Player Discussion What do we have in Oscar Fantenberg?

[F A N]

No problen with resigning Fanta but he should battle it out with Benn for the third LD spot. Instead, moving Benn to the right side would mean we have only one right shooting D, which as we saw with Vegas last year can limit options, especially on special teams.

I would like to see one of Juolevi, Rathbone, Rafferty earn a spot and Benn can play whichever side on the 3rd pairing.

It would be good to upgrade on Fantenberg but no bad feelings if we re-sign him.

 

[mossey3535]

I think judging Fantenberg by the slogging hockey the team played in the playoffs, which was also enabled by the refs letting us get away with a lot of obstruction (wow, what a weird time 2020 has been), is misleading. Basically all his deficiencies were hidden by "playoff-style" hockey. In the regular season he will be back to the same old if not worse defenceman (who admittedly had some good stretched but mostly averaged out to be a below-average defender) because we won't get stuck in our zone for THAT long (we did get hemmed a lot last regular season but not to the ridiculous extent that we did in the playoffs) where Fanta can just skate in a small circle and lean on dudes until his clears look like strong defensive plays just because we're desperate for any relief of the relentless pressure the other team is putting on us.

 

[Crabe]

That's an interesting argument. I don't think I've ever heard of the idea of a player's weaknesses being hidden by "playoff style" hockey." Nobody expects Fantenberg to be a puck mover - he's a guy who isn't even expected to play most nights if the D-corps is healthy. Of course he's a "below-average defender," that's what depth defensemen are. The questions are, can he defend, and can he avoid dumb mistakes? And the answer is yes to both questions. He's better than Benn, at any rate. But if you know of anybody better that we could sign for league minimum (or close to it) to be our #7, name 'em.

 

[MS]

I thought he had a pretty good first 10 games, then 25 absolutely horrific games to finish the regular season, then reverted back to being simply ‘bad’ in the playoffs.

 

[mossey3535]

That's an interesting argument. I don't think I've ever heard of the idea of a player's weaknesses being hidden by "playoff style" hockey." Nobody expects Fantenberg to be a puck mover - he's a guy who isn't even expected to play most nights if the D-corps is healthy. Of course he's a "below-average defender," that's what depth defensemen are. The questions are, can he defend, and can he avoid dumb mistakes? And the answer is yes to both questions. He's better than Benn, at any rate. But if you know of anybody better that we could sign for league minimum (or close to it) to be our #7, name 'em.

He made plenty of dumb mistakes in the regular season. That's why he was flat-out terrible for a stretch when people were saying he had lost his job to Benn.

I wouldn't say the answer to either of those questions is yes. It's sometimes, and that's being charitable.

Forbort and Bogosian both just signed for $1M. Van Riemdsyk $800k, Pysyk $750k, Davidson $700k, Matt Irwin $700k.....this kind of stuff isn't hard to find. Just because we (and everyone else in the league) left Fantenberg to the end doesn't mean he's a premium player. I mean, he doesn't even have three full seasons in the league...

 

[Gaunce4gm]

He’s worth league minimum definitely. Might not be on the Canucks but he’s worth it to someone who wants a 6/7/8 for cheap

 

[vanuck]

Fantenberg could not move the puck to save his life in the playoffs, and was one of the reasons our puck possession was so awful. Would rather move on and look at someone like Koekkoek.

 

[Bertuzzzi44]

Fantenberg is an above average defender. He has decent size and plays a simple effective game. He’s not the best puck mover and isn’t overly skilled, but he does a solid job of defending and played well in the playoffs. Good capable bottom pairing Dman.

 

[wonton15]

He's a 7/8 that filled in as our 5/6 okay. His signature move was to bank it off the glass to clear it out of our zone and then repeat as he gets hemmed in. He had his moments of looking like a legit defender for sure, though

 

[iceburg]

I would like to see one of Juolevi, Rathbone, Rafferty earn a spot and Benn can play whichever side on the 3rd pairing.

It would be good to upgrade on Fantenberg but no bad feelings if we re-sign him.

They have their bottom pairing depth guy in Benn. They need to hold one of the slots open for a developing player who is ready to move to the next level. If the three you mention come to camp and none show they are close to ready, then they pick up a D-man on wiavers or sign one. Fantenberg might still be available at that time if he hasn't gone to Europe. There's no rush.

 

[F A N]

They have their bottom pairing depth guy in Benn. They need to hold one of the slots open for a developing player who is ready to move to the next level. If the three you mention come to camp and none show they are close to ready, then they pick up a D-man on wiavers or sign one. Fantenberg might still be available at that time if he hasn't gone to Europe. There's no rush.

The Canucks are one Dman short though. Juolevi, Rathbone, Rafferty are still in the development stage where if they are the team's 7th Dman you might as well send him down. Ideally, one of those Dmen grab a 3rd pairing spot and you can pair him with Benn or someone else. I think they are looking to re-sign Fanta though. But I just have a feeling that if Fanta re-signs, Green will want to play him and Benn.

 

[Blue and Green]

The Canucks are one Dman short though. Juolevi, Rathbone, Rafferty are still in the development stage where if they are the team's 7th Dman you might as well send him down. Ideally, one of those Dmen grab a 3rd pairing spot and you can pair him with Benn or someone else. I think they are looking to re-sign Fanta though. But I just have a feeling that if Fanta re-signs, Green will want to play him and Benn.

A 7th defenceman usually gets plenty of chances to play due to injuries. I'd have no problems employing Juolevi or 25YO Rafferty and his one-way contract in that role if good enough. Rathbone, from what I hear, would probably benefit from a bit of AHL time to develop his defensive game.

 

[iceburg]

The Canucks are one Dman short though. Juolevi, Rathbone, Rafferty are still in the development stage where if they are the team's 7th Dman you might as well send him down. Ideally, one of those Dmen grab a 3rd pairing spot and you can pair him with Benn or someone else. I think they are looking to re-sign Fanta though. But I just have a feeling that if Fanta re-signs, Green will want to play him and Benn.

This is my concern as well on re-signing Fantenberg. If one of Rafferty, Juolevi, or Rathbone show they are ready, they need to get regular minutes or they might as well send them to the minors.

 

[F A N]

A 7th defenceman usually gets plenty of chances to play due to injuries. I'd have no problems employing Juolevi or 25YO Rafferty and his one-way contract in that role if good enough. Rathbone, from what I hear, would probably benefit from a bit of AHL time to develop his defensive game.

Both Juolevi and Rafferty essentially one full AHL season under their belts. I prefer they don't sit for too long (e.g. 10 games without making their debuts). We could also use some depth down on the farm (if there is a farm).

 

[MS]

Both Juolevi and Rafferty essentially one full AHL season under their belts. I prefer they don't sit for too long (e.g. 10 games without making their debuts). We could also use some depth down on the farm (if there is a farm).

Rafferty is 25. There isn't a lot of developing to do there and I have zero issue carrying him as a 7th or 8th defender. He's barely younger than Stecher and the same age as Horvat.

Agree that I still wouldn't necessarily want Juolevi sitting constantly.

 

[bandwagonesque]

Unless the group 6 UFA rules are amended to account for a shortened season, Rafferty will hit unrestricted free agency after this year, although he probably would have anyway. I don't think the team will invest much in him at this point unless he plays his way onto the opening night roster.

 

[rypper]

I think part of why I still look at Fantanberg with any kind of shine is that I think of during the playoffs he was a guy who was actually throwing the body consistently and sticking up for teammates.

Is that a great reason to what to bring him back? No. Especially not if the rest of his play is lacking. But it's still an area we could stand to address.

 

[VanJack]

I'm almost at the point where as far as the Canucks are concerned, next year is almost a 'write-off' year. If they make the playoffs, great. But if they don't then not a big deal either.

As the pandemic drags onward, it's obvious we're looking at a truncated NHL season. There's talk of more bubbles; a Canadian-only division since the Canada-U.S. border might still be closed; and a flat salary cap taking its toll on player movement.

I'd rather see them roll the dice with young blueliners like Rafferty, Rathbone and Juolevi than go out and sign another NHL journeyman or two like Fantenberg. It'll probably be a rough baptism for sure for the young d-men. But they'll benefit a lot more from gaining experience and potentially make the Canucks better down the road.

And by the end of next season, they're gaining cap space with the contracts for Edler, Pearson, Sutter, Baertschi and Benn all expiring. And surely with only a year left on the contracts for Beagle, Roussel and Eriksson, that buyouts are in order.

So next year might be about 'taking a step back' in order to 'take a step forward' whenever life returns to normal after next season.

 

[F A N]

I'm almost at the point where as far as the Canucks are concerned, next year is almost a 'write-off' year. If they make the playoffs, great. But if they don't then not a big deal either.

As the pandemic drags onward, it's obvious we're looking at a truncated NHL season. There's talk of more bubbles; a Canadian-only division since the Canada-U.S. border might still be closed; and a flat salary cap taking its toll on player movement.

I'd rather see them roll the dice with young blueliners like Rafferty, Rathbone and Juolevi than go out and sign another NHL journeyman or two like Fantenberg. It'll probably be a rough baptism for sure for the young d-men. But they'll benefit a lot more from gaining experience and potentially make the Canucks better down the road.

And by the end of next season, they're gaining cap space with the contracts for Edler, Pearson, Sutter, Baertschi and Benn all expiring. And surely with only a year left on the contracts for Beagle, Roussel and Eriksson, that buyouts are in order.

So next year might be about 'taking a step back' in order to 'take a step forward' whenever life returns to normal after next season.

Honestly, it does feel like it would be a write off year regardless, unless we win the Cup or something. While the playoffs was exciting, there wasn't a whole lot to gain from a deep run in the playoffs. We're all just there watching on TV and there's less time in between games so everything just happened quickly.

 

[iceburg]

Rafferty is 25. There isn't a lot of developing to do there and I have zero issue carrying him as a 7th or 8th defender. He's barely younger than Stecher and the same age as Horvat.

Agree that I still wouldn't necessarily want Juolevi sitting constantly.

Solid point about Rafferty. If he isn't ready now, he never will be. They need to test him to see if he fits in the top 8.

 

[MS]

Solid point about Rafferty. If he isn't ready now, he never will be. They need to test him to see if he fits in the top 8.

He's also on a 1-way deal, astonishingly.

 

[iceburg]

He's also on a 1-way deal, astonishingly.

I guess we'll see if that works out. Can't imagine why it had to be one-way...I guess we should be thankful he doesn't have a NMC...