Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO

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

Moderator: Referees

Locked
User avatar
Cousin Strawberry
MVP
MVP
Posts: 26183
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:19 pm
Location: in the shed with a fresh packed bowl

Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by Cousin Strawberry »

Island Nucklehead wrote: If we're going to move Edler, trade him for someone that can actually help us in 5-7 years.
Hey i like that....its Docs signature move version 2.0

Try to focus on 5-7 years from now :mex:
If you need air...call it in
ESQ
MVP
MVP
Posts: 4477
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 6:34 pm

Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by ESQ »

Mëds wrote:Seabrook without Keith is barely more than a more physical, right-shooting Edler.
Well, Seabrook had 39 points to Edler's 24 this season.

Seabrook has missed 5 games over the past 5 seasons to Edler's 74.

In Chicago's down year of 2010-11 where they squeaked into the playoffs as 8th seed, he had 49 points.
User avatar
Chef Boi RD
MVP
MVP
Posts: 28946
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:36 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by Chef Boi RD »

Stick a fire hydrant with Keith and Chicago's PP and it would get 39 points. Seabrook doesn't make Keith Kane and Toews look good, they make him look good
“Tyler Myers is my guy... I was taking to Scotty Bowman last night and he was bringing up his name, and saying he’s a big guy and big guy need big minutes to play, he is playing great for ya… and I agree with him… He’s been exceptional” - Bruce Boudreau
Iceman2014
CC 2nd Team All-Star
Posts: 275
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2014 12:13 pm

Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by Iceman2014 »

RoyalDude wrote:Stick a fire hydrant with Keith and Chicago's PP and it would get 39 points. Seabrook doesn't make Keith Kane and Toews look good, they make him look good

Yeah, adding Seabrook makes absolutely no sense at any level. I much prefer my plan where you deal 2 or 3 of Edler, Tanev and Hutton and then add Shattenkirk via free agency. Shatt is 28 and would cost a bit more but he is a need with his offensive skills, he could mentor other D especially Juolevi and is 4 years younger than Seabrook. The main point: he's a free agent! He wouldn't cost the team any assets and it would be fine signing him to a 6 or 7 year deal where the contract expires when he's 34 or 35.

Anyway, next!
User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
MVP
MVP
Posts: 31126
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by Blob Mckenzie »

Shattenkirk would have zero interest in coming to Vancouver

Trade two or three of Tanev, Edler and Hutton. Why exactly? I guess Gudbranson ,Biega, Stecher and Sbisa is a great top 4 defence . Subban and Pedan can play on the bottom pairing and Mcaneny and Sautner can round out the top 8. Should be good.
“I don’t care what you and some other poster were talking about”
User avatar
SKYO
MVP
MVP
Posts: 14992
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:34 pm

Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by SKYO »

Island Nucklehead wrote:
SKYO wrote: Acquiring Seabrook at his lowest value is just a smart, smart pickup for this rebuilding team, he's been a key dman at every level, vocal leader, captain material, local guy to boot.
What kind of impact do you think he'll have here? Even if he kept up his pace, and became our 4th-highest scoring player, what does that do for our team? Going Edler-Seabrook gets us what, maybe an extra 5-8 points in the standings? Great, so we miss the playoffs by 17 points instead of 25 lol.

This team needs so much more than a Brent Seabrook until he's 39. If we're going to move Edler, trade him for someone that can actually help us in 5-7 years.
'What kind of impact do you think he'll have here?'
It's more than player points and team points in the standings, it's more about having a dman that knows how to win, instilling confidence in the young guys, & unlike the chill low-key Hank the tank Seabrook is a vocal leader, he'll go after guys to up their play, all while leading by example on the ice and in the locker room.

I'd deal Guds and/or Tanev to get prospects/picks or young players to help the team for the future.
RoyalDude wrote:Stick a fire hydrant with Keith and Chicago's PP and it would get 39 points.
Yup Duncan Keith is elite, he helped up his stats for sure, but Seabrook is still a good hockey player, and he can help his team win if he is in the proper role, like being in a more offensive focused D-pairing usage, like being paired with Hutton who if he stays healthy and properly used by the new coach, that pairing could help each other out big time, Huts should be a 30+point dman next season.

Hutton and Guds was a train wreck, Tanev has limited offensive capabilities, he'll be 28 next season and has reached 20 points just once in his career.

Blackhawks have had some shitty depth dmen in the lineup and none have really exploded on scene even with Keith and all the HHOF's so lets not pretend Seabrook got all his 400 points in the regular season and almost 60 points in the playoffs out of being fire hydrant dana murzyn styles, he obviously has skills to score on his own, more than Edler, Tanev and Gudbranson have or ever will.

I'd pair Hutton with Seabrook for now, then in 2-3 years Juolevi with Seabrook.

So to summarize acquiring Seabrook will be a prudent move as Brent will be a reputable transitional veteran dman that will help and assist our young dmen develop, plus score points all while being a leader - much more than any of current veteran defensemen can do.

Everyone thought Miller was a waste of money at his old age but he proved everyone wrong, these days players taking care of themselves & who have talent they can play well into their late 30's, while still being effective enough to help their teams win.
Can the Canucks just win a Cup within the next 5 years.
User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
MVP
MVP
Posts: 31126
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by Blob Mckenzie »

The team already has two boat anchor contracts. Why do they need to add a third ? I like Sebrook but he makes no sense for THIS team. I doubt he'd even waive to come to this tire fire and miss the playoffs for the next five years so it's a moot point.
“I don’t care what you and some other poster were talking about”
User avatar
Island Nucklehead
MVP
MVP
Posts: 8392
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:27 pm
Location: Ottawa

Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by Island Nucklehead »

SKYO wrote: 'What kind of impact do you think he'll have here?'
It's more than player points and team points in the standings, it's more about having a dman that knows how to win, instilling confidence in the young guys, & unlike the chill low-key Hank the tank Seabrook is a vocal leader, he'll go after guys to up their play, all while leading by example on the ice and in the locker room.

I'd deal Guds and/or Tanev to get prospects/picks or young players to help the team for the future.
Back to the veteran mentorship / winning culture circle jerk. How much veteran mentorship did the Blackhawks have when Brent won his first cup? Brian Campbell, John Madden and Brent Sopel? We don't need to pay $7M for veteran mentorship. We need a couple $7M+-calibre players, and in about 5 years we might actually have some. That would be right around the time we'd be doing our best to dump the aged and massively declining Seabrook and his albatross deal.

Btw, Brian Campbell is a UFA again. Offer him $2.5M and I'm sure he'll veteran mentor the fuck out of our team for a year or two.
User avatar
SKYO
MVP
MVP
Posts: 14992
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:34 pm

Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by SKYO »

Island Nucklehead wrote:
SKYO wrote: 'What kind of impact do you think he'll have here?'
It's more than player points and team points in the standings, it's more about having a dman that knows how to win, instilling confidence in the young guys, & unlike the chill low-key Hank the tank Seabrook is a vocal leader, he'll go after guys to up their play, all while leading by example on the ice and in the locker room.

I'd deal Guds and/or Tanev to get prospects/picks or young players to help the team for the future.
Back to the veteran mentorship / winning culture circle jerk.

How much veteran mentorship did the Blackhawks have when Brent won his first cup?

Brian Campbell, John Madden and Brent Sopel?

We don't need to pay $7M for veteran mentorship.

We need a couple $7M+-calibre players, and in about 5 years we might actually have some.

That would be right around the time we'd be doing our best to dump the aged and massively declining Seabrook and his albatross deal.

Btw, Brian Campbell is a UFA again. Offer him $2.5M and I'm sure he'll veteran mentor the fuck out of our team for a year or two.
The thing about veteran mentorship / winning culture is that's what Seabrook is all about PLUS scoring points, he's not just a great leader but can also score more points than any of our current VETS on defense, do you even see that correlation?

Edler $5M, Gudbranson probably looking at around $4.5M, Tanev basically $4.5M per, almost $14M dollars on these three and Seabrook can probably outscore all three of them combined PLUS adding that winning leadership this team is severely lacking.
Can the Canucks just win a Cup within the next 5 years.
User avatar
Island Nucklehead
MVP
MVP
Posts: 8392
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:27 pm
Location: Ottawa

Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by Island Nucklehead »

SKYO wrote: The thing about veteran mentorship / winning culture is that's what Seabrook is all about PLUS scoring points, he's not just a great leader but can also score more points than any of our current VETS on defense, do you even see that correlation?
We've gone over how Seabrook's point totals would likely drop in Vancouver, just as Edler's would likely go up in Chicago. Remember when the Canucks were a high-skill, high-scoring team, and Edler was putting up 40+ points? If we knocked off 20% of Seabrooks offence (seems reasonable), suddenly he's a $6.8M, 32 year old, 30 point d-man.
Edler $5M, Gudbranson probably looking at around $4.5M, Tanev basically $4.5M per, almost $14M dollars on these three and Seabrook can probably outscore all three of them combined PLUS adding that winning leadership this team is severely lacking.
Is Seabrook going to play the whole game? We'd still to replace the roster spots. Given how often our d-men go down, I'd spread the wealth. And before you start in about how durable Seabrook has been, remember they said similar things about Brandon Sutter when he became foundational.
User avatar
Todd Bersnoozi
CC Legend
Posts: 3724
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2005 4:14 pm

Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by Todd Bersnoozi »

SKYO wrote:
I'd rather overpay Seabrook who can play big minutes top pairing still, rather than overpay Gudbranson who'll likely command 4m- 5m per, I'd rather spend a few extra bucks on Seabrook.
Oh man. After watching the games of some of our popular Canucks quickly deteriorate (ie: Higgy, Burr, Ehrhoff, Edler, Sedins) after they got into their early 30s, I think I'd pass on Seabrook and hang on to Gudz. Gudz is entering his prime now and his best hockey is ahead of him, whereas Seabrook's is on the decline and his best years are behind him. In general, I say do not trade a guy entering his prime years cuz that's the mostly likely time they'll explode for a career year and it'll come back to haunt ya and make u look bad.

The Hawks are starting to look like the post 2011 Canucks, a team heading on the downward trend. In 2012, we were a first seed and lost to the 8th seed Kings (eventual Cup winners); the present first seed Hawks lost to the 8th seed Preds. Boy, I think the Hawks looks worst than us to lose to the Predators, but I guess if the Pred go all the way to win the Cup, the Hawks won't looks so bad. Let's not forget last year when the Hawks loaded up at the trade deadline only for a disappointing post season as well. Boy, we have seen the Canucks and the Bs fall after being one of the top teams for a few years, now it's happening to the Hawks. BlackHawk Down.

Image
Iceman2014
CC 2nd Team All-Star
Posts: 275
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2014 12:13 pm

Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by Iceman2014 »

Blob Mckenzie wrote:Shattenkirk would have zero interest in coming to Vancouver

Trade two or three of Tanev, Edler and Hutton. Why exactly? I guess Gudbranson ,Biega, Stecher and Sbisa is a great top 4 defence . Subban and Pedan can play on the bottom pairing and Mcaneny and Sautner can round out the top 8. Should be good.
Oh my. Where was my brain?! What was I thinking?!?!?! I am SO STUPID! Yes, let's keep those guys. We are already a powerhouse team. Canucks finished 29th. Let's keep, primarily, the same team and push for 28. Hell, let's shoot for the moon and aim for 20th! Yes, the future would also look bright with all those young, high end players coming up from the farm and our awesome Sedin succession plan. What was I thinking?! Silly me!

It's nice to see you and the Shatt are so tight where you could definitively answer for him. Also, there aren't a ton of teams with the cap space to take on a big contract. Canucks will lose Miller and deal some more contracts away in my hypothesis. Canucks will have room!
User avatar
Meds
MVP
MVP
Posts: 13355
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by Meds »

Iceman2014 wrote:
Blob Mckenzie wrote:Shattenkirk would have zero interest in coming to Vancouver

Trade two or three of Tanev, Edler and Hutton. Why exactly? I guess Gudbranson ,Biega, Stecher and Sbisa is a great top 4 defence . Subban and Pedan can play on the bottom pairing and Mcaneny and Sautner can round out the top 8. Should be good.
Oh my. Where was my brain?! What was I thinking?!?!?! I am SO STUPID! Yes, let's keep those guys. We are already a powerhouse team. Canucks finished 29th. Let's keep, primarily, the same team and push for 28. Hell, let's shoot for the moon and aim for 20th! Yes, the future would also look bright with all those young, high end players coming up from the farm and our awesome Sedin succession plan. What was I thinking?! Silly me!

It's nice to see you and the Shatt are so tight where you could definitively answer for him. Also, there aren't a ton of teams with the cap space to take on a big contract. Canucks will lose Miller and deal some more contracts away in my hypothesis. Canucks will have room!
If I recall, Shattenkirk's interest in playing for a Canadian team does not extend beyond Toronto and Montreal.....

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/shat ... canadiens/

Obviously most of what we read is speculation, but I can't see him wanting to come to Vancouver, Calgary, or Edmonton. In general most American born players of any reputable talent like to return to America given the chance. Exceptions seem to be when the team in question is one of our two original six franchises.

Overpaying for a guy like Shattenkirk, and it would take a pretty big overpayment, would be shit stupid management. Shattenkirk is already 28, by the time we are even a regular playoff team again we would be paying top dollar for a defenseman who is approaching his mid-thirties and still under contract for 2 more years.

I don't think we are going to be an attractive destination for any marquis free agents for at least 3 more seasons.
Benjo
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 844
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 9:39 pm

Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by Benjo »

Pretty sure Shattenkirk has a Rangers jersey on under his caps jersey ready to go when season ends.
User avatar
Meds
MVP
MVP
Posts: 13355
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 16-17 Sponsored by SKYO

Post by Meds »

SKYO wrote:He can continue to produce here, he'll get top pairing minutes and #1 powerplay time, he's clutch and when Keith is injured he's been a iron curtain defensively.

Seabrook scored 32 & 24 points before Kane, Toews, Panarin, Hossa arrived.

A lot of the top tier dmen in the league can play well into their late 30's, this should hold true to this beast, plus being around a lot of hungry young guys could spark him too.
[/b]

32 and 24 points from a youthful player is a far cry from the 40+ you say we could count on from an aging defenseman.
Jan.2016
[about Seabrook]
"Quietly the best two/three D-man in the game," Kings coach Darryl Sutter said via text message this week. "Plays every situation, whichever type of game it is. Great playoff stats and big goals. Three Cups, Olympic gold, world junior gold. All-Star Game last year. Power play, penalty kill and leadership."

Let's just state the obvious here: Sutter isn't one for hyperbole. But it very much captures the feeling of many opposing coaches, players and hockey executives around the league when it comes to the level of respect that's out there for the playoff warrior Seabrook.
So now you are recommending we give up a significant asset (because that's what it would take as Chicago would have NO SHORTAGE of suitors for Seabrook if he hit the market), to get a $6.8M 2nd or 3rd defenseman and then sell him as our stud blueliner? We've been overselling a guy at that spot for years.
Locked