Photo Credit: NHL.com

WWYDW: Appointment Viewing

The Canucks announced the broadcast schedule on Monday morning, which means that the offseason is finally coming to a close and the prognosticating and speculation that comes with it will soon be replaced with actual games to analyze. So, it only seems appropriate to turn our attention to the upcoming season. What games will you be circling on your calendar this year and why? 

Last week I asked: Would you trade for Erik Karlsson? If so, what would you give up? (Please try to be realistic.)


From Beagle to Karlsson? That’s going to make this team competitive? What is going to be given up to get him? Hughes?

This team has one centre, one winger, barely one D and maybe Demko makes the jump to goal and maybe does better than Markie?

You just drafted Hughes — why would you even entertain the haul you would give up to get Karlsson. Nuts. Set this team back another decade. Totally nuts.

EK may be the best D in the league but that doesn’t make him the best D for this team unless you get the deal of a lifetime.


I wouldn’t trade for Karlsson. The price will be too high, and he’ll be in his 30’s by the time they’re ready to compete. If they want to add veteran depth to their defense, they should explore free agency. Giving up young players will just prolong the rebuild.


Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

If you can take Ryan with Karlsson for a reasonable package built around the Canucks’ second tier of prospects – players like Adam Gaudette, Kole Lind, and Olli Juolevi (No Petterson, no Hughes, no 1st round pick this season) – and then flip Karlsson to an Ottawa rival in need of help on defense like Toronto or Boston (Chara’s going to retire at some point), for a major return, absolutely do it.

As for acquiring Karlsson to play on the Canucks – that’s just a terrible idea. Karlsson is amazing, but he isn’t going to lift a bottom-five team to contention by himself, and the cost of acquisition will likely be very high.


As with any trade, it totally depends on the cost.

There are only a couple of scenarios that make a trade like that palatable for where the canucks are right now in their development and I don’t see any of those being realistic so basically no…I wouldn’t trade for him.

Advertisement - Continue Commenting Below

Those things?

1) We get him for cheap. Not going to happen.
2) He signs for cheap. Not going to happen.

Basically what I don’t want the team to have (as long as there is a cap structure like there is currently) is a 10+ million dollar player. Hell, I don’t even want an 8 million dollar player if it can be helped. There is no leverage at all with a player like Karlsson. He’s going to cash in and easily be an 8+ million dollar player. It doesn’t fit.

As I mentioned before…I want a lot of good cost controlled young “stars” all around 6-7 million (for the best of them) then surrounded by good veteran short term deals for when they are ready for a run. Then those contracts are traded right before FA, and we reload.

I’d love to have Karlsson as a one year rental. That would be fun. I’d even give up some assets for that…but nothing major….like I said…Not going to happen.


With the Canucks being a bottom dweller, Karlsson having only one year left before unrestricted free agency and being at an age where players cash in on long-term contracts that general managers keep handing out even though they are usually poor value in the long run, it really doesn’t make sense for the Canucks to even consider acquiring Karlsson with a view to keeping him for the long-term.

If they can get him for next to nothing, then of course it makes sense. I’d be happy to see the Canucks trade Eriksson, Beagle and Gudbranson for Karlsson. Obviously, Ottawa wouldn’t go for that. They aren’t a team to take on bad contracts and they’d be sure to get better offers.

If the Canucks can manage to get him and flip him so that they get something out of it (preferrably in assets for the future) or if they can take part in a 3-way deal where another team gets Karlsson and the Canucks get more value back than what they pay out as their part of the deal it can make sense, but generally there are better fits for Karlsson than the Canucks. A current Stanley Cup contender with low (or no) state income tax and a desirable location makes the most sense. Vancouver may be a great place to live but otherwise just isn’t a fit.

Hockey Bunker:

Lets see, best dman in hockey. Only 28. Right handed (rare). Offensive powerhouse even on his own.
You are right why would the Canucks go after him, when they have Hutton and Gudbranson and other future Superstars on D. Why would the team want to win now when they can wait another 4 years!! What would they be thinking. Sheesh.


Regarding Karlsson, it makes sense for the Canucks to kick the tires to see if they can lowball the Sens but since other teams will be more willing to make better offers then the Canucks should not get into a bidding war.
Ultimately the best thing is for the Canucks to walk away, they may very well need this cap space, especially considering the potential penalties from Luongo’s contract if he retires before the end of it; also the Canucks are not in a win now situation so they should not be trying to make any serious offers here.

  • Killer Marmot

    Not one game, but a series. From October 9 to 24 the Canucks will play in succession Tampa Bay, Florida, Pittsburgh, Winnipeg, Boston, Washington, and Las Vegas, all of them playoff teams last year. Washington apparently did quite well.

    Someone in NHL scheduling hates the Canucks.

        • DogBreath

          Your boys will be interesting to watch in the early going. They should be good, but if they have a tough start, look out. Major disaster on your hands. It will be very difficult to untangle what they’ve put together.

          • LAKID

            The same thing applies to the Nuks (but they are not good). I would be shocked if the Oilers make it out of October with a winning record. The Nuks on the other hand have no hope so……. Fire Benning.

          • DogBreath

            The difference is expectations. The Oils stockpile of #1 overall picks (or traded assets), including arguably the best player on the planet, should put them in a conversation for a cup. The Canucks? They’ve got another year or two near the bottom before they have the pieces to trend up. The Oil have no salary cap room and long term commitments. This year better work for them, starting in October ….

  • I moved to Northern BC last year so I won’t be taking in any games in person this year, for the first time in awhile. I’ll watch the CBC hockey night in Canada games as they stream free, but I cut cable awhile back and am not paying extra to watch this terrible team night-in and night-out. From 2007 to 2015 I never missed a game, but I have better things to do with my time than watch bad hockey.

    I’ll catch Boeser and Pettersson doing exciting things on the NHL.com highlights, watch the free games, and save myself the headache.

  • bushdog

    i cut cable because of the stupidity – the greed – of the cost. i can stream games but again the cost is far too high. they don’t care about the vast majority who can’t afford any of it as long as a few thousand dolts will pay the price. i agree with goon, i’ll watch the cbc games when i can and highlights too. if i was in that cesspool of a city and went to 3 games a month my pension is gone and i’m panhandling and homeless. but who cares that i’ve been a fan of canucks for almost 60 years? certainly not the rapacious scum that just want to suck up all the money they can..and they get it

    • Canuck4Life20

      Sportsnet now is $25/month. That’s $175 for every Canucks game online if you subscribe from October to April. Add on another $11 for Netflix I pay less than I ever did and get every Canucks game plus a huge catalog of TV and Movies. No cable necessary.

    • #29JackMack

      very sad Bushdog, hopefully you can get a radio, the broadcasters are very good and it’s free for all the shut-ins and those that can’t get out to games.

    • For the 2010/2011 and 2011/2012 seasons I bought a package through Canucks’ website that allowed me to stream the ~50 Rogers games for less than $50 for the whole season. Got the CBC games free through their website, and the handful of TSN games I’d just go to a sports bar or friend’s place to watch. It was great. Don’t really understand how, with the proliferation of online streaming, cable-cutting, and broadband over the past eight years, we’ve actually gone *backwards* on this front.

      • Canuck4Life20

        It’s not hard to understand at all and I’m pretty sure the answer to your question is in your final sentence. People have been cutting the cord, and less cable subscribers mean less people are paying for the sports channels. Those of us that still want to watch are left paying more as there are less people to spread the costs around. As I stated above I like the current set-up better and I don’t think things have gone backwards at all. My monthly bill is much lower than it used to be as I am no longer paying for news, lifestyle networks, and kids channels that I will never watch. And in the summer, I’ll cancel my subscription because I couldn’t care less about the Blue Jays.

        Also, Rogers signed a pretty big deal with the NHL since then. This has been reflected in an increasing salary cap and Rogers needs to get a return on their $5.2 billion investment somehow.

        • I think you’re misunderstanding. I wasn’t paying cable. I was paying for streaming through Canucks online, for access in BC – it was a deal they had with Rogers, so Rogers was getting most of that money. They’re losing *tonnes* of potential viewers to illegal streaming sites or to people just tuning out, because so many people have cut cable and Rogers, the NHL, and the teams have all these goofy region lockouts. I’d still happily be paying for online access if it was a reasonable price and let me watch the games I wanted to watch – instead, I just tune out unless it’s a free game on CBC.

          • DJ_44

            I am pretty sure they did the math. Rogers now had GameCenter Live which give you every game in the league for $30/month. Use a VPN and you can pull in the Canucks games without the 48hr delay.

            Now that they offer this service, they have no reason to offer the cheap per team stream, although that is available through SN Now. Y0u have to pay about $150-200USD to get just home and away Utica Comets games, so SN Now is not that out of line, and Rogers GameCenter is a bargin in comparison.

          • That is not what I’m saying at all. What I’m saying is that they used to offer a reasonably-priced service that allowed you to watch most of the games, and now they don’t, and that is a step in the wrong direction. I don’t see how that is controversial.

            I pay for the things that I consume. I’m not a thief or a pirate, I never have been. If I don’t want to pay for something, I don’t take it. Period. And I am not willing to pay four times as much as they were asking me to pay a few years ago for a much worse product.

  • Vancouver vs. Toronto. But not just this year, over the next few years. Since Toronto is rebuilding “the right way” (i.e. lottery luck, signing elite hometown UFA’s that had Leafs blankets as a baby) while Vancouver is retooling on the fly “the wrong way” (i.e. exceptional drafting despite losing every draft lottery, terrible UFA signings and trades), I want to see how the two teams evolve and their core players hit their primes.

      • Defenceman Factory

        Shanahan is certainly a better president than Linden. Why is it Shanahan gets so much credit and his GM doesn’t while Benning gets all the blame and Linden doesn’t?

        • Macksonious

          Shanahan and Linden inherited completely different situations…. tough to compare ’em.

          Toronto was terrible for many years prior and were able to accumulate a number of solid prospects during that time. A year after Shanahan takes the job, they win the draft lottery. Success followed.

          Vancouver should have started their rebuild before Linden’s arrival and the summer of 2013 was a golden opportunity. They instead decided to replaced the coach and give it another try. After the Sedin’s were re-signed mid season, the “rebuild on the fly” direction was set before he even took the job. Difficult situation.

          Many things to consider in order to make a fair comparison.

          • Go back and look at Toronto’s prospect pool from when Shanahan took over. Outside of Morgan Reilly, it was garbage. It was actually a very comparable situation to Vancouver – Toronto had a couple of good young players in Reilly, Gardiner, and Kadri, and their prospect pool was otherwise barren. They also had a much worse contract situation with one of the worst contracts in the league in Clarkson at over 5 million, as well as Phaneuf at 7, and a whole pile of other older players on questionable contracts (and a still-excellent Kessel). A couple of good young players but nothing in the prospect pool behind them, several terrible, expensive, anchors of contracts, and a couple of older star players keeping the team from completely bottoming-out. That sounds incredibly familiar.

            Why does Shanahan get credit? Because he came in, assessed the situation, cleaned house, and implemented an effective plan to correct the situation. They have a very impressive prospect pool despite having graduated half a dozen prospects to the NHL over the past two seasons (the Marlies just won the Calder) and they’re going to be one of the best teams in the NHL next year. So yes, lets look down our noses at their terrible management group.

          • DogBreath

            Shanahan weaponized their cap, were fortunate to tank and get Matthews, and seem to have landed on their top draft picks (who’ve contributed at a young age). I love that the Leafs have sucked for so long, but you’ve got hand it to them. They’ve done everything right since Shanahan took over and everything seem to have worked out for them. Unfortunately they’re going to be in the cup conversation this year, especially if they shore up their defence.

          • Canuck4Life20

            I’m not sure where anyone said they were looking down their noses at the Leafs management. You sure see what you want to see and you are quite proficient at ignoring facts that don’t suit your agenda. The other day you were telling us what a great job the Oilers and Flames have done. Today you’re singing the Leafs praises. You don’t watch Canucks games. Why exactly are you here?

          • Macksonious

            Okay Goon, fair enough.

            Toronto’s prospects weren’t exactly bursting at the seams when Shanahan took the job in 2015. However.. if you include Nylander (2014) to that group combined with the young roster players he inherited, still had more to work with. Linden in 2014 inherited Horvat as a prospect with nothing significant on his roster, as far as young players go.

            Also, Shanahan was given the green light to do a complete tear down. Linden wasn’t given that option, the Sedin’s 4 year deals signed months prior removed it. No way ownership would support a full rebuild just after resigning their franchise players.

            To be clear, Shanahan deserves props for his work and its fair to criticize Linden. I’m merely pointing out some factors to consider when making such a comparison.

          • Macksonious

            I would like to make the following correction in my response to Goon:

            Shanahan took over in 2014, not 2015, therefore Nylander was drafted after he took the job.

      • Shanahan hasn’t made glaring errors like Benning on the UFA/trade front but at the same time, you can’t give Shanahan credit for winning the lottery or getting a gift like Tavares wanting to come home. Shanahan had a better starting point whereas Benning had to work with no prospects other than Horvat and a ton of declining veterans.

        Personally, if I had to choose between Benning or Shanahan, I’d take Benning every time because in the long run, Benning’s ability to find prospects in all levels of the draft will yield a better, long-lasting team. Build through the draft is the only legitimate, sustainable way to build a team.

        Really, what has Shanahan done that’s makes him so special? Draft-wise, he has Matthews, Marner, and Nylander and no one else has really become a legit roster player since 2014. Benning has actually drafted more NHL players from 2014-2017 and he found some outside of the 1st round too but nobody wants to give him credit for it. Lamouriello and Nonis made some trades but I don’t see a salary dump like Phaneuf as being special and I think they overpaid for Andersen. Getting a 1st for Franson (Nonis) and getting some 2nds for Spaling/Polak (Lamouriello) were good trades.

        • Jim "Dumpster Fire" Benning

          “Personally, if I had to choose between Benning or Shanahan, I’d take Benning every time because in the long run, Benning’s ability to find prospects in all levels of the draft will yield a better, long-lasting team. Build through the draft is the only legitimate, sustainable way to build a team.”

          Exactly! Now why in the hell is the guy a GM/President and not Head of Scouting LIKE HE SHOULD BE. He is literally terrible at EVERY single aspect of his job title OTHER than scouting. He screws up UFA signings, butchers contract negotiations, and his pro talent evaluation is horrible. He constantly puts out mixed messages to the media/fans and falls asleep from Dec-Mar each year forgetting to extract VALUE from expiring contracts. Yet here we are and not only does the guy still have a job, but he was extended, and has been given a promotion, during a rebuild in which he has gone on record stating that he made offers to PK Subban, John Tavares, and other superstars that have ZERO BUSINESS even being considerations in the minds of competent GMs. Yet here we are…. As of yesterday, Bodog came out with their over/under lines for all 31 teams for 18/19 and the Canucks are at 77.5pts. Take the under

  • Defenceman Factory

    This year is going to be very interesting to watch. It is a huge test for coach Green. He has a lot of options and I can’t wait to see how he responds. Will he go full Willy, take no risks and play only veterans or will he push the young guys into the line-up and force Benning to move out some vets? Can Boeser score 40? Where does Pettersson play? Does Sutter actually get more of an offensive role? Does he earn staying there?

    The first 20 games are going to be fascinating. If it’s a disaster what will Aquilini do? What will happen at the trade deadline? How many rookies will get a call up?

    I don’t share the complete doom and gloom of some although I don’t expect to challenge for a playoff spot either. There is no shortage of interesting story lines to follow and new players to evaluate I just couldn’t pick which games would be the best to watch. I’ll watch every game I can.

    • canuckfan

      I agree that Canucks will be interesting to watch this year. Yes a tough beginning to the season which I think they will be just fine. We cannot have the bad goal tending to start games the team needs the great stops and easy stops so they aren’t digging themselves out of a hole each and every night.
      I think Green is going to ice the best team possible and will judge the players through camp and exhibition games that will give the team the best chance of winning. Speed and hard work with the ability to put the puck in the net.