CanucksCorner.com Forums

damonberryman wrote:I realize how lame this sounds but I will say it anyway. We seem to be in most games.

Isn't that managements stated goal. to be competitive on a nightly basis.

Blob Mckenzie wrote: Benning is a dead man walking at this point. So are Trevor and Willie

Wanna bet?

Hockey Widow wrote:

Island Nucklehead wrote:

SKYO wrote:

Hockey Widow wrote:Buffalo is apparently shopping Mikhail Grigorenko. Don't want to pay him on his next deal. Maybe the deal for Kane is dead but.....Hutton for Grigorenko?

You mean colorado?

She might mean Girgensons. Not sure how he helps us, except for filling the "Age Gap".

Yes, sorry, I got the wrong guy. Got my Grigs and Girgs mixed up

Lol I remember when Grigs & Girgs were supposed to be the next big thing in Buffalo.

Hmm they've still got a lot of young centres in Buffalo these days... and a shortage on dee moving forward.

Hutton for Reinhart anyone?

Strangelove wrote:Lol I remember when Grigs & Girgs were supposed to be the next big thing in Buffalo.

They may not have had bigger fish to fry, but they certainly took care of a smaller one.

Topper wrote:

Strangelove wrote:Lol I remember when Grigs & Girgs were supposed to be the next big thing in Buffalo.

They may not have had bigger fish to fry, but they certainly took care of a smaller one.

Codyfish?

Strangelove wrote:

Hockey Widow wrote:

Island Nucklehead wrote:

SKYO wrote:

Hockey Widow wrote:Buffalo is apparently shopping Mikhail Grigorenko. Don't want to pay him on his next deal. Maybe the deal for Kane is dead but.....Hutton for Grigorenko?

You mean colorado?

She might mean Girgensons. Not sure how he helps us, except for filling the "Age Gap".

Yes, sorry, I got the wrong guy. Got my Grigs and Girgs mixed up

Lol I remember when Grigs & Girgs were supposed to be the next big thing in Buffalo.

Hmm they've still got a lot of young centres in Buffalo these days... and a shortage on dee moving forward.

Hutton for Reinhart anyone?

I really really really like Hutton. But that's a deal I'm tempted to make especially if we are holding onto Tanev and Edler and with Juolevi in the system. No question we need a top six centre and Benning had a hard on for Sam his draft year. Problem is both GMs probably think the other needs to add to the trade.

Hockey Widow wrote:
I would like them to move:

Tanev
Hansen.
Sbisa.

Re-sign Miller and Burrows, one year

We might be able to get something decent for Sbisa and Burr with the way they have played this season. I don't mind holding on to Sbisa, but wouldn't mind trading him if the return is good either. Sell high. *hehe* Maybe with Burr, we can try what we were thinking with Hammer last season. Trade Burr to a contender, but try to re-sign him in the off season. I'd personally rather just move Burr and move on and work in younger legs, but mainly just want to get something for him. Gotta make up for that botched/failed non-Hammer trade from last season. We can't afford to continue to let assets walk away for nothing. Especially when we have traded 2nd/3rd rounders for questionable returns and we don't have the quality of depth in the system.

Hockey Widow wrote: Re-sign Miller and Burrows, one year
Keep Dorsett at least one more year.
Edler stays to play with Stetcher and take some pressure off of Hutton on the left side.
Keep Markstrom and get him into more games. Hope Demko is ready after next season to join the Canucks then trade Markstrom with Miller as the mentor to Demko.

I guess it would depend on what Burrows wants, but any more than $1.5-$1.8M at this stage of his career is too much for the role he'd be penciled into (ie 4th line). He's the kind of role player better teams would have no problem transitioning out of the organization. Personally, I'd rather see him go to a competitor like New York or Tampa on a cheap 1-year deal to chase a cup.

Miller can stay to insulate Markstrom, and Demko stays in Utica.

Dorsett has no value, given injury and contract.

Edler would be a valuable trade piece, but no rush to move him given his contract.

Eriksson and Sutter aren't going anywhere. They are Benning's foundational pieces.

The Benning legacy: Brandon Sutter and Loui Eriksson. Sbisa is due for an extension in the summer and will probably get a 30% raise. The new GM will have a bit of a mess to clean up.

We do need help up front but we must keep reminding ourselves that we have just recently had some depth on defense for the first time in a long time. We have 2 top 4 out right now and 1- 7th or 8th.
Every year, man, it always happens.
I see the logic in trading Edler, if he's willing.
If we are to make "A" deal, either for Tanev or Hutton, it needs to be a home run.
Under 25. No issues, (physical or mental), tough, with hands, no less than a 50 plus, point guy.
Anything short of that defeats the purpose.

Hockey Widow wrote:
I really really really like Hutton. But that's a deal I'm tempted to make especially if we are holding onto Tanev and Edler and with Juolevi in the system. No question we need a top six centre and Benning had a hard on for Sam his draft year. Problem is both GMs probably think the other needs to add to the trade.

Im trading Hutton, long before I'm trading Tanev. I'm just not sold on Hutton, it's concerning to see his play digress this season. He is either resting on his laurels of last season "I'm too good to try now" or he just isn't as good as we had originally thought. Either way if there is a D-man I'm trading it's him, but his stock may be falling this season. We can't trade Edler thanks to the Mike Gillis brilliance at contract negotiating.

Hockey Widow wrote:

Strangelove wrote: Hmm they've still got a lot of young centres in Buffalo these days... and a shortage on dee moving forward.

Hutton for Reinhart anyone?

I really really really like Hutton. But that's a deal I'm tempted to make especially if we are holding onto Tanev and Edler and with Juolevi in the system. No question we need a top six centre and Benning had a hard on for Sam his draft year. Problem is both GMs probably think the other needs to add to the trade.

So you ask yourself would you trade Horvat for Hutton? probably not, Horvat + 2nd for Hutton and Virtanen? too much on our side. (But Huts and JV are probably what they need the most) That's when it gets risky for both sides, unless both miraculously decide to go all out and make another jets/sabres like blockbuster with multiple pieces involved.

This deal would take months to complete, finally happening in July.

RoyalDude wrote:

Hockey Widow wrote:
I really really really like Hutton. But that's a deal I'm tempted to make especially if we are holding onto Tanev and Edler and with Juolevi in the system. No question we need a top six centre and Benning had a hard on for Sam his draft year. Problem is both GMs probably think the other needs to add to the trade.

Im trading Hutton, long before I'm trading Tanev. I'm just not sold on Hutton, it's concerning to see his play digress this season. He is either resting on his laurels of last season "I'm too good to try now" or he just isn't as good as we had originally thought. Either way if there is a D-man I'm trading it's him, but his stock may be falling this season. We can't trade Edler thanks to the Mike Gillis brilliance at contract negotiating.

In regards to Hutton; I think it's concerning how he's being coached right now. He and Guds have become very good friends but they are getting their signals crossed a lot and it's making them both look bad, yet they stay together.
Don't know how smart that is.
I would have thought that after the progress Hutton made last year, he should have been encouraged to bring a more physical presence this year, (crunching hits and some meanness), but I haven't seen anything like that.
I'm not ready to give up on him at all yet because you can see he's willing to learn and takes things seriously.
Like a quality piece of clay that needs more molding.

SKYO wrote:
So you ask yourself would you trade Horvat for Hutton? probably not, Horvat + 2nd for Hutton and Virtanen? too much on our side. (But Huts and JV are probably what they need the most) That's when it gets risky for both sides, unless both miraculously decide to go all out and make another jets/sabres like blockbuster with multiple pieces involved.

This deal would take months to complete, finally happening in July.

Hutton is overvalued by Canuck fans, that being said, he's the one I would trade. Tanev has more value and I don't want to see him traded. You'd never get Reinhart for Hutton, Girgensons maybe.

Hutton is like a Sopel or a Aucoin. Decent draft pick but nothing special, very meh type player. He's second pairing at best.

RoyalDude wrote:

SKYO wrote:
So you ask yourself would you trade Horvat for Hutton? probably not, Horvat + 2nd for Hutton and Virtanen? too much on our side. (But Huts and JV are probably what they need the most) That's when it gets risky for both sides, unless both miraculously decide to go all out and make another jets/sabres like blockbuster with multiple pieces involved.

This deal would take months to complete, finally happening in July.

Hutton is overvalued by Canuck fans, that being said, he's the one I would trade. Tanev has more value and I don't want to see him traded. You'd never get Reinhart for Hutton, Girgensons maybe.

Hutton is like a Sopel or a Aucoin. Decent draft pick but nothing special, very meh type player. He's second pairing at best.

I don't know, Dude, that big bodied skating ability don't grow on trees.