54
Photo Credit: Matthew Henderson

Canucks Army Monday Mailbag: August 21st

I could see a healthy Anton Rodin who plays an entire 82 game season putting up about 30 points.

Elias Pettersson: Probably two-to-three years out from making the team. Whenever he does, I’d expect him to take on a big role. Pettersson already sees the ice like a professional and his playmaking ability isn’t far behind. Right now, it’s all about filling out his frame.

Jonathan Dahlen: I don’t think Dahlen will make the Canucks out of training camp, but I think he’ll be close enough that they store him away with the Utica Comets for a late-season call-up. He’s a hell of a player. I could see him really finding his stride in the NHL by the middle of the 2018-19 season.

Adam Gaudette: I’ll be surprised if Gaudette doesn’t join the Canucks for a handful of games near the end of the season like Brock Boeser did last year. I doubt he’ll have anywhere near as immediate an impact on the Canucks as Boeser did in his first handful of games, but he’ll hold his own, I am sure. Gaudette might need the most time of the three to come into his own at the NHL level. It might be another three seasons before we see Gaudette reach his fullest potential.

As for the Bo Horvat contract, I’d think anything in the $4.5-4.75-million range on a long-term deal is fair. Even if Horvat gets to $5-million, which so many have suggested as a floor for his next deal, it won’t be the end of the world. It’s just that I think of that number as an absolute ceiling more than a floor. That’s where I differ from most.

I keep picking Olli Juolevi as my surprise to make the Canucks out of training camp because I genuinely think he’s NHL ready. At the very least, there’s not much else he can accomplish at the OHL level. The logistics such as they are don’t offer a clear path for Juolevi to the Canucks lineup, though. That will be his likely downfall and probably the reason Juolevi goes back to the London Knights for another season. And if he’s not in the conversation for the best defender in the OHL, then the Canucks have a problem.

I don’t think the Canucks have to worry too much about salary cap recapture with Roberto Luongo. The Florida Panthers are an internal budget team. Anything that helps them reach the floor is golden in their books. As Luongo ages into chronic-injury territory (imagined or otherwise), the Panthers will be all too happy to store him away on injured reserve for the remainder of his deal to help artificially raise their salary.

If the Panthers don’t do that, then there’s nothing the Canucks can do to prepare for Luongo’s cap recapture penalty. It’s salary cap end-times.

If the Canucks spend this season fully committed to rebuilding their hockey team, and all their moves align with that goal, then I think it won’t matter where they finish. The response of the fanbase will be a vote of confidence that ownership can’t ignore, and they just might extend Canucks general manager Jim Benning’s contract. I’m just not sure that Benning is ready to bite that bullet. If the Canucks flounder around aimlessly while all the while losing night in and night out, as they have for much of his tenure, then it will make an extension wholly unjustifiable. Hell, it would be hard to justify bringing him back for another season period.It’s interesting that you raise development as a reason to keep Benning. By Benning’s own words, having prospects playing in a winning environment is crucial to their development, and he’s done a miserable job to that end.

It’s interesting that you raise development as a reason to keep Benning. By Benning’s own words, having prospects playing in a winning environment is crucial to their development, and he’s done a miserable job to that end. Many in the industry hold him responsible for stunting Jake Virtanen and Jared McCann’s development by inserting them into the Canucks lineup too soon, too. If you wanted to argue that Benning is an above average scout and amateur talent evaluator, then I’m all ears. I’m having a hard time buying the developmental angle, though.

I wish you’d asked this question when Corsica.Hockey was around. With the Similarity Calculator tool they had, this would’ve been a far easier task. I wouldn’t expect many matches, though. Bo Horvat’s statistical profile is interesting as all hell. There aren’t many players who played as many minutes in as difficult a situation as Horvat has at this early a stage of his career. The ones that did, though, produced far, far better results than Horvat. Without Corsica.Hockey or any other similarly useful sites for the kind of information you’re asking for, that’s the best answer I can give you. I’d ask me again when Corsica.Hockey is live again. Maybe the end of September?

Let’s go with a 79OVR.

I expect Jake Virtanen to spend another year with the Utica Comets and get close to the 0.5 point per game mark. Assuming steady development and growth, he could be a player that’s ready for a bottom-six role as soon as next season.

If the Canucks would just buy into the rebuild wholeheartedly, that would do all the work for them. I think that the Canucks youth will get an opportunity to shine in spite of the competitive mantra from the top. Well, minus Jordan Subban that is.

Denmark.

I doubt it.

I’d set the odds at 50/50 for an Erik Gudbranson trade at the deadline.

Boeser probably won’t next season, but I could see him getting there not long after.

That’s a no for me.

Well, the Edmonton Oilers didn’t pay Connor McDavid the max. They didn’t forsake the RFA advantage, either. I just don’t see that. McDavid is a one of a kind, generational talent. If I’m running the Oilers, I lock him up for as long as possible, as soon as possible, and avoid any kind of mess. As for your follow-up tweet, I don’t think that McDavid’s deal affected the Leon Draisaitl negotiations. I just don’t see it. There’s one Connor McDavid and everyone else. He’s in a tier of his own. An outlier that shouldn’t factor into anyone else’s contract negotiations.

It probably has to do with Cody Franson being a big guy who doesn’t throw his body around. He’s not the greatest skater, too.

I haven’t heard much of anything about the Canucks and their pre-season game in China. I know the Twins are making the trek, but beyond that, who knows?

It’s only a bad thing if those prospects don’t have anything left to learn in lower levels of hockey. At that point, the tires start spinning. Besides, you want to maximize your usage of players while they’re at their cheapest and closest to their peak. That’s the goal.

  • Bud Poile

    16-17 30 43 9

    15-16 31 38 13

    14-15 48 29 05

    109W-110L-27T
    ” If the Canucks flounder around aimlessly while all the while losing night in and night out, as they have for much of his tenure, then it will make an extension wholly unjustifiable. Hell, it would be hard to justify bringing him back for another season period.It’s interesting that you raise development as a reason to keep Benning. By Benning’s own words, having prospects playing in a winning environment is crucial to their development, and he’s done a miserable job to that end.”

      • Dirk22

        What point are you trying to make here Bud?

        That as the team has become more ‘Benning’ they’ve progressively gotten worse? ……Or that they have one of the leagues worst records over the last three seasons? ……Or that you don’t understand what this ‘one game under 500’ record actually means as it accounts for their SO/OT wins but not their losses. Their actual record is 77 – 110 in regulation and 32-27 in SO/OT….or added together: 109-137. There’s Benning’s ‘winning environment’ that he’s built.

          • Bud the Dud

            No, it’s called serial trolling from a sad lonely imbecile with multiple accounts guys. Bud Poile and Locust are the same poster ffs!

            He doesn’t believe for a minute that the Benning clown show is doing a good job… “The only thing that matters is the playoffs” – Bud Poile.

            As you once so eloquently said Freud “Only a troll would come here everyday and say everything is fine”.

            Smell the coffee eh.

        • Bud Poile

          Dirk,what you don’t seem to fathom is the team Benning inherited had two or three legitimate prospects from six Gillis drafts,an ageing core with 10 NTC’s and a fanbase with zero recognition of those facts.
          You and our Dud as everyday evidence.
          Bettman introduced OT but NHL regulation that ends in a tie has a point awarded as such.
          A competitive team takes the opposition into overtime.
          Whatis it exactly that you fail to grasp?

          • This argument is so tired and ridiculous.

            Benning has been running this team for four drafts. FOUR. No players under 21 in the system are Gillis draftees – all Benning. At this point, the entire prospect pool and the majority of the roster are Benning’s acquisitions.

            Benning inherited a 6th overall pick that he squandered. He inherited Ryan Kesler, and through a series of bad moves turned one of the best two-way centres in the game into nothing more than Ryan Sutter. Had Benning just done the blindingly obvious when he first took over the team – drafted Ehlers or Nylander, held onto the 2nd he turned into Vey, not pissed away Bonino – the Canucks prospect pool and on-ice product would look *dramatically* different.

            You can’t keep blaming this team on Gillis. Gillis has been gone for *years*. This is Benning’s team, this is Benning’s prospect pool, and it has been for awhile now.

          • Bud the Dud

            Great post Goon.This moron will be telling us next it’s the ghost of Roger Neilson’s fault we are soooo bad.This is year four of BENNING’S tenure and the team is going backwards – it’s all on LinBenning and no one else.!

            Benning is widely regarded as the worst GM in the league… that’s fact not comment!

          • Dirk22

            Hint: When you’re trying to argue that a team is ‘competitive’ maybe don’t post a record which is among the worst in the NHL over the last three years.

            There’s nothing much more to grasp there except your tired argument that Benning’s mistakes (Sutter, Sbisa, Dorsett, Virtanen, Eriksson, Prust, Gudbranson etc.) are somehow Gillis’ fault because of his poor draft record. “Gillis drafted poorly so we’re going to trade away picks for bad NHL’ers and then sign mediocre players for big $.” Sounds like a winning plan.

  • TheRealPB

    I am not sure how much you can hold Benning wholly responsible for Virtanen and McCann’s development (or lack thereof) any more than you can give him complete credit for Hutton, Stetcher, Horvat, Granlund or Baertschi’s progress. Much of that comes down to the coaching staff and much of it comes down to the player themselves. Why was it that Tryamkin, McCann and Virtanen clearly flunked their off-season training regimens? Why was it that others seemed to make considerable strides forward? It’s way too simplistic to simply write the current management as not being a good development environment. And I doubt that Benning and co. are that blind — they know the team will and has sucked. I don’t think it’s about being a winning environment (no matter what they say publicly and of course they are going to say that) it’s about being in a competitive and professional environment. There’s a big difference. The vets they have brought in or kept around (with the notable exception of Prust) are total pros, even if they are having a hard time on the ice (like Eriksson). I’ve been less impressed with some of the younger guys they’ve brought in in terms of their supposed leadership (I still haven’t forgiven Gudbranson or Sutter for throwing their younger teammates under the bus) but overall I don’t think you could say that the Canucks have not developed young players. It’s just that the team around them is either decaying or filled with not great marginal players.

    • Moderated Post

      The narrative on Benning is that he’s a talent evaluator, not a number’s guy or an orator, therefore his decisions related to the evaluation of talent deserve that much extra scrutiny. I’ll give him props for seeing the character and ability in Granlund and Baertschi while bearing in mind that they also appear to have made the most of their fresh starts. And plus, he traded spare parts for each of them. Stetcher too, a low risk bet that Benning made and has paid off primarily because the kid has drive and heart.

      Virtanen and McCann though raise serious questions about Benning’s status as a superior evaluator of talent. True, both of them needed to take advantage of the opportunity they were given, but if there were any doubts as to their characters Benning didn’t need to pick either of them, as in both cases there was still better talent on the board when they were picked.

      I don’t buy the argument that Benning had his arm twisted for the Virtanen pick. He’s the GM and as the leader he has to take responsibility for what happens under his watch. Through interviews we’ve seen that he was highly involved with coach Willie on roster decisions, and the team sits where he’s led it. Can he turn it around? For each good move he’s made there’s an equally bad one, and not much progress is going to be made if he keeps taking one step forward and one step back.

      • Bud the Dud

        No need for the novel dude… ONE draft pick out of 27 (that’s not including the last draft) playing on the team heading into year four tells us all we need to know about Benning’s BRUTAL ‘talent evaluation’.

        • Bud Poile

          20 picks (if we are not counting the last draft).
          5 have played in the NHL.
          5 more should play in the NHL (Gaudette,Demko,Juolevi,Brisebois,Lockwood).
          1 more has the talent to make it (Zhukenov).
          That’s 11 out of 20 picks with a shot at an NHL career.
          Good NHL teams pull 2 NHL’ers per draft.
          The Benning Canucks scouting team may have hit a home run in the 2017 draft which will bring his record up substantially higher.

          • You’re equivocating between “play in the NHL” and “have an NHL career”.

            Good teams pull 2 players who have NHL careers from the draft. There’s no sign yet that Benning has even managed that – there’s no guarantee 1st rounders like McCann and Virtanen will reach the 200 game mark, let alone longshot depth picks like Brisebois and Lockwood.

          • Bud the Dud

            This numbskull peddles the same tired rhetoric day after day ffs.

            Shoulda coulda woulda means absolutely NOTHING! They ain’t here in the show, end of!

            I and no other Canucks fan in their right mind gives a monkeys about Benning draft picks that don’t play for the VANCOUVER CANUCKS. In fact, players like Forsling, McCann or Tryamkin (in the KHL) eventually ending up playing well on other teams is even more of a disaster because they were given up on by Benning only to succeed on OTHER NHL TEAMS ffs! WASTED, BUST draft picks. Get it!

            Go back to Thailand and stay there with the rest of the creeps who can’t get a decent Canadian woman!

          • Bud the Dud: I disagree with pretty much every single thing Bud Poile has ever posted, but at least he makes coherent arguments and contributes a perspective, even if it’s a wrong one.

            You’re not really doing that. Surely you have better things to do with your time than making these kinds of posts.

          • Bud Poile

            Goon,
            That’s right, because it’s waaaaaaay too early to know how many will make it.
            But time has shown us exactly how many made it from the previous regimes.
            So we place a guess on what is early on and what the experts are telling us.
            Looking at Benning’s second draft : Boeser,Brisebois and Gaudette are widely said to become NHL’ers.We lost our second round pick for Baertschi,who has made it.
            There’s four NHL’ers that came to us out of one NHL draft.
            Zhukenov has the skill level to make it five.
            The last time the Canucks pulled 4 NHL’ers from one draft was 2004 and the next previous time was ’94 (with 12 picks for every NHL team).
            It’s also important to decipher what a GM does with prospects that are deemed expendable AKA Shinkaruk-Granlund,McCann-Gudbranson,Clendenning-Sutter.
            Gillis has had two prospects make 200 games out of six drafts,losing an NHL starter to gain one of them.
            Connauton was traded along with a second for 12 games worth of Derek Roy,for a great example.
            So,back to your point.There are very good early indications Benning’s staff pull MORE than two NHL from 3 out of his 4 drafts.
            Poignantly, the previous regime’s draft failures has near EVERYTHING to do with player quality today unlike Gillis whom rode the draft successes of his successor,Brian Burke.
            Benning started from ground zero thanks to Bozo.

        • Vintage

          This is among the more ridiculous things you like to post. Almost every team in the league is in the same boat, with one or two players from the 2014/2015/2016 draft playing for their NHL team.

          • Dirk22

            Bud fake news disclaimer: **11 Gillis draft picks played NHL games last year so I’m sure a couple more will hit the 200 game plateau** Not saying he had a great draft record as most of these guys are NHL/AHL tweeters but just want anyone to be disingenuous eh Bud.

            Also, give us one reference where Bresbios is ‘widely said to become an NHL’er.’ That wasn’t more fake news was it?

  • Neil B

    For what it’s worth, I’m pretty much a fan of Gudbranson’s game, and likewise expectant/hopeful of him being traded sometime between now & the deadline.

    Not because I think he’s unreservedly bad (he is terrible at zone exits; but he’s pretty darned good at preventing the opposition to enter the zone with possession, when they system allows him to aggressively challenge up high), but because he pretty much brings the same skill set and game as McEneny, who would be a much less expensive fit on the 3rd pairing. If we can pay $660K for 2 seasons instead of $3.5 mill for one, I’m all in on that.

    • Neil B

      Oh, and by the way, depending on what Newell Brown does with the 1PP unit, Boeser could maybe hit 30g. Go watch Atkinson’s reel from 2016-17, and see how many of those 10 pp goals he scored were from the off side, set up by RH C Gagner in high slot. Boeser likes to shoot from the same spot, and from what I’ve seen, has a similar release.

  • I would rather see Juolevi go to Finland and get some professional development time with Salo. There are enough question marks with Gudbranson, Del Zotto, Wiercioch, Holm, Pedan, Subban, and McEneny. Management needs to give them TOI to figure out what they have and if they will fit in long term.

    • DJ_44

      Juolevi is not going back to London. I imagine the choice is the Canucks (which is where I think he will be, and not as a “surprise”) or pro in Finland. Trading Hutton for futures should would look good right now.

  • MoeLemay

    I firmly believe that, regardless the outcome of the upcoming season, Benning should be allowed at least a three year extension.
    This way we will be beginning to see the fruits of his labour or lack thereof….
    I am, unlike most of you nerds, a patient man….

    • Rodeobill

      I agree with this. I am not specifically a Benning fan, but I think he has done better than people give him credit for. Things stink the last few years, but I am dubious that anyone else would have had different or better results. Things are starting to look up, and if the GM must assume responsibility for the failures then he surely deserves credit too. The plan at the beginning of his tenure was to get bandages for a gaping hole in the roster for younger players at the NHL level, and now has begun to fill the cupboards below that. The only way I see that he does NOT deserve an extension is if he strays away from the direction things are moving from now.

  • Dan-gles

    I bumped into a recognizeable someone from the Canucks organization this spring on the beach in Maui. They admitted to me that Virtanen was absolutely not bennings pick. That was an aquilinni pick 100% and none too popular amongst the front office. Surprised this hasn’t come out earlier from people “in the know”. I am not a benning supporter per se, but I believe a meddling owner = middling results. I think we got a meddler on our hands.

    • defenceman factory

      Benning has certainly made a few mistakes of his own but I find it easy to believe some of the errors weren’t all his. Benning had been in the job for a month before the 2014 draft. He wouldn’t have had an opportunity to scout the players the Canucks staff were putting forward as preferred picks. I doubt they were the same players they were looking at closely in Boston. To speculate further I also think Benning walked into the Canucks where the rebuild on the fly mantra was already in place.

      If he gets extended ownership is accepting responsibility for some of Benning’s moves and giving appropriate time for some of his recent moves to pan out.

      • Moderated Post

        ahahahah here’s another guy “draft guru Benning was handicapped at as first draft as GM because Boston’s top 10 list was considerably different than Vancouver’s!” Lol

        And poor Jim, he just walked into the Canucks where rebuild on the fly was already in place. Hello?! He interviewed for the job and got tired for it! So unless you and Dud were the only other applicants Benning sure thought it was a real good idea!

        • defenceman factory

          It is possible to have a difference of opinion without being disrespectful. I think everyone one here would appreciate it if you tried a little harder to do that.

          Your theory seems to be ownership and Linden handed Benning the keys and gave him free reign the minute he walked in. I think it more likely Jim was hired for his perceived skills and asked to implement something he had no input into and little time to evaluate. There are no jobs, including NHL GMs, where you get to contradict your new boss or the owner of the company on your first day.

          On the entire body of Benning’s work he doesn’t deserve to have his contract renewed. If he does get re-upped I will consider that an indication that some of the moves that didn’t pan out aren’t all on Jimbo.

          • Moderated Post

            You insult Jim’s manhood and his knowledge of the draft class and you ask me to be nice?

            Look, Jim got hired for the job over all the other candidates because ownership felt they could trust him with the keys… and that means that they saw eye to eye on practically everything. Jim’s the boss and he’s getting paid to be the boss. Of course he’s got to respect the owner’s input, but if he can’t convince an owner that a bad idea is a bad idea then he’s a lackey and not a GM.

    • Moderated Post

      hahahaha you so realize that this defence of Benning makes him look like a boot licker, don’t you? Like, draft guru Benning gets hired as GM to implement the Boston model and the first thing he does is follow the Owner’s orders without saying boo?

  • DJ_44

    The idea that the 2014 is not on GMJB is ridiculous. He was GM and it is his. I also have not ever heard him shirk this responsibility. It was a very good draft for him, as five of his picks will play >200 NHL games.

    His picks have played more NHL games (280) than any other teams draft class; and it is not even close. And that is not even considering Demko, a goalie one year in the pro ranks. The next closest team is Florida at 227 and all of those games are by first overall Aaron Ekblad.

    If you want to used the 200 games played as a marker for the NHL career, thats fine, but it is foolish to make the argument at 2014, or even 2013. Way too early.

    • Moderated Post

      So you’re saying that Benning’s 2014 draft was a massive success (based on games played) but then he messed it up afterwards? Virtanen, McCann, Demko, Tryamkin, Forsling. Three are no longer on the team with only part of Gudbranson to show for it, while the highest pick is barely keeping up in the minors. You could even argue that picks 1 and 2 were going to play in the NHL anyway in their first season given the team’s depleted roster, so were they the 2 most NHL ready in their respective draft slots?

      • DJ_44

        So you’re saying that Benning’s 2014 draft was a massive success (based on games played) but then he messed it up afterwards?

        No, I didn’t say that. I stated that GMJB had a very good 2014 draft; he selected quality players, and the numbers prove it (as much as they can at this stage). You constantly raise the issue GMJB is not good at the draft table, using weak-to-nonexistent argument as fact. It is dispelled when you actually look at the numbers, and gets no better when you compare to the teams in the league as a whole, especially when you remove the top 2 players from each draft class.

        Three of the five are still with (or belong to) the Canucks. McCann is not here; dealt in the Gudbranson trade. Forsling was traded; not every move works out.

        Your arguments are weak not backed up with facts. Some may think you even have an agenda. You know, like complaining kids in the NCAA are not on the NHL team yet, even though it is a mutual decision of team and player…like it is a failure. But you would not do that, that would be disingenuous.

        • Moderated Post

          You conclude that Benning had a very good 2014 draft based on the number of games played by his picks. His first 2 picks played because he left spots for them on the roster so they wouldn’t have to go back to junior. Tryamkin played because his agent made it so it was either the NHL or the KHL. Benning swapped Forsling for a guy he thought was better, and while it wasn’t a bad move per se history already shows that it was a mistake. Those are facts.

          Benning didn’t have to take Virtanen or McCann yet he did even though there were better options still on the board based on your games played metric. His 2014 draft wasn’t very good at all.

          • DJ_44

            You conclude that Benning had a very good 2014 draft based on the number of games played by his picks.

            That is one measure that at this early juncture, that can be used to assess the overall quality of the draft class. The 2014 Canucks draft class in in front of all the league by a long margin. That is one measure, as most players for all teams drafted from that year are still developing and maturing.

            His first 2 picks played because he left spots for them on the roster so they wouldn’t have to go back to junior.

            So, left spots, just like Horvat the year before? They made the team out of camp, and both had solid rookie campaigns. The choice was NHL or CHL. They made the team and, throughout the year, validated the decision by their play. So this is not fact as you claim, it is unfounded opinion.

            Tryamkin played because his agent made it so it was either the NHL or the KHL.

            This is why you think Tryamkin played in the NHL? He refused a conditioning stint in Utica, but once his conditioning was up to where it should have been (and Nikita acknowledged this fact) he was in the NHL lineup (and never left). So this is not fact, it is fantasy.

            This does not even mention Demko, who is developing very nicely and he will play a tonne in the future.
            This is why it was a very good draft.

            So, while you love the hindsight game, you must make decisions based on information and circumstances at the time.

            You want to talk about the 2015 class, or 2016, or 2017? They all look like they will, or have the potential to (2016 and 2017 are way way too early) provide multiple players for the Canucks for years to come.

          • Canucks Realist

            DJ F-off with your bogus cherrypicking posts!

            There were 7 Benning picks in 2014 not 5, and two were first rounders. Both are Canucks busts for first rounders.

            Of those 7 only TWO remain, Virtanen and Demko, both are still in Utica! Neither is setting the world on fire.

            Tryamkin is gone to the KHL and he won’t be back after his wife decided they are moving back to Russia. If you’re married you will understand this.

            The 2014 draft is a bust and to say otherwise is laughable.

          • DJ_44

            You draft a kid that’s got nothing left to learn in junior and not old enough for the AHL he plays in the NHL unless he’s from Europe. You know that when you are picking them, and that’s Bo, Jake and Jared.

            You don’t really know that when you pick them, because they all went back to junior for their D+1 season, and a lot depends on performance that season. They only stay with the club (in D+1 or D+2) if they are ready and contribute, which Jake and Jared did. The following season was all on Jake and his lack of conditioning. This was not an issue his first season.

            You assertion that Virtanen and McCann were gifted spots (and by extension Games Played) at the NHL level is false, just as it would be if that assertion was leveled at Horvat.

        • Moderated Post

          Your one measure is totally bogus, because Benning couldn’t play those 3 anywhere else besides the NHL. In fact, as soon as the AHL option became possible Virtanen got buried there and McCann got shipped out, despite their solid rookie campaigns.

          • DJ_44

            You are wrong. Virtanen and McCann could have played in the CHL … Just like Bo the year before…but they made the team. If Virtanen had not let his v conditioning slide, he would have been up last year. Put him in Utica and let him learn. McCann was traded.

            As for Tryamkin, who is still in the Canucks organization, they brought him over to play in the NHL. The only question was his poor conditioning, once he corrected that issue he played full time.

            The general metric for a player being an NHLer is 200 games. 5 Members of the 2104 class will easily reach that milestone.
            You are saying “some stats don’t count if I don’t want them to count”.
            Great argument….cover your ears and scream louder….using multiple accounts…..niiiiice.

          • Moderated Post

            What’s Bo got to do with anything? He was picked by a different GM. Next you’re going to say that Vey was an excellent draft pick because he’s close to 200 games too, ignoring the fact he saw so much ice only due to Coach Willie.

            If McCann was doing so well, why was he traded? Benning gave up cost certainty with him and had to throw in extra to get his man, which he tried to trade again in the off season!

          • DJ_44

            What’s Bo got to do with anything? He was picked by a different GM.

            Virtanen and McCann made the team, while they could have been sent back to junior; just like was the case with Bo in 2014. Bo did not play in 2014 because “he left spots for [them] on the roster so they wouldn’t have to go back to junior.” He played because he was good enough to make the team. Same with Virtanen and McCann. Vey was not a Canucks draft pick (one of the trades I was not a fan of), but if he plays 200 games with LA, Van, Calgary, then he meets an accepted threshold of an NHL career (and would be credited as a draft success by a metric commonly used to assess draft success — to the drafting team –LA).

            If McCann was doing so well, why was he traded?

            Look at it another way: If McCann was so terrible why would the other team want him?
            He was traded because that was the price for Gudbranson. Time will tell.

            I even typed slower so you can follow along.

          • Moderated Post

            You draft a kid that’s got nothing left to learn in junior and not old enough for the AHL he plays in the NHL unless he’s from Europe. You know that when you are picking them, and that’s Bo, Jake and Jared. In Y2 when you are AHL eligible if you’re good (Bo) you stay in the big leagues and if you’re not (Jake) you get sent down unless you’ve already been given up on (Jared).