Roster Questions

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

If an overhaul of this team is needed, which of the following players who should MG shop around...

Hank and Danny
12
7%
Edler
44
25%
Booth
45
26%
Higgins
8
5%
Bieksa
15
9%
Ballard
45
26%
Hamhuis
2
1%
None of the above
2
1%
 
Total votes: 173

User avatar
sagebrush
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 948
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 12:36 pm
Location: around the bend

Re: Roster Questions

Post by sagebrush » Fri May 17, 2013 2:57 pm

Iain MacIntyre @imacVanSun May09 11:34am:
Burrows believes NTC clause already in effect. Usually starts w extension, July 1. Seeking clarity. Suddenly seems important.
Iain MacIntyre @imacVanSun May09 11:48am:
Clarity comes: Burrows NTC kicks in w new deal, July 1. Same applies to Edler, Higgins extensions.
Not to pick on anyone in particular, but the wheels are turning. :drink:

User avatar
tantalum
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1911
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 3:41 am
Location: Carl Junction, MO

Re: Roster Questions

Post by tantalum » Fri May 17, 2013 5:48 pm

Yep the NTCs for Burrows and Edler kick in on July 1 so it does allow them to be moved at the draft for instance. Also note that if they are traded the new team has the option to honor the NTC or not. If they decide not they have 24 hours to provide notice to the player after the trade is complete. It's why Jeff Carter no longer has a NTC. The Blue Jackets declined to honor that clause. Same with Ricjards (LA declined to honor it).That little bit of info makes Burrows or Edler a touch more valuable as the new team would be able to move them wherever and whenever if the fit isn't there.

Higgins NTC clause is limited but I don't know the details.

User avatar
Reefer2
MVP
MVP
Posts: 3795
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 8:47 am

Re: Roster Questions

Post by Reefer2 » Fri May 17, 2013 6:00 pm

tantalum wrote:Yep the NTCs for Burrows and Edler kick in on July 1 so it does allow them to be moved at the draft for instance. Also note that if they are traded the new team has the option to honor the NTC or not. If they decide not they have 24 hours to provide notice to the player after the trade is complete. It's why Jeff Carter no longer has a NTC. The Blue Jackets declined to honor that clause. Same with Ricjards (LA declined to honor it).That little bit of info makes Burrows or Edler a touch more valuable as the new team would be able to move them wherever and whenever if the fit isn't there.

Higgins NTC clause is limited but I don't know the details.
wow - serious the team picking the player up does not need to honour the NTC?

User avatar
Orcasfan
CC Veteran
Posts: 126
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 8:28 pm

Re: Roster Questions

Post by Orcasfan » Fri May 17, 2013 6:21 pm

I second just about everything that Tant said! So, according to some of you guys, you wouldn't be interested in players like Datsyuk or Zetterberg because they are not 6'3" and 220 lbs? Really? :look:

User avatar
Lancer
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 2155
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 10:41 am
Location: Arnprior, Ontario

Re: Roster Questions

Post by Lancer » Fri May 17, 2013 7:14 pm

tantalum wrote:Yep the NTCs for Burrows and Edler kick in on July 1 so it does allow them to be moved at the draft for instance. Also note that if they are traded the new team has the option to honor the NTC or not. If they decide not they have 24 hours to provide notice to the player after the trade is complete. It's why Jeff Carter no longer has a NTC. The Blue Jackets declined to honor that clause. Same with Ricjards (LA declined to honor it).That little bit of info makes Burrows or Edler a touch more valuable as the new team would be able to move them wherever and whenever if the fit isn't there.

Higgins NTC clause is limited but I don't know the details.
Of those three, I think only Edler has to worry.

I don't think the reasons for trading Burrows (removing bad ref karma, removing salary) trump the reasons for keeping him (chemistry with the Sedins, intense player who can play anywhere in the lineup). Besides, I don't think his trade value is wuite what some may think it is.

Same thing for Higgins. He's a decent 3rd-liner but Gillis won't get much for him so trading him would be more of a salary dump thany anything and for what he brings the price isn't bad.
Love the Sport. Love the Team.

Hate the League.

User avatar
tantalum
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1911
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 3:41 am
Location: Carl Junction, MO

Re: Roster Questions

Post by tantalum » Fri May 17, 2013 7:21 pm

Reefer2 wrote: wow - serious the team picking the player up does not need to honour the NTC?
That was the way it was under the old CBA. I haven't heard anything different with this CBA. If the trade clause is already active, however, then the trade clause always remains. So, when Luongo gets moved he will retain his NTC no matter what.


Lancer...don't disagree with anything you said. Edler holds the most value. Of course the reason he holds the most value is why I have reluctance moving him.

User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
Posts: 5882
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Roster Questions

Post by Meds » Fri May 17, 2013 8:04 pm

tantalum wrote:
Reefer2 wrote: wow - serious the team picking the player up does not need to honour the NTC?
That was the way it was under the old CBA. I haven't heard anything different with this CBA. If the trade clause is already active, however, then the trade clause always remains. So, when Luongo gets moved he will retain his NTC no matter what.


Lancer...don't disagree with anything you said. Edler holds the most value. Of course the reason he holds the most value is why I have reluctance moving him.
I thought that if a player waived his active trade clause the receiving team could opt out of it.....

dbr
CC Legend
Posts: 3048
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 5:37 pm

Re: Roster Questions

Post by dbr » Sat May 18, 2013 6:26 am

Meds wrote:
tantalum wrote:
Reefer2 wrote: wow - serious the team picking the player up does not need to honour the NTC?
That was the way it was under the old CBA. I haven't heard anything different with this CBA. If the trade clause is already active, however, then the trade clause always remains. So, when Luongo gets moved he will retain his NTC no matter what.


Lancer...don't disagree with anything you said. Edler holds the most value. Of course the reason he holds the most value is why I have reluctance moving him.
I thought that if a player waived his active trade clause the receiving team could opt out of it.....
It's exactly the opposite of that.

User avatar
Orcasfan
CC Veteran
Posts: 126
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 8:28 pm

Re: Roster Questions

Post by Orcasfan » Sat May 18, 2013 3:38 pm

Over at CDC, there's a minor discussion sparked by an article by Jeff Angus where he mentions that Lapierre will not be re-signed. Not a big loss, by the way. So that got me thinking about our 3rd and 4th C's (again). And, once again, my eyes are drawn to Detroit. :hmmm: Look at who they have playing as their 3rd and 4th line C's. It seems Andersson and Nyquist fill both roles, play about the same TOI, both Euros, and both have proven themselves as scorers in the minors! Why wouldn't the Canucks want to go in that direction?

I thought Gillis was supposed to be fashioning this team on the Detroit model? If he has, then he has failed miserably! I think everyone knows that the Detroit system starts with scouting, then drafting, then player development. They never rush anyone. They certainly are not worried about the Swedes! But, most importantly, they emphasize skill, while at the same time balancing with size - but not sacrificing skill for size per se. The point, both tactically and strategically, is that every line can contribute to scoring! Their bottom six is filled with young studs, role players (Tootoo) and wily, battle-proven vets. Most of whom have come through their system. So who do we have in comparison? Really, who would you put up to match in quality? Hansen and Higgins are it! Pathetic, isn't?

Instead of signing plugs like Sestito, etc, we should be bringing more guys up from the minors (like Volpatti, who Washington just reupped!) Unfortunately, it looks like Gillis is going to take another wrong turn, now, and emphasize size over skill. So we'll be swaying from one strategy to the next, depending on how our near-sighted GM sees which way the current "wind" is blowing! If he really had confidence in his own vision, he would stick with what works over the long haul.

As you can see, I am becoming more and more disenchanted with GMMG. So much so, that I would not be opposed to a replacement! Of course, the danger with that, is that we could end up with someone even worse!

User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
Posts: 5882
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Roster Questions

Post by Meds » Sat May 25, 2013 12:42 pm

Reefer2 wrote:Kevin does not think a change is needed.

He wants the same type of coach who lets the players lead.

http://www.theprovince.com/sports/hocke ... story.html

Yea Kevin and we saw what came out of that.

This country club atmosphere is what is causing part of the problem (IMO), get rid of that shit and make the players play and hold the accountable.
While reading that link I was rocked with disbelief. I've always liked KB3, but when I hear that I think the time has come for him to be moved out. That mentality is what needs to go. Any of these guys who are content with the country club atmosphere should be given the option to suck it up or waive their NTCs. Kesler's locker clean out interview was the response I want from the players on this team, "I just want to win, and I want to win now."

I'm now a proponent of asking Bieksa if he'll waive his NTC.

Edler
Bieksa
Lou
Ballard
Booth

That is a list of names that should be able to fetch some good pieces if shopped around in various combinations or individually.

User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 17138
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: Roster Questions

Post by Strangelove » Sat May 25, 2013 8:31 pm

Orcasfan wrote: So, according to some of you guys, you wouldn't be interested in players like Datsyuk or Zetterberg because they are not 6'3" and 220 lbs? Really? :look:
6'3" and 220 lb makes a nice fantasy one supposes.
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

User avatar
Orcasfan
CC Veteran
Posts: 126
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 8:28 pm

Re: Roster Questions

Post by Orcasfan » Mon May 27, 2013 6:01 pm

Given the choice, I'd rather move Bieksa rather than Edler. Bieksa, in my view, has already peaked and is heading downhill. Edler...who knows? The problem, of course, is that Bieksa is that much - sought - after right hand D. So, it ain't gonna happen!

Actually, one of the big holes in the long-term is the 1st C, once Hank ages enough. I have absolutely no confidence in Kesler filling that position adequately! :look: He is not a playmaker; he does not make line-mates better. He is a very good 2nd C, and is essential on special teams. But, in the next couple of years, the Canucks need to either draft or acquire a young player who can develop (in 2-3 years) into the #1 C.

I don't think Gaunce projects to that, but I could be wrong. If Gaunce can develop into a good 2nd C, then I can see the team rolling Kesler as the #1, and really having 1a and 1b lines (given the other parts. of course! ;) ).

User avatar
SKYO
CC Legend
Posts: 9273
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:34 pm

Re: Roster Questions

Post by SKYO » Mon May 27, 2013 6:51 pm

Orcasfan wrote:Given the choice, I'd rather move Bieksa rather than Edler. Bieksa, in my view, has already peaked and is heading downhill. Edler...who knows? The problem, of course, is that Bieksa is that much - sought - after right hand D. So, it ain't gonna happen!
Not to mention juice has a full ntc.
Orcasfan wrote: Actually, one of the big holes in the long-term is the 1st C, once Hank ages enough. I have absolutely no confidence in Kesler filling that position adequately! :look: He is not a playmaker; he does not make line-mates better. He is a very good 2nd C, and is essential on special teams. But, in the next couple of years, the Canucks need to either draft or acquire a young player who can develop (in 2-3 years) into the #1 C.
Which is why I am advocate of re-signing the Sedins, they are our best hope for a Cup in these next 5 years if they re-sign.
And if that happens it gives MG, or whatever GM we have, a lot of time to find/draft a future number 1 center for 2018 and beyond.
A long time ago, a baseball player remarked: "If I owned a ballclub, I'd hire a $5,000 coach and a $15,000 scout."

User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
Posts: 5882
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Roster Questions

Post by Meds » Mon May 27, 2013 7:59 pm

SKYO wrote:
Orcasfan wrote:Given the choice, I'd rather move Bieksa rather than Edler. Bieksa, in my view, has already peaked and is heading downhill. Edler...who knows? The problem, of course, is that Bieksa is that much - sought - after right hand D. So, it ain't gonna happen!
Not to mention juice has a full ntc.
Orcasfan wrote: Actually, one of the big holes in the long-term is the 1st C, once Hank ages enough. I have absolutely no confidence in Kesler filling that position adequately! :look: He is not a playmaker; he does not make line-mates better. He is a very good 2nd C, and is essential on special teams. But, in the next couple of years, the Canucks need to either draft or acquire a young player who can develop (in 2-3 years) into the #1 C.
Which is why I am advocate of re-signing the Sedins, they are our best hope for a Cup in these next 5 years if they re-sign.
And if that happens it gives MG, or whatever GM we have, a lot of time to find/draft a future number 1 center for 2018 and beyond.
That's where I would be OK with both re-signing the Sedins to 3 year deals (unless they want more than $5.5M), trading Schneider and our 1st to move up and get McKinnon. That would really load up the center position for us down the road.

McKinnon projects to be a top 6 forward, probably a #1 pivot. I was big on Drouin at first, but watching some of the Memorial Cup, it looks like Drouin is going to be pretty 1 dimensional. A pure scorer who has slick hands and speed and could just as easily go the way of Robbie Schremp as he could become Patrick Kane or Pavel Datsyuk (the latter if he really worked on his defensive game and back checking, he certainly has the hands for it).

Gaunce, from the sounds of things this year, projects to be a 2nd or 3rd line center.

Schroeder could still pan out as a 2nd line center if he's surrounded by some size and can play like St. Louis. Or he's going to be a sought after 3rd scoring line middle man.

Kesler will be around for a while still, and if he really wants to win then he'll mold himself into a total team guy and play where he can best help the team to win games. With what he brings to the ice that can be anything from a 1st line center to a 3rd line shutdown guy depending on his wingers.

User avatar
Per
CC Legend
Posts: 3561
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:45 am

Re: Roster Questions

Post by Per » Tue May 28, 2013 10:52 am

Rödin is returning home and has signed a two year contract with Brynäs.
Whatever you do, always give 100 %!
Except when donating blood.

Post Reply