Farhan Lalji wrote:-To clear cap space, I'd also try and move Kesler. Unlike Morrison and/or Cooke (who are also overpaid), it would be easier to move Kesler due to his potential...and young age. I know many will disagree with me on here, but Kesler is a dime a dozen Him being here for 1.9 mill is crazy IMO.
the Cunning Linguist wrote:Without the usual kneejerk reaction, I'll try to respond... First, you seem to forget that when Carter was here, the WCE still commanded most of the attention of the best checking lines and defence on the opposition; that of course changed later in the year.
And when that changed later in the year, the Sedin-Sedin-Carter line was STILL dominant. Pre-2004, the WCE line was STILL dominant despite them getting all the attention from the top D and checkers.Trading Naslund for Carter essentially makes Vancouver a one line team, plus a bunch of plumbers; they cannot carry this team now, nor under that scenario.
IMO, being a one-line team is better than being a ZERO line team (which is what the Canucks are right now). In the past, the Canucks never had problems putting the puck in the net despite being a one-line team.Trading for Carter essentially raises the salary load on that one line by the difference between Pyatt's salary and Carter's - 2.5M-$700k=$1.8M and for what? Marginally better scoring? Maybe? No, I wouldn't do it.
I'd argue that Sedin-Sedin-Carter would be significantly better than Sedin-Sedin-Pyatt. I'm not taking anything away from Pyatt. I'm very proud of what he's done for us this year, but he's still a below average player overall......one that has looked decent playing alongside the Sedins. Carter is an average player overall....and the Sedins' made him almost look like a superstar.If all the scoring is concentrated on the Sedin line, how is that any different than it is now? Oh yeah, we wouldn't have one of the best LW scoring threats over the last 5 years any longer...
Sid Dithers wrote:No I wouldn't take Carter back, that ship has sailed. Yes, Naslund is a better player. Anyone can walk down this road till your legs fall off. But the real problem has nothing to do with the Canucks top offensive players. It has to do with all the other players. If anyone thinks that the Sedins and Naslund are under pressure to score only 17 games into the season, imagine what it will be like by about game 60, with the Canucks on the outside looking in, Cooke and Kesler have 8 goals combined, and Green, Chouinard and Santala are still looking for their first of the year. Not to mention the team won't be getting much offensive help from the D corps this year. The truth is, Nonis loaded up the second, third and fourth lines with a bunch of stiffs and counted on guys who are on the downside to regain their form (Morrison and Cooke). And apart from some goals by Pyatt, none of it is working. The Sedins and Nazzy look like they are under the gun right now, but this is child's play compared to the pressure that is surely coming if some of these other plumbers don't start denting twine. And the cynic in me just doesn't see this happening in any meaningful way. At which point DN will come to realize the problem that is created with having a 6.75 mill goalie in a salary cap system.
Badfish wrote:...this whole post makes me wonder as to the truthfullness of Farhan's name...
How dare you!First off, comparing Naslund to Carter is ridiculous. you are right about Carter, but Naslund without the twins is hardly useless.
Naslund isn't useless without the twins but for 6 mill, shouldn't you expect more? Without the twins, how many goals/points does Naslund have this year? Has Naslund's line (sans Sedin twins) looked at ALL good this season? (save for maybe one or two games).
Furthermore, Naslund doesn't kill penalties, isn't the greatest defensive player, and won't hurt you physically.
I'm NOT saying that Naslund and Carter are the same. What I am saying however, is that Naslund hasn't done much this year without the Sedins'. I question whether he still has the ability to. If he no longer does, then his role/use/worth (as it pertains to the Canucks) is not much different than what Carter's would be.Second, Naslund never carried a line before really, if you think about it. This season is proof itself that the success of the WCE line was not due to one individual carrying the rest, but about 3 quite good players who just clicked.
I agree to an extent, but disagree as well. Did you watch Naslund play around 2000/2001? THAT was the year that the Canucks played the Avs in the 1st round. Naslund carried the Canucks on his ass that year. When Naslund broke his leg, the Canucks were finished.As for the Kesler thing, c'mon man! how could you miss that? Obviously 1.9 for Kesler being here is crazy, which is why we were about to sign him for less then half that before we got screwed into a bad situation by the now fired Bobby Clarke. There's nothing we can do with him but hope he either A) plays well enough to earn his 1.9 or B) Sign him for a more resonable price next year after not fullfilling his 1.9 this year.
I was unaware of the fact that we can't trade Kesler. I apologize for that. At the time however, I was UNHAPPY that the Canucks signed Kesler. I still stand by that. Hopefully, he picks it up.as was said above, our problems are not with our top offensive players, but with the rest. a good idea imo is Keep naslund, trade one of our trys-hard-but-can't-score forwards (ie Morrison, Cooke, pretty much anyone outside the Sedins, Pyatt and naslund.) for some offensive help to play with naslund, keeping the twin line intact while getting some talent for naslund to play with. Then we'd have two very solid lines. Of course, this is easier said then done. The debate between what we need more, an offensive forward or a defenseman is better left to another thread.
The problem with that scenario, is that Morrison and Cooke probably won't fetch us much right now (unless we trade one of them for another overpaid player....which ultimately, won't really make us better).I enjoy your posts Farhan, and I want to believe you are who you say you are, but on this one I just think you're way off
Farhan Lalji wrote:Bottom line: If Naslund, without the Sedins', cannot help/ignite the 2nd line, then he's basically no different than Anson Carter......just 3.5 million dollars more expensive.
True, but so then why would we want Carter, aside from the salary loss? no sense bringing him back to play with the twins, as Pyatt's doing a fine job so far, and Carter on the second line does us no good.
[/quote]I can see your point in that naslund's 6 mil may be better used elsewhere if he can't contribute on the second line, (although I'd rather add an offensive player to play with him first) but there are other players I would look to deal first. if we do trade him somewhere we better get more back then a frickin' anson carter. maybe 2 of them, but it's not worth the cap room if we're just going to get more mediocre players who have trouble scoring.
Island Nucklehead wrote:
Trading him for cap value? This I can see, but I would much rather get a couple younger players with some upside, not someone who can play with the Sedins. This team needs secondary scoring, if we could trade Naslund (which I would not be sold on), I would want at least 2 second line caliber players for him.