Trade potential?
Moderator: Referees
Trade potential?
Im not one for making proposals. I rather find it silly on CDC how they go about it.
however with the recent signing of Mark Recchi in Tampa that give them 14 forwards.
add to that Brandon Bochenski who also just signed there.
I was reading on Spectors about the latest signings and he mentioned the two most likely candidates to move are Michelle Oulette and Jussi Jokien.
Oulette is a 200 pound RW and Jokien a LW that has the touch in shootouts.
Oulette career high is 19 goals and Jokiens is 17 2 years ago. both are young
Bernier and Oulette on the RW would solidify that postion for the next 4 years and Jokien would come in handy on the shootouts that killed us last year (maybe put us in the playoffs last year)
Tampa Bay needs defense. we need offense.
I would be willing to part with Bieksa and a prospect for Jokien and Oulette.
is that too much? too little? I think Bieksa and a draft pick is good but not sure if many would agree which is why I put in the prospect.
however with the recent signing of Mark Recchi in Tampa that give them 14 forwards.
add to that Brandon Bochenski who also just signed there.
I was reading on Spectors about the latest signings and he mentioned the two most likely candidates to move are Michelle Oulette and Jussi Jokien.
Oulette is a 200 pound RW and Jokien a LW that has the touch in shootouts.
Oulette career high is 19 goals and Jokiens is 17 2 years ago. both are young
Bernier and Oulette on the RW would solidify that postion for the next 4 years and Jokien would come in handy on the shootouts that killed us last year (maybe put us in the playoffs last year)
Tampa Bay needs defense. we need offense.
I would be willing to part with Bieksa and a prospect for Jokien and Oulette.
is that too much? too little? I think Bieksa and a draft pick is good but not sure if many would agree which is why I put in the prospect.
-
- MVP
- Posts: 77
- Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 9:31 pm
I don't think people are writing Bieksa off, on the contrary, I think people think that he's about our only really attractive asset that other teams would want that we could afford to move because of the strength of our defense. That said, I'm not sure I'd move him, maybe for both those guys, but not with a prospect, and I might not even like this trade straight across.
Mark
- Linden Is God
- CC Hall of Fan Member
- Posts: 1950
- Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 1:58 pm
- Location: Timmins, Ontario
If Tampa offered both for Bieksa, i think i would probably do it already.. i have written him off already... im kidding.. anyways i think this would be a great trade. I am still very high on bieksa... although his contract is in the same neighbhorhood as jeff finger meaning he only played so many games and got a huge.. possibly deserved raise. But like Matty said. We need offense. I really think with Lu back there we could stand to have a possibly softer d. Only of course if our offence is in gear.
I really think that Oulette is a capable winger. That could solidify our second line right wing role for a few years. And Jokinen would be great as a forward that could jump around. He has flashes of talent and has always been terrific in the shootout. I think we could have used a guy like him last year. I really think i would make this trade. If that rumour was true about eric cole. i know oullette isn't eric cole but getting a second forward in the deal with some offensive upside i think would be a good fit.
I really think that Oulette is a capable winger. That could solidify our second line right wing role for a few years. And Jokinen would be great as a forward that could jump around. He has flashes of talent and has always been terrific in the shootout. I think we could have used a guy like him last year. I really think i would make this trade. If that rumour was true about eric cole. i know oullette isn't eric cole but getting a second forward in the deal with some offensive upside i think would be a good fit.
- the Cunning Linguist
- CC 1st Team All-Star
- Posts: 599
- Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 9:18 am
- Location: If not in here then offthepost.ORG...
- Contact:
I don't see how trading BXA and not getting a Top 6 dman back is a step forward - we'd eventually have to find a replacement on the Top 6... So we rob Peter to pay Paul. Given the age and fragility of Salo, Ohlund and even Mitchell, a 7th and 8th defenceman with experience is a must...
Ohlund/Salo
Edler/Mitchell
Krajicek/ ?
McIver, Baumer, ????
Ohlund/Salo
Edler/Mitchell
Krajicek/ ?
McIver, Baumer, ????
- Linden Is God
- CC Hall of Fan Member
- Posts: 1950
- Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 1:58 pm
- Location: Timmins, Ontario
- Mikodat
- CC 1st Team All-Star
- Posts: 604
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 11:58 am
- Location: Victoria
- Contact:
<i> I think Bieksa and a draft pick is good but not sure if many would agree which is why I put in the prospect.</i>
Agree , it would be a good trade both ways. And our cap hit would be minimum. Bieksa at 3.75 mill is not a bargain ... We still got Salo, Mitchell, Ohlund to anchor our d.. all are better than Bieksa at this stage.. plus Edler , Krajicek who show more upside than Bieksa . I doubt they would take Krajicek instead of Bieksa.. Bieksa despite his woeful lack of defensive skills is a crowd pleaser and an offensive dman with ballzzzzz. 2 proven NHL forwards for 1 dman and a prospect sounds about right..
Agree , it would be a good trade both ways. And our cap hit would be minimum. Bieksa at 3.75 mill is not a bargain ... We still got Salo, Mitchell, Ohlund to anchor our d.. all are better than Bieksa at this stage.. plus Edler , Krajicek who show more upside than Bieksa . I doubt they would take Krajicek instead of Bieksa.. Bieksa despite his woeful lack of defensive skills is a crowd pleaser and an offensive dman with ballzzzzz. 2 proven NHL forwards for 1 dman and a prospect sounds about right..
Nuck fan Since 1970 and still no Cup
for replaceing d.. i would be surprised if Gilis doesn't add another veteran d man. Yeah i would love to keep bieksa. but you have to give up something good to get something good in return. the one thing that im not a big fan of with bieksa is that he is more so an offensive defenseman. He seems to lack alot of skill infront of our own net. Before his injury last year. He looked brutal in our own zone. Kinda like Phaneuf at times. But i still feel our team would have been alot better with him in the line up. He has game.and is a gamer.
Re: Trade potential?
A LOT of people (online and offline) seem to be comfortable with the idea of trading Bieksa. In many people's minds, Bieksa is our best bargaining chip in terms of making trades (and to a large extent, I can understand that point of view).mattola wrote:
I would be willing to part with Bieksa and a prospect for Jokien and Oulette.
A lot of characteristics that make Bieksa appealing to us, (i.e. grit, toughness, relatively young, leadership, power play ability, etc.) will also be of appeal to other teams.
Here is take on it however:
IF you are going to trade Kevin Bieksa, do NOT do it for the following....
a) A player that is either a young prospect, or a draft pick. With Luongo here for 2 more years, Canucks need to be focusing on winning NOW. Canucks are NOT in a rebuilding stage, and should only be looking to add pieces in hopes of becoming a legit contender.
b) A One-for-One player-for-player swap with a forward. Trading Bieksa one for one for a forward, will probably only land us with a player of Taylor Pyatt's ability (or slightly above that). Ultimately - all you are doing here, is strengthening one asset (offense), while depleting another (defense). Making a trade doesn't necessarily make you better....it can just make you different. Our 2005/2006 record, in comparison with our 2007/2008 record, is tremendous evidence of that. Another thing to keep in mind - we saw how our defense was decimated with injuries last season. In this sense, why further deplete our defense and make us even MORE susceptible to injury? Salo and Ohlund have had injury problems for multiple years now...and they aren't getting younger.
IF you are going to trade away a guy like Kevin Bieksa, put him in a part of a package deal (i.e. with draft picks and/or prospects). With this package, you can then either get an upgrade on defense (which further adds to our defensive prowess), OR help up front (so despite our defense being depleted, our offensive prowess has made a SIGNIFICANT upgrade).
That way - even if our defense were to be decimated with injuries (as was the case last year), our offense (and Luongo) would still be dangerous enough to compensate for that.