Vancouver Canucks Messageboard

DonCherry4PM wrote: ↑Tue Jul 03, 2018 3:45 pm

Strangelove wrote: ↑Tue Jul 03, 2018 10:37 am

Island Nucklehead wrote: ↑Tue Jul 03, 2018 3:25 am

Hockey Widow wrote: ↑Tue Jul 03, 2018 12:33 am Again Doc. How many positions did they give up in that swap of picks?

Why bother rehashing this again and again?

Because people (yourself included) keep repeating the myth that a pick was "pissed away" in the Sutter trade.

So rather than a pick, would you say that a "young developing player" was pissed away? Wasn't Clendening's potential "greater than any extra picks we could have had"?

Clendening was not worth even a 7th rounder at the time of the trade.

In fact he only played 9 NHL games after that trade before being waived.

We picked up Clendening because we had injuries up the yin yang

... and desperately needed a guy who could fill in as a #6 for a short time.

So no, a "young developing player" was not "pissed away"... he was a write-off.

DonCherry4PM wrote: ↑Tue Jul 03, 2018 3:45 pm Quoted portions excerpted from the below:

Strangelove wrote: ↑Sun Jul 01, 2018 1:59 pm

Blob Mckenzie wrote: ↑Sun Jul 01, 2018 1:43 pm the standard amount of picks and not one extra

... as long as ALSO other "young developing players" are coming in - YES

The overall potential of those "young developing players" that came in

... is/was greater than any extra picks we could have had.

What "extra pick/s" exactly could we have had instead of Clendening at the time of the Sutter trade?

The previous Forsling trade has nothing to do with this line of thought btw...

Also you're taking the conversation I was having with Backed-up Blob out of context.

Ronning's Ghost wrote: ↑Tue Jul 03, 2018 11:11 am

Strangelove wrote: ↑Tue Jul 03, 2018 10:45 am

Ronning's Ghost wrote: ↑Tue Jul 03, 2018 7:41 am

RoyalDude wrote: ↑Tue Jul 03, 2018 6:18 am Sutter is still a quality asset and will be a very tradeable/desirable asset after this season with 2 years remaining on a modified contract.

This feature, if it exists, is only useful if the Canucks actually do trade him. The player drafted with the pick Bonino might have returned instead could be ready to contribute now.

And if Canucks eventually trade Sutter for that exact same player after getting a few years of use out of Sutter?

Then Benning did very well to trade for a player who is presumably younger than Sutter and with more upside.

Hmmm... not sure if you missed the point there Cliffy.

Ronning's Ghost wrote: ↑Tue Jul 03, 2018 11:11 am

Strangelove wrote: ↑Tue Jul 03, 2018 10:45 am I'm the "try to focus on X-number of years from now" guy remember?

And we're now X=0, correct ? Playoffs in 2019, and looking good doing it ?

ABSOLUTELY

Blob Mckenzie wrote: ↑Tue Jul 03, 2018 6:25 pm I LOVE the foe feature. less drivel

Good thinking, perhaps now you'll have your ass handed to you on a platter less often!

So given this thread, what does everyone think of the da Haan signing.

Lol

DC4Pm just crapped on a mods neck.


Gesus someone get a blanket or a tarp

Blob Mckenzie wrote: ↑Tue Jul 03, 2018 8:17 pm Lol

DC4Pm just crapped on a mods neck.


Gesus someone get a blanket or a tarp

Obviously my old pal Blobert has me on ignore...

Hey HW, my initial thought about the de Haan signing is that Canes seemed to give a lot of term for a guy missing a lot of the last season with a shoulder injury. 4 years at 4.55 million. Adds nice depth to the Canes defence if the shoulder is ok. In terms of the Canucks, Hughes and Juelevi play on the left side and we have a bunch of others on the left too. Plus, if I was a free agent at this point the Canucks would be a lot farther down on my list so I am not sure he would have been interested in the Canucks in any event. Do you know if Benning put in an offer?

Hockey Widow wrote: ↑Tue Jul 03, 2018 8:01 pm So given this thread, what does everyone think of the da Haan signing.

I like it for the Canes for a few reasons. Probably a bit overpaid but not by much, the term is fine for a 27 year old guy and I like the fact there’s no trade protection. He’s 18 months younger than Roussel who got the same term but De Haan has some injury concerns, so assuming he checks out its a decent signing. De Haan is a 3/4 dman on most teams in this league. I would have taken him for the same money and same term as he’s a better player than Del Zotto who is likely out equivalent on the left side.

The big thing for them is they can now trade Faulk or one of their other dmen for futures or a player they want now for their roster. They have lots of flexibility and a desirable asset to move.

If Jimbo does the same with the logjam of players we have on the roster I will be much more enthused by our own signings. It’s the biggest reason why I say we have to wait for the other shoe to drop before we judge what they did on July 1st.

I wonder, if Hughes or Juolevi show they are ready for the NHL who gets moved? Would be nice to get a few more assets in the hopper for this year’s draft.

As far as I know Benning did not put an offer in for de Haan. I know his agent reached out but I think it’s clear given what we have already, the room we have to clear anyway, de Haan wasn’t a serious consideration for Benning.

Strangelove wrote: ↑Tue Jul 03, 2018 7:30 pm We picked up Clendening because we had injuries up the yin yang

... and desperately needed a guy who could fill in as a #6 for a short time.

He was picked up days before the injury epidemic hit the defence.

Visionary

Topper wrote: ↑Wed Jul 04, 2018 5:17 pm

Strangelove wrote: ↑Tue Jul 03, 2018 7:30 pm We picked up Clendening because we had injuries up the yin yang

... and desperately needed a guy who could fill in as a #6 for a short time.

He was picked up days before the injury epidemic hit the defence.

Visionary

He was picked up days before the extent of injuries were known. We were hurting pretty bad back there. But I hated the trade anyway.

Griffith Molino signs with Marlies. Toronto likes our castoffs.

Stromer re-signs.

Ryan Strome's two-year extension with the #Oilers carries a $3.1M AAV.

MA Fleury extended in Vegas, 3-years, $21M. Keeps him in the desert until he's 36.

Canadiens sign newly acquired Joel Armia to a 1-year, $1.85M contract.

Island Nucklehead wrote: ↑Fri Jul 13, 2018 9:09 am MA Fleury extended in Vegas, 3-years, $21M. Keeps him in the desert until he's 36.

Canadiens sign newly acquired Joel Armia to a 1-year, $1.85M contract.

$7M a year for MAF, imo you should try to lock up your #1 goalie to under $6M per long term so you can keep more cap space for your centers and top dmen, some depth.

Similar to what the LA Kings did with Quick $5.8M per.