Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
BladesofSteel wrote:After reading Bennings less than encouraging opinion on Jensen, I'd be surprised if he was in a Canucks uni come September.
I'd agree that JB doesn't seem that impressed with Jensen. Baertschi probably replaced him on the depth chart. It's too bad, I thought Jensen looked pretty good when he got a few games under Torts. He got some time wth the Sedins, scored some nice goals and looked really close to being NHL ready. Jensen is definitely in tuff and will have to clearly outplay other guys @ camp to win a job. JB might give him one last look at camp and if Jens doesn't look good enuff, then maybe trade him or expose him on waivers.
Island Nucklehead wrote:Utica down 2-0 after 1. They're likely done.
Nice run, boys, Manchester is simply a better team.
Yeah, too bad. The baby Canucks had a great run and gave us something the big club couldn't. It'd be nice to see one form of a Canucks team win a championship one of these years. Although huge preference to the big club.
Too bad about the end result, but the farm team gave reason for hope this season. The growth of prospects like Gaunce, Grenier and even Shinkaruk this year has been encouraging. Prospects due to challenge for spots on the big club this Fall like Baertschi, Markstrom, Clendenning and Corrado showed that they're ready to do so.
It will be an interesting season next Fall though, and I don't think we can expect them to go as far next time. Eriksson is no sure lock to re-sign with Vancouver even if he's virtually guranteed to be the starter in Utica, so who will tend net? Cannata? Clendenning and Corrado may be replaced by Hutton and Subban but those two are arguably further behind the development curve. Cassels and (perhaps) Labate will play in Utica, and no doubt Shinkaruk can fill the void Baertschi will leave behind (I have optimism), but who knows if O'Reilly or any of the other vets re-sign. I'd hate for this Spring's performance to set expectations too high but certainly more to look forward with the farm than in years past.
Bringing back O'Rielly and Sanguinetti is key. They are the veteran core that drive the offense, what little they have. Included on the list of UFA's are Archibald, Biega, Cannata, Defazio and Acton. It'd be great if half of these guys can be retained, as this is still a very going franchise, and building a long term core is always desirable.
Benning confirmed Monday the Canucks will not be signing Patrick McNally.
“We are going to let him be a free agent,” Benning said. “We have got a lot of good young defencemen who we feel are ahead of him. With (Ben) Hutton and (Jordan) Subban being our two young offensive guys, we just felt we can only develop so many young defencemen at once.”
BladesofSteel wrote:Benning confirmed Monday the Canucks will not be signing Patrick McNally.
“We are going to let him be a free agent,” Benning said. “We have got a lot of good young defencemen who we feel are ahead of him. With (Ben) Hutton and (Jordan) Subban being our two young offensive guys, we just felt we can only develop so many young defencemen at once.”
That is either spin because McNally has other plans - or he is a very bad GM.
I don't know how he can realistically expect fans to buy that - he signs Sautner (UFA) and Stewart and then says he doesn't have room for McNally!?! - that is ridiculous.
BladesofSteel wrote:Benning confirmed Monday the Canucks will not be signing Patrick McNally.
“We are going to let him be a free agent,” Benning said. “We have got a lot of good young defencemen who we feel are ahead of him. With (Ben) Hutton and (Jordan) Subban being our two young offensive guys, we just felt we can only develop so many young defencemen at once.”
That is either spin because McNally has other plans - or he is a very bad GM.
I don't know how he can realistically expect fans to buy that - he signs Sautner (UFA) and Stewart and then says he doesn't have room for McNally!?! - that is ridiculous.
S_C
Yeahhhhh sure sounds like Spin to me. McNally is 23 years old, but why you wouldn't try to get at PPG college d-man into your system is a bit perplexing. I really don't see how it could hurt.
That's why I brought up the recent signings of undrafted UFA Sautner and 7th round pick Mackenze Stewart --- in my opinion, McNally has better skills and potential as a defenceman for today's NHL than either of them... so Benning has no problem extending a contract to them, but says "we can only develop so many young defencemen at once" when it comes to McNally?
Southern_Canuck wrote:so Benning has no problem extending a contract to them, but says "we can only develop so many young defencemen at once" when it comes to McNally?
S_C
Gotta think there is something more going on here. Point per game Dmen at the US college level are not that common.
Does he see himself as another Mike Reilly or Justin Shultz before them that wants to get onto the NHL right now rather than spend a couple more years in the minors?
Is it attitude problems? does it have to do with his suspension?
You don't just walk away from a potential PP QB because there ain't no more seats on the bus.
I'm sure management has a good explanation. I know Benning has been beating the "character" drum for some time now, and perhaps McNally doesn't fall under that category. Also as mentioned, Hutton and Subban both have better potential, (with less baggage).
I don't see why some are up in arms In losing an aging former 4th round pick with a checkered past. If he didn't wow management with his offensive ability, why waste a contract?
FFIW, Mackenze will be groomed as a winger. Say what you will about his upside, but the system isn't exactly littered with hulking forwards who can skate and rumble
BladesofSteel wrote:
FFIW, Mackenze will be groomed as a winger. Say what you will about his upside, but the system isn't exactly littered with hulking forwards who can skate and rumble
Any further discussion of Stewart should probably go into a "2015-16 Kalamazoo Wings" post.
BladesofSteel wrote:I'm sure management has a good explanation. I know Benning has been beating the "character" drum for some time now, and perhaps McNally doesn't fall under that category. Also as mentioned, Hutton and Subban both have better potential, (with less baggage).
This is what concerns me most about Benning, and our previous regimes as well... is character truly the most important feature for young players? We've tried that route with COHO and he showed his true character (or his Dad's) almost immediately. Why not put more of an emphasis on skill/speed/size, and if in doubt between two equal prospects, take the one with character?
I'm sure Chicago was looking for character when they drafted Kane, Beach, Skille etc. Or LA when they drafted Mersch, Voynov etc. I realize that two of these guys were busts - but Chicago and LA have 5 cups recently between them and are widely regarding as two of the better drafting teams in the league.
Why hamstring our picks with unrealistic goals of having "character" at 17, 18 or 19 years old? Who the hell has character at that age?
BladesofSteel wrote:I'm sure management has a good explanation. I know Benning has been beating the "character" drum for some time now, and perhaps McNally doesn't fall under that category. Also as mentioned, Hutton and Subban both have better potential, (with less baggage).
I don't see why some are up in arms In losing an aging former 4th round pick with a checkered past. If he didn't wow management with his offensive ability, why waste a contract?
Asset management. Why let him go for nothing? Why not sign him, and then trade him?
BladesofSteel wrote:I'm sure management has a good explanation. I know Benning has been beating the "character" drum for some time now, and perhaps McNally doesn't fall under that category. Also as mentioned, Hutton and Subban both have better potential, (with less baggage).
I don't see why some are up in arms In losing an aging former 4th round pick with a checkered past. If he didn't wow management with his offensive ability, why waste a contract?
Asset management. Why let him go for nothing? Why not sign him, and then trade him?
Pffft.
What asset?
What return in a trade?
Honestly, think about it.
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.
I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
BladesofSteel wrote:I'm sure management has a good explanation. I know Benning has been beating the "character" drum for some time now, and perhaps McNally doesn't fall under that category. Also as mentioned, Hutton and Subban both have better potential, (with less baggage).
I don't see why some are up in arms In losing an aging former 4th round pick with a checkered past. If he didn't wow management with his offensive ability, why waste a contract?
Asset management. Why let him go for nothing? Why not sign him, and then trade him?
You don't think they would have explored that option?
Seriously people, step away from the board for a while and go get some sunshine.