Former Canucks: Players & Management (Willie Desjardins fired by Kings, COO Victor De Bonis to SEA)

[Melvin]

You're talking him up like he had actual value. It's pretty clear both from the trade and his subsequent play that this is a false assumption. Even if you hate Benning's trades, and I know I loathe a few of them, you have to admit that he'sd have held on to Shinkaruk for dear life or asked for way too much in a trade if he thought he was a legit player. As much as we may question the players he targets Benning has only ever traded away pieces he was done with while letting everybody else walk.

This is circular reasoning and creates an unfalsifiable argument. If Benning trades Kole Lind for waiver wire junk right now it would be a bad trade even though Lind is probably 75%+ likely to bust. Lind busting doesn't mean anything because it's always the most likely scenario with a prospect. I didn't care about Shink and think Benning had the right idea to be shopping him.

Moreover, I am not interested in discussing that trade again. As I said. Why we keep having to compare Shinkaruk to Granlund misses the point entirely. My point is that if we swapped Granlund for Rychel right now we would lose absolutely nothing of value so "gaining" him in the first place was not anything that matters. I would actually prefer the younger worthless player who might just maybe break out after a change in scenery (who knows?)

 

[F A N]

He pretty clearly had the same value as Goldobin when we traded for him. Let’s call it value of mid second round pick. Now yes since that trade his value has fallen of a cliff. However we traded him for a player who because of Waivers (doesn’t matter if he was better or not) had no value.

In hindsight shrink sucks and I was wrong about him. I still think he would probably do as good as Granlund has in the same role. They both suck and are both currently worthless. One has just had an absolute ton of undeserved prime playing time.

You think Shinkaruk had the value of a mid second round pick? You should think again.

Granlund outperformed Shinkaruk at the AHL and outperformed him at the NHL level. He was and is the better player.

Funny thing is that some poster(s) bring up Treliving's comments on the trade when he traded Granlund partly to mainly because he was a Centre. Granlund obviously proved he can play wing as well.

At the end of the day, Granlund is the better player who is an NHL player. Shinkaruk is not.

 

[Peter10]

No. Not really. The Canucks get 140 games and counting out of Granlund. The Flames got sweet fanny apple out of Shink.

The decision goes the Benning.

140 games of force fed top 6 ice time in which he played terrible. Probably would have gotten similar results had they played Reid Boucher in that role.

While the decision to trade Shinkaruk has been proved to be the correct one, the targeted return was a bad decision. It turned out to be a loss/loss trade - Flames got a prospect that busted hard and the Canucks got a player with the value of a waiver wire pick up.

 

[F A N]

140 games of force fed top 6 ice time in which he played terrible. Probably would have gotten similar results had they played Reid Boucher in that role.

While the decision to trade Shinkaruk has been proved to be the correct one, the targeted return was a bad decision. It turned out to be a loss/loss trade - Flames got a prospect that busted hard and the Canucks got a player with the value of a waiver wire pick up.

140 games of force fed top 6 ice time in which he played terrible? Did you watch the Canucks play the past 2+ seasons? First off, Granlund hasn't played 140 games with the Canucks. Second of all, I am pretty sure Granlund wasn't force fed top 6 ice time last season. Sounds like someone has no clue.

 

[Megaterio Llamas]

So what? We "got" 120 games out of Linden Vey. Who cares? We are a ****ing terrible team with a GM desperate to prop up his own acquisitions.

No one is arguing that a third round pick would not have been preferable in our situation. Or that a pick was what we really needed. But we did get a marginal NHLer for a washout. Better than nothing, most would agree I think.

 

[Megaterio Llamas]

140 games of force fed top 6 ice time in which he played terrible. Probably would have gotten similar results had they played Reid Boucher in that role.

While the decision to trade Shinkaruk has been proved to be the correct one, the targeted return was a bad decision. It turned out to be a loss/loss trade - Flames got a prospect that busted hard and the Canucks got a player with the value of a waiver wire pick up.

I'm not sure that's fair. I really don't get the hate here. The guy plays in the bottom six and makes peanuts. Discard him when something better hopefully moves up the pipeline. He did play 55 games for Calgary as well. It's not like he's Willie D or a Green fetish.

 

[Peter10]

I'm not sure that's fair. I really don't get the hate here. The guy plays in the bottom six and makes peanuts. Discard him when something better hopefully moves up the pipeline. He did play 55 games for Calgary as well. It's not like he's Willie D or a Green fetish.

Ok, terrible was too strong a word. In an isolated view I dont mind Granlund playing in the bottom 6 for this team (and the state it is in) although I dont understand what he did to deserve a raise. However, this is not a player you should give up any value for. Could have gotten similar results with a waiver player like Pulkkinen.

 

[Megaterio Llamas]

Ok, terrible was too strong a word. In an isolated view I dont mind Granlund playing in the bottom 6 for this team (and the state it is in) although I dont understand what he did to deserve a raise. However, this is not a player you should give up any value for. Could have gotten similar results with a waiver player like Pulkkinen.

Yeah Granlund is just a cheap replaceable part. We don't disagree, He probably shouldn't be among the thirteen man forward group this year. If he's pushing the Gaudette's and the Dahlen's out he's getting in the way of progress.

 

[Peter10]

Yeah Granlund is just a cheap replaceable part. We don't disagree, He probably shouldn't be among the thirteen man forward group this year. If he's pushing the Gaudette's and the Dahlen's out he's getting in the way of progress.

That was just my point in the argument about who "won" the Granlund/Shinkaruk deal. Canucks pretty much didnt get anything which they couldnt have had for free via a different route anyway. Granlund helped this team nothing hence to me that trade is a loss for the Canucks too. In the end both teams traded a piece that had some sort of value (how much is a different point) and in the end got nothing out of it.

 

[Archangel]

Bieska to Edmonton? Someone tossing shit against a wall to check what will stick? Even before they signed the Czech player yesterday, I could not see Bieska going to Edmonton. He has standards

 

[racerjoe]

You think Shinkaruk had the value of a mid second round pick? You should think again.

Granlund outperformed Shinkaruk at the AHL and outperformed him at the NHL level. He was and is the better player.

Funny thing is that some poster(s) bring up Treliving's comments on the trade when he traded Granlund partly to mainly because he was a Centre. Granlund obviously proved he can play wing as well.

At the end of the day, Granlund is the better player who is an NHL player. Shinkaruk is not.

It doesn’t matter what his value was. I just used a second because it was easy. If it was less, what does that say about the Goldobin trade?

Neither player should be playing NHL hockey. One has just been gifted that chance, for two seasons.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

You think Shinkaruk had the value of a mid second round pick? You should think again.

Granlund outperformed Shinkaruk at the AHL and outperformed him at the NHL level. He was and is the better player.

Funny thing is that some poster(s) bring up Treliving's comments on the trade when he traded Granlund partly to mainly because he was a Centre. Granlund obviously proved he can play wing as well.

At the end of the day, Granlund is the better player who is an NHL player. Shinkaruk is not.

I agree with this post. On the other hand, I can see the criticism because, at the time the trade was made, it fell in line with the trend of Benning's other trades for waiver eligible players like Vey, Clendening, etc. I think the criticism is justified in that Shinkaruk should have been traded for a 2nd/3rd/4th round pick based on that pick having a higher potential than Granlund (basically a lottery ticket).

 

[DL44]

Benning made the right read on how he projected Shink's potential.

I still think Granlund has more to give.

Yeah Granlund is just a cheap replaceable part. We don't disagree, He probably shouldn't be among the thirteen man forward group this year. If he's pushing the Gaudette's and the Dahlen's out he's getting in the way of progress.

Flip side of the argument is that if Gaudette and Dahlen are unable to overcome the roster hurdle that is Granlund, it means they are not ready yet.

Granlund's versatility of being able to play in all situations and positions WILL be a tough hurdle for most average rookies to overcome in yr 1. We'll see soon how they show in camp - above/below average... we'll see soon how Granlund shows in camp.

Right now I still have the expectation he's on the opening day roster. For a team that will be hurting for goals, his shot and flash scoring should be in the lineup.

 

[Peter10]

Benning made the right read on how he projected Shink's potential.

I still think Granlund has more to give.



Flip side of the argument is that if Gaudette and Dahlen are unable to overcome the roster hurdle that is Granlund, it means they are not ready yet.

Granlund's versatility of being able to play in all situations and positions WILL be a tough hurdle for most average rookies to overcome in yr 1. We'll see soon how they show in camp - above/below average... we'll see soon how Granlund shows in camp.

Right now I still have the expectation he's on the opening day roster. For a team that will be hurting for goals, his shot and flash scoring should be in the lineup.

The question is not if Granlund is a hurtle but rather if he is made a hurtle to them. While I agree that in case they cannot out play them, they for sure should stay in the minors, I rather think they will have to do more than that. They might be ready but I assume unless they are just incredible, those roster spots will be gifted to the like of Granlund, Schaller, Roussel, etc

 

[JanBulisPiggyBack]

I remember a time when we use to like our own team, now unless you exceed expectations you are hated. I was not a fan of the Granlund trade, in fact I hated it more than the McCann trade by comparison..... but Granlund played well enough that first year to have me easily overcome the resentment of the trade itself, he could play a role on most teams in the NHL as he is an NHL player, and versatile one at that. What he isn’t is a quality top sixer which is the only real arguement you can make against him, but don’t let his deployment on our team lessen his value as a 3rd-4th liner in this league

 

[Peter10]

I remember a time when we use to like our own team, now unless you exceed expectations you are hated. I was not a fan of the Granlund trade, in fact I hated it more than the McCann trade by comparison..... but Granlund played well enough that first year to have me easily overcome the resentment of the trade itself, he could play a role on most teams in the NHL as he is an NHL player, and versatile one at that. What he isn’t is a quality top sixer which is the only real arguement you can make against him, but don’t let his deployment on our team lessen his value as a 3rd-4th liner in this league

He isnt even all that good on a 3-4th line role, at least he probably wouldnt on a half decent team. He looks ok because half of that team is filled with junk. I wouldnt mind him if he was a UFA signed to a cheap contract or acquired via waivers but people claiming him to be a great trade win by Benning made me sour on him. That and the royal treatment he got as a Benning trade target "gotta make him look good no matter how". Probably would have like the player (or at least be ok with him) under different circumstances but not this way.

 

[MS]

140 games of force fed top 6 ice time in which he played terrible? Did you watch the Canucks play the past 2+ seasons? First off, Granlund hasn't played 140 games with the Canucks. Second of all, I am pretty sure Granlund wasn't force fed top 6 ice time last season. Sounds like someone has no clue.

Granlund has played 138 games with the Canucks.

And yes, he was force-fed top-6 icetime in 16-17 and was terrible and then force-fed top-9 icetime (with a long stretch in the top-6) in 17-18 and was again terrible.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

But we did get a marginal NHLer for a washout. Better than nothing, most would agree I think.

the same as nothing, imo

 

[krutovsdonut]

we need someone to do a hitler reacts to the flames trading shinkaruk video.

 

[RandV]

You think Shinkaruk had the value of a mid second round pick? You should think again.

It's impossible to tell at this point but a 2nd rounder is a common price Benning has been paying for guys like Granlund. He was having a solid D+3 year in the AHL and all we know is that Benning was shopping him for a 'comparable' Dman prospect, but when couldn't get that ended up settling for Granlund.

 

[Megaterio Llamas]

the same as nothing, imo

I'd like to play 5 on 4 for a few exhibition games playing nobody in Granlund's stead to test your theory but somehow I don't think the Canucks would be willing to play along

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

I'd like to play 5 on 4 for a few exhibition games playing nobody in Granlund's stead to test your theory but somehow I don't think the Canucks would be willing to play along

haha, i can't tell whether you know what i mean and are yourself not willing to play along, or if you like benning legitimately don't understand that you don't have to trade assets for replacement level players because you can just get for free from waivers or the free agent pile.

i guess either way it doesn't really matter though.

 

[JanBulisPiggyBack]

Who here believes Granlund passes through waivers and who he doesn’t

I think during the season he gets grabbed, at the start of the season when rosters are set he doesn’t

 

[Melvin]

I'd like to play 5 on 4 for a few exhibition games playing nobody in Granlund's stead to test your theory but somehow I don't think the Canucks would be willing to play along

He would be replaced by Tyler Motte or Brendan leipsic or whoever the hell and we wouldn't miss a beat.

 

[Bleach Clean]

This is circular reasoning and creates an unfalsifiable argument. If Benning trades Kole Lind for waiver wire junk right now it would be a bad trade even though Lind is probably 75%+ likely to bust. Lind busting doesn't mean anything because it's always the most likely scenario with a prospect. I didn't care about Shink and think Benning had the right idea to be shopping him.

Moreover, I am not interested in discussing that trade again. As I said. Why we keep having to compare Shinkaruk to Granlund misses the point entirely. My point is that if we swapped Granlund for Rychel right now we would lose absolutely nothing of value so "gaining" him in the first place was not anything that matters. I would actually prefer the younger worthless player who might just maybe break out after a change in scenery (who knows?)

This. People need to pay attention to how this argument is framed:

1. No attachment to Shinkaruk the prospect.

2. Comparison between Granlund to Shinkaruk misses the point entirely.

3. Granlund is replacement level, and so gaining him was not anything that mattered. On the flipside, losing the potential in the youth of Shinkaruk does matter. This all comes down to the methodology of cultivating value from prospects and not squandering that potential value for a fringe player.

I actually prefer a player like Granlund to one like Shinkaruk. That said, the methodology behind the deal is something I cannot agree with. The result does no belie the logic in that trade.