Mailbag Part 2: Jonathan Dahlen, Adam Gaudette, and the Expansion Draft

Jonathan Dahlen’s had an amazing start to his fourth full season in the Allsvenskan, putting up 20 points in 11 games. That shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone at this point, though, given that he’s already dominated at that level over both of the past two seasons. What remains to be seen is whether or not he can translate that success to a higher level. He’s has mixed results in the AHL so far, and hasn’t gotten so much as a whiff of SHL or NHL action.

At this point, I think Dahlen is a long shot to make the NHL. The truth is, he always was. He was a smart selection from a process standpoint for the Senators in the second round of the 2016 draft, and a great return for the aging Alex Burrows at the 2017 trade deadline, but I always felt he was over-hyped in this market. That having been said, he still appears to have more upside and a better chance of cracking an NHL lineup than the player he was traded for, Linus Karlsson, who is on pace to have another low-scoring season in Sweden’s second-tier men’s league

I imagine it just wasn’t worth the trouble. It’s still a four-hour bus ride from New York City to Utica, with the team having just played in Jersey the previous night. I don’t think missing one game is going to cost either player too much. You might be overthinking this.

Jim Benning said he was expected back in late November. I don’t believe there’s been an update since then.

Yes and no. On the one hand, playing a run-and-gun style with a lead in the third period is likely to produce more turnovers, and thus create more high-danger scoring chances for the other team. On the other hand, the best way to cut down on scoring chances against is to keep the puck as far away from your net as possible, and if you spend 20 minutes in your own zone you’re bound to give up your fair share of high-danger chances, too. I think you can justify playing a bit more conservatively when you have a lead, especially late in the third period, but what the Canucks’ have done in their games against Philadelphia and New York is extreme. It’s one thing to dump the puck in when carrying it in presents an unnecessary level of risk, it’s quite another to resort to dumping and chasing by default. Needless to say, if you get outshot as severely as the Canucks did the other night, you’re doing something wrong.

I think the value in a potential Juolevi-Puljujarvi trade would be very close for both teams, so much so that I can’t really say I have a strong opinion on the possibility. I think Puljujarvi is more likely to simply be in need of a change in scenery, but Juolevi plays the premium position. Needless to say, I wouldn’t be upset if the Canucks pulled the trigger on this deal, but I wouldn’t fault them for passing on it at this stage, either. I would like to see how both players fare over the rest of the season before making a decision on who is more valuable.

It might be a little tough for the Canucks to get their hands on him, but I think Sven Baertschi would fit nicely in this lineup.

Zhukenov went unsigned by the Canucks this June, and has bounced up and down the Russian leagues, making appearances in the MHL, VHL, and KHL at multiple times since heading overseas in 2017. He also had a brief stint in the Czech Tier 2 league last season, before returning to the VHL. I’m not 100% clear on whether the Canucks will retain his rights until he becomes an unrestricted free agent, or if they expired this summer. At any rate, I don’t expect him to be returning to North America any time soon.

It will depend on how this season goes. I think there’s a decent chance he will get a call-up towards the end of the year, either due to injury, or because the team is out of a playoff spot and someone has been dealt away. That being said, if the team can stay healthy and remain in a playoff spot, the Canucks may begin to ask themselves where he fits in long-term.

As I said in part 1, I think Baertschi will be the first call-up based on the fact that he has a much more proven track record at the NHL level than the team’s other options.

I can see the case for either side. On the one hand, Gaudette has proven he can play at the AHL level, and the obvious next step in his development is to prove he can stick on an NHL roster. With that in mind, I think it’s reasonable to keep him up if he can get semi-regular action. On the other hand, if he’s just going to sit in the press box on most nights, and isn’t likely to get in any game time unless the team is hit with an injury, then they might as well let him play big minutes in Utica and wait for a call-up. This is part of the reason I can’t understand why they waived Sven Baertschi. Even if you don’t think Baertschi is anything to write home about, a 26-year-old player is certainly a better option to sit in the press box than a 23-year-old, no?

The short answer is they don’t get to. The Canucks are going to have to come to a decision about which goaltender is in their long-term plans and act accordingly. The team will likely hold on to Jacob Markstrom until the end of the year if they’re in a playoff spot at the deadline, but if Demko plays well they may have to accept the possibility of losing him in free agency. By the same token, if they decide Markstrom is their guy, they may have to explore trade options for Thatcher Demko. Luckily, they have some time to figure it out, given that the expansion draft isn’t until June 2021. They may simply elect to hang on to both guys until then, and cross that bridge when they come to it.