And yet all of them have cited to play in various spots on the Canucks roster. Gaunce being better than Prust when the actual trade happened was certainly debatable, but you have to appreciate management being wary of another kid mking it out of training camp unless he blew it out of the water.
Perhaps there should have been less emphasis on forcing Virtanen on the roster instead looked at the players who were NHL ready.
So is Baertschi, who just happens to be developing into one of our best players not named Sedin recently. How quickly were people to wave him off as yet another supposed failure? Age does not necessarily equate to experience. Granted, I don't think Vey will amount to anything noteworthy, but he is still considered a young player. The difference between him and the idolization over Zack Kassian is only one kept getting vaulted to the top line.
Vey was giften first PP opportunities for the majority of last season and got plenty of time up the lineup and at no point did he really showcase himself to be a future contributor. He's been a little better this year but still is simply not very good. Zack spent some time with the Sedins, but the vast majority of the time in the bottom 6 and produced at a good rate considering his ice time. He showed flashes of being a real difference maker.
Ironic, yes. But my point was not to compare Vey's over-usage, but essentially an inherent bias. Certain players are deemed bad based on a few games and that narrative never changes. Take Sutter, who frankly, outplayed Horvat and Vrbata handedly at the beginning of the season. Nope, he still sucks.
A few games? Sutter has over 500 NHL games. Taking his 15 or so games at the beginning of the year oftentimes playing next to the Sedins over his career would be completely ridiculous. Sutter is a useful player but is overpaid and not someone who needed to be locked down long-term. He skates fast, has a decent shot and is a good PKer while at even strength is largely trapped in his own zone.
Virtanen is a unique case where sending him back would mean going to junior, thus management kept him around the lockerroom-- an action that ultimately paid dividends. Had they been allowed to send him to the AHL, I suspect he would have been playing there most of this season. As for Higgins and Prust. It's a mixture of both. If we didn't have as many kids playing up and beyond expectations, we wouldn't have waived the aforementioned as we'd have no one to adequately fill the spot.
It's really not an overly unique case since many teams face this situation with one or more prospects every year. How has keeping Jake up paid dividends? This season has been pretty much worse case scenario for Virtanen. He's shown flashes of skill but largely is completely our of his element in the NHL.
It is not a mixture of both for Higgins and Prust. Both players were so god awful that they would have lost spots to AHLers.
Of which we required neither. You're right though, we acquired him to mentor the kids and fight. Perhaps not the best assortment of skills, but given the circumstances of why the trade happened, Prust was basically all we could get. How is Benning supposed to know Prust would throw a hissy fit when every word out of Montreal is how much of a purported character guy he is? The Habs only made the move to clear salary after re-upping Plekanec. They never actually wanted to move him.
If the Habs really didn't want to move him then they would have made room for him. In reality he's an overpaid plug and when you acquire plugs for their supposed character and it blows up in your face you deserve to be criticized. We didn't need a fighter, we didn't need a mentor. His best attributes were redundant.
Zack Kassian ruined Zack Kassian's value. Can we stop this nonsense? The kid is an alcoholic who the team spent three years attempting to work with. Three different coaches threw their hands up and demoted him. Montreal quite literally threw him off the team after he had just been kicked out of Vancouver. At what point do we lay the fault of Kassian on Kassian's shoulders? Benning spent almost all of last season trying to trade him, but no one wanted him. There's a reason we ultimately got Prust. And there's further reason Montreal had to take back Ben friggin' Scrivens.
Montreal got rid of deadweight and got a fifth round pick. Don't think they played it overly well either. Seems like Edmonton gave him a shot and he took it. Kassian deserves blame for getting himself in the situation, I've never argued otherwise, but Benning did not play the situation well at all.
Kassian may be idolized on this board. Around the league? He's a fringe NHL players with far too much baggage.
There you go again. Just because people want him back and think it was a bad trade must mean that we think he's a superstar that's idolized. Kassian had his faults, both on and obviously off the ice, but had enough skill and showed enough in his time here to be worth investing more time into.
Sadly, yes.
For me, it depends on how you evaluate the trade. Benning took a gamble on potentially flipping Prust, all whilst using him as a placeholder and mentor to a youthened line-up. Furthermore, he wanted to avoid the backlash associated with keeping Kassian, but couldn't find any takers. While it ultimately failed, the end result isn't a noteworthy loss.
It was a bad trade for bad reasons. Prust was never going to return a good pick. Benning ends up with the backlash anyway since Kassian is now playing real well in Edmonton.
Kassian had no value, which is why we eventually got Prust in the first place. After his incidents, they just wanted him gone.
and they were wrong to do so