If the Canucks are rebuilding, why do we mind waiting? Why trade him (and a draft pick) for a rental player? The Canucks sold low, extremely low, on Kassian.Arbour wrote:I think you're over valuing Kassian, like others here I saw him as a player with untapped potential, but it's been three plus years and the only thing that has been consistent is the mantra about waiting for him to break out as a power forward...next year. Like it or not the Canucks are a rebuilding team and if they can't see a place for Kassian why would any other team in a similar situation pay a 2nd or 3rd for him?Island Nucklehead wrote:What roster spots have opened up? We still have Sedin, Sedin, Vrbata, Burrows, Bonino, Higgins, Hansen, Horvat, Dorsett, Vey, Baertschi Kenins and now Prust. Who's moving to make room for Virtanen?
Higgins, Burrows and Anaheim's 2nd for Dominic Moore, because we like his compete and character.
Do you not think Kassian could have returned a better asset for a rebuilding team? Maybe a 2nd or 3rd round pick?olpaddy wrote: As far as Prust goes who is a UFA at the end of the yr Zack is a RFA at the end of the yr... Lets talk asset management what do you do with Zack Kassian Bad Back/finger who played in zero playoff games in a yr when he wants a raise??? Do you walk away from Salary Arb? HW wouuld know more about the rumblings of 9 off the ice but I suspect the franchise is fed up...
Nobody said the Canucks had to take a roster player back for Kassian. If they wanted to open roster spots, dump him for a 5th. Not only do you clear salary and roster spots, but you don't wind up pissing away assets for 30+ players that most agree are past their best before date.As far as roster spots are concerned the same argument would apply whether Kassian was traded or not, and if his position is taken at camp by a younger player, and if the rumors are true that he has been on the block for some time, there is a good chance he becomes waiver wire fodder.
Montreal fans seem unanimously happy about this trade.