Tciso wrote: ↑Mon Jul 21, 2025 4:59 pm
Part of the problem with trading Joshua is that we are weaker without him, contributing to the need to make a big trade. But, moving him didn't free up all that much cap. Certainly not enough to afford the center Blob et. al. are hoping for. Instead, we have to trade Chytil as well, -plus- the assets to make up the difference.
So, we trade Joshua, Chytil, and either a 1st, or Willander for Mason McTavish, and Karlsson fills in for Joshua. Is that what has you people sopping wet between the legs?
And, that still relies on Anaheim coming to the dance with a bucket and a mop.
I hope that there were better reasons than hope to trade Joshua. Was it his dink stirring JT's drink??
Maybe you didn't hear. Canucks acquired Evander Kane making Joshua expendable and redundant. The cap space allows the Canucks to try and make a deal for a center without having to try and shed cap from a position of weakness. Hellooooooo!
Kane wasn't brought in for the 3rd line, right?
I think it's adorable that you are the only one on the board having a meltdown over the departure of Dakota Joshua.
Indeed. His career line isn't all that inspiring. He posts great 4th line numbers on a 3rd line salary.
The Canucks do need to find a replacement for him, and one that is more of a cantankerous prick who makes half the salary. Honestly, I would have preferred the Canucks to flip Joshua sooner and then have used the salary to grab Perry on a 1 year deal.
Somewhere in NW BC trying (yet again) to trade a(nother) Swede…..
Cousin Strawberry wrote: ↑Mon Jul 21, 2025 9:22 pm
They should have sign Sammy blaze
They replaced him with Chase Stillman
Pretty much.
Except Stillman doesn’t have the rep for the physical game that Blais had.
In just about every way, Allvin did Pittsburgh management a favor with that trade. The 4th-rd pick is the only thing of any value coming back in that trade.
Stillman should be looking at decent rentals in Abby for the foreseeable future.
Mëds wrote: ↑Mon Jul 21, 2025 8:46 pm
The Canucks do need to find a replacement for him, and one that is more of a cantankerous prick who makes half the salary. Honestly, I would have preferred the Canucks to flip Joshua sooner and then have used the salary to grab Perry on a 1 year deal.
I think Perry would have done that.
Kane has the prick part down.
But I also think this board is sleeping on Karlsson. He can be a bit of a prick. He’s a yapper, he goads guys into penalties, he tends to play to the puck. I don’t know that we’ve seen him fully lean into this in the NHL because new call ups tend to be more concerned with not making mistakes, but I can see him developing this more. I can see him becoming a player other teams don’t like, and there’s always a benefit to having the opposition’s frustrations directed at these kinds of guys instead of focusing their aggression on others.
By the way, which current Canuck is the most disliked by opponents in the way Burrows was disliked? I don’t think anyone gets to that level (or Ruutu or Lapierre or Cooke or Torres — all of whom were cheap players (Burrows never really had the intent to injure thing)). But for what the Canucks have, my money would be on Conor Garland. He’s a yapper, he never gives up on a play, his liberal with his stick, and he makes plays that embarrass guys (little dudes shouldn’t be coming out of so many one on one or one on two battles with the puck; how many times is Garland lined up and escapes the hit?).
UWSaint wrote: ↑Tue Jul 22, 2025 9:51 am
But for what the Canucks have, my money would be on Conor Garland. He’s a yapper, he never gives up on a play, his liberal with his stick, and he makes plays that embarrass guys (little dudes shouldn’t be coming out of so many one on one or one on two battles with the puck; how many times is Garland lined up and escapes the hit?).
UWSaint wrote: ↑Tue Jul 22, 2025 9:51 am
But for what the Canucks have, my money would be on Conor Garland. He’s a yapper, he never gives up on a play, his liberal with his stick, and he makes plays that embarrass guys (little dudes shouldn’t be coming out of so many one on one or one on two battles with the puck; how many times is Garland lined up and escapes the hit?).
Edmonton Journal: Buried in a longer column is the news that Penguins fans will find pertinent. Edmonton really wanted Silovs. Vancouver said no. Vancouver said no, not because of the price, but in fact declined at any price. Vancouver refused to trade the goalie to Edmonton.
Cornuck wrote: ↑Tue Jul 22, 2025 11:49 am
This warms my heart
Edmonton Journal: Buried in a longer column is the news that Penguins fans will find pertinent. Edmonton really wanted Silovs. Vancouver said no. Vancouver said no, not because of the price, but in fact declined at any price. Vancouver refused to trade the goalie to Edmonton.
Lol. First “100%” confident in signing Boeser, then talk to the hand on Silovs.
UWSaint wrote: ↑Tue Jul 22, 2025 9:51 am
But for what the Canucks have, my money would be on Conor Garland. He’s a yapper, he never gives up on a play, his liberal with his stick, and he makes plays that embarrass guys (little dudes shouldn’t be coming out of so many one on one or one on two battles with the puck; how many times is Garland lined up and escapes the hit?).
Cornuck wrote: ↑Tue Jul 22, 2025 11:49 am
This warms my heart
Edmonton Journal: Buried in a longer column is the news that Penguins fans will find pertinent. Edmonton really wanted Silovs. Vancouver said no. Vancouver said no, not because of the price, but in fact declined at any price. Vancouver refused to trade the goalie to Edmonton.
It makes sense. You don't trade a high upside goalie prospect to a divisional rival.
Megaterio Llamas wrote: ↑Tue Jul 22, 2025 6:53 pm
It makes sense. You don't trade a high upside goalie prospect to a divisional rival.
Geez, imagine if they had done that.
Yah, glad we didn't trade King Arturs to the Oil. The only way I'd give them Silovs is if they're willing to pay a king's ransom. It would have to look something like:
I could care less who we are trading a player to, whether it’s to your nearest neighbor or your most furthest away neighbor, I don’t fucking care, never have, really. If Edmonton was offering a higher more quality asset in return for Silovs than the one we received, then management did a disservice to the organization.
