CanucksCorner.com Forums

Lmao the Benning Defence team is already out in damage control mode.

If he has another deadline with his finger jammed up his anus he is done in this town. Finished. I will have a big assed bucket of popcorn and a dozen beer and enjoy the show. I can just see his press conference now after he just chugged a 40 pounder of Canadian Club.

Sorry kids but he will be making moves just for the optics alone. He knows he's on razor thin ice and only has the fire Desjardins card and that's about it. He has very little other than Tryamkin and Gaudette for goodwill in the bank. People see Ehlers , Ritichie, Nylander and Tkachuck all excelling while we have Vanilla Juolevi and Jake the Fake. The Italians are not patient people.

Blob Mckenzie wrote:Lmao the Benning Defence team is already out in damage control mode.

If he has another deadline with his finger jammed up his anus he is done in this town. Finished. I will have a big assed bucket of popcorn and a dozen beer and enjoy the show. I can just see his press conference now after he just chugged a 40 pounder of Canadian Club.

Sorry kids but he will be making moves just for the optics alone. He knows he's on razor thin ice and only has the fire Desjardins card and that's about it. He has very little other than Tryamkin and Gaudette for goodwill in the bank. People see Ehlers , Ritichie, Nylander and Tkachuck all excelling while we have Vanilla Juolevi and Jake the Fake. The Italians are not patient people.

OPTICS? LOL, what are you Matt Sekeres now? Selling hysteria to justify your job? LOL. Optics is for the fair-weather no-mind fans.

Holy Hell man, what's happened to your sensibility? Or are you just an angry human in general? Do you not agree that re-signing Miller is not a bad idea? Do you not agree that with 1 year left on his contract, Expansion Draft, a MNTC on a player whom doesn't want to leave and whom is loved by the MGMT, FANS AND MEDIA - trading Hansen isn't as cut and dry as you like to think?

The only guy that I could possibly see being traded is Burrows. But for what? A 3rd round pick in an utterly shitty draft class? Whoopdie doo

The same issues with trading Hansen is the same issues with trying to trade a defenceman.

What is the big effin deal with trading now, at the Deadline when the deadline isn't what it used to be and that the lead up to the draft and draft tends to see bigger deals made then.

Give it a rest Booze Fest

Madcombinepilot wrote:first off, you think wrong. Burrows is one of the few puck retrievers we have. IF we trade him and lose/ trade Hansen, well, we see how the rest of the team goes into the corners and gets pucks...
Miller would be a bonus, Sbisa is a loss of Depth. I would rather trade Edler.. looking to the future
you have already traded the entire team 10 times over this week.. "keeping trade chips" is not really in line with your posts...

Tanev is the best defenceman we have.. why are you trading him, and keeping Edler??? in 2-3 years when the team matures, Edler is going to be old, slow and worthless.. Tanev has a better potential to be still contributing to the team.. you need to make up your mind.. are you wanting to trade picks for players, or stockpile picks?? why are you trading 2 first round picks? (this years and Virtanen??)

lol you trade burrows ffs, you keep Burrows and the 90% of the Canucks fan base will revolt because there is no point in keeping him, he belongs to a contender now, he's been here for the last shitty 5 years after 2011 and the team is still trash, Bo Horvat and Baertschi are brought along just fine, the team doesn't need his "mentorship" anymore.

Team needs to bring in more youth for this crumbling team, this season is a write off, next season with Burrows and his millions off the books you bring in Boeser for Burr, and Virtanen for Megna.
And whoever else we bring in via trade preferably a power forward that can get you those precious puck retrievers to fetch pucks.

Team needs a lot of things to rebuild, with the emphasis on youth/talent and size.

As for Tanev he's our best chance at getting a really good return and he doesn't have any NTC so he can go wherever which opens up a lot of options.

I say we stay on course and try to make the playoffs. Avoid the Decade Long Colorado Avalanche losing culture at all costs. Ole Genius Benning don't need to pick in the top 10 to land a gem. Gaudette, Demko, TryMyNapkin, BreezeBios, Lockwood, Forsling, Boeser, etc., etc., etc...

RoyalDude wrote:I say we stay on course and try to make the playoffs

Blob Mckenzie wrote:

RoyalDude wrote:I say we stay on course and try to make the playoffs

There is obviously a lot of moving parts in running a hockey team! lol.

Blob Mckenzie wrote:

RoyalDude wrote:I say we stay on course and try to make the playoffs

Is that all that's left in ya, Bubbles? What's happened to ya bro? You used to tow the Management Line like nobody's business.

lol you trade burrows ffs, you keep Burrows and the 90% of the Canucks fan base will revolt because there is no point in keeping him, he belongs to a contender now, he's been here for the last shitty 5 years after 2011 and the team is still trash

,

I hate to disagree (but I do like how 'the entire Canuck nation' just became 90%!!), but (staying in reality for a moment) Burrows belongs to us, and is 100% in control of weather or not he is traded.. if you seriously think the 3rd (if we are lucky) round pick he brings back is going to change the direction of the team in the next year or so, I truly think you are mistaken. Yes, he could have been moved before, but that's not what we are discussing. I am simply commenting on the gross exaggeration of your message. I am not against moving him, in fact, I would like to get an asset back for him then resign him here in the off season (1 year contacts - like the wings do to old guys like Bertuzzi) as he is still better than what we have coming through the system and has value in that 3rd/4th line utility guy

Bo Horvat and Baertschi are brought along just fine, the team doesn't need his "mentorship" anymore.

while the two you mentioned seem to be progressing just fine, 'the team' next year will consist of 6-8 guys who have less than 3 years NHL experience.. lots of other will need mentorship.. and there is no telling who will click with who for the mentorship roles.

Team needs to bring in more youth for this crumbling team, this season is a write off, next season with Burrows and his millions off the books you bring in Boeser for Burr, and Virtanen for Megna.

So Burrows doesn't offer more to the team than Chaput?? Like really??
How much youth will make you happy?? as it stands, we have one of the youngest teams in the league, and over the next 2 years as Miler and the Twins come off the roster, its going to get younger still.. how many rookies and sophomore's on the team will make you happy?

I am saying get Burrows down the lineup where he belongs, pay him and play him like that 3/4th line guy...

And whoever else we bring in via trade preferably a power forward that can get you those precious puck retrievers to fetch pucks.

I think your confusing yourself on this statement.. how many players are you getting back? are you trading Burrows for a power forward, then trading your power forward for puck hounds? or you already making the second (or third) fantasy trade in your head after a first trade that the GM really has no control over??

Team needs a lot of things to rebuild, with the emphasis on youth/talent and size.

I agree. your just not going to fill all those holes with only a Burrows trade.. in fact, your not even scratching the surface

As for Tanev he's our best chance at getting a really good return and he doesn't have any NTC so he can go wherever which opens up a lot of options.

and brings me back to keeping Tanev.. why give you your youngest veteran defender with the most experience (both NHL and international) on your team? I understand that you want the most return for a player - not disagreeing with your intent or heart here - just saying that if you want to fix the Canucks, its not an overnight fix.. its going to take a couple years. In a couple years, do you want a 29-30 year old Tanev, or a 34-35 year old Edler anchoring your defence, when the next oldest guy is looking to be a mid 20's Gubrandson?



on a side note: Climax Saskatchwan is on the same highway as small towns Havor and Turner.. thus making that highway the infamous "Havor-Turner-Climax Road!"

Madcombinepilot wrote: Burrows belongs to us, and is 100% in control of weather or not he is traded.. if you seriously think the 3rd (if we are lucky) round pick he brings back is going to change the direction of the team in the next year or so, I truly think you are mistaken.

So Burrows doesn't offer more to the team than Chaput?

How much youth will make you happy?

I am saying get Burrows down the lineup where he belongs, pay him and play him like that 3/4th line guy...

Well your love and fight for Burrows is admirable, it's a lost cause brudda, I'd trade Burr for even a 3rd and use that pick to protect Hansen to keep the Sedins happy and to keep a solid vet around.

Burrows, it seems fairly obvious he'll sign for cheap to be in his hometown in Montreal, I mean I would if I were him, his fave team growing up, they got a better chance at a Cup sooner than the Canucks (everyone seems to think we won't win one for another 5 years IF that), and he lives there in offseason yada yada.

"How much youth will make me happy" is kind of dumb question, I just want a decent rebuild - enough of the old vets, bring in some young blood, it's like your Mike Gillis who just wants to hang onto everyone forever and a day, let him go yo.

Madcombinepilot wrote:

As for Tanev he's our best chance at getting a really good return and he doesn't have any NTC so he can go wherever which opens up a lot of options.

I understand that you want the most return for a player - not disagreeing with your intent or heart here - just saying that if you want to fix the Canucks, its not an overnight fix.. its going to take a couple years.

In a couple years, do you want a 29-30 year old Tanev, or a 34-35 year old Edler anchoring your defence, when the next oldest guy is looking to be a mid 20's Gubrandson?

Like anything it's what Tanev is offered from another team, if it's a young proven power forward or a W. Nylander type, it's a no-brainer you gotta do it, he's our best trade chip to improve up front.

Tanev is only available in part thanks to Tryamkin and Gudbranson along with Stecher flanking the right side now.

SKYO, real it in buds, or you'll be hitting up the pharmacist for some anti-depressants post Trade Deadline Day.

I'll purchase some kush for you and mad after burrows gets dealt.

SKYO wrote:I'll purchase some kush for you and mad after burrows gets dealt.

Just trying to help you in keepin' it real, ya dig?

Well your love and fight for Burrows is admirable, it's a lost cause brudda, I'd trade Burr for even a 3rd and use that pick to protect Hansen to keep the Sedins happy and to keep a solid vet around.

read my entire answer.. I am all for trading Burrows. I was saying your overstating the importance of it.

Burrows, it seems fairly obvious he'll sign for cheap to be in his hometown in Montreal,

really? where did you get that from? Everything I have ever heard about Burrows is that he is absolutely loyal to the Canucks organization.. the guys pisses whale juice....

I mean I would if I were him, his fave team growing up, they got a better chance at a Cup sooner than the Canucks (everyone seems to think we won't win one for another 5 years IF that)

Not to put too fine a point on it, but your not him. I agree that most other teams have a better shot at the cup than us in the next 5 years, but you don't know what another human thinks or feels. you simply cant.

"How much youth will make me happy" is kind of dumb question, I just want a decent rebuild - enough of the old vets, bring in some young blood, it's like your Mike Gillis who just wants to hang onto everyone forever and a day, let him go yo.

not a dumb question at all. Its a direct question to you. your defecting the question by talking about rebuild in your next sentence. How much youth will make you happy?

regarding the rebuild, Most people want a decent rebuild. Decent rebuilds take time. you can only pour so much youth into a team so fast or they end up sucking for decades like the leaves and Oilers.
I am not Gillis or anything like him. I never said to "hang onto everyone and a day", I said to trade Burrows, I am not clinging to him like you are insinuating.. that's a fallacy.

Like anything it's what Tanev is offered from another team, if it's a young proven power forward or a W. Nylander type, it's a no-brainer you gotta do it, he's our best trade chip to improve up front.

I would consider talking about a trade of Tanev for a 'proven power forward'.. who did you have in mind?
not sure I would not trade him for a Nylander.. we might have that type of player in Boesser, and I think we have enough smallish forwards.

Tanev is only available in part thanks to Tryamkin and Gudbranson along with Stecher flanking the right side now.

Were you not advocating trading Gudbranson a few posts ago in the trade thread? I agree we need to trade a Defenceman or 2 in the next couple days (I would prefer trade Edler, and sacrifice Sbisa -or Granlund - to expansion)

SKYO wrote:

Madcombinepilot wrote: Burrows belongs to us, and is 100% in control of weather or not he is traded.. if you seriously think the 3rd (if we are lucky) round pick he brings back is going to change the direction of the team in the next year or so, I truly think you are mistaken.

So Burrows doesn't offer more to the team than Chaput?

How much youth will make you happy?

I am saying get Burrows down the lineup where he belongs, pay him and play him like that 3/4th line guy...

Well your love and fight for Burrows is admirable, it's a lost cause brudda, I'd trade Burr for even a 3rd and use that pick to protect Hansen to keep the Sedins happy and to keep a solid vet around.

Fuck. That. Shit.

You don't burn a fucking draft pick to keep Hansen just to keep the Sedins happy. You trade Hansen to get a draft pick.....probably a 2nd plus. You been into the carfentanyl a few times recently SKYO?

Burrows, it seems fairly obvious he'll sign for cheap to be in his hometown in Montreal, I mean I would if I were him, his fave team growing up, they got a better chance at a Cup sooner than the Canucks (everyone seems to think we won't win one for another 5 years IF that), and he lives there in offseason yada yada.

That's pretty obvious is it?

I would say he would probably sign here for close to the same $$$ as he would in Montreal.