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

[Soups On]

Hmm...let's see....Etem was a first round pick of the Ducks: Clendening a second-round pick of the Hawks who had a splendid rookie year in the AHL; Vey was rated as one of the Kings top prospects when we traded for him; and Pedan was a third-round pick of the Islanders, who was supposedly stuck behind a strong blueline prospect pool and just waiting to bust out.

I'd say they're pretty good comparisons to Dahlen and Goldobin.

Etem was a solid attempt as Jensen was not working out here. Didn't work out and despite having a chance to give Utica the depth it really needed, Jimbo lost him.

Clendenning was putting up good numbers and at looking at the basic stats, I could understand the rationale. But Benning and Co ****ing pro scouted him and somehow failed to realize he couldn't skate at all. That doesn't work in the NHL.

Vey was in his draft+5 season. Huge overpayment by Benning. Practically a useful top 4 defensemen in Garrison for a guy who didn't have the skill to make up for how soft he was in the corners.

Goldobin can skate well, is highly creative, and is not **** along the boards. Defensively he needs work, but according to San Jose fans, he's a lot better then last year.

Dahlen is near PPG in the SEL and had a really solid outing at the WJC. He is not comparable to those other players. He may work or he may not like any other prospect.

No, Dahlen and Goldobin are not comparable to those players you listed. These two are young and showing very positive development curves.

 

[xtr3m]

Larionov is behind Goldobin and the Professor won't let Goldy to simply coast.

 

[Bobby Digital]

Not about value it's about need.

This team needs elite talent. Badly. Goldobin is very unlikely to be am elite talent. Not impossible, nothing is impossible, but elite talents rarely play 100+ games in the ahl with good not great numbers and then get dealt at the deadline.

Now obviously Hansen was never going to return an elite talent. That goes without saying. But you get a draft pick, you get a much younger prospect, and you give yourself a chance. It's not likely, but imo it's more likely to hit a homerun with someone like Dahlen than someone like Goldobin,even if Goldobin has higher odds at making the nhl in some capacity.

We don't need a guy who will probably go on to have a solid career, another sven baertschi or someone like this. We need a ****ing monster, and the only way to get a monster is to stockpile as many draft picks as possible and pray to the right God.

The easiest ways to get your monsters is to suck enough to get a top 3 pick. If Goldobin turns into a legit 2nd line winger than we can consider the trade a success. Trust me, I get what you're saying. I've been asking for a blow up and to stock pile picks probably longer than probably anyone on this board. However Goldobin is worth more than a late 1st in this years draft. The smartest thing Benning could have done outside the Burrows trade is sell off guys like Hansen, Edler, Gudbranson (If possible) etc for 1st round picks in the 2018 draft but I don't think he's patient enough to wait for those picks. I really think they will try pushing for a playoff spot next season, as dumb as that is.

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

I cannot ****ing believe we retained salary on Jannik Hansen, the biggest bargain in the nhl.

Benning is a complete and utter moron.

 

[Soups On]

The easiest ways to get your monsters is to suck enough to get a top 3 pick. If Goldobin turns into a legit 2nd line winger than we can consider the trade a success. Trust me, I get what you're saying. I've been asking for a blow up and to stock pile picks probably longer than probably anyone on this board. However Goldobin is worth more than a late 1st in this years draft. The smartest thing Benning could have done outside the Burrows trade is sell off guys like Hansen, Edler, Gudbranson (If possible) etc for 1st round picks in the 2018 draft but I don't think he's patient enough to wait for those picks. I really think they will try pushing for a playoff spot next season, as dumb as that is.

When that bloody Buffalo team decides to turn it around, it would be great if Edler would waive to go there next year. They need a top 4 LD so bad and they have several prospects to select from.

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

The easiest ways to get your monsters is to suck enough to get a top 3 pick. If Goldobin turns into a legit 2nd line winger than we can consider the trade a success. Trust me, I get what you're saying. I've been asking for a blow up and to stock pile picks probably longer than probably anyone on this board. However Goldobin is worth more than a late 1st in this years draft. The smartest thing Benning could have done outside the Burrows trade is sell off guys like Hansen, Edler, Gudbranson (If possible) etc for 1st round picks in the 2018 draft but I don't think he's patient enough to wait for those picks. I really think they will try pushing for a playoff spot next season, as dumb as that is.

I agree with you, and that's why I am so frustrated.

Benning is not patient enough to wait for draft picks so he wants to load up on guys who can be on next year's team and try in vain for a playoff spot. His MO has not changed since day one and that really sucks because I thought with the Burrows trade he had finally shifted course.

 

[Regal]

I agree with you, and that's why I am so frustrated.

Benning is not patient enough to wait for draft picks so he wants to load up on guys who can be on next year's team and try in vain for a playoff spot. His MO has not changed since day one and that really sucks because I thought with the Burrows trade he had finally shifted course.

Yea, but who wants to waive for Buffalo

 

[RandV]

Finally the voice of reason in all the TSN 1040 hype train about the Canucks deadline....let's be objective here.....The Sharks felt they could part with Goldobin for Hansen, a guy who they likely end up exposing in the expansion draft....so it's basically a rental.

And as far as Dahlen is concerned, the Sens were convinced that he was worth parting with for a 36 year old winger firmly on the backside of his career.

The comparisons to guys like Vey, Pedan, Clendening and Etem are legitimate concerns....other team's prospects who slid down the depth chart and were expendable for a reason...Jimbo track record in acquiring these guys is what it is.

I wouldn't quite put them on the level as Vey & company, as a year or two here makes a huge difference. Vey hadn't been able to cut it yet and was a few months away from requiring waivers. The better comparison to be made here to put things into more of a neutral perspective is that Goldobin is basically where Shinkaruk was at this time last year.

 

[Tinhorn1]

Hold on. With that type of thinking, any prospect who is traded for a win-now player is a concerning prospect..? San Jose wants to win right now and they parted with one of their best prospects (behind Meier and Leblanc) who, correct me if I'm wrong, still has a few years in his ELC. Thomas Tatar played 4 years in the AHL and is now a top 6 winger. Sometimes that's what it takes and there's nothing wrong with that. Even then, San Jose has lots of winger depth and playing a creative, offensive winger with average defense on the fourth line does nothing for that team. Goldobin might've had a very good chance of cracking the top 9 in San Jose next year but that team wants to win right now before their productive veterans fall of a cliff or are let go. I don't think it's fair to call it concerning that Goldobin was let go as he's showed the type of progression we hoped Jake would show.

If San Jose wins the cup, which they have a really good chance of, getting a really good prospect in Goldobin and the 31st pick is a great deal for both parties.

With that said, not happy with salary retention either. Could've taken a small cap dump from them if they really needed cap space.

This is spot on, in my opinion. Sometimes teams pushing for a cup trade promising, fairly developed prospects. Sometimes they regret it. Sometimes the team trading for the prospect regrets not picking someone else. Sometimes they both get what they want. What a concept. We'll see how this goes, but you can't just say this is a bad move because he's near the same point in his contract status as some other players who have been traded for and then busted recently for the Canucks. That makes no sense.

And of course there's risk. There's risk in everything. Let's live a little.

 

[Hollywood Burrows]

Hold on. With that type of thinking, any prospect who is traded for a win-now player is a concerning prospect..? San Jose wants to win right now and they parted with one of their best prospects (behind Meier and Leblanc) who, correct me if I'm wrong, still has a few years in his ELC. Thomas Tatar played 4 years in the AHL and is now a top 6 winger. Sometimes that's what it takes and there's nothing wrong with that. Even then, San Jose has lots of winger depth and playing a creative, offensive winger with average defense on the fourth line does nothing for that team. Goldobin might've had a very good chance of cracking the top 9 in San Jose next year but that team wants to win right now before their productive veterans fall of a cliff or are let go. I don't think it's fair to call it concerning that Goldobin was let go as he's showed the type of progression we hoped Jake would show.

If San Jose wins the cup, which they have a really good chance of, getting a really good prospect in Goldobin and the 31st pick is a great deal for both parties.

With that said, not happy with salary retention either. Could've taken a small cap dump from them if they really needed cap space.

San Jose doesn't have a "really good chance" of winning the cup. I think it's kind of insane to say that about any team. They're a good team and a contender, but to think that condition is actually going to pay off for the Canucks is very very optimistic.

It's true that San Jose might still like Goldobin, and are okay giving him up to add a veteran even if they expect he'll be an NHL player. But it's also the case that they have far more information with which to determine his value and potential than Benning. They've had him on their minor league team for two seasons now. I don't feel confident that Benning and the Canucks have a better handle on this player's future than Wilson.

I think this holds true whenever you try and trade for another club's prospects. I would much prefer Benning to pursue draft picks.

I compare him to Linden Vey in the sense that both players put up solid numbers for their minor league team, and were unable to stick after a couple looks with the NHL club. If you prefer:

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

I wouldn't quite put them on the level as Vey & company, as a year or two here makes a huge difference. Vey hadn't been able to cut it yet and was a few months away from requiring waivers. The better comparison to be made here to put things into more of a neutral perspective is that Goldobin is basically where Shinkaruk was at this time last year.

Yes I suppose I should give Benning some credit. He is at least targeting guys one year earlier than he used to, in comparison to Vey and baertschi. At least Goldobin gives us one season where he's waiver exempt.

 

[Bobby Digital]

Yes I suppose I should give Benning some credit. He is at least targeting guys one year earlier than he used to, in comparison to Vey and baertschi. At least Goldobin gives us one season where he's waiver exempt.

It's clear you haven't watched Goldobin play at all. Your "scouting" is based of age and PPG. How can you be so sure of someone you've never watched?

Goldobin is on essentially the same pace Thomas Tatar was at the same age.

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

It's clear you haven't watched Goldobin play at all. Your "scouting" is based of age and PPG. How can you be so sure of someone you've never watched?

Goldobin is on essentially the same pace Thomas Tatar was at the same age.

And the same place hunter Shinkaruk was. We can each name examples it doesn't prove anything.

How much I've watched him is irrelevant. Unlike some of the egotists here I have no delusion that I am an NHL scout.

 

[Jack Burton]

Curious, have you watched Goldobin play extensively to form such strong opinions? Serious question.

I wouldn't say extensively but definitely enough to form that opinion. While Vancouver is my #1 team, I'm hockey crazy and follow multiple players and teams. I absolutely love the Draft and scouting it. Following my favorite players and watching them make the transition to the NHL.

But bottom line it's just IMHO. I've been wrong on players before and will be again.

 

[Tinhorn1]

And the same place hunter Shinkaruk was. We can each name examples it doesn't prove anything.

How much I've watched him is irrelevant. Unlike some of the egotists here I have no delusion that I am an NHL scout.

I don't think it's egotistical to watch prospects play and inform others of your opinion. In fact, I quite appreciate the posters who do so.

I haven't watched Goldobin play either, though, so have nothing really to add. You're right that baseline stats paint a very limited picture, and people can cite examples both ways. Sometimes AHL offence translates, and sometimes it doesn't. We will see, as they say.

 

[Bobby Digital]

And the same place hunter Shinkaruk was. We can each name examples it doesn't prove anything.

How much I've watched him is irrelevant. Unlike some of the egotists here I have no delusion that I am an NHL scout.

Exactly my point. So bringing up comparable AHL stats in every post like you have is pointless.

As for not watching him. Mabey you should because having such a strong opinion on someone you've never watched makes absolutely no sense. You don't need to be a scout to watch and form an opinion on a player.

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

Exactly my point. So bringing up comparable AHL stats in every post like you have is pointless.

As for not watching him. Mabey you should because having such a strong opinion on someone you've never watched makes absolutely no sense.

I don't have a particularly strong opinion on him as a player, how he plays, anything like this.

I do have an opinion his probability of success, and I am perfectly comfortable with my ability to gauge how probable a player is to bust without watching him play much. I know this rankles some people, and I am okay with this as well.

If you want we can play a game. We will take a pool of players and predict where they will be in 3 or 4 years. I will make my judgment based solely on stats. You may watch the player as much as you like and make your decision based on that.

We will check in in a few years and see who did better. Sound like fun?

 

[F A N]

I like this trade less after knowing that we have retained 20% of Hansen's contract and I wish Benning placed further conditions like if the Sharks make it to the Cup Finals the Canucks get their 2018 2nd, but I still like this trade.

Realistically, Hansen isn't worth more than a late first most years. And between Goldobin and a conditional 4th and a late first in this year's draft, it might as well be Goldobin.

I wasn't a huge fan of Goldobin in his draft year. I'm usually weary of prospects whose work ethic and willingness to take a hit is in question. But his offensive upside is not in question.

Speaking of offensive upside, I disagree with the Shinkaruk comparable. You can go back to the Shinkaruk threads before the trade. Shinkaruk's offensive upside in the NHL, not to mention the probability he would develop into an NHL player was seriously in question, even among fans who were most optimistic. And I'm saying this as a relatively optimistic fan at the time. I didn't think there was any way Shinkaruk would develop into a star player in the NHL and if he wasn't in the top 6 I don't believe he would be an NHL player. Goldobin is a better offensive prospect than Shinkaruk was last season and fans making the comparable do not appreciate the difference. Shinkaruk lacked the hockey IQ and seemingly lacked the explosiveness and escapability that is required for a player like him to succeed in the NHL. And I've said this before, if Benning had determined that Shinkaruk is likely to never develop into an NHL player, dumping him when he still has some value is the right decision. All that "that trade was not necessary" is simply nonsense. Hanging onto a prospect for too long is a mistake that for some reason Canucks fans as a whole have not caught onto.

I am perfectly comfortable with my ability to gauge how probable a player is to bust without watching him play much.

Good for you, but it doesn't make your views credible when you say this, but I agree that some posters here have this egotistic delusion that they are better than an NHL scout.

 

[VanJack]

San Jose doesn't have a "really good chance" of winning the cup. I think it's kind of insane to say that about any team. They're a good team and a contender, but to think that condition is actually going to pay off for the Canucks is very very optimistic.

It's true that San Jose might still like Goldobin, and are okay giving him up to add a veteran even if they expect he'll be an NHL player. But it's also the case that they have far more information with which to determine his value and potential than Benning. They've had him on their minor league team for two seasons now. I don't feel confident that Benning and the Canucks have a better handle on this player's future than Wilson.

I think this holds true whenever you try and trade for another club's prospects. I would much prefer Benning to pursue draft picks.

I compare him to Linden Vey in the sense that both players put up solid numbers for their minor league team, and were unable to stick after a couple looks with the NHL club. If you prefer:

Yes, and to Gaunce and Goldobin you can add Hunter Shinkaruk....27 goals and 24 assists between Utica and Stockton as a 21-year old....still waiting for him to make an impact in the NHL.

 

[canwincup]

I don't have a particularly strong opinion on him as a player, how he plays, anything like this.

I do have an opinion his probability of success, and I am perfectly comfortable with my ability to gauge how probable a player is to bust without watching him play much. I know this rankles some people, and I am okay with this as well.

If you want we can play a game. We will take a pool of players and predict where they will be in 3 or 4 years. I will make my judgment based solely on stats. You may watch the player as much as you like and make your decision based on that.

We will check in in a few years and see who did better. Sound like fun?

So if Boeser is playing in the AHL next year and putting up similar numbers to Goldobin, you would move him for a late 1st?

At that stage he'll be in his draft + 3 and realistically won't become a 'star'.....so might as well give up on him for a late 1st.

 

[Billy Kvcmu]

Evaluating a player just by stats and PPG without actually watching him is the dumbest way to do it

 

[Kryten]

Evaluating a player just by stats and PPG without actually watching him is the dumbest way to do it

It only works 90% of the time

 

[Snatcher Demko]

How about we see how Goldobin does this year and next year (presumably under a new coach) before we start the pitchfork parade?

There's a ton of players out there with similar stats progression, and some have been busts while others have become solid NHLers.

 

[VanJack]

I cannot ****ing believe we retained salary on Jannik Hansen, the biggest bargain in the nhl.

Benning is a complete and utter moron.

Here's a thought.....if the Sharks expose Hansen in the Expansion Draft, and he ends up in Vegas, the Canucks can always re-acquire him....after all, they'd still be paying part of his salary anyway.....The Great Dane returns!

 

[Billy Kvcmu]

It only works 90% of the time

Not when the player actually has good stats but ppl are still complaining