Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO
Moderator: Referees
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO
I'm just trying to win a debate! To do that I have to be savage and ruthless.
With that comes some shots at our dmen, but make no mistake these guys have value.
What's scaring suitors away from Seabrook is the contract, why the price will go down for his services.
I just want more size, veteran leadership and a guy who can get points on our top 6 D, tired of the Edler's, Tanev's and Gud's lack of scoring, with rookies Hutton and Stecher slowly coming along.
Pipsqueak Subban might be able to score, but christ can this team ever have some beef and scoring ability? Our entire team is on the small side, bean poles, might as well be team China.
2015/16 season points:
Chicago - Seabrook - 49 pts
Florida - Gudbranson - 13
Fedun - 1
Tryamkin - 2
Biega - 7
Weber - 7
Sbisa - 8
Hamhuis - 13
Tanev - 18
Bartkowski - 18
Edler - 20
Hutton - 24
2016/17 points:
Chicago - Seabrook - 39 pts ($6.875m)
Biega - 3
Guds - 6 (turned down $4.5m per by Panthers with ultra low income tax)
Larsen - 6
Tryamkin - 9
Tanev - 10 ($4.45m)
Sbisa - 13
Hutton - 19
Edler - 21 ($5m)
Stecher - 24
Edler would be difficult to move and get good value back, due to NTC, but worth a shot? If not he and Stecher on the 2nd pairing would be ideal, Edler with a lesser role would do better imo (might even increase his trade value), same with Stecher who can be used more in the offensive zone, sheltered from the top pairing.
Tanev and Gudbranson can be dealt anywhere no problem (as they lack any NTC protection) so we can get much more flexibility on them, Chicago a analytics team probably would love Tanev to lower their cap hit.
Gudbranson could be dealt to Toronto as they want to shore up their pathetic defense, probably can get their first rounder + prospect as they are hungry to improve quickly after getting a taste of the playoffs and defeat.
I mean you guys are tired of the wasted money on the Sutter's (4.375m), Dorsett's (2.65m), Sbisa's (3.6m), why not give the extra coin on a Seabrook instead? Combine Sutter and Dorsett contract and you got a Seabrook. *drops mic*
With that comes some shots at our dmen, but make no mistake these guys have value.
What's scaring suitors away from Seabrook is the contract, why the price will go down for his services.
I just want more size, veteran leadership and a guy who can get points on our top 6 D, tired of the Edler's, Tanev's and Gud's lack of scoring, with rookies Hutton and Stecher slowly coming along.
Pipsqueak Subban might be able to score, but christ can this team ever have some beef and scoring ability? Our entire team is on the small side, bean poles, might as well be team China.
2015/16 season points:
Chicago - Seabrook - 49 pts
Florida - Gudbranson - 13
Fedun - 1
Tryamkin - 2
Biega - 7
Weber - 7
Sbisa - 8
Hamhuis - 13
Tanev - 18
Bartkowski - 18
Edler - 20
Hutton - 24
2016/17 points:
Chicago - Seabrook - 39 pts ($6.875m)
Biega - 3
Guds - 6 (turned down $4.5m per by Panthers with ultra low income tax)
Larsen - 6
Tryamkin - 9
Tanev - 10 ($4.45m)
Sbisa - 13
Hutton - 19
Edler - 21 ($5m)
Stecher - 24
Edler would be difficult to move and get good value back, due to NTC, but worth a shot? If not he and Stecher on the 2nd pairing would be ideal, Edler with a lesser role would do better imo (might even increase his trade value), same with Stecher who can be used more in the offensive zone, sheltered from the top pairing.
Tanev and Gudbranson can be dealt anywhere no problem (as they lack any NTC protection) so we can get much more flexibility on them, Chicago a analytics team probably would love Tanev to lower their cap hit.
Gudbranson could be dealt to Toronto as they want to shore up their pathetic defense, probably can get their first rounder + prospect as they are hungry to improve quickly after getting a taste of the playoffs and defeat.
I mean you guys are tired of the wasted money on the Sutter's (4.375m), Dorsett's (2.65m), Sbisa's (3.6m), why not give the extra coin on a Seabrook instead? Combine Sutter and Dorsett contract and you got a Seabrook. *drops mic*
Can the Canucks just win a Cup within the next 5 years.
- Hockey Widow
- CC Legend
- Posts: 19129
- Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO
SKYO
All parties involved have said it is absolutely false that the Panthers offered Gudbranson $4.5 nor did he turn down such an offer. It was Florida media speculation that that's probably what the Panthers would offer and he would probably decline it.
He said he was fine with the bridge deal he got and that they had not progressed past that point.
As for Seabrook, I just don't get the clamouring to trade Tanev and Edler for assets/picks then bring in a high paid guy who is on the backside of his career.
Trade one of Edler
Tanev
Sbisa
Sign another bridge deal for Gudbranson.
If Green is the coach, well he really likes Pedan and has been saying all season he should be in the NHL. Under Green I think he gets a long long look and may become that mean Russian we want. At least he has no problem playing a ballsy game.
Subban will get an NHL look under Green but he also knows Subban's game, warts and all. He has said he still needs to develop the D side of his game to be effective and play more min in the AHL, never mind the NHL.
Vegas could surprise us and take Pedan.
All parties involved have said it is absolutely false that the Panthers offered Gudbranson $4.5 nor did he turn down such an offer. It was Florida media speculation that that's probably what the Panthers would offer and he would probably decline it.
He said he was fine with the bridge deal he got and that they had not progressed past that point.
As for Seabrook, I just don't get the clamouring to trade Tanev and Edler for assets/picks then bring in a high paid guy who is on the backside of his career.
Trade one of Edler
Tanev
Sbisa
Sign another bridge deal for Gudbranson.
If Green is the coach, well he really likes Pedan and has been saying all season he should be in the NHL. Under Green I think he gets a long long look and may become that mean Russian we want. At least he has no problem playing a ballsy game.
Subban will get an NHL look under Green but he also knows Subban's game, warts and all. He has said he still needs to develop the D side of his game to be effective and play more min in the AHL, never mind the NHL.
Vegas could surprise us and take Pedan.
The only HW the Canucks need
- Island Nucklehead
- MVP
- Posts: 8392
- Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:27 pm
- Location: Ottawa
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO
It also helps have a good argument.SKYO wrote:I'm just trying to win a debate! To do that I have to be savage and ruthless.
For all the reasons given by various posters (age, contract, NMC, team performance, team outlook) you continue to harp on the same things. You have made your points, and others have refuted them.
- Blob Mckenzie
- MVP
- Posts: 31126
- Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
- Location: Oakalla
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO
Trading Tanev will be enough to ensure a bottom 3 finish. No need to trade your three best defencemen unless you want to see 60 shots against every night.Iceman2014 wrote:Oh my. Where was my brain?! What was I thinking?!?!?! I am SO STUPID! Yes, let's keep those guys. We are already a powerhouse team. Canucks finished 29th. Let's keep, primarily, the same team and push for 28. Hell, let's shoot for the moon and aim for 20th! Yes, the future would also look bright with all those young, high end players coming up from the farm and our awesome Sedin succession plan. What was I thinking?! Silly me!Blob Mckenzie wrote:Shattenkirk would have zero interest in coming to Vancouver
Trade two or three of Tanev, Edler and Hutton. Why exactly? I guess Gudbranson ,Biega, Stecher and Sbisa is a great top 4 defence . Subban and Pedan can play on the bottom pairing and Mcaneny and Sautner can round out the top 8. Should be good.
It's nice to see you and the Shatt are so tight where you could definitively answer for him. Also, there aren't a ton of teams with the cap space to take on a big contract. Canucks will lose Miller and deal some more contracts away in my hypothesis. Canucks will have room!
Why the hell woild Shattenkirk want to play here ? The team is terrible, it's got a meh prospect pool, terrible travel , awful weather and a bipolar fan base. I'd think he may want to try and win and get paid. The Canucks aren't the only team with money.
“I don’t care what you and some other poster were talking about”
- Island Nucklehead
- MVP
- Posts: 8392
- Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:27 pm
- Location: Ottawa
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO
And not even that much of it...Blob Mckenzie wrote: Why the hell woild Shattenkirk want to play here ? The team is terrible, it's got a meh prospect pool, terrible travel , awful weather and a bipolar fan base. I'd think he may want to try and win and get paid. The Canucks aren't the only team with money.
Capfriendly has us at 16 roster spots for next year with $17M to spend. Horvat and Gudbranson need contracts. Is Miller coming back? Gaunce/Cramarosa/Boucher/Chaput/Pedan could eat up $4-$5M combined.
So yeah, we could trade Edler for picks and have enough to overpay Shattenkirk, but for a team of our calibre it would have to be a pretty big overpay. If the Rangers offer $6.5M, we'd probably have to cough up closer to $8M...
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO
It was a valiant effort by you IN, salute. We shall agree to disagree.Island Nucklehead wrote:It also helps have a good argument.SKYO wrote:I'm just trying to win a debate! To do that I have to be savage and ruthless.
For all the reasons given by various posters (age, contract, NMC, team performance, team outlook) you continue to harp on the same things. You have made your points, and others have refuted them.
Cue Jayz: Onto the next one.
Pedan, Subban don't know to think of them as NHL pro's just yet, WD didn't care for em that's for sure.Hockey Widow wrote: Trade one of Edler
Tanev
Sbisa
Sign another bridge deal for Gudbranson.
In any case yes JB will in all likelyhood re-sign Guds and hopefully deal one of Edler or Tanev to continue on the rebuild...monday morning, hook the coffee up to my veins.
Can the Canucks just win a Cup within the next 5 years.
- Cousin Strawberry
- MVP
- Posts: 26169
- Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:19 pm
- Location: in the shed with a fresh packed bowl
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO
Island Nucklehead wrote:Gaunce/Cramarosa/Boucher/Chaput
Is there seriously nobody else in our organization?
If you need air...call it in
- Island Nucklehead
- MVP
- Posts: 8392
- Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:27 pm
- Location: Ottawa
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO
lol I'm glad you asked UDL. Drew Shore, Anton Rodin, Mike Zalewksy, Evan McEneny, Tom Nilsson and Joseph Labate are also RFA's.Uncle dans leg wrote:Island Nucklehead wrote:Gaunce/Cramarosa/Boucher/Chaput
Is there seriously nobody else in our organization?
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO
I don't think we've ever been an attractive destination for marquis free agents, and that certainly won't change this offseason.Mëds wrote: I don't think we are going to be an attractive destination for any marquis free agents for at least 3 more seasons.
We only have a shot when the player for whatever reason really wants to come here - Hamhuis, Demitra, Eriksson. Otherwise we overpay - Miller, Sundin.
High taxes, brutal media who love to stir the shit-pot, high cost of living - even the Roxy can't outweigh that.
- Todd Bersnoozi
- CC Legend
- Posts: 3724
- Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2005 4:14 pm
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO
I'd only consider Seabrook for 2 reasons:SKYO wrote: What's scaring suitors away from Seabrook is the contract, why the price will go down for his services.
I just want more size, veteran leadership and a guy who can get points on our top 6 D, tired of the Edler's, Tanev's and Gud's lack of scoring, with rookies Hutton and Stecher slowly coming along.
a) If he's a UFA
or
b) We're a contender and we need a guy like him to push us over the top.
a) I'd be totally game to go for him if he's a UFA. I'd much rather give a guy like Seabrook a fat long term contract over a guy like Eriksson.
b) Right now, Seabrook will cost us a shitload to try to acquire a player like that. As we're rebuilding, I don't see the point in giving up top picks/prospects for him. I think JB should just stay the course and keep stockpiling on picks and prospects. Hopefully a couple of them will turn out to be stand out players and a few of them will turn out to be solid NHLers. Also, even though our D has its problems and losing Tryamkin didn't help, we need offense and some scorers up front more than anything. I'm actually fine with our D core for the time being.
-
- CC 2nd Team All-Star
- Posts: 275
- Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2014 12:13 pm
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO
SKYO wrote:I'm just trying to win a debate! To do that I have to be savage and ruthless.
With that comes some shots at our dmen, but make no mistake these guys have value.
What's scaring suitors away from Seabrook is the contract, why the price will go down for his services.
I just want more size, veteran leadership and a guy who can get points on our top 6 D, tired of the Edler's, Tanev's and Gud's lack of scoring, with rookies Hutton and Stecher slowly coming along.
Pipsqueak Subban might be able to score, but christ can this team ever have some beef and scoring ability? Our entire team is on the small side, bean poles, might as well be team China.
2015/16 season points:
Chicago - Seabrook - 49 pts
Florida - Gudbranson - 13
Fedun - 1
Tryamkin - 2
Biega - 7
Weber - 7
Sbisa - 8
Hamhuis - 13
Tanev - 18
Bartkowski - 18
Edler - 20
Hutton - 24
2016/17 points:
Chicago - Seabrook - 39 pts ($6.875m)
Biega - 3
Guds - 6 (turned down $4.5m per by Panthers with ultra low income tax)
Larsen - 6
Tryamkin - 9
Tanev - 10 ($4.45m)
Sbisa - 13
Hutton - 19
Edler - 21 ($5m)
Stecher - 24
Edler would be difficult to move and get good value back, due to NTC, but worth a shot? If not he and Stecher on the 2nd pairing would be ideal, Edler with a lesser role would do better imo (might even increase his trade value), same with Stecher who can be used more in the offensive zone, sheltered from the top pairing.
Tanev and Gudbranson can be dealt anywhere no problem (as they lack any NTC protection) so we can get much more flexibility on them, Chicago a analytics team probably would love Tanev to lower their cap hit.
Gudbranson could be dealt to Toronto as they want to shore up their pathetic defense, probably can get their first rounder + prospect as they are hungry to improve quickly after getting a taste of the playoffs and defeat.
I mean you guys are tired of the wasted money on the Sutter's (4.375m), Dorsett's (2.65m), Sbisa's (3.6m), why not give the extra coin on a Seabrook instead? Combine Sutter and Dorsett contract and you got a Seabrook. *drops mic*
You've lost the debate. Sorry. You're the only one who doesn't realize it.
Botchford was on 1040 morning show and I caught his segment via clip (I don't listen to the 1040 morning show). Botch claims he chatted with Benning and Tanev is not on the table. Botch also asked where Canucks plan on getting scoring from - apparently Benning said it will come from Boeser, Goldy, Dahlen and one other player (name escapes me).
Personally, I don't think that's enough. Benning is hoping Goldy and Dahlen work out and there aren't too many other goal scorers in the system at any level. Maybe this year's first pick will step in soon. Still, that doesn't leave a lot of guaranteed scoring.
Benning needs to add more talent and Tanev could do that. I am thinking Hutton may go for some scoring depth/prospects/etc. Anyway, it's too bad he won't make a bold move and deal Tanev when the value is high and get some great prospects in return.
- BladesofSteel
- CC Hall of Fan Member
- Posts: 1852
- Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 6:29 pm
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO
Botchford.
Tanev may not be on the table, but that doesn't mean Benning isn't listening to offers.
We're talking about a club that finished in the bottom 5 two consecutive years. Just how many untouchables do you think Benning has?
This Saturday's draft lottery, followed by the expansion draft and amateur draft will paint a much clearer picture on which players Benning makes available for this summers Blockbuster.
There, I said it. Benning will make a Blockbuster this summer.
Tanev may not be on the table, but that doesn't mean Benning isn't listening to offers.
We're talking about a club that finished in the bottom 5 two consecutive years. Just how many untouchables do you think Benning has?
This Saturday's draft lottery, followed by the expansion draft and amateur draft will paint a much clearer picture on which players Benning makes available for this summers Blockbuster.
There, I said it. Benning will make a Blockbuster this summer.
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO
To make a blockbuster trade you needs some "blocks". Apart from Tanev and maybe Edler...I don't see any other pieces to move which will get us anything.BladesofSteel wrote:Botchford.
There, I said it. Benning will make a Blockbuster this summer.
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO
Remember 1-2 years from now.BladesofSteel wrote:Botchford.
Tanev may not be on the table, but that doesn't mean Benning isn't listening to offers.
We're talking about a club that finished in the bottom 5 two consecutive years. Just how many untouchables do you think Benning has?
This Saturday's draft lottery, followed by the expansion draft and amateur draft will paint a much clearer picture on which players Benning makes available for this summers Blockbuster.
There, I said it. Benning will make a Blockbuster this summer.
Scoring will magically come.
Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO
Well there are two ways to end up with 70-80 points at the end of a year.
#1 Lose a ton of 2-1 games. Good goal tending though, in it till the end.
#2 Lose a ton of 6-5 games. Team scored some nice goals though, in it till the end.
If you were paying for seats, which ?
Bet I know.....
#1 Lose a ton of 2-1 games. Good goal tending though, in it till the end.
#2 Lose a ton of 6-5 games. Team scored some nice goals though, in it till the end.
If you were paying for seats, which ?
Bet I know.....
"evolution"