Seannnp

Members
  • Content Count

    334
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Seannnp

  1. My final list (I think) based on some combination of need/BPA Kakko Hughes Byram Turcotte Dach Cozens Podkolzin Krebs Boldy Seider Zegras Broberg How I think it will go : Hughes/Kakko Kakko/Hughes NOT A DAMN CLUE NOT A DAMN CLUE NOT A DAMN CLUE NOT A DAMN CLUE NOT A DAMN CLUE NOT A DAMN CLUE NOT A DAMN CLUE NOT A DAMN CLUE NOT A DAMN CLUE NOT A DAMN CLUE NOT A DAMN CLUENOT A DAMN CLUE
  2. exactly my point, so we would end up like Ontario and Alberta, trying to figure out a private system that needs as much fixing as ICBC did prior to the changes. Options doesn't necessarily mean better options. I would prefer to have $300k in accident benefits, $2800 a month in wage loss benefits whilst I focus on my recovery. I think in Alberta and Ontario accident benefits are less than $100k and youre only saving 200-300 dollars on average. Do you want to know how quickly a serious accident can burn through 100k in treatment?
  3. Changed? He flipped his entire list. Turcotte, Cozens and Dach outside of the top 10? My head hurts
  4. The reason ICBC rates are through the roof is because of fraudulent, exaggerated claims, lawyers driving up costs of settlements, increased costs of repairs, etc. Much of the public know very little about privatization yet advocate for it like they are experts. Privatization only leads to lower prices in the short term. Eventually, prices get higher and higher and they aren't regulated by legislation (meaning they would not have to apply to the utilities commission to increase prices), younger drivers or inexperienced drivers would pay exponentially more regardless of their driving records, claims are more easily denied, you can get cancelled at anytime which increase your rates with other insurers, coverage would be a lot less for both accident benefits and tort for serious injuries. longer wait times to get vehicle repaired, caps on rental vehicles much lower than what is being offered by ICBC. I think you should read up on the state of private insurance in Ontario. ICBC until now was the only jurisdiction in NORTH AMERICA that did not have caps on tort compensation. Lawyers were demanding crazy settlement dollars to resolve files or moved forward with litigation which ultimately drove up costs of claims. Did you know a medical expert opinion contracted by a lawyer could be anywhere between 5k-15k and those costs are paid for by ICBC which eventually results in increased premiums. Lawyers literally take 30% of a settlement from their injured clients for doing paperwork including their wages, treatment expenses, etc and ICBC pays their costs of doing business. With the new caps and driver based rating system, I fully expect ICBC to turn things around. Like everything, it takes time to turn things around.
  5. Why? So we can end up like Ontario and Alberta?
  6. I'm not overly excited about Zegras. My preference would be, of the 4 mentioned above Dach Krebs Boldy Zegras and depending on who else is available I would include Cozens, and Podk ahead of Zegras as well.
  7. A lot has changed in the last 5 years. Just look at the winners since 2014.
  8. If we could get Dach at 10, it would be like getting Pettersson and Hughes in the last two drafts!!!!
  9. But youre not grabbing a top 6 forward or a top 4 d. You are grabbing a chance at those type of players. Just look at Yakupov, Virtanen or Pujuljarvi. Nothing is a sure thing. With Gaudette at least we know he is an NHL player. He is still developing and whilst his current projection is a 3c, doesn't mean he cant amount to more. Kesler was projected to be nothing more than a 20 goal 3rd line two way center. He sure surprised a lot of people around the league scoring 40 goals and cementing himself as a 2c. This isn't to say that Gaudette is the next Kesler but he has shown that he can play in the NHL whereas draft picks only show potential to do the same. I would not trade Gaudette and allow him to develop. He did a great job in his first year as pro basically showing he has what it takes to replace Sutter as our 3c in his rookie campaign.
  10. They may ask for 1 more nut, maybe twin nuts so they can have their own version of the Sedins
  11. That's crazy!! I didn't post it with the original post but Ghost, Theodore and Connor, along with Werenski were the ones I would go after. For those that are commenting Hughes, McDavid, etc. I don't think that ever happens even if we add (Boeser, Horvat, Petey and Hughes not included) With Calgary not having a 1st this year, do you think they would give us Hanifin for 10th? 1 for 1?
  12. Lol if that were the case, I would keep 8 and 10 and draft Krebs along with Podkolzin. Draft dmen in the 2nd and 3rd rounds.
  13. Which players in the league defenseman or forward would you trade the 10th OA pick/package for?
  14. All valid points. I agree that the team would have to want Tanev along with any other Canuck player for a trade to work out in. I was just presenting possibilities that were available to use that could be explored. I take 10 3rd round picks, over our 10th OA, every day of the week and twice on sundays. You just have to look at some of the players that have been drafted in the 3rd-5th rounds. There have been some all-stars, some hall of famers even that have been taken in the later rounds and if youre giving Jim Benning 10 cracks at find a few gems, I would rather take that than one 1st round pick. This doesn't even get into the value that 10 3rd rounders would bring back. Trading down always has a perceived value regardless of the success probability being exponential. This is simply because team needs, team perspective is different from team to team. If you had the 3rd OA pick but really really wanted Gabe Villardi and were convinced he was going to reach his ceiling, etc the 3rd round pick no longer carries the same value to you as it does to another team when the player you want is likely to go in the 6-7-8 position. The value for your team is in trading down and acquiring additional assets. You could say the 6th pick holds more value for your team because it comes with an additional 2nd for example. We'll just agree to disagree here. I think it takes a lot. I don't think there are very many teams Lucis is interested in playing for. The Stanley cup contenders likely don't have a spot for Lucic, then basement dwellers, rebuilders he likely does not want to go to. The perfect fit for him is a team that is in transition to compete. A team that is finishing a rebuild, looking to compete in the next year or two, could use another high draft pick and could take on the salary and Lucic needs to be willing to go there. I cant think of single team other than Vancouver and Arizona where this would work out for all parties involved. In some cases free agents are not worth the money. When Eriksson signed his contract, he was worth that contact. When Lucic signed his contact, he may have been slightly over paid but was worth pretty much what he was being paid. Panarin this year likely gets 10million. He is absolutely worth that contract. Problem is some players cant live up to those contacts throughout the term. Edmonton has the option of either drafting one of Boldy or Krebs or signing Panarin at 10 million, which option do you think they are taking? Can they take the 2nd option without the cap space? Would that option be more of a possibility if they didn't have Lucic? As of right now no one helps them out and takes Lucic off their hands and his 6 mill cap, 24 million dollars for 2 2nds. It starts with 8th OA, or Puljujarvi and 2 2nds minimum.
  15. If we were expecting to compete for the playoffs, were constrained by the cap and couldn't add secondary scoring to the best player in the world, with a decent defense core and up and coming prospects already in the system; not to mention free agents like Karlsson, Panarin and Lee available that we could potentially go after, absolutely I would. Oilers have 2 first line centers, a 2nd line center, 3 top 4 defenseman with Bouchard likely to make the jump next year. They need desperate help on the wings. RNH takes one spot if someone like Sutter can come in and play 3c and take on the defensive responsibilities. They are missing top 6 forwards as Pool and Yam haven't shown they are ready to take on that role. They do not have the cap space to bring on guys like Lee, Panarin or Karlsson to help with the offense because of 6 million tied into a player that cant play the top 6 role they need him to play. The 8th OA isn't going to be ready for a minimum of two years and likely wont be an impact forward in his first year, so that's 3 years away. They have little to no cap space and need a 3c (Brock Nelson just signed a 6x6 contract today to play 3c for the Islanders for his 20-25 goals a year), and two more top 6 wingers. How do you expect them to fill those spots and compete with no cap space. Other GM's not only need to consider the 6 million cap hit but also the 24 million salary that actually needs to be paid and the expansion protection slot. The NMC that Lucic has can be disqualified when he gets traded to the Canucks so long as both parties agree to it. I would expect Benning to ensure that happens. Lucic also decides where he wants to go and hes expressed his feelings to return home. Holland has no leverage. He needs to bring in players to produce and help McDavid get this team to the playoffs and that Lucic contract is his biggest obstacle. Maybe the additional 2nd doesn't happen but if you think someone is going to take on a 6m cap hit for 4 more years, pay 24 million dollars in cash for 1st round pick only its never going to happen and if there is a team that is willing to do that Lucic has to agree to the trade. Oilers don't have very many options. I don't think they have any options actually. The Canucks are gearing upto compete but likely wont be for another year or two, they have the cap space at the very least for the next two years, they can renegotiate the NMC allowing us to move Lucic or expose him during the expansion draft (he wont get picked up anyways), we can still move Eriksson, and our owners are in a pretty good financial position to take on the additional salary.
  16. my apologies if I come across that way but that's twice now that you've left remarks without adding anything of value to the discussion at hand. Specifically with the number of trades, you were dismissive and based your opinion on nothing factual but more so on the fact that because you weren't aware of it, it couldn't be possible. Again with the Eriksson comment you did the same thing. You didn't understand why there was a difference in the return value and instead of asking for clarification implied I had no other reason to propose those returns other than they benefitted the Canucks. You seemed to be condescending in that post yourself and never backed up your claim of how these trades "heavily favored" our team.
  17. I see your point and maybe Tanev holds more value to the Canucks than he would Dallas but Honka isn't something I would trade Tanev for...at all. That's like trading Goldobin for Adam Larsson or Travis Hamonic or Marc Edouard Vlasic. Top 4 defensive defenseman that are excellent in their crafts do not trade for a projects. I think the value of a first round is dependant on team need and position for contention. Dallas seems to be in compete now mode. Benn and Seguin are getting older and they don't have much coming up in their pipeline for forwards. Im assuming they want to ice the most competitive team possible now and would not place the same value on 18th OA as the Canucks, Wings or Rangers would. Two GM's involved in every trade, both GM's cant have the best players in a single trade. Someone has to give to get (to fill a need). RHD is huge need for Dallas. This trade could happen before the 21st selection. Canucks could call up 19OA, 20OA, 22OA, 23OA as well. With Pittsburgh's depleted prospect pool, I was thinking it would be beneficial for them to start with 3 picks in the first two rounds as opposed to 2 No way any GM in the league is taking on the Lucic contract unless their is a huge overpayment. Lucic also has a NTC and has said that he wants to play in Vancouver. Holland has no leverage in this case. You either trade Lucic to Vancouver or you move a roster player to free up the necessary cap space to add to the roster. In Lucic's case its the best example of addition by subtraction. 2 2nds isn't nearly enough for a 6 million dollar player for 4 more years that is likely going to play 4th line minutes. In 2 years from now when Vancouver is hopefully competing or at the very least on paper seems to have a good team that can compete but need to add one or two significant pieces, you wouldn't trade your 1st and 2nd to get rid of Eriksson? I would do it in a heartbeat given we have enough prospects and a young roster. Eriksson can still play. He can keep up with the game, he can penalty kill and is not a liability on the ice. He also carries a 6m cap hit with only 9 million remaining over 3 years. The financial situation in Ottawa is a dumpster fire, they have legal matters that cost a fortune, ongoing, an owner that hates having to pay. With Lucic they pay close to 24 million over 4 years, with Eriksson they pay 9 million over 3 years and the cap hit is the same. Ottawa has every reason to do this if they cant get to the floor. Put yourself in Melnyks shoes what would you rather have? Eriksson or Lucic (similar offensive production, except one could be a PK specialist and a mentor for your up and coming group at 9 million or pay an extra 15 million?) Don't think Melnyk cares about the 1st and 2nd enough to pay an extra 15 million. If he did hed still have Stone and Karlsson. Im all for constructive criticism Yes unless he can stay healthy and then he is absolutely worth a 1st. Agreed somewhat but he is what the Oilers need and at 2m, he is a lot cheaper than most 3c's Last heard they were working on resigning/qualifying him. Agreed this is where I disagree. Hutton made great strides this year. Took on top pairing minutes for a stretch of time alongside Stetcher. Has consistently played top 4 minutes. He is still young, improving and cost controlled somewhat. top 4 dmen are at a premium. Given his age, contract status and what he shown so far, late 2nd or 3rd and prospect is where I put his value. I would love to take a chance at Honka. I think they might go for it with the Benning special. Gives both players a change of scenery and maybe they put it together.
  18. All good my friend, I had to read it a few times myself to make sure that I wasn't the one that wrote it wrong lol
  19. Appreciate that man. If Tanev plays more than 65 games they get a 3rd round pick. If he plays less than 65 games for them, the pick goes up to a 2nd. I think Tanev and a 2nd has pretty decent value. If he plays more than 65 games( 70 plus for example), Tanev alone is worth that 1st round pick. Are we really undervaluing him because of one off year? He didn't play great this year but he is more than just a serviceable defenseman. He still has one year left, great cap hit, can play big minutes against the top guys in the league and not look out of place and helps keep the puck out of the net, and shots away from our goalie. Im sure Tampa would have loved to have him this year in the playoffs. Despite him being useful, the Sens will realize that we are trying to offload a contract we don't want on the books and will leverage that against us to get max value. I think the most Benning will give up is a 3rd. I literally do negotiations, mediations, arbitrations every single day. I know a thing or two about leverage, perceived value, etc.
  20. finally, sincerely thank you for actually adding some value to this discussion. I come here to talk Canucks, listen to what others have to say, etc not face the remarks of a bunch of wannabe comedians, so thank you. NRY and NYI did have good assets to get some of those mid round 1st picks. Im not proposing mid 1sts. I'm proposing acquiring one of the last picks in the round at 29 and mid to late pick with Dallas (I still believe Tanev has top 4 value and would remain healthy if deployed in a different role in a different market - so im assuming we have a good asset in Tanev). With the Edmonton deal you are claiming Lucic is a terrible contract - which I agree with - but you also seem to imply hes not going anywhere because of it. I can only assume that would be the case if teams were unwilling to take it on regardless of the return 8th OA and 38th OA or that Edmonton will never give up that much and just keep him. I don't think they have the option of keeping him, they absolutely have to move that contract out. They do not have the cap space to sign legitimate difference making wingers that can help with their secondary scoring. They are playing RNH as the 3c which takes away from their scoring need. I don't think you can get a defensive 3c that is capable of 20 goals for 2 million in this league anymore. So given the appetite to move the Lucic contract and free up some space, add offensive wingers through free agency, free up RNH to play wing in the top 6 and the need for a 3c, this trade checks off all the boxes for the Oilers. They still have decent prospects in Bouchard, Yamamoto, Pujuljarvi and can still pick up some guys in the 3rd,4th, 5th round.
  21. Why? Because they are willing to trade them for what I perceive to be approximate value? I'm certain that Carolina would prefer to upgrade their forward group then draft 29th, a player who likely doesn't help them for 2-3 years if ever. I'm sure our offer could be beaten by other teams for that 1st round pick but usually when you make a proposal you don't consider what all 30 teams may be willing to offer. I seriously don't get the smartass comments? You can simply just say "hey man, don't think these trades work because of x,y,z"...what are you 12?
  22. 13 trades by Montreal in 1999/2000 13 trades by Buffalo in 2014/2015 22 trades by Tampa in 1999/2000 16 trades by Colorado in 2003/2004 12 trades by Penguins in 2008/2009 this what I found after doing google searching for 2 minutes. So when you said I was mistaken, you just assumed I was wrong? Based on what? Because you couldn't comprehend a team could turn over a roster in a year?
  23. I would love something with Johnny Canucks as the logo similar to the blackhawks or the Vancouver giants. Blue and Green colorways.