Rumor: Friedman: Vancouver is a "stealth team" in the hunt for Noah Hanifin

[pitseleh]

Hanifin is a tough player to get a read on. On one hand, he has been sheltered by some good players and he doesn't look like a great defender when you watch him play. On the other, he was sunk by bad goaltending and is actually a 55%ish xGF/Corsi player and a top-20 defender at even strength in terms of primary points per 60 (min 1000). Giving up significant value for him would mean taking on a lot of risk in terms of his ability to play up the lineup.

 

[ProstheticConscience]

I just don't see what we've got that would really interest Carolina besides draft picks and ffs we need more of those, not less. Getting Hanifin would just be more of the same failed strategy of trading for older players/prospects that haven't worked out the way their draft teams hoped they would have. No thanks.

 

[Horse McHindu]

Instead of targeting Hanifin, it might be better to bite the proverbial bonerr and make a package for Dougie Hamilton. Hamilton plays the right side and so he’d be a better fit for us anyways.

1st + 2nd + Tanev

 

[CanaFan]

Instead of targeting Hanifin, it might be better to bite the proverbial bonerr and make a package for Dougie Hamilton. Hamilton plays the right side and so he’d be a better fit for us anyways.

1st + 2nd + Tanev

Or we skip trying to shortcut the rebuild and just do this the right way instead?

Hamilton turns 25 this summer and we look to be a good 3-5 years away from being even competitive again. It doesn’t make sense to be targeting in-prime players this far out from being competitive. Those should be acquired later so their age aligns better with the rest of the core rather than wasting good years missing playoffs.

 

[Kryten]

Or we skip trying to shortcut the rebuild and just do this the right way instead?

Hamilton turns 25 this summer and we look to be a good 3-5 years away from being even competitive again. It doesn’t make sense to be targeting in-prime players this far out from being competitive. Those should be acquired later so their age aligns better with the rest of the core rather than wasting good years missing playoffs.

Considering Hamilton was drafted by Boston after Tranna tried to shortcut their rebuild I think lessons should be learned by now. Who am I kidding I still think we are in the middle of our own Torontoesque failed rebuild

 

[Horse McHindu]

Or we skip trying to shortcut the rebuild and just do this the right way instead?

Hamilton turns 25 this summer and we look to be a good 3-5 years away from being even competitive again. It doesn’t make sense to be targeting in-prime players this far out from being competitive. Those should be acquired later so their age aligns better with the rest of the core rather than wasting good years missing playoffs.

It’s a fair point, but even if we were to use your logic, you’re basically saying that a 28-30 year defenseman would have no use on a competitive team.

Hamilton makes this team better and gives the team a far more realistic shot of making the playoffs. Period. Hamilton would be a long term asset that would fill a HUGE hole on our right side D. Period.

I get whole theory of, “let’s just stay the course and risk being terrible so that we accumulate higher end picks,” but that mindset is dangerous. Why? Because - you risk demoralizing the current prospects/young players within the system by placing them in an environment where they lose almost all of their games. Wouldn’t YOU rather have guys like Horvat, Boeser, Virtanen, Demko, etc., coming into camp thinking that they have a far more realistic chance of making the playoffs?

 

[Horse McHindu]

It’s a fair point, but even if we were to use your logic, you’re basically saying that a 28-30 year defenseman would have no use on a competitive team.

Hamilton makes this team better and gives the team a far more realistic shot of making the playoffs. Period. Hamilton would be a long term asset that would fill a HUGE hole on our right side D. Period.

I get whole theory of, “let’s just stay the course and risk being terrible so that we accumulate higher end picks,” but that mindset is dangerous. Why? Because - you risk demoralizing the current prospects/young players within the system by placing them in an environment where they lose almost all of their games. Wouldn’t YOU rather have guys like Horvat, Boeser, Virtanen, Demko, etc., coming into camp thinking that they have a far more realistic chance of making the playoffs?

I’ll add one more point here:

Under the new lottery system, even a team that barely misses the playoffs has a shot of moving up significantly in the lottery. We saw what happened with Carolina last month.

That’s another reason why I don’t see a huge risk in going after Hamilton. Get Hamilton, push for the playoffs, and even if you narrowly miss like Carolina did, maybe you get lucky one of these years and skyrocket in the lottery.

 

[Kryten]

I’ll add one more point here:

Under the new lottery system, even a team that barely misses the playoffs has a shot of moving up significantly in the lottery. We saw what happened with Carolina last month.

That’s another reason why I don’t see a huge risk in going after Hamilton. Get Hamilton, push for the playoffs, and even if you narrowly miss like Carolina did, maybe you get lucky one of these years and skyrocket in the lottery.

So instead of rebuilding and getting 7.5-18.5% odds at number one overall and hoping for the best lets compete for the playoffs and get 1-2% odds and hope for the best?

 

[ProstheticConscience]

I’ll add one more point here:

Under the new lottery system, even a team that barely misses the playoffs has a shot of moving up significantly in the lottery. We saw what happened with Carolina last month.

That’s another reason why I don’t see a huge risk in going after Hamilton. Get Hamilton, push for the playoffs, and even if you narrowly miss like Carolina did, maybe you get lucky one of these years and skyrocket in the lottery.

Terrible idea. If we're going to chase the lottery, at least chase the best odds not the outlier.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

It’s a fair point, but even if we were to use your logic, you’re basically saying that a 28-30 year defenseman would have no use on a competitive team.

Hamilton makes this team better and gives the team a far more realistic shot of making the playoffs. Period. Hamilton would be a long term asset that would fill a HUGE hole on our right side D. Period.

I get whole theory of, “let’s just stay the course and risk being terrible so that we accumulate higher end picks,” but that mindset is dangerous. Why? Because - you risk demoralizing the current prospects/young players within the system by placing them in an environment where they lose almost all of their games. Wouldn’t YOU rather have guys like Horvat, Boeser, Virtanen, Demko, etc., coming into camp thinking that they have a far more realistic chance of making the playoffs?

I would agree with that... Picking high is good for 3-4 years,but waiting until the stars are right to win the lottery for years after that can be fatal...Thats when losing becomes 'acceptable',and it becomes self-perpetuating....Then,before you know it, your on your 2nd rebuild,on top of your first one.

Hamilton,though..is not a player I would target.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Or we skip trying to shortcut the rebuild and just do this the right way instead?

Hamilton turns 25 this summer and we look to be a good 3-5 years away from being even competitive again. It doesn’t make sense to be targeting in-prime players this far out from being competitive. Those should be acquired later so their age aligns better with the rest of the core rather than wasting good years missing playoffs.

3-5 years before being even being competitive.?.wow..I am optimistic,but that is pretty far in the opposite direction...To each their own.

 

[VanJack]

Any starting and ending discussion on Hanifin is going include the Canucks 7th overall pick...otherwise from the Canes perspective there isn't much point.....guys like Horvat, Juolevi, Virtanen, Pettersson, Demko, Dahlen and Boeser are 'untouchables'.....and I just don't see anyone else on the Canucks roster who would be of any interest to them.

 

[Melvin]

Juolevi, Virtanen, Demko, Dahlen should be in no way "untouchable."

 

[Horse McHindu]

So instead of rebuilding and getting 7.5-18.5% odds at number one overall and hoping for the best lets compete for the playoffs and get 1-2% odds and hope for the best?

I get that, but again, that’s only one half of the coin. The other half of the coin is that consistent losing and consistent bottom 5 finishes start to effect the morale of players.....often times to the point where it effects their motivation and development. Consistent bottom finishes with the hopes of stockpiling high ends prospects is often akin to filling a leaking bucket with water.

Prospects are far more likely to develop when they feel like they are playing//striving for something, and when they are surrounded by players that have achieved great success in the league. For a conducive lockerroom, there should be players within certain age demographics. That is why Benning brought in players to fill in that 20’s age gap when he got here.

I feel that this is a concept that is often lost amongst the “blow it up” crowd and the “lets ignore everyone over 24” crowd.

As far as lottery odds go, we should know better than anyone that poor finishes doesn’t guarantee one a superstar. Meanwhile, teams like New Jersey, Philadelphia, and Carolina were rewarded greatly.

 

[CanaFan]

It’s a fair point, but even if we were to use your logic, you’re basically saying that a 28-30 year defenseman would have no use on a competitive team.

Hamilton makes this team better and gives the team a far more realistic shot of making the playoffs. Period. Hamilton would be a long term asset that would fill a HUGE hole on our right side D. Period.

I get whole theory of, “let’s just stay the course and risk being terrible so that we accumulate higher end picks,” but that mindset is dangerous. Why? Because - you risk demoralizing the current prospects/young players within the system by placing them in an environment where they lose almost all of their games. Wouldn’t YOU rather have guys like Horvat, Boeser, Virtanen, Demko, etc., coming into camp thinking that they have a far more realistic chance of making the playoffs?

He’d have use but only for a few more years. And yet you’re paying a premium to get him at age 25 when you don’t *really* need him until age 28-30. Why waste the assets now? It’s a misuse of the value you are trading away.

Sure Hamilton makes the team better, so will the #7 pick. The issue is whether you want to spend that value acquiring a guy who is halfway through his prime today or a guy who is 3-4 years before his prime and will have his prime align with this team’s competitive window.

As for the “competitive mindset”, it’s been a long running theme of yours and I don’t have the desire to get into a long drawn out debate over the merits or lack of merits of this POV again. In short, they don’t need to go out and acquire Hamilton or Tavares or some other big name to “tell” the team they are being competitive. These are competitive individuals. They will compete regardless. The notion that they will lose all hope and fade away into ruin if they don’t walk into training camp in the fall with an iron clad belief they will make the playoffs is misguided.

It’s simply not necessary to coddle and protect players like they are fragile eggs. They won’t break if they face some adversity. Jesus, some people thrive *because* they go through adversity first.

Build the right way and stop looking for short cuts that will ultimately bite us in the ass just like Gudbranson, Eriksson, etc.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

I get that, but again, that’s only one half of the coin. The other half of the coin is that consistent losing and consistent bottom 5 finishes start to effect the morale of players.....often times to the point where it effects their motivation and development. Consistent bottom finishes with the hopes of stockpiling high ends prospects is often akin to filling a leaking bucket with water.

Prospects are far more likely to develop when they feel like they are playing//striving for something, and when they are surrounded by players that have achieved great success in the league. For a conducive lockerroom, there should be players within certain age demographics. That is why Benning brought in players to fill in that 20’s age gap when he got here.

I feel that this is a concept that is often lost amongst the “blow it up” crowd and the “lets ignore everyone over 24” crowd.

As far as lottery odds go, we should know better than anyone that poor finishes doesn’t guarantee one a superstar. Meanwhile, teams like New Jersey, Philadelphia, and Carolina were rewarded greatly.

Is there some data on this bolded part that you can point us to?

 

[Serac]

Juolevi should be untouchable in a trade for Hanafin. It's basically a lateral move. Difference being that Hanafin is "ready" now but Juolevi is maybe another year away, but we would have to add to Juolevi to which we would then just be bleeding assets.

Unless we can acquire Hanafin for scraps, I'd steer clear. Something revolving around Hutton+ would be my guess though.

 

[Horse McHindu]

Is there some data on this bolded part that you can point us to?

That’s the problem with this new generation. Everything has to be about data and advanced analytics. There’s far more to hockey than that.

Look at the NHL over the past 30 years. Look at how many teams have struggled year after year after year. LOTS of teams......despite many of these teams consistently having high draft selections, and ultimately, not really going anywhere, only to begin a new rebuild a few short years later.

There’s far more to rebuilding than mindless prospect and draft pick accumulation. You know that old Geiko commercial? “It’s so easy a caveman can do it?” That’s not applicable to being a GM in the NHL.

 

[F A N]

Getting Hanifin would just be more of the same failed strategy of trading for older players/prospects that haven't worked out the way their draft teams hoped they would have. No thanks.

Hanifin is one month older than Boeser. And the team that drafted him had hoped he would develop into a #1 Dman. 3 years later, he's not that but he did put up 10 goals and 32 points and made the all star team.

If the reason you're not acquiring him is that he's 21 and hasn't been as good as Carolina had hoped he would be, then that's absolutely stupid. If it's his defensive ability that you're concerned about then that's a valid reason to not pay the expected big price for him.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

That’s the problem with this new generation. Everything has to be about data and advanced analytics. There’s far more to hockey than that.

Look at the NHL over the past 30 years. Look at how many teams have struggled year after year after year. LOTS of teams......despite many of these teams consistently having high draft selections, and ultimately, not really going anywhere, only to begin a new rebuild a few short years later.

There’s far more to rebuilding than mindless prospect and draft pick accumulation. You know that old Geiko commercial? “It’s so easy a caveman can do it?” That’s not applicable to being a GM in the NHL.

So you are basing this broad statement that being on a bad team ruins a prospects developement on... what exactly?

That seems like aa truism instead of anything substantial. That is why Im challenging that statement.

 

[I in the Eye]

Make moves that go for the playoffs, or make moves that challenge for the basement... doesn't matter, the team will still be a bottom feeder. It would be great if this was a philosophical difference in team building, but it's not. They've made moves to try and gun for the playoffs for 4 years already. A bottom feeding playoff team. Just don't involve a 1st in any deal... that would just be sacrificing the future, for the sake of the future. There is no present.

 

[Canucks1096]

I am not quite sure what to think of Hanifin now. Seem to be a lot different range of opinion on him

I don't watch Carolina games. I am going by stats, what I read and YouTube highlights.

Has anybody actually saw a lot of Carolina games that can give a legit scouting reporting on him? What you read a lot of times might not be the samething on what you see.

His strengths?
His weaknesses?
Potential? Number 1/2/3/4 D

 

[PuckMunchkin]

I am not quite sure what to think of Hanifin now. Seem to be a lot different range of opinion on him

I don't watch Carolina games. I am going by stats, what I read and YouTube highlights.

Has anybody actually saw a lot of Carolina games that can give a legit scouting reporting on him? What you read a lot of times might not be the samething on what you see.

His strengths?
His weaknesses?
Potential? Number 1/2/3/4 D

Limited viewing, so take this with a grain of salt;

- a big guy that is still a great skater
- good positionally
- plays a safe solid game in his own end
- carries the puck well
- for what ever reason, I don't remember how he does on the PP

Tanev is better defensively, but other then that he would be instantly our no.1 defender.
Potential to be a true no.1 is still there, but pretty safe bet to become a great no.2

Someone who has watched more Hanifin should correct any misconceptions I might have.

 

[ProstheticConscience]

Hanifin is one month older than Boeser. And the team that drafted him had hoped he would develop into a #1 Dman. 3 years later, he's not that but he did put up 10 goals and 32 points and made the all star team.

If the reason you're not acquiring him is that he's 21 and hasn't been as good as Carolina had hoped he would be, then that's absolutely stupid. If it's his defensive ability that you're concerned about then that's a valid reason to not pay the expected big price for him.

No, the reason why I'm not acquiring him is as I already said: I doubt Carolina is interested in much beyond our draft picks which we badly need. I mean, seriously. Which objectively good players do the Canucks have that could be traded without ripping a gaping hole in the lineup? Not bloody many. I look at the team from last year and which players do I really want to keep? Boeser, Horvat, Edler, Tanev...and...uh...not much else.

I don't think the Canucks are in a position to pay a big price for anyone. Literally all Benning has done is pay out more than he gets back and now there's just bloody nothing left. Enough already. Just build through the draft ffs. Stop trying to find a shortcut that isn't there.

 

[F A N]

No, the reason why I'm not acquiring him is as I already said: I doubt Carolina is interested in much beyond our draft picks which we badly need. I mean, seriously. Which objectively good players do the Canucks have that could be traded without ripping a gaping hole in the lineup? Not bloody many. I look at the team from last year and which players do I really want to keep? Boeser, Horvat, Edler, Tanev...and...uh...not much else.

I don't think the Canucks are in a position to pay a big price for anyone. Literally all Benning has done is pay out more than he gets back and now there's just bloody nothing left. Enough already. Just build through the draft ffs. Stop trying to find a shortcut that isn't there.

I don't think the Canucks have the assets (that they are willing to part with) to get the deal done either. Unlike you, I doubt Carolina is interested in our draft picks unless they can deal it for a player. I don't think they are trading Hanifin for draft picks. If they want our 7th in return, it must be because they have a deal in place for a player.

As for shortcuts, I don't see this as a shortcut at all. Say we draft a Dman with the 7th overall pick. Is he likely to be better than Hanifin? As a prospect Hanifin was highly regarded. A legitimate top 5 pick in a better draft. Where do you think he would have gone in this draft as a draft eligible prospect? Certainly not #7.

IMO Hanifin should/will be a top 4 Dman next season. He does need to get better defensively, but he's Boeser's age with 2 more years of NHL experience. He isn't a prospect and the ceiling is still there. If the 7th overall is what it took, I would make the deal. If the Canucks need to add it will depend on who they need to add. If we need to add a lot more, my gut is that we might be better off simply keeping our pick. But let's not overrate draft picks here. 3 years post draft, how many of us would be happy if say the Dman we picked at #7 is as good as Hanifin?