Canucks Army Monday Mailbag: December 4th

Without the chance to talk to Nikita Tryamkin himself, I can’t give a worthwhile answer. It’s all up to him. Based on what I know about his exit, I’d say it’s 60/40 that he doesn’t come back.

I don’t think anyone’s trading for Jordan Subban with the way his season has gone down with the Utica Comets.

It’s still early, and I’m not someone who follows the Utica Comets on a game-to-game basis. Based on my sparse interactions with him to date, Comets head coach Trent Cull seems to be a decent coach.

I haven’t heard anything too alarmingly negative from or about him. A lot of what I have heard tends to suggest that he’s placing a premium on development in Utica, which is encouraging. I guess what I’m saying is that the jury is still out on Cull, which makes sense since he barely has two months worth of action under his belt in the Canucks organization.

I don’t know, and I can’t say I particularly care.

First of all, thank you. I really appreciate it and I’m sure the rest of the team does, too.

As for Thatcher Demko, I don’t know what the Canucks plan is for his development or whether he’s ahead of it or not.

I’m willing to bet that the Canucks might’ve preferred a one-year deal for Anders Nilsson, but they had to offer the second year to lock him up. That’s purely speculation though. Whatever the case, having to trade one of Jacob Markstrom or Nilsson to accommodate Demko if he’s kicking down the door for an NHL job is something I am fairly certain the Canucks can handle.

The Buffalo Sabres had the most efficient power play in the league last year, and we all know how that ended. It’s hardly a guarantee of a trip to the post-season, but by large, a top ten power play would be a good omen, yes. For a team with significant deficiencies at five-on-five, like the Canucks, good special teams is one of the few options available to them to mask that and have short-term success.

I suspect that Nikolay Goldobin will find his way back to the Utica Comets as Brandon Sutter returns to full health. Then again, if he has another game or two like the one in Nashville, maybe he gets to stick around a bit longer.

Jake Virtanen had most of his shifts in the third period against the Toronto Maple Leafs on Saturday, so that was an encouraging sign for his long-term ice-time prospects. We’ll see how long Canucks head coach Travis Green sticks to the plan.

Analytics or otherwise, there’s no justifying a decision like that. Not at this stage in the Canucks development arc, nor in Kevin Bieksa’s career. The two were good for each for a long, long time. But all good things must pass, and so on.

The Canucks were justified in moving on from Bieksa, too. The signs of age-related decline were overwhelming. To the Canucks credit, they recouped solid value for Bieksa, too. As for Bieksa, he’s not what he used to be, certainly, but looks better with the Ducks than he did in his last season with the Canucks. Everyone was better off for that split, it seems.

I don’t have the coding chops to tell you how Horvat does against specific bins of competition, i.e. against star players, etc. I can tell you that he’s playing the highest quality of competition of any active Canucks forward. I’d like to be able to tell you that he’s performing well in those circumstances concerning his two-way results, but that remains a work in progress. Let’s put it this way — Horvat’s two-way impact right now is in the middle of the pack among Canucks forwards.

The Horvat line looked hemmed in against the Maple Leafs, but so did every other Canucks line. In fact, Horvat’s line did better than most of the Canucks forward groups.

Oh, totally. That’s a realistic and achievable goal.

I have no clue. For the Canucks’ sakes, I hope not.

It has to happen eventually, right? Brock Boeser isn’t your average NHL’er, so I don’t expect his shooting percentage to drop to league average numbers. Right now, he’s scoring on north of 20 per cent of his shots, though, which we know isn’t likely to last. The Canucks are also scoring on nearly 12 per cent of their shots at even strength with Boeser on the ice. The difference between his actual and expected goals is massive.

It’s hard to project if, much less when players are going to see their percentages normalize. I think Boeser will finish the year with about 30 goals and 25 assists.

The Canucks are in the bottom-ten of the league in Corsi for percentage and expected goals percentage. I don’t think you’re being bamboozled, but I don’t think they’re going to look as good in the wins column in March/April as they do right now either.

Yes.

I can’t quite tell you who has the best bang for their buck in dollars per Corsi ratio, but according to www.CapFriendly.com, the best dollars per point player not on an entry-level contract is Vegas Golden Knights winger Jonathan Marchessault. The Knights are paying about $32,500.00 per point by Marchessault.

I’m not sure if he’ll still be available to the Canucks if they’re drafting in the 8-12 range, but if Michigan defenceman Quinn Hughes is there, they have to take him.

If the Canucks have to re-sign one of Erik Gudbranson or Thomas Vanek, and I would advise strongly against either of those options, then I lean towards Vanek. I’d sign him for another one-year deal for about the same money ($2.5-million) as the Canucks have invested in him currently.

If Elias Pettersson is producing around the point per game mark, then that would constitute a good tournament for me.

The outlook of the Canucks season should have no impact on their plans at the trade deadline. The Canucks aren’t even close to finished with this rebuild, and with that in mind, they have to stay focused on the future at the deadline and sell off every asset that isn’t going to be a significant part of this Canucks team when they’re a contending team.

I probably lean towards Boeser just because he’s already shown that he is an NHL player. Things can often go awry with even the best prospects. Boeser is an NHL’er, guaranteed. That’s the difference for me. That said, I’m amenable to an argument for Pettersson.

I haven’t seen any research to suggest that this isn’t anything other than an old hockey adage.