Trade rumours & armchair pipe dreams 17-18 Sponsored by SKYO

[DonCherry4PM]

I know Vanek only landed a 3rd last year, but I think we might get a 2nd for him... cuz Benning.

I was comparing deadline deals last year and Benning killed it....

Or how about a package deal - Guds + Vanek for a late 1st.

DARE TO PIPE DREAM

Since the price for Gudbranson (plus a 5th round pick) was a former 24th overall plus a second round pick and a fourth round pick, wouldn't killing it this year require that Benning get at least as much back ?

Get out the pitchforks folks, we got us one of those damned logical thinkers here.

To be fair, perhaps Strange doesn't feel that Guds + Vanek for a late 1st is "killing it".

I would posit that for Benning to "kill it" with respect to trading Guds, either your requirement would have to be met (i.e. that the Canucks would have to get back at least as much as was initially traded for Guds) or one would have to admit that the initial Guds trade was not a good one (i.e. that JB initially overvalued Guds but, now that Guds' value has been proven lower, salvaging a 1st for Guds and Vanek is quite the feat).

Also, if the likely increase in what we could land for Vanek this year is "cuz Benning", shouldn't it also follow that the likely decrease in what we could land for Guds this year is also "cuz Benning"?

[Blob Mckenzie]

Examples of Stalwart - Jared "Harold Druken" McCann Rasmus "Per Olav Brasar" Asplund.

Hmmmm so the Canucks would have taken Asplund with the 32 nd overall pick ? How do you know this? That second round (2016) is littered with high end young kids. You also omitted the 4th . Funny how when 3rd and 4th were sent out for Higgins and Paulson you soaked the board with piss

[Blob Mckenzie]

Lol at the Benning apologist posse getting skullfucked for the thousandth time

[Chef Boi RD]

Examples of Stalwart - Jared "Harold Druken" McCann Rasmus "Per Olav Brasar" Asplund.

Hmmmm so the Canucks would have taken Asplund with the 32 nd overall pick ? How do you know this? That second round (2016) is littered with high end young kids. You also omitted the 4th . Funny how when 3rd and 4th were sent out for Higgins and Paulson you soaked the board with piss

Such as Jonathon Dahlen?

[Strangelove]

I know Vanek only landed a 3rd last year, but I think we might get a 2nd for him... cuz Benning.

I was comparing deadline deals last year and Benning killed it....

Or how about a package deal - Guds + Vanek for a late 1st.

DARE TO PIPE DREAM

Since the price for Gudbranson (plus a 5th round pick) was a former 24th overall plus a second round pick and a fourth round pick, wouldn't killing it this year require that Benning get at least as much back ?

Yeahno this is a deeper draft as far as higher-end players, especially for defencemen (which we need).

You caught me PIPE DREAMING about a 16th - 31st pick... but I'm on record as being in favour of re-signing The Guds.

BTW this has nothing to do with the PIPE DREAMS my good friend Blobby has about Stevie Y.

[Hockey Widow]

I think sometimes we/me can caught up in the rebuild mentality and start thinking that trading almost everyone is going to make us better. I liked the Gudbranson trade, as did most people on this board. I didn’t think it was an overpayment but agreed it was a high price.

Now Gudbranson excited everyone his first few games. A hard hitting not afraid to fight type of guy. A lot of us called him Mitchell lite. We saw how much we needed a crusher on the back end. But alas two seasons of injuries and we really haven’t seen what we have in him.

If we can get a very good return trade him. If we can get a good contract sign him. But don’t just punt him because we are rebuilding. My preference, 4-5 year deal under 5 per. A Tanev type of deal. Limited or no trade protection.

[Blob Mckenzie]

Yikes I wouldn’t go a penny over 4 million per over 4 years and even then it seems high for a guy who is a bottom pairing guy on a decent team. I think he’s overpaid now for what he does. Is he better than Derek Englynd ?

The real question is what is his value ? I can’t see anyone coughing up a 1st for him or a top prospect. I can see him
maybe fetching a 2nd and a scrub. Far cry from 2016.

[Mickey107]

Can't tell about Gudbransson. Don't know where he's at.
The new Sportsnet radio 650am sucks. Old TSN 1040 has no access.
The new station almost never gets interviews with roster players except for post game shit which is nothin.
Some times when you hear guys talk, you can get a feel for what's up.
Would really like to hear Guds before shipping him out or re-signing him.

[Chef Boi RD]

Examples of Stalwart - Jared "Harold Druken" McCann Rasmus "Per Olav Brasar" Asplund.

I should have been more specific: a former 24th overall Jim Benning draft pick, and therefore, by standard Royal Dude criteria, generational.

Even the dearly beloved GMs like Pollock and Holland have their draft duds, its par for the course. A masterpiece is created through trial and error, the end result is all that matters, we are not there yet, patience grasshopper. The Genius is the asset management, Harold McCann and Anton Rasplund will only mount to a hill of beans, trust me. Guds is the better asset than those two jack asses combined

[Topper]

I think sometimes we/me can caught up in the rebuild mentality and start thinking that trading almost everyone is going to make us better. I liked the Gudbranson trade, as did most people on this board. I didn’t think it was an overpayment but agreed it was a high price.

Now Gudbranson excited everyone his first few games. A hard hitting not afraid to fight type of guy. A lot of us called him Mitchell lite. We saw how much we needed a crusher on the back end. But alas two seasons of injuries and we really haven’t seen what we have in him.

If we can get a very good return trade him. If we can get a good contract sign him. But don’t just punt him because we are rebuilding. My preference, 4-5 year deal under 5 per. A Tanev type of deal. Limited or no trade protection.

I've never quite understood this collective penchant for dumping Guds. It's been going on for months......buy the same folks who complain the Canucks are a bunch of light weights.

I see the Canuck defense about where the forward group was two years ago. It is time to let some vets move along, even if they must be nudged, placeholders get rotated and fish or cut bait on the kids.

[Chef Boi RD]

Bubbles can't see the forest through the trees (the drafting developing through the placeholders)

[dangler]

I think sometimes we/me can caught up in the rebuild mentality and start thinking that trading almost everyone is going to make us better. I liked the Gudbranson trade, as did most people on this board. I didn’t think it was an overpayment but agreed it was a high price.

Now Gudbranson excited everyone his first few games. A hard hitting not afraid to fight type of guy. A lot of us called him Mitchell lite. We saw how much we needed a crusher on the back end. But alas two seasons of injuries and we really haven’t seen what we have in him.

If we can get a very good return trade him. If we can get a good contract sign him. But don’t just punt him because we are rebuilding. My preference, 4-5 year deal under 5 per. A Tanev type of deal. Limited or no trade protection.

You forgot option #3: If you can't get a good return,if you can't sign him to a good contract, you lose him for nothing.
I wonder if the Aquamen are waiting to see how Benning does at the TD before deciding on keeping him.
It must put extra pressure on JB, no?

[Blob Mckenzie]

Bubbles can't see the forest through the trees (the drafting developing through the placeholders)

Obviously you would give Gudbranson what he wants. 5 million a year for a bottom pairing guy playing 17-18 min a night. You think Eriksson and Sutter are killing it as 30 point butter soft players. Salary cap be damned !!

[Island Nucklehead]

I think sometimes we/me can caught up in the rebuild mentality and start thinking that trading almost everyone is going to make us better. I liked the Gudbranson trade, as did most people on this board. I didn’t think it was an overpayment but agreed it was a high price.

Now Gudbranson excited everyone his first few games. A hard hitting not afraid to fight type of guy. A lot of us called him Mitchell lite. We saw how much we needed a crusher on the back end. But alas two seasons of injuries and we really haven’t seen what we have in him.

If we can get a very good return trade him. If we can get a good contract sign him. But don’t just punt him because we are rebuilding. My preference, 4-5 year deal under 5 per. A Tanev type of deal. Limited or no trade protection.

I don't think they are looking at moving him as rebuilding piece (he's 26 FFS), but because he's priced himself out of what they're willing to pay him and we need to recoup some assets that we spent acquiring him. If I'm his agent I'm looking for an Orpik-esque deal. Not sure the Canucks want to go there.

I think this was the problem a few people saw when we traded for him. Nobody hated the player or his style of play. The concern was the cost to acquire him, and his looming contract status. Here we are just over a year later, and the reality is McCann+2nd for 80-ish games of Gudbranson will not look good on the ledger if he a. walks for nothing, or b. returns a 2nd round pick.

[ukcanuck]

Been reading all of the Vanek trade talk and the consensus seems a 3 round pick.

Perhaps someone who tracks this sort of thing can tell me how often third rounders pan out to take regular shift on the big club?

Because I’m leaning towards keeping the guy.

He’s been bounced around a ton and I’m thinking if a club showed faith in him he would respond with a couple good years that we might not get out of a third round gamble.

I noticed his emotional reaction to scoring on Minnesota the other night. It seems like there is a heart beating under that jersey ?