HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Notices

Canucks interested in Andrew Ladd

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-23-2010, 02:44 PM
  #151
Meganuck*
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Vancouver,BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,036
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GroundskeeperWillie View Post
That hasn't been confirmed has it?

In any case, I remember when Gillis tried to acquire Backes and was rebuffed. He promptly signed the player to an offer sheet. Will he do it again?
The compensation for Backes would have been a 2nd and 3rd (I think). If they offer Ladd 3m+ (which is rumored around what he wants), I think the compensation is much more.

Meganuck* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 02:50 PM
  #152
Bobby Lou
We Surrender
 
Bobby Lou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Crease
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,329
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GroundskeeperWillie View Post
That hasn't been confirmed has it?

In any case, I remember when Gillis tried to acquire Backes and was rebuffed. He promptly signed the player to an offer sheet. Will he do it again?
I don't think they'll have a problem qualifying Ladd specifically; the problems arise when they attempt to qualify Ladd, Niemi, AND Hjalmarsson. They have $1.4 million in cap room with the new cap number with no moves and 14 players under contract, and simply qualifying Ladd puts them over the limit. This is just speculative but I believe qualifying all three will cost roughly around $2.3 million in qualifying offers.

Assuming they move Versteeg first they should have no trouble qualifying all three, but then they'll need them all to accept the qualifying offers since spending market value on any of the three means they'll again be over the cap.

Assuming they move Versteeg and Byfuglien I think they'd be alright, but they'll still need the three key RFA's (Ladd, Hjalmarsson, and Niemi) to take deals at significantly less then they should be making.

If they move Ladd, Byfuglien AND Versteeg I think they should be alright keeping Niemi and Hjalmarsson at relative market value, but then they'd have to fill out the roster with basically minimum salary players as they'll have 14 players signed and be damn near the cap.


Last edited by Bobby Lou: 06-23-2010 at 03:07 PM.
Bobby Lou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 02:50 PM
  #153
Placebo Effect
Registered User
 
Placebo Effect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Your Mind
Country: China
Posts: 7,155
vCash: 500
3 million is a 2nd rounder

With the cap going up, expect the maximum 2nd round compensation to be 3.3ish million (if not more).

Placebo Effect is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 02:55 PM
  #154
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,504
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meganuck View Post
WHO do we have that is "similar" to Raymond?

And what are you going to say when Ladd isnt playing with a stacked 3rd line and isnt contributing any types of offense?
Grabner/Shroeder/Rodin/Shirokov? I'm not suggesting we put him on a 3rd line with a couple plugs and we'll see him rack up the points. We need a "stacked" 3rd line, and he can be a big part of that. He needs to play with good players to put up points, just like 99% of the league.

Scurr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 03:02 PM
  #155
RobertKron
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 8,598
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
Grabner/Shroeder/Rodin/Shirokov? I'm not suggesting we put him on a 3rd line with a couple plugs and we'll see him rack up the points. We need a "stacked" 3rd line, and he can be a big part of that. He needs to play with good players to put up points, just like 99% of the league.
None of those four bring what Raymond does on the defensive side of the puck, and on the PK. Behind Kesler and Burrows, Raymond is probably the team's top defensive forward, and the drop-off after him is reasonably steep.

RobertKron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 03:03 PM
  #156
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,854
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meganuck View Post
The compensation for Backes would have been a 2nd and 3rd (I think). If they offer Ladd 3m+ (which is rumored around what he wants), I think the compensation is much more.
the compensation for Backes was a 2nd round pick. He was signed to the same contract that the Blues signed Bernier to (which the Canucks matched). Gillis gave up a 2nd and 3rd to acquire Bernier's rights from Buffalo though - it wasn't an offer sheet.

the compensation now for Ladd would depend on where the salary cap ends up... but under last year's cap (at $56.8mill), it was a 2nd round compensation for any salary up to $3.013mill... this year, that will go up, with the cap going up... my guess is that it should be around $3.2mill or so.

The next level of compensation is a 1st and a 3rd. There is no level of compensation that is a 2nd and 3rd.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/page.htm?id=34760

Quote:
GROUP 2 - SUBJECT TO COMPENSATION AND RIGHT TO MATCH

These players have been tendered a qualifying offer by their respective Clubs and are subject to draft-choice compensation and right to match. The draft choice compensation scale is based on compensation offered by the new Club:

OFFER
COMPENSATION
$994,433 or below None
Over $994,433 to $1,506,716
Third-round choice
Over $1,506,716 to $3,013,434 Second-round choice
Over $3,013,434 to $4,520,150 First-round and third-round choice
Over $4,520,150 to $6,026,867 First-round, second-round and third-round choice
Over $6,026,867 to $7,533,584 Two first-round choices, one second- and one third-round choice
Over $7,533,584 Four first-round choices
so technically they can give Ladd an offer of $3.1mill or so and only pay a 2nd round comp. pick... but IMO that's just not worth it for Ladd... would rather pay Raymond that, as his offensive potential is higher, while the intangibles that Ladd brings (that Raymond doesn't) are always cheaper to find than offense is.

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 03:06 PM
  #157
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,504
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MW View Post
None of those four bring what Raymond does on the defensive side of the puck, and on the PK. Behind Kesler and Burrows, Raymond is probably the team's top defensive forward, and the drop-off after him is reasonably steep.
Ladd just happens to be a responsible defensive player. Maybe I'm missing something, who is our best power forward type prospect?

Scurr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 03:21 PM
  #158
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,854
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
Ladd just happens to be a responsible defensive player. Maybe I'm missing something, who is our best power forward type prospect?
I think Ladd is getting overrated here... he's a good player, but I don't think he's worth $3+mill, and he has yet to earn the "power-forward" tag - that was his projection when he was drafted, but so far he's been more a grinder, than power-forward - not unlike Bernier has.

He's also okay defensively, but nothing great, and in his 5 years in the league, he has only seen PK time one year (his first year in Chicago, where he played on the 2nd unit)... this year he was taken off the PK (and the PK went from 18th to 4th in the league with their changes this year).

Raymond is a better PK forward, because of his speed and defensive positioning... Ladd though - so far in his career - has been a very good grinder, who hasn't gotten any special teams time, and gets most of his minutes sheltered. This past season he finished 10th among forwards on Chicago in quality of competition, so it's quite obvious he wasn't out there against the opposition's top players... Raymond finished the year at #2 behind Kesler on the Canucks.

from what I've seen it's pretty obvious that Raymond is a superior defensive player at this stage.... I'd love to see Ladd here at 3rd line salary, being the 3rd LW on this team.. at most you pay him $2.5mill or so and hope he develops into the powerforward he was once projected to be - basically be the next Bernier, who hasn't lived up to those projections. But he is not a player you overpay significantly hoping he helps you in areas that he has never played in before (the PK and top defensive match-ups)... if the Canucks can somehow land Ladd at a reasonable price, they will still need to find a strong PK center at the very least, with Kesler, Burrows, Raymond and Hansen being the other PKers, and Ladd doing what he has so far in his career - be a physical presence on your bottom-6.

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 03:26 PM
  #159
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,375
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MW View Post
None of those four bring what Raymond does on the defensive side of the puck, and on the PK. Behind Kesler and Burrows, Raymond is probably the team's top defensive forward, and the drop-off after him is reasonably steep.
I disagree on two levels.

First, I think both Sedins are currently better defensive players than Mason Raymond. They're not used on the PK at all (which continues to mystify me), but they're both decent back-checkers that know where to be in the defensive zone.

Second, I think Grabner brings essentially the same offensive skillset that Raymond does, but with the (measured) potential to be a more explosive player. Defensively, I think Grabner is "okay", but he is a tireless worker and seems to have improved by leaps and bounds in this area of the game. I don't think he looked much different defensively last season than Raymond did when he first started playing for the Canucks, except that he has more core body strength and doesn't get knocked off his skates as often as Raymond did (and continues to).

I don't know if Grabner will have the same trajectory as Raymond, but I'd be willing to give it a shot next season if it means significantly upgrading other areas of the roster.


Last edited by Proto: 06-23-2010 at 03:37 PM.
Proto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 03:28 PM
  #160
pitseleh
Registered User
 
pitseleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,632
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO View Post
Ladd though - so far in his career - has been a very good grinder, who hasn't gotten any special teams time, and gets most of his minutes sheltered. This past season he finished 10th among forwards on Chicago in quality of competition, so it's quite obvious he wasn't out there against the opposition's top players... Raymond finished the year at #2 behind Kesler on the Canucks.
Last year he was #1 on the Hawks. I think it's more a reflection of having Toews improve to the point where he can play tough minutes and adding an excellent two-way player like Hossa than a reflection of Ladd's ability.

pitseleh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 03:31 PM
  #161
HamhuisHip
LeggsOverMyHamhuis
 
HamhuisHip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Victoria
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,088
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO View Post
I think Ladd is getting overrated here... he's a good player, but I don't think he's worth $3+mill, and he has yet to earn the "power-forward" tag - that was his projection when he was drafted, but so far he's been more a grinder, than power-forward - not unlike Bernier has.

He's also okay defensively, but nothing great, and in his 5 years in the league, he has only seen PK time one year (his first year in Chicago, where he played on the 2nd unit)... this year he was taken off the PK (and the PK went from 18th to 4th in the league with their changes this year).

Raymond is a better PK forward, because of his speed and defensive positioning... Ladd though - so far in his career - has been a very good grinder, who hasn't gotten any special teams time, and gets most of his minutes sheltered. This past season he finished 10th among forwards on Chicago in quality of competition, so it's quite obvious he wasn't out there against the opposition's top players... Raymond finished the year at #2 behind Kesler on the Canucks.

from what I've seen it's pretty obvious that Raymond is a superior defensive player at this stage.... I'd love to see Ladd here at 3rd line salary, being the 3rd LW on this team.. at most you pay him $2.5mill or so and hope he develops into the powerforward he was once projected to be - basically be the next Bernier, who hasn't lived up to those projections. But he is not a player you overpay significantly hoping he helps you in areas that he has never played in before (the PK and top defensive match-ups)... if the Canucks can somehow land Ladd at a reasonable price, they will still need to find a strong PK center at the very least, with Kesler, Burrows, Raymond and Hansen being the other PKers, and Ladd doing what he has so far in his career - be a physical presence on your bottom-6.
Well said NFiTO. My sentiments exactly.

I would hope if Gillis continues to be rebuffed and Ladd becomes open to a offer sheet that he would look into doing so at a reasonable salary ($2-2.5M).

HamhuisHip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 03:33 PM
  #162
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,375
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO View Post
I think Ladd is getting overrated here... he's a good player, but I don't think he's worth $3+mill, and he has yet to earn the "power-forward" tag - that was his projection when he was drafted, but so far he's been more a grinder, than power-forward - not unlike Bernier has.

He's also okay defensively, but nothing great, and in his 5 years in the league, he has only seen PK time one year (his first year in Chicago, where he played on the 2nd unit)... this year he was taken off the PK (and the PK went from 18th to 4th in the league with their changes this year).

Raymond is a better PK forward, because of his speed and defensive positioning... Ladd though - so far in his career - has been a very good grinder, who hasn't gotten any special teams time, and gets most of his minutes sheltered. This past season he finished 10th among forwards on Chicago in quality of competition, so it's quite obvious he wasn't out there against the opposition's top players... Raymond finished the year at #2 behind Kesler on the Canucks.

from what I've seen it's pretty obvious that Raymond is a superior defensive player at this stage.... I'd love to see Ladd here at 3rd line salary, being the 3rd LW on this team.. at most you pay him $2.5mill or so and hope he develops into the powerforward he was once projected to be - basically be the next Bernier, who hasn't lived up to those projections. But he is not a player you overpay significantly hoping he helps you in areas that he has never played in before (the PK and top defensive match-ups)... if the Canucks can somehow land Ladd at a reasonable price, they will still need to find a strong PK center at the very least, with Kesler, Burrows, Raymond and Hansen being the other PKers, and Ladd doing what he has so far in his career - be a physical presence on your bottom-6.
Everything you said is true but entirely beside the point. People aren't suggesting swapping Mason Raymond for Andrew Ladd. That would be an insane idea. What they're suggesting -- or at least what I would consider suggesting -- is the following:

If you put Michael Grabner on the second line, is the drop-off more precipitous than the increased output (both tangible and intangible) on the third line? This is a highly debtable point, but it's interesting. If people believe in Grabner's ability, then it might be a gamble worth making.

There is one more point to make here: straight across the board this is probably an inefficient move (Grabner and Ladd into the forward line-up, Raymond out). However, we must also factor in what return Raymond would receive. Would he garner a young defensemen on an inexpensive ELC? If so, is a young #6 D with top-pairing potential on the back end and Andrew Ladd on your third line enough to make having Grabner instead of Raymond palatable?

Also, Quality of Competition is an interesting stat, but Raymond also played with a Ryan Kesler all season, who has twice been nominated for the Selke and is one of the best two-way forwards in the entire NHL.

Proto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 03:36 PM
  #163
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,854
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pitseleh View Post
Last year he was #1 on the Hawks. I think it's more a reflection of having Toews improve to the point where he can play tough minutes and adding an excellent two-way player like Hossa than a reflection of Ladd's ability.
so how does a guy go from #1 to #10 in one season because of the improvement of 2 guys? If Toews and Hossa are taking bigger defensive responsibilities shouldn't Ladd still be in the top-5 or 6 somewhere? and if he was really good enough to be the #1 checking forward for them just a year ago, why not use him on the PK at all? And it's not like Chicago didn't have a need to use him there - Bolland and Hossa - #2 and #6 among forwards on the PK, both missed significant time this past season to injury, yet Ladd was still not used on the PK.

I think his defensive abilities are being overrated here. He was also on the ice for the 5th most goals against among Chicago forwards (with 54GA, while top spot was Madden and Toews with 56), which seems pretty high considering that he was 10th in QOC, and played only 13:41/game overall, while the top-4 all played big minutes, with the exception of Madden (15:24/game).

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 03:40 PM
  #164
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meganuck View Post
The compensation for Backes would have been a 2nd and 3rd (I think). If they offer Ladd 3m+ (which is rumored around what he wants), I think the compensation is much more.
Here is the chart from last year - it will go up this year by about 5%:
Code:
FREE AGENT CLASSIFICATIONS

GROUP 2 - SUBJECT TO COMPENSATION AND RIGHT TO MATCH

These players have been tendered a qualifying offer by their respective Clubs and are subject to draft-choice compensation and right to match. The draft choice compensation scale is based on compensation offered by the new Club:

OFFER	                                COMPENSATION
$994,433 or below 	                None
Over $994,433 to $1,506,716        Third-round choice
Over $1,506,716 to $3,013,434 Second-round choice
Over $3,013,434 to $4,520,150 	First-round and third-round choice
Over $4,520,150 to $6,026,867 	First-round, second-round and third-round choice
Over $6,026,867 to $7,533,584 	Two first-round choices, one second- and one third-round choice
Over $7,533,584 	                        Four first-round choices
http://www.nhl.com/ice/page.htm?id=34760

An offer of $3 million would hit the sweet spot it would seem. However Ladd would have to be first qualified and it seems that the Hawks do not have the space to do so.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 03:40 PM
  #165
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,026
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pitseleh View Post
Last year he was #1 on the Hawks. I think it's more a reflection of having Toews improve to the point where he can play tough minutes and adding an excellent two-way player like Hossa than a reflection of Ladd's ability.
Yup. Toews is able to handle all the tough matchups and come out ahead.. Going into the playoffs I thought that the Canucks might have the 2 best lines in terms of offensive / defensive balance... until they ran into Toews.

Both in the Olympics and in the playoffs, Toews showed he was the best of the best. Full credit.

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 03:40 PM
  #166
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,504
vCash: 500
I have no idea how you can reasonably say that Ladd has shown to be nothing more then a grinder when he has put up almost double the points Raymond has the last two seasons and matched him in even strength goals this season. I'm also pretty sure that if he's good enough defensively to play on the Stanley Cup champs checking line, he's pretty damn good defensively. And then you compare him to Bernier? Seriously? I'm pretty sure Ladd had more goals last season even strength then Bernier has in his career, I'll check when I get a chance.

Scurr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 03:42 PM
  #167
pitseleh
Registered User
 
pitseleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,632
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO View Post
so how does a guy go from #1 to #10 in one season because of the improvement of 2 guys? If Toews and Hossa are taking bigger defensive responsibilities shouldn't Ladd still be in the top-5 or 6 somewhere?
Because he doesn't play on their lines. If Toews's line gets the toughest minutes and Hossa's line gets the next toughest minutes, it leaves Ladd's line to get table scraps.

Quote:
and if he was really good enough to be the #1 checking forward for them just a year ago, why not use him on the PK at all? And it's not like Chicago didn't have a need to use him there - Bolland and Hossa - #2 and #6 among forwards on the PK, both missed significant time this past season to injury, yet Ladd was still not used on the PK.
I have no idea. Maybe he's not a good PKer? Being a good penalty killer and being a good defensive forward aren't necessarily the same thing though there tends to be a lot of overlap.

Quote:
I think his defensive abilities are being overrated here. He was also on the ice for the 5th most goals against among Chicago forwards (with 54GA, while top spot was Madden and Toews with 56), which seems pretty high considering that he was 10th in QOC, and played only 13:41/game overall, while the top-4 all played big minutes, with the exception of Madden (15:24/game).
His goaltending only had an .884 SV% when he was on the ice at EV. There's no way that a significant proportion of that isn't due to luck/goaltender performance as opposed to Ladd's abilities. The two years prior that number was .914 and .921.

I don't think he's some elite defensive forward but he's a guy who can play on a third line with some young players and help that line not be a liability. That's something the Canucks could use as they try to break in young players on their third line behind an established top-6.

pitseleh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 03:43 PM
  #168
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,375
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by xtr3m View Post
Ouch, just like that.
This might very well true... but IBWC (in before Wetcoaster) to say that unless Matt Sekeres's source is Jason Botchford (who actually seems to have real sources), I don't really listen to anything Sekeres has to say. Ever. The guy is off the mark constantly. The source yesterday seemed to have come from the Blackhawks organization anyway, given the wording of the report (and the subsequent publishing in the Chi Trib).

Even if it is true there's no guarantee Chicago is able to stick to their guns. Eliminating half of the league because you play them four times a year strikes me as the height of inefficient management. We're talking about a third-line winger here.

Plus, it's not like the Canucks off-season rests on acquiring Andrew Ladd. It's just a fun diversion/interesting theoretical discussion. He just happens to be available and the sort of player the Canucks desperately need. If Chicago doesn't manage to trade him I'd love to see the Canucks put the screws to them July 1 and offersheet Ladd and Hammer.

Proto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 03:43 PM
  #169
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,854
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proto View Post
Everything you said is true but entirely beside the point. People aren't suggesting swapping Mason Raymond for Andrew Ladd. That would be an insane idea. What they're suggesting -- or at least what I would consider suggesting -- is the following:

If you put Michael Grabner on the second line, is the drop-off more precipitous than the increased output (both tangible and intangible) on the third line? This is a highly debtable point, but it's interesting. If people believe in Grabner's ability, then it might be a gamble worth making.

There is one more point to make here: straight across the board this is probably an inefficient move (Grabner and Ladd into the forward line-up, Raymond out). However, we must also factor in what return Raymond would receive. Would he garner a young defensemen on an inexpensive ELC? If so, is a young #6 D with top-pairing potential on the back end and Andrew Ladd on your third line enough to make having Grabner instead of Raymond palatable?

Also, Quality of Competition is an interesting stat, but Raymond also played with a Ryan Kesler all season, who has twice been nominated for the Selke and is one of the best two-way forwards in the entire NHL.
IMO, yes... and that's why I wouldn't move Raymond to replace him with Grabner, as I've said many times here.

Grabner is just not near as ready defensively to match-up against the opposition's top lines and replace Raymond on the PK. It would hurt the team more than help it, especially if you have Hodgson as your #3 center, where the option to use his line as the top checking line just isn't an option this early in his career.

The time to deal Raymond is when Grabner steps up and produces consistently... and when the team has developed other defensive options overall, or Grabner actually improves defensively enough to use him in the team's toughest match-ups... this, IMO, is what top teams do... they don't deal established players that are contributing at a high level for unproven rookies who bring nothing more than potential at this stage. It would be like Chicago, last year, moving guys like Ladd, Versteeg, etc expecting Beach, Bickell, etc to take on full-time roles... now they are forced into that situation thanks to the cap, but last year, they kept their established guys and made their youngsters earn spots (as was the case with Bickell).

Trading Raymond now, expecting Grabner to replace him next season before he's proven to be ready to fill that kind of role, is a rebuilding team move, not a contender.

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 03:44 PM
  #170
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,504
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proto View Post
Everything you said is true but entirely beside the point. People aren't suggesting swapping Mason Raymond for Andrew Ladd. That would be an insane idea. What they're suggesting -- or at least what I would consider suggesting -- is the following:

If you put Michael Grabner on the second line, is the drop-off more precipitous than the increased output (both tangible and intangible) on the third line? This is a highly debtable point, but it's interesting. If people believe in Grabner's ability, then it might be a gamble worth making.

There is one more point to make here: straight across the board this is probably an inefficient move (Grabner and Ladd into the forward line-up, Raymond out). However, we must also factor in what return Raymond would receive. Would he garner a young defensemen on an inexpensive ELC? If so, is a young #6 D with top-pairing potential on the back end and Andrew Ladd on your third line enough to make having Grabner instead of Raymond palatable?

Also, Quality of Competition is an interesting stat, but Raymond also played with a Ryan Kesler all season, who has twice been nominated for the Selke and is one of the best two-way forwards in the entire NHL.
That's what I was getting at, thank you.

Scurr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 03:48 PM
  #171
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,026
vCash: 500
Sekeres has at least some sources. He may not be entirely accurate how he portrays things but he doesn't make stuff up.

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 03:49 PM
  #172
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,854
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pitseleh View Post
I don't think he's some elite defensive forward but he's a guy who can play on a third line with some young players and help that line not be a liability. That's something the Canucks could use as they try to break in young players on their third line behind an established top-6.
I agree with that... that's why I'd have no problem with Ladd here (again at a reasonable salary) because if he's brought in to fill roles he's capable of, he'd be an asset. That role is being a physical presence on a 3rd line that does not see the top match-ups (which will continue to go to the Kesler line). Basically, I'd love to have him here to be our next Bernier-like project, and hopefully this time he progresses where Bernier hasn't been able to.

But I would not bring him in at a $3+mill salary (which he apparently wants) to try and improve our PK and overall defensive game. IMO, that would lead to the same disappointment we've seen with Bernier, who was brought in hoping to fill a spot next to the Sedins, while he hadn't proven he was capable of playing such a role. Sign Ladd at $3+mill, and I'd be willing to bet he'd be criticized as much - if not more - than Bernier has this past season.

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 07:49 PM
  #173
Tarot Sport*
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,281
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
And then you compare him to Bernier? Seriously? I'm pretty sure Ladd had more goals last season even strength then Bernier has in his career, I'll check when I get a chance.
Nope. Not close. 54 to 17 not close.

Tarot Sport* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 08:11 PM
  #174
topheavyhookjaw
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,134
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO View Post
I agree with that... that's why I'd have no problem with Ladd here (again at a reasonable salary) because if he's brought in to fill roles he's capable of, he'd be an asset. That role is being a physical presence on a 3rd line that does not see the top match-ups (which will continue to go to the Kesler line). Basically, I'd love to have him here to be our next Bernier-like project, and hopefully this time he progresses where Bernier hasn't been able to.

But I would not bring him in at a $3+mill salary (which he apparently wants) to try and improve our PK and overall defensive game. IMO, that would lead to the same disappointment we've seen with Bernier, who was brought in hoping to fill a spot next to the Sedins, while he hadn't proven he was capable of playing such a role. Sign Ladd at $3+mill, and I'd be willing to bet he'd be criticized as much - if not more - than Bernier has this past season.
I'd rather pay Ladd 3 than Bernier 2. The intensity and jam he brings is much more than Bernier's, and his offensive game is better frankly.

Now I'd be uncomfortably paying the two of them a combined 5 to flank the third line, that's a lot of money for those two guys. But if Bernier is potentially moved I'd pay Ladd 3.

topheavyhookjaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-23-2010, 09:47 PM
  #175
Moobles
Registered User
 
Moobles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,552
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by topheavyhookjaw View Post
I'd rather pay Ladd 3 than Bernier 2. The intensity and jam he brings is much more than Bernier's, and his offensive game is better frankly.

Now I'd be uncomfortably paying the two of them a combined 5 to flank the third line, that's a lot of money for those two guys. But if Bernier is potentially moved I'd pay Ladd 3.
Agree. Ladd is more of what we expected and needed out of Bernier. But if Chicago is asking for more than Ladd's worth I'd give Bernier a last chance. It's not worth moving someone like Raymond (as nuckfan has said) for Ladd, as enticing as he'd be on our 2nd/3rd lines.

Moobles is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:55 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.