Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
When Guddy returns???
#1
Let's try dreaming a little dream... 

Fast forward to the middle of February... since winning 4 in a row after the Xmas break, our guys have kept pace with the rest of the wild card teams and we're shockingly still within a couple of points of a playoff spot.

Even MORE shockingly, the back end of Hutton, Stetcher, Tryamkin, Sbisa, Tanev and Edler have all managed to stay healthy since the post Xmas revival... 

Not only have they stayed healthy, but they are playing some decent hockey... Of course, they all goof up from time to time, but all in all, the group, as a whole, has been fairly effective.

And then, just when everyone is feeling comfortable with their lot in life... Guddy comes back to practice and he's lookin good!!! And not only is he lookin good in practice, but he's letting everyone know, he's itchin to get back into the lineup...  and as luck would have it, there's a few tough games coming up on the sked, against some "heavy" teams... 

Ya , ya, ya... I know... the odds of us keeping a healthy group of DMen together for 6 weeks is about as likely as WD receiving a vote of confidence from "Bure" OR "Shoes" heading into the Shark Club sporting a mullet and an Oiler jersey... but like I said, let's try dreaming a little dream...

Do we leave the group alone or do we insert Guddy back into the lineup... and if so, who comes out and why.


I've never been there before, but once I went there twice...
Reply
Thanks given by: nicky
#2
(2017-01-03, 12:42 PM)SAVARYGUY Wrote: Let's try dreaming a little dream... 

Fast forward to the middle of February... since winning 4 in a row after the Xmas break, our guys have kept pace with the rest of the wild card teams and we're shockingly still within a couple of points of a playoff spot.

Even MORE shockingly, the back end of Hutton, Stetcher, Tryamkin, Sbisa, Tanev and Edler have all managed to stay healthy since the post Xmas revival... 

Not only have they stayed healthy, but they are playing some decent hockey... Of course, they all goof up from time to time, but all in all, the group, as a whole, has been fairly effective.

And then, just when everyone is feeling comfortable with their lot in life... Guddy comes back to practice and he's lookin good!!! And not only is he lookin good in practice, but he's letting everyone know, he's itchin to get back into the lineup...  and as luck would have it, there's a few tough games coming up on the sked, against some "heavy" teams... 

Ya , ya, ya... I know... the odds of us keeping a healthy group of DMen together for 6 weeks is about as likely as WD receiving a vote of confidence from "Bure" OR "Shoes" heading into the Shark Club sporting a mullet and an Oiler jersey... but like I said, let's try dreaming a little dream...

Do we leave the group alone or do we insert Guddy back into the lineup... and if so, who comes out and why.

  All six those healthy? Come playoff time? You are an optimist. Gudbransen plays. Either Edler or Tanev will be injured.

But. like the Pied Piper's song says, "Dream..." (song was out in about 1952)   Aww. here it is.  The plane is a P-51 Mustang, btw






Enjoy




 
Phill 2:10-11 
Reply
Thanks given by:
#3
Trade either Tanev or Gudbranson for either Duchene or Landeskog.



Reply
Thanks given by: Marsh
#4
(2017-01-03, 04:17 PM)trapper Wrote: Trade either Tanev or Gudbranson for either Duchene or Landeskog.





 Keep Guddy, trade Tanev for the best draft pick we can get. Probably a first round middle of the pack

Sweet song. I remember it well

 Here's another one for ya:






Play it. Your blood pressure will drop
 
Phill 2:10-11 
Reply
Thanks given by:
#5
(2017-01-04, 01:01 AM)Highstyx Wrote:
(2017-01-03, 04:17 PM)trapper Wrote: Trade either Tanev or Gudbranson for either Duchene or Landeskog.





 Keep Guddy, trade Tanev for the best draft pick we can get. Probably a first round middle of the pack

Sweet song. I remember it well

 Here's another one for ya:






Play it. Your blood pressure will drop
 
I get trading older players for picks but why trade a proved youngish player for a crapshoot pick? Tanev is the only significant asset other than draft picks the Canucks have to get a guy like Duchene or Landeskog. And Tanev out creates an expansion protected spot for the player coming in.

If the Canucks finish picking 8th to 10th I'd consider trading the first round pick and a player on the protected list for a significantly better player that is likely to be available. This one is complicated though because the draft lottery takes place after the expansion draft and it would blow up any chance to win the lottery. Unless there are future considerations in case of the Canuck pick winning the lottery.

Note: Vegas can drop to 6th overall in the lottery but pick 3rd in every other round. A trade with Vegas after the expansion draft might be a very attractive option.
How to start an argument on the internet: 1) Post something. 2) Wait.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#6
i am not on the trade Tanev bandwagon.     I am not even going to be happy about Sbisa going to Vegas.  

Guddy was # 3 overall and has upside.     I wonder if a D challenged team would give up a first rounder for him? 

JB likely would not be willing at this point.   

Edler, Miller, Burrows and Hansen could all bring a decent return in the correct situation.
A word to the wise ain't necessary - it's the stupid ones that need the advice.
Reply
Thanks given by: nicky
#7
(2017-01-04, 11:39 AM)shoes Wrote: i am not on the trade Tanev bandwagon.     I am not even going to be happy about Sbisa going to Vegas.  

Guddy was # 3 overall and has upside.     I wonder if a D challenged team would give up a first rounder for him? 

JB likely would not be willing at this point.   

Edler, Miller, Burrows and Hansen could all bring a decent return in the correct situation.

Tanev and Sbisa are in a different situation than the four you mentioned, shoes. It's not one and not the other. Tanev brings more than your four and the Canucks really need 1st line forwards more than bottom 9 which is the most likely return for your scrubs....er, veterans.
How to start an argument on the internet: 1) Post something. 2) Wait.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#8
(2017-01-04, 11:39 AM)shoes Wrote: i am not on the trade Tanev bandwagon.     I am not even going to be happy about Sbisa going to Vegas.  

Guddy was # 3 overall and has upside.     I wonder if a D challenged team would give up a first rounder for him? 

JB likely would not be willing at this point.   

Edler, Miller, Burrows and Hansen could all bring a decent return in the correct situation.

We gave up a player who we drafted 24th over all and the 33 pick ( a Benning 1st rounder by his own logic) in last year's draft for Gudbranson. Now you ask if we can get a single first rounder back for Gudbranson?
Reply
Thanks given by:
#9
I don't want to see any of our d-men moved. I know we lack depth up front but the defense is looking better in the long run as Tryamkin and Stetcher continue to get better.

If Benning is hell bent on moving a d-man then I would move Gudbranson for Landeskog or Duschene one for one.

It's no surprise that this win streak coincides with Tanev and Edler coming back from injury. When you move the puck out of your end quickly the other team has less opportunities.

I've supported Sbisa in many threads before. He gets into trouble when he thinks he's Bobby Orr out there when he makes rushes up ice and then gets caught. He loves to stick handle and he loses the puck when he does that. When he keeps it simple by just moving the puck, not making bad pinches, staying positionally sound he's a very effective player and he is a physical presence in clearing the net front.
Reply
Thanks given by: nicky
#10
Hey you guys....

I wasn't talking about trading guys when Guddy gets back... I was just wondering if the Canucks would disrupt the game lineup if everyone remained healthy...

One step at a time... first we figure out if they disrupt the lineup, THEN we can start shippin guys out of town!!! LOL


I've never been there before, but once I went there twice...
Reply
Thanks given by:
#11
Ok.... now that we've moved on to the Trading part of the thread... Wink

Let's consider the following... Tonight is game 40... The trade deadline is February 28th, 3pm Eastern...

The Canucks play host to the Red Wings on that same day, February 28th, at 7pm... and it will be game 62 of the schedule.

So, we have 23 games to figure this thing out.... AND GO!!!!!


I've never been there before, but once I went there twice...
Reply
Thanks given by:
#12
If all the current defencemen were healthy, the team would have the following to choose from:

Biega, Edler, Gudbranson, Hutton, Larsen, Sbisa, Stecher, Tanev, Tryamkin

I would think that Edler, Hutton and Sbisa would stay in on the left side.

That leaves Biega, Gudbranson, Larsen, Stecher, Tanev and Tryamkin to fill out the three spots on the right. From those three I think that Tanev, Gudbranson and Stecher would be the likely ones to play, with Tryamkin as spare and Biega as #8. Stecher's play has been better than Larsen's, and I think that management views Gudbranson as having greater experience and leadership skills than Tryamkin at this point. Biega is great as a fill-in, but Tryamkin has certain physical attributes that probably place him above Biega.

I think we would see:

Edler - Tanev
Hutton - Gudbranson
Sbisa - Stecher

As for potential trades, I wouldn't know. We've already seen the defence get stretched due to injury this year, so moving out pieces even to get that needed draft pick or forward would be risky. A tough call.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#13
(2017-01-04, 01:14 PM)abdemarco Wrote: If all the current defencemen were healthy, the team would have the following to choose from:

Biega, Edler, Gudbranson, Hutton, Larsen, Sbisa, Stecher, Tanev, Tryamkin

I would think that Edler, Hutton and Sbisa would stay in on the left side.

That leaves Biega, Gudbranson, Larsen, Stecher, Tanev and Tryamkin to fill out the three spots on the right.  From those three I think that Tanev, Gudbranson and Stecher would be the likely ones to play, with Tryamkin as spare and Biega as #8.  Stecher's play has been better than Larsen's, and I think that management views Gudbranson as having greater experience and leadership skills than Tryamkin at this point.  Biega is great as a fill-in, but Tryamkin has certain physical attributes that probably place him above Biega.

I think we would see:

Edler - Tanev
Hutton - Gudbranson
Sbisa - Stecher

As for potential trades, I wouldn't know.  We've already seen the defence get stretched due to injury this year, so moving out pieces even to get that needed draft pick or forward would be risky.  A tough call.

Wow.... AbD, sitting out the Trammy... Nice work my man...

Now.... 

duck!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  Laugh Laugh Laugh


I've never been there before, but once I went there twice...
Reply
Thanks given by:
#14
Tryamkin and Stecher progressing rapidly wasn't something the Canucks planned in the past off-season so there's more depth than expected. Even mild regression from Hutton hasn't been burdensome.

The only reason I can think of is that Edler, Tanev and Gudbranson are the 3 obvious defensemen to protect from expansion and in the 7-3-1 protection racket, trading one of those three means an extra forward is exposed and probably Sbisa becomes protected. Not ideal but then if Hansen is dealt at the TDL the problem is minimized. If Nashville can spare Seth Jones, I can't see why we would be upset by trading any of the Canucks D for the right return.
How to start an argument on the internet: 1) Post something. 2) Wait.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#15
(2017-01-04, 02:30 PM)Marsh Wrote: Tryamkin and Stecher progressing rapidly wasn't something the Canucks planned in the past off-season so there's more depth than expected. Even mild regression from Hutton hasn't been burdensome.

The only reason I can think of is that Edler, Tanev and Gudbranson are the 3 obvious defensemen to protect from expansion and in the 7-3-1 protection racket, trading one of those three means an extra forward is exposed and probably Sbisa becomes protected. Not ideal but then if Hansen is dealt at the TDL the problem is minimized. If Nashville can spare Seth Jones, I can't see why we would be upset by trading any of the Canucks D for the right return.

That trade is not looking so good right now for the Preds but it's solidified the Blue Jackets on the back end. Horvat has similar numbers as Johansen.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#16
Ab,

I would HATE for Tryamkin to be sat out. They upside on this guy is tremendous. Canucks will send Stecher down once Gudbranson is healthy or do they waive Biega?
Reply
Thanks given by:
#17
I like Tryamkin a lot as well, but I'm just trying to get into management's head on this one. Stecher has been a help on the PP, and doesn't seem to be a major defensive liability. Tryamkin has also been good, but I would think the brass see Gudbranson replacing #88's skill set. Do they keep Biega up as expansion draft fodder?
Reply
Thanks given by:
#18
Again, the odds of our current group being totally healthy when Guddy gets back are extremely low.... Oh well, at the very least
it's a good problem to have and one that most of us didn't envision....


I've never been there before, but once I went there twice...
Reply
Thanks given by:
#19
(2017-01-04, 05:53 PM)abdemarco Wrote: I like Tryamkin a lot as well, but I'm just trying to get into management's head on this one. Stecher has been a help on the PP, and doesn't seem to be a major defensive liability. Tryamkin has also been good, but I would think the brass see Gudbranson replacing #88's skill set. Do they keep Biega up as expansion draft fodder?

We're going to having a numbers problem. Someone will need to be sent down. Stecher can be sent down without being waived. Tryamkin has a no AHL clause in his contract. Sbisa meets the expansion draft requirements for exposure. Tanev, Edler and Gudbranson will be protected as we can only protect 3 d-men so Biega can be exposed on waivers at anytime so it doesn't hinder us in terms of expansion.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#20
Ok, so if Stecher is demoted would we see:

Edler - Tanev
Hutton - Gudbranson
Sbisa - Biega

with Tryamkin as the extra?
Reply
Thanks given by:


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)