Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGIT?

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

Moderator: Referees

Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGIT?

Postby The Brown Knight » Fri Nov 15, 2013 12:18 pm

Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGIT?

Given where we are in the standings right now, and given how we've faired against elite teams this season, this idea and notion would almost seem to be downright laughable.

However - consider this:

1) We have the number #1 penalty kill in the league
2) Against the elite teams this year, the Canucks have largely outplayed their opponents.......even to the point of dominating them for large parts of the game.......only to fall up short due to their lack of finish.

As it relates to point #2, look no further than the last 5 games or so. Even against the LA Kings, had it not been for Jonathan Quick, the Canucks could have raced out to a substantial lead. Their two games against the Sharks, Ducks, and Coyotes, are also evidence of the Canucks looking like a far more dominant team.

So - would the presence of an 'impact' forward.....

1) Drastically help our Power Play
2) Drastically help our scoring ability 5 on 5
3) Allow Tortorella the option of splitting up Kesler from the twins to give us two legit scoring lines again.......and in effect, not overplaying our stars to the point of possibly risking them burning out later in the year.

With names like 'Evander Kane' and 'Jordan Eberle', and even 'Claude Giroux' being thrown around, perhaps Gillis would be wise to bite the proverbial boner and sell our farm? (p.s. I'd only consider "selling the farm" for Giroux. Not Kane or Eberle).
"I post the Brown Way" ~ Connor McHindu"

The Dark Indian Rises
User avatar
The Brown Knight
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1037
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:42 am

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Postby Blob Mckenzie » Fri Nov 15, 2013 12:31 pm

Yes they are a thirty goal guy who plays with testicles dangling between his legs away from being a contender . What do they have to get said player ?
Tell me how my ass tastes.
User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3066
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Postby The Brown Knight » Fri Nov 15, 2013 12:40 pm

Blob Mckenzie wrote:Yes they are a thirty goal guy who plays with testicles dangling between his legs away from being a contender . What do they have to get said player ?


Honestly, it would probably involving us giving said trade partner

-David Booth (to clear cap space).
-Our Farm (Shinkaruk, Horvat, etc.).

I don't know if the Flyers actually are willing to move Giroux (conflicting reports on whether he's being shopped), but that's what I'd consider giving up for him.

For Evander Kane, I wouldn't give up quite so much, but the package involved would probably be something close to those lines.

Oilers and MacTavish hate us for snubbing them with Corey Schneider and so I doubt they'd deal us Eberle at fair value.
"I post the Brown Way" ~ Connor McHindu"

The Dark Indian Rises
User avatar
The Brown Knight
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1037
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:42 am

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Postby The Brown Knight » Fri Nov 15, 2013 12:46 pm

Also a few things:

1) Unlike the thread I created a month ago (i.e. moving a top 4 d-man for a top 6 forward), I DON'T think we should move a defenseman like Edler for the help up front.......as all that would essentially do is "re-arrange" our strengths (i.e. different team, same results). We'd have more punch up front but would also be highly susceptible to key injuries on the blue-line should there be some.

2) Unlike the thread I created a month ago (i.e. moving a top 4 d-man for a top 6 forward), I am NOT suggesting that we get any 'run of the mill' top 6 forward (i.e. a Wayne Simmonds type........as maybe the thread I created a month ago would have implied).

Given how we've dominated most of our opponents this season, only to fall short due to a lack of finish, I am strongly considering the idea of flat out going for it at all costs. If Giroux is available, sacrifice the farm, and bring him in.
"I post the Brown Way" ~ Connor McHindu"

The Dark Indian Rises
User avatar
The Brown Knight
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1037
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:42 am

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Postby SKYO » Fri Nov 15, 2013 2:02 pm

The Brown Knight wrote:
Blob Mckenzie wrote:Yes they are a thirty goal guy who plays with testicles dangling between his legs away from being a contender . What do they have to get said player ?


Honestly, it would probably involving us giving said trade partner
-David Booth (to clear cap space).
-Our Farm (Shinkaruk, Horvat, etc.)


I agree that this team desperately needs a sniper to help finish off teams better, get that killer instinct back especially in the final minutes of a game/ot.

I'd keep Shinkaruk and Horvat at all costs, the team should trade Jensen first for a big trade, as in one training camp/preseason Shinkaruk already passed him on the depth chart.

To land a player who isn't a rental would cost the team (Booth or Kassian or Hansen or Tanev) + Jensen + 1st.

But for a good rental (Cammalleri, Whitney, Ryder?) it should only cost a 1st or 2nd + one of our lower ranked prospects like: Grenier, Rodin, Anthony, Blomstrand, Labate, Mallet, McNally, Sauve, Friesen, Polasek etc.
User avatar
SKYO
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3318
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:34 pm

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Postby Island Nucklehead » Fri Nov 15, 2013 3:33 pm

Rental market looks like shit (as usual), and the only "impact" player on a team that could be selling is probably Marian "I just tore something and I'm out 3-4 weeks" Gaborik. Word is Columbus will not be re-signing him and will be trading him at the deadline. The cost will probably be a lot...

Another one is Jagr. Does he have enough juice in the tank? 0 goals (10 assists) in last years run to the Finals with Boston. Again, the idea of giving up assets for him? No thanks.

I'd rather not make a play for Calamari... I don't want to give the Flames anything.


Looking at our team, I think we're better off keeping the assets we have and hopefully getting ourselves into the dance this season, maybe make some noise once we're in. We probably won't go far, but any of the used-up garbage rentals won't put us into the "Elite" category anyways. This year always was going to be a "holding pattern" kind of year, IMO. Too soon for the kids to make an impact, too much Booth on the roster, and no flexibility against the cap.

Now if we can make a smaller move for a guy like Matthias or someone else with a reasonable cap hit and some term left, then go ahead. I'm thinking more of the next 2-3 years is our best shot to re-tool and go for it. If we're lucky by 2015/16 we have a nice balance of skill/depth/vets/youth etc. etc. to make some waves.
User avatar
Island Nucklehead
CC Legend
 
Posts: 4078
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:27 pm

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Postby SKYO » Fri Nov 15, 2013 3:54 pm

Island Nucklehead wrote: This year always was going to be a "holding pattern" kind of year, IMO. Too soon for the kids to make an impact, too much Booth on the roster, and no flexibility against the cap.

Now if we can make a smaller move for a guy like Matthias or someone else with a reasonable cap hit and some term left, then go ahead. I'm thinking more of the next 2-3 years is our best shot to re-tool and go for it. If we're lucky by 2015/16 we have a nice balance of skill/depth/vets/youth etc. etc. to make some waves.


Yeah if this a status quo year and the team is going to go all out in the next 2-3 years, then acquiring a player like Matthias to solidify our 3rd line would be beneficial for short and long term success.
User avatar
SKYO
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3318
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:34 pm

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Postby Blob Mckenzie » Fri Nov 15, 2013 5:17 pm

Agree with SKYO . You do not trade Bo or Hunter. Gaunce + Tanev + 1st or 2nd rounder could net a real nice piece from a team but he had best be a guy on this side of 27 and signed somewhat long term for decent dollars.

Its too bad Cammaleri is in Calgary because we all know the price will be higher for Vancouver. He has some gas in the tank and a history with MG and can play the middle in a pinch. A decent playoff pedigree and he isn't a lazy, moody prick like Gaborik.

Whitney looks baked at this point. Not sure about Ryder or what he would cost. Team has a shitload of wingers as it is .

Evander Kane will cost Kassian + Hansen + Tanev. You willing to do that trade ?
Tell me how my ass tastes.
User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3066
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Postby ClamRussel » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:19 pm

Cammalleri would be a fine addition if the price is reasonable, same w/ Matthias.

Kane would be too costly and its not like he's w/o his issues & question marks. Love to have him here but at what cost?

Face it, we're in the problem we're in because Gillis blew it on the goalie front. Landing a decent 1st round pick was great....but it should have come w/ a top 9 forward as well. Even if he had to throw a little something back the other way. Bottom line is, Gillis just solved New Jersey's problem w/ Brodeur's inevitable retirement. The price should have been more. Adam Henrique + 1st would have been fair. Goalies like Cory Schneider don't grow on trees. You could see the look on Lamoriello's face at the draft; he couldn't believe he pulled it off and was trying to look cool about it. Horvat's an awesome prospect but there is certainly a gap on our forward lines thats been there since Manny took that puck to the eye.
"Once a King, always a King"
-Mike Murphy
User avatar
ClamRussel
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3679
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 10:50 am
Location: New South Wales, Australia

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Postby The Brown Knight » Fri Nov 15, 2013 7:35 pm

Good posts in this thread.

I'm also an advocate of keeping Shinkaruk and Horvat..........UNLESS a guy like Claude Giroux is available (there are conflicting reports out there that state that he might be).

Outside of Giroux though (and people of his "ilk"), absolutely not.

Don't get me wrong - guys like Evander Kane, Wayne Simmonds, etc., would be nice additions, but no way we give up Horvat, Shinkaruk, etc.

Only if a cream of the crop type guy is available, would I consider the idea of selling the farm (based on the fact that we've dominated against elite teams this year as far as actually carrying the play but simply not finishing).
"I post the Brown Way" ~ Connor McHindu"

The Dark Indian Rises
User avatar
The Brown Knight
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1037
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:42 am

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Postby Art Vandelay » Fri Nov 15, 2013 8:45 pm

ClamRussel wrote:Face it, we're in the problem we're in because Gillis blew it on the goalie front. Landing a decent 1st round pick was great....but it should have come w/ a top 9 forward as well. Even if he had to throw a little something back the other way. Bottom line is, Gillis just solved New Jersey's problem w/ Brodeur's inevitable retirement. The price should have been more. Adam Henrique + 1st would have been fair. Goalies like Cory Schneider don't grow on trees. You could see the look on Lamoriello's face at the draft; he couldn't believe he pulled it off and was trying to look cool about it. Horvat's an awesome prospect but there is certainly a gap on our forward lines thats been there since Manny took that puck to the eye.


LOL @ the Devils adding Henrique in a package for a goalie with 100 games over 4 years. Sure why don't they throw in Jon Merril and Damon Severson too. Schneider got back market value yet you think Sweet Lou was ripe to be raped. Fucking hilarious.
User avatar
Art Vandelay
CC Veteran
 
Posts: 172
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2013 11:56 pm

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Postby ClamRussel » Fri Nov 15, 2013 9:50 pm

Art Vandelay wrote:
ClamRussel wrote:Face it, we're in the problem we're in because Gillis blew it on the goalie front. Landing a decent 1st round pick was great....but it should have come w/ a top 9 forward as well. Even if he had to throw a little something back the other way. Bottom line is, Gillis just solved New Jersey's problem w/ Brodeur's inevitable retirement. The price should have been more. Adam Henrique + 1st would have been fair. Goalies like Cory Schneider don't grow on trees. You could see the look on Lamoriello's face at the draft; he couldn't believe he pulled it off and was trying to look cool about it. Horvat's an awesome prospect but there is certainly a gap on our forward lines thats been there since Manny took that puck to the eye.


LOL @ the Devils adding Henrique in a package for a goalie with 100 games over 4 years. Sure why don't they throw in Jon Merril and Damon Severson too. Schneider got back market value yet you think Sweet Lou was ripe to be raped. Fucking hilarious.


Only a goalie with some of the best numbers over those games. Only 21 losses in 3 years, a stellar save % and a shutout every 10 games. If it wasn't for the salary cap going down he would never have hit the market. You're out to lunch.
"Once a King, always a King"
-Mike Murphy
User avatar
ClamRussel
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3679
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 10:50 am
Location: New South Wales, Australia

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Postby RyanGinger » Fri Nov 15, 2013 11:06 pm

IMO, with the Sedins/Kes doing well together, we're a Top 6 winger and a 2C from going deep into the playoffs. Higgins is great, but should be our 3LW, not our 2LW. Santorelli has been playing well as our 2C, but would heavily improve our Bottom 6 as our 3C. That leaves van with this forward lineup heading into 2014-15 (face it, there's a small chance we go too deep this year):
1. Sedin-Sedin-Kesler
2. ?????-?????-Burrows
3. Higgins/Shink-Santorelli-Hansen
4. Richardson-Horvat-Kassian
(If we don't acquire a 2LW, Shink/Higgins could play 2LW but hopefully there'll be room for them in our Bottom 6)
--
Trade 1 (2C)
-> To VAN: Ryan Johansen - From Van, big upside, young, big
-> To CLB: Weise, Alberts/Tommernes, Gaunce, Schroeder, 2015 1st

Trade 2a (2LW)
-> To VAN: Evander Kane - From Van, big, young, gritty, goal-scorer, not happy in WPG
-> To WPG: Edler/Hamhuis, Higgins/Hansen, Booth (retain 25% for cap compliance, if WPG even wants him), Jensen, 2nd, 3rd

Trade 2b (2LW)
-> To VAN - Wayne Simmonds - pretty young, strong, solid Top 6 gritty power forward
-> To PHI - Higgins/Hansen, Tanev, Jensen, 2nd
--
For the "Player/Player" situations in the proposals, comment which of the two players traded you think would help the deal go through and/or help us.
--FINAL 2014-15 LINEUP--
forwards:
1. Sedin - Sedin - Kesler
2. Kane/Simmonds - Johansen - Burrows
3. Shinkaruk - Santorelli - Higgins/Hansen
4. Richardson - Horvat - Kassian
defensemen:
1. Edler/Hamhuis - Garrison
2. Stanton - Bieksa
3. Weber - Tanev
(Corrado as our 7th Dman)
--
NTC's to consider: Edler, Hamhuis, Hansen (starts in 2014-15)(modified NTC), Higgins (Limited NTC), Simmonds (modified NTC)
--
-> I checked on Capgeek and all trades, recalls (Horvat, Shinkaruk, Corrado), and resigns (Santo-1.25m, Kassian-1m, resign Johansen in 2014 offseason for 1.6m, Tanev-1.6m if not traded, Weber-0.66m) would work. Also, I'm pretty sure the caps only going up :mrgreen:
-> If an injury occurs, Dalpe, Welsh, and Archibald have all proven themselves to be able to fill in a bottom 6 role
-> Comment whether you'd go with Trade 2a (Kane) or 2b (Simmonds) or neither
-> Please leave feedback
22-33-17
User avatar
RyanGinger
CC Veteran
 
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 7:20 pm

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Postby Todd Bersnoozi » Fri Nov 15, 2013 11:17 pm

I'm not sure if the Nucks are 1 player away from being a legit contender. Maybe if we can land an Ovechkin/Stamkos type. *hehe* More realistically, a E.Kane/Camerlarri type would be nice. The only problem is we are close to the cap and would need to move a high priced player to make room for such a guy. Unfortunately we also have alot of guys with NT clauses, so there's not a lot of options on guys who can be moved. Maybe Edler/Booth? Doubt anyone would want Booth though. It's going to be hard for MG to make a deal for an impact player.

More realistically, I think the Nucks are hoping that our core players will not decline in play too much and hope that some of our prospects like Boho/Shinkaruk/Gaunce/Jensen can step in in the next year or 2 and be very good players right away who will complement our aging star players. Not sure if we have the horses to be a legit contender this season, but if we're lucky we'll have a very strong team in a couple years and make a serious push then.

I think the Nucks are kind of following San Jose's model. Build around your star players (ie - Thornton, Marleau) with great young players (ie - Pavelski, Couture, Hertl). There are 3 important factors needed for this to work though:
1) u hope your star players will not decline too much in the next few years (ie - Sedins/Kes)
2) u hope your prospects will turn out to be as good as u hope them to be (ie - BoHo/Shinkaruk/Gaunce/etc)
3) u hope your prospects can become very good NHL players fast and step in sooner than later.

All 3 factors are needed for this to work. If one doesn't pan out, we're screwed (especially points 1 + 2). :lol:
User avatar
Todd Bersnoozi
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1225
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2005 4:14 pm

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Postby RoyalDude » Fri Nov 15, 2013 11:27 pm

We don't need anybody, all we need to do is flip the switch.

Anybody know when that's going to happen?
"I just want to say one word to you. Just one word. Are you listening? - Plastics." - The Graduate
User avatar
RoyalDude
CC Legend
 
Posts: 4377
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:36 pm
Location: Vancouver

Next

Return to Canucks Corner Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ESQ, Tciso and 3 guests