Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 2013-14

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

Moderator: Referees

Re: Trades and rumours 2013-14

Postby RyanGinger » Fri Nov 29, 2013 11:05 pm

Mondi wrote:Give me a break.

Trading away picks and prospects and virtually all of our forward depth.

And that post took a lot of work.
Our core isn't getting any younger. This years draft is not the deepest of drafts, and the pick we make in the 2nd half of the 1st round likely won't be an impact player soon enough that our core is still good enough to make a run.

Kane is 22, Johansen is 21, and Johansson is 23. Half of the guys I trade are around 27 and not huge impact players. The others are still good young players, some with a pretty bright future, but you gotta give to get, and IMO I think what we'd get would make us a cup favourite no doubt.

Lastly, look at the lineup I made. Its stacked, but it's probably not very realistic. I think WPG and WSH would probably accept the trades, and the signings would go through, but I doubt MG would do any of them, hence the title "In a perfect world".
22-33-17
User avatar
RyanGinger
CC Veteran
 
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 7:20 pm

Re: In a perfect world (Proposal)

Postby Knucklehead » Sat Nov 30, 2013 12:43 am

RyanGinger wrote:2013-14 TRADE DEADLINE
1) TRADE – TO WPG: RICHARDSON, HANSEN, BOOTH, WELSH, WEISE, 2nd
````````````````TO VAN: KANE blah, blah, blah.


I read that post and realized it was a bad day to quit drinking, so here goes: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink:

Nope it stil doesn't make sense, not for us nor for Winterpeg. We give up too much depth for one player and the Jets would want an impact player for Kane, none of which is being offered.

The second proposal, excuse me for a second, :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: :drink: I may be able to express my feelings about it now. :shock: where is the puke smilie, one is needed here.

You are essentially offering up 4 1st round picks or the equivalent for Johannsen, a 24th overall pick in the 2009 draft that has never scored 50 points in any level of hockey, I might put up that package for Kane if Gaunce or the 1st were take out.

And how can "SCHROEDER/ALBERTS/TOMMERNES" even be an option as if these three have remotely the same relative value?

Please tell me RyanGinger are you a flames or leafs fan as I cannot conceive of any Canucks fan proposing this crap.
Knucklehead
CC Veteran
 
Posts: 119
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 11:39 am

Re: In a perfect world (Proposal)

Postby dbr » Sun Dec 01, 2013 11:34 am

Knucklehead wrote:
RyanGinger wrote:2013-14 TRADE DEADLINE
1) TRADE – TO WPG: RICHARDSON, HANSEN, BOOTH, WELSH, WEISE, 2nd
````````````````TO VAN: KANE blah, blah, blah.


I read that post


That was your first mistake.
dbr
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2519
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 5:37 pm

Re: In a perfect world (Proposal)

Postby mathonwy » Sun Dec 01, 2013 2:19 pm

RyanGinger wrote:2013-14 TRADE DEADLINE
1) TRADE – TO WPG: RICHARDSON, HANSEN, BOOTH, WELSH, WEISE, 2nd
````````````````TO VAN: KANE

Kudos for the effort but Pass.

Like Knucklehead said, too much depth for 1 player.

Kane might be able to help get us into the playoffs but Richardson, Hansen, Booth and Weise are the players that will help us get deep into the playoffs.

Tom Sestito ($0.750m) / Zac Dalpe ($0.550m) / Darren Archibald ($0.660m) as a 4th line is not a sustainable 4th line. Weise is very much needed on this team.

RyanGinger wrote:2) TRADE – TO WSH: TANEV, SCHROEDER/ALBERTS/TOMMERNES, JENSEN, GAUNCE, 1st, 3rd
````````````````TO VAN: JOHANSSON, STRACHAN (For cap compliance)

Johansson plays on Washington's top line.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/cap ... hird-line/

Johansson-Backstrom-Ovechkin
Fehr-Grabovski-Brouwer
Chimera-Beagle-Ward
Volpatti-Latta-Wilson
Alzner-Carlson
Schmidt-Green
Urbom-Strachan
Neuvirth, Holtby

Tanev would definitely be an upgrade on their back end but Tanev plus "SCHROEDER/ALBERTS/TOMMERNES, JENSEN, GAUNCE" is not nearly enough for a first line player.

Washington's achilles heel is balanced goal scoring. Nobody is in double digit goal totals except for Ovie and of course, goals are what we are desperately seeking. If we want Johansson, our offer needs to include goals (or potential goals). Every player that we have that fits into that mold makes too much.
User avatar
mathonwy
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2103
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 1:53 pm

Re: In a perfect world (Proposal)

Postby RyanGinger » Sun Dec 01, 2013 11:21 pm

mathonwy wrote:Tom Sestito ($0.750m) / Zac Dalpe ($0.550m) / Darren Archibald ($0.660m) as a 4th line is not a sustainable 4th line. Weise is very much needed on this team.
IMHO I can't see us winning a cup this year. If we can just have a pretty bad bottom 6 for 1/4 of this season 2014-15 will be a lot better (Higgins-Horvat-Santorelli) if everything proposed happens.


Knucklehead wrote:We give up too much depth for one player

Mondi wrote:Trading away virtually all of our forward depth

mathonwy wrote: Like Knucklehead said, too much depth for 1 player.
(about the Kane trade) I know how much we're giving away in this, but look at our 2014-15 Lineup after. Keep in mind, I would NEVER do this trade by itself. I'd only do it if what I also proposed was to happen.


Knucklehead wrote:Jets would want an impact player for Kane, none of which is being offered.
Depending on how the 2014-15 cap ends up, they could have enough cap space left to sign a guy like Moulson. Also, the deal would only go through if Booth can get some positive value, which seems very possible.
22-33-17
User avatar
RyanGinger
CC Veteran
 
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 7:20 pm

Re: Trades and rumours 2013-14

Postby Blob Mckenzie » Sun Dec 01, 2013 11:47 pm

Change your name to Dime Bag Darrel.
Tell me how my ass tastes.
User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3102
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: Trades and rumours 2013-14

Postby dbr » Mon Dec 02, 2013 6:50 am

Wait, people are saying they wouldn't trade five depth players ( :lol: ) and a second round pick ( :lol: :lol: ) for Evander Kane because of what it would do to our depth?

They'd turn down a trade that is "quality for quantity" in it's purest form? Fans of a team with a plethora of "top nine" type players and a distinct lack of legitimate, every day offensive producers?

Give me a break guys. :lol:

If this trade doesn't happen it's because the Jets don't want to trade a player of Kane's ability, age and contract situation for five depth players (or much more likely because we occupy reality and nobody authorized to make trades for a hockey team would even bother making such an asinine offer in the first place).
dbr
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2519
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 5:37 pm

Re: Trades and rumours 2013-14

Postby dbr » Mon Dec 02, 2013 6:53 am

Seriously, every time I think about this I laugh.

I'd do that deal a thousand times out of a thousand, hell we could call up the Comets fourth line and give them two shifts a night and spread the remaining ice time out among our two first lines..
dbr
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2519
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 5:37 pm

Re: Trades and rumours 2013-14

Postby The Brown Knight » Mon Dec 02, 2013 9:12 am

RyanGinger wrote:
2013-14 TRADE DEADLINE
1) TRADE – TO WPG: RICHARDSON, HANSEN, BOOTH, WELSH, WEISE, 2nd
````````````````TO VAN: KANE



No way we should give up that much depth. That would be an absolute terrible deal.

Personally - I'd give up Kassian, Hansen, Tanev, and a 1st.
"I post the Brown Way" ~ Connor McHindu"

The Dark Indian Rises
User avatar
The Brown Knight
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1037
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:42 am

Re: Trades and rumours 2013-14

Postby Meds » Mon Dec 02, 2013 9:34 am

The Brown Knight wrote:
RyanGinger wrote:
2013-14 TRADE DEADLINE
1) TRADE – TO WPG: RICHARDSON, HANSEN, BOOTH, WELSH, WEISE, 2nd
````````````````TO VAN: KANE



No way we should give up that much depth. That would be an absolute terrible deal.

Personally - I'd give up Kassian, Hansen, Tanev, and a 1st.


So two fewer players, two of whom are upgrades to the original proposal, and a more valuable pick?

Ok then....
User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Trades and rumours 2013-14

Postby The Brown Knight » Mon Dec 02, 2013 9:44 am

Meds wrote:
The Brown Knight wrote:
RyanGinger wrote:
2013-14 TRADE DEADLINE
1) TRADE – TO WPG: RICHARDSON, HANSEN, BOOTH, WELSH, WEISE, 2nd
````````````````TO VAN: KANE



No way we should give up that much depth. That would be an absolute terrible deal.

Personally - I'd give up Kassian, Hansen, Tanev, and a 1st.


So two fewer players, two of whom are upgrades to the original proposal, and a more valuable pick?

Ok then....



Again - depth. What's the point of getting Kane if you give up THAT much depth to the point where you entire bottom 6 would be completely decimated?

The Jets are going to want some significant pieces if they are going to move a guy like Kane. Why would they want 4 scrubs and Hansen?

If we're even thinking of getting a guy like Kane, it's not going to be easy. Not at all.
"I post the Brown Way" ~ Connor McHindu"

The Dark Indian Rises
User avatar
The Brown Knight
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1037
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:42 am

Re: Trades and rumours 2013-14

Postby Meds » Mon Dec 02, 2013 9:55 am

The Brown Knight wrote:
Meds wrote:
The Brown Knight wrote:

No way we should give up that much depth. That would be an absolute terrible deal.

Personally - I'd give up Kassian, Hansen, Tanev, and a 1st.


So two fewer players, two of whom are upgrades to the original proposal, and a more valuable pick?

Ok then....



Again - depth. What's the point of getting Kane if you give up THAT much depth to the point where you entire bottom 6 would be completely decimated?

The Jets are going to want some significant pieces if they are going to move a guy like Kane. Why would they want 4 scrubs and Hansen?

If we're even thinking of getting a guy like Kane, it's not going to be easy. Not at all.


I don't think either move is good, that's why I've said all along that we ship out a top 4 defenseman (preferably Edler) and then throw in A depth player and/or pick, that isn't first round, in exchange for Kane.

Then Booth gets shopped with a depth player and/or pick, that isn't a first, in exchange for a top 4 defenseman. The timing is almost right for this. Booth is trending up at the moment, and if he continues with his recent play he might have some value.
User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Trades and rumours 2013-14

Postby The Brown Knight » Mon Dec 02, 2013 10:52 am

Moving one of our Top 4 defenseman would be a very bad move in my opinion.

Defense is one area where a top CANNOT afford to be thin.

Sure - things look rosy on our D right now, but we haven't had any significant injuries back there. If you have more Edler or any other Top 4 D guy for offensive help, you are always 1 guy away from having a fairly vulnerable defensive corps.

The only way you ever consider moving a Top 4 defensemen for forward help, is if you have 1-2 superstar defensemen (i.e. like Chicago does with Keith and Seabrook, or like how LA has with Doughty). If you don't have a superstar on defense, you better damn make sure that your depth back there is guaranteed.
"I post the Brown Way" ~ Connor McHindu"

The Dark Indian Rises
User avatar
The Brown Knight
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1037
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:42 am

Re: Trades and rumours 2013-14

Postby dbr » Mon Dec 02, 2013 11:00 am

It's like watching two guys argue over whether it would be better to bend Scarlett Johansson over their kitchen table, or whether it's too rickety and she should be bent over the couch instead.
dbr
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2519
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 5:37 pm

Re: Trades and rumours 2013-14

Postby The Brown Knight » Mon Dec 02, 2013 11:01 am

dbr wrote:It's like watching two guys argue over whether it would be better to bend Scarlett Johansson over their kitchen table, or whether it's too rickety and she should be bent over the couch instead.


Couch. Definitely the couch.
"I post the Brown Way" ~ Connor McHindu"

The Dark Indian Rises
User avatar
The Brown Knight
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1037
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:42 am

PreviousNext

Return to Canucks Corner Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests