CanucksCorner.com Forums

The team is a mess, but that’s hockey. Consistency year to year doesn’t seem to be a thing anymore in the NHL. I like the Sherwood, Lankinen and DeBrusk signings, those have been a success. The rest not so much and I put Joshua in this category.

If the season’s ends up a complete shit shows, decisions have to be made with

Miller - is he an alpha male prick?
Pettersson
Boeser - UFA
Demko - UFA after this season

Signing Lankinen is looking like a priority

Tocchet needs to loosen the straps a little. The boys seem tight and in fear of fucking up.

Willander hopefully signs at season’s end and gets a few games. He is pretty much a shoe in next season, and potentially his old WJC running mate - D-Pete but man do they need to fix the D. All of the D not named Hughes and Hronek need to go.

I think if we do a smart sell we can be competitive next season. Boeser could land us a mitt full at TDD.

Pettersson could get us 1-2 good top six forwards and a top 4 d plus a pick. But it would have to be a rebuilding or just missed team.

Hoglander maybe a 2nd at TDD less in the off season but would save us 3 million in cap next year.

Dump Desharnais for whatever you can get.

Soucy has one year left so we may be able to move him.

I’d like to see McWard up the rest of the year to see if we have a player next year. He can’t be any worse that Juulssen

The team is off and has been off for a year.

If I was the Canucks management:

Regarding JTM vs Petey - go to Hughes and see who he wants to stay and try to trade the other. That being said, still if the other guy would bring back a much better package, trade him regardless of what Hughes would think. I am assuming the rift is truly real between the two.
Boeser - if won't re-sign for close to current cap hit trade him. Would go no higher than 7.5 mil per on him.
Hoglander - just trade him
Lankinen - would re-sign for no more than 2.25 mil per, anything more than that, trade him. He is an elite back-up that can step up for a while, that's it. Ideally get him for a 3 year deal.

Others: Suter, Desharnais and Heinan - trade for what you can get at TDL. Some playoff bound teams would probably like the depth that would bring to their teams.

I would keep Soucey as I believe 1 of the Canucks management biggest mistakes last off season was letting Cole go. You need some veteran, tough, presence still on that blue line who is competent.

of course this is all on the assumption that you are keeping Tocchet as coach next year.

I think the team's bump last year was poorly understood or something. The signing of Heinen was kind of weird because it's made Hoglander redundant. Debrusk was a solid target and has been a fair value deal, thus far, not many of those are signed anymore. Desharnais was a fair gamble but signing Forbort just kind of seemed like we lost out on some other targets and had to pivot.

I don't really see the need to do anything urgent, other than to keep Hughes happy. Tocchet is fine, the EP/Miller thing can be resolved over the summer, Demko is a huge ? for me...

I think everyone wants a move, but more than likely these moves are done to save jobs and not to improve hockey teams. Which often are horrible.

Argay Ham wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2025 8:36 am I think the team's bump last year was poorly understood or something. The signing of Heinen was kind of weird because it's made Hoglander redundant. Debrusk was a solid target and has been a fair value deal, thus far, not many of those are signed anymore. Desharnais was a fair gamble but signing Forbort just kind of seemed like we lost out on some other targets and had to pivot.

I don't really see the need to do anything urgent, other than to keep Hughes happy. Tocchet is fine, the EP/Miller thing can be resolved over the summer, Demko is a huge ? for me...

I think everyone wants a move, but more than likely these moves are done to save jobs and not to improve hockey teams. Which often are horrible.

Well, yes, you don't just make a move to make a move. Regarding JTM and Petey, the Canucks don't have to get a 'grand slam' in a trade for 1 of them but they can't lose it either. They have to be careful there. Even if a trade doesn't really improve the Canucks on the ice, it could still be a 'win' if it improve the culture in the dressing room.

theman wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2025 8:54 am Well, yes, you don't just make a move to make a move. Regarding JTM and Petey, the Canucks don't have to get a 'grand slam' in a trade for 1 of them but they can't lose it either. They have to be careful there. Even if a trade doesn't really improve the Canucks on the ice, it could still be a 'win' if it improve the culture in the dressing room.

Agreed, man. Doing it right isn't impossible, but it's also not impossible to land a plane without landing gear. I think public sentiment is going to drive what happens the next 6 or so weeks and I can't say I'm overly optimistic.

I’m worried management will make a trade just to make a trade. They don’t seem to a patient leadership.

I predict RT will be gone by end of January if a few more wins don’t happen.

Argay Ham wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2025 8:36 am I think the team's bump last year was poorly understood or something. The signing of Heinen was kind of weird because it's made Hoglander redundant. Debrusk was a solid target and has been a fair value deal, thus far, not many of those are signed anymore. Desharnais was a fair gamble but signing Forbort just kind of seemed like we lost out on some other targets and had to pivot.

I don't really see the need to do anything urgent, other than to keep Hughes happy. Tocchet is fine, the EP/Miller thing can be resolved over the summer, Demko is a huge ? for me...

I think everyone wants a move, but more than likely these moves are done to save jobs and not to improve hockey teams. Which often are horrible.

Outside of Sprong--whose signing more or less required moving out a forward or losing one in waivers--the forward moves by this bunch were good this offseason. I don't think Heinen is redundant to Hoglander at all. The design of the moves--again, Sprong excepted--was (1) increase speed and (2) increase resources who can PK adequately (or better). While DeBrusk hasn't PK'ed much at all, he did so in Boston -- and there were other interests involved in signing DeBrusk. And my impression is that the PK is better for these moves, as is the overall team forward depth. The forward issues are with the pedestrian productivity of the top end.

Defense is a different story. Here they were going for length and size. They decided (rightly, in my view) that signing Z at that price tag wasn't really possible without giving in other areas that needed attention, and so they tried the same model minus the flashes of offense (length, net presence) but on the cheap. Because they believe in the "towers" approach to defense. I have my doubts about the effectiveness of model (particularly on the cheap) because of the mobility and puck movement tradeoff, but it is what it is. Desharnais is not necessarily a bad signing. Forbert is not necessarily a bad signing. But to have both in the lineup with Myers and Soucy? It really is a commitment to trying to squeeze all of your offense and danger into those times when Hughes is on the ice.

For the most part, the Allvin (and JR) moves have made more sense as a group and after the dust settles than individually. (That speaks of a plan). But with the D, I think its the wrong plan because it really fails to take advantage of what you tried to do with the forward group.

Probably all sent down just for cap reasons:

General Manager Patrik Allvin announced today that D Guillaume Brisebois, F Jonathan Lekkerimäki and F Max Sasson have been assigned to Abbotsford (AHL).

https://twitter.com/canucks/status/1879 ... Rc7-srCNGQ

Argay Ham wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2025 8:36 am I think the team's bump last year was poorly understood or something. The signing of Heinen was kind of weird because it's made Hoglander redundant. Debrusk was a solid target and has been a fair value deal, thus far, not many of those are signed anymore. Desharnais was a fair gamble but signing Forbort just kind of seemed like we lost out on some other targets and had to pivot.

I don't really see the need to do anything urgent, other than to keep Hughes happy. Tocchet is fine, the EP/Miller thing can be resolved over the summer, Demko is a huge ? for me...

I think everyone wants a move, but more than likely these moves are done to save jobs and not to improve hockey teams. Which often are horrible.

The EP/Miller thing will be much harder to resolve after July 1st. Right now you have a free and clear option to move Petey without his say-so.

If it’s not as bad as some people think, then an internal resolution that sees them kiss and make up should have happened by now.

2Fingers wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2025 9:25 am I’m worried management will make a trade just to make a trade. They don’t seem to a patient leadership.

I predict RT will be gone by end of January if a few more wins don’t happen.

I think they've been very patient in this.

11 months since Pettersson was a top-line play driver. They extended him and tried to find a winger for him. They've let him try and work this out.

Miller has been off since September.

Soucy, Desharnais, Myers, Brannstrom, Juulsen, and Friedman, have been a disaster.

Heinan took a while to find his footing.

The team that won the Pacific Division last year, and lost to the eventual SC Finalists by virtue of injuries to the starting goaltender, top-line winger, and the psychological collapse of their top-flight center, is now 1 point outside of the playoff picture and barely treading water.

While injuries are indeed part of the reason for this, I think that many management groups would have made a move by now.

UWSaint wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2025 9:29 am Defense is a different story. Here they were going for length and size. They decided (rightly, in my view) that signing Z at that price tag wasn't really possible without giving in other areas that needed attention, and so they tried the same model minus the flashes of offense (length, net presence) but on the cheap. Because they believe in the "towers" approach to defense. I have my doubts about the effectiveness of model (particularly on the cheap) because of the mobility and puck movement tradeoff, but it is what it is. Desharnais is not necessarily a bad signing. Forbert is not necessarily a bad signing. But to have both in the lineup with Myers and Soucy? It really is a commitment to trying to squeeze all of your offense and danger into those times when Hughes is on the ice.

For the most part, the Allvin (and JR) moves have made more sense as a group and after the dust settles than individually. (That speaks of a plan). But with the D, I think its the wrong plan because it really fails to take advantage of what you tried to do with the forward group.

The past 6 Stanley Cup winning blueline corps.....

Florida: Ekblad, Forsling, OEL, Kulikov, Montour, Mikkola

Vegas: Pietrangelo, Martinez, Theodore, Whitecloud, McNabb, Hague

Colorado: Makar, Toews, Byram, Girard, Manson, Johnson & Johnson

Tampa: Hedman, Sergachev, Cernak, McDonagh, Rutta, Schenn, Savard

Tampa: Hedman, Sergachev, Cernak, Shattenkirk, McDonagh, Rutta, Bogosian

St. Louis: Pietrangelo, Bouwmeester, Parayko, Dunn, Bortuzzo, Edmundson,Gunnarsson


The Canucks blueline corps from 2023-24 and 2024-25

Vancouver 23/24: Hughes, Hronek, Myers, Soucy, Zadorov, Cole, Juulsen

Vancouver 24/25: Hughes, Myers, Soucy, Juulsen, Desharnais, Friedman, Forbort, Brannstrom, (Hronek)

I'd say your doubts regarding the tower approach are well founded. The 6 winners had some beef, but few of them were of the tower sort. I believe only 5 of those names are 6'5" or taller, and almost all of them are mobile. The key ingredient here is strength, mobility, and ability (to make a pass).

This comparison also highlights the Canucks' greatest weakness.....our blueline. Only Hughes and Hronek are playing top-4 minutes on any of those teams. Only Myers and Soucy crack the 3rd pairing on those teams, and not consistently.

Highlights with a mic drop.

Blueline help feels close. McWard, D-Petey might be ready now, Kudrayatsev is an intriguing puck moving prospect, and Willander will probably get signed and be in the lineup by April. So, I figured that they didn't want to give anyone (anyone=Zadorov, who had the secret sauce and unfortunately knew it) term as a free agent D but this is the result, a hodgepodge that doesn't really gel or feel viable. We may have a wasted year because of this. I can also imagine some miracle run and minor retooling but it is looking more like this was the experimental year before they got it right.

If EP moves, it would have to be for a haul of assets...it does not have to be for a center as discussed in the media, because they might be looking at Raty being close as a 2/3 pivot for that spot. My dream scenario is somehow getting one of those quality youngsters, the kind that grew up in Canuck pajamas...

Sooooooo....how long til we start profiling the 1st Rd draft picks?