Confirmed with Link: [VAN/SJ] Hansen(20% ret.) for Goldobin, Cond'l '17 4th (becomes 1st if SJ wins Cup)

[Tobi Wan Kenobi]

Leave it to other Canuck fans to immediately **** on one prospect as soon as they're traded and worship another as soon as they're acquired.

Judge the player, not the jersey.

lol I've watched both play. Goldobin is a much better skater, much better vision, passing, has better puck protection skills and better hands. Shinkaruk is overrated here it's mind boggling. He has fancy edgework and a decent release on his shot..that's it. Zero breakaway speed..below average hockey sense. I don't see how you can watch both of them and come to the conclusion we just acquired another Hunter Shinkaruk

 

[CanaFan]

I don't understand people's positions. Bring up Shinkaruk as an example as to why risk/reward players shouldn't be required.

But is Goldobin really any less or a risk then anyone taken in 20-31th pick this year? To me it's clear he's less of a risk.

Others say there was no need to trade Hansen, I disagree. We are on pace for back to back bottom 3 seasons. We clearly are in need to tank and move older assets.

I've seen some people say we didn't get "fair value". We basicaly got a prospect equivalent to a top 15 pick in this years draft. That's fair value to me.

See this is the part I disagree with. Imagine a random pick in the 15-25 range from 2014. Some of those picks are already NHL studs - Larkin, Pastrnak, Fabbri, Schmaltz. A first round pick in 2017 has the *potential* to get you that. But after 3 years of development it seems likely that Goldobin doesn't give you that potential. So now you're looking at a player more like a Milano or a Kapanen. A player who isn't a bust and looks to have a decent chance to be an NHL player of some type, but probably not a high end one.

That's what the draft pick gives you. More risk but more potential for reward. At this point I would take more potential for reward over less risk. We have lots of "could maybe be an NHLer" tickets in the system. What we need is for one that could become a first liner, even at the risk of being a total bust too.

 

[CanaFan]

lol I've watched both play. Goldobin is a much better skater, much better vision, passing, has better puck protection skills and better hands. Shinkaruk is overrated here it's mind boggling. He has fancy edgework and a decent release on his shot..that's it. Zero breakaway speed..below average hockey sense. I don't see how you can watch both of them and come to the conclusion we just acquired another Hunter Shinkaruk

I didn't come to that conclusion though they are both tracking similarly. My point is Shinkaruk is not "garbage" and Goldobin is not the second coming. I've seen more tempered, reasonable expectations from the posters who compare the two than from the ones who act like there is a mile wide gap between the two.

 

[MeatAndPotatoes]

This trade doesn't look good next to the Burrows one. That was a steal.
It does look good next to a lot of the other trades out there.
I think it's fair value.

Goldobin is a 50/50 prospect to me. By that I mean he's got a 50% chance to bust and a 50% chance to become a solid top 9 NHL skill player.

 

[vancityluongo]

Yup. Said a few times that if we didn't hit a home run on Hansen we shouldn't trade him.

This isn't a home run. We got less for Hansen than we did for Burrows.

Very upsetting that we make this sort of poor rushed trade in order to protect Markus f'ing Granlund in the expansion draft.

It's not a home run. But it's not a pop fly to center either. To keep the baseball analogy going, this is a base hit from a team down 10 runs. It doesn't fix anything overall, but the team simply needs to keep generating as many base hits as possible.

The value is nothing to celebrate, but it's not horrible. I don't agree that this was not worth doing when looking at the context of this organization. Of course it would be better to expose Sutter, never acquire/overplay Granlund in the first place and keep Shinkaruk, etc. But relative to what can be realistically expected, I'm pleased that they're doing something more than just exposing Hansen to Vegas (which was clearly in the plans). Any moves that bandaid the perpetual bleeding of assets is a-okay with me.

Like I said earlier, I fully expect the shine to wear off this trade soon enough and hopefully the majority of the base is still firmly in the Fire Benning camp. And hopefully Aquilini decides to turf the guy who is forcing him to retain salary on a player who was a terrific member of this organization for a decade, because the team fell short on the all-in goal of making the playoffs by 20 points.

 

[CanaFan]

It's not a home run. But it's not a pop fly to center either. To keep the baseball analogy going, this is a base hit from a team down 10 runs. It doesn't fix anything overall, but the team simply needs to keep generating as many base hits as possible.

The value is nothing to celebrate, but it's not horrible. I don't agree that this was not worth doing when looking at the context of this organization. Of course it would be better to expose Sutter, never acquire/overplay Granlund in the first place and keep Shinkaruk, etc. But relative to what can be realistically expected, I'm pleased that they're doing something more than just exposing Hansen to Vegas (which was clearly in the plans). Any moves that bandaid the perpetual bleeding of assets is a-okay with me.

Like I said earlier, I fully expect the shine to wear off this trade soon enough and hopefully the majority of the base is still firmly in the Fire Benning camp. And hopefully Aquilini decides to turf the guy who is forcing him to retain salary on a player who was a terrific member of this organization for a decade, because the team fell short on the all-in goal of making the playoffs by 20 points.

Sums it up for me as well.

 

[WTG]

See this is the part I disagree with. Imagine a random pick in the 15-25 range from 2014. Some of those picks are already NHL studs - Larkin, Pastrnak, Fabbri, Schmaltz. A first round pick in 2017 has the *potential* to get you that. But after 3 years of development it seems likely that Goldobin doesn't give you that potential. So now you're looking at a player more like a Milano or a Kapanen. A player who isn't a bust and looks to have a decent chance to be an NHL player of some type, but probably not a high end one.

That's what the draft pick gives you. More risk but more potential for reward. At this point I would take more potential for reward over less risk. We have lots of "could maybe be an NHLer" tickets in the system. What we need is for one that could become a first liner, even at the risk of being a total bust too.

Well, I think equating the 2014 draft to the 2017 draft seems unfair, this years draft is already said to have a weaker top 40 then usual. But nonetheless, that is based on anecdotal and there is really no way to actually factually prove that it's weaker without reverting to a argument from authority.

But this all comes down to personal preference for you then? You would have prefered the choice of picking up a higher ceiling prospect, and you are willing to risk more to get that higher ceiling prospect. Fair enough.


Also, to clarify, I wasn't trying to say that peoples preferences are wrong. Just trying to argue against people who think this is just a flat loss of value type of trade.

 

[timw33]

It's not a home run. But it's not a pop fly to center either. To keep the baseball analogy going, this is a base hit from a team down 10 runs. It doesn't fix anything overall, but the team simply needs to keep generating as many base hits as possible.

The value is nothing to celebrate, but it's not horrible. I don't agree that this was not worth doing when looking at the context of this organization. Of course it would be better to expose Sutter, never acquire/overplay Granlund in the first place and keep Shinkaruk, etc. But relative to what can be realistically expected, I'm pleased that they're doing something more than just exposing Hansen to Vegas (which was clearly in the plans). Any moves that bandaid the perpetual bleeding of assets is a-okay with me.

Like I said earlier, I fully expect the shine to wear off this trade soon enough and hopefully the majority of the base is still firmly in the Fire Benning camp. And hopefully Aquilini decides to turf the guy who is forcing him to retain salary on a player who was a terrific member of this organization for a decade, because the team fell short on the all-in goal of making the playoffs by 20 points.

I really like this analogy. We're down big and we need to just start string hits instead of popping and striking out (Virtanen, Sutter, Gudbranson, Sbisa, Eriksson).

Maybe we can draw a bases loaded walk with the draft lottery too?

 

[y2kcanucks]

I really like this analogy. We're down big and we need to just start string hits instead of popping and striking out (Virtanen, Sutter, Gudbranson, Sbisa, Eriksson).

Maybe we can draw a bases loaded walk with the draft lottery too?

Some of those moves felt like getting beaned in the jock and subsequently thrown out at 1st because you took too big of a leadoff.

 

[stampedingviking]

Done with this team now. What absolute *********. How anyone can stand for this is embarassing. See you all on the other side.

See ya, don't let the door hit your arse on the way out.

 

[mossey3535]

I think this was an average trade. I think you'd be better off with a 2nd or 3rd rather than a pie-in-the-sky conditional.

But for Benning that's an improvement. Two decent moves in a row, good on him.

 

[CanaFan]

Well, I think equating the 2014 draft to the 2017 draft seems unfair, this years draft is already said to have a weaker top 40 then usual. But nonetheless, that is based on anecdotal and there is really no way to actually factually prove that it's weaker without reverting to a argument from authority.

But this all comes down to personal preference for you then? You would have prefered the choice of picking up a higher ceiling prospect, and you are willing to risk more to get that higher ceiling prospect. Fair enough.


Also, to clarify, I wasn't trying to say that peoples preferences are wrong. Just trying to argue against people who think this is just a flat loss of value type of trade.

I think the tendency to categorize an entire draft as "weak" is a bit lazy and doesn't apply uniformly to all spots in the draft. The lack of a Matthews or McDavid drives a lot of that perception but that doesn't impact a 15-25 pick. And 2014 was called a "weaker" draft too, so it's dangerous to discount an entire draft based on a general perception. Even 2012 gave a Filip Forsberg and Tomas Hertl.

And yes, I prefer ceiling over lower risk for the team right now. We have a good amount of middle 6 prospect depth. Adding more potential Baertschis and Granlund's isn't as beneficial to this rebuild as adding a better Bo Horvat or a better Brock Boeser. Even at the risk of getting a total bust in the end.

And fair enough, I don't view it as a loss. At the end of the day it's still the right type of move for this team. I'm just arguing that it isn't as big a win as I think some are calling it. Maybe it's just the lowered expectations but this was a solid move, not an amazing one.

 

[CanaFan]

Some of those moves felt like getting beaned in the jock and subsequently thrown out at 1st because you took too big of a leadoff.

This is so spot on.

 

[Petrichor]

That 20% retainment is a bigger deal than some of you imagine. I know it's only $500,000, but aren't we only allowed 3 or a limited amount?

That means when it comes to trading the Sedins, that'll be problematic. Who has $14 million cap room?!

 

[vancityluongo]

Some of those moves felt like getting beaned in the jock and subsequently thrown out at 1st because you took too big of a leadoff.

I was gonna add that the Virtanen, Gudbranson, Sutter, etc. moves were all eyes closed full fledged swings at wild pitches. But your description is better.

I think the tendency to categorize an entire draft as "weak" is a bit lazy and doesn't apply uniformly to all spots in the draft. The lack of a Matthews or McDavid drives a lot of that perception but that doesn't impact a 15-25 pick. And 2014 was called a "weaker" draft too, so it's dangerous to discount an entire draft based on a general perception. Even 2012 gave a Filip Forsberg and Tomas Hertl.

And yes, I prefer ceiling over lower risk for the team right now. We have a good amount of middle 6 prospect depth. Adding more potential Baertschis and Granlund's isn't as beneficial to this rebuild as adding a better Bo Horvat or a better Brock Boeser. Even at the risk of getting a total bust in the end.

And fair enough, I don't view it as a loss. At the end of the day it's still the right type of move for this team. I'm just arguing that it isn't as big a win as I think some are calling it. Maybe it's just the lowered expectations but this was a solid move, not an amazing one.

Agreed.

 

[Laterade]

That 20% retainment is a bigger deal than some of you imagine. I know it's only $500,000, but aren't we only allowed 3 or a limited amount?

That means when it comes to trading the Sedins, that'll be problematic. Who has $14 million cap room?!

Sedins will retire here before we trade them. They deserve that much.

 

[Canucker]

Goldobin seems to me to be like Benning's new Khokhlachev. I'm looking forward to seeing him play but I'm pretty underwhelmed at the return for Hansen.

It's like one step forward with the Burrows trade, two steps back with the Hansen deal and no Miller deal.

 

[Billy Kvcmu]

Just saw the salary retaintion
Meh, that prob means they can't trade the twins this summer. Oh well

 

[JA]

I am pleased with this deal. Goldobin has a very high ceiling and has shown few signs of any slowdown in his development. There appear to be some current concerns about his potential defensive game, but from what I have read, he was considered among the better offensive forwards in the first round of the 2014 NHL Draft.

There is some risk associated with this player, but the payoff would be significant if Goldobin ever reaches his potential. To have acquired him along with a fourth-round pick in exchange for Jannik Hansen is respectable for the Canucks. The organization has gained another future piece in exchange for a player whose services are less valuable to the Canucks right now than to another team. The player that Goldobin has the potential to become has more value than Hansen, and nothing negative has occurred thus far to indicate that his development is off-track. This is a fairly worthwhile gamble, especially as there is no guarantee that San Jose's 2017 first-round pick would pay any more dividends for the Canucks than Goldobin might.

Would the 25th-to-31st-overall pick in 2017 have been preferred over Goldobin, the 27th-overall pick in 2014? I'm not so sure; Nik Goldobin is at the point of his development where he is at the brink of making the NHL. If San Jose wins the Stanley Cup, we would walk away with both Goldobin and the 31st-overall pick in 2017. Two first-round picks (one former, one current) for Jannik Hansen would be a marvelous deal for the Canucks.

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=87137231&postcount=84

OHLW: Having been in on almost 48% of the Stings' offense, it goes without saying he has elite offensive talent. How do you see him bringing that to the NHL level?

Ross: What Goldobin has accomplished as an OHL with such little offensive support is very impressive, as he sits as one of the OHL's top producers after leading all rookie scorers in 2012-13. He's proven that he can lead the offensive charge but also compliments teammates well sending slick imaginary passes for easy tap-in goals. At the next level, Goldobin could adopt a similar role as current NHLers such as Jordan Eberle or Patrick Kane - two players who can slow the game down with using exceptional puck handling abilities. He's the type of player who can buy extra time for teammates using his deceptive hands and projects as a future staple on the power play.

OHLW: Goldobin is all over the map in some Independent draft rankings. In your opinion, why is that?

Ross: It's a bit perplexing to me why he's ranked so drastically different in the draft rankings, especially in a draft class that is void of players lacking his high end offensive abilities. I am sure his defensive inconsistencies, wavering compete level and even his Russian passport concern some scouting agencies and contribute to these variances. Similarly to Max Domi being selected 12th overall last season, teams looking to add skill should consider Goldobin in the top half of the first round as well. It will be interesting to watch Goldobin and his Sarnia Sting to see if they creep into a playoff position. Goldobin could elevate his value with a strong showing in the post-season as he's been known to have a "clutch" element in his game - just ask the London Knights.

http://thehockeywriters.com/nikolay-goldobin-prospect-profile/

Nikolay Goldobin – The Next Ones: NHL 2014 Draft Prospect Profile
May 28th, 2014
Shawn Reznik
Nikolay Goldobin THW Close-Up:

Date of birth: 10/7/1995
Place of birth: Moscow, Russia
Ht: 6’0″ Wt: 185 lbs
Shoots: Left
Position: RW
NHL Draft Eligibility: 2014

THW The Next Ones Rankings (January 2014): 22

Other Rankings:

THW War Room Rankings (April): 25

Future Considerations: 23

Craig Button: 28

CS Final Rankings for North American skaters: 24

You want a Russian player with an NHL skillset? Then Nikolay Goldobin is your man.

Born in Moscow, Goldobin decided to make the jump across the pond last year when the Sarnia Sting drafted him 36th overall in the CHL Import Draft. It may have been the wisest decision he and the Sting have made. Goldobin was a point-per-game player last season and followed it up this year with 38 goals and 56 assists in 67 games.

Sarnia struggled mightly all year, but Goldobin was a bright spot for them. A gifted offensive winger, Goldobin possesses some of the smoothest hands in the draft. He can tear through defenders and come out clean on the other side. His scoring game is bolstered by his deadly shot, which he isn’t afraid to use.

There are a few glaring issues that Goldobin does need to work on. Although he’s speedy, he doesn’t play well when someone uses the body on him. Like many Russians, he was built for skill, not physicality, and his skill will only allow him to go so far. Goldobin is also built like a toothpick, so hitting the gym will need to be stressed frequently.

Dynamic Russian wingers like Kovalchuk and Ovechkin are known to be conspicuously absent when they are needed in the defensive zone. Goldobin is no different. But then again you aren’t picking him in the draft because of his defensive acumen. He’s arguably the biggest “boom-or-bust” player in the draft, but his ‘boom’ is very high.

...

http://lastwordonsports.com/2014/04/21/2014-nhl-draft-profile-20-nikolay-goldobin/

2014 NHL Draft Profile #20: Nikolay Goldobin
By Ben Kerr -
April 21, 2014

...

Nikolay Goldobin has outstanding offensive skill. There is no doubt about that, the guy knows how to put up points, and has all the tools to do so. He is blessed with the ability to stickhandle in a phone booth. His wide array of moves can leave defenders spinning. He also has a killer wrist shot, and an outstanding release. Goldobin also has a very effective one-timer. Add to all of this great hockey sense and the ability to find holes in the defense. Top it all of with some incredible vision and passing skils, and there is no doubt about Goldobin’s abilities in the offensive end of the ice. When he is on his game, he is quite simply a dynamic offensive catalyst for Sarnia. Goldobin can play a high speed game off the rush, or he can show poise with the puck and be patient and wait for an opening in the offensive zone. He doesn’t seem to get flustered often with the puck on his stick, and if he has the time and space out there, chances are that he will take advantage of it.

Goldobin is a very good skater. His top end speed and his acceleration are both well above average. He also has outstanding agility and edgework which makes him extremely elusive both off the rush and in the cycle game. His balance could be improved, as he will need to add strength. He can sometimes be knocked off the puck by bigger and stronger defenders, and this also hurts him in his ability to win board battles.

Goldobin will also need to improve his defensive game. He sometimes can get puck watching out there, and he likes to cheat to create offensive chances. He needs a lot of coaching in this aspect, and it is something that is very much a work in progress at this point in his career. He also needs to bring the same intensity at the defensive end of the ice that he brings at the offensive end.

In terms of style, Goldobin reminds me of a cross between Alex Semin and Mike Ribeiro, however these are stylistic comparisons only. In terms of potential, Goldobin is a real boom or bust prospect. His defensive game, size and inconsistent effort level could lead some to believe he will never become an effective NHLer, however his talent level is amongst the best in this draft, and if he reaches his potential he can be a true top line offensive catalyst.

Swiss scout Dennis Schellenberg's take:

https://www.draftsite.com/nhl/player/nikolay-goldobin/20216/

Nikolai is a very skilled forward who has great puckhandling skills and good hands. He is an offensive force, has a good shot arsenal and isn’t afraid to use it. Next to his goal scoring touch, Nikolai can also set up plays very well and has a good overview for his line mates. Because he is a very agile skater, he can skate fast also while carrying the puck and make plays even with no space available. His defensive game though has to improve. Often he is a spectator in his own zone and he also needs to gain some strength, even though he compensates his lack of strength with his agility and quickness. However, his pass is very strong but he takes too many risky passes and forces turnovers. His strength is clearly in the offensive zone where he can create a scoring chance out of nowhere at any time and because he is very good in finding open spots to put himself in a good scoring position, he is an offensive weapon at any time he is on the ice.

 

[Petrichor]

Sedins will retire here before we trade them. They deserve that much.

They also deserve a chance at a cup. Trading them to a contender next TDL can accomplish this.

 

[Jack Burton]

Goldobin seems to me to be like Benning's new Khokhlachev. I'm looking forward to seeing him play but I'm pretty underwhelmed at the return for Hansen.

It's like one step forward with the Burrows trade, two steps back with the Hansen deal and no Miller deal.

Hansen never should have been traded for this return.

Golgobin is basically a poor man's Nail Yakupov. Just oozes talent but looks completely lost out there on the defensive side of things.

 

[Regal]

Hansen never should have been traded for this return.

Golgobin is basically a poor man's Nail Yakupov. Just oozes talent but looks completely lost out there on the defensive side of things.

Yakupov looks lost on offense too though unless he's shooting the puck. Goldobin's creativity and offensive awareness seem like strengths.

 

[Billy Kvcmu]

Hansen never should have been traded for this return.

Golgobin is basically a poor man's Nail Yakupov. Just oozes talent but looks completely lost out there on the defensive side of things.

Goldobin had only played 11 NHL games so far

 

[thefeebster]

Hansen never should have been traded for this return.

Golgobin is basically a poor man's Nail Yakupov. Just oozes talent but looks completely lost out there on the defensive side of things.

Canucker's Khokhlachev comparison is pretty spot on, in terms of playing style, pedigree and progression as well.

 

[Maurice Del Taco]

Good trade for Hansen and the Canucks.
It's going to be really weird seeing him in a sharks jersey!