Trades and rumours (& fantasies) 2013-14

[Hockey Widow]

I think the Canucks have made it clear that anyone not named Sedin they would move, for the right price. The right price being the operative phrase. I don't sense that the Canucks are in rebuild mode move players for the sake of change. I do sense that they know this team is not elite and are therefore, perhaps for the first time, contemplating moving pieces of the core.

I doubt MG moves players unless the return is good which means he is unlikely to move anyone of the core at the deadline. Other GMs may be calling but unless they are willing to make a real good offer I doubt MG pulls the trigger. MG has said it, he wants young roster players and prospects/picks, not aging veterans. They key is the combination of young roster players with prospects/picks. He wants help for now and in the future.

[Zedlee]

I think the Canucks have made it clear that anyone not named Sedin they would move, for the right price.

Could you please explain how have they made this clear and to whom?

To the contrary, Gillis has stated a couple of times that he would not ask anyone to waive their no movement/trade clause. That is pretty clear and means that the core stays put. I'd personally like to see some changes to the core, but I can't see how Gillis can state one thing publicly and then go and do the opposite.

[$lacker]

I think the Canucks have made it clear that anyone not named Sedin they would move, for the right price.

Could you please explain how have they made this clear and to whom?

To the contrary, Gillis has stated a couple of times that he would not ask anyone to waive their no movement/trade clause. That is pretty clear and means that the core stays put. I'd personally like to see some changes to the core, but I can't see how Gillis can state one thing publicly and then go and do the opposite.

What Gillis has made clear to other GM's and what he has made clear to the public are two very different things Zed. I'm assuming that HW is referring to the former. To me there is way too much smoke for there not to be something up. From everything we are seeing my thoughts are that 4 players have been asked that if should something come up, would they consider moving on?

Judging from the fact that Kesler played for the US for 4 games with this hand injury, yet can't play for his club team who is fighting tooth and nail to make it into the playoffs, maybe he is being held out if Gillis feels there is a good chance he is going to get the kind of deal he needs to make the trade. Of the four, probably only one or two gets traded, but if it goes down it will be significant.

[Zedlee]

I think the Canucks have made it clear that anyone not named Sedin they would move, for the right price.

Could you please explain how have they made this clear and to whom?

To the contrary, Gillis has stated a couple of times that he would not ask anyone to waive their no movement/trade clause. That is pretty clear and means that the core stays put. I'd personally like to see some changes to the core, but I can't see how Gillis can state one thing publicly and then go and do the opposite.

What Gillis has made clear to other GM's and what he has made clear to the public are two very different things Zed. I'm assuming that HW is referring to the former. To me there is way too much smoke for there not to be something up. From everything we are seeing my thoughts are that 4 players have been asked that if should something come up, would they consider moving on?

Judging from the fact that Kesler played for the US for 4 games with this hand injury, yet can't play for his club team who is fighting tooth and nail to make it into the playoffs, maybe he is being held out if Gillis feels there is a good chance he is going to get the kind of deal he needs to make the trade. Of the four, probably only one or two gets traded, but if it goes down it will be significant.

Given the Canucks swoon lately there is a lot of speculation in the papers and on Team 1040 but I'm not sure that is anything more than commentators stirring up the pot. I'm not impressed with the job Gillis has done overall, but I think he is a man of his word. I just can't believe that he would out and out lie to his ticket buying public with regards to the NTC's. Same with Kesler...hard to believe they would sit him out if he could go. I guess we shall see what the plan is by March 5. Should be interesting.

[Strangelove]

Gillis has stated a couple of times that he would not ask anyone to waive their no movement/trade clause. That is pretty clear and means that the core stays put.

There's a lot of talk about only the Sedins and Bieksa having FULL NTCs.

Some say all other NTC guys would submit a list of... 6-10??.. teams they'd accept a trade to each year.

So Gillis wouldn't necessarily have to ask some of these guys to waive their "NTC" to trade them.

I'd personally like to see some changes to the core, but I can't see how Gillis can state one thing publicly and then go and do the opposite.

1). LAWYER

2). What if during a crappy year player(s) approached Gillis and offered to waive NTC(s)?

[Topper]

I think the Canucks have made it clear that anyone not named Sedin they would move, for the right price.

Could you please explain how have they made this clear and to whom?

To the contrary, Gillis has stated a couple of times that he would not ask anyone to waive their no movement/trade clause. That is pretty clear and means that the core stays put. I'd personally like to see some changes to the core, but I can't see how Gillis can state one thing publicly and then go and do the opposite.

There has been no word from the Canucks, nor would anyone expect such. What we do know is that normally reliable reports like Pierre LeBrun and Bob McKenzie have noted a willingness to listen to offers an nearly anyone.

That does not mean that the team is actively shopping players. What it implies is that the Canucks have let it be know that if there is a player another team covets, give a call and submit a realistic offer to start discussions.

It initiates some back and forth that may get a deal done.

[Blob Mckenzie]

So let me hear this straight - Brett Connolly was drafted 5 years ago, sits like 100th in scoring in the AHL and you'd make him the centrepiece for Kesler? Wow. Fuck, I wouldn't even trade Nikkas Jensen straight up for him. Is it because he's a BC boy like the amazing Jason Garrison?

Who suggested this ? I for one said if they get Connolly back in an Edler deal that Tampa would have to add.

Why the need to take a poke at Garrison. He is a top 4 d man on a decent contract.

[Blob Mckenzie]

I think the Canucks have made it clear that anyone not named Sedin they would move, for the right price.

Could you please explain how have they made this clear and to whom?

To the contrary, Gillis has stated a couple of times that he would not ask anyone to waive their no movement/trade clause. That is pretty clear and means that the core stays put. I'd personally like to see some changes to the core, but I can't see how Gillis can state one thing publicly and then go and do the opposite.

It really doesn't have to be so black and white. Gillis could approach all of the players with the limited NTC and say the team is trying to re-tool and get younger. He could then ask if all of them are on board with that. I could think of at least one guy who wouldn't be on board with that or may be open to move to a contending club.

[$lacker]

As per @LouisJean_TVA, Ryan Kesler has asked the Canucks to trade him.

Well, this makes things interesting....

[Boston Canucker]

Well, in the very least, given that there has not been and does not seem likely to be much excitement on the ice, all these rumors will make Canuck watching interesting over the next week. I'd prefer to not trade Kesler but if 1) he really wants out and 2) the deal is very good, okay then. But for those GMs who think Kesler wanting a trade means Gillis will be forced to take a bad deal, the Luongo situation shows he won't, and their is no equivalent to Schneider behind Kesler. If there's no good deal for Kesler, he stays as an excellent #2 center, provided he's healthy.

Let the fun begin..or continue.

Okay, how about Kesler to NYR for Nash similar age, bigger cap hit for Nash but only for 4 more years, and he can still score...will it happen? can't imagine, but it's crazy speculation time, what the hell.

[The Brown Knight]

Kesler for Nash would be an absolutely terrible deal.

Canucks should be looking for a young promising guy either 25 or below. Period.

Stack up the farm, build up the prospect pool, complement the next Canuck core of Horvat, Shinkaruk, Kassian, etc.

None of this fucking Rick Nash crap.....with all due respect.

[ClamRussel]

Okay, how about Kesler to NYR for Nash similar age, bigger cap hit for Nash but only for 4 more years, and he can still score...will it happen? can't imagine, but it's crazy speculation time, what the hell.

Based on what fantasy?

Nash 42gp 18-9-27
Kesler 60gp 20-18-38

The grass is always greener...

[Boston Canucker]

Okay, how about Kesler to NYR for Nash similar age, bigger cap hit for Nash but only for 4 more years, and he can still score...will it happen? can't imagine, but it's crazy speculation time, what the hell.

Based on what fantasy?

Nash 42gp 18-9-27
Kesler 60gp 20-18-38

The grass is always greener...

18 in 42 is quite a bit better than 20 in 60. Nash had a bad start to season, concussion, but has been playing well, a threatening power forward, his game has been looking good. I see him play a lot. I don't want to lose Kesler but if we're talking trade, what the hell, lets have some fun with it....when it comes to trade deadline speculation it is all fantasy. I sure don't want Callahan back for him, we need scoring.

[BigTuna]

Nash has been the NHLs most overrated player for years. The rim-jobs he gets from the media as a "Franchise Player" is laughable.

[2Fingers]

Nash has been the NHLs most overrated player for years. The rim-jobs he gets from the media as a "Franchise Player" is laughable.

Just like 99% of the Laugh players.