Trade Deadline Discussion

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

Moderator: Referees

Fred
CC Legend
Posts: 3434
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 7:00 pm

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion

Post by Fred » Fri Jan 20, 2012 1:14 pm

Quality RH defensemmen are much like hens back teeth...not many a round and although some lefties can play the other side there's a lot to it. Taking the puck along the boards on a dump in on your back hand, pivoting and lateral movement the different way. Big adjustments, some can most don't like to. I always remember years ago they moves Dennis Kerns form left to the right side....we lost a great left sided guy and ended up with a poor right sided guy instead.
cheers

ESQ
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2577
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 6:34 pm

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion

Post by ESQ » Fri Jan 20, 2012 1:19 pm

coco_canuck wrote:Just read a great article about Raymond.
Wow that was good! I have never seen such a well-written, balanced, thought-out article about "another team" in the mainstream media, let alone a blogger!

But here's my question: Does Hansen bring the exact same things to the table that Raymond does?

In Raymond's best season, he was averaging over 17 min/g, and put up 53 points. This year, Hansen is averaging just under 15 min/g and is on pace for 44 points. Raymond had 18 points on the PP, Hansen has 0 this year.

After 08/09, I saw Raymond as a Tanguay-type upside - 70-80 point range at his peak, excellent complementary player. Last year the wrist injury caused a lot more damage than he let on, which contributed to his decreased ice time. Do I think he still has that potential? Tough to say with Kesler's struggles, but its clear to me that Kesler is the straw that stirs the drink on the second line, not Raymond.

Hansen meanwhile has been effective playing with Malhotra, Hodgson, Lapierre, and Henrik as his centremen. So I guess what I'm saying is, despite the solid qualities of Raymond, Hansen's emergence this year may have made him more expendable than the author acknowledges.

User avatar
coco_canuck
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 966
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 9:54 pm

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion

Post by coco_canuck » Fri Jan 20, 2012 1:22 pm

Potatoe1 wrote: This bit is also totally on point and echos what some of us have been saying all season.

The Canucks played the 2 most physical teams in the conference (Sharks and Pred) and had no problems. When they played a less physical Hawks team they had such a large edge that I the Hawks moved a high end defenseman to open cap space for more grit (this is my opinion anyway, otherwise trading Campbell just makes no sense at all).
Yup, we've been banging that drum for a while now, and I think slowly many are coming around to it.

It really is a well reasoned article. I found myself nodding as I was reading it, which is more than I can say about many of our own local media and bloggers. Although to be fair, there is some good stuff being published locally, but it tends to be tainted with emotion or special interest.

Really on point about the Hawks and Wings, especially the Hawks who decided to go with more peripheral toughness instead of speed and skill.

From everything I've seen of the Hawks this year, they're certainly one of the top teams in the West, but if all things remain equal, I wouldn't be the least bit concerned about meeting them in the playoffs. The Canucks/Hawks rivalry has undergone a complete role reversal. Vancouver is just more skilled, faster and deeper.

I said this earlier, when the Canucks are relatively healthy and play their game, they're easily the best team in the league.
Potatoe1 wrote:
It seems we have officially eliminated Rome and Ballard as right side Salo replacements to it's either going to be Tanev or some ridiculously over priced rental player.
Seems that way.

I don't move Tanev unless a significantly more valuable defenceman is coming back the other way. I don't think he's going to be a number 1 defenceman, but at the very least he's going to be a capable top 4 d-man. The most familiar comparison I can make for Tanev is Hamhuis, minus the physical side and overall shooting ability.

It's pretty clear Ballard and Rome are nothing more than 5-7 d-men on this team. They could do reasonably well for stretches if they play they could play the left-side on the 2nd pairing, but that's not usually the need.

Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1612
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion

Post by Potatoe1 » Fri Jan 20, 2012 1:33 pm

tantalum wrote:I like Schenn but he's a summer type of acquisition. He's not a deadline acquisition for what should be a contending team. He is struggling and acquiring that type of guy is taking the player from the frying pan and putting him the fire. Do that move in the summer and the kid gets a clean slate has the summer, camp and 82 games to work on his game before the playoffs role around.

In all honesty, if the canucks decide to move Schneider over Luongo (likely), than a deal for Schenn is the type of deal I'd love to see....but in the summer.
I agree there is a short term risk with Schenn, still though, very big upside there.

As for "waiting" I guess it just depends on what might be available now vs. draft day. Tough to speculate although I don't see Schneiders stock getting any higher unless he takes Lu's job, in which case he wont be traded.

User avatar
The Brown Wizard
CC Legend
Posts: 8838
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:19 pm
Location: in the shed with a fresh packed bowl

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion

Post by The Brown Wizard » Fri Jan 20, 2012 1:44 pm

mathonwy wrote: I'm a big Rome fan.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUYqTE3cnuQ
I still say it wasn't THAT late...
Witchcraft... Oh, but it IS. A dark and terrible magic...

User avatar
tantalum
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1911
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 3:41 am
Location: Carl Junction, MO

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion

Post by tantalum » Fri Jan 20, 2012 1:55 pm

Potatoe1 wrote: I agree there is a short term risk with Schenn, still though, very big upside there.
No doubt. Upside for upside deal.
As for "waiting" I guess it just depends on what might be available now vs. draft day. Tough to speculate although I don't see Schneiders stock getting any higher unless he takes Lu's job, in which case he wont be traded.
I tend to believe that Gillis won't move Schneider until the draft. I think for one he wants insurance if Loungo gets hurt, but I also think there is that niggling feeling in the back of everybody's mind that maybe Luongo isn't the way of the future. If I has to put odds on it, 95% chance it's Schneider gets moved, perhaps even higher. However, a poor playoff where one of the major weaknesses is Luongo during that series and there might be some soul searching going on in the organization.

Personally I don't see his value being lower on draft day provided he doesn't get hurt. Right now the bulk of teams looking for goaltending are not playoff teams. They are sellers who I'm sure would be fine with solving a goaltending issue but they would be just as fine waiting until draft day. Once the playoffs are done you may also have additional teams that are all of a sudden questioning the goaltending situation.

Again, I'm just not sure a deal for Schenn is a deal I make right now as he is struggling. I'd be sorely tempted to do so and if as a GM I also had a line on a competent back up (i.e. not a reimer or gustavsson) I would pull the trigger, because honestly I wouldn't much hesitate to do that deal in the summer. Schenn fills a need moving forward. But can you find that dependable back up?

Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1612
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion

Post by Potatoe1 » Fri Jan 20, 2012 2:20 pm

coco_canuck wrote: Yup, we've been banging that drum for a while now, and I think slowly many are coming around to it.

It really is a well reasoned article. I found myself nodding as I was reading it, which is more than I can say about many of our own local media and bloggers. Although to be fair, there is some good stuff being published locally, but it tends to be tainted with emotion or special interest.

Really on point about the Hawks and Wings, especially the Hawks who decided to go with more peripheral toughness instead of speed and skill.
The media does seem to be coming around a bit though.

After the loss in the finals all we heard about was how the team lacked grit and toughness, we were basically portrayed like a passive group of bunnies that would fold as soon as some big mean hockey players stepped on the ice.

The broken record was played so loudly all summer that even some teams bough in and tried to push us around.

The Hawks were the best example of a group that bought into the myth. They dump Campbell add a couple of goons, then in their fist game against us they play like a bunch of dummies and get hammered by our power play. In their second game against us they play a total clean no hitter and win easily.

We are now more then half way through the season and I can only think of 1 game were the "pushing us around" game plan actually worked to the other teams advantage and that was the game in LA a few weeks back.

I'm not even sure it was the physical play as much as the fact that the Canucks simply didn't match the Kings effort.
From everything I've seen of the Hawks this year, they're certainly one of the top teams in the West,
Of course they are.

Last years poor regular season was a total anomaly IMO, that Hawks team is good and will be good for a long time. I do not however consider them a favorite in the west and I think they hurt themselves a lot by Trading Campbell for a bunch of riff raff.

That team is good because their core is excellent and they have other good talent coming through their system. There attempt to "get tougher" was quite misguided and poorly executed IMO.

I said this earlier, when the Canucks are relatively healthy and play their game, they're easily the best team in the league.
One of the things that rang true in the Blog was how the Bruins matched up against us once Kesler was injured.

He said he wasn't sure about the outcome of the final because he felt the Bruins could shut down the Twins and that the rest of the canucks roster wouldn't be able to score enough.

That is basically what happened although we also had some defence / goaltending issues as well.

If you look at what Gillis has done since the final it would seem that he echos the same concerns.

Gillis really hasn't added toughness what he's done is make the second and 3rd line a lot more offensively potent.

He added a player in Booth who cant fight a lick but can battle in front and score goals in traffic, and the 3rd line is now a scoring line vs the physical checking unit we had last year.

Chara is the best defensive player in the game right now but when he is off the ice the Bruins defense is really nothing special. Guys like McQuaid, Ference and Boychuck, are quite tough and physical, but their defensive game isn't gret.

This BTW is part of the reason Boston just feasts on bad teams, Chara shuts down their best players and there isn't a lot of depth to exploit their 2nd and 3rd defensive pairings. The teams with scoring depth haven't had much of a problem against the Bruins this year.

A healthy Kesler and Booth should have a field day against the second pairing, not to mention Hodgson and Raymond.

You want to beat the Bruins forget trying to hit and fight with them. You beat them on the power play and by getting scoring from the 2nd, and 3rd lines.

That's why mediocre Tampa team had them on the ropes last year.

User avatar
coco_canuck
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 966
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 9:54 pm

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion

Post by coco_canuck » Fri Jan 20, 2012 2:59 pm

Potatoe1 wrote: You want to beat the Bruins forget trying to hit and fight with them. You beat them on the power play and by getting scoring from the 2nd, and 3rd lines.

That's why Tampa had them on the ropes last year.
Yup,

As an aside, not pointed at you, it's just interesting how the perception is that the Bolts had the Bruins on the ropes and lost in game 7, and how the Canucks were dominated and lost in game 7. It all came down to expectations, but each series was a long, and demanding battle that really could have gone either way.

Fans don't want to hear it, but if you consider the injuries the Canucks had, still getting to game 7 was a testament to the talent on the team.

Last year the 2nd was the helicopter line, and when the blades stopped spinning, well, it's simple physics. You're right in pointing out this team is much better equipped to handle big injury.

The concern right now is an extra top 4 d-man that can play the right side, and that could be solved with Tanev if he can keep up.

If Tanev can't, then I'd be looking for a good defenseman, but otherwise I'd simply look for a depth winger with some toughness. Another depth d-man wouldn't hurt either, but with 9 capable NHL d-men including Tanev, a 10th isn't a pressing need.

User avatar
Jovocop
CC Legend
Posts: 3779
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:18 pm

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion

Post by Jovocop » Fri Jan 20, 2012 4:14 pm

One more defenseman off the list.
BEAUCHEMIN, DUCKS COME TO TERMS ON THREE-YEAR EXTENSION

ANAHEIM, Calif. -- The Anaheim Ducks have signed veteran defenceman Francois Beauchemin to a three-year contract extension worth US$10.5 million.

Anaheim announced the deal Friday, keeping Beauchemin off the free-agent market this summer.

Beauchemin is in his seventh full NHL season, playing briefly in Montreal and Columbus before a trade sent him to the Ducks in November 2005. He won the Stanley Cup with Anaheim in 2007.

Beauchemin signed with Toronto as a free agent in 2009, but the Ducks reacquired Beauchemin on Feb. 9 last year, giving up high-scoring forward Joffrey Lupul and top prospect Jake Gardiner.

The 31-year-old Beauchemin is Anaheim's top-scoring defenceman this season with six goals and 12 assists. He scored two goals on Wednesday in the Ducks' sixth win in seven games after a miserable start.

User avatar
Orcasfan
CC Veteran
Posts: 126
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 8:28 pm

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion

Post by Orcasfan » Fri Jan 20, 2012 6:54 pm

This has turned into a really interesting, thoughtful (for the most part) thread. Thanks to all, but I especially want to tip my hat to coco_canuck, pot, and Fred, for helping me evolve my thinking on the issue of a right-shooting D on that right side for the Canucks. For some reason, this seems to have become a bigger issue for the Canucks than you hear about with other teams. Of course, that may be one of the problems - you never hear about it because none of our brilliant sports journalists ever mentions it! :roll:

Regardless, the issue has become very public now with the call-up of Tanev. AV made it very clear that he was given a chance to fill in on that right side with Edler, replacing Salo, because no one else was satisfactory in that position. So you have to assume that if Tanev does well, then he will stay up and probably move down to the right side of the 3rd pairing after Salo returns. Then, the pressure will really be on MG to trade Ballard, either at the deadline or at the draft. There's no way, he can justify paying a 3rd pairing D that much - 4.2 mil! :wow:

User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Legend
Posts: 15197
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion

Post by Hockey Widow » Fri Jan 20, 2012 7:19 pm

It does seem simple at face value doesn't it. Count me in with those that think the Tanev re-call is to find a solid r/s D man to help offset the loss of Salo but moving forward to help stabilize the bottom pairing. Ballard and Tanev played well together on the bottom pairing and if Tanev is going to stay then there is no reason to not keep them together, when Salo is healthy, unless you need the Ballard cap space. If you don't then you keep him until the end of the season then evaluate. If you need the cap space fine you have Alberts, Rome and Sulzer to play there.

This move may just be the end of the stubbornness of trying to fit a L/S onto the R/S year after year and seeing it fail for some reason. We have all seen this before when Salo goes down, our whole defence looks confused and out of synch. More than any other single D man being out. So the problem seems that we have failed to find a l/s guy who can adequately and efficiently slide over to play the r/s. So logic would dictate that if MG is going to add someone on the back end it has to be a R/S d'man. They are hard to come by and would suggest even more that Tanev would not be moved in any package. HE is a valuable commodity for us moving forward.

But when Salo gets back we have to be concerned about roster spots and cap so unless MG is willing to waive an Alberts, Rome or Sulzer and if he has not traded one of them, then Tanev will likely be sent back.

I guess I never really understood all of this before and now that I do it makes sense. But if Tanev is ready to stay in the NHL it may be time for them to let someone else go to make room. Play to your strengths.
The only HW the Canucks need

User avatar
Chef Boi RD
CC Legend
Posts: 15799
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:36 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion

Post by Chef Boi RD » Fri Jan 20, 2012 9:07 pm

tantalum wrote: In all honesty, if the canucks decide to move Schneider over Luongo (likely), than a deal for Schenn is the type of deal I'd love to see....but in the summer.
You are completely mental if you are trading Schneider for Schenn. A guaranteed good player in Schneider, franchise goalie in the making for a non-guaranteed player. Who's taking the risk here? We are. Stupid trade for us, but GREAT for Toronto.

What is all the love affair for a D-man who is stinking the joint out in Tee-Oh? Oh I know, as soon as he plays for us, he will become that superstar D-man that was expected of him, cause like all top draft picks always pan out, ie Gilbert Brule, Jason Bonsignore, Brendl, Daniel Tkaczuk and so on and so on and so on and so on.
"I just want to say one word to you. Just one word. Are you listening? - Plastics." - The Graduate

User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 22179
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion

Post by Strangelove » Fri Jan 20, 2012 9:48 pm

coco_canuck wrote: Rome is a pretty underrated player and that's because the perception is that the coaching staff is overrating him.
Image
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!

Waffle
CC Veteran
Posts: 107
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2011 11:38 am

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion

Post by Waffle » Sat Jan 21, 2012 12:45 am

Canucks Army had a post in December entitled "Defenseman Trade Targets" and gave a list of players who might be available by the trade deadline. Its depressing how thin the list was, and Josh Gorges is no longer on it. It will be pure genius if the team can add a right sided defenceman at the deadline without giving up any significant assets, as it seems like just about every team in the league is looking for the same thing.

Johnny Oduya
Bryan Allen/Tim Gleason
Mark Eaton
Shane O’Brien
Shea Weber
Jamie McBain
Carlo Colaiacovo
Pavel Kubina/Brett Clark (Clark is a left handed shot though)
Toni Lydman
Josh Gorges
(I removed Willie Mitchell)

DEFENSEMAN TRADE TARGETS
http://canucksarmy.com/2011/12/8/defens ... de-targets

User avatar
tantalum
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1911
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 3:41 am
Location: Carl Junction, MO

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion

Post by tantalum » Sat Jan 21, 2012 7:53 am

RoyalDude wrote:
tantalum wrote: In all honesty, if the canucks decide to move Schneider over Luongo (likely), than a deal for Schenn is the type of deal I'd love to see....but in the summer.
You are completely mental if you are trading Schneider for Schenn. A guaranteed good player in Schneider, franchise goalie in the making for a non-guaranteed player. Who's taking the risk here? We are. Stupid trade for us, but GREAT for Toronto.

What is all the love affair for a D-man who is stinking the joint out in Tee-Oh? Oh I know, as soon as he plays for us, he will become that superstar D-man that was expected of him, cause like all top draft picks always pan out, ie Gilbert Brule, Jason Bonsignore, Brendl, Daniel Tkaczuk and so on and so on and so on and so on.
First thing....I rarely discuss trades as "I would trade this for that". I discuss the players as a basis for a trade. Schneider for Schenn would be the basis for a trade...the core of the trade if you will, but not necessarily the entire trade.

Second, I love Schneider. I would personally have little issue with the team moving forward with him over Luongo following this season. BUt let's not pretend he is some sort of guaranteed superstar goaltender. He has 54 games under his belt and never had to be a starter in the NHL. There are question marks about Schneider. I also don't believe anyone is calling Schenn a superstar D-man but rather a guy who will likely become a solid top 4 physical D-man. Maybe more but I'm not sure he'll become less. That struggling player right now is on pace for about 25 points and a plus season at 15-17 minutes a game. He's a right side guy. Very much the type of guy the canucks can use now and in the future. And he's 22...about a month older than Tanev. Call me crazy but if the canucks are going forward with Luongo there are far worse things the team could do than move forward with a sub-26 year old core of Edler, Schenn and Tanev on the back end.

And hell who knows, make that deal a deal on draft day involving a Schenn or Tanev for Weber may become a reality. The Preds don't want Schneider but may want another piece from the canucks along with the piece the canucks can get for Schneider.

Or move Schneider for a young forward. Do whatever but the core of the return is likely going to be a young player with promise.

Post Reply