IF you could have Ilya Kovalchuk for 1.5 years....would you?

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

Farhan Lalji

IF you could have Ilya Kovalchuk for 1.5 years....would you?

Post by Farhan Lalji » Fri Jan 16, 2009 7:29 pm

IF you could have Ilya Kovalchuk for 1.5 years....would you?

Let us pretend that the following has happened with the Canucks:

-By March 4th, the Canucks are somewhere between 4th and 6th place after having a pretty good February. All the hockey "pundits" out there (including regular CC posters such Sid Dithers, Madcombepilot, Dangler and Island Nucklehead, ;)) come to the agreement that if the Canucks just had that ONE extra superstar player, they would be a serious contender for the cup.

-By this time, the Ilya Kovalchuk rumors have spread like wildfire. "It's not a matter of 'if'....it's a matter of 'who,'" exclaimed the 230 lb. Bob McKenzie on TSN.

Behind the scenes, Atlanta's GM and Mike Gillis are having conversations.

Gillis: We are interested in the services of Kovalchuk. We think we have a real chance here. What do we need to give up?

Atlanta's GM: We're not sure what the exact package will be......but it's going to cost you atleast Hodgson.
.
.
.
.
.
So - here's my question to you guys: What would you be willing to give up for Ilya Kovalchuk at the trade deadline if Atlanta was having talks with Vancouver?

Keep in mind: The Canucks would Kovalchuk and for this year AND next.

User avatar
the toucan kid
CC Legend
Posts: 3923
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 10:50 am

Re: IF you could have Ilya Kovalchuk for 1.5 years....would you?

Post by the toucan kid » Fri Jan 16, 2009 7:42 pm

Yes I would do that.

Kovalchuk being made captain takes him off the market this year. So sorry Farhan, put this thread in your back pocket for next year at this time.

Farhan Lalji

Re: IF you could have Ilya Kovalchuk for 1.5 years....would you?

Post by Farhan Lalji » Fri Jan 16, 2009 8:15 pm

the toucan kid wrote:
Kovalchuk being made captain takes him off the market this year.
Can you say that with utmost certainty?

Leaves tried to move Sundin last year. Marleau was almost moved from San Jose. I am sure that there are other examples of captain's being traded (although In Kovalchuk's case, he was named captain this particular year).

User avatar
the toucan kid
CC Legend
Posts: 3923
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 10:50 am

Re: IF you could have Ilya Kovalchuk for 1.5 years....would you?

Post by the toucan kid » Fri Jan 16, 2009 8:40 pm

Yes, with as much certainty as an outsider with no particular aptitude can have.

Nobody makes someone a Captain and trades them a month later, especially because they have another year to sort it out.

dr.dork
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1771
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 9:13 am
Location: Vancouver

Re: IF you could have Ilya Kovalchuk for 1.5 years....would you?

Post by dr.dork » Fri Jan 16, 2009 8:44 pm

the toucan kid wrote:Yes, with as much certainty as an outsider with no particular aptitude can have.

Nobody makes someone a Captain and trades them a month later, especially because they have another year to sort it out.
Vinnie is being shopped after the big looooong billion dollar contract he signed and the big looooong lovefest that the owners had with him. That lovefest lasted a total of a few months.

Nothing is certain except death and losing in vegas.

Farhan Lalji

Re: IF you could have Ilya Kovalchuk for 1.5 years....would you?

Post by Farhan Lalji » Fri Jan 16, 2009 8:51 pm

dr.dork wrote:
the toucan kid wrote:Yes, with as much certainty as an outsider with no particular aptitude can have.

Nobody makes someone a Captain and trades them a month later, especially because they have another year to sort it out.
Vinnie is being shopped after the big looooong billion dollar contract he signed and the big looooong lovefest that the owners had with him. That lovefest lasted a total of a few months.

Nothing is certain except death and losing in vegas.
In Vinnie's case, I think it might have more to do with the fact that the Lightning have some major financial issues. Other than that though, I think you may be right.

User avatar
Sid Dithers
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 952
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2005 8:34 pm
Location: Surrey, B.C.

Re: IF you could have Ilya Kovalchuk for 1.5 years....would you?

Post by Sid Dithers » Fri Jan 16, 2009 10:15 pm

Are you asking if I would grab Kovalchuk as the final piece? Yes. But I'm not at all convinced the Canucks are going to be in good shape come March 4. In which case I'd still grab Kovalchuk, but as the building block for the future.

But Farhan's hypothetical really bugs me in a different way. One more piece, one more piece, one more piece. When does it become time to admit that the assembled team just isn't good enough, and barring moving half the roster out of here, they aren't going to come close to being a serious contender this year? The team you build to win a Cup is done in the summer. If it isn't in place by the time the puck drops for real in October, you're SOL. You can add a piece or two along the way, but the team largely has to be an excellent team after training camp breaks. And in 2008-2009, the Canucks ain't that.

But back to the question, no I don't move Hodgson to make it happen. No chance.
AraChniD iS stoOpiDz!

User avatar
woodhog
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 695
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 10:31 am
Location: The Great White North

Re: IF you could have Ilya Kovalchuk for 1.5 years....would you?

Post by woodhog » Fri Jan 16, 2009 11:45 pm

I don't think Kovalchuk is going anywhere anytime soon.
But hypothetically speaking, I wouldn't trade Hodgeson for anybody right now.
In this age of salary cap NHL, you need your young, cheap players to fill out the roster.
Besides, his potential is too strong to give up on IMO.
The other point is that at the deadline it is certain to cost you alot more than just Hodgeson. Perhaps a 1st pick, a roster player (Kesler?) and maybe Schneider too.

User avatar
jchockey
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1551
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 8:46 am
Location: Vancouver, BC

Re: IF you could have Ilya Kovalchuk for 1.5 years....would you?

Post by jchockey » Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:36 am

The Thrashers will keep Kovalchuk until next year if they believe they even have a smidgen of a chance to re-sign him.

User avatar
Mozy
MVP
MVP
Posts: 420
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 12:18 pm
Location: Vancouver
Contact:

Re: IF you could have Ilya Kovalchuk for 1.5 years....would you?

Post by Mozy » Sat Jan 17, 2009 4:08 pm

This is a no brainer. Yes.
Did you see the pool? They flipped the bitch

dr.dork
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1771
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 9:13 am
Location: Vancouver

Re: IF you could have Ilya Kovalchuk for 1.5 years....would you?

Post by dr.dork » Sat Jan 17, 2009 8:04 pm

Sid Dithers wrote:
But Farhan's hypothetical really bugs me in a different way. One more piece, one more piece, one more piece. When does it become time to admit that the assembled team just isn't good enough, and barring moving half the roster out of here, they aren't going to come close to being a serious contender this year?
In reality, we had one 3 week hot streak (10-12 games) in November. Other than that we have been sub-average. Injuries are an excuse after november, but not in october, and all teams have injuries.

Currently we are almost 100% healthy.

I think we can get on a hot streak and close the season strong, but only with my rose coloured glasses on. If I put my jaded blue and green glasses on we miss the playoffs.

What bugs me is we have QUIT doing the things that do NOT slump. Hitting and fighting and being a pain in the ass to play against should not slump.

Farhan Lalji

Re: IF you could have Ilya Kovalchuk for 1.5 years....would you?

Post by Farhan Lalji » Sat Jan 17, 2009 10:48 pm

dr.dork wrote:
In reality, we had one 3 week hot streak (10-12 games) in November. Other than that we have been sub-average. Injuries are an excuse after november, but not in october, and all teams have injuries.
Wow....just wow. :?

Seriously. Are you kidding me?!?!

Canucks were without Luongo for 2 months!!! Hell - We are now allowed to say that we didn't have Sundin for the 1st half year! On top of that, we've missed Demitra for an entire month (probably our 4th or 5th best overall forward), combined with injuries to Salo, Bieksa, Johnson, and some either key players (Pyatt and Rypien may not count as 'key players'...but still).

ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!?!

All teams have injuries, but how many teams have had injuries to their very best player? (and in our case, easily one of the top 10...or even top 5..players in the NHL).

Lets see how Calgary would do without Iginla for half a year, Kipper for two months, Phaneuf for one month, and some other injuries to various players. Ditto for San Jose: Thornton for half a year, Marleau for one month, and Nabakov for two. Detroit. Zetterberg for half a year, Osgood for two, Hossa for one.

What part of, WE WERE 8 FREAKING GAMES OVER .500 BEFORE LUONGO GOT INJURED do people not understand?!?!?!?

Let's see how this team does in February.

Farhan Lalji

Re: IF you could have Ilya Kovalchuk for 1.5 years....would you?

Post by Farhan Lalji » Sun Jan 18, 2009 3:37 am

Sid Dithers wrote:
But Farhan's hypothetical really bugs me in a different way. One more piece, one more piece, one more piece. When does it become time to admit that the assembled team just isn't good enough, and barring moving half the roster out of here, they aren't going to come close to being a serious contender this year?
What bugs me about your comments, are:

A) Like dr.dork and a few other posters, you are unfairly judging this team based on what they've done WITHOUT a healthy Luongo AND a non-rusty Sundin (although by this logic, I am also guilty of the same thing......only that I'm on the other side of the spectrum in terms of my optimism). It's not fair to write this Canuck team off without actually seeing what they can do with a reasonably healthy line up that INCLUDES their top players at 100% health and/or non-rustiness. By the same token, I also admittedly need to stop "counting the chickens before they've hatched." My biggest fault is that I'm a homer...I can admit that.

B) You fail to acknowledge the fact that in the playoffs, the top seeds are often NOT around when the 3rd round hits. Who cares if San Jose and Detroit are 'better' than the Canucks on paper or on the ice? (and for the record - I still don't think we can conclusively say that....given that we haven't seen the Canucks with a fully healthy and non-rusty Sundin AND Luongo leading this team)....which leads me to point 'C'

C) Look at the Edmonton Oilers from 05/06. These guys were also very mediocre for most of the year....due to the fact that they didn't have adequate goaltending. At the trade deadline, they went out and got Sergei Samsonov (bust) and Dwayne Roloson (huge piece as it turned out). By your logic, Edmonton were foolish for being buyers at the deadline since they were nowhere near being the best team. As it turned out, Dwayne f'cking Roloson literally almost was their "missing piece." Who's to say that the Canucks can't be similar to Edmonton in this regard? With a healthy/non-rusty Sundin AND Luongo...combined with another missing piece...why CAN'T the Canucks be a major major player?

D) In the past 10 seasons, here are some very NON top-tier teams that made the Stanley Cup finals:

1998: Washington Capitals
1999: Buffalo Sabres
2002: Carolina Hurricanes
2003: Anaheim Ducks
2004: Calgary Flames
2006: Edmonton Oilers

So basically, 35% of the teams that have made the cup finals within the last 10 years, have been NON-top tier teams. Lest we forget...the Vancouver Canucks from 1994. Florida Panthers from 1996 are yet another example.

E) The Canucks have the best goalie...or 2nd best goalie...in the league. This is arguably the BIGGEST reason why the Canucks will be a huge factor if they make the playoffs....assuming that Luongo gets a shred of help...unlike the 06/07 playoffs. Given how the Canucks looked earlier this season with Luongo (i.e. beating teams by shutting them down AND winning with a high scoring offense), combined with the addition of Sundin, I fail to see how ANYONE can write this team off....after *1* game of having Luongo back....a very rusty Luongo....and a very rusty Sundin, Johnson, Salo, and Pyatt.

This team needs to be judged based on how they play in February.

After that? If the Canucks fail to live up to expectations during the month of February, then guys like Madcombepilot, dr.dork, Island Knucklehead, Sid Dithers, Robert, DonCherry4PM, etc., etc. can be dismissive of the Canucks to their hearts content. Heck - I'll even join in on the party. ;)

User avatar
Island Nucklehead
MVP
MVP
Posts: 8351
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:27 pm
Location: Ottawa

Re: IF you could have Ilya Kovalchuk for 1.5 years....would you?

Post by Island Nucklehead » Sun Jan 18, 2009 11:54 am

Farhan Lalji wrote: After that? If the Canucks fail to live up to expectations during the month of February, then guys like Madcombepilot, dr.dork, Island Knucklehead, Sid Dithers, Robert, DonCherry4PM, etc., etc. can be dismissive of the Canucks to their hearts content. Heck - I'll even join in on the party. ;)
You're the one suggest a full fledged fire sale if we fall out of contention Farhan...


A few points on your past two posts:

I agree with the playoff assessment. Teams just have to get in and hope to get hot at the right time. I have no doubt that the Canucks (if healthy and hot) could take on a team like Detroit, and pretty much any team not in San Jose. If this team makes the Western Final it will be a GREAT season, and there is little reason why they couldn't. Get in, that's sometimes all it takes.

On the injuries:

Yep, we lost Luongo and shit the bed. The problem is, he's back and we're still losing, not to mention he hasn't been any better than the backups. I'm willing to give him some time, but we definitely don't have the luxury of allowing him to have his typical slow start, because if we hit 13th entering the stretch drive it's curtains.

Sundin hasn't done shit, and I'm not shocked considering he's older than dirt and his only hockey has been skating for Pokerstars commercials. He looks like Bertuzzi floating around out there. PLEASE Farhan, for the love of God don't compare him to Iginla or Thornton. He was a point/game last year, these guys are superstars. He hasn't played in 9 months, they've played all season. He's 108 years old, they're in their primes. Mats is on pace for 8g and 16 pts and is -4 thus far. I thought that he couldn't hurt us if he signed...well that statement is debatable thus far. Daniel is still getting a point/game as he was before Sundin signed, ditto for Hank with 4 in 5 games, so teams aren't afraid of Mats yet. He's going to have to have a big game for us to start getting the Sedin's some worse defenses to play against.

Finally, can people just stop including Salo in any injury summary? It goes without saying...he's going to be hurt. The Canucks should seriously consider buying out the remaining years of his contract and using the nearly 2 Million or so to either give Ohlund the raise he'll need or bring in someone else. If Rob Davison is going to play this much, he might as well stick around. Salo is destined for old timers, no-hit hockey.

Farhan Lalji

Re: IF you could have Ilya Kovalchuk for 1.5 years....would you?

Post by Farhan Lalji » Sun Jan 18, 2009 12:40 pm


You're the one suggest a full fledged fire sale if we fall out of contention Farhan...
Yes. Key words being, "if we fall out of contention." I don't see what your comment has to do with anything. :? All I said was that this team DESERVES to be judged when our top players are all healthy and non-rusty. Based on how we did earlier in the season with Luongo, I argued that this team, with full health, was right up there with Detroit and San Jose....given the fact that we were 8 games over .500 before the Loo injury (along with the five shutouts, and along with the fact that the Canucks were beating teams in a wide variety of different ways).

IF however - my 'gut feeling' proves to be inaccurate and the Canucks 'shit the bed' come February (and are 7 points+ out of playoff contention), then yes........I don't think it would be a completely bad idea to do a complete firesale.



On the injuries:

Yep, we lost Luongo and shit the bed. The problem is, he's back and we're still losing,
IT'S BEEN ONE FUCKING GAME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Are you kidding me?!?!?!?!?!!? Seriously. Give Luongo ATLEAST 5-6 more games. It's completely idiotic to assume that Luongo would've been in PEAK form in his first game back. Give him 6 games....maybe more...to get back to his earlier season form. Sheesh!
Sundin hasn't done shit, and I'm not shocked considering he's older than dirt and his only hockey has been skating for Pokerstars commercials.
[/quote]

Again - just a completely moronic comment to make...no offense. Sundin went without 9 months of playing hockey. GIVE THE GUY SOME TIME!!!! We saw how long it took guys like Scott Niedermayer to get back into the thick of things? You MIGHT be right with the age thing, but there's no fucking way we can say something like that after just 4-5 games!

Post Reply