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

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion

Postby RoyalDude » Fri Jan 20, 2012 9:11 am

okcanuck wrote:who said anything about Scott Stevens. Next time read the post . All I said was Luke can be developed into a top 4 D. Guaranteed superstar? Where do you see that on my post? IMO the Leafs destroyed any confidence that an 18 year-old could possess. The leafs were going nowhere that year and it was ridiculous for Wilson to say at the time that he was one of their top defenceman.

No, Burke and Wilson blew it as far as Schenn is concerned, but his career can be resurected given better coaching and patience.


I was just using Stevens as an example, pick any successful D-man, I don't care, Kevin Lowe? 'Can Be'??? Like Gilbert Brule 'Can Be' developed into a Top 6 Forward? Are we still blaming the Blue Jackets on destroying Brule's confidence? Here's some advice, not all high draft picks pan out, plain and simple, but hey Ron Wilson must be an idiot, the architect for Schenn's disappointing pro career, blame him. Eventually, Schenn is gonna have to stand up for himself and prove he belongs just like everybody else in the working world.

There are no guarantees in life okcanuck, so why are you trading a guaranteed player for a non-guaranteed player? I guess you like to roll Las Vegas style.

Ask the Avalanche if they would like Shattenkirk and Stewart back for Johnson? I think we all know the answer to that one.
"I just want to say one word to you. Just one word. Are you listening? - Plastics." - The Graduate
User avatar
RoyalDude
CC Legend
 
Posts: 9534
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:36 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion

Postby Vpete » Fri Jan 20, 2012 9:36 am

BladesofSteel wrote:Today's trade proposal:

Mason Raymond and Chris Tanev
for
Zach Bogosian and Chris Thorburn

Doesn't solve all the problems, but would certainly make the team more "balanced".


Chevy hangs up the phone laughing so hard it breaks the ice frozen on Winnipeg's rivers. Bogosian is far from under-performing and is actually starting to play like he was predicted too. Thorburn could be available as a gritty forward but he is key on the GST line, Glass, Slater, Thorburn as an effective checking and physical group who pots a few goals. Yeah really,, I'm serious.

Guy you might be able to pull out of Winnipeg is Fehr but he sucks.
Brick Top: Do you know what "nemesis" means? A righteous infliction of retribution manifested by an appropriate agent. Personified in this case by an 'orrible cunt... me.
Vpete
CC 2nd Team All-Star
 
Posts: 320
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion

Postby coco_canuck » Fri Jan 20, 2012 11:20 am

Just read a great article about Raymond.

I was going to post something about the sudden clamouring for trading Raymond (not just on this site), but this article does a really good job of it and I don't have much to add to it.

This is from a non-Vancouver perspective, but it's a well written and salient article that takes a very rational look at Raymond's value.

http://sharkcircle.wordpress.com/2012/01/20/vancouver-canucks-would-be-foolish-to-trade-mason-raymond/
User avatar
coco_canuck
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 966
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 9:54 pm

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion

Postby Vpete » Fri Jan 20, 2012 11:27 am

coco_canuck wrote:Just read a great article about Raymond.

I was going to post something about the sudden clamouring for trading Raymond (not just on this site), but this article does a really good job of it and I don't have much to add to it.

This is from a non-Vancouver perspective, but it's a well written and salient article that takes a very rational look at Raymond's value.

http://sharkcircle.wordpress.com/2012/01/20/vancouver-canucks-would-be-foolish-to-trade-mason-raymond/


That's a really well thought out article- good points. Now can we get him to tell us what's wrong with 5-6 d-pairing?
Brick Top: Do you know what "nemesis" means? A righteous infliction of retribution manifested by an appropriate agent. Personified in this case by an 'orrible cunt... me.
Vpete
CC 2nd Team All-Star
 
Posts: 320
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion

Postby Potatoe1 » Fri Jan 20, 2012 11:32 am

RoyalDude wrote:
I was just using Stevens as an example, pick any successful D-man,


There is a pretty big difference between a first ballot hall of famer like Scott Stevens and "any ole defenseman".

How about finding a physical second pairing guy which is all I heard anyone talking about with regard to Schenn.

Do you not think he's capable of that?


Bogosian is far from under-performing and is actually starting to play like he was predicted too.


I agree, they are nuts if they trade him.

People's expectations for young defenseman is quite insane. Guys like Fowler and DD are complete anomalies, most of defenseman don't start coming into their own until their early / mid twenties.

3 things good GM's should never move. Good young defenseman with high end upside, young potential power forwards, and their first round pick when coming off a lottery season.

Everything else can be excused but trading those things generally makes you look foolish.
Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1614
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion

Postby Fred » Fri Jan 20, 2012 11:41 am

Nice to read an article or opinion where the author doesn't have a dog in the fight. The author does mention that maybe there are to many Raymond types on the roster so his value would be greater else where ?
cheers
Fred
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3433
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 7:00 pm

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion

Postby coco_canuck » Fri Jan 20, 2012 11:47 am

Vpete wrote:That's a really well thought out article- good points. Now can we get him to tell us what's wrong with 5-6 d-pairing?


:lol:

I don't know the writer, but I'll take a shot at it.

The easy answer is Ballard, Rome and Alberts' inability to play the right side.

It's not much of a problem when Salo plays with Edler, because then the top 2 pairings are stabilized, and it makes it easier to hide the 3rd pair and find more favourable match-ups. But when one of the top pairings begin to struggle, there's more pressure on the 3rd pair, and that bottom pairing's mistakes are magnified due to seemingly cascading mistakes.

I have to say, I'm really surprised none of the left-handed d-men on this team can fairly comfortably play the right side. Yes, it's favourable to have a right-handed player on the right-side, but given the disproportionate number of left-handed d-men compared to right-handed ones in the league, nearly every team employs a left-handed d-man or two on the other side.

Rome and Ballard can be decent on the right side as long as they're on the 3rd pair and play protected minutes, the problems arise when Rome or Sulzer is paired with Edler and have to face stiffer competition.

The automatic reaction is to point to the absence of Salo's talent, but more than anything, it's due to him being a capable right-handed d-man. Of course, Salo is great defensively with high hockey IQ, and he has great passing ability, but if as long as the Canucks can get someone on the right-side who can handle top 4 minutes, the defence as a whole and the 3rd pair should improve significantly.

Some suggest Tanev is being showcased, and that may very well be the case, but my automatic assumption was for him to play on Edler's right side to stabilize the defence. Tanev doesn't need to do anything extraordinary when paired up with a talent like Edler, he needs to maintain his poise and confidence, and just make simple and safe plays under pressure. Tanev also has great hockey IQ for a young player and he's a fantastic skater. Not too diminish Rome, but Tanev is a much better fit on Edler's off side.

In regards to Rome, he has been pretty bad since he came back from injury, but that's not uncommon. We tend to be harder on him and more disparaging due to Ballard's situation and the confidence the coaching staff has in Rome, but in fairness to Aaron, he's a really solid 5-6 D-man. Rome is a pretty underrated player and that's because the perception is that the coaching staff is overrating him. Regardless, I wouldn't worry too much about Rome being a problem for this team, and if anything we should be happy we have a capable player like him playing for peanuts.
User avatar
coco_canuck
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 966
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 9:54 pm

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion

Postby tantalum » Fri Jan 20, 2012 11:56 am

coco_canuck wrote:Just read a great article about Raymond.

I was going to post something about the sudden clamouring for trading Raymond (not just on this site), but this article does a really good job of it and I don't have much to add to it.

This is from a non-Vancouver perspective, but it's a well written and salient article that takes a very rational look at Raymond's value.

http://sharkcircle.wordpress.com/2012/01/20/vancouver-canucks-would-be-foolish-to-trade-mason-raymond/


Pretty much what I have said. While Raymond appears to be the expendable guy who you can argue is dropping down the depth chart a bit you can't simply move him for grit (like the Neil and Ott proposals you see kicking around). The player coming back has to bring many of the same elements to the table in addition to some extra grit. That new guy doesn't have to be as fast or perhaps not as good of a penalty killer but he needs to be close because as the author says, Raymond is a very good two-way player without that gritty element to his game. And given the canucks are very much a team that stresses two way play and is made up of two-way players Raymond is not just some guy they are wasting a roster spot on. You also have to factor in how his team mates may feel about moving a guy that has battled back from a broken back and has returned to the lineup almost as if he never missed a game.

Though I somewhat disagree with the Ruutu thought. I think Ruutu is the type of guy that brings many of those same things to the table that Raymond does AND has some grit. The tripping point is that he is UFA while Raymond will be RFA and likely to sign a multi-year deal wherever he ends the year.
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

Postby coco_canuck » Fri Jan 20, 2012 12:01 pm

Potatoe1 wrote:
RoyalDude wrote:How about finding a physical second pairing guy which is all I heard anyone talking about with regard to Schenn.


I know you've been banging the Schenn drum here, and while I think he's better than those opposed to your idea say he is, but I'm not sure I would give Schneider and dump Ballard to get Schenn.

Call me naive, but I think Gillis will have an easier time moving Ballard than many think, and all you need to do is look around the league and see the lack of capable d-men who are relatively young, and look at the cap space many teams will have next season, regardless of what happens with the CBA.

$4.2M isn't chump change, but given the UFA market for D-men, it's hardly a ridiculous price-tag.

I think the Canucks can find a deal where maybe they send draft-pick or mid-level prospect for someone to take Ballard..or they can take on a player or two with smaller salaries who they either just waive or use as depth if the cap allows it.

With that, I don't think there's any pressing need to sacrifice Schneider, or any other top asset's value, by including Ballard's salary in the deal.

As for Schenn, it's true he has some assets that the Canucks can use, but so far I'm seeing a player who is struggling to fit in the top 4. So far this year his ice-time is down by 6 minutes compared to last season. Granted, d-men can take longer to develop, but his regression is a cause for concern. I suppose he could improve in the Canucks' environment, but that's not a guarantee and it could be fairly long-process that may or may not pay off.

I'm not sold on his offensive ability, and I haven't seen much improvement in his shut-down game over his 4 year NHL career.
User avatar
coco_canuck
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 966
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 9:54 pm

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion

Postby tantalum » Fri Jan 20, 2012 12:05 pm

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.
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

Postby coco_canuck » Fri Jan 20, 2012 12:07 pm

tantalum wrote:Though I somewhat disagree with the Ruutu thought. I think Ruutu is the type of guy that brings many of those same things to the table that Raymond does AND has some grit. The tripping point is that he is UFA while Raymond will be RFA and likely to sign a multi-year deal wherever he ends the year.


I think they're similar in offensive production, but it's interesting to note that Ruutu has scored 20 goals twice, but only once since the lock-out and he's had some injury issues.

He does bring grit, but his defensive game isn't as good as Raymond's, nor is he as fast.

I actually value Raymond higher than Ruutu based on age, talent, assets and potential.

Also as you mentioned, Ruutu's current salary is $1.3M more than Raymond's and he's hitting UFA at the end of the year where he's likely looking to cash in on an overpayment by the traditionally over-zealous teams looking to boost their top 6.
User avatar
coco_canuck
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 966
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 9:54 pm

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion

Postby Potatoe1 » Fri Jan 20, 2012 12:17 pm

coco_canuck wrote:This is from a non-Vancouver perspective, but it's a well written and salient article that takes a very rational look at Raymond's value.

http://sharkcircle.wordpress.com/2012/01/20/vancouver-canucks-would-be-foolish-to-trade-mason-raymond/



To be honest I have never put any stock in the Rymond rumors, I'm not totally adverse to trading him, but I dont think Gillis will.

This bit prety much perfectly captures why Raymond is a good player
And then, in a flash, they see Mason Raymond appear all the way from off the screen behind and catch the forward, causing a turnover the other way and getting the play turned back in the right direction. That’s what Mason Raymond is, to me, he’s a great “territorial player,” he keeps the play moving towards the other net instead of his. And when you’re on the ice with someone like that, you have a greater margin for error, because he has the speed to recover and prevent rushes going the other way.


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

Although, what many pundits don’t realize about the Vancouver Canucks, specifically, is that they are much stronger and grittier than they are given credit for.

For instance, the Chicago Blackhawks and always-adored Detroit Red Wings are actually much softer than the Canucks, and much more lacking in muscle and players who can win battles along the boards and in front of the net. If you want proof (for the Red Wings, anyway), just watch how the Wings played against the big San Jose Sharks lineup the last two postseasons compared to how the Canucks played them. One team looked completely out of its league physically, outmatched and scared, and one team had far less problem with the Sharks’ size. That’s not to say if I’m a Canucks fan, I’m not wishing for more roster help in the form of physical forwards or physical two-way D, but I know if I’m a Blackhawks or Red Wings fan, I’m wishing a lot harder for those same things.

I’m amazed at how much flack the Canucks receive for a lack of grit while the Red Wings get none at all, even though they are the team who got manhandled two years in a row by the Sharks. How is being manhandled by the Sharks better than being manhandled by the much more physical Bruins when you’re injured?


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).
Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1614
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion

Postby Vpete » Fri Jan 20, 2012 12:24 pm

I'm a proponent of Ott but I don't say that trading Raymond is the way to do it. The problem with sites like capgeek and such is they allow people to create trades (and rumous) based on matching salary numbers as if that is the only consideration.

Look at the morons at Calpuck every trade starts with Stajan because his salary is so dumb. Similar to trades where Ballard is shipped out from Vancouver.

The best news for the Canucks is that Raymond will still be affordable should they wish to re-sign him. That's alright in my book.

I like how the author of that article essentially agrees with the thoughts on the Canucks having 1/3 Kesler, no Hamhuis, a lost Raymond and still doesn't even touch on no Samuelsson as having a significant effect on the finals.
Brick Top: Do you know what "nemesis" means? A righteous infliction of retribution manifested by an appropriate agent. Personified in this case by an 'orrible cunt... me.
Vpete
CC 2nd Team All-Star
 
Posts: 320
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion

Postby Potatoe1 » Fri Jan 20, 2012 12:39 pm

coco_canuck wrote:
Some suggest Tanev is being showcased, and that may very well be the case, but my automatic assumption was for him to play on Edler's right side to stabilize the defence. Tanev doesn't need to do anything extraordinary when paired up with a talent like Edler, he needs to maintain his poise and confidence, and just make simple and safe plays under pressure. Tanev also has great hockey IQ for a young player and he's a fantastic skater. Not too diminish Rome, but Tanev is a much better fit on Edler's off side.



I just cant agree with those who think Tanev is being shopped.

The kid is basically the only young player in the organization that can be counted on to play in the NHL and the fact we can stash him on the farm to increase our over all depth holds significant value.

I personally think the Canucks are grooming him to step into Salos spot when he retires. The call up is IMO just management wanting to have a "look see" at a kid who has made big strides in the AHL (note the moose have basically turned their season around with Tanev leading them in ice time).

If he plays well next to Edler then he becomes the insurance against Salos injury and the Canucks can avoid paying a kings ransom for another top4 at the deadline.

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.
Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1614
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: Trade Deadline Discussion

Postby mathonwy » Fri Jan 20, 2012 12:46 pm

coco_canuck wrote:In regards to Rome, he has been pretty bad since he came back from injury, but that's not uncommon. We tend to be harder on him and more disparaging due to Ballard's situation and the confidence the coaching staff has in Rome, but in fairness to Aaron, he's a really solid 5-6 D-man. Rome is a pretty underrated player and that's because the perception is that the coaching staff is overrating him. Regardless, I wouldn't worry too much about Rome being a problem for this team, and if anything we should be happy we have a capable player like him playing for peanuts.

I'm a big Rome fan.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUYqTE3cnuQ
User avatar
mathonwy
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2108
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 1:53 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Canucks Corner Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 5thhorseman, Bing [Bot] and 10 guests