Post-Game Talk: GAME #38 - Canucks vs. Flames - April 7, 2013

[Angry Little Elf]

I didn't really see anything wrong with what Roy said about UFA/being a rental. It's been what? 2 games? Come on now. He complimented the city/team a lot in the interview.

Yeah, Scott Oake worded the question oddly, too

 

[Orca Smash]

Vandermeer? He doesn't have NHL legs anymore. Tanev @ 1.1M? Good luck with that. Basically it means having no real 3rd pairing and using Schroeder in a 4th line role to which he isn't suited. I'm more comfortable with Lapierre.



850K this time for Tanev? He expects him to take a paycut from his ELC? MG would have to acquire McBain from the Hurricanes, he's under contract. Of course, both line-ups are relying on Kassian to fill a top 6 role, which he hasn't been consistent with this season. I'd like to see Torres back, but losing Raymond cuts down on team speed.

Can you contort your line-up to make Roy fit under the cap? Yes. Does it make sense? Not really. I think Roy goes to the East, and the Canucks try to make due with either Schroeder or find a 3C for Malhotra money.

First it does not have to be vandermeer, can be anyone cheap, its an extra depth defense men. Were not signing a 6th-7th d man to much at all.

He also said this does not account for tanev 500k raise at the bottom, even if tanev wanted a bit more, it is easily workable. He is not going to get anything more then 2m, i am expecting a 2 year deal for now at 1.5m, at this point imo. As for lapierre he has not impressed me at all this year, he has given the puck away numerous times in the last few games. I know some people love him but I wont be upset if he walks. Gillis also said some of these journey men like players in the interview with cam cole will have to be replaced with younger players in the future, I assume he talking about people like lapierre.

Also good of you to admit you can in fact add roy, instead of insisting it cannot be done.

 

[RobertKron]

I watched the entire Flames vs Sharks game last night, and it was pretty much the same story. The Flames are playing relatively well right now, I don't think it was realistic to expect the Canucks to dominate them.

Happens often with teams after they're out of it and sell off some guys at the deadline. The pride kicks in.

 

[PG Canuck]

Happens often with teams after they're out of it and sell off some guys at the deadline. The pride kicks in.

Teams that are out of the race, love to play spoilers too. Literally no pressure on them to grind out wins.

 

[Orca Smash]

I watched the entire Flames vs Sharks game last night, and it was pretty much the same story. The Flames are playing relatively well right now, I don't think it was realistic to expect the Canucks to dominate them.

I watched it as well, and they played extremely hard, the sharks seemed to struggle even more then we did vs the flames. At one point sharks fans boo'd the team during the PP.

Calgary is a roster full of prideful vets and young guys trying to stay in the nhl right now, the work ethic at the moment is high, and they played a game full of heart last night and tonight.

 

[JA]

A bit off-topic:

This is from the 1994 Canucks Fan Appreciation Day. When Pavel's name was announced, the entire crowd erupted with excitement. This may be the loudest ovation a Vancouver player has ever received. He helped shape Vancouver into a hockey market:



His jersey retirement will be tremendous. Without a doubt, he is the greatest Canuck.

 

[Derp Kassian]

Not getting another steady 5-6 D type is going to screw this team over eventually. 1 Tanev injury away from having Ballard/Alberts/Barker or some combination of those guys as a pairing.

 

[Hammer79]

First it does not have to be vandermeer, can be anyone cheap, its an extra depth defense men. Were not signing a 6th-7th d man to much at all.

He also said this does not account for tanev 500k raise at the bottom, even if tanev wanted a bit more, it is easily workable. He is not going to get anything more then 2m, i am expecting a 2 year deal for now at 1.5m, at this point imo. As for lapierre he has not impressed me at all this year, he has given the puck away numerous times in the last few games. I know some people love him but I wont be upset if he walks. Gillis also said some of these journey men like players in the interview with cam cole will have to be replaced with younger players in the future, I assume he talking about people like lapierre.

Also good of you to admit you can in fact add roy, instead of insisting it cannot be done.

While it can be done, it's not doable without really cheaping out and becoming weaker in other areas. Not only do you have to trade a goalie (which is in everyone's best interest anyway no matter which one gets traded), you'd have to compliance buyout or trade Ballard and Booth, and most likely let Raymond walk, hope that Kassian is ready to handle a top 6 role, and hope that Tanev doesn't get north of $2M. You also have to fill out your roster with players on ELC's or veteran players under $1M a piece, including 6D, so forget about having a solid 3 pairings on D. No other moderate to big signings allowed.

You're essentially trading Booth, Ballard and Raymond for Roy. While I'm sure some people would do that, does it ultimately make sense to tie up $5M in a 3C, be it Kesler or Roy? Raymond is a speedster who would be on a 20g 20a pace over 82 games, and while Booth slumped this year he's usually in the 20-30 goal range. I still think they find a 3C that will make half of what Roy is going to want.

 

[Tables of Stats]

While it can be done, it's not doable without really cheaping out and becoming weaker in other areas. Not only do you have to trade a goalie (which is in everyone's best interest anyway no matter which one gets traded), you'd have to compliance buyout or trade Ballard and Booth, and most likely let Raymond walk, hope that Kassian is ready to handle a top 6 role, and hope that Tanev doesn't get north of $2M. You also have to fill out your roster with players on ELC's or veteran players under $1M a piece, including 6D, so forget about having a solid 3 pairings on D. No other moderate to big signings allowed.

You're essentially trading Booth, Ballard and Raymond for Roy. While I'm sure some people would do that, does it ultimately make sense to tie up $5M in a 3C, be it Kesler or Roy? Raymond is a speedster who would be on a 20g 20a pace over 82 games, and while Booth slumped this year he's usually in the 20-30 goal range. I still think they find a 3C that will make half of what Roy is going to want.

Why do you have to buy out Booth and Ballard when you could trade them? Also, while losing a guy like Raymond would hurt, I don't think that center depth as opposed to winger depth is a terrible thing. A good center improves a line more than an equally skilled winger and with Hank, Kes, and Roy as our top three centers I think we can get a lot out of Higgins, Hansen, Kasian, and Jensen next season.

The other upside is that it forces us to let our youth play and grow, we can't afford not to let guys on ELC's play if we go this route.

 

[Orca Smash]

While it can be done, it's not doable without really cheaping out and becoming weaker in other areas. Not only do you have to trade a goalie (which is in everyone's best interest anyway no matter which one gets traded), you'd have to compliance buyout or trade Ballard and Booth, and most likely let Raymond walk, hope that Kassian is ready to handle a top 6 role, and hope that Tanev doesn't get north of $2M. You also have to fill out your roster with players on ELC's or veteran players under $1M a piece, including 6D, so forget about having a solid 3 pairings on D. No other moderate to big signings allowed.

You're essentially trading Booth, Ballard and Raymond for Roy. While I'm sure some people would do that, does it ultimately make sense to tie up $5M in a 3C, be it Kesler or Roy? Raymond is a speedster who would be on a 20g 20a pace over 82 games, and while Booth slumped this year he's usually in the 20-30 goal range. I still think they find a 3C that will make half of what Roy is going to want.

Do I think we should tie up 5m in roy? Ask me at the end of the season when we can evaluate him, its been 2 games.

And again your putting stigmas on lines, as i mentioned before gilman said they may consider moving kesler to wing, if not use kesler more in a shutdown role,its not a big deal who is 3c or 2c, if roy could double as a 2c does it make the 5m sound better to you? Also factor in with keslers recent injury history how much value do you put on someone like roy?

Your insisting on arguing something its way to early to discuss. We dont know exactly how much roy's cap hit will be, if the canucks will even want him, maybe he will have a bad playoff and all this is mute, maybe he just wont want to stay here. This all started because you were insisting we cannot keep him at all under any circumstances and several people have posted nice lineups with him re-signed at a fairly high cap hit.

Also on the previous page "Vancouver canucks" posted a line up with raymond and roy which would definitely be workable. Booth and ballard will have to go, and i like both of them, but sacrifices will be made. Is roy worth booth and ballard? Thats what we will find out...If he makes a much bigger impact then those two. If not it wont matter we are even having this discussion right now.

 

[Lindt]

Anyone have the Hansen after hours clip? I can find Roy but don't see Hansen anywhere.

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

One guy who deserves some props for last night is Dale Weise. Scored a goal, threw a huge hit (that took McGrattan out of the game, the same guy who'd taken a run at Daniel Sedin - and fell face first into the boards - earlier), and was effective on the PK. Nice return for him.

 

[thepuckmonster]

One guy who deserves some props for last night is Dale Weise. Scored a goal, threw a huge hit (that took McGrattan out of the game, the same guy who'd taken a run at Daniel Sedin - and fell face first into the boards - earlier), and was effective on the PK. Nice return for him.

It's his blond beard fuzz. Gives him the power to do all.

Also hides the slightly strange jawline.

 

[Samzilla]

Yeah, Scott Oake worded the question oddly, too

that's what scott oake does best: ask awkward and/or inappropriate questions.

 

[Grumbler]

The boxscore shows we were outshot bad and dominated in the face offs against the flames. I guess we were trying right?

 

[MikeK]

I thought we were lucky to be a head after the first half of the game. CGY had 3 posts and Schneider had to make some huge saves. CGY also had some good energy and was bringing it hard for the first 30mins. Had it not been for some lucky bounces and Schneider it could have blown up in our faces. That said, I thought the team looks so much better then we did prior to the deadline. Once Kesler is back this team might actually be a contender after all.

 

[Karl Hungus]

Not getting another steady 5-6 D type is going to screw this team over eventually. 1 Tanev injury away from having Ballard/Alberts/Barker or some combination of those guys as a pairing.

I have the same fear. Our D seems to work fairly well when everyone is healthy. And we have been luck so far this season on the blue line. If we lose Bieksa or Tanev the D starts to get pretty awkward with two guys playing out of their usual position.

 

[Karter]

Worked super late then passed out after looking up the highlights.

What did Roy say in his interview that people keep mentioning?

 

[Barney Gumble]

I have the same fear. Our D seems to work fairly well when everyone is healthy. And we have been luck so far this season on the blue line. If we lose Bieksa or Tanev the D starts to get pretty awkward with two guys playing out of their usual position.

Agree.

Garrison-Ballard pairing didn't look too bad though earlier in the season. Edler's is the weak link in the top four though - pair him up with some of our "lower tier guys" and Schneider will be seeing alot of rubber against him.

Hamhuis-Bieksa
Garrison-Ballard
whoever-Tanev

is still "ok".

First time I've said this, but in the off-season, I'd be open to dealing Edler *provided* we get at least a #4 right side D in another trade/transaction (or part of a package in that Edler trade).

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

Agree.

Garrison-Ballard pairing didn't look too bad though earlier in the season. Edler's is the weak link in the top four though - pair him up with some of our "lower tier guys" and Schneider will be seeing alot of rubber against him.

Hamhuis-Bieksa
Garrison-Ballard
whoever-Tanev

is still "ok".

First time I've said this, but in the off-season, I'd be open to dealing Edler *provided* we get at least a #4 right side D in another trade/transaction (or part of a package in that Edler trade).

Something involving Edler for Shattenkirk would be intriguing. Alas, I think any deals with the Blues for a defenseman set sail after Bouwmeester.