Line Combos: Your 2015-2016 Vancouver Canucks

[Bourne Endeavor]

Daniel Sedin / Henrik Sedin / Alexandre Burrows
Sven Baerstchi / Bowie Horvat / Radim Vrbata
Christopher Higgins / Brandon Sutter / Jannik Hansen
Ronalds Kennis / Linden Vey / Brandon Prust

Derrick Dorsett

that's what I would do if I were coach

Dorsett is better than Prust. So swap them.

 

[Disappointed EP40]

I can see trading Vrbata and Higgins for picks. They aren't core and we have young prospects near NHL ready to replace them (Gaunce, Kenins, Shinkaruk, Grenier & Virtanen. I do think many Canuck fans are over-estimating what those two players will return in picks and partly blaming Benning for not getting the return they want. A return that isn't actually there in the market place.

From what I see right now, I doubt Vrbata will return much more than a mid to late 1st or even an early 2nd. I don't think he will return an added prospect. I don't think Higgins will return more than a late 3rd at best and more likely a 4th or a 5th.

With the addition of Sutter (who I see as a 2b centre ) and the emergence of both Kenins and Gaunce as promising LW"s, I think I would prefer to keep Hansen to form a Kenins/Gaunce - Sutter - Hanxen second line for defensive games and a Baertschi - Horvat - Burrows second line for offensive games. Maybe trade Hansen and/or Burrows at trade deadline based on how Virtanen, Cassels & Grenier have developed. I doubt Hansen gets any more than Higgins so keeping Higgens is more valuable right now than what pick we would get for him.

What I don't see making any sense is trading Hamhuis. Hamhuis, Edler and Tanev are the core of the Canucks defense. If traded, the most Hamhuis would return would be a mid to late round pick and a prospect. Odds are what ever players we got in return would not come close to what Hamhuis brings to the Canucks. Any pick, and it is unknown what position that pick would play and how successful he would be, would not likely be even making the team before 3 to 5 years and even then years before hitting prime. No matter how rebuilt the Canucks forwards and goal would be losing any of Hamhuis, Tanev or Edler would leave such a gaping hole in the defense that Benning would be forced to go out and trade for a replacement thus defeating the whole purpose. Past those three, the next Canuck prospect to possibly develop into a top 4 D is Brisebois and his development is at least 3 to 4 years away.

To be a winning team or a contender, you need both skilled young players plus skilled experienced core players as mentors. Not just young prospects will skill. I agree with Linden and WD. You want to bring rookies into a winning environment. Look at the Oilers. A team filled with ultra-skilled forwards and a **** defense. All that has happened is that those ultra-skilled forwards haven't developed like they should have but they have learned to accept losing. They are looking at McDavid to lead them into victory instead of looking within themselves. Pretty sad for such skilled 1st overall picks.

If you only are getting a 4th or later for Higgins, you keep him.

And you trade Prust before anyone.

 

[Hi-wayman]

If you only are getting a 4th or later for Higgins, you keep him.

And you trade Prust before anyone.

Why? Prust & Higgins have two different roles on the Canucks.

Higgins is an offensive/speedy forward who looks to be losing his roster spot to young prospect Baertschi due to Higgins inconsistent play.

Prust is an in your face defensive forward & penalty killer who was acquired to replace the role the team wanted Matthias to fill, but who also was too inconsistent in his play to be re-signed.

I think Prust was acquired as a stop gap to fill that in your face role for a year or two until Gaunce is ready to take that roster spot from Prust. Currently Gaunce isn't ready to do that, but will learn by listening to & watching Prust play & getting some spot duty this season.

IMHO the Canucks improved immensely as a team when Matthias' role was replaced by Prust just by Prust's attitude alone.

 

[Disappointed EP40]

Why? Prust & Higgins have two different roles on the Canucks.

Higgins is an offensive/speedy forward who looks to be losing his roster spot to young prospect Baertschi due to Higgins inconsistent play.

Prust is an in your face defensive forward & penalty killer who was acquired to replace the role the team wanted Matthias to fill, but who also was too inconsistent in his play to be re-signed.

I think Prust was acquired as a stop gap to fill that in your face role for a year or two until Gaunce is ready to take that roster spot from Prust. Currently Gaunce isn't ready to do that, but will learn by listening to & watching Prust play & getting some spot duty this season.

IMHO the Canucks improved immensely as a team when Matthias' role was replaced by Prust just by Prust's attitude alone.

Prust sucks and is an upcoming FA. Higgins doesn't and isn't.

That's why you trade Prust.

 

[Love]

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Baertschi-Horvat-Vrbata
Higgins-Sutter-Hansen
Prust-Vey-Dorsett

Edler-Tanev
Hamhuis-Weber
Sbisa-Corrado

Miller
Markstrom

That's me being realistically-optimistic. I could also see the middle 6 looking like:

Higgins-Sutter-Vrbata
Baertschi-Horvat-Hansen

 

[PM]

I don't like the idea of it but I think this is how our bottom-4 defense is going to look this year when healthy.

Hamhuis - Sbisa
Bartowski - Weber
Corrado

I just don't see Corrado getting playing time over Bartowski due to him being a new Benning acquisition who is also pretty pricey. I think his only chance to break into the lineup is by injury or beating out Weber. Even though Weber played decent with Hamhuis last year I see them getting Sbisa into the top-4 on a permanent basis. When Benning said he thought Sbisa was going to be a top-4 dman he wasn't kidding. One way or another, Sbisa is going to be playing in the top-4, regardless of if he actually deserves to or not.

 

[Strangelove]

Prust is an in your face defensive forward & penalty killer who was acquired to replace the role the team wanted Matthias to fill, but who also was too inconsistent in his play to be re-signed.

Prust sucks and is an upcoming FA. Higgins doesn't and isn't.

That's why you trade Prust.

Aren't you the same guy who summed up Sutter the other day with "Sutter sucks!"

How many Canuck players suck... if you don't mind my asking.

And is it just the ones Benning brought in?

 

[mathonwy]

This thread depresses me.

I refuse to slot Prust into our line up.

Refuse.

 

[Vancouver_2010]

Why move 2 good players.

Move Dorsett and Prust they are both overpaid and worse hockey players. Plus they both make more than Hansen and Higgins.

Who would want Dorsett @ 2.65 million dollars or Prust @ 2.5 million dollars? Who is stupid enough to make those trade?

 

[Disappointed EP40]

Aren't you the same guy who summed up Sutter the other day with "Sutter sucks!"

How many Canuck players suck... if you don't mind my asking.

And is it just the ones Benning brought in?

In a comparison against Higgins - Prust sucks. And yes, Sutter sucks. So does Sbisa. I don't have to explain in any detail, because it has been stated over, and over, and over again.

If you're suiting up Prust over Higgins, because Prust is an "in your face" guy, you're failing to build a good hockey team.

Skill/Talent > Meat/Potatoes.

But way to attack the poster and not the argument.

 

[David71]

Who would want Dorsett @ 2.65 million dollars or Prust @ 2.5 million dollars? Who is stupid enough to make those trade?

there will be SOME "boneheaded dumb gm ala mike milbury would. they bring "grit intangibles". team with cap space of course.

 

[Strangelove]

In a comparison against Higgins - Prust sucks. And yes, Sutter sucks. So does Sbisa. I don't have to explain in any detail, because it has been stated over, and over, and over again.

If you're suiting up Prust over Higgins, because Prust is an "in your face" guy, you're failing to build a good hockey team.

Skill/Talent > Meat/Potatoes.

But way to attack the poster and not the argument.

So you feel I'm attacking you and that the GM of your team generally brings in players that "suck".

Interesting.

Honestly, I have no idea what you "state over, and over, and over again".

I was chatting with a few posters in the Trade board the other day when you popped in with your "Sutter sucks!" comment.

Next thing I see from you is your "Prust sucks!" comment above.

I thought it was funny (and sad!).

Obviously I don't know enough about you to know whether you're a quality poster or not.

But hey, might be a good idea to ease up on the "Whatever-NHL-player sucks!" routine my brother.

 

[Hi-wayman]

In a comparison against Higgins - Prust sucks. And yes, Sutter sucks. So does Sbisa. I don't have to explain in any detail, because it has been stated over, and over, and over again.

If you're suiting up Prust over Higgins, because Prust is an "in your face" guy, you're failing to build a good hockey team.

Skill/Talent > Meat/Potatoes.

But way to attack the poster and not the argument.

No one but you suggested that Prust would replace Higgins. My earlier post was quite clear. Prust was acquired to replace Matthias. I also said Prust likely was a stop gap acquisition to fill that role until Gaunce was able to take that role on.

Canuck management for the last 2 or 3 years has noted the Western Conference is populated by some very physical teams. Winnipeg has developed into a just down right mean. You claim that skill & talent > meat and potatoes. Unfortunately reality proves you wrong. Edmonton is the most skilled team in the Conference and they are a yearly loto pick team. What is true is a balanced team > a skill or a meat & potatoes team & a balanced team not only includes a combination of skill players & support meat & potatoes players, those players also need to have the right winning attitude and team support spirit and have a mix of ages and maturity. The Canucks would have to lose for years to even try to equal Edmonton's talent pool, but a properly balanced team can win without such an overload of skill.

As for Higgins if he is traded or not. Higgins will partly determine that. He is a good player with useful talent and skill, but Higgins too often becomes very inconsistent & that is a ticket to another team as far as the coach is concerned. That was Kassians problem.

The Canucks have younger players who would like to take Higgins roster spot. So if Higgins is traded, it will not be due to opening a roster spot on the team that Prust needs to use to make the team. Matthias already did that. Higgins roster spot will be lost to someone like Baertschi, Vey,,Shinkaruk, Kenins or Vitanen and it will Higgins own fault for being inconsistent.

 

[Hi-wayman]

So you feel I'm attacking you and that the GM of your team generally brings in players that "suck".

Interesting.

Honestly, I have no idea what you "state over, and over, and over again".

I was chatting with a few posters in the Trade board the other day when you popped in with your "Sutter sucks!" comment.

Next thing I see from you is your "Prust sucks!" comment above.

I thought it was funny (and sad!).

Obviously I don't know enough about you to know whether you're a quality poster or not.

But hey, might be a good idea to ease up on the "Whatever-NHL-player sucks!" routine my brother.

Hi Strangelove. I like your post, but a correction on your Icon. As an old real estate appraiser it's not really location, location location. really it is timing, timing, timing.

 

[Back in 94]

Prust is gonna be our whipping boy next year. Nuck faithful will run him and his girlfriend outta town the first chance they get. Lol.

 

[Balls Mahoney]

Baertschi as a 2nd line reg despite never playing a full season in the NHL is a stretch

Who else are you going to put there? Baertschi for better or worse is the best option we have since throwing Kassian out for lulz.

 

[Disappointed EP40]

So you feel I'm attacking you and that the GM of your team generally brings in players that "suck".

Interesting.

Honestly, I have no idea what you "state over, and over, and over again".

I was chatting with a few posters in the Trade board the other day when you popped in with your "Sutter sucks!" comment.

Next thing I see from you is your "Prust sucks!" comment above.

I thought it was funny (and sad!).

Obviously I don't know enough about you to know whether you're a quality poster or not.

But hey, might be a good idea to ease up on the "Whatever-NHL-player sucks!" routine my brother.

Again, you're talking about me and not the argument. I could write about you, but I gather you can figure out how I would sum that up.

To the actual point, Prust sucks, I'm not going to go into details on why, because people can and will come to their own conclusions about it and will do so in the Prust thread.

In the Line-Combo thread, I will spell it out that way.

Higgins >> Kenins > Prust

 

[Disappointed EP40]

No one but you suggested that Prust would replace Higgins. My earlier post was quite clear. Prust was acquired to replace Matthias. I also said Prust likely was a stop gap acquisition to fill that role until Gaunce was able to take that role on.

Canuck management for the last 2 or 3 years has noted the Western Conference is populated by some very physical teams. Winnipeg has developed into a just down right mean. You claim that skill & talent > meat and potatoes. Unfortunately reality proves you wrong. Edmonton is the most skilled team in the Conference and they are a yearly loto pick team. What is true is a balanced team > a skill or a meat & potatoes team & a balanced team not only includes a combination of skill players & support meat & potatoes players, those players also need to have the right winning attitude and team support spirit and have a mix of ages and maturity. The Canucks would have to lose for years to even try to equal Edmonton's talent pool, but a properly balanced team can win without such an overload of skill.

As for Higgins if he is traded or not. Higgins will partly determine that. He is a good player with useful talent and skill, but Higgins too often becomes very inconsistent & that is a ticket to another team as far as the coach is concerned. That was Kassians problem.

The Canucks have younger players who would like to take Higgins roster spot. So if Higgins is traded, it will not be due to opening a roster spot on the team that Prust needs to use to make the team. Matthias already did that. Higgins roster spot will be lost to someone like Baertschi, Vey,,Shinkaruk, Kenins or Vitanen and it will Higgins own fault for being inconsistent.

Players don't have sub-positions and their 'spots' aren't locked in as , Prust is here to replace Matthias, Baertschi is here to replace Higgins, etc. Sure you have, roles, but it's not so specific.

With that said, if you're making room for any young player, you bump the least talented out of a line-up that needs more talent. (And youth for that matter.)

This is where Prust is a no-brainer to be sat, or traded, before Higgins. Higgins can play the bottom six fine. Kenins can replace Prust's "in-your-face".

To keep a role player over a much more skilled player is the type of mentality that down-grades our overall skill and ability. (As Benning has done.)

 

[biturbo19]

Why? Prust & Higgins have two different roles on the Canucks.

Higgins is an offensive/speedy forward who looks to be losing his roster spot to young prospect Baertschi due to Higgins inconsistent play.

Prust is an in your face defensive forward & penalty killer who was acquired to replace the role the team wanted Matthias to fill, but who also was too inconsistent in his play to be re-signed.

I think Prust was acquired as a stop gap to fill that in your face role for a year or two until Gaunce is ready to take that roster spot from Prust. Currently Gaunce isn't ready to do that, but will learn by listening to & watching Prust play & getting some spot duty this season.

IMHO the Canucks improved immensely as a team when Matthias' role was replaced by Prust just by Prust's attitude alone.

I don't really agree with most of this. But Higgins and Prust do definitely fill completely different "roles".


Either way though, i think there's some flexibility in that there should be a one guy to trade at the deadline if young players from Utica are making noise. Kind of depends on who is pushing for a spot really. At the moment, i'm partial to moving Prust...but there are so many balls in the air with guys like Baertschi/Kenins/Gaunce/Shinkaruk/Jensen/Grenier on the wings...and Virtanen in the mix for a potential 9-game stint even...so many moving parts.

And of course, it also hinges on what you can get for different pieces...if there's any demand at all, and where you think you most need the depth. Injuries can play a huge role too...if we're as banged up as last deadline...maybe there's no deal at all and you just roll on with what we've got. A lot of hockey still to be played.

 

[The Jesus*]

I really wanted to see Kassian get a crack full time with the Sedins. Keep him there, boost his confidence, and then when the Sedins wither we have a big tough top 6 winger good for 40+ points.

Still so frustrated about that trade. I think this is the year where we really crash and burn. We got worse, and almost every other team in the west got better. Sedins will be a year older and slower.

Really hoping for a top 5 pick. And for Benning to be fired. Seriously. Someone should leave a trail of Where's Waldo books to lead Benning out of the city for good.

 

[biturbo19]

I don't like the idea of it but I think this is how our bottom-4 defense is going to look this year when healthy.

Hamhuis - Sbisa
Bartowski - Weber
Corrado

I just don't see Corrado getting playing time over Bartowski due to him being a new Benning acquisition who is also pretty pricey. I think his only chance to break into the lineup is by injury or beating out Weber. Even though Weber played decent with Hamhuis last year I see them getting Sbisa into the top-4 on a permanent basis. When Benning said he thought Sbisa was going to be a top-4 dman he wasn't kidding. One way or another, Sbisa is going to be playing in the top-4, regardless of if he actually deserves to or not.

That does seem the most likely outcome. As a starting point at least.

Though i think it's important to take a less "lineup card-y" sort of perspective on "top-4D". The way this staff likes to roll lines (and d-pairs)...i think it's really "top pair" which is Edler-Tanev...and after that it's just paper numbers vs minutes numbers.

You can write it out like:

Edler-Tanev
Hamhuis-Sbisa
Bartkowski-Weber

or whatever...but that doesn't exactly mean the minutes are going to be distributed 1-2-3-4-5-6 along that order.

Special teams usage and those "extra shifts" mean a lot overall. Just as we had a Bieksa last year playing effectively the same number of minutes in games as Tanev...despite one being on the "1st pairing" and one being on the "3rd pairing" by the lineup card. And you'd have a Bieksa playing more minutes most every night vs Weber who was apparently playing in the "top-4" and even raking in top-PP minutes. (with the exception of nights where we were on the PP all day).

People seem to get very literal about the cut-off between "top-4" and "not top-4" based on the way it gets written down on a "projected lineup card". I think you've gotta be far more flexible in thinking about how the minutes will ultimately break down.

The "hardest minutes" are what really matter. That's EV+PK minutes. In the event of which ATOI/60 for our defencemen last year breaks down something like:

Edler-20.35.
Tanev-19.92.
Hamhuis-19.08.
Bieksa-18.8.
Sbisa-18.07.

So Sbisa lands...~0.73 ATOI/60 minutes behind Bieksa. Not "top-4" minutes per se, but awfully close. To bump that up even just a minute more to surpass Bieksa...maybe that's something, and at that point i'd call Sbisa a fairly indisputable "top-4D". But that's just me...i find PP minutes and which partner a defenceman is paired with tend to really obscure and distract from who the "top-4D" on a team really are in a lot of situations.


However it shakes out...i do think they're counting on Bartkowski to be a regular fixture. And i do think Sbisa is going to be asked to absorb that fractional piece of a minute that Bieksa played more than him. I'm expecting roughly...Sbisa takes Bieksa's minutes, Bartkowski takes last year's Sbisa minutes. And if Bartkowski is actually decent...he should be able to play Sbisa type minutes well enough.

My biggest hope is that Corrado gets a fair shake. His development has kind of flatlined and that sucks...but a young player like that getting his groove back like he had early in his NHL experience, would be absolutely huge for this team. And he's got the shooting ability to make Weber a pressbox denizen once again. Possibly.

A lot of ways it could shake out though, and the "pairings on paper" don't necessarily mean everything.

Still think we're one solid veteran defenceman away from a very deep blueline. And that veteran defenceman is Ehrhoff and he's still out there...but i digress...tirade for another thread.

 

[rypper]

IMHO the Canucks improved immensely as a team when Matthias' role was replaced by Prust just by Prust's attitude alone.

Is Prust's attitude going to score 18 goals for us?

 

[biturbo19]

Is Prust's attitude going to score 18 goals for us?

He's going to will Sutter to score his usual 20, which is 5 up on Bonino...and Baertschi to score Matthias' flukey 18g.

job done.

 

[Get North]

If Sbisa is on the right with Hamhuis he'll do fine and I think posters on here will see him as a quality player. When we hit injuries he jumped beside with Hamhuis and played well. He seemed more comfortable moving the puck and didn't make many mistakes.

Hopefully Bartkowski-Weber/Corrado will become a good 3rd pairing and do well in the system. If it becomes an atrocious pairing, I wouldn't mind seeing 3 pairings with 3 guys who can really help the ones who struggle. It's ugly but maybe it can work? Edler-Weber, Hamhuis-Sbisa, Bartkowski-Tanev. I think it would be unique if they click together and compliment each other well.

 

[rypper]

Sbisa could barely handle being an NHL defenseman on his natural side last season and now we want to try him on his off wing? Sheesh.