Peter Zezel

Members
  • Content count

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Peter Zezel

  • Rank
    Aces Prospect
  • Birthday
  1. <br /><br />I could be mistaken here but, don't we just need to lose 108,607 dollars in cap room to fit salo on the roster. According to <a href='http://www.capgeek.com/charts.php?Team=29' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='nofollow external'>http://www.capgeek.c...rts.php?Team=29</a> I could be wrong here but if not, by by ryan parent. I retract my statement.
  2. ^^Agreed^^
  3. Salo when healthy is our top defencemen bar none. But he will get injured again this season thats almost a for sure. My hope is that he'll be there for playoffs. That being said can we afford to let Bieska go? If he keeps on improving he would be better 6th defencemen than Rome or Alberts. But time will tell and I'm open to losing players for the betterment of our team.
  4. I agree with you and I'm not saying he is untouchable. But if he were to be traded I would want some type of fair compensation for him. And I believe he's a solid 5th defensemen on our team right now. So losing him and not gaining a player of equal value would be a loss. Picks wouldn't help this team out. And as of right now his salary doesn't allow for us to be compensated fairly. So let him continue to grow this season and see what happens. I have faith in MG that he will better our team. But Bieska deserves a spot over Rome. And Salo is a gamble. Hope he comes back healthy but with his history of injuries, how much stock can we put into him down the stretch?
  5. 1. Bieksa is not named Sedin and as such is not so integral to the team that he cannot be traded. Trading Bieksa would not disrupt the chemistry any more than trading any other player or letting any players go as free agents and replacing them with others. There might be an adjustment period like there is with all players, but I dont think Bieksa is so valuable that it would derail the entire team from competing for the Stanley cup. That is overstating his importance a lot, imo. 3. Bieksa has trade value I am sure. What that is, who knows. 4. It is very possible that at some point a move will have to be made (not necessarily Bieksa), so chemistry will be affected anyway 5. The goal is to put the best team on the ice within the confines of the salary cap. MG is trying to build a team where every contract is seen as value for the money. Bieksa is one of the few contracts that really is not at this point.
  6. I'm a fan of Bieska, I think is a valuable player who is finding his stride this year. My question is at 3.75 mil a year and only having points in 1 game. What is his trade value? Can we get something back of equal value and if not is there any point in a trade. He's an experienced Canuck defenseman who knows the system and playing well so far this year. But if we trade him to save on cap room, get a player of lesser value, who also needs to learn the Canuck system, it could be disruptive to the chemistry of the team. We all saw what happened to Alberts last year. And if we are seriously trying to make a cup run, can we afford to take a chance?