I'm starting to get the feeling that the canucks are gonna Make a trade to accommodate the young guys.
is beiga waiver exempt...or does he have to clear
Point Projections:
Assuming they stick for the whole year, how many goals/points do you expect out of Virtanen, McCann, and Hutton?
- Jake Virtanen: 12 goals, 25 points
- Jared McCann: 8 goals, 20 points
- Ben Hutton: 4 goals, 22 points
Hutton > everything
I agree. I love Hutton and hope he stays.
Having said that - can Hutton play the right side?
(i.e.
Edler-Tanev
Hamhuis-Hutton?)
If not, then do you move Edler to the right side?
(i.e.
Hamhuis-Edler
Hutton-Tanev?)
If neither of the above are options, then this is where Jeff Patterson's argument kicks in: Is it better for Hutton to be THE guy down in Utica, get tons of ice-time and responsibility, and then be the first call up when injuries occur on the big club? Is that option better than being a 5/6 guy on the big club and getting limited ice-time?).
My other thought is this:
1) If the Canucks feel that Hutton is ready for Top 4 duty
2) If none of Hamhuis/Edler can play the right side
Do you actually TRADE a guy like Dan Hamhuis NOW (as opposed to trade deadline) and get you 1st round pick + B prospect right NOW, so that you open up the spot for Hutton.
Edler-Tanev
Hutton-Bartkowski
I get the feeling they are going to do what they had planned all along. I don't think either McCann or Gaunce start the year in Vancouver. Too bad for McCann, as he literally has: Worked his tail off, been strong without the puck and in his own zone, looked like he could help our second powerplay unit out a ton, and produced.... Yet I think Jake will still make the team over him. I have a hard time believing management would move prust or dorsset out of the lineup, which would have to be done if McCann + Gaunce make it.
But if you want to play devils advocate, I do believe showing well at this level is different than being able to play 82 games a year. Would McCann show as strongly in the last 20 games as the first 20? Maybe, hell he would improve like horvat. But I also consider this: the canucks have some young talent for the first time in a while... By keeping the vets up MAYBE you are able to sell at the deadline, recoup some picks, plus finish low enough to have a chance at a real impact player.
This group of young players with the addition of a couple high end prospects would be pretty intreguing. Most definetly ahead of where Calgary was a few years ago.
I agree. I love Hutton and hope he stays.
Having said that - can Hutton play the right side?
(i.e.
Edler-Tanev
Hamhuis-Hutton?)
If not, then do you move Edler to the right side?
(i.e.
Hamhuis-Edler
Hutton-Tanev?)
If neither of the above are options, then this is where Jeff Patterson's argument kicks in: Is it better for Hutton to be THE guy down in Utica, get tons of ice-time and responsibility, and then be the first call up when injuries occur on the big club? Is that option better than being a 5/6 guy on the big club and getting limited ice-time?).
My other thought is this:
1) If the Canucks feel that Hutton is ready for Top 4 duty
2) If none of Hamhuis/Edler can play the right side
Do you actually TRADE a guy like Dan Hamhuis NOW (as opposed to trade deadline) and get you 1st round pick + B prospect right NOW, so that you open up the spot for Hutton.
Edler-Tanev
Hutton-Bartkowski
Hutton was on his off side for that first shift cluster **** that resulted in a goal against. Whether he went over the boards on his off side or just rotated over with the flow of the play I don't know. Didn't see him over there again the rest of the game though.
Brendan Gaunce isn't listed on the team roster but I doubt that has to do with it
I agree. I love Hutton and hope he stays.
Having said that - can Hutton play the right side?
(i.e.
Edler-Tanev
Hamhuis-Hutton?)
If not, then do you move Edler to the right side?
(i.e.
Hamhuis-Edler
Hutton-Tanev?)
If neither of the above are options, then this is where Jeff Patterson's argument kicks in: Is it better for Hutton to be THE guy down in Utica, get tons of ice-time and responsibility, and then be the first call up when injuries occur on the big club? Is that option better than being a 5/6 guy on the big club and getting limited ice-time?).
My other thought is this:
1) If the Canucks feel that Hutton is ready for Top 4 duty
2) If none of Hamhuis/Edler can play the right side
Do you actually TRADE a guy like Dan Hamhuis NOW (as opposed to trade deadline) and get you 1st round pick + B prospect right NOW, so that you open up the spot for Hutton.
Edler-Tanev
Hutton-Bartkowski