Post-Game Talk: [GM39] Canucks defeat Devils | 6-4 (Pettersson(2), Miller(2), Garland, & Joshua) | By the Hair of Our Chinny-Chin-Chin

[nucks88]

So do they start DeSmith against the Rangers and save Demko for the Islanders?

 

[SopelFanThe3rd]

I still like Mikheyev. I think he's been mostly fine.

 

[SopelFanThe3rd]

I don't think Myers has been all that bad but I'd really like to see:
Hughes-Hronek
Soucy-Zadorov
Cole-Juulsen

Would be the steadiest D we have had in ages and pretty physical too.

 

[Chairman Maouth]

It's late for this but I missed it last night. Maybe you did too.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Well, the first question should be why a guy was playing meaningless games last year which put him in danger of missing training camp and put him in position to look this bad. Completely dumb, but I'll leave that topic alone for now.

Sticking with your original line of thinking when there is so much more information isn't what I would describe as 'silly'. Sure, last year people preferred Mikheyev to Garland. Since then we've seen Mikheyev suffer a brutal injury and then come back looking like a fairly limited player. His best asset was his speed and there's no guarantee he's that guy again. Meanwhile Garland has been one of the best forwards on the team and has been extremely effective dating back to late last year when he first started playing with Joshua.

The other information we've learned is that this team is a playoff team. The team is trying to compete this year and there is no doubt who is the more effective player right now and that has to factor in way more than banking on what Mikheyev might show next year or the year after.

The last piece of information is that this team is suddenly flush with depth players who need raises. Blueger is a more important of a player than Mikheyev is. Same could be argued for Lafferty & Joshua - or they are at least comparable. Those three players might combine for 7 million bucks on new contracts which would roughly be the same as Mikheyev and two other 4th liners. Who would you rather have?

All that being said - I don't think it matters. The sentiment out there was that the Canucks overpaid for Mikheyev as a free agent as since then his value has only gotten worse. I don't see why a team would take him right now.

And even though this post is all negative, like I said I doubt he's going anywhere so I'm going to try to be optimistic with Mikheyev. I think he's a smart player that at his best has shown he can be a perfectly fine complementary winger in our top six. If he can be even the guy he was last year then that would be a huge boost to this team down the stretch.

i guess i am seeing this in terms of upside

we are currently at bar none the best possible garland there ever will or could be. two months ago and 75% would have shot him and his play-killing spinning into oblivion out of a cannon.

mikheyev just has a higher upside. more versatile player, can do more things on more different lines, and is very possibly at his lowest possible level. but i agree, his play of late is frustrating to watch.

even within this single season, i would guess that by the end of the rs mikheyev will be the easily better and more valuable player.

nut i guess we also differ greatly in our estimation of garland’s impact. this season and last, i haven’t seen anything from him worth anything until very very recently.

 

[m9]

i guess i am seeing this in terms of upside

we are currently at bar none the best possible garland there ever will or could be. two months ago and 75% would have shot him and his play-killing spinning into oblivion out of a cannon.

mikheyev just has a higher upside. more versatile player, can do more things on more different lines, and is very possibly at his lowest possible level. but i agree, his play of late is frustrating to watch.

even within this single season, i would guess that by the end of the rs mikheyev will be the easily better and more valuable player.

nut i guess we also differ greatly in our estimation of garland’s impact. this season and last, i haven’t seen anything from him worth anything until very very recently.

I don't really disagree in general but I think you have to really factor in how well the team is playing in terms of making moves. There are short-term goals for this team now, if this was any year from the previous decade it would be easy to just sell high on the productive player and cash out. Can't do that with the team near the top of standings.

We'll see what happens with Mikheyev. Yes there are legitimate reasons for why he is playing like he is and also reasons why there is legitimate hope he'll be better going forward. But I think it's also fair to evaluate the current player we have and that player is one not playing up to his contract.

 

[Nucker101]

It's late for this but I missed it last night. Maybe you did too.

This made me chuckle:

Friedman: “you’re one of the best at breaking down and talking hockey, what do you think your guys have done well and what do you need to improve?”

Hughes: *gives typical boring hockey cliche answer and doesn’t really answer the question*

 

[Huggy43]

yes it's pretty funny. most announcers use check points like 5 minutes to play in the period or 5 minutes in but Shorty likes his pot reference

Halford & Brough pointed this out in October & I swear he’s done it every game

 

[AlainVigneaultsGum]

Halford & Brough pointed this out in October & I swear he’s done it every game

One of the first things that pops up for suggestions when you punch his name into Google hahahahaha.

He says 69 a lot too lol.

 

[Wisp]

I still like Mikheyev. I think he's been mostly fine.

He's been perfectly at value. You certainly getting exactly what you paid for.

I dunno, given the dynamics of Garland (simultaneously untradable contract but also somehow valuable to the team because the Canucks third line is slaying everyone), maybe Mikheyev is the player you move to try and try to get an upgrade on as part of a package.

 

[elitepete]

I'll actually rotate on your dick.

can you spin around on the dick without taking it out?

 

[mossey3535]

I don't think Myers has been all that bad but I'd really like to see:
Hughes-Hronek
Soucy-Zadorov
Cole-Juulsen

Would be the steadiest D we have had in ages and pretty physical too.

Myers needs to sit even just to keep him honest. He's been spoonfed minutes on this team.

 

[SopelFanThe3rd]

Juulsen > Myers

 

[JanBulisPiggyBack]

You know we are back to the glory days when a win gets us about 4 pages of post game talk and a loss gets us about 15 pages