Granlund vs Shinkaruk

[Cupless44]

In a vaccuum sure, but when you understand that Baertschi was done in Calgary it looks like the Canucks overpaid.

It's funny, whenever the Canucks are in a situation where we get ripped off for a player who's on his way out of the organization people make excuses for Benning because his hands were tied, but when the shoe is on the other foot apparently it's okay to give fair value.

I think there are some other teams who would have given up a reasonable pick to have a look at Beartschi. I don't have a problem giving up a pick for a guy you really believe in but Benning has done it too much obviously.

And yes the asset management is very poor. But some here cant have it both ways. Poor asset management is also not trying to get something for a declining 35 year old Burrows before he is a UFA. Better, more successful franchises move on from veterans. The loyalty, intangible, leadership thing is so overblown in this city. Rebuilding properly with younger, better talent should have commenced 3-4 years ago. The window SLAMMED shut in 2013. I saw it in 2012 playoffs personally.

The window slammed shut in 2013 yet some want to keep trotting out Burrows until he is 40 because he slayed the dragon in 2011. zzzzzzz

 

[y2kcanucks]

I think there are some other teams who would have given up a reasonable pick to have a look at Beartschi. I don't have a problem giving up a pick for a guy you really believe in but Benning has done it too much obviously.

And yes the asset management is very poor. But some here cant have it both ways. Poor asset management is also not trying to get something for a declining 35 year old Burrows before he is a UFA. Better, more successful franchises move on from veterans. The loyalty, intangible, leadership thing is so overblown in this city. Rebuilding properly with younger, better talent should have commenced 3-4 years ago. The window SLAMMED shut in 2013. I saw it in 2012 playoffs personally.

Treliving in his post-deadline press conference said that the 2nd round pick was by far the best offer they received. So it seems like the Canucks probably overpaid.

I agree completely with your second paragraph.

 

[canwincup]

Treliving in his post-deadline press conference said that the 2nd round pick was by far the best offer they received. So it seems like the Canucks probably overpaid.

I agree completely with your second paragraph.

Let's say the Canucks offered what the rest of the market was offering would they have gotten Baertschi then? I bet Treliving would have traded him to a team outside of the conference.

So they might have overpaid but they wouldn't have gotten Baertschi any other way.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Let's say the Canucks offered what the rest of the market was offering would they have gotten Baertschi then? I bet Treliving would have traded him to a team outside of the conference.

So they might have overpaid but they wouldn't have gotten Baertschi any other way.

We don't have enough information to really say one way or the other, which is why it hasn't been a hotly contested issue on here.

Regarding Granlund though, he's always been a replacement level player. Wasting an asset on him when you can get these guys for free is stupid.

 

[Paulinvancouver]

Granlund. Easily.

 

[drax0s]

Regarding Granlund though, he's always been a replacement level player. Wasting an asset on him when you can get these guys for free is stupid.

How many players in the last 2 years acquired for free on waivers have scored as many points as Granlund after being acquired? I'll give you a hint: Two.

 

[CanaFan]

How many players in the last 2 years acquired for free on waivers have scored as many points as Granlund after being acquired? I'll give you a hint: Two.

That may have something to do with the fact that he's being massively overused relative to his actual production. How many guys on waivers had produced like Granlund's last year in Calgary? Cause that's the player we acquired, not the one getting 17 mins a night under Benning/Willie.

 

[drax0s]

That may have something to do with the fact that he's being massively overused relative to his actual production. How many guys on waivers had produced like Granlund's last year in Calgary? Cause that's the player we acquired, not the one getting 17 mins a night under Benning/Willie.

Okay, how many produced even half of what Granlund produced this season? Hint, it's about the same.

Waiver wire very rarely amount to much at all.

 

[CanaFan]

Okay, how many produced even half of what Granlund produced this season? Hint, it's about the same.

Waiver wire very rarely amount to much at all.

We just picked up a player (Boucher) who had more points two years ago (19 in 39) than Granlund even in his current role.

At the start of the year we waived a player (Etem) who had 12 points in 39 games playing mainly on the 4th line (he averaged 13 mins between Van and NYR).

That's just two obvious examples with our own team. 20 points in 50 games at 17 mins per game isn't that rare.

 

[y2kcanucks]

And I also go back to the Brandon Pirri example where he was a 22 goal scorer and was dealt for a 6th round pick.

There are plenty of cheap or waiver fodder who could do what Granlund is doing if given 17 minutes a night.

 

[sting101]

Okay, how many produced even half of what Granlund produced this season? Hint, it's about the same.

Waiver wire very rarely amount to much at all.

Where is Martin Gelinas these days.

 

[CanaFan]

Where is Martin Gelinas these days.

Waiver wire Hall of Fame.

 

[racerjoe]

Oh I understand asset management, and generally the Canucks are very poor in this department. But in this case, people like you are vastly over rating Hunter Shinkaruk as a prospect and stubbornly maintain his value is higher than it is.

I do not believe he has NHL game, and so far neither do 2 separate NHL organizations. He was a late first rounder, Granlund was a 2nd rounder. Big deal. Granlund had better AHL numbers.

As for getting him free on waivers that is nothing more than pure speculation on your part. Unless you talk to the Flames front office regularly. You have no proof they would have put him on waivers the following year, you have no proof they would not have made another deal to avoid doing that.

Maybe some around here do, but you don't think you overrate Granlund?

 

[drax0s]

We just picked up a player (Boucher) who had more points two years ago (19 in 39) than Granlund even in his current role.

At the start of the year we waived a player (Etem) who had 12 points in 39 games playing mainly on the 4th line (he averaged 13 mins between Van and NYR).

You guys both missed the key part of my point. "After they were acquired". Guys picked up on waivers may have at one point produced, but rarely do after they get picked up. Granlund, however, did.

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

You guys both missed the key part of my point. "After they were acquired". Guys picked up on waivers may have at one point produced, but rarely do after they get picked up. Granlund, however, did.

That's probably fair.

But how many get a legit chance? Guys plucked off waivers play a smattering of games with crap minutes usually. Guys for whom the team paid an asset get a much better opportunity because they feel the need to justify the acquisition cost.

So it's a bit of an arrow of causality issue.

 

[CanaFan]

You guys both missed the key part of my point. "After they were acquired". Guys picked up on waivers may have at one point produced, but rarely do after they get picked up. Granlund, however, did.

What's the difference? Look at Granlund's numbers when we acquired him, that alone could have gotten him waived if Vancouver hadn't stepped in. Boucher put up better numbers than Granlund has this year, a season later he's waived. Ditto for Etem. These guys are capable of putting up "Granlund level" numbers, if a team is willing to stick it out with them, though obviously most teams don't bother. And that's sort of people's beef with Granlund. Most teams wouldn't bother, but Benning has strong motivation to make sure his acquisition "succeeds", which is the same reason we stuck so long with Vey too.

 

[y2kcanucks]

What's the difference? Boucher put up better numbers than Granlund has this year, a season later he's waived. Ditto for Etem. These guys are capable of putting up "Granlund level" numbers, if a team is willing to stick it out with them, though obviously most teams don't bother. And that's sort of people's beef with Granlund. Most teams wouldn't bother, but Benning has strong motivation to make sure his acquisition "succeeds", which is the same reason we stuck so long with Vey too.

Which is one of many reasons why the team sucks.

 

[drax0s]

But how many get a legit chance? Guys plucked off waivers play a smattering of games with crap minutes usually. Guys for whom the team paid an asset get a much better opportunity because they feel the need to justify the acquisition cost.

So it's a bit of an arrow of causality issue.

Yeah, that's a good point. Kind of one of those things that'd be hard to prove one way or another, TBH. My gut tells me they get fewer opportunities because waiver acquisitions are generally older and there's less willingness by teams to put up with mistakes, but that's just a hunch. I mean there's not much point in trying to develop a 25 year old waiver acquisition who has flaws, whereas a younger player (21-23) picked up via trade still has that ephermeal "potential", whether they end up realizing it or not.

I just noticed a pattern that guys picked up off waivers tend not to perform well at all across the board minus a few people, whereas there's some been at least some at least serviceable NHL play for people acquired via trade. That flies in the face of the "we could've just picked up a player on waivers to give us what Granlund gave us" argument for me, personally, because few other teams have actually done that.

 

[geebaan]

Yeah, that's a good point. Kind of one of those things that'd be hard to prove one way or another, TBH. My gut tells me they get fewer opportunities because waiver acquisitions are generally older and there's less willingness by teams to put up with mistakes, but that's just a hunch. I mean there's not much point in trying to develop a 25 year old waiver acquisition who has flaws, whereas a younger player (21-23) picked up via trade still has that ephermeal "potential", whether they end up realizing it or not.

I just noticed a pattern that guys picked up off waivers tend not to perform well at all across the board minus a few people, whereas there's some been at least some at least serviceable NHL play for people acquired via trade. That flies in the face of the "we could've just picked up a player on waivers to give us what Granlund gave us" argument for me, personally, because few other teams have actually done that.

doesn't that just tell you to the above point though? That a guy you trade for will get more of a chance, than someone you don't care about you got for free?

 

[Cupless44]

Maybe some around here do, but you don't think you overrate Granlund?

No. I don't like him much really. I just think he is a notch better than AHL fodder.

 

[me2]

How many players in the last 2 years acquired for free on waivers have scored as many points as Granlund after being acquired? I'll give you a hint: Two.

How about UFAs?

 

[racerjoe]

No. I don't like him much really. I just think he is a notch better than AHL fodder.

If you value him more than Boucher, or Pirri than you do over value him.

 

[tantalum]

So while this heated discussionon granlund has really taken off, somewhere around that 3 point game I think, he has a 3 goals 0 assists in 10 games.

In his last 30 games he has 11 points and was blanked in 23 games. I continue to to fail to see what some others are seeing. He's a 30 point forward getting massive amounts of icetime who contributes very little if it isn't one of the rare games he hits the scoresheet. When he hits the scoresheet he may hit it a couple of times so I know people will say consistency is what he needs. I'd say he is consistent....90% of his points come against teams that are not in a playoff spot right now (and they are all wildcard teams).

I might eat my words but I don't expect this player to rise to the occasion of a stretch drive or playoff race.

 

[FroshaugFan2]

You guys both missed the key part of my point. "After they were acquired". Guys picked up on waivers may have at one point produced, but rarely do after they get picked up. Granlund, however, did.

PA Parenteau, Burmistrov, and Puempel have better PPG rates than Granlund since being claimed. So do Andrighetto and Schroeder, who went unclaimed. So does Ribeiro who is on waivers today.

Plus all of these players get less TOI than Granlund.

 

[DL44]

So while this heated discussionon granlund has really taken off, somewhere around that 3 point game I think, he has a 3 goals 0 assists in 10 games.

In his last 30 games he has 11 points and was blanked in 23 games. I continue to to fail to see what some others are seeing. He's a 30 point forward getting massive amounts of icetime who contributes very little if it isn't one of the rare games he hits the scoresheet. When he hits the scoresheet he may hit it a couple of times so I know people will say consistency is what he needs. I'd say he is consistent....90% of his points come against teams that are not in a playoff spot right now (and they are all wildcard teams).

I might eat my words but I don't expect this player to rise to the occasion of a stretch drive or playoff race.

I don't think anyone can argue against what you just described.
The points of contention seem to be - How much can the 23 yr old continue to develop...
And the actual quality of is defensive play.

Otherwise, he's pretty much what you just described ... currently.