[canuck2xtreme]

gweng, on Jul 5 2009, 03:08 PM, said:

~ He'd fill a void...

And what void would that be?? He's not a puck moving defenceman.

The only void he'd fill has to do with our cap space.

And don't say top six forward, because one, he hasn't proven that yet, and two, we don't need a top 6 forward.

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Demitra-Kesler-Samuelsson

^ Top 6. No need to ruin our salary cap for another.

[sc1191]

Neo, on Jul 5 2009, 09:08 PM, said:

good grief, either a lot of you have failed grade 4 math or you aren't using your heads before posting - we cannot afford what Kessel is worth to get him from the bruins. THERE IS A SALARY CAP.

Calm down . Boston are in a bit of cap trouble, so they would have problems matching any substantial offer. Salary can also be shed via trade possibly making enough room for Kessel and a Solid-Dman depending on the players and salary going each way. Now, just to make it clear, I'm not saying that we should go and throw an offer sheet at Kessel as it would put us very close to the cap. I'm just saying it wouldn't be impossible.

[Penucks Girl]

Signing Versteeg would get to the Hawks, but Barker would be a better fit. And no, we don't really need another forward, top 6 or other

[Schroeder]

Versteeg is a very attractive player to land but there are other players that might be worth giving up picks for. E.g. Barker, Kessel.

Since teams can be over the salary cap before the season begins, it is highly likely that chicago will match the offer sheet if the compensation is a second rounder ( we don't even have ours). A first and third round pick would be too costly for versteeg. The only player that might be worth a 1st and 3rd round draft pick is Kessel.

This doesn't mean Versteeg and Barker aren't available. Chicago might be willing to part with one of them through trades.

Our first priority is a puck moving defensemen so if there were to be a trade, Barker will likely be involved in it.

[Neo]

the reality is the aren't a lot of puck moving d-men out there. i'm guessing the canucks are giving that role to edler more this year, and also using samuelson on the point on the pp (he's a pretty good skater).

i agree that barker might be a better target than versteeg, but i'd say the hawks are more likely to match an offer for barker.

[GrassyPonderous]

Neo, on Jul 6 2009, 06:07 AM, said:

the reality is the aren't a lot of puck moving d-men out there. i'm guessing the canucks are giving that role to edler more this year, and also using samuelson on the point on the pp (he's a pretty good skater).

i agree that barker might be a better target than versteeg, but i'd say the hawks are more likely to match an offer for barker.

I disagree. I agree that Barker is more valuable than Versteeg, but the kicker for signing Barker would be term. If he were offered a contract for 3 or more years, the Hawks would have little choice but to accept the picks. They could not afford Keith, Seabrook, Campbell, and Barker on big-money contracts, and keep Kane and Toews. With Hossa on the Hawks forever, and Campbell's insane cap hit, I would say the Hawks have their backs against the wall with Barker. If we are willing to part with a 1st and 3rd, Barker could be scooped.

[Jim Lahey]

canuck2xtreme, on Jul 5 2009, 03:13 PM, said:

And what void would that be?? He's not a puck moving defenceman.

The only void he'd fill has to do with our cap space.

And don't say top six forward, because one, he hasn't proven that yet, and two, we don't need a top 6 forward.

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Demitra-Kesler-Samuelsson

^ Top 6. No need to ruin our salary cap for another.

NO OTHER TEAM would ever consider Burr a first liner or Sam for that matter. Demo is a cripple...
you realize that was a career year for Burrows right? Hes a solid 2/3 line winger set to score 20 a year. Sam might do the same.

Not many goals on this top 6?????????

Dont be so sure we dont need more top 6 players...

[canuck2xtreme]

Jim Lahey, on Jul 6 2009, 02:38 PM, said:

NO OTHER TEAM would ever consider Burr a first liner or Sam for that matter. Demo is a cripple...
you realize that was a career year for Burrows right? Hes a solid 2/3 line winger set to score 20 a year. Sam might do the same.

Not many goals on this top 6?????????

Dont be so sure we dont need more top 6 players...

Yes I do realize it was a career year for Burrows. Just because a player has one good year doesn't mean he's topped out. He is in the top 6 because he fit well with the Sedins and even though he only played there for what, 3 months? he still racked up 28 goals. A full season with the Sedins, and more experience, and I think he can at least equal that total. Samuelsson played behind a very deep forward group in Detroit, and he can play a more expanded role here. He's fast, and has a pretty good shot as well. As far as Demitra, yes he's injury prone. So is Gaborik, and people were falling over themselves to give the guy $8 million a year to come here.

Consider our cap space. Consider who's out there and how much they'd realistically cost. You don't have to like it, but realistically, this is most likely our top 6 to start the season. Would it be nice to add another top end guy? Of course! But we dont NEED to, and given our cap situation and the fact that we still need a puck moving defenceman, it's likely not going to happen unless it's via trade to gain some cap space.

[Jim Lahey]

no
no

you said we dont need anymore top 6 guys...
even though the Sedins dont produce many goals and the rest will score 20 or so.
Is that enough scoring? I disagree. Cap isnt really an issue when trades are in play.
Versteeg will be a 30+ goal guy for a decade, IMO.

[joker1234]

Neo, on Jul 3 2009, 12:06 AM, said:

An outstanding young talent with a huge upside, and the blackhawks are in cap trouble.

The Canucks could make an offer sheet to both Versteeg and Barker. The chances of Chicago matching both are slim. If we get them both, great, we then trade a Raymond and or a Johnson for a draft pick.

[canuck2xtreme]

Jim Lahey, on Jul 6 2009, 03:01 PM, said:

you said we dont need anymore top 6 guys...

Correct. We don't need any more. Would be nice, but we don't need more.

Jim Lahey, on Jul 6 2009, 03:01 PM, said:

Cap isnt really an issue when trades are in play.

Cap isn't an issue?? Are you kidding?? Congratulations! Your credibility is now shot. Go make a thread about how we should sign Kessel, Versteeg, Barker, Sundin and Koivu, because clearly cap isn't an issue. I have nothing more to discuss with you, I don't want to argue pointlessly in circles with someone who clearly can't grasp the basics of the salary cap concept.

[Penucks Girl]

~ Anything regarding B3ker is now a dream, Chicago signed him 3 yrs / 9.25

[canuckswin07]

yes please