Who would you rather have?

[eviohh26]

So you'd take a PP specialist with a good shot over a 40 point ES player that is responsible defensively and is great at forechecking?

idk man, doesn't really seem like the smartest decision from a team-building standpoint.

Never said that. I said i value more into even strength. But im also saying our team needed a few guys that could play on the PP. Vanek plays on the 2nd pp. Teams have needs. Ours was to improve our pathetic PP.

 

[eviohh26]

I respect anyone who needlessly adds an 's' to the end of his first name. Hansen will also always have a special place in my heart for being the only prospect worth a damn in the Canucks system for a short period of time.

My disgust for Gagner's play doesn't help that combo. It's also tough to give a merc like Vanek a ton of respect when he won't be here all that much longer.

I always thought the Vanek pick up was to trade him at Deadline for a return. I still hope that happens.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Yea 50% of his career points are on the PP. But not exactly a bad thing is it? He is 2nd pp unit. And our pp has been fairly weak up to this year. I do put alot more value into even strength. But its not like we dont need a guy on the PP. Hansen was a great PK'er tho.

Just because Hansen was very rarely played on the PP doesn't mean he'd be good for the PP. Are you suggesting that some players who are good at even strength wouldn't benefit from playing with 1 fewer opponent on the ice? Meanwhile, there are players who aren't good at even strength who only make a living off their PP contributions. Hansen was a jack of all trades type of player who really didn't have many holes in his game.

 

[y2kcanucks]

I always thought the Vanek pick up was to trade him at Deadline for a return. I still hope that happens.

With the rumours that the Canucks were looking to be buyers, I'd be very surprised. That may have changed now with the big losing streak. Still doubt we get a draft pick for him.

 

[eviohh26]

Just because Hansen was very rarely played on the PP doesn't mean he'd be good for the PP. Are you suggesting that some players who are good at even strength wouldn't benefit from playing with 1 fewer opponent on the ice? Meanwhile, there are players who aren't good at even strength who only make a living off their PP contributions. Hansen was a jack of all trades type of player who really didn't have many holes in his game.

He was not a PP player. He has hands of stone... I liked him but he was hands of stone.

 

[y2kcanucks]

He was not a PP player. He has hands of stone... I liked him but he was hands of stone.

That was his biggest knock, but he still would have put up more points if he were on the PP, perhaps as a trigger man more than someone responsible for distributing the puck. Either way, he was more valuable than what Vanek is now.

I hate doing this, but even looking at what each player was traded for last year.

 

[eviohh26]

That was his biggest knock, but he still would have put up more points if he were on the PP, perhaps as a trigger man more than someone responsible for distributing the puck. Either way, he was more valuable than what Vanek is now.

I hate doing this, but even looking at what each player was traded for last year.

Depending on the years we are talking. He had no business on the PP with the teams we had. He was one of the best PKers we've had tho. He wasn't going to be on the PP over Kesler and Burrows

 

[Verviticus]

the first pair will probably win more games, the second pair is more entertaining, so i picked #2

edit: that said, i think people overvalue what hansen is now. he is not the same player he was two years ago

 

[y2kcanucks]

Depending on the years we are talking. He had no business on the PP with the teams we had. He was one of the best PKers we've had tho. He wasn't going to be on the PP over Kesler and Burrows

Fair comment.

the first pair will probably win more games, the second pair is more entertaining, so i picked #2

edit: that said, i think people overvalue what hansen is now. he is not the same player he was two years ago

Fair comment, though for the purposes of this thread we're assuming that we get the Hansen from 5 years ago.

 

[vancityluongo]

2014 Hansen > Vanek > Gagner >= Kenins just on an absolute basis.

Even then, that's with some hindsight factored in knowing that Kenins would flame out. If we're solely talking about that stretch he had with Hansen and Bo; that player is much more valuable than whatever Sam Gagner currently contributes. Posters on this board were projecting Kenins as a Torres like wrecking ball to be a staple on our 3rd line for years to come.

 

[vancityluongo]

edit: that said, i think people overvalue what hansen is now. he is not the same player he was two years ago

I dunno about that. Not that I closely watch the Sharks is any way, but Hansen's probably going through the Gaunce effect a little bit. He didn't immediately mesh with Pavelski in their top-6 and was subsequently pushed into playing marginal minutes. Posters here are now parading his 3 points in the same way they scream 0 goals for Gaunce, but I bet if the Canucks traded for Hansen tomorrow and put him with the Sedins he'd be back to being a 30-35 point player and a stud penalty killer.

 

[ProstheticConscience]

the first pair will probably win more games, the second pair is more entertaining, so i picked #2

edit: that said, i think people overvalue what hansen is now. he is not the same player he was two years ago

Was assuming the question referred to the players as they were from the specified seasons.

 

[rypper]

While I like what Coach Vanek has brought to the team this season, I can't under any circumstances pick the option with Gagner and his contract.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Read the thread and still can't figure out if we're including contracts.

If we are...

Hansen - Good two way player, complimentary on all lines, motor always going, good teammate
Vanek - Potent offensive player who can soak up soft offensive zone starts and PP minutes, bit of a void defensively, has some veteran wiles to impart
Kenins - Largely useless replacement level AHL winger
Gagner - Game seems to have fallen off a cliff. Better than Kenins, but at a vastly inflated salary.

I take Hansen/Kenins easily. Without salaries being a factor, it's more of a wash, and maybe slightly in favor of Vanek/Gagner despite Hansen being the best overall player.

 

[Ace of Hades]

As I said contracts are not included. Disregard that.

 

[racerjoe]

In game Hansen would have had the biggest positive affect on the game. If anything Gagne is proving to have a negative affect. Really I would take Hansen of old over both those two, and Kennis is just a body.

 

[MS]

Jake is not a top skater. god damn. A good skater sure.

I'm hardly a big Virtanen fan, but he might be the fastest player in the NHL. He's dumb as a sack of rocks in the offensive zone, but his skating is ludicrously good.

__________

As for the original question, it's Hansen and Kenins by a mile. Like not even close. 14-15 Hansen is so much better than the other 3 players listed it isn't funny. And 14-15 Kenins is better than Gagner.

It's a shame Kenins got hurt at the start of 15-16 and basically lost his spot because he tried to play through it and looked awful. Then by the time he was healthy and lighting up the AHL in the 2nd half of the season, he wasn't in the organization's plans any longer and didn't get another look.

 

[Shareefruck]

Hansen and Kenins easily. In fact, Hansen is on the only player of the bunch who I would want on a contender anyways, so even if it was just Hansen alone vs. Vanek and Gagner, I would take Hansen.

Hell, for the stretch that we were an awful team, I would argue that Hansen was our best and easily most complete player.

And personally, I still have a soft spot for thinking that under different circumstances, Kenins could have turned into something useful.

You are the same poster that said he was best skater from his draft. and u think he will score 30. And im a homer? wait.. Dont both of you think Boeser is going to out score matthews. Im a homer tho.

As someone who has been very skeptical of Virtanen from the start, thinking that he was the best skater of the draft was a very reasonable opinion.

 

[JumpierPegasus]

Vanek and Gagner are the much more talented duo. However, Hansen and Kenins were the much better all around duo. Both are dogs who hounded the puck. The question is where in the lineup. Bottom 6 I'll take Hansen and Kenins. But if they have to move up the lineup due to injuries and such I'll take Gagner and Vanek simply for their PP and offensive abilities (though Gagner hasn't shown much in his time here)

I'll take Hansen and Kenins because I don't want any of those guys in my top 6 anyway

 

[LaVar]

people are vastly underrating hansen and how good he was. i take him over vanek 10 times out of 10.. was faster, better on the pk (defensively in general..), could play him on any line, etc..

gagner is honestly not worth much, and i'd take kenins over him just for cap purposes..

poll shouldn't be close at all.