Speculation: Summer 2018 Roster Discussion Part IV

[Maladroit]

Stop making Goldobin sound like a bonafide superstar. He can't even stick up with the big boys on a bad Canucks team. He'll probably be one of those players that moves around alot in his career. As of right now, the trade isn't as bad as you make it sound. Hansen was easily replacable, and that's exactly what we did. It didn't work out for both teams. Oh well.

How is saying "it's too early to write this guy off as a bust given his performance so far" the same thing as saying he's a bonafide superstar? Goldobin is not going to be a star but he still has a good chance to carve out a career a middle six scoring winger. Doug Wilson got fooled by Hansen's one-year SH% spike into believing he was something more than he's always been. It was a dumb trade.

 

[Barrie22]

Goldobin is also rumoured to be on the trading block in vancouver.

So thats not looking good either.

 

[Maladroit]

Goldobin is also rumoured to be on the trading block in vancouver.

So thats not looking good either.

He'll probably end up on waivers after all the idiotic contracts Benning signed this summer. Then some smart team like Arizona will pick him up, give him power play time and watch him score 40 points.

 

[Barrie22]

He'll probably end up on waivers after all the idiotic contracts Benning signed this summer. Then some smart team like Arizona will pick him up, give him power play time and watch him score 40 points.

Lol at smart team like arizona.

 

[Maladroit]

Lol at smart team like arizona.

Chayka isn't afraid to take a chance on skill and the Coyotes could use another top-nine forward. Galchenyuk and Goldobin could be deadly together on the power play.

 

[Dicdonya]

Stop making Goldobin sound like a bonafide superstar. He can't even stick up with the big boys on a bad Canucks team. He'll probably be one of those players that moves around alot in his career. As of right now, the trade isn't as bad as you make it sound. Hansen was easily replacable, and that's exactly what we did. It didn't work out for both teams. Oh well.

Him not sticking was a mistake for Vancouver, not shocking based on the state of that team.

Goldobin spent most of his time playing with Horvat. Together they had positive possession stats, positive GF% and were generally decent together. After Horvat, he played with mainly Virtanen and Boeser, both of which he played fine with statistically.

It appears he was absolutely wrecked playing with the Sedins. As I am not a Van fan, I have no idea why/when they decided to take him off of Horvat's line. However he and Sedin's were an absolute train wreck. He played only 70minutes with Henrik Sedin, and they were on the ice for 1 gf and 8 ga. Yikes. Wonder how much that affected his overall stats.

Horvat primarily played with Boeser and Baertschi. That line looked something like this:

CF% 47.78
FF% 45.48
SF% 47.63
GF% 57.14
HDCF% 47.00
HDGF% 57.14
On Ice SH% 10.60
SV% 92.77
PDO 1.034
ZS% 61.13

So outside of GF% they were not great as a line, with very easy zone starts, and slightly unsustainable PDO. Not great

Add Goldobin to Horvat/Boeser :

CF% 57.02
FF% 57.29
SF% 57.97
GF% 50.00
HDCF% 54.55
HDGF% 100.00
On Ice SH% 7.50
SV% 89.66
PDO .972
ZS% 50.00

That line was leaps and bounds better together. Outside of GF% they were better in every way. They were dominating possession, in harder zone starts, with worse goaltending and lower SH%. Their PDO being so low also shows that line was due for an uptick in production.

Also Horvat's numbers generally were better with Goldobin than without, so its not like that pairing was a one way street with Goldobin dragging Horvat down to prop Goldobin up.

I have no idea what happened during the year that stopped Goldobin from being on Horvat's line, but at the absolute least, he was a better linemate for Horvat/Boeser than Baertschi was, yet Goldobin only got 38 games, while Baertschi got 53.

Goldobin may never be a star, but he was not so bad that he should not have even been playing on the Canucks.

 

[Hinterland]

Him not sticking was a mistake for Vancouver, not shocking based on the state of that team.

Goldobin spent most of his time playing with Horvat. Together they had positive possession stats, positive GF% and were generally decent together. After Horvat, he played with mainly Virtanen and Boeser, both of which he played fine with statistically.

It appears he was absolutely wrecked playing with the Sedins. As I am not a Van fan, I have no idea why/when they decided to take him off of Horvat's line. However he and Sedin's were an absolute train wreck. He played only 70minutes with Henrik Sedin, and they were on the ice for 1 gf and 8 ga. Yikes. Wonder how much that affected his overall stats.

Horvat primarily played with Boeser and Baertschi. That line looked something like this:

CF% 47.78
FF% 45.48
SF% 47.63
GF% 57.14
HDCF% 47.00
HDGF% 57.14
On Ice SH% 10.60
SV% 92.77
PDO 1.034
ZS% 61.13

So outside of GF% they were not great as a line, with very easy zone starts, and slightly unsustainable PDO. Not great

Add Goldobin to Horvat/Boeser :

CF% 57.02
FF% 57.29
SF% 57.97
GF% 50.00
HDCF% 54.55
HDGF% 100.00
On Ice SH% 7.50
SV% 89.66
PDO .972
ZS% 50.00

That line was leaps and bounds better together. Outside of GF% they were better in every way. They were dominating possession, in harder zone starts, with worse goaltending and lower SH%. Their PDO being so low also shows that line was due for an uptick in production.

Also Horvat's numbers generally were better with Goldobin than without, so its not like that pairing was a one way street with Goldobin dragging Horvat down to prop Goldobin up.

I have no idea what happened during the year that stopped Goldobin from being on Horvat's line, but at the absolute least, he was a better linemate for Horvat/Boeser than Baertschi was, yet Goldobin only got 38 games, while Baertschi got 53.

Goldobin may never be a star, but he was not so bad that he should not have even been playing on the Canucks.

Vancouver Canucks: Why the Killer B’s line should stay together

Baertschi is a countryman so I have some additional infos. He was playing injured pretty much all season long battling all sorts of stuff. They tried to promote other guys and shelter Sven several times but it failed. It certainly wasn't for a lack of trying. Assuming Baertschi is back to 100% the Canucks shouldn't break up that line.
Goldobin will never be an NHL regular.

 

[Dicdonya]

Vancouver Canucks: Why the Killer B’s line should stay together

Baertschi is a countryman so I have some additional infos. He was playing injured pretty much all season long battling all sorts of stuff. They tried to promote other guys and shelter Sven several times but it failed. It certainly wasn't for a lack of trying. Assuming Baertschi is back to 100% the Canucks shouldn't break up that line.
Goldobin will never be an NHL regular.

Im not going to get in a big long debate over a player who is not even on our team, but I am not going to change my mind based on one puff piece on the Canucks specific portion of that website, that provides exactly zero reason or evidence within the piece to actually explain why the line should stay together. All it says is "Hey our record wasn't utter crap with these guys leading the way" so keep them as a line.

Maybe that line was good together, ok fine , statistically Goldobin was better for Horvat/Boeser than Baertschi was. Whether the circumstances surrounding those stats paint a different picture or not, I do not know, but at the very least they do not scream that Goldobin is not even good enough to play on the cellar dweller Canucks team, unless they try to staple him to the Sedins I guess, which wont be possible any more.

So sure, they may be a great line together, Goldobin did great with them as well, that was really my only point. Saying he is trash that belongs out of the league because he can't even hold a spot on the Canucks roster, which is essentially what the poster I was quoting was eluding to, was something I disagreed with.

 

[Hinterland]

Im not going to get in a big long debate over a player who is not even on our team, but I am not going to change my mind based on one puff piece on the Canucks specific portion of that website, that provides exactly zero reason or evidence within the piece to actually explain why the line should stay together. All it says is "Hey our record wasn't utter crap with these guys leading the way" so keep them as a line.

Maybe that line was good together, ok fine , statistically Goldobin was better for Horvat/Boeser than Baertschi was. Whether the circumstances surrounding those stats paint a different picture or not, I do not know, but at the very least they do not scream that Goldobin is not even good enough to play on the cellar dweller Canucks team, unless they try to staple him to the Sedins I guess, which wont be possible any more.

So sure, they may be a great line together, Goldobin did great with them as well, that was really my only point. Saying he is trash that belongs out of the league because he can't even hold a spot on the Canucks roster, which is essentially what the poster I was quoting was eluding to, was something I disagreed with.

I do follow the Canucks quite a bit...and everytime I saw Goldobin he played poorly. Even when he scored he still didn't play well. His allround game just isn't there. He's not strong enough on the puck and often out of position against the puck. Desjardins was a very relaxed players coach who lets you get away with such bs. Green, a tactician who's very much into details won't so I'm not surprised about the fact that he wants nothing to do with Goldobin. Goldobin just hasn't improved the slightest bit since the trade and a few points don't make up for his bad game.

 

[Doctor Soraluce]

Wow, way to be condescending as hell.

Seemed appropriate considering his response.

 

[Doctor Soraluce]

I’m not a newer fan at all. The Heatley for Havlat deal was a good move at the time and I never said it was bad.

You even said in a previous thread that you haven't been a fan that long. You're obviously very young and I'm guessing were either in diapers or not even born when the Sharks upset the Wings the first time.

Anyway, the merits of the deal and DW's ability to ditch shitty contracts remain intact. In fact even more so... I forgot Heatley was making 7.5mil when they ditched him. That's like a 9+mil player nowadays. And they got back a player that they had a reasonable expectation would be faster and similar production who wasn't a defensive liability which was the goal at the time. The fluke injury after the fact doesn't change the reality of that trade at the moment in time it was made. If Kane falls off a cliff in 4 years I have little doubt that lifetime GM, DM will be able to turn shit into gold or at least aluminum.

 

[Dicdonya]

I do follow the Canucks quite a bit...and everytime I saw Goldobin he played poorly. Even when he scored he still didn't play well. His allround game just isn't there. He's not strong enough on the puck and often out of position against the puck. Desjardins was a very relaxed players coach who lets you get away with such bs. Green, a tactician who's very much into details won't so I'm not surprised about the fact that he wants nothing to do with Goldobin. Goldobin just hasn't improved the slightest bit since the trade and a few points don't make up for his bad game.

Thats all fine, like I said I am not saying hes a stud, just not garbage as some make him out to be. Maybe the Van coach wont want to play him due to his defensive issues, but I agree with Maladroit that someone will still take a chance on this kid because for everything he is lacking defensively, he still is good offensively, and is still young enough that he may wise up on the defensive side of things, and turn himself from a liability into an asset.

From what I see of him playing with a defensively responsible center like Horvat, as long as he has someone cover his weaknesses, as a duo/line goldobin can be a positive possession, positive gf% player. As long as who ever does have him understands that, I think he will be a fine 2/3 line scoring winger in the end. Only time will tell at this point.

 

[Hinterland]

Thats all fine, like I said I am not saying hes a stud, just not garbage as some make him out to be. Maybe the Van coach wont want to play him due to his defensive issues, but I agree with Maladroit that someone will still take a chance on this kid because for everything he is lacking defensively, he still is good offensively, and is still young enough that he may wise up on the defensive side of things, and turn himself from a liability into an asset.

From what I see of him playing with a defensively responsible center like Horvat, as long as he has someone cover his weaknesses, as a duo/line goldobin can be a positive possession, positive gf% player. As long as who ever does have him understands that, I think he will be a fine 2/3 line scoring winger in the end. Only time will tell at this point.

I don't know. He reminds me a lot of Anthony Duclair or Teemu Pulkkinen. Always good for points...especially in the AHL but also in the NHL. They, however, just don't have the hockey smarts (and probably not the drive) to succeed in the NHL. I used to be a fan of those two, too. Pulkkinen is gone already...Duclair and Goldobin are just about out. Columbus is probably Duclair's last chance...and not a very good one. If Goldobin gets another chance it's also gonna be his last one.

 

[Dicdonya]

I don't know. He reminds me a lot of Anthony Duclair or Teemu Pulkkinen. Always good for points...especially in the AHL but also in the NHL. They, however, just don't have the hockey smarts (and probably not the drive) to succeed in the NHL. I used to be a fan of those two, too. Pulkkinen is gone already...Duclair and Goldobin are just about out. Columbus is probably Duclair's last chance...and not a very good one. If Goldobin gets another chance it's also gonna be his last one.

I would agree with that most likely, it may not be their completely last chance, if they get to like 25 and still have not scratched out a decent start to a career by then, I agree they are almost certainly done though. Only slight difference in opinion is I do not think its a smarts issue with Goldobin, but more the drive issue as you put it.

Anyways, it does not seem like we actually disagree on much here, just minor differences of opinion which is cool. So I am just gunna leave this conversation here, and just have to wait and see what the future brings for Goldobin.

 

[Barrie22]

Every one knew goldobin was a boom or bust player. What i and i believe a lot of others were excited about with him was that he was an offense oriented player that knew he had to work on his defensive game and he had the willingness to do it.

But his 2 years in san jose he didn't show any of that willingness to change his game and it has now continued to his 2 years in vancouver.

 

[Maladroit]

I agree that this is a make or break year for Goldobin. If we're sitting here having the same conversation next summer he's done as a NHLer barring massive KHL production that gets him a look later on in his career a la Dadonov. But he's definitely good enough to play on some NHL teams right now. Wingers just don't make that much of an impact on defense for his defensive game to be that much of a detriment when he can obviously score. He isn't Boedker-level awful without the puck either.

That's why I'm hoping a team like Arizona can pick him up, maybe play him on a sheltered scoring line with Perlini and Galchenyuk, give him power play time and watch the points pile up. If they don't pile up then he's a bust and that's that. But he hasn't been given that opportunity yet and any time he's actually been given an extended NHL audition he's done things like this:

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

I was at that game where he walked Doughty and scored. It was awesome.

 

[Juxtaposer]

You even said in a previous thread that you haven't been a fan that long. You're obviously very young and I'm guessing were either in diapers or not even born when the Sharks upset the Wings the first time.

Anyway, the merits of the deal and DW's ability to ditch ****ty contracts remain intact. In fact even more so... I forgot Heatley was making 7.5mil when they ditched him. That's like a 9+mil player nowadays. And they got back a player that they had a reasonable expectation would be faster and similar production who wasn't a defensive liability which was the goal at the time. The fluke injury after the fact doesn't change the reality of that trade at the moment in time it was made. If Kane falls off a cliff in 4 years I have little doubt that lifetime GM, DM will be able to turn **** into gold or at least aluminum.

You do realize that “in diapers when the Sharks upset the Red Wings” includes 25 year olds like me, right? Wouldn’t exactly call myself “very young”.

 

[SnarkAttack]

"That doesn’t look good for young forwards Adam Gaudette and Nikolay Goldobin, who looked primed for more ice time and opportunities in 2018-19."

From the same Canucks writer who wrote about the "killer B's"

2 thoughts:

1. What an overused line name, and that line wasn't exactly killer. To be fair, most line names are stupid.

2. That writer seemed to think that Goldobin was ready for more opportunities. Just because Benning signed other players doesn't show anything. Benning is a complete idiot.

I'm not saying Goldobin is amazing either, but he still can't be written off, even if he may be approaching that time.

 

[SnarkAttack]

You even said in a previous thread that you haven't been a fan that long. You're obviously very young and I'm guessing were either in diapers or not even born when the Sharks upset the Wings the first time.

There is so much readily accessible information that "being there" doesn't mean you know more about it. I became a fan in the early days of Owen Nolan, but I could tell you about the days before him better than most who watched from the beginning of the franchise.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

You even said in a previous thread that you haven't been a fan that long. You're obviously very young and I'm guessing were either in diapers or not even born when the Sharks upset the Wings the first time.

Anyway, the merits of the deal and DW's ability to ditch ****ty contracts remain intact. In fact even more so... I forgot Heatley was making 7.5mil when they ditched him. That's like a 9+mil player nowadays. And they got back a player that they had a reasonable expectation would be faster and similar production who wasn't a defensive liability which was the goal at the time. The fluke injury after the fact doesn't change the reality of that trade at the moment in time it was made. If Kane falls off a cliff in 4 years I have little doubt that lifetime GM, DM will be able to turn **** into gold or at least aluminum.

Yeah, I am 21 years old, and I was not even born when the Sharks beat the Red Wings in 1994. How on earth is that relevant to the Heatley for Havlat trade that occurred in 2011? What does me “obviously being young” provide this argument, outside from a chance for you to attempt (and fail) to condescend me.

Havlat’s injuries weren’t really just fluke injuries either. Although he had been relatively healthy in the 3 seasons before he got here, he had a long history of constantly being injured prior to that. It was the defining trait of his career and he got injured in every season he played here. He was an injury prone 60 point player with 4 years left at $5M on his contract. There was a lot of risk in taking on that contract that we ended up buying out.

Heatley did make $7.5M back then, and that was like $9M today. But he also scored like a $9M player today. Heatley had scored 104 goals and 218 points in the 3 seasons before we traded him. A 35 goal, 38 assist player (Heatley’s average over his last 3 seasons before we traded him) would be worth around $9M today. Meanwhile, Kane, who averages 26 goals and 18 assists over his past 3 seasons, is not even worth $6M. That, along with the fact that Kane has 7 more years, and Heatley only had 3, makes it pretty obvious that the resolution of the Heatley situation, which was us trading a bonafide star 1st liner for a decent 1st liner with an injury history on a fairly sketchy contract that we ended up buying out, is NOT something that can make us say “Oh yeah, we’ve got nothing to worry about with the Vlasic, Couture, Jones, and Burns contracts - let alone the f***ing joke that is the Kane contract.”

There is so much readily accessible information that "being there" doesn't mean you know more about it. I became a fan in the early days of Owen Nolan, but I could tell you about the days before him better than most who watched from the beginning of the franchise.

There is this, but I was also literally there for the entirety of the Heatley era.

 

[stator]

Yeah, I am 21 years old,

I have a hard time with those that cannot drink bourbon when the game goes south.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Also, one final reason that the Heatley trade is in no way a sign that the Vlasic/Burns/Couture/Kane/Jones contracts are not a problem: Every single one of these players have a 3 team modified NTC (outside of Vlasic who has a full NMC for the first 4 years and then transitions to a 3 team NTC for the final 4) and none of these players would ever in a million years list a Minnesota team who just missed the playoffs and then traded their best player and only all-star as one of the 3 teams they would accept a trade to.

I have a hard time with those that cannot drink bourbon when the game goes south.

Lol, I was already drinking during the Sharks’ SCF run but I’ve been sober since the midway point of the 2016-2017 season.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Also, one final reason that the Heatley trade is in no way a sign that the Vlasic/Burns/Couture/Kane/Jones contracts are not a problem: Every single one of these players have a 3 team modified NTC (outside of Vlasic who has a full NMC for the first 4 years and then transitions to a 3 team NTC for the final 4) and none of these players would ever in a million years list a Minnesota team who just missed the playoffs and then traded their best player and only all-star as one of the 3 teams they would accept a trade to.

The Heatley trade isn't a sign to that specific a degree. Heatley reportedly had a full NMC when he was dealt to San Jose and then had a 10 team no-trade list when he was dealt to Minnesota that was not known of at the time. Chances are that these contracts will be more difficult to move but I honestly don't have the same level of concern over these contracts as you and a few others do. I don't expect any of these guys to decline in a manner like Heatley did and I think the contracts are movable and that's all I really care about. When someone starts declining, I only care that they're able to move it, not necessarily get value back.

 

[Maladroit]

The Heatley trade isn't a sign to that specific a degree. Heatley reportedly had a full NMC when he was dealt to San Jose and then had a 10 team no-trade list when he was dealt to Minnesota that was not known of at the time. Chances are that these contracts will be more difficult to move but I honestly don't have the same level of concern over these contracts as you and a few others do. I don't expect any of these guys to decline in a manner like Heatley did and I think the contracts are movable and that's all I really care about. When someone starts declining, I only care that they're able to move it, not necessarily get value back.

None of us care about getting value back for these contracts either, what I'm concerned about is the high likelihood that moving the Kane, Couture or Vlasic contracts will require taking back a similarly toxic deal even if Wilson or whoever the GM is at that point is able to convince these guys to waive their NTCs. I'd be perfectly okay with moving Kane or Couture for a 7th round pick once they start to decline but that's not realistic. We're going to have to take a negative value contract back and probably retain salary on top of that.