What would the Canucks have to give up to get Nylander?
— Laura ??? (@canucks181) November 11, 2018
What would be a fair trade for Vancouver to acquire William Nylander from the Maple Leafs?
— Howard Ng (@howardng02) November 11, 2018
Not saying the Canucks should go after Nylander but what would the offer have to look like to get him
— Cody Feldbusch (@rcbusch03) November 11, 2018
I got a lot of questions about William Nylander this week, some of which overlapped more than others. I’m grouping these three together because they’re basically the same.
I don’t think the Canucks have the pieces to get a William Nylander deal done. We’re talking about a player who’s had back-to-back 20-goal, sixty-point seasons. You can argue about player quality all you want, but the Canucks don’t have a player with that kind of track record in their system right now. The kind of players that look like they’re on their way – Elias Pettersson, Bo Horvat, Brock Boeser – are all understandably complete non-starters for Vancouver. So is Quinn Hughes. Unless the Canucks feel confidently enough that they won’t be in lottery contention, and they shouldn’t, this year’s first is off the table, too. That pretty much concludes the list of assets the leafs would consider taking in return. A package centering around a veteran or an unproven prospect like Olli Juolevi or Thatcher Demko isn’t getting it done. Even as the leafs are losing leverage, there’s a team out there that’ll be willing to give up more.
@failsonmcdonald for the mailbag – Juolevi for puljujarvi straight up. Yes or no?
— Cat Smith (@catnuck) November 11, 2018
It would be a bit of a gamble for both teams involved. I feel like the Canucks would probably come out on top in this transaction, but can’t say for certain. It’s been puzzling watching Jesse Puljujarvi struggle so much since being selected by Edmonton, but he hasn’t exactly done anything since to prove he was worthy of a fourth-overall selection, even in the AHL. At some point, we need to consider the possibility that scouts were wrong about him.
Juolevi, on the other hand, may not ever live up to being a top-five pick, but he looks like he’s on his way to being a capable NHLer for a long time. It basically comes down to how sure you are that Puljujarvi isn’t the problem in Edmonton, but I can’t say I know for sure that’s the case.
1. Does the injury to Boeser raise questions about him trying too hard too much over the last year in a bit because there was no one else that could score?
— Mike Ing (@mikeIng18) November 11, 2018
Boeser’s injury last year was a fluke. Whatever he’s aggravated since would have come playing with a completely new roster, one that’s scored quite a bit in the early going. You’re overthinking this.
2. When Beagle comes back which is a month or so. Do you have to trade Granlund or Goldobin for a defenseman to make room for Gaudette and fill in the gap for the long awaited trade of Gudbranson to the leafs or for a pick if they end up falling out of playoff contention?
— Mike Ing (@mikeIng18) November 11, 2018
There’s a lot going on here.
This take may be too hot for some people, but Nikolay Goldobin and Markus Granlund are more valuable to this organization based on where the team is at right now, and are arguably better players anyway. Wanting to make room for Gaudette makes sense, but you’re not going to just trade somebody willy-nilly to make it happen if he’s still ineligible for waivers.
I’m also not sure why you would trade them for a defenseman when the team has as many logjam issues at that position in the short and medium-term as they do at forward. The type of defenseman Granlund or Goldobin is netting them in a trade might not even be in the lineup when everyone is healthy.
Finally, I do actually think Erik Gudbranson’s strong play recently might make him a movable asset again, and for a decent return; but the team acquiring him won’t be the Leafs. The contract is too rich and he doesn’t really fit the model I’d expect them to follow now that Dubas has taken over.
With news the Leafs are exploring a trade for Nylander do the Canucks have enough to swing a deal? You see TSN throwing Brett Pesce’s name out a lot, is he much better than Tanev?
— Ryan McNutt (@Mawesome21) November 11, 2018
I think I already did a fair job of exploring why the Canucks aren’t going to be a landing spot for Nylander, so let’s move on to question two: is Brett Pesce much better than Chris Tanev?
Start with the fact that he’s 23. Even if they’re relatively comparable players, that already makes Pesce a far more valuable asset.
Then there’s the fact that since Pesce broke into the league, only 25 players have controlled a better share of the shots at even-strength than he has. Only seven have allowed less shots against per 60 minutes of play. These are the areas where Tanev has traditionally shown his value, but Pesce’s numbers dwarf what Tanev has been able to accomplish. In fact, despite his reputation, Tanev’s numbers haven’t been all that impressive in recent years.
Team effects may make the difference appear larger than it is, but I’m still taking healthy 23-year-old Brett Pesce over perpetually injured, nearing-thirty Chris Tanev 11 times out of 10. More importantly, even with Pesce’s impressive underlying profile I still wouldn’t consider him fair value in a trade for William Nylander.
Boeser for Nylander?
— Kam Lee (@kam2046) November 11, 2018
Now this is interesting. I’d imagine if you pitched this trade to fans of both teams six months ago both sides would have scoffed. I wonder if Boeser’s early-season struggles and Nylander’s hold-out have done anything to change that. The value is closer than you’d think.
If I were the Canucks’ I’d pass, though. I still think Boeser has the higher ceiling and there’s a good chance he’ll come cheaper, too.
Thoughts on Granlund so far?
— Markus Meyer (@Markus_Meyer27) November 12, 2018
Yourself in 2017: "What exactly happened to Granlund? At the time he was acquired, Granlund looked like a marginal player at best."
After a banner 2017, disastrous 2018 and good start to 2019, I'd love to hear how you feel about the original trade and Canucks "Swiss Army Knife".
— Geordie (@geordiedent) November 11, 2018
When Markus Granlund was playing with the Sedins and scoring 19 goals, I didn’t believe he was as good as he looked. When he was playing on the fourth line and struggling, I didn’t believe he was as bad as he looked. I was initially surprised he was able to make an impact in the Canucks lineup when he was acquired, but my opinion of him as arguably been on of the most stable over his Canucks’ career. He’s a decent two-way player, mostly unremarkable, but useful nonetheless. The Canucks won the trade handily, though to what exact end is probably debatable. He’s off to a good start this season, on pace to finish with 38 points. My guess would be the actual total will end up somewhere closer to 30.
what would a potential 2020 expansion draft protected/exempted/exposed list look like for the current Canucks roster? Pettersson exempted?
— Tobs (@Tobs_44) November 11, 2018
Elias Pettersson, Quinn Hughes, Olli Juolevi, Kole Lind, Michael DiPietro, Lukas Jasek, Petrus Palmu and Jonah Gadjovich will all have played two or fewer pro seasons. Everyone else will either be finished their contract or will need to be protected.
I don’t want to poach content from Ryan Biech, who wrote a piece for the Athletic on this very subject. I’ll just say that the rules are expected to allow for seven forwards, three defensemen, and one goalie to be protected and let you speculate based on that information.
How has your opinion on each of Gadj, Palmu, Jasek, Dahlen, Macewen, and Gaudette changed since September?
— Sean O'Connor (@seantoconnor) November 11, 2018
It hasn’t changed significantly, to be honest. I thought Gaudette looked ready for the NHL and he’s proven me correct. I had hoped for a bit more from Palmu and Gadjovich but also expected them to take some time to adjust to the AHL. I didn’t think Dahlen was ready for the NHL quite yet and still don’t think he’s quite there. Lukas Jasek remains an intriguing work in progress. MacEwen’s continued progression is probably the closest thing to a surprise, but he had a good season last year too, so it’s far from a shock.
so when do the Sedins pull a Mike Fisher and come out of retirement for our playoff run ????
— white boy eric (@Einthecar) November 11, 2018
As much as I wish the Sedins could have gone on one last run I think it’s best to let sleeping dogs lie. Few players get to go out the way they did. No sense pushing it.
If all healthy- what are your line combos, at this point? Would you keep shotgun with EP? I would, but move Goldy to another line- with Bo maybe.
— John Butler (@Whostheboes) November 11, 2018
My feeling is the opposite. Virtanen’s not much of a passer and I think that limits Pettersson’s effectiveness. Talk about the “rush line” all you want, but Horvat is much more of a pure score-off-the-rush player than Pettersson is. I think it’s finally time to reunite the Baertschi-Horvat-Virtanen line that was turning heads in the preseason some time ago.
Here’s my ideal lineup:
There’s a lot of room for movement on right wing, where I think all four players could offer different looks on a line with Pettersson or Horvat. Lineups aren’t meant to be static, and I wouldn’t mind seeing Eriksson get a long audition with Horvat and Baertschi too, but this is what I’d go with right now.
You’ll notice I don’t have Jay Beagle in a completely healthy lineup. That’s intentional. If you can tell me which centre deserves to sit over him I’m willing to listen.
Do you think there is a way we could get Zaitsev from the leafs as he’s a good right hand shot? Maybe give up a left pairing guy like Pouliot and 2 Second Rd Picks?
— Pass it to PETEY (@NucksJays) November 11, 2018
I have zero interest in seeing Nikita Zaitsev in a Canucks uniform on his current contract. I have even less interest in giving up two top-62 picks for the privilege. That’s the type of deal the Leafs ought be giving up assets to get rid of, not the other way around.
So at what point do we have to believe that this team is for real and that the points will be coming?
— Daniel Schwarz (@dan_qotsa) November 11, 2018
Figuring out what exactly the Canucks are right now is a tall task. They’ve been lucky at times (I don’t think you’re going to see the Bruins play that sloppy again all season, and we’re already starting to see Elias Pettersson’s shooting percentage regress), but they’re also improving as the season goes along. Are they “for real”? I can’t say I’m entirely convinced, but making the playoffs isn’t out of the question.