We are now one week away from trade deadline day in the NHL. It’s a day that can be overrated in a lot of respects, but it still has a lot of importance. The Canucks acquired two very important pieces of their team at last year’s trade deadline in Chris Higgins and Max Lapierre. Of course, there are always teams that acquire aging/overrated players at inflated prices, so buyer beware.

This year there are a lot of big name players likely to be available. Rick Nash is the biggest name, but players like Jeff Carter, Ales Hemsky, Tuomo Ruutu, and PA Parenteau are also likely available. But what I think everyone in Canucks nation wants to know, is what is Mike Gillis thinking right now? Is he ready to mortgage the future? Does he want to make a big splash? Is he willing to trade Cory Schneider? What about Mason Raymond? I don’t know what Mike Gillis is thinking but I can make some guesses.

What roster players is he willing to give up?

I don’t think that Mike Gillis is willing to give up much. Mason Raymond is likely available, if he can acquire a grittier winger to play on the 2nd line. Cory Schneider could be available, but only for a king’s ransom. The only way Schneider goes is if they get a top 3 defenceman (similar to Edler/Hamhuis/Bieksa quality) or a 30 goal scoring winger with grit. I don’t see that happening, so I think Schneider stays. I also think that Mike Gillis is extra hesitant to give up Schneider because he’s probably a little bit nervous about Roberto Luongo in the playoffs.

Is he ready to mortgage the future?

A lot of teams decide to ‘mortgage the future’ on deadline day, and usually it backfires. The LA Kings did that last year when they gave up a former 1st round pick and a 2011 1st and 3rd round pick for Dustin Penner. Of course, mortgaging the future can work sometimes, as it did when Dallas acquired Joe Nieuwendyk from the Flames for Jarome Iginla. Obviously Calgary won that trade in the long run, but Nieuwendyk was a key member of Dallas’ Stanley Cup winning team in 1999.

I don’t believe Gillis is ready to mortgage the future in terms of giving up their top young players like Cody Hodgson or Chris Tanev. He might be convinced to give up a 1st round draft pick, but only for a serious upgrade on Mason Raymond or on their defense.

What is his greatest worry?

While I believe that Mike Gillis is a little worried about another Roberto Luongo playoff meltdown (aren’t we all?), I think he’s most worried about a run of injuries on defense. Keith Ballard is injured with either a neck injury or a concussion, so his timetable is uncertain. He also has to expect that Sami Salo will suffer an injury somewhere along the line. Salo has had an excellent season, but you always need Sami Salo insurance.

Who is he targeting?

I think Mike Gillis has three realistic targets as he gets close to the deadline: a gritty 2nd line winger that can score, a gritty 4th liner and a top 5 defenceman. Some players I believe Gillis might try to acquire are David Jones (Colorado), Travis Moen (Montreal), Bryan Allen (Carolina) and Greg Zanon (Minnesota). Here’s some more info about them:

David Jones

At 6’2″, 210 lbs, Jones would give the Canucks some more size and grit on their 2nd or 3rd line. He scored 27 goals last year and he’s only 27 years old. Jones is also from North Vancouver, so there’s that. Jones doesn’t come without question marks though, he’s had an off year this year, on pace for only 20 goals. He’s also averaging less ice time this year than he has in three years. Jones makes $2.5 million this year and is slated to become an unrestricted free agent at season’s end. For all of those reasons I think that Colorado may be willing to part with him, even though they are still in a playoff race.

Travis Moen

Moen is 6’2″, 217 lbs and has a Stanley Cup ring. He’s on pace for 15 goals this year and is one of Montreal’s top penalty killers. That’s exactly what the Canucks need for their 4th line, with perhaps an ability to go to play on their 3rd line as well. Moen will be an unrestricted free agent at the end of the season which means he’s likely on his way out of town, playing on a non-playoff team like Montreal.

Bryan Allen

A former first round pick by the Canucks all those years ago, Allen is now 31 years old and slated to become an unrestricted free agent at the end of the season. Allen is huge, 6’5″ and 226 lbs, but offers very little offensively. Think of him as an upgrade on Andrew Alberts. Allen hasn’t played a playoff game since he was with the Canucks in 2004 and would likely welcome a return back to Vancouver. With everyone healthy, Allen would probably sit #7 on the Canucks depth chart, behind Keith Ballard and Chris Tanev.

Greg Zanon

I’m a big believer in bringing BC boys to the team. I think for BC boys playing for the Canucks for the first time gives them a boost of energy, causing them to play better. Zanon is from Burnaby, he’s 31 and is 5’11″ and 202 lbs. With the Wild destined to miss the playoffs, the Wild will probably want to unload the pending unrestricted free agent. Zanon isn’t having a banner year in Minnesota, but he’s a capable top 6 defenceman that can kill penalties and block a lot of shots. At worst, he would be a nice insurance policy should the Canucks defense corps run into injury problems.

Nobody is ever really sure what Mike Gillis is thinking. I don’t think anyone predicted Max Lapierre or Chris Higgins getting traded to Vancouver last February, but they turned out to be great fits with the Canucks. I have a sneaking suspicion that Gillis might do the same thing this year.

Mats Sundin’s #13 banner was raised to the rafters of the Air Canada Centre in Toronto on Saturday night, and it made me think back to his time in Vancouver. Sundin, as you might remember, spent half a season in blue and green during the 2008-09 season. The Mats Sundin that Canucks fans got to see, at age 38, wasn’t of hall of fame caliber but he wasn’t a bust either.

Sundin struggled initially in Vancouver, trying to get back into game shape. He finished the regular season with only 28 points in 41 games, playing on the Canucks second line. But I get annoyed with anyone who compares Sundin to Mark Messier, whom the Canucks signed in 1997. The Messier experiment was a complete disaster, as the Canucks did anything but flourish with #11 in the lineup. The team under Messier’s leadership became divided early on, and was promptly dismantled after the arrival of the Moose. Messier was brought in to be the Canucks’ captain, first line centre and help lead the team to a Stanley Cup. Instead, they were one of the worst teams in the NHL. Sundin, on the other hand, was brought in to be the Canucks’ second line centre, and bolster their team for a long playoff run.

Mats Sundin’s regular season numbers weren’t exactly eye popping, but it was in the playoffs where Sundin showed his true value. I think a lot of people forget that Sundin played his best hockey as a Canuck in the playoffs. Sundin put up 8 points in 8 games, putting him behind only Daniel and Henrik Sedin on the team. Sundin’s best game was probably game 6 versus Chicago in the second round, which might have been remembered more glowingly in these parts had Roberto Luongo been able to stop a puck in the third period.

Perhaps the real legacy of Mats Sundin was what he taught his teammates. It has been said that he encouraged Ryan Kesler to shoot the puck more (it seems hard to remember a time where Kesler didn’t love shooting the puck now), and perhaps Kesler is better for it. Many people around the Canucks organization have said that Sundin was a good influence in terms of showing his teammates how he prepares for games. The following season, Daniel and Henrik Sedin rose to superstardom and Ryan Kesler became a Selke Trophy finalist. Nobody knows for certain if Sundin helped them reach that status, but it’s certainly plausible. And for that reason, the Sundin experiment was a success.

If you enjoy this blog, be sure to like us on Facebook!

It goes without saying that finishing first in the conference is very important, but it’s likely going to be a lot more advantageous this year than last. Last year, the reward for finishing in first place was a date with the Chicago Blackhawks. I don’t think I need to remind anyone how hard that turned out to be.

Taking a look at the Western Conference standings as it looks today, the 8th place team is likely to be one of Phoenix, Calgary or Dallas. Colorado and Minnesota are also in the mix, but I don’t think they have what it takes to ultimately secure the final playoff spot. It’s also possible that Chicago or Los Angeles could slip up and finish in 8th, but I think that’s unlikely.

With a 14 point cushion on Calgary in the Northwest Division, the Canucks look like a sure bet to win their division. That ensures them a top 3 finish in the conference, but settling for 2nd or 3rd in the conference isn’t a wise state of mind.

Playing a weaker opponent in the first round is very important in order to finish off a series quickly and reduce the chance of injuries. If the Canucks finish in second spot, they would likely have to play the Los Angeles Kings. The Kings are a team that the Canucks have had  a lot of trouble with in recent years. They’re also big and physical. Avoiding the Kings and getting Phoenix or Calgary (the two most likely opponents to finish in 8th spot) would be advisable.

While Phoenix and Calgary aren’t exactly doormats, the Canucks match-up well against them. Calgary is a physical team, they have great goaltending and they have Jarome Iginla, but they’re thin everywhere else. Phoenix has the defensive coaching guru, Dave Tippett, but they don’t hold a candle to the Canucks in talent.

While it’s a bit of an obvious statement to make, it’s particularly important this year to finish in first place. The difference between the number 8 seed and the number 7 seed is likely to be immense. That’s why it’s important that the Canucks get on a roll down the stretch and surpass Detroit for top spot.

In the biggest thing to happen to this since Yahoo’s Puck Daddy blog talked about us last year, Rob The Hockey Guy has an article up on The Province’s website! You can read it on our website here or on The Province’s website here. Big thanks to Wyatt Arndt and the boys at the Legion of Blog for making it happen.

Note: This article was also featured on the Legion of Blog on The Province’s website as part of Feature Friday. Big thanks to Wyatt Arndt (better known as @TheStanchion on Twitter) for the opportunity!

Early on in head coach Alain Vigneault’s tenure with the Vancouver Canucks, he was known as a compulsive line juggler, and was criticized heavily for it. In the past two seasons, Vigneault has gotten away from line juggling, instead keeping more stability with his lines. That was, until the last 2-3 games.

Byron Bitz with the Sedins? How about Ryan Kesler on the second power play unit? Both of those moves paid off in a 4-3 win over the Nashville Predators on Tuesday. On Thursday, Vigneault threw some more names into a hat, coming up with trios that featured Duco-Hodgson-Lapierre and Raymond-Malhotra-Hansen. Those two bizarre moves got Maxim Lapierre and Manny Malhotra their first goals in 24 and 10 games respectfully.

In the short term AV has managed to spark his team, giving them a break from the monotony of an 82 game regular season. But what I am most interested in is the long term effects of this.

Now, don’t get me wrong, I don’t foresee Byron Bitz becoming a full-time linemate of Daniel and Henrik Sedin on the Canucks first line. Nor do I see Ryan Kesler getting demoted to the second unit power play. But when the playoffs roll around, the Canucks will likely need a plan B at some point. With rare exception, teams in the midst of a long playoff run face some adversity. In a lot of cases, the head coach of said team makes some kind of key lineup change that helps his team to victory.

I think most people would agree that Alex Burrows has been a great fit with the Sedins ever since he was put on their line in 2008. But what happens if their line gets shutdown? In the past AV has had two options for the Sedins: Alex Burrows and Mikael Samuelsson. In fact, Samuelsson played much of the 2010 playoff series against the Los Angeles Kings with Daniel and Henrik Sedin, and was their leading scorer in the first round. Without that critical move, the Canucks may have lost the series. Last season it was a line that featured Alex Burrows, Ryan Kesler and Mason Raymond that got the job done in game 7 versus the Chicago Blackhawks.

Perhaps if a playoff series got nasty, the Sedins would be more effective with Byron Bitz than Alex Burrows. Maybe Bitz would give the Sedins more room. Perhaps if an opponent’s top defence pairing neutralizes the Sedins, Alex Burrows would be able to contribute more with Ryan Kesler.

I don’t know if Byron Bitz is the best second option, or even the third or fourth best option to play with the Sedins, but now is the time to try it. Alain Vigneault would (rightly) be hesitant to try experimenting with new line combinations in the Stanley Cup playoffs, especially combinations that involve putting a guy with 10 career NHL goals on your top line.

So I say, keep on experimenting AV! People can call you crazy all they want, but four years ago nobody thought a former ECHL checking forward would be the perfect fit with the Sedins, did they?

There is some interesting news this week concerning the NHL possibly moving the Phoenix Coyotes to Seattle this week. More from the Vancouver Sun:

That was the puck chatter north and south of the border, after an article appeared in the Seattle Times over the weekend, stating talks between city staff and San Francisco multimillionaire Christopher Hansen about building a new arena near Safeco Field were underway, and that “National Hockey League commissioner Gary Bettman has expressed a strong interest in placing a team in Seattle, leading to widespread speculation that the financially struggling Phoenix Coyotes could be moved here.”

Of course, talk of the Coyotes moving is nothing new. People have been talking about Phoenix moving for about four years now. But there has to be a limit to the amount of money the NHL is willing to lose on the team, especially if a new/better market is available.

I have always thought that Seattle would be a great place for an NHL team given how well they support their other sports teams, the climate and their hockey history. The Seahawks, Mariners and Sonics (when they had them) did very well, all things considered. Their MLS team, the Sounders, is a model franchise. Seattle is also home to a WHL franchise, and has been for a very long time.

The possibility of Seattle getting a team has always been a pipe dream in years’ past, seeing as how they don’t have a suitable NHL arena. The Seattle Thunderbirds of the WHL played out of the Key Arena, but they had to creatively fit the ice in. When I saw a game there in the 90s, the seats behind one of the nets had to be removed. Essentially, one third of the arena’s seats is not usable for hockey.

Seattle is an excellent basketball city, but they won’t get their beloved Sonics back unless they get a new arena. If/when this happens, they will surely make the arena compatible for hockey this time around.

There’s no guarantee that the NHL would work, but it would have to be better than Phoenix or Atlanta. I think it could be as successful as San Jose as a franchise, but they should approach it in the right way. If the NHL could move into Seattle before the NBA, that would go a long way. If that isn’t possible, they probably would be wise to wait a couple of years, so to not get overshadowed by the more established NBA.

If Seattle did get an NHL team, why not name them the “Metropolitans”, after the Seattle team that won the Stanley Cup in 1917. That would be a pretty slick nickname. They might want to redesign their uniforms though.

Of course, selfishly as a Vancouverite, I would love to see Seattle get a team. Getting to see the Canucks on the road only three hours down the road? Fantastic. I’m sure I wouldn’t be the only one making a trip or two down the I-5 each season.

What would be interesting to see is if Vancouverites would make the trip to Seattle to see other teams play. Tickets would surely be considerably cheaper and easier to obtain. Fans north of the border would get more opportunities to see Sidney Crosby (assuming he plays again) and Alex Ovechkin (assuming he regains his superstardom again) play. And what about all the Leafs fans that live in Vancouver? They wouldn’t pass up another chance to see their team play, would they? There’s also a few Flames, Oilers and Habs fans in this town that would be salivating at the thought of seeing their team more often.

So make it happen Gary Bettman! Oh, and make it happen rich guy who might build the arena.

The Canucks lost another game in the shootout on Thursday night, losing the game 4-3 to the Detroit Red Wings. While they didn’t deserve to win the game based on their play in regulation time and overtime, the shootout is a different animal. It usually has very little to do with the run of play. They lost the shootout because Detroit is a much better shootout team than the Canucks.

The Canucks are one of the best teams in the NHL but they are one of the worst in shootouts. One would think that a team that boasts a Vezina trophy finalist and a lineup filled with offensive talent would be good in shootouts. Instead, Vancouver has a 3-5 record, are 19th in shooting percentage and are 5th worst in save percentage. And this is not a new problem for the Canucks, it has gone on a few years. They were 4-5 last season and 4-4 the year before and 3-7 the year before that. So what gives?

No Go-To Guy

The shooters that beat Roberto Luongo on Thursday night were Pavel Datsyuk and Jiri Hudler. That should come as no surprise, as these are the Red Wings’ go-to guys in the shootout. The Wings have played in 6 shootouts and Datsyuk and Hudler have shot in every single one of them. If they needed a 3rd shooter, Todd Bertuzzi would have been called upon.

The Canucks quite simply don’t have a go-to guy in the shootout. Mason Raymond and Alex Edler were given the assignment on Thursday, but they don’t shoot all the time. Alex Burrows and Cody Hodgson have shot most often, but they have only shot in 5 of their 8 shootouts.

Alain Vigneault

Alain Vigneault does not stop pucks or score goals, and if he had a guy like Pavel Datsyuk in his lineup he would get questioned a whole lot less. But with that being said, Vigneault has done a poor job of giving his team the best chance of winning in the shootout.

Vigneault needs to recognize who his best shootout performers are, and stick with them. Too often he has played hunches or given opportunities to players just because they are having a good game. What he ought to be doing is identifying his top guys and turning them into shootout specialists. The Canucks’ shooters were never more consistent than when Kyle Wellwood and Pavol Demitra were trotted out in each game, despite their play in regulation time. Last year AV failed to recognize Jeff Tambellini as his best shootout option, as he didn’t select him every game despite his excellent career shooting percentage.

This year, Vigneault needs to realize that Cody Hodgson and Alex Burrows are his two best shootout specialists. Burrows and Hodgson are each 2/5 in the shootout this year and consistently put forth a great effort. A lot of fans and media have been suggesting that Vigneault give Daniel and Henrik Sedin another chance. Perhaps Daniel should get the odd opportunity (after Hodgson and Burrows), but Henrik has put forth some of the worst shootout attempts I have ever seen (including this one).

Roberto Luongo

Quite simply, Roberto Luongo needs to be better. He is too good of a goalie to perform this poorly in the shootout. Luongo has a respectable career shootout save percentage at .663. Currently this year, Luongo has a .476 SV% in the shootout.

Luongo is 49th out of 57 NHL goalies in save percentage. He appears lost in the net, biting on every fake and getting beaten by any decent shooter. But it didn’t used to be this way.

In Luongo’s first season in Vancouver (2006-07), he was pretty good in the shootout. He had the 25th best shootout save percentage out of 71 goalies. Lu was even better the following two seasons (07-08, 08-09), but has seen his shootout save percentage drop in each of the last three seasons.

It appears that either Luongo’s reactions are starting to slow down with age, or shooters have a book on him.

Luongo might want to consider shifting the way he approaches the shootout. Unlike some other goalies, Luongo treats a shootout attempt the same as a breakaway. He stays reactive to the shooter and doesn’t make the first move or keep the shooter guessing. While this is probably the best way to play a breakaway, it leaves him prone to shootout attempts when players walk-in with pre-planned moves in mind. A lot of the successful shootout goalies keep the shooter guessing by utilizing the poke check or mixing up their positioning.

Shootout Philosophy

As I have already outlined, I believe the Canucks should identify their top shootout players, and run with them. This should be done with at least 2 of their first 3 shooters. Even though the Canucks don’t have a stud in the shootout like Pavel Datsyuk or Jonathan Toews, they can still identify a specialist or two.

Maybe above all, the Canucks need to treat the shootout seriously. That means practicing it and scouting it. The Canucks ought to be scouting goalie and shooter tendencies. It boggles my mind every time I see Alex Burrows walk-in and score with the same old move on opposing teams. I mean, if I know the move he’s going to do, how is it that NHL teams don’t?

Perhaps the Canucks already do a lot of scouting for the shootout, but it doesn’t appear so.

The good news out of all of this is that there are no shootouts in the playoffs. But the shootout can be the difference between finishing first, second or third in the conference, and that can be the difference in who hoists the Stanley Cup in June.

Whenever there’s less than a month to go before the NHL trade deadline (February 27 this year), there are bound to be lots of wild rumours bouncing off the walls. One such wild rumour had Corey Perry on his way to the Vancouver Canucks for Corey Schneider, Keith Ballard and Mason Raymond. This is of course a ridiculous trade, one that doesn’t meet the Ducks needs at all. Yet, somehow there were a lot of Canucks fans that didn’t want the reasonably priced, highly skilled and gritty Hart Trophy winner from a year ago in exchange for a back-up goalie, sixth defenceman and third line winger. But I digress.

There’s always a lot of names that get tossed around before the trade deadline, but when Bob McKenzie brings up a name, people take notice. Bob McKenzie is reporting that Brenden Morrow may become available before the trade deadline. If Morrow becomes available, Mike Gillis will surely be one of the first people in line to put forth an offer.

McKenzie goes on to note that Brendan Morrow has a no trade clause and that Dallas may not ask him to waive it should they get closer to a playoff spot. But if things go bad in the next three weeks, and if Morrow wants a chance to win a Stanley Cup, maybe something could be done. Morrow makes $4.1 million this year and next.

Morrow is exactly what the Canucks need. He is a great bodychecker and can score. Apart from that, he has loads of leadership and experience.

Now, what it would take to get Morrow could be another story. If Dallas ownership (Tom Gaglardi, arch nemesis of Canucks owner Francesco Aquilini) decides to meddle, then a deal could be quashed before it begins. If not, the asking price would likely be high, despite the fact that Morrow is having a disappointing season and is 33 years old. But Morrow brings more than just stats to the table, as long as he’s healthy.

Hypocrite (noun):

a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, especially a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.

Take it away Jon Stewart!

Two lackluster outings in a row on home ice as the Canucks continue to struggle without the concussed Sami Salo and Alain Vigneault has had enough. The Canucks announced on Wednesday that they would be re-calling defenceman Chris Tanev from the AHL.

Tanev is getting the recall despite the fact that the Canucks have seven other healthy defencemen on their roster. Salo has been out for five games and this move signals to me that Chris Tanev is not getting an audition as a spare part on the Canucks, rather he is getting an audition to be a major part of the team going forward.

The plan all along this season was to bring Chris Tanev along slowly. He looked calm and cool under pressure in 25 regular season and 5 playoff games with the Canucks, but he is still only two years removed from playing with the Rochester Institute of Technology. The Canucks wanted to ensure that he got a lot of ice time and got a chance to play in all situations in the AHL.

Now with the injury to Sami Salo, there is a gaping hole at right defence. Even when Salo returns, there will be a bit of a gap on the right side, as Kevin Bieksa and Sami Salo are the only right handed shots with the big club. Chris Tanev, as you might have guessed, also shoots right. Thus far the Canucks have chosen to play with one defenceman playing the ‘wrong side’ on their third pairing.

The Canucks ought to be in the market for a top 4 defenceman (as insurance if and when Sami Salo gets hurt again), but perhaps Chris Tanev can be that guy. Certainly they have big plans for him down the road, but maybe the future is now for the 22 year old. Just like how Ryan Kesler’s injury in October gave Cody Hodgson his chance to prove himself, this injury to Salo may offer the same for Tanev.

Alain Vigneault may choose to give Tanev time on the third pairing and play him sparingly, but I don’t think he will or should. This audition for Tanev should be to see if he can play with Alex Edler on the second pairing. Chris Tanev, your time is now.