Confirmed with Link: Canucks re-sign F Alexandre Grenier to 1-Year Deal

[stevecanuck16]

If anything, I think Gillis deserves credit for the idea of stashing Grenier in Austria. The Canucks weren't sure enough about him to waste a contract slot, but he was intriguing enough to be given another shot. Once he did well in Austria, it was now more justifiable to give him a contract. A great tactic to use on late-rounder "project" types.

Benning would have avoided a ton of criticism if he had used the same tactic on Mackenze Stewart.

 

[VC]

We could easily get two NHL players out of the 2011 draft (Corrado and Grenier). Probably 1 from the 2012 draft and easily 2-3 from the 2013 draft.

Factor in the undrafted FAs in Tanev, Lack, and Kenins and all of sudden it doesn't look so bad.

I wouldn't count Grenier in the easy NHLer. He made strides down the stretch but lets not get ahead of ourselves as he has yet to play an NHL game.

 

[skywarp75]

ive only seen a few highlights of this guy but he looked really good

 

[Pip]

I wouldn't count Grenier in the easy NHLer. He made strides down the stretch but lets not get ahead of ourselves as he has yet to play an NHL game.

Fair point.

 

[Barney Gumble]

I wouldn't count Grenier in the easy NHLer. He made strides down the stretch but lets not get ahead of ourselves as he has yet to play an NHL game.

I got tired of being negative the past month or two.

 

[VC]

I got tired of being negative the past month or two.

I'm the opposite, been too positive and now have turned to the darkside.

I don't really care what GM gets credit, I just want the team to do well. I had Grenier as a bust before this season and now I can see him getting some games in. He will be 24 by the start of the season so he would be a good story of being an ECHLer to NHLer. Good to have players actually make through the system.

 

[Barney Gumble]

I don't really care what GM gets credit, I just want the team to do well. I had Grenier as a bust before this season and now I can see him getting some games in. He will be 24 by the start of the season so he would be a good story of being an ECHLer to NHLer. Good to have players actually make through the system.

True. Guess we got spoiled by the success of Burrows seemingly managing against all odds to make the jump from the ECHL-AHL-NHL.

But one can dream....

 

[Horse McHindu]

Grenier's potential to make the team as a RW'er

Grenier's potential to make the team as a RW'er

I like Grenier a lot and hope he makes the team this season. Here is my question however: Given that we have Burrows, Vrbata, Hansen, and Dorsett on our right side, can Grenier realistically make this Canucks squad this season as a RW'er?

Can Grenier play other forward positions? (C, LW)

If Grenier can only play RW, but proves that he's good enough to make the team, then do you really want to move a guy like Hansen? For the record, I absolutely love Hansen and have reservations about moving him. Vrbata is a good guy to move, but I'd move him at the trade deadline if the Canucks are out of playoff contention.

Moving Burrows or Vrbata would hurt our top 6 greatly, while Dorsett's contract is probably unmoveable. If Grenier (or Virtanen for that matter) prove worthy of making this Canucks team, then I think Hansen is the RW'er that you move......although like I said, I'd rather keep Hansen.

Only way I'd move Hansen is if you can package Hansen with one of Corrado or Clandening, and get a good young Top 4 RH defenseman in return.

I might be in the minority here, but I'd rather see Grenier make the team as opposed to Virtanen (unless of course, Virtanen rocks it out of the park). I just think Grenier is more mature at this stage.

 

[Horse McHindu]

True. Guess we got spoiled by the success of Burrows seemingly managing against all odds to make the jump from the ECHL-AHL-NHL.

But one can dream....

Burrows taking a guy like Grenier under his wing could be a great story. Both are French, both came from the ECHL, and neither were expected to amount to anything significant.

 

[DL44]

Burrows taking a guy like Grenier under his wing could be a great story. Both are French, both came from the ECHL, and neither were expected to amount to anything significant.

Well... definitely gotta hand it to you today for spurring the prospect discussions...

I look forward to your Shinkaruk discussion bump!


But for what it's worth... i don't think you should be trading vets to be replaced by zero game NHL players... Not the safest way of re-tooling..
Sure make room for Baertschi's and Kenins.. but moving players out for Grenier or Gaunce etc carries quite a bit more risk.

 

[Horse McHindu]

Well... definitely gotta hand it to you today for spurring the prospect discussions...

I look forward to your Shinkaruk discussion bump!

Shinkaruk's next on my hit list.

But for what it's worth... i don't think you should be trading vets to be replaced by zero game NHL players... Not the safest way of re-tooling..
Sure make room for Baertschi's and Kenins.. but moving players out for Grenier or Gaunce etc carries quite a bit more risk.

Agreed. But again - I think that raises the question. Even if a guy like Grenier proves himself worthy of a roster spot, who do you take out? That right side is pretty stacked, and all 4 of Burrows, Vrbata, Hansen, and Dorsett play very important roles for us.

Gaunce and Virtanen have an advantage because if they make the team, they can play the left side and Higgins is somewhat extraneous.

 

[momo]

We could easily get two NHL players out of the 2011 draft (Corrado and Grenier). Probably 1 from the 2012 draft and easily 2-3 from the 2013 draft.

Factor in the undrafted FAs in Tanev, Lack, and Kenins and all of sudden it doesn't look so bad.

Gillis ran 6 drafts. Frankly if he didn't spend 50% of his picks on over-agers like Mallet and throw-away picks like Morgan Clark maybe this team wouldn't be so bad.