2019 Roster and Fantasy GM Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

Peter Griffin

Registered User
Feb 13, 2003
34,783
7,030
Visit site
Pettersson = no need for Jack Hughes. Would be nice to have him, sure, but there's no reason to pay a premium to get him when we already have a tremendous rookie to fill the 1C spot, plus Horvat as a fine 2C and now Madden in the organization looking quite promising.

I think Jack Hughes ends up being a winger at the NHL level.
 

Pip

Registered User
Feb 2, 2012
69,173
8,486
Granduland
Pettersson = no need for Jack Hughes. Would be nice to have him, sure, but there's no reason to pay a premium to get him when we already have a tremendous rookie to fill the 1C spot, plus Horvat as a fine 2C and now Madden in the organization looking quite promising.

I don’t understand what a B prospect like Madden has to do with whether or not we need Jack Hughes or not
 
  • Like
Reactions: dim jim

kanuck87

Registered User
Oct 12, 2008
7,167
1,460
I'm not saying necessarily any of you are wrong but I think you should start a poll about "Horvat for the 1st OA" in the trade forum and see what the reaction is.

The 3 1sts and Horvat was my realistic trade idea. I'm not saying I would pay that but I imagine that's the price.

The poll is going to be a lot closer than you think it will be. Horvat is currently a 60-70 point two-way centre who plays with garbage linemates and is on an absolute steal of a contract.

He's basically the absolute perfect 2C in almost the same mold that Kesler was.
 

Balls Mahoney

2015-2016 HF Premier League World Champion
Aug 14, 2008
20,402
1,922
Legend
I'm bored at home on Sunday, I'll start it. Let's see what happens. :D

I'm completely open to being wrong on this.
 
Last edited:

kanuck87

Registered User
Oct 12, 2008
7,167
1,460
I'm bored at home on Sunday, I'll start it. Let's see what happens. :D

I'm completely open to being wrong on this.

Me too. And it looks like I will be.

However, I still do think that the value isn't that far off. Like if we attached our 2019 1st round pick (10-15 range) with Horvat, I think a team like Colorado would take it. Not that I think we should offer it.
 

Blue and Green

Out to lunch
Dec 17, 2017
3,411
3,360
I don’t understand what a B prospect like Madden has to do with whether or not we need Jack Hughes or not

Another fair point. I was thinking in terms of where the Canucks' organizational strength is and what the team would be willing to part with to get him compared to other teams, but you're right that Madden isn't much of a factor in any conversation around Hughes.
 

Baby Pettersson

Moderator
Mar 8, 2014
8,294
7,065
Saskatoon
I'm not saying necessarily any of you are wrong but I think you should start a poll about "Horvat for the 1st OA" in the trade forum and see what the reaction is.

The 3 1sts and Horvat was my realistic trade idea. I'm not saying I would pay that but I imagine that's the price.

Horvat is a 1C though. So why trade a 1C for someone who could maybe be a 1C.
 

Josepho

i want the bartkowski thread back
Jan 1, 2015
14,762
8,234
British Columbia
in his defence (which I can't believe i'm saying) madden' +1 is looking substantially better than lind's and he's legitimately outperforming multiple ncaa 1st rounders from that year
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hindustan Smyl

Addison Rae

Registered User
Jun 2, 2009
58,532
10,753
Vancouver
in his defence (which I can't believe i'm saying) madden' +1 is looking substantially better than lind's and he's legitimately outperforming multiple ncaa 1st rounders from that year
Lind was outperforming multiple first rounders, remember those dumb Glass vs Lind debates on here?

Madden is good but let’s pump the brakes here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hindustan Smyl

Addison Rae

Registered User
Jun 2, 2009
58,532
10,753
Vancouver
Agree, but how much value do you put in Hughes being better than Horvat? It’s risky.
It really isn’t, Horvat is great but when’s the last first overall forward that wasn’t better than him?

RNH and Hischier are the only debatable ones aside from the biggest bust ever in Yakupov in the past ~20 years

Nash, Kovalchuk, Ovechkin, Crosby, Kane, Stamkos, Tavares, Hall, Mackinnon, McDavid and Matthews are clearly ahead.

It’s really not much of a risk based on this analysis.
 

Horse McHindu

They call me Horse.....
Jun 21, 2014
9,668
2,650
Beijing
Canucks/Leafs offer

For the record, I DON’T recommend that the Canucks entertain the following offer, but if the Leafs offered us:

To Vancouver: Patrick Marleau (cap dump) + 2019 1st.

To Toronto = ????????

We offer Toronto..........what?
 

Askel

By the way Benning should be fired.
Apr 19, 2004
2,386
774
Malmö/Vancouver
Lind was outperforming multiple first rounders, remember those dumb Glass vs Lind debates on here?

Madden is good but let’s pump the brakes here.
Yeah can we please wait a little bit before we say that Madden would be a 1st rounder in re-draft. Im extremely happy with the that Madden is progressing but there is a big leap from college to the pros.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dim jim

DomY

Registered User
Aug 11, 2008
1,256
141
Canucks/Leafs offer

For the record, I DON’T recommend that the Canucks entertain the following offer, but if the Leafs offered us:

To Vancouver: Patrick Marleau (cap dump) + 2019 1st.

To Toronto = ????????

We offer Toronto..........what?

To play along I think it would actually go something like this:

To VAN: Marleau + 1st 2019 + Liljigren
To TOR: Edler + Granlund

I think the only way TOR gives up their pick is for a dman. Granlund could be a useful 4th line piece. If not, sub in Markstrom and add a small piece coming back to Vancouver to balance it out.

Then we'd send Marleau back to SJS, what I am guessing is the only other team he will play for.

To VAN: 3rd rounder > Conditional 2021 1st if SJS wins the Cup + AHL prospect + Francis Perron
To SJS: Marleau (50% retained)

Van would get a 3rd and the Barricuda top center for Marleau, which is similar to the value the LVGK got back for eating salary on Brassard's deal (4th and Reaves) but inflated slightly for eating more salary. Help out Utica for their playoff run.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hindustan Smyl

Horse McHindu

They call me Horse.....
Jun 21, 2014
9,668
2,650
Beijing
To play along I think it would actually go something like this:

To VAN: Marleau + 1st 2019 + Liljigren
To TOR: Edler + Granlund

I think the only way TOR gives up their pick is for a dman. Granlund could be a useful 4th line piece. If not, sub in Markstrom and add a small piece coming back to Vancouver to balance it out.

Then we'd send Marleau back to SJS, what I am guessing is the only other team he will play for.

To VAN: 3rd rounder > Conditional 2021 1st if SJS wins the Cup + AHL prospect + Francis Perron
To SJS: Marleau (50% retained)

Van would get a 3rd and the Barricuda top center for Marleau, which is similar to the value the LVGK got back for eating salary on Brassard's deal (4th and Reaves) but inflated slightly for eating more salary. Help out Utica for their playoff run.

Good post and I appreciate your contribution.

From my perspective, Toronto wouldn’t be looking to take on salary if they packaged Marleau (or whomever) with a 1st. The goal for Toronto would be to reduce cap space so that they could re-sign Matthews, Marner, and Gardiner.

I’m also of the opinion that the Canucks should NOT let Edler walk (or trade Edler) for the following reasons:

1) Too much pressure exerted on Hutton or a young Hughes.
2) Juolevi is potentially rushed into the NHL. Given his injury history and time off, he needs to develop in Utica, log big minutes, and prove that he can stay healthy.
3) I don’t feel comfortable with that LD depth with Edler gone.
 

Intangibos

High-End Intangibos
Apr 5, 2010
7,806
3,370
Burnaby
To play along I think it would actually go something like this:

To VAN: Marleau + 1st 2019 + Liljigren
To TOR: Edler + Granlund

I think the only way TOR gives up their pick is for a dman. Granlund could be a useful 4th line piece. If not, sub in Markstrom and add a small piece coming back to Vancouver to balance it out.

Then we'd send Marleau back to SJS, what I am guessing is the only other team he will play for.

To VAN: 3rd rounder > Conditional 2021 1st if SJS wins the Cup + AHL prospect + Francis Perron
To SJS: Marleau (50% retained)

Van would get a 3rd and the Barricuda top center for Marleau, which is similar to the value the LVGK got back for eating salary on Brassard's deal (4th and Reaves) but inflated slightly for eating more salary. Help out Utica for their playoff run.

They won't take Granlund. They would much rather a guy like Motte IMO.

I'm not moving Markstrom right now. I just don't think we get enough value for him, and I don't think he's just peaking. I've been high on him for a while and it looks like he's finally finding that focus and consistency that has been what's holding him back. Even with those issues he's behind a team that is not good defensively. He's straight up carrying games right now and while Pettersson was out was maybe our MVP.

He could become a Schneider level piece and I think it's worth the gamble. Don't forget at one point he was considered the best goalie prospect not in the NHL, and IIRC when we acquired him it turned out in Florida he didn't even have a goaltending coach.

I would not pay to acquire or sign an elite NHL goaltender, for their cost I would rather upgrade the skaters for a decent goalie as the gap between elite and above-average is nowhere near what it used to be. This is not how the league seems to see it, and they may very well be right, but above-average goalies are a dime a dozen while elite goalies can get top-15 picks. I'll take the gamble rather than getting a marginal return with the added bonus of bringing Demko along properly.

I'm still really really in favor of moving Gudbranson, I believe his value is quite high to a number of teams. I don't think Dubas has any interest, but coaches, especially ones like Babcock, have a lot of influence over players they target or ship out. Babcock is a great coach, but he seems like one of those coaches who makes questionable player decisions. Leivo not getting a shot is an example of it. AV is a great coach, but Tanner Glass lmao

One of Sutter/Beagle or even Stetcher could be pieces.

Anyway, I don't think Edler + a throw in like Motte will get that level of a return. Edler is a rental. Tanev would have to be going. Toronto could use both a RD+LD so either move Edler+Tanev for a hell of a return or Edler+Stetcher+throw in

I like the pieces you're trying to get and your subsequent move with SJ, but I wonder what it would take to pry Nylander out. He looks awful right now, but do you guys take the gamble he will turn it around? His value must be pretty low and Dubas might be sweating about that contract in a time we have to compete.

It could really backfire, this could be a Eriksson type back breaking contract, but it could be a move that puts us over the top if it works out. If. I don't think $7m is the overpayment people make it out to be (based on his previous production). I preferred Horvat to Nylander but Horvat is still underrated around the league and he got 5.5m. The league is trending in the direction of 22 year olds getting big money when they've performed, and the game is really starting to grow in the US and I think we can expect the cap to keep going up. Getting long-term contracts locked down now has a lot of value, but again when you miss it can really f*** everything up.

Really not sure I would pull the trigger on Nylander, though. If I had quality pro scouts I trusted tell me he's playing fine and just in a slump I might. It's a move that might win you the cup, or cost you the cup. Spooky stuff.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: GoTeamDom

4Twenty

Registered User
Dec 18, 2018
9,987
11,831
The poll is going to be a lot closer than you think it will be. Horvat is currently a 60-70 point two-way centre who plays with garbage linemates and is on an absolute steal of a contract.

He's basically the absolute perfect 2C in almost the same mold that Kesler was.
Let me start this by saying I'm a huge Horvat fan. Really like the kid. Does a lot of things well.

But I have a huge issue with the "currently a 60-70" point C. One, he's never hit 60, never paced for 60, and is currently on pace for 65. There is nothing wrong with that, he's a good player, I just hate how the label doesn't match.

Ie. Toronto fans used to call Phil Kessel a 50 goal scorer, and he may very well have paced that at some stage, but he's never even surpassed 40 goals. So he's not a 50 goal scorer or a 40 goal scorer but got the tag. It's semantics I know, it just bothers me.
Horvat is a 1C though. So why trade a 1C for someone who could maybe be a 1C.
He's a low end 1st. 40th in the league in p/gp from a center. Hes's a really good player. Not all 1C's are equal and Jack Hughes has the potential to be a 100 point C, so there is a massive difference between 60point C and 100 point C.
in his defence (which I can't believe i'm saying) madden' +1 is looking substantially better than lind's and he's legitimately outperforming multiple ncaa 1st rounders from that year
Madden and Lind both have the distinction that they were both old for their draft years. I'm pleased with the progress, but as an example, Quinn Hughes was born in 99 as well, this is his sophmore year, Madden is a freshman.

Madden was a strong pick, who has certainly improved his stock substantially, but again, people, stop pencilling these kids into future lineups. Players like Madden don't make you even pause for a single micro second when thinking about adding a player of Jack Hughes ability.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FacepalmBenning

DomY

Registered User
Aug 11, 2008
1,256
141
Real good arguments here. I also wouldn't move on from Markstrom just yet. I really think Ian Clark has tapped into something great. I think I saw that Markstrom is 10-3-2 in his last 15 games, and the 3 losses were all shutouts. I also don't think the Canucks need that much more major surgery to position themselves positively going forward.

They really need a high end 2C (like Brassard, RNH, Stastny) and I do not know if Gaudette is that player. I'm sure he will be given the chance. He could be moved to the wing though if it doesn't work out at C for him.

The makeup of the D is still in flux. Really have no idea what's going to happen with it. Say you hit on Hughes and decide to keep Edler Tanev Hutton Stetcher and Gudbranson, and Juolevi stays healthy enough to replace Pouliot. If you're building a defense around transition, you'd probably want to get rid of guys like Edler Tanev and Gudbranson, and then you'd probably need to bulk up your forwards with guys who can skate (the new power forward). If you're OK with your D just trying to hold the fort in their own end, then you probably should get rid of Hutton and Tanev. But right now as they are constructed, they are kind of doing both things kind of bad.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->