Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGIT?

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

Moderator: Referees

User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 17692
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Post by Strangelove » Thu Nov 21, 2013 5:08 pm

Mondi wrote: Q: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGIT?

A: No.
Okay....
Mondi wrote: Short of Crosby, or Toews the Canucks are not one impact forward short of being legit.
:hmmm:

So is it fair to say you're somewhat wishy-washy?

What about Ovie, Stamkos, Tavares, Getzlaf, etc?
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

User avatar
The Brown Knight
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1033
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:42 am

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Post by The Brown Knight » Fri Nov 22, 2013 9:28 am

Mondi wrote:Why the fuck would anyone want David Booth?

He's worth $4 million and can't buy a goal, or even get into the lineup of a team that can't score a tonne.
If a rebuilding team is interested in a player such as Horvat or Shinkaruk (or both), they might be willing to take on Dave Booth's contract to make it fair. Especially if said team is trying to get rid of a high cap player themselves.
"I post the Brown Way" ~ Connor McHindu"

The Dark Indian Rises

User avatar
The Brown Knight
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1033
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:42 am

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Post by The Brown Knight » Fri Nov 22, 2013 10:21 am

Mondi wrote:Now we're trading our future forwards for some crusty under achieving guy in his 30s to hope and pray this team makes the playoffs?
Negatory.

As I've clearly stated in the past, *I* would only deal Horvat and/or Shinkaruk for a franchise player that is under the age of 30. Your Shea Weber's and Claude Giroux's and what have you.

Even for guys like Evander Kane and Rick Nash, I would absolutely NOT give up Horvat or Shinkaruk. Every other prospect, draft pick, etc., would be available for Kane or Nash (as far as I'm concerned), except for Horvat and Shinkaruk.

That is my stance.
"I post the Brown Way" ~ Connor McHindu"

The Dark Indian Rises

User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 17692
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Post by Strangelove » Fri Nov 22, 2013 11:33 am

Mondi wrote: No Strangelove. You, like I, know that the Canucks are not capable of acquiring the kind of forward that would turn them into a legitimate contender.
Yes but that wasn't the question. :hmmm:
Mondi wrote: Unless you are suggesting that any of Crosby, Ovechkin, Stamkos, or Toews are realistically available? If which case, I'd suggest you're losing a step, or four.
If the Great Strangelove lost ten steps you still couldn't keep pace with the Great Strangelove. :mex:

Just for the record, you've gone from "No" to "Yes" to "It's not a rational question". Image
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

User avatar
The Brown Knight
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1033
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:42 am

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Post by The Brown Knight » Fri Nov 22, 2013 11:38 am

Mondi wrote:If you are a GM would you trade Weber or Giroux for David Booth and a CHL player?
Nope.

And I don't think I ever stated as such.

If I was the GM of the Philadelphia Flyers or Nashville Predators and for whatever reason, I felt it would be in the best interests of my team to move Giroux or Weber ((((On a personal note - I would never trade franchise players under the age of 27.....and even between 27-30 would be met with reluctance)))

I would ask for Shinkaruk, Horvat, a 1st round pick, AND maybe 1-2 more roster players. If I had to eat some salary in order to get two potential future superstars in Horvat and Shinkaruk, then I would take on Booth's contract.
"I post the Brown Way" ~ Connor McHindu"

The Dark Indian Rises

User avatar
SKYO
CC Legend
Posts: 9501
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:34 pm

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Post by SKYO » Fri Nov 22, 2013 12:14 pm

A few ways the team could trade Booth is either with another teams player who is equally unwanted (player stuck behind depth and is overpaid doing it), or by a team who believes Booth might change it around if on another team with the ability to give him more ice time, or a Versteeg type of trade where the canucks would have to retain like 20%-30% of his salary.

Either way Gillis should do it so we can be done with another one of MG's "experiments"
A long time ago, a baseball player remarked: "If I owned a ballclub, I'd hire a $5,000 coach and a $15,000 scout."

User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Legend
Posts: 13405
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Post by Hockey Widow » Fri Nov 22, 2013 2:05 pm

Maybe we will get lucky this year. It will be deadline day, we sit 12 points out of a playoff spot with everyone having games in hand. MG smells the coffee and says, we ain't gonna make it. Let's be sellers. Ya I know we have all those NTC but they can be dealt with.

So we don't want to clean house, we don't want to rebuild, but we have been handed a great chance to get some picks and prospects. But in my scenario Booth has also turned it on and is once again looking like a sniper.

Playoff bound teams do crazy things. He'll we even find a taker for Alberts, get offered the moon for Burrows, Higgins, Bieksa, Edler, Luongo, Hamhuis, Hansen, Santorelli. We get offered picks for Weise and Santorelli.

The world awaits MG to clean the mess up and we all know at deadline day OUR players will be worth more than players on other teams. With a few bold moves MG will have us set for next season. Even RD will be singing his praises when all is said and done. We will get to spend the summer arguing over all the deals that got done, wondering why we didn't get much.
The only HW the Canucks need

User avatar
SKYO
CC Legend
Posts: 9501
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:34 pm

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Post by SKYO » Fri Nov 22, 2013 2:22 pm

http://www.thehockeynews.com/blog/rumor ... wQ.twitter
NBC Sports’ Jason Brough noted that Craig Button had wondered if the offensively anaemic Vancouver Canucks might have interest in Flames winger Mike Cammalleri, who has nine goals and 13 points in 15 games. Brough wasn’t sure if the Canucks would part with a high pick or top prospect for Cammalleri, suggesting they could ask the Flames to take struggling David Booth’s $4.25-million-per-season contract off their hands, which the Flames could then dump via compliance buyout next summer.

Given Cammalleri is earning $7 million this season ($6 million cap hit), the Flames could also offer to pick up part of his contract to make him palatable to clubs with limited cap space. In addition to the Canucks, the New York Rangers, Detroit Red Wings and Carolina Hurricanes are three other low-scoring clubs carrying hefty payrolls that could have interest in Cammalleri, along with budget-conscious teams like the Ottawa Senators and Nashville Predators.

Even if the Flames absorb half of Cammalleri’s remaining salary, it could take a while to find a suitable trade partner. Some of those cap-strapped teams would still have to shed salary to absorb the remainder of his contract. His limited no-trade clause will also be a factor. It’s expected the Flames will shop him close to the March trade deadline, when most of his salary will be paid out and playoff contenders start shopping in earnest for scoring help.
Booth + conditional 1st or 2nd.
A long time ago, a baseball player remarked: "If I owned a ballclub, I'd hire a $5,000 coach and a $15,000 scout."

User avatar
herb
CC Legend
Posts: 3014
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2004 3:17 pm
Location: Mars

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Post by herb » Fri Nov 22, 2013 2:29 pm

I think you only go after help like Cammalleri if you know you have a competitive team that would receive significant playoff benefits by such an addition.

I think the Canucks have a competitive team, but I don't know that right now. There are too many question marks. I could see this team missing the playoffs, being sellers at the deadline and getting a top 10 draft pick. Do I think that will happen? No, but I don't think that outcome is inconceivable. I also don't think it's inconceivable that they contend for the division title.

This is why I advocate waiting it out. If we're a bubble team in January/February, then obviously Gillis has some tough decisions to make. I would hate to see futures given up given the trajectory a disappointing regular season combined with the disappointing past two years projects.

User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Legend
Posts: 13405
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Post by Hockey Widow » Fri Nov 22, 2013 3:08 pm

If we are a bubble team come deadline day I do not want to act like the flames of past. No way, no how should we be considering being a buyer. We are not one piece away nor are we a contender who just wants to add depth.
The only HW the Canucks need

User avatar
sagebrush
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 948
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 12:36 pm
Location: around the bend

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Post by sagebrush » Fri Nov 22, 2013 6:35 pm

Hockey Widow wrote:If we are a bubble team come deadline day I do not want to act like the flames of past. No way, no how should we be considering being a buyer. We are not one piece away nor are we a contender who just wants to add depth.
In that case, we should be selling - for promising young NHL players, NHL ready players, or cap relief. Not gutting the team, but re-tooling for next year & the year after.

This assumes that building towards a contender is more important than some playoff games this season. Aquaman may not agree.

User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 17692
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Post by Strangelove » Fri Nov 22, 2013 7:31 pm

Mondi wrote:
Strangelove wrote: Just for the record, you've gone from "No" to "Yes" to "It's not a rational question". Image
Approaching the problem realistically, I have said no all along. For the record.
EARTH TO MONDI: Wut da fock has reality got to do, got to do with it! Image

We were in Fantasyland from the moment the thought was first conceived in the OP's head!

I know you want to be the voice of reason?

But yeah no that's just not being realistic bro...
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Legend
Posts: 13405
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Post by Hockey Widow » Fri Nov 22, 2013 10:03 pm

sagebrush wrote:
Hockey Widow wrote:If we are a bubble team come deadline day I do not want to act like the flames of past. No way, no how should we be considering being a buyer. We are not one piece away nor are we a contender who just wants to add depth.
In that case, we should be selling - for promising young NHL players, NHL ready players, or cap relief. Not gutting the team, but re-tooling for next year & the year after.

This assumes that building towards a contender is more important than some playoff games this season. Aquaman may not agree.
Don't agree. We can be neither. We can sit with what we have and see how far we go and get some of thee kids in the line up next year. But I would not be opposed to selling one or two pieces for the right return. We don't have yo tank the season to do that.

But so much will depend upon the standings.
The only HW the Canucks need

User avatar
sagebrush
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 948
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 12:36 pm
Location: around the bend

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Post by sagebrush » Fri Nov 22, 2013 11:37 pm

Hockey Widow wrote:
sagebrush wrote:
Hockey Widow wrote:If we are a bubble team come deadline day I do not want to act like the flames of past. No way, no how should we be considering being a buyer. We are not one piece away nor are we a contender who just wants to add depth.
In that case, we should be selling - for promising young NHL players, NHL ready players, or cap relief. Not gutting the team, but re-tooling for next year & the year after.

This assumes that building towards a contender is more important than some playoff games this season. Aquaman may not agree.
Don't agree. We can be neither. We can sit with what we have and see how far we go and get some of thee kids in the line up next year. But I would not be opposed to selling one or two pieces for the right return. We don't have yo tank the season to do that.

But so much will depend upon the standings.
Never suggested that we tank, or make massive changes. Trading a core player & a couple support guys at the deadline could improve the team soon - if we find ourselves on the bubble this season.

User avatar
RoyalDude
CC Legend
Posts: 12008
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:36 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: Are the Canucks an "impact" forward away from being LEGI

Post by RoyalDude » Sat Nov 23, 2013 5:38 pm

5 biggest reasons why we went from cup contender to bubble team in a few short years

1. Loss of Erhoff
2. Booth not panning out
3. No more Ryan Beast Mode Kesler
4. The slow development of Kassian
5. Lack of quality prospects pushing for jobs
"I just want to say one word to you. Just one word. Are you listening? - Plastics." - The Graduate

Post Reply