhelming here but that was the right idea too allowing them to shift one of the 3 centers to the wing and ensure you had 4 very good players to deploy on the top two lines
the way things are now i expect miller and boeser will be fine regardless of who they play with and will perform fine but pettersson is going to underwhelm again because he'll be stuck with subpar wings and the team is going to need back to back career years from garland and joshua on the 3rd line to tread water
and i'm not being critical of management here. i think they did a reasonably good job given their circumstances. i kind of cringe at the term debrusk got and i'm slightly skeptical joshua will live up to his deal but it's hard to argue with the heinen, sprong or sherwood contracts. they didn't have the assets to make a trade and no one really moved that would have be an improvement anyways. but people aren't saying the forward group is as good as you can expect. they're saying it's one of the strongest in the league. i don't get it
