[Trade] Markus Granlund to Van for Shinkaruk

[DazzlinDino]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

Haha...Dreger knows nothing and now he's actually admitting it. What a maroon.

Must be bother him that no one let him in. Good for the parties involved for keeping things under wraps!

[chummer]

To be fair, did anyone know that Granlund or Shinkaruk were in play?

[Royle9]

Originally Posted by chummer

To be fair, did anyone know that Granlund or Shinkaruk were in play?

Weisbrod and Feaster

[dammage79]

After 24 hours, I like this trade even more. Has nothing to do with how mad Canucks fans are, thats just a bonus. More to do with the fact that the Flames went after a goal scorer. Shinkaruk may or may not make it but at least they're trying to get more shot driven thinkers into the line up. After watching the playmaking olympics failure in ANA the other night where everyone was thinking pass first, it'll be nice to see a shooter get a chance to change things up a bit.

[868904]

Even prior to the trade, many Flames fans thought that Granlund was stuck as a tweener. Because of his size and skating, he didn't fit the checking roles, and he needed to produce more offense to fit into a top 6 role. I've been saying the Flames needed to try him on the wing, especially opposite a playmaker like Gaudreau. According to Treliving, they tried this in the AHL and it wasn't all that great.

As for Shinkaruk, Canuck fans are still bewildered with the trade. They just don't understand the rush to trade him especially for a guy who will have to clear waivers next year. It really looks to me that Benning and Weisbrod really don't like him, which is weird because he is essentially the same player as Baertschi. I guess Weisbrod just wants his guys.

I'm also in the camp that thinks the Canucks are trying to land Drouin, and acquiring another centre like Granlund allows them to trade a Horvat or McCann, which I think would be required in a package. A McCann and Hamhuis package might get them Drouin.

[868904]

One other thing I like about Shinkaruk is the fact that he plays LW, the same position as Gaudreau. It really allows the coaching staff to structure a second line that is similar to the first line. May make systems work easier when you have similar players.

The way it is looking, a system that allows the LWers more freedom would make sense, when you consider that moving forward, the LWers are Gaudreau, Shinkaruk, Ferland, and Bouma.

You let Gaudreau and Shinkaruk loose on offense, and you let Ferland and Bouma loose on the forecheck.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by 868904

It really looks to me that Benning and Weisbrod really don't like him, which is weird because he is essentially the same player as Baertschi.

Not only Benning likes Baertchi and dislikes Shinkaruk, but also Treliving likes Shinkaruk and does not like Baertchi.

Are they really all that similiar though? From what I read, Shinkaruk is tenacious about fighting for the puck and also has a great shot. Baertchi was nothing like this, he was more like playmaker with good stickhandling and speed.

[Bingo]

Found a snippet about Granlund in the Predators game story (notorious Wideman game)

"I was all but ready to give up on Markus Granlund after the most recent road trip. He’s just not big enough to play a skill role, the pucks were sliding off his stick and he was losing too many battles. Have to admit he was better tonight though. Plays were actually created on his stick instead of dying as we've seen often lately."

had a positive tone but certainly spoke to my view of the player for most of the season.

Good having some kernels like this when said player is traded to a rival.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Weitz

...You disagree?

Fans don't value guys until they are their own. Happens in every sport in every league.

I don't think it is fair to characterise the response among Flames fan as a belief that Shinkaruk was mismanaged and held back by the Canucks. I certainly never thought so, and have been of the opinion this year that he is an improving prospect who is not ready to play in the NHL yet.

[D as in David]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Found a snippet about Granlund in the Predators game story (notorious Wideman game)

"I was all but ready to give up on Markus Granlund after the most recent road trip. He’s just not big enough to play a skill role, the pucks were sliding off his stick and he was losing too many battles. Have to admit he was better tonight though. Plays were actually created on his stick instead of dying as we've seen often lately."

had a positive tone but certainly spoke to my view of the player for most of the season.

Good having some kernels like this when said player is traded to a rival.

Who is this quote from? Treliving?

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by D as in David

Who is this quote from? Treliving?

Bingo in a game story

[ernie]

Originally Posted by chummer

To be fair, did anyone know that Granlund or Shinkaruk were in play?

Tony Gallagher knew that Shinkaruk (and likely Gaunce) have been in play. He mentioned it last week during a pre-game that they'd been offered up in previous deals/negotiations.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by D as in David

Who is this quote from? Treliving?

Yeah that's me ... sorry if I made that unclear

Just was saying it's good to be on record sometimes when you inevitably get challenged by a Vancouver fan for flip flopping.

[united]

Oh boy, if Granlund isn't big enough to play a skill role, Johnny better change his game real quick!

[Super-Rye]

Originally Posted by chummer

To be fair, did anyone know that Granlund or Shinkaruk were in play?

I didn't see anyone report that either was being shopped, which is interesting because it sounds like Shinkaruk has been in play for a little while.

I put up a post on my blog where I felt that Granlund was the odd man out, and thought Treliving would move him before the deadline. (Although I suggested a swap with Dallas for Ritchie)

That's kinda like knowing, right?

[Bingo]

Had a look because I had a memory of Granlund coming on and then ... not.



Gets on a roll (point per game) at the end of the 2013-14 season, and carries it into the next season (2014-15) then just fizzles out around November 20th of 2014. Slides and slides and slides after that.

[genetic_phreek]

I don't understand how so many people thought Granlund was a tweener. He's not a 4th line type player, he's a top 6 player which is why he was successful in producing in the A. He was on the top 6 maybe a few games but obviously the whole team didn't improve play so he was bumped again due to waiver eligibility.

Also in terms of Shinkaruk, I don't get how people think this kid is the next coming of a sniper. His numbers aren't even much different from Granlund's other than the fact that he fills a need for wingers.

As far as I'm concerned, the only reason Calgary wins this trade is from a positional need and not because we got the "better" player.

[868904]

Originally Posted by Pointman

Not only Benning likes Baertchi and dislikes Shinkaruk, but also Treliving likes Shinkaruk and does not like Baertchi.

Are they really all that similiar though? From what I read, Shinkaruk is tenacious about fighting for the puck and also has a great shot. Baertchi was nothing like this, he was more like playmaker with good stickhandling and speed.

I don't think Treliving had a problem with Baertschi, Hartley probably did. Remember, it was Baertschi that wanted out, not the other way around. I get so tired of people saying the Flames got rid of Sven, when it was the player who forced the issue, not the other way around. With the graduation of Gaudreau last year, the organization was clearly lacking in skill wingers and Baerstchi was next in line, but he couldn't wait. In a sense, this Shinkaruk trade is Treliving replacing Baertschi; it's just ironic that it came from the Canucks.

When I say similar, I mean, smallish offensive skilled wingers who need to work on their 200 foot game. Not necessarily shooter versus playmaker.

[devo22]

Originally Posted by genetic_phreek

I don't understand how so many people thought Granlund was a tweener. He's not a 4th line type player, he's a top 6 player which is why he was successful in producing in the A.

Tweener, bottom 6, top 6 ... in the end it doesn't really matter what you call him: there's simply no way he would have been a top 6 guy in Calgary. The Flames are stacked at center (Monahan and Bennett as a 1/2, plus Backlund and Stajan who can play up and down the lineup, plus guys like Jankowski and Arnold who are better suited for bottom 6 roles), and Treliving said he didn't work on the wing.

There's a chance that Granlund can be a top 6 center somewhere, but it wasn't going to happen in Calgary. Therefore, you move him for a younger player who's a better fit positionally right now and who buys them time and flexibility. That's proper asset management, plain and simple.

[genetic_phreek]

Originally Posted by devo22

Tweener, bottom 6, top 6 ... in the end it doesn't really matter what you call him: there's simply no way he would have been a top 6 guy in Calgary. The Flames are stacked at center (Monahan and Bennett as a 1/2, plus Backlund and Stajan who can play up and down the lineup, plus guys like Jankowski and Arnold who are better suited for bottom 6 roles), and Treliving said he didn't work on the wing.

There's a chance that Granlund can be a top 6 center somewhere, but it wasn't going to happen in Calgary. Therefore, you move him for a younger player who's a better fit positionally right now and who buys them time and flexibility. That's proper asset management, plain and simple.

I don't disagree at all. I'm just saying in general because people seem to think we just stole a top guy from Vancouver for chop liver which isn't the case.