logo

CanucksArmy Monday Mailbag: Nation Network Callers, John Weisbrod, Chris Tanev and Tanking!

alt
Photo credit:Matthew Henderson
J.D. Burke
6 years ago
Before I get into the usual, Sunday run of queries, I’m going to start by tackling some questions that were meant for Jon Abbott and I on Thursday’s episode of Nation Network Radio powered by Shark Club Sports Bar & Grill. Since the good people of Twitter were kind enough to ask, and we just ran out of time before we could respond, I figure I owe them their answers.
I would make Nikolay Goldobin my top priority. Against the Anaheim Ducks, Goldobin played one of his better two-way hockey games in his time as a Canuck; against San Jose, Goldobin was an absolute force. Right when I thought I was out, he pulls me back in with a couple of performances that flash his potential value to this hockey club.
Keep Goldobin with Bo Horvat, and do everything possible to get his production and confidence at a high-level by the season’s end. Give the young Russian something to build on this summer and going into training camp. Snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. A few weeks ago, Goldobin looked like a write-off. Now, less so.
I’d say that Troy Stecher is already a top-four defenceman. Last year, Stecher was a solid first-pair defenceman even. His raw underlying metrics this year aren’t great, but that’s probably due to team effects more than anything. In general, players fare better with Stecher as their linemate or partner than without him, and that suggests he’s doing a good job in a tough situation.
That’s a good question. I think it’s because Canucks president Trevor Linden was originally expected to take on more of a PR role than a manager’s role. We now know that this hasn’t been the case and that Linden has his hands in almost every facet of the Canucks hockey operations.
For whatever it’s worth, good or bad, I think Linden is starting to bear some public scrutiny for his role in this mess. And I think that will only get more intense with time, barring a turnaround sooner than later.
The person you’re thinking of is Canucks assistant general manager John Weisbrod. I don’t want to speak on specifics because there are certain details I don’t have at my disposal, but from what I can gather, Weisbrod has a significant role in the front office. Weisbrod’s fingerprints are all over the Markus Granlund and Sven Baertschi acquisitions, and he’s had a hand in bringing Erik Gudbranson to Vancouver, too. Weisbrod does a little bit of everything. His hockey background involves a lot of scouting, though, so that’s probably where he does most of his work. I wrote about Weisbrod a few seasons ago, if you’re interested.
I wouldn’t blame Canucks goaltending coach Dan Cloutier for Jacob Markstrom’s shortcomings. The fact remains that Markstrom just isn’t a starting-calibre NHL netminder. All the flaws in his game that are causing problems this season have been there for years now.
That’s a tough question to answer, because I think that when Chris Tanev is healthy on a team that doesn’t possess the puck that often (the Canucks), he does very well. As for your second question, I suspect the answer is yes, but I can’t definitively suggest as much until I look into this in greater detail. It makes intuitive sense, and I’d assume that the answer is yes, but without proof, I can’t offer one.
See: the second part of my last answer.
This isn’t a question I’m qualified to answer at this time. Check in when the CanucksArmy Prospect Profiles series gears up in May! For now, though, check out this article by CanucksArmy’s Ryan Biech on The Athletic Vancouver wherein he offers a few suggestions for what to do with that pick.
I’d suspect it’s more likely that Adam Gaudette will play the final six games of the season if his NCAA season ends next Saturday. It’d give him some practice time and a little rest for his first NHL game.
Rasmus Dahlin, Andrei Svechnikov and Filip Zadina.
I have absolutely no idea why the Canucks would try to sign Brock Boeser to a contract this summer. It makes no sense whatsoever.
I don’t think it’s a matter of whether the Canucks can or cannot get Petrus Palmu over to the AHL next season as much as a question of whether Palmu wants to be there. Palmu is on a two-year deal with TPS Turku, so I’d assume at this stage that he’ll spend another season in the Finnish Liiga.
None of Sven Baertschi, Chris Tanev, Markus Granlund or Brandon Sutter should feel terribly comfortable about their role in Vancouver for next season. I don’t know if the Canucks will trade any of those players this off-season, but they’re at the top of the list of players they should consider trading.
It’s not necessarily wrong to suggest that Erik Gudbranson was playing better in the lead up to and immediate aftermath of his three-year $12-million contract extension. It’s just that the bar for playing better was so obscenely low. We’re talking about someone who was in the bottom-three of the entire league among regular defencemen with respect to the ratio of shots that their team controlled with them on the ice.
So, the Canucks started playing Gudbranson with Alexander Edler, and like almost everyone else who gets that assignment, Gudbranson’s numbers and play seemingly went up accordingly. The problem? Gudbranson still had the third-worst ratio of shot control among Canucks skaters with ten or more games after signing a contract extension on February 20th. I hate to be a downer, but Gudbranson was still playing awful hockey; it was just slightly less awful.
I don’t like either of those options, to be honest. Frankly, I think the NHL’s knee-jerk reaction to the Edmonton Oilers getting all those first overall picks and the Arizona Coyotes and Buffalo Sabres #Tankathon has swung the pendulum too far. The draft is supposed to be a mechanism for improving teams and levelling the playing field for the haves and have-nots. What’s so wrong with bad teams having a good chance at the best available talent in the draft?
No, but if the Canucks do decide to offer John Carlson a legitimate offer in free agency, it will mean they’ve dealt one of Erik Gudbranson or Chris Tanev.
As many as are the best available player to them where they’re drafting.
Why not trade both of them? It’s not like having Gudbranson and Tanev has worked wonders for the Canucks defensive efforts in the last two seasons.
That said, if the Canucks can only trade one of Gudbranson or Tanev, I’d lean towards Tanev just because the return would be far higher. That and the Canucks have more time to trade Gudbranson afterwards.
I think the health question is valid for both of those players, though. Just a guess, but I think that teams would use the question of their short- and long-term health to drive down value rather than to ultimately avoid the player.
April 7th.
31.2% chance.
I’d deal Gudbranson, Tanev and try to convince Alexander Edler that a change of scenery is in everyone’s best interests. Then I’d look at the free agent market and see which players I can sign to short-term deals and flip for draft picks at next year’s trade deadline. It’s all about the future.
Any pair with Rasmus Dahlin on it is going to be a top-three pairing in the NHL in three years.
No, I think the fact that Reid Boucher wouldn’t be eligible to contribute on a playoff run would ward teams off from him.
The Vegas Golden Knights.
They look like hockey gloves to me.
If we’re talking Manny Malhotra from 2011, then he wins this and it’s not especially close. Sutter is a low-end third-line centre.
Jimothy Timothy.
No. The Brent Seabrook contract is so bad and lasts for so long that it’s not worth considering even for a first-round pick. It’s one of the most prohibitive contracts in the entire NHL, frankly.
The Canucks need all the high-end talent they can find, regardless of position. And for whatever it’s worth, someone like Quinn Hughes wouldn’t be unreasonable at second-overall if they desperately need a defenceman. That said, if you think you can get Hughes at fourth overall and someone is willing to trade significant assets to move up and take Andrei Svechnikov, then you jump all over the opportunity.
If everything goes right, Guillaume Brisebois can be a third-pair defenceman at the NHL level. In all likelihood, he’s probably a six or a seven in terms of talent. It’s just that the Canucks are going to give him every chance to succeed and then some, so you have to take that into consideration.

Check out these posts...