• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

397 Excellent

About Noseforthenet

  • Rank
    Canucks Rookie

Recent Profile Visitors

2,513 profile views
  1. Actually, this is huge and there's a pretty big fit, here. Probably the first big rumor out of Vancouver I can really get behind. We need that top 6 winger to play with Bo. Pearson might fit the bill, but Benn is on another level and Captain of another team. Not only that, there might be a fit for Eriksson to go the other way. Salary is an issue on both ends of this one. Not only that, Eriksson would for sure waive for Dallas. He started his career there. He has roots there. Swap both for salary sake. He's a left winger, so the trade would be something along the lines of: To Dallas: Pearson Eriksson 2nd and 3rd 2019 picks Gaudette/Sutter (Maybe our 10th overall 2019 if they don't take Gaudette/Sutter and the 2nd and 3rd picks. If it's Sutter, they might want the 1st pick anyways.) To Van: Benn Nichuskin
  2. That was figured out back in January. How is this even news?
  3. Let's say we even entertained this thought here for a sec. Malkin's near 10 mil cap hit would be okay, ONLY if Eriksson was going the other way in the trade, let alone whatever else needed to be dealt for Malkin. Now, how good is Malkin on faceoffs? Do we want Petey playing wing? Is this how we're supposed to appease Goldobin because we believe in his talent?! Is this to help bring back Tryamkin (literally the only real good logic to add to this idea)? So many questions for the motivations behind this idea, when I think the best question is: why would we trade the 10th overall pick to Pittsburgh to go along with this when there are a pile of centermen in the top 10 of this draft?! Personally, I think it COULD be done, but I kind of feel like Jeff Goldblum in Jurrassic Park. "People find out they can do something and then do it without even questioning whether they actually should!"
  4. We take acquired talented right handed D-man who can play now and let someone else use the pick.
  5. Then why trade him for Shea Weber? I'll admit the trade didn't work out for them, but there was still a reason why they looked for the trade. Even at a 1 for 1 hockey trade.
  6. You gotta watch the games more and you will see why Tanev is getting injured year after year. I made the mistake of thinking he would be better off traded last season. He does play hard minutes. Harder than anyone else on the team. If we don't support our guys who play those minutes, we're going to keep losing. Period.
  7. Glad both you and HorvattoBaertschi aren't making the team then. Of course we need a number 1. We also need Tanev healthy in the times we need him the most. PK isn't gonna chew up any of the hard minutes Tanev has. He is not gonna be out there blocking shots on the penalty kill or defending the lead in any big situation. We need a number 1 right sided Dman, but not THAT kind of #1 right sided dman. Plan A would be trading for a guy like Jacob Trouba and the like, Plan B would be signing Tyler Myers, Plan C, D, E and so on down the line would be settling for guys like Mcquaid or Stralman in the bargain bin. Not to mention, if we did trade for PK, we would have to trade him again in a couple seasons anyway at a lesser value even to afford Quinn Hughes' new contract and I can imagine it's gonna be a big one like Petey's will. Just...think first, before ya go all gung ho on a guy like PK.
  8. The only merit this has is that Benning tried to land PK before and the deal fell thru. The team needs are different now and the fact that he is right handed is the only real reason to acquire him, now that we have Hughes playing. Might as well sign Adam Mcquaid if that's the reasoning we're going to be using to acquire $9 mil plus players. At least Mcquaid would fill more of a need.
  9. I don't care what anyone says...Malkin should be on the table. No question. Pittsburgh needs more depth. Case in point, this season's playoff disappointment.
  10. Yeah, but I don't think New Jersey makes that trade or any others like it. It was a joke.
  11. I wonder if NJ would take Hutton for him straight up? He is a top 4 dman after all *cough* Edmonton *cough*
  12. I don't think it's THAT worth it to go and get Jack Hughes. If we had lucked out and got the pick, that's different. We have more pressing needs than the pick. You make the call, you ask what they're looking for, and figure out whomever you would be willing to part with. End of the day, you don't go spending your money on a Ferrari when you live in a 2 bedroom apartment with leaks in it. You just actually fixed one of the biggest ones, there's still a couple more to go.
  13. After Clendening, I would rather not get a D from Chicago. That cost nothing, but it wasn't really anything we got anyways. If they are willing to part with them, it makes me think they're not as good as we think.
  14. Baertschi won't be playing much longer at the rate of his concussions. One more and he's done for. Best to plan as if we won't have him and if he's still around and not clogging up the lineup when he's here, it's a bonus.