Bo Horvat sent to junior – Canucks roster sits at 25

The Vancouver Canucks didn’t have to use the waiver-wire to send anybody down on Sunday, but they cut their roster by one by officially sending Bo Horvat down to the London Knights. Both Horvat and fellow first round pick from the Knights Max Domi last until the very end of training camp, and the Knights are again in a position to roll through the Ontario Hockey League in search of their third consecutive J. Ross Robertson Cup.

As for the Canucks, this means that they’ll probably switch the newly-acquired Zac Dalpe from winger back to centre, where he’d played at Ohio State but struggled in his first couple of seasons of pro hockey. There are probably still a couple of moves the team has to make before rosters are set Monday at 2 p.m. Eastern, as the Canucks currently stand at 25 players on the roster.

Here is the updated depth chart:

Forwards:

David Booth
Alex Burrows
Zac Dalpe
Jannik Hansen
Chris Higgins
Zack Kassian * ††
Ryan Kesler
Brad Richardson
Mike Santorelli
Jordan Schroeder **
Daniel Sedin
Henrik Sedin
Tom Sestito
Hunter Shinkaruk †
Dale Weise
Jeremy Welsh †† 

Defence:

Andrew Alberts
Kevin Bieksa
Alex Edler
Jason Garrison
Dan Hamhuis
Chris Tanev
Yannick Weber 

Goalies:

Eddie Lack ††
Roberto Luongo

* – Suspended
** – Injured
† – Eligible for junior hockey
†† – Waiver-exempt (Capgeek)

The team can’t start the season with players on the long-term injured reserve, so a player other than Welsh is going to have to be sent down in order to get the Canucks to 23 players. That means either a trade (call up Craig MacTavish. Maybe the Oilers want Sestito?) or that Hunter Shinkaruk is going to head down to junior like Horvat.

I also can’t find a provision in the collective agreement that says Zack Kassian can’t be sent down to Utica as a paper transaction to get the team below 23 players on the roster until the team can put Jordan Schroeder on the long-term injured reserve Tuesday. The American Hockey League would assuredly honour his NHL suspension, but I’d assume he’d be back up and in the press box for the season opener if the Canucks went that route.

Brad Ziemer suggests that Shinkaruk is going down too, but that Shinkaruk was, as of Sunday, still skating with the team on the last day of camp:

Still a bit mysterious and we don’t want to say anything for certain until the roster is set tomorrow. I imagine Welsh starts the season in Utica, for sure, but cutting from 24 to 23 presents a bit of a challenge.

Update: Hmm…

Per the CBA illustrations in Article 50, teams must set their rosters prior to opening day (ie: Monday) but cannot place players on long-term injured reserve until opening day (ie: Tuesday). This was mentioned on Hockey Night in Canada last night, but if the Canucks can indeed put Jordan Schroeder on the injured reserve prior to the start of the season, it saves the team from having to make a move in addition to sending down Welsh to get under 23 players.

Suspension rules are also incredible hazy. Here is the full text of Article 16.4:

16.4 Active Roster Size; Playing Roster:

(a) There shall be a maximum of twenty-three (23) Players on each Club’s Active Roster at any one time, provided, however, that, on the date of each season’s Trade Deadline, a Club’s Active Roster may be increased to any number of Players the Club, in its discretion, so determines, subject to Article 50.

(b) Clubs are not permitted to Loan Players where the result of such Loan(s) would reduce the Club’s Active Roster below eighteen (18) skaters and two (2) goaltenders. However, Clubs will not be required to Recall Players to maintain the minimum eighteen (18) skaters and two (2) goaltenders on days which they do not play an NHL Game, provided that the deficiency below those thresholds is a result of an injury that has caused the removal of such disabled Player from the Active Roster.

(c) Except in case of emergency, there shall be no reduction of the required minimum Playing Rosters of the Clubs, below eighteen (18) skaters and two (2) goaltenders.

Do suspended players count against the active roster limit? They count against the salary cap. Bill Daly didn’t respond to my email last week asking that question, but I guess we’ll find out tomorrow.

  • argoleas

    The “I’d trade the Canucks roster for the Oilers roster” should essentially result in you instantly being able to never post another comment on here. The Oilers have been the worst team in the league for four consecutive years. In two of which, the Canucks won the president’s trophy. If you’d trade the latter for the former you’re just a total moron, there’s no way around that.

    It’s already been pretty well established that NMOO is only here to bitch. Earlier I set out the options with respect to what to do with the youth, asked him to pick one, and he wasn’t able to. He just complains, he doesn’t actually have any ideas or constructive thoughts.

    • argoleas

      The Oilers and Islanders (largely through tanking) have higher upside rosters than the Canucks.

      Not sure why this is difficult to grasp…

      “It’s already been pretty well established that NMOO is only here to bitch. Earlier I set out the options with respect to what to do with the youth, asked him to pick one, and he wasn’t able to.”

      The world does not centre around you champ.

      I don’t respond to every delusional Canuck fan with which I disagree…

      • argoleas

        You did respond to me. And your response was to dodge the question and say absolutely nothing of value. You instead said “all I want is a clear direction from the management” or something equally vague and meaningless, and went back to bitching about Gillis.

        There were three alternatives as to what to do with Corrado and Horvat. You weren’t able to actually select and defend an alternative. You provide no actual insight. All you do is whine.

        • argoleas

          Perhaps there is more to the world than the 3 alternatives you provide…

          And I’m not sure why you limit your alternative list to a couple of young players.

          The original criticsm was that it was merely lip service that young players were, finally, going to be integrated into the lineup.

          Picking two players and creating a false dilemma is adorable, though…

  • argoleas

    LMFAO. So Gillis trades his future goalie away for a guy who ends up in juniors. Why not just give Schneids away for free to begin with? Oh yea, HE DID. HAHAHAHAHAHAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA! What a winning combo. If Gillis keeps this up, all the players from the Canucks will end up in juniors. Don’t worry, though, the twins and Luongo will still bring the cup here based on past failures. LOL. My my, this team’s like a train wreck I just can’t take my eyes off. LOL

  • Big Cap

    Let’s Review:

    1. Luongo and his unstable mental toughness and commitment to playing in Vancouver

    2. A backup goalie with zero NHL regular season experience

    3. Kesler, consistently fighting injuries and always on the mend

    4. A head coach who’s a complete unpredictable wild card.

    5. Sedin(s), Bieksa, Burrows, Hamhuis, all on the wrong side of 30.

    6. Kassian and his unwillingness to mature and play a positive role or consistently demonstrate skill to play in the top 6

    7. Questionable depth and talent on the bottom 6 forwards.

    8. David Booth and his injury(s)

    9. Now playing in a much tougher division and will no longer beat up and pad their stats against a terrible NW division.

    10. A new coaching system that players are still learning.

    11. Sedin(s) are now Forced to kill penalties and have to block shots.

    12. A GM who is to timid to pull off any major moves in a proper time frame.

    13. One Playoff win in two seasons.

    ****Did I miss anything??

    There are ALOT of “questions”, “ifs” and “buts”

    The Window Has Officially Closed On The Vancouver Canucks.

  • JCDavies

    @NM00

    Not going to chip in about the youth movement or anything else at hand here, but just wanted to say that no matter what Torts does here it won’t be his last coaching job. Look how long Iron Mike kept getting hired for- he’s won a cup and his style of coaching/personality will always appeal to somme. So Torts isn’t going to burn the barn down in interest of self-preservation

    • argoleas

      I suspect the league is starting to trend away from giving recycled coaches an infinite number of chances.

      I guess we’ll see how things work out in Vancouver.

      But if Torts is fired after 2 or 3 years with a barrage of media blowups, I’m not sure another team will want to deal with him…

    • JCDavies

      Remember, the Canucks are known for bad drafting. Since when have the Canucks ever thought about the future with their drafting? 4 decades later you really think the Canucks will draft a franchise player? Other teams like Pittsburgh make plans to draft franchise stars like Crosby and Malkin. The Canucks do nothing in their lean years and as a resultt, keep flopping from lean to mediocre back and forth…a perpetual abyss of mediocrity.

      • argoleas

        Yes, you are right, the Canucks never drafted Linden, Bure, Sedins, Kesler, Edler, no one at all. They’ve certainly made some bad picks (who hasn’t) and they certainly have traded away some good players that they drafted (Vaive, Neely, etc). But again, who hasn’t?

        Pittsburgh “made plans” to draft Malkin and Crosby? When? When they were also “planning” to possibly fold their franchise and luckily were able to suck bad enough (and get bailed out by Mario) enough to land Fleury, Crosby and Malkin? That’s some awesome “planning”. The same kind of “planning” that led to us having a draft lottery in the NHL, so like PIttsburgh back in the 80s couldn’t trade their best players to end up last in the league to pick Lemieux?

        The Canucks do nothing in their lean years? I thought at the end of their lean 90s they picked the Sedins? How exactly, with consistent finishes in the top of their division (and league) were they supposed to be “planning” for success?

        It’s nice to see that you pay such close attention to hockey.

        • argoleas

          And here come the excuses. It’s too hard to draft well, it’s too hard to get a real good GM, it’s too hard to get a center, a goalie, a Captian who can stand up for himself…it’s too hard.

          The Sedins? top of the division? This is a weak division the Canucks are in, The Sedins..oh yeah, how many cups have they won? If you call that success, than you don’t have any real standards. Or have you forgotten all those play off chokes? Oh wait, all team choke in the okay offs. Can you also enlighten me as to what the Canucks have done that’s so richly deserving of your praise since their inception, over 44 years ago? I see nothing but a sea of mediocrity. If mediocrty is your idea of success, than i want no part of it. Oh, do you want to compare how good the Canucks are to the Jets as well? Greztky, Lemiux, Crosby, Roy etc etc, none of them have ever been with the Canucks.Oh wait, you have Linden and Lumme and the Sedins. LOL. What a wonderful thing to be proud of. Are you happy with the Presidents Trohpies as well? Or regular season success? It’s called “standards” man, standards.If I wanted to hear how the Canucks are successful and can do no wrong, I could just listen to Don “shill” Taylor. Go and ask Don, where is the cup? and he’ll tell you the same excuses you just wrote to me.

      • argoleas

        Hm, dunno about that. Sedins, Kessler, Edler. These look pretty good to me. Others may not be franchise players, but as noted above, some damn good drafts have been traded away as well. As for the plans for drafting such great players, well not sure how one plans to severely suck (or in the case of Edmonton, serially severely suck), but not too many teams have a green light to just dump a season or seasons to get to that 1st spot, certainly not Vancouver that has been competitive for the last decade since the Sedins draft. Much can be said about Vancouver draft history, and more significantly, their draft tradeaways, but we must all remember that the teams that are doing very well now like LA and Chicago really sucked in the mid 2000s so they got the really high picks. Again, one can say these are necessary ingredients to success, but it needs to be put in perspective when assessing the success rate of a teams entire draft history.

        • argoleas

          LOL. If those 4 players are the saviors for this team then the Canucks are in more trouble than I thought. No offense to those 4 players but a good as a donkey is, a donkey is still no race horse. Vanouver’s team has sucked for a long long time. And what have they got to show for it.

          It’s ok to suck if sometimes you win the cup. The Canuck’s have still to win one, and it’s almost half a century coming up. Does that ever resonate with their fans? Half a century, the average man lives about 70 something years here, give or take a few. The fact that this team has had over four decades of futility speaks volumes to the systematic problem that affects this club. The Canucks do everything bad, or never good enough.Say what you want about Chicago but they’ve now won 2 cups in this decade. Where are the Canucks? Oh don’t worry, give them 20 more years. More time, more time. Don’t worry, take your time, people live forever.LOL

          • argoleas

            I do seem to recall something about these 4 players being at the core of a recent team that was 1 game away from winning the cup, which would have put them on par with the Pittsburgh team that you so rave about, and LA as well, in terms of recent wins. You are cherry picking Chicago as a team that has done very well, but what about all those many other teams that also have nothing to show for all their efforts, and have accomplished much less than Vancouver over the last 10 years. Do they all suck as well? But game-won wise, Vancouver has been one of the most successful teams in the last 10 years, which impacts draft position. Again, much can be said about the draft and trade history and strategy of the last few GMs, and there is a strong argument to be made that the window is either closing or closed. But doing everything bad? Whatever.

          • argoleas

            If the players you have have shown they don’t have what it takes to win the prize, why stick with them?
            Second, there aren’t many teams left who have never wona cup, the Canucks are one of them. Don’t compare yourself with mediocrity and think because this team is slightly better than Buffalo that makes their futility ok. It’s the Stanley Cup or the trash bin.

            Nothing to show for theie efforts? Even Carolina and Tampa have a cup, and they grow sugar cane down there. They could care less about hockey, yet they’re still able to win a cup. Have the Canucks won one yet? Wouldn’t it be embarrassing if you came from a “hockey Town” yet a town who could care less about hockey wins the prize first? You would think alarm bells would be sounding, right? Oh, nooo, not here. There’s no rush, let’s just compare ourselves to the worst teams in the league and stand proud. Proud of what?

            Am I “cherry picking” now that I mentioned Tampa and Carolina? Hmm, teams who’s never won the cup, Jets, Buffalo, St. Louis, Canucks,…are there anymore? You see where I’m going with this. The Canucks have absolutely NO sense of urgency and it shows. Pretty soon every team would have won one cup except the Canucks. Most teams have won one except the Canucks. Are you going to compare this team with winners or losers? The choice is yours. Just because you don’t like standards doesn’t mean I or other people should dislike it either. Think about that tonight. Colina and Tampa, they grow palm trees and sugarcane down there…and they have a cup. The Canucks have nothing but false dreams. Maybe I’m cherry picking, Maybe I should compare how good this team is against even more loser teams like the Jets and Sabers. Why is it that so many of the Canucks fans have no standards? Wy don’t the Canucks just come clean and make their motto ” The Canucks, we’re pretty good compared to the worst teams, come watch us play.” Why go through all that BULLSHAT, year after year?

  • argoleas

    Not a surprise. The Canucks doing what they do best, trade potential stars away, trade away grit, keeping old failing cougars, never having a plan of succession, never having a real plan for the present or future.

    Gillis should enjoy playing GM because once this is all over, there is not one team in the NHL that will hire that clown as GM, and he knows it. There’s not one GM out there that respects Gllis as a GM, and Gillis knows this. Someday, all the fanboys will look back and see Gillis as a prime example of why their team never won anything. The Canucks don’t need competition, they do a wonderful job shoot themselves in the foot.

  • pheenster

    Raymond and Grabner are exactly the same player.

    Goals per game over the last four years identical? Check.

    One really good season? Check.

    Tailed off considerably since? Check.

    Easily knocked off the puck? Check.

    Taken a significant pay cut? Raymond just did, Grabner will in a couple of years. So, check.

  • argoleas

    They are first trying the same thing with a different voice. I understand this to be the desire of ownership and the GM, since making a coaching change is the simplest step to try to shake things up, before trying more drastic steps like trading core players. It is obvious that they first want to see how a (possibly) uninjured Booth, better Kassian, focused Luongo, and reinvigorated Edler will work out. Then, as injuries require, Corrado, Jensen, Lain, and some of the other more recent reclamations will be called up. This is their thinking I believe, and its what we should expect. Anyone that actually believed the crap they would be immediately filling the squad with lots of youth should give their head a shake.

    Will this work out? I believe there have been many instances where a new coach was able to get more out of the same team. IN any case, now we will see if the team was just on a inevitable dive, or if last season was just having everyone under-performing. Not sure we can make it a 2 year window since 2011-2012 you had the hangover plus the blinding star called LA Kings. So this is what we will get, and we will see if it works. If not, do not hesitate to commence a rebuild.

    Also, I dont see the NTC, even if we have any of these, as a difficult obstacle. If the team so desires, they can always request the player waive it to a team of his choosing, vast majority of players would go with that. It

  • JCDavies

    I basically view the team as getting Kesler and Booth. Santorelli has been a pleasant surprise, though I don’t expect too much out of him. The Sedins could be declining, or they could be evening out to their career norm. A lot depends on the biggest variable of all, Luongo.

    I don’t think the Canucks are as obviously bad as you say. But like I said, I’m happy waiting and seeing how things shake out during the season. It’s the only logical, even keel thing to do.

    While I’m not necessarily optimistic that everything is going to go well, such as Kesler playing up to snuff again, or Booth returning to a decent form like he had in his first year, or the Sedins continuing to be effective scorers, or any other of the “what ifs” on the team, I think it’s the definition of lunacy to say that you know that all those things will go wrong and that a first round exit is their fate.

    They could easily miss the playoffs all together. Lots of variables here, and lots of reasons they could be a great team or a terrible team.

    Midseason, my man, midseason.

  • JCDavies

    Jesus, the season hasn’t even started for any team, much less the Canucks and everyone is calling this season a wash and to get ready for next year, cause Gillis screwed the pooch with what a poor team we have.

    Wait until mid-season to start freaking out, folks.

    Vancouver fans really are the lowest common denominator. Even Toronto fans would be ashamed.

    I’m not saying they’ll be the best team in the NHL this season, but damn, some people see the glass half empty or half full, Canucks fans just see it as empty and the glass is smashed and you have cancer.

    • JCDavies

      I believe that’s what Flames fans were telling themselves in the middle of their 4 consecutive first round losses.

      But, hey, let’s just turn a blind eye to the completely underwhelming (yet predictable) reset that has given us an inferior product in 2013-2014 than the one that got swept by San Jose a few months ago.

      “We are all Canucks” or some other such nonsense…

      • JCDavies

        Anyone can freak out to start the year. It’s not hard. It also makes you look like a bit of a tit mouse (hehehehehehe…Simpsons reference, you uncultured swine!) when things aren’t as doomsday, Armageddon, attack of Barney the Purple Dinosaur as you say they are.

        Like I’ve said before, I’ll wait until midseason, because like the number of reasons I can think of that we might have a bad season, I can think of a number of reasons we might have a good season. Once midseason rolls around, I’ll have a better idea how it’s panning out.

        And as I’ve also said before, if things are going sideways, blow the whole thing up, because the players who were counted on as leaders are not leading and Gillis deserves to be let go, and trade deadline deals to replenish the cupboards are indeed in order.

        But I refuse to go crazy before the season. We all know that’s your job. But when everyone else is doing it, it actually legitimately annoys me.

        • JCDavies

          How does suggesting another 1st round exit equate to “freaking out”?

          It has been pretty obvious since last April considering the cap situation and org depth chart.

          Just like it’s obvious upgrades for 2014-2015 will be extremely difficult without a trade if the plan is, once again, to hand out raises and keep the same cast of characters intact.

          I suppose I could have been complicit in manufacturing consent for the organization by dreaming on Clarkson, Horton, Gordon, Cullen, Grabovski and the like.

          But, as you say, that’s not my job…

  • Fred-65

    Shinkaruk and Horvat are top quality. I won’t knock Gillis for these picks. But this GM really needs to start backing some of the B.S. he throws out there on a yearly basis to the media. And the media would do so much better than simply trying to enhance their own investment in the product (Team 1040 for example).

    It’s all getting to become a little much to take.

    • JCDavies

      That’s the job of the media, though.

      It’s up to each individual reader and listener to wade through the manure, turn on the critical thinking component of the brain and call BS when necessary.

      The lip service about resets and young players was apparent in April. And May. And June.

      Gillis had boxed himself into a corner pretty badly…

  • Fred-65

    I never believed that MG stuff about giving young players a chnace. IMO it meant if some one blows our socks off then he’ll make the team. The numbers just didn’t add up there was no room, the exception I thought might be Corrado…frankly because I thought he deserved it. But the rest were no better than Weise, Richards or Santorelli ( sp ) and they all had more experience.

    Of all the draft picks other than Corrado I thought Shinkaruk showed he has a skill that will mke him a NHL player and early, he’s a sniper. Gaunce obviously needs a tad more speed to fit in and Horvat doesn’t have a skill that sets him apart yet.

  • JCDavies

    Unsurprisingly, you can’t believe a word reported by sports journalists about what’s really going on with your favourite sports teams. It’s not because they aren’t doing their job, it’s because their only source of information is the business that needs to skew every bit of news into fattening its already large wallet. Thusly, when Gillis tells you he is going to reset this team and go younger, what he really means to say is “blah, blah. blah… DISTRACTION!” and for us to hopefully fork over some more of that hard earned cash with dreams that this time — yes this time — things will be better.

    This isn’t reset. This is more of the sameness. And frankly, it’s made me take back whatever nasty thing I’ve said about NM00.

    Here is what Dalpe is (are you ready to get excited??: a good skating, defensively weak player with some offensive upside that at age 23 he has yet to experience. Scouts may “rave” about his potential and say all the things you want to hear about the new guy in town. But Dalpe is not part of a reset at all. He is more like a band aid. And a generic store brand one at that.

    The assets the Canucks gave up in that trade were worthless (from a strict commodity, non human point of view — which athletes are to me because I don’t care about them as humans). Fourth round picks are largely AHL roster fillers. Kellan Tochkin is a never was.

    And cap wise, Welsh and Dalpe cost a grand total of $1.5 million, which is not a huge financial risk. That said, neither one of them are likely to be remembered here as investments that paid off.

    What does it all mean? One, Gillis lied when he said he was resetting the team. What he meant was he was trading Corey Schneider. Two, this team is still good enough that if it gets hot by late March it could win the Cup. Lesser teams have pulled that feat, so there is always that. And thirdly, the Canucks still don’t have a 3rd line centre that can play at a championship level. That means the chances that statement #2 comes to fruition are next to nil.

    I don’t think Gillis can reset that at all.

    • JCDavies

      “This isn’t reset. This is more of the sameness. And frankly, it’s made me take back whatever nasty thing I’ve said about NM00.”

      Don’t take anything back. The NM00 persona is meant to have bile thrown in its direction…

      At least there’s the 2014-2015 reset about which to be optimistic.

      Although the raises to Sedin, Sedin, Hansen, Tanev & some role players may hinder those plans…

      Will there be wish fulfilment about the 14-15 equivalents to Clarkson, Horton, Cullen, Gordon, Grabovski and, my personal favourite, Luongo for Dipietro plus?

      Stay tuned…

  • JCDavies

    I agree with andyg.

    Corrado and Jensen will probably still get their opportunity to contribute to the NHL club – it is a little early to assume that they aren’t in the team’s plans this season. Schroeder should get his opportunity as well.

    Horvat, Gaunce and Shinkaruk were all given much longer looks than they would have in past years.

    • JCDavies

      On what are you basing that Schroeder should get his opportunity as well?

      Horvat, Gaunce & Shinkaruk likely received longer looks due to the lack of depth/injuries/suspensions as much as anything else.

      And playing preseason games doesn’t mean anything really…

      • JCDavies

        “On what are you basing that Schroeder should get his opportunity as well?”

        The lack of team depth that you often like to remind us about seems like an obvious reason.

        “Horvat, Gaunce & Shinkaruk likely received longer looks due to the lack of depth/injuries/suspensions as much as anything else.”

        I think they were going to get the full preseason regardless of the injuries/suspensions.

        “As much as anything, it’s about having the right young players in the first place.

        Such as Grabner, Hodgson & KConn…”

        The quality of these players is very much debatable.

        • JCDavies

          Lack of team depth does not mean Schroeder will get his chance if the organization is trending in another direction (i.e. something about grit).

          If Horvat, Gaunce & Shinkaruk were going to get the full preseason regardless, then what did you mean earlier with “Horvat, Gaunce and Shinkaruk were all given much longer looks than they would have in past years”…

          The quality of Grabner, CoHo & KConn absolutely is debatable.

          But considering the last player the Canucks drafted and developed is Mason Raymond, the above three would have been something at least…

          • JCDavies

            “Lack of team depth does not mean Schroeder will get his chance if the organization is trending in another direction (i.e. something about grit).”

            It doesn’t mean anything, but it is one possible reason. You might disagree, and that’s fine, but I think he is going to get an opportunity to prove himself.

            “If Horvat, Gaunce & Shinkaruk were going to get the full preseason regardless, then what did you mean earlier with “Horvat, Gaunce and Shinkaruk were all given much longer looks than they would have in past years”…”

            I’m not sure why this is unclear, but the Canucks seemed to want to give their young players every chance to prove themselves. I don’t think in past years those three players would have been given the same opportunity to stick around for the entire preseason and try to impress enough to make the team. This year they were given that opportunity.

            “the above three would have been something at least…”

            “Something at least”, maybe. But “the right young players”, I’m not so sure.

          • argoleas

            Time will tell if Schroeder gets his chance and what he does with that chance…

            “I’m not sure why this is unclear, but the Canucks seemed to want to give their young players every chance to prove themselves. I don’t think in past years those three players would have been given the same opportunity to stick around for the entire preseason and try to impress enough to make the team. This year they were given that opportunity.”

            Was it an opportunity to stick around for the entire preseason…or simply warm bodies due to injuries and suspensions?

            I’m still not sure why, based on this preseason, we are to believe something has changed.

            The Canucks have one ELC on the roster and we won’t know what kind of an opportunity he will get until he returns from his suspension…

            And the Grabner, Hodgson, KConn quip was a not-so-subtle dig at…

          • JCDavies

            I don’t know why you keep harping on about Grabner, Hodgson and Connaughton as if they were the be-all and end-all of prospects. Hodgson I’ll give you — he actually does have top-end skill for all of the bitterness with which he left here. Connaughton is not as good as Corrado and arguably equivalent to Tommernes or McNally, while I maintain that Grabner is a one-dimensional player on a poor team who would have fit the Canucks about as well as Raymond did.

            I agree with several of the others who’ve said already that the Canucks actually did seem to give Horvat, Shinkaruk and Corrado decent looks through the preseason, not just to fill the lineup card — I mean they may as well have used AHL scrubs if they wanted to do that. It’s clear that Gaunce wasn’t ready, that Jensen underwhelmed (and got injured) in the real camp, and that Schroeder also had an injury issue to contend with. I like the Dalpe and Welsh trade; two big bodies who are young and relatively skilled. You may dismiss Dalpe as a Carolina castoff but from what I read he was one of the higher rated of their prospects and from their boards at least was discussed as being improperly used (which may bring up a different issue of whether or not he fits the bill as a bottom six forward). It seems like a fair deal to pick up two promising players in a salary dump for an undersized center and a 4th round pick (hey, we’re getting back a 2nd rounder, sort of).

            At any rate, I don’t disagree that the Canucks are in tricky territory with an aging core and an uncertain future. But I think the refrain that there’s been no attempt to prepare for that transition is incorrect. You keep stating that the Canucks have developed no young talent since Hansen I don’t think is at all accurate. It’s not exactly overflowing, but this is the first year in a long time that the cupboard looks at least promising. Would you rather that the organization rushes the development of it’s prospects just to prove its commitment to a youth movement? I’d rather not sit through years of completely crappy teams just to entertain such a notion — it’s worked out so well on Long Island and Edmonton in recent memory.

          • JCDavies

            Grabner is one of the top even strength goal scorers over the last 3 years.

            Does this team not need goal scoring at even strength?

            Did the Canucks do well to get Horvat & Shinkaruk?

            Or are they simply the new toys that look shinier because all the older toys (Grabner, Hodgson, Sauve, Schroeder, Rodin, KConn, Jensen, Gaunce, Mallet) look dull by comparison?

            “At any rate, I don’t disagree that the Canucks are in tricky territory with an aging core and an uncertain future. But I think the refrain that there’s been no attempt to prepare for that transition is incorrect.”

            The fact that the organization needs to be reset – whatever that means – is proof that management has been ill-prepared for the phasing out of the Burke/Nonis core.

            “You keep stating that the Canucks have developed no young talent since Hansen I don’t think is at all accurate.”

            What’s that?

            I’ve mentioned a few times that the last drafted and developed NHL regular is 2005 2nd rounder Mason Raymond.

            Look it up yourself if you disagree…

            “I’d rather not sit through years of completely crappy teams just to entertain such a notion — it’s worked out so well on Long Island and Edmonton in recent memory”

            I’d trade either roster for the current Canuck version.

            Tanking doesn’t guarantee anything.

            But prolonging the mediocrity is just as devoid of entertainment value…

          • JCDavies

            Yes, you’ve gone on about Grabner and even-strength goal-scoring. He’s scored 34, 20, and 16 goals in the last three years that you can’t seem to get over. As I’ve said repeatedly, his style is one that would likely not fit the Canucks — blazing speed, shoot first, meh defensively, wouldn’t go with the cycle-play of the Sedins, not necessarily with Kesler’s line (if he was healthy) and is too reminiscent of Raymond otherwise. You can’t just assume he’d be providing that kind of secondary scoring to the Canucks. I like him well enough but he didn’t have much of a future here, and clearly not in Florida. Who knows what finally gave him the spark to pull his game together enough to have a legitimate NHL career? Regardless it was four years ago. Get over it.

            Your point about the newer prospects being more attractive because, well, they’re newer is just stupid. That’s like saying Nathan Smith or RJ Umberger looked more attractive than the Sedins because they were drafted a year or two later. Horvat and Shinkaruk are qualitatively better than most that you listed (not Hodgson perhaps) with good reason — much more highly ranked and in Shinkaruk’s case I think perhaps mistakenly undervalued by other teams.

            You’d really trade the entire Canucks roster for Edmonton (7 straight years out of the playoffs) or the Islanders (14 seasons of missing the playoffs and 6 of first round defeats in the past 20 years). Because both teams have shown you the right way to “reset”?

            I know you are dead set on your sky-is-falling-many-first-round-losses-and-playoff-misses-to-come schtick, but it’s premature, it’s at this point unfounded, and it’s more than a little pretentious. You’re talking about a team that’s had two extremely disappointing and ignominious back to back defeats following a SCF game seven appearance and two successful regular seasons, after a string of high finishes (yes yes, I know it’s only because of the invisible hand of Burke/Nonis and the weak division, whatever). Deliver your chicken little prattle after this team is actually the bottom feeder you so delight in describing.

          • argoleas

            “Your point about the newer prospects being more attractive because, well, they’re newer is just stupid. That’s like saying Nathan Smith or RJ Umberger looked more attractive than the Sedins because they were drafted a year or two later. Horvat and Shinkaruk are qualitatively better than most that you listed (not Hodgson perhaps) with good reason — much more highly ranked and in Shinkaruk’s case I think perhaps mistakenly undervalued by other teams.”

            The Canucks diluted their NHL team to acquire the pick to select Horvat.

            He better be good or it will be another in a long line of poor trades from this GM.

            What makes Horvat & Shinkaruk so much better than Hodgson and Schroeder?

            “I know you are dead set on your sky-is-falling-many-first-round-losses-and-playoff-misses-to-come schtick, but it’s premature, it’s at this point unfounded, and it’s more than a little pretentious.”

            Remember this comment at the end of the year…

            “Deliver your chicken little prattle after this team is actually the bottom feeder you so delight in describing.”

            I’m not sure this team is going to be a bottom feeder in the next 2-3 years. Not if the Sedins are retained at least.

            It will probably be more like the slow and steady decline of the Calgary Flames or Philadelphia Phillies…

          • argoleas

            What you are continuing to insist on is that the Canucks are doomed to early round knockouts and playoff misses. That sounds like a bottom feeder to me, at least from the relatively lofty position that the Canucks have occupied in recent years. I would agree with the assessment that this is a long slow slide into irrelevancy if there wasn’t a tangible sense that the cupboard is at least starting to get restocked. I’d compare it with the late 90s when the “reset” was all about blowing up the team and starting it again. Thanks to the genius of Keenan and some pretty piss-poor drafting (Holden, Ference, Allen, the string not broken until we got the Sedins) that really was a precipitous fall. You’re talking about the core as if they’re on the wrong side of 35, not 30. Yes, the Sedins, Kesler, Luongo, etc are aging — but if they really can start to prime some of their prospects — and by prime I mean get them real playing time and experience, including WJC for the likes of Horvat and Shinkaruk and Corrado — then all the better. Throwing young players to the wolves just so you can say that you’re having a youth movement is foolish.

            I didn’t say Horvat or Shinkaruk are better than Hodgson who is clearly better than any of the other prospects the Canucks have produced in recent memory — though questions linger here and in Buffalo about what he really is.

            So given all your predictions, tell me, will you be happily surprised if the Canucks manage to be a successful team? Will you cheer for them this season? Or will you look for all of your dreams to come true?

          • argoleas

            “What you are continuing to insist on is that the Canucks are doomed to early round knockouts and playoff misses. That sounds like a bottom feeder to me, at least from the relatively lofty position that the Canucks have occupied in recent years.”

            A bottom feeder (to me) would be what the Flames finally did this past season.

            The previous seasons of 1st round exits and battling for the playoffs was not really bottom feeding.

            Those were misguided attempts at holding on too long and trying to recapture the fleeting glory of their SCF run.

            Which is exactly the path the Canucks appear to be on by resigning as many players as they can and trying again with an aging core.

            There still isn’t any evidence that anything is different in terms of integrating youth into the lineup.

            And there certainly isn’t any evidence that the Canucks have the right young players, either.

            “So given all your predictions, tell me, will you be happily surprised if the Canucks manage to be a successful team? Will you cheer for them this season? Or will you look for all of your dreams to come true?”

            It depends.

            I don’t want this franchise hanging around the middle like Calgary did for far too long.

            If that’s the case, I’d rather they miss the playoffs altogether than squeak in and lose early.

            And, as I’ve previously said, let the Sedins walk, buyout/trade Luongo and, most importantly, fire management.

            However, if the team is a legit contender, I’ll happily go to a number of conference final and final games like I did in 2011.

            But it’s not going to happen…

            The window has closed.

          • JCDavies

            “The fact that the organization needs to be reset – whatever that means – is proof that management has been ill-prepared for the phasing out of the Burke/Nonis core.”

            Or this could just be the natural process all teams go through as their core players get older.

  • JCDavies

    Bo and Hunter should go down and develop properly. It is rare to have an 18 year old stay up. These guys (and other younger prospects) should develop.

    I love the idiots on here whining about not having youth here. Just idiots. There was never much room in the top 6. Our better prospects don’t need to be here playing bottom 6 roles/minutes. Let them develop.

    Again, not defending Gillis but you need to look at facts. Yes, those pesky facts. It’s a veteran team and there is no way a bunch of young players were breaking camp with them. 1 or 2 would’ve been realistic and most of that would’ve been in the bottom 6. Gillis did make us young but probably not better.

    • JCDavies

      “I love the idiots on here whining about not having youth here. Just idiots. There was never much room in the top 6. Our better prospects don’t need to be here playing bottom 6 roles/minutes. Let them develop.”

      Don’t think I don’t know to whom you are referring…

      • JCDavies

        You’re not the only idiot on these boards. However, you were in my thoughts when typing out that descriptor! Not to worry, my furry little friend. I haven’t forgotten about you.

        Like I’ve said over and over, it isn’t possible to make significant changes when most of your key players have no trade clauses. I’m not sure what Gillis meant by reset but you had to know there were going to be very few significant moves made for this season. Gillis did get a few solid prospects but they’re a little ways away.

  • elvis15

    So Shinkaruk will stay up till Kassian returns, without an acquisition. Hopefully, Sestito will be behind Schroeder, Santorelli, Richarson, Wiese and Dalpe, so at worst he’ll be our 14th forward. At best we get someone off waivers and waive him out of Vancouver.

  • elvis15

    The one thing that might be a helpful wrinkle is since IR and LTI aren’t the same thing, perhaps IR is allowed prior to setting the roster so that we can free up one more spot from having Schroeder out. From there, whether he still qualifies for LTI or not does matter apart from cap implications.

    I guess we’ll see, since that’s why they have Gilman around, to make sense of the CBA and ensure we’re cap compliant.

    • elvis15

      What’s wrong with giving the Canes’ kid a chance instead? haha.

      Gillis spoke today and said they had a 23 man roster since Welsh doesn’t have to clear waivers (Dalpe would). At this point, his only debate seems to be whether to keep Shinkaruk up for a bit or send him down to make room for someone on the waiver wire.

      All in all, we seem to be set and in a position to grab someone interesting.

    • orcasfan

      This ship sailed the second they sent Corrado down, with the stated reason that they weren’t going to keep a kid up and play him 9 minutes a night on the third pairing. If that was the reasoning (and it’s perfectly valid) why would anyone expect that Bo Horvat would be kept up to center the 4th line?

      • elvis15

        Why would Corrado be playing 9 minutes a game if they were giving him a legitimate chance?

        The youngest drafted and developed NHL regular on the team is the newly extended Jannik Hansen and he’s 27 years old.

        There isn’t a shred of evidence that anything has changed…

        • andyg

          The chance of anyone out of this years draft making this teem was slim,and not the best thing for them anyway. Gaunce is not ready for the role he will need to play at this level.(we do not want these kids ruined)

          The youth were all given a long look and just because players like Corrado and Jensen were sent to the farm system does not mean that they won’t play a big role for us this year. At this point their the depth that we will need. Now that the Canucks have their own team they are better to send players like that down to have leading roles and develop quicker than to play a lesser at the nhl level. When we need them they will be ready for the big show.

          • JCDavies

            Sending down Horvat & Shinkaruk is all fine and dandy.

            But who are these young players that are going to be given a chance?

            Kassian and Schroeder?

            I’ll believe it when I see it.

            I suspect Tortorella’s #1 priority is to make the playoffs in what may very well be his last opportunity to coach an NHL team.

            Is he really going to bet his job on giving ice time to guys who may be fringy NHLers at this point?

            Of course, the issue isn’t simply about giving young players a chance.

            As much as anything, it’s about having the right young players in the first place.

            Such as Grabner, Hodgson & KConn…

        • elvis15

          Um, because “giving a guy a legitimate chance” does not mean “dictating our defensive pairings to give him playing time”. It’s pretty damned obvious that Edler, Garrison, Hamhuis, Bieksa and Tanev are the top 5 in Vancouver, and they’re all better than Corrado. So he’d be the 6th D, which generally means you’re playing very limited minutes.

          If Tortorella feels that playing his best pairing 25+ minutes provides the best chance to win, which is a legitimate gameplan, then your third pairing won’t see a lot of action.

          • orcasfan

            “If Tortorella feels that playing his best pairing 25+ minutes provides the best chance to win, which is a legitimate gameplan, then your third pairing won’t see a lot of action.”

            And this is part of my point.

            Tortorella knows it’s not going to be easy to make the playoffs this season.

            The roster and division don’t make it a slam dunk anymore.

            So is the organization going to privilege veterans to try and get every last point and CONTINUE to ignore integrating young players into the lineup?

            That’s been the modus operandi for the last 5 years and, so far, this reset seems to be the same message with a different messenger…

          • JCDavies

            “The roster and division don’t make it a slam dunk anymore. So is the organization going to privilege veterans to try and get every last point and CONTINUE to ignore integrating young players into the lineup?”

            So wait, are you complaining that the coaching staff is going to put the best possible team on the ice or not?

            Here are the options. First, you do everything you can to win, ignore prospect development, burn ELC years, keep Corrado up and play your third pairing in limited minutes while giving your best pairing the majority of the ice time.

            Second, you do everything you can to get your good young players ice time at the NHL level, even if it costs you points in the standings. Which would probably mean playing Corrado in the top 4.

            Third, you give your top prospects playing time in juniors or in the AHL, helping their development, with the compromise that while you might not have the best depth at the NHL level you’re free to deploy that NHL roster in the manner that gives you the best chance to win.

            They’ve selected option 3. Given that I’m not even sure that option 2 is actually a GOOD thing for this organization’s young players, and given that this team should make the playoffs (i.e. we aren’t Calgary or Florida) it sounds like the worst possible plan, to me. But which would you have preferred?

          • JCDavies

            I’d prefer an actual direction where it’s clear the organization is either trying to win now or win a few years from now.

            Right now it appears to be a rudderless ship – with a drunken captain – that is not good enough to contend and not good enough to tank, either.