Value of: Mikael Granlund to Vancouver
- Thread starter Canuck86
- Start date
biturbo19
Registered User
- Jul 13, 2010
- 27,269
- 12,401
Yeah. My understanding of the situation was that Boudreau had said he likes the idea of Granlund playing wing with Koivu, which i'd presume to be the plan to start at least.
Plus, beyond that...most i'd trade from a Canucks perspective would be...a swap of Granlunds or a cap dump. Not that he isn't worth more...but i wouldn't be dealing anything valuable from the Canucks for him. Not the right player to target.
He can't play center in the NHL, so if that's why you're interested, save your breath. My guess is he gets a year on the wing to prove himself, and if he fails there, the Wild will move him for whatever they can get.
Granlund is actually a very solid player. He's been incredibly productive playing for Team Finland and already is a clear top 6 guy in the NHL. When playing C, like most Finns, he never sacrificed defense for offense. He is very capable in his own end, something that surprises most because he is small. He's also suffered from Yeo's defensive system. I expect a big year if he is stapled to Koivu's W, as most assume he will be. Think about small playmakers like Granlund - they always end up on the wing...way too much responsibility at C. I wouldnt be surprised if he breaks out under Boudreau.
As for Canucks, anything short of Tanev/Boeser/Horvat isn't worth it. His value isn't high because he has been miscast as a C and his upside remains high. PonyBoy is wrong, he can play C in the NHL - 2nd line production offensively already with good two-way play. But at W he can be much better.
As for Canucks, anything short of Tanev/Boeser/Horvat isn't worth it. His value isn't high because he has been miscast as a C and his upside remains high. PonyBoy is wrong, he can play C in the NHL - 2nd line production offensively already with good two-way play. But at W he can be much better.
BrockBoeser6
Registered User
Terrible for Wild. Sutter has zero upside...he's just a guy as they say. Granlund is a beast in big moments, already can match Sutter in both ends and has the draft pedigree and international success to suggest he has another level to hit.
Granlund played wing for us in the playoffs and he was our best player in the series. He's going to be staying in MN and he will be one of our top line wingers.
PuckInTheNards
Registered User
- Feb 4, 2008
- 1,977
- 446
I don't know about all this beast talk... He's a fine player and not overly expensive. Was a mediocre 2c but seemed to blossom on the wing. He'll be on Mikko's right side next season... We'll see how that goes. No interest in trading him - the return wouldn't be worth it
BrockBoeser6
Registered User
Sorry, forgot the sarcasm emoji. The idea of us trading for another Granlund is as much of a joke as my first response. Gave up too much for one Granlund, don't plan on doing the same for another. Keep him.
Granlund has 31 goals in 240 games, an 11 goals pace over 82 games and all that while havimg top6 minute with tons of pp time. Terrific playmaker tough
BagHead
Registered User
I don't mean offense here, but you gave up too much for the wrong Granlund. Mikhael Granlund is a good two-way #2 center, and a poor #1 center. He'd be a G.D. great #3. That said, he plays wing as well, and his most productive future may lie there, so if this is about trading for a center, that's what you're getting into. His play also does get better the more important the game is, which is amazing to see as a fan that hasn't seen many of those types on his team. I won't say "beast" like others have, but he's been a hero before for us, in those games.
In any case, I think the Wild will keep him for at least another year, and maybe much longer than that, if the production comes along.
How many needs for the Wild does that fit?
Lempo
Recovering Future Considerations Truther
- Feb 23, 2014
- 27,726
- 86,699
... and on that note, the perceived value is going to go up before the season starts because he will again be great in the World Cup, as he always is in the Lion jersey, and it will leave people pondering if his mediocrity has been an utilization issue rather than translating to smaller ice issue. Set to play wing again in a top line for the WC, we'll see if it will be next to Koivu or Barkov.
Not even close on any of those points. Putting up 2nd-3rd line numbers while getting 1st line ice time isn't a good thing. Getting moved to wing by a team that only had 2 centers to begin with, pretty much says it all.
BrockBoeser6
Registered User
Don't worry no offense taken. I know we spent too much for Markus but that doesn't change my feelings that we should not do the same for Mikael. I know he's a very good player and would require some form of an overpayment to acquire him. I just think you guys are better off keeping such a valuable player unless another team is willing to overpay to get him.
He was the best forward at the WHC and should have won MVP over Laine. Granlund will have a great year next year, he will really surprise people.
NuxFan09
Registered User
I have always liked him and think we could be a nice winger to have going forward on the Canucks. I understand the Wild fans now saying he is to be slotted as a winger this upcoming year so likely he isnt available unless the offer was too enticing.
I think the Wild are fairly set on D, maybe could use a winger if he was to get moved.
As a Canuck fan having him would be a nice addition going forward, could slot in well on Horvat or Sutters wing as the set up guy. Would also help our PP.
Like I have done in the past, when hockey pool time comes around in the fall, Granlund is a player that I have taken before and will look to do so again this year.
Canucks could offer:
Hansen- cost effective winger who is very versatile
columbus 2nd round pick they owe us for torts
Grenier- prospect that hasnt had a look here and would do well with a new team imo
I know that offer doesnt blow your socks off, Hansen is underrated, most teams will look at his stats or age and that is how they will value him. In reality he is pretty much our best 2 way forward and most consistant night in night out. With that said, we have 2 young RW in Virtanen and hopefully Boeser who are going to need more ice time and Eriksson is a lock for no worse than 2nd RW for years now.
He was getting 2nd line icetime, putting up 2nd line numbers. Koivu was the first line center and got the first line icetime.
gwh
Registered User
- Mar 4, 2013
- 3,688
- 622
1y to RFA, 40 point undersized 2way center. Better at playoffs, but overall a lukewarm NHL mid6 player. 1st line talent on 1st assists, but not enough to carry his career.
His value is pretty much a generic 2nd liner in the league. Passable player, but Coyle & Nino are the ones with potential and Haula/Zucker are bottom 6ers with massive upsides.
Granlund is just lagom. Good complimentary 2nd liner, but nothing more.
His value is pretty much a generic 2nd liner in the league. Passable player, but Coyle & Nino are the ones with potential and Haula/Zucker are bottom 6ers with massive upsides.
Granlund is just lagom. Good complimentary 2nd liner, but nothing more.
gwh
Registered User
- Mar 4, 2013
- 3,688
- 622
We play the centers really low, while Granlund's strong areas are odd man rushes and dishing saucers from behind the goal.
Granlund VS. Koivu
http://public.tableau.com/shared/TDS63S7JJ?:display_count=yes&:showVizHome=no
Granlund vs RNH
http://public.tableau.com/shared/MBWCWXZFP?:display_count=no
So, because you gave too much to Calgary in a trade for Granlund's brother, you want the Wild to accept less for his older, much better, brother?
The offers so far from Vancouver are beyond abysmal.
