Canucks News N Notes 24-25

[Meds]

If he can be that good top-4 defenceman the team needs to contend 5-on-5 and on the PK, then $5.5 AAV is a good deal. If he can stay healthy, he appears to play a style that will age well with him.

If this is what a mid-to-high 1st-round pick gets you, I can’t complain. The guy has been invisible in the games I’ve seen, but in a good way. Like nothing really dynamic happens good or bad with him on the ice. That’s not a bad thing.

Thumbs-up on this not-quite-so-low-key bit of roster-building. Hope the scarecrow keeps it up.

The Canucks have looked much better in their own zone and quicker to transition with control since he arrived. That actually is a dynamic shift for this team in a good way. It’s a ery small sample size though.

[Nuckertuzzi]

Hughes (7.85 mil) - Hronek (7.25 mil)
M Petey (5.5 mil) - Myers (3 Mil)
D Petey (ELC) - Soucey (3 mil)

Thank you Myers for taking the 50% cut, and thank you again for being good! A rough start to the year but overall the past year and half has been by far his best throughout the time he's been here. Hope he can keep it up for the remaining 2 years of his term because we're going to need some value contracts back there now that we're going to need to put some $ up front and with the OEL+Mikheyev pain coming next couple years. We should definitely get some ELC value between EPD, TW, and/or any of the other young hopefuls if they can make the jump....couldn't come at a better time.

[Argay Ham]

We have 3 top 4 dmen signed. This is good. Hopefully goes a long way to helping keep Quinn in the fold when his time comes.

Good for Allvin to get this done now. Did he learn from last year? It would have been disastrous to see M Pettersson hit FA.

I think someone in the organization has found their conviction. That's about all I know. And they are winning. We look like the team from last year more and more.

[Topper]

We have 3 top 4 dmen signed. This is good.

time for a 911 call

[Chef Boi RD]

Question. What would you rather:

Zadorov at $5 million per year over 6 years?

Or

M. Pettersson at $5.5 million over 6 years?

Zadorov cost us a 3rd rd pick and 5th rd pick
M. Pettersson cost us a 1st rd pick

[Topper]

Demko humour when the Titanic music plays

https://x.com/spookyghourl/status/1887270624063852846

[UWSaint]

Zadorov or Marcus Pettersson?

As a #3 for a unit on a team trying to play quicker? Pettersson, though this is tentative since we saw a lot of Zadorov and I’ve only caught bits and bops of Pens games over the past 5 years. But from what I’ve see in those bits and bops, he plays intelligently, efficiently and effectively.

Zadorov at his best could make an impact and was amusing to watch, but he was inconsistent and undisciplined. He isn’t solid and steady, what you would prefer as a #3. He’s a 4-5 in profile—an accent to have on a defensive unit for his plus size and physicality and intimidation—and he always has been that. He’s eating big minutes this year in Boston and they are struggling just like the Canucks. I love big z, don’t get me wrong, but I’d rather rely on a player like I think MP is to hold down the second pair.

[Blob Mckenzie]

Question. What would you rather:

Zadorov at $5 million per year over 6 years?

Or

M. Pettersson at $5.5 million over 6 years?

Zadorov cost us a 3rd rd pick and 5th rd pick
M. Pettersson cost us a 1st rd pick

Pettersson all day. Much better player.

[Tciso]

Question. What would you rather:

Zadorov at $5 million per year over 6 years?

Or

M. Pettersson at $5.5 million over 6 years?

Zadorov cost us a 3rd rd pick and 5th rd pick
M. Pettersson cost us a 1st rd pick

Pettersson all day. Much better player.

Agree.

[Meds]

We have 3 top 4 dmen signed. This is good. Hopefully goes a long way to helping keep Quinn in the fold when his time comes.

Good for Allvin to get this done now. Did he learn from last year? It would have been disastrous to see M Pettersson hit FA.

I think someone in the organization has found their conviction. That's about all I know. And they are winning. We look like the team from last year more and more.

The blueline does.

The forwards do not.

[theman]

Question. What would you rather:

Zadorov at $5 million per year over 6 years?

Or

M. Pettersson at $5.5 million over 6 years?

Zadorov cost us a 3rd rd pick and 5th rd pick
M. Pettersson cost us a 1st rd pick

Pettersson all day. Much better player.

Agree.

Same here, he is more consistent and steady. I would have loved to keep Zadarov as an 'X factor' and for his willingness to drop the gloves but that is done now.

[Lancer]

Question. What would you rather:

Zadorov at $5 million per year over 6 years?

Or

M. Pettersson at $5.5 million over 6 years?

Zadorov cost us a 3rd rd pick and 5th rd pick
M. Pettersson cost us a 1st rd pick

Pettersson all day. Much better player.

Agree.

Same here, he is more consistent and steady. I would have loved to keep Zadarov as an 'X factor' and for his willingness to drop the gloves but that is done now.

Different players who play different roles on the blueline. Forget his playoff heroics, and Zadorov was a bigger poor-man's Bieksa - almost top-4 material who plays heavy and mean and can throw in the odd bit of offense. Pettersson is a poor-man's Hamhuis with less offensive skill and hitting; Steady defensive acumen and ability to disrupt play and support the breakout, but that's pretty much it.

It would have been great if you had a player who could do both, but one can only imagine the price tag on such a player.

I still think the blueline could use Zadorov's heavy hitting and attitude. Myers is the only defenceman you could call physically intimidating and willing to use his size for violence, unless D-Petey sticks and even then, the kid needs to add muscle and experience to really play that style effectively. Hopefully management can nab someone with those qualities for the bottom-pairing and have Forbort as the 7th defenceman.

In the meantime, Pettersson is more necessary now than Zadorov.

[UWSaint]

Different players who play different roles on the blueline. Forget his playoff heroics, and Zadorov was a bigger poor-man's Bieksa - almost top-4 material who plays heavy and mean and can throw in the odd bit of offense. Pettersson is a poor-man's Hamhuis with less offensive skill and hitting; Steady defensive acumen and ability to disrupt play and support the breakout, but that's pretty much it.

It would have been great if you had a player who could do both, but one can only imagine the price tag on such a player.

Good post and I like the player analogies. They are imperfect and all analogies, but they do map on to orientation and value in a helpful way. One big difference is that the "poor man" bit can make a substantial difference because there is such a wildly significant marginal advantage to improving the top end of a defensive group than the bottom end. And if the poor men in your analogy becomes the rich men, then there is a serious degradation, and that's what happened when the offseason tried to replace Zadorov and Cole with Desharnais and Forbert.

In addition, what you have around the players matters, how they fit in matters. I'd rather have a MP type than the Zadorov type, but I might prefer an MP type and Zadorov type over two MP types. When you have one, you will miss the other if the grass is always greener on the other side.

As for playoff heroics, Z had some great moments. But am I the only one who thinks it was the defensive personnel more than anything else -- their attributes and weaknesses -- that required the Canucks to endlessly collapse against Edmonton -- and even against Nashville -- and that this was a limiting factor in whether the Canucks could take the game to the opposition instead of just play defensively and reactively? It might have been a coaching decision, but I have to assume that collapsing is what you do when you can't keep up or when you can't take advantage of spacing for breakouts anyway -- its the best structure when other things fail just as the dump and chase is the best zone entry only when all else fails. Z wasn't a good puck mover outside the stretch pass and refused to make himself time by getting on the puck quickly, Cole wasn't a good puck mover (except to the Oilers....), Soucy defaulted to the safest play (the glass) as the playoffs went on, Myers fixates on one play and doesn't adjust when its not there....

[Chef Boi RD]

Chef agrees, M.P. Is preferable

[Lancer]

One big difference is that the "poor man" bit can make a substantial difference because there is such a wildly significant marginal advantage to improving the top end of a defensive group than the bottom end. And if the poor men in your analogy becomes the rich men, then there is a serious degradation, and that's what happened when the offseason tried to replace Zadorov and Cole with Desharnais and Forbert.

Indeed. Management has even admitted that Desharnais and Forbort were bandaid solutions vice their preferred option to replace Cole and Zadorov. They held together alright until Hronek was sidelined, and then Hughes got hurt, and the blueline got exposed big-time as the bottom of the order had to be pushed up. One thing to replace an injured Ian Cole with depth; it's another to replace a Hronek or even Myers, let alone a Hughes. They now have a potential top-4 who can withstand an injury to one of them. Hell, they held off MacKinnon and the Avalanche sans-Hughes. It's the depth at the top of the order they needed addressed, and MP3 fits that bill.

As for playoff heroics, Z had some great moments. But am I the only one who thinks it was the defensive personnel more than anything else -- their attributes and weaknesses -- that required the Canucks to endlessly collapse against Edmonton -- and even against Nashville -- and that this was a limiting factor in whether the Canucks could take the game to the opposition instead of just play defensively and reactively? It might have been a coaching decision, but I have to assume that collapsing is what you do when you can't keep up or when you can't take advantage of spacing for breakouts anyway -- its the best structure when other things fail just as the dump and chase is the best zone entry only when all else fails. Z wasn't a good puck mover outside the stretch pass and refused to make himself time by getting on the puck quickly, Cole wasn't a good puck mover (except to the Oilers....), Soucy defaulted to the safest play (the glass) as the playoffs went on, Myers fixates on one play and doesn't adjust when its not there....

I wager it was a combination of things. I think the Nashville series banged up a bunch of players - Hughes not being the least of them - so the coaches opted to play things extra-conservatively. I also think both coaches and players were too deferent/scared of McDavid and Draisaitl's ability to carve them up, so they doubled-down on conservative play in both the defensive and neutral zone; bend-but-don't-break while continually hemmed in their zone against that line, and hope that they can catch a break when those two were on the bench. It didn't work then, and we've seen it not work this season.

You can say the blueline didn't have the healthy horses to play any other style. Last year's playoffs, you would have a point. I would add that the coaches have to eat some of this. They keep complaining about the players not exiting the zone with possession and speed, but it doesn't seem that any of their efforts to change that have manifested themselves on the ice this season. Either they don't have answers to that question (and that's a problem, if so) or they haven't figured out how to get the players to do it consitently.

Then again, you see how they've played since trading Miller, and you wonder what his presence in the room, on the bench and on the ice played into this season's problems in that regard.