Add in Gudbranson...
- 1970vintage

Babcock would love it

Babcock would love it
- Lindenis#1

Need to replace the toughness they lost when Martin left.

Gunnarsson is a write off at this point. Guy can't stick handle.

But Utunen might have enough to be a decent depth defender.
- Lindenis#1

Utunen seems like a decent pick, I've read some positive stuff about him. Even if he turns out to be nothing, I won't criticize that pick since he appears to have some actual NHL potential.


As for Gunnarsson, you know a pick is bad when the best case scenario your hoping for is that the player turns out to be a future NHL scrub.

Karlsson...
- 1970vintage

As I said we didn't have the assets to acquire him as we were in on the bidding but he went elsewhere.

Add in Gudbranson...
- 1970vintage

Maybe if Lou/Hunter were still there.

Dubas/Gilman would probably view Gudbranson as a negative asset at his cap hit unless they felt they could flip him for a pick/prospect.

is that the gambling line? because i got 100 bucks burning a hole in my pocket if it is
- Lindenis#1

PlayNow/SportsAction

I doubt JB actually scouts these guys as much as his Euro scouts do.


Late round picks are more on the scouts than the GM. But yeah, the way this team scouts dmen at all levels needs to be re-evaluated lol.
- Nucker101

Yeah i doubt it also, its just easier to name one guy instead of 10 guys.

They look to have quinn hughes right. Just need to be drafting D higher. 1st and 2nd rounds.

PlayNow/SportsAction
- LeftCoaster

I'm putting money on that under all day.

Morning Poll Question: The #Canucks Point Total is set at 77.5. 😐 Would you put money on the Over or the Under?

Over - 15%
Under - 85%


I went solidly on the under. No cuts announced yet.
- LeftCoaster

REALLY. I was banking on 78 points for the season.

This is going to get a bunch of eye rolling type responses over feelings and whatnot, but unless Benning can find an AHL team willing to play Nilsson on loan, I can't see them making a claim. I definitely think they should, but I do think the organization respects Bachman too much to demote/move him from Utica
- WhiteLie

This is the most reasonable reason not to claim him, but does it out weight the hurt feelings it would cause leaf fans

As I said we didn't have the assets to acquire him as we were in on the bidding but he went elsewhere.
- Nucknab23

Based on what SJ gave up Canucks certainly had what it would take

REALLY. I was banking on 78 points for the season.
- manvanfan

No more than 55 points for the season.

REALLY. I was banking on 78 points for the season.
- manvanfan

Figured on 80-85 pts.

#picking10th

Based on what SJ gave up Canucks certainly had what it would take
- 1970vintage

We did but it would have been two of our top prospects+ + +

Can't do it.

Based on what SJ gave up Canucks certainly had what it would take
- 1970vintage

Doesn’t matter. He would never sign here

REALLY. I was banking on 78 points for the season.
- manvanfan

Make some money

REALLY. I was banking on 78 points for the season.
- manvanfan

Gun to my head, I take the under. But yeah, I'd have them right around 78 as well.




They probably would have finished with like 70 points if the team didn't go "playoff mode" for the Sedins last year instead of "summer mode" during the final few games.

So even if you think the team improves and stays healthier, I'm not sure I'd gamble on much more than 78.

Figured on 80-85 pts.

#picking10th
- LordHumungous

i'd poop if this team makes the equivalent of a 6 win leap in the standings playing in this division with this roster.

Doesn’t matter. He would never sign here
- CanuckDon

He might not sign in SJ either. The risk you take to get one of the best players in the league.

Gun to my head, I take the under. But yeah, I'd have them right around 78 as well.




They probably would have finished with like 70 points if the team didn't go "playoff mode" for the Sedins last year instead of "summer mode" during the final few games.

So even if you think the team improves and stays healthier, I'm not sure I'd gamble on much more than 78.
- Nucker101

not likely.

No more than 55 points for the season.
- A_SteamingLombardi

That should be it, but you know this team will head to overtime 10-15 times and steal a couple wins from that

Gun to my head, I take the under. But yeah, I'd have them right around 78 as well.




They probably would have finished with like 70 points if the team didn't go "playoff mode" for the Sedins last year instead of "summer mode" during the final few games.

So even if you think the team improves and stays healthier, I'm not sure I'd gamble on much more than 78.
- Nucker101

73 point team last year. Lost a guaranteed 100points of offence. Brought back the same D, same goaltending. Replaced Dowd, Dorsett and Vanek with Beagle, Schaller and Roussell.

Basically outside of the defence becoming good and EP putting up godly numbers its all but a guarantee they smell like poop again.

But on the plus side they'll be a little more fun to watch, ideally.

i'd poop if this team makes the equivalent of a 6 win leap in the standings playing in this division with this roster.
- Lindenis#1

Not popular opinion I know but I think losing the Sedins will actually help us a touch.

See where it goes.

73 point team last year. Lost a guaranteed 100points of offence. Brought back the same D, same goaltending. Replaced Dowd, Dorsett and Vanek with Beagle, Schaller and Roussell.

Basically outside of the defence becoming good and EP putting up godly numbers its all but a guarantee they smell like poop again.

But on the plus side they'll be a little more fun to watch, ideally.
- Lindenis#1

Ill enjoy the prospects checking in on how the prospects are developing again.

Not popular opinion I know but I think losing the Sedins will actually help us a touch.

See where it goes.
- LordHumungous

Delusional