Shinkaruk to Flames for Granlund

[givemeda411]

Chris Higgins: Hunter is very skilled but soft. A lot of guys weren't too impressed this past camp. But still labeled the trade weird.

- this from Higgins's brother.

[Blob Mckenzie]

One thing I do like about this trade is that Granlund is a C. Can never have too many of those. I wonder if it is also because Gaunce probably has passed him on the depth chart too.

Gauncy is a winger now.

Maybe McCann will be converted into a winger as well with his lethal shot, a dual c/w.

Henrik aging, Sutter injured a lot this year, it's apparent we need more center depth, and the Finn Granlund seems like he has upside scoring wise. stealthy trade.

Gaunce has been back at center for a while .

[Rumsfeld]

Absolutely retarded trade.

[Blob Mckenzie]

Absolutely retarded trade.

I would have rather seen a 2nd rounder come back, whether it's from this year or next. Why exactly do they need another small, light player who isn't especially fast.

[TDA Rum]

I think we have to wait until after the trade line is finished to get a good understanding of what Benning & Lindens plan is... i don't think they are done making moves...

[Todd Bersnoozi]

I am guessing Vey and Cracknell will be gone... McCann probably Utica bound next year...

I like the Cracker, I hope we find a way to keep him the offeason. I wouldn't mind giving him a couple years @ close to minimum. He has some size, a BC boy and a good work ethic/attitude, a great guy to have for the bottom 6. He's a bit slow, but don't mind that for mainly a 4th liner.

I don't mind the Shinkaruk trade. We already have Bearcheese who's a similar player, although I think I'd rather have Huntard over Bear. Just not a big fan of euros. Huntard is probably mainly an offensive player who can't really play on the bottom 6 while Granlund sounds like a 2-way guy who can play on a checking role. A line of Grandlund-Cracker-Drosett might be ok (although Etem was great there last game).

[Island Nucklehead]

Not really sure what to think about this one. Granlund requires waivers next year and is a C. Canucks must be looking at plugging McCann in Utica for next season. Also not sure how I like dealing a scorer like Shinkaruk, guy is one of the few in the system with high-end offensive potential.

Conversely, we didn't give up a pick, and Granlund is certainly more NHL-ready, but his development might be stalled.

Why was there was a rush to deal HS?

[BladesofSteel]

Yet another failed 1st round pick in adding to long, rich history of inept drafting.

[Island Nucklehead]

Yet another failed 1st round pick in adding to long, rich history of inept drafting.

Yeah this is a sentiment I don't really get. Has Shinkaruk failed? He's putting up nearly .5 Goals per game in the AHL (scoring 13.5% of his teams total goals), leads the Comets in scoring and only turned 21 in October.

[SKYO]

Absolutely retarded trade.

I would have rather seen a 2nd rounder come back, whether it's from this year or next. Why exactly do they need another small, light player who isn't especially fast.

Bullshit, you know damn well your ass would be like,

*great, we traded a 1st round draftee for a 2nd, pissing away youth hey Benning?

OR

*now watch we trade that 2nd with prust for Ladd. lmfao

[Southern_Canuck]

Posters making me laugh with "at least we didn't give up a pick"
Yeah, that's a Benning.

Baertschi has to be feeling pretty good right now.

So the Canucks have another waiver eligible young player next season. Will Granlund be a Clendenning, Vey, or Baertschi?

S_C

[Hockey Widow]

Waited to offer my opinion. Now that the initial shock, confusion, anger and scepticism have passed I don't mind this deal. I had hopes that this year's version of Shinkaruk were signs that he had fully recovered from his surgery and he had discovered his scoring touch in the pros. Was looking forward to seeing if he could replace Vrbata's scoring next year.

But we were all aware that the huge knock on Shinkaruk is his lack of a two way game and second, he is soft along the wall, poor puck retrieval. The Canucks never talked about him as part of their future like they did for players like Virtanen, McCann, Baertschi. It was always, he still has work to do. It is unfortunate that he only got one NHL game. There was obviously something in his game or about him that Benning didn't like as he tried to trade him last year too. I think he just assessed him as a player that did not fit into their plans moving forward.

Granlund has a good two way game. He is a centre that has not adjusted too well when he has had to play wing so I am not sold as much on his versatility as Benning but then again I've never been a hockey scout. Granlund has had good AHL numbers, similar, slightly better with fewer games, than Shinkaruk, so I think his skill level is there. He will never be as flashy as Shinkaruk who has the potential to be a highlight goal score, but streaky.

Granlund is a year older with 80+ games in the NHL. We know he can play at the NHL level already while Shinkaruk has yet to make the jump. We lose roster flexibility next season with this deal and Granlund will be RFA requiring a higher cap hit than Shinkaruk. So a few negatives that way.

I don't know why this deal was made now. Is the Vey injury more serious? Is another trade in the works? Rumours are circulating that McCann + could be on the move that involves getting Drouin. Why the rush if nothing else is in the works? Could this not have waited until the summer otherwise?

Benning today said
1) the team still wants to make the playoffs. Does this mean Granlund is a piece they see that adds a little more depth, two way game to the current team to help them reach the playoffs while losing Shinkaruk doesn't impact that at all. If so, major fail Jim. I don't see this move as a short term win.

2) the move was made because the Canucks expect to have Rodin in the line up next year and along with Baertschi they see Shinkaruk as a redundant piece. So they flip that piece to strengthen the centre ice position within the organization. But if the redundant piece argument is true, like Blob said, why not move Shinkaruk for a 2nd, or a defensive prospect, other than another team has to be willing to offer up one of those?

So at the end of the day I don't understand this trade but I don't hate it. I'm more like Doc, meh. Two young players that bring different skill sets, following similar developmental paths, that didn't fit the team they were on. Granlund was far down the depth chart at centre on the Flames and the Canucks saw Shinkaruk as redundant. Flames win in that they get roster flexibility with respect to contract status and in that they will save a few bucks on the cap. Canucks win in that they get a player who has already made the jump to the NHL and, IMO, is the better two way player.

But really, until Shinkaruk makes the jump and until we get to see Granlund play some games for us, one cannot really assess this deal.

[Strangelove]

Absolutely retarded trade.

Speaking of "retarded"... Shinkaruk was born and raised in Calgary, Alberta.

C'mon man, his Calgarian parents named him "Hunter"!

So retarded...

[Arbour]

From knowledgeable Utica watchers: Shinkaruk has the innate natural ability to get into the open and find the puck from a rebound or a pass as he arrives and can convert in those situations which is generally how he gets his points, however, his passing is not particularly good, nor is his ability to carry the puck, his defensive game needs work and he is easily pushed off the puck. He can disappear for whole periods, but will score if left open. Consensus from the above is that he is still a work in progress and will need more time in the AHL, since the deficiencies in his game at this time, in spite of his point production, would not translate well at the next level.

Green seems to have a handle on his players and I would be surprised if he didn't have input into this deal. While Benning has the final say he certainly didn't ignore Green's input when acquiring Baertschi. Granlund's AHL point production is somewhat similar to Shinkaruk's ie 25 goals and 21 assists in 52 games in 2013/14 as a 20 year old.

[Tciso]

That descritpion can be condensed to one word. "Europe"

From knowledgeable Utica watchers: Shinkaruk has the innate natural ability to get into the open and find the puck from a rebound or a pass as he arrives and can convert in those situations which is generally how he gets his points, however, his passing is not particularly good, nor is his ability to carry the puck, his defensive game needs work and he is easily pushed off the puck. He can disappear for whole periods, but will score if left open. Consensus from the above is that he is still a work in progress and will need more time in the AHL, since the deficiencies in his game at this time, in spite of his point production, would not translate well at the next level.

Green seems to have a handle on his players and I would be surprised if he didn't have input into this deal. While Benning has the final say he certainly didn't ignore Green's input when acquiring Baertschi. Granlund's AHL point production is somewhat similar to Shinkaruk's ie 25 goals and 21 assists in 52 games in 2013/14 as a 20 year old.