Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

MikeGillis58

Should The Canucks Have Traded For Mike Richards? Did We Miss Out?

58 posts in this topic

The Los Angeles Kings got Mike Richards for Wayne Simmons, Brayden Schenn, and a 2nd Round Draft Pick. I'm sure the Canucks could have offered an equal package of Mason Raymond, Cody Hodgson, and our 1st Round Pick to the Philadelphia Flyers.

Imagine this as the Canucks line up heading into the 2011/12 playoffs.

Daniel Sedin - Henrik Sedin - Alex Burrows

David Booth - Mike Richards - Ryan Kesler

Chris Higgins - Samuel Pahlsson - Jannik Hansen

Manny Malhotra - Maxim Lapierre - Dale Weise

Dan Hamhuis - Kevin Bieksa

Alex Edler - Sami Salo

Keith Ballard - Chris Tanev

Roberto Luongo

Cody Schneider

Ryan Kesler could have moved to the wing and focus only on scoring, while the Kings could have been much weaker without Mike Richards on their team.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Richards isn't exactly much less reliable than Kesler. it's Kesler's fault people want him on the wing, because all he did this season was shoot the puck. Ideally, you want a passer who uses his wingers as the center. Even then, this would not be a big issue because Mike Richards can play on the wing even if Kesler can't. It's really a non issue.

Now, the problem with the trade would be that the Canuck's do not have Wayne Simmonds. Every team would die to have a guy like him. He's not the fastest or most skilled guy, but he flashes character like no other. Always involved, and always working his butt off and is only 23. The guy, statistically had a better season than Richards. Add the fact that Hodgson was coming off a back surgery, there simply isn't equal value. So, that alone, should end the discussion.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, except Richards is one of the few guys (Datsyuk, Staal (you pick which one) ?) who is a better two way centre than Kesler...

The cap would have been the killer though, not practical.

However, what drives me nuts is the concept that its beyond comprehension to have his offensive role relegated... Staal for the Penguins picks up the #1 defensive match up 100% of the time from the 3rd line... And he plays a ton of minutes...

It drives me nuts when people suggest we put Kesler on the wing. It is like suggesting people put Toews or Datsyuk on the wings, "because they can then focus only on scoring". These are not 1-dimensional guys. Rather, they're the most reliable defensive players in the league, and they're all really good at taking faceoffs. MG58, it's not personal, but you armchair GM all the time so I don't know why you'd suggest this. It's madness to take one of the league's best defensive centres (last year's top guy, mind you) out of his natural position. Simply put, it is NOT worth the extra 10 goals and 10 assists he'll get.

In relation to your proposal, it's crazy to put the less reliable centre there. Unless he's improved, he's never had a very good f/o%, and I don't think he's gotten a single Selke nomination. It made sense for Cody Hodgson to replace Malhotra's role. It makes absolutely no sense for Richards to replace Kesler's role. I think you are underestimating his defensive capabilities and the value that brings to the team's success.

The proposal itself seems sound, but I think you need to factor in Richard's colossal contract. That was a serious risk that LA took, one that Gillis has stated he doesn't want to go for.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if we did miss out there isn't much that can be done about it now and we are really screwed, no?

Actually, we should also discuss if we missed out on the whole Coho trade, since no one brought it up yet.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think M Richards and kesler like eachother. We need to trade for a playmaking winger with speed...... yakupov for schneider

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It drives me nuts when people suggest we put Kesler on the wing. It is like suggesting people put Toews or Datsyuk on the wings, "because they can then focus only on scoring". These are not 1-dimensional guys. Rather, they're the most reliable defensive players in the league, and they're all really good at taking faceoffs. MG58, it's not personal, but you armchair GM all the time so I don't know why you'd suggest this. It's madness to take one of the league's best defensive centres (last year's top guy, mind you) out of his natural position. Simply put, it is NOT worth the extra 10 goals and 10 assists he'll get.

In relation to your proposal, it's crazy to put the less reliable centre there. Unless he's improved, he's never had a very good f/o%, and I don't think he's gotten a single Selke nomination. It made sense for Cody Hodgson to replace Malhotra's role. It makes absolutely no sense for Richards to replace Kesler's role. I think you are underestimating his defensive capabilities and the value that brings to the team's success.

The proposal itself seems sound, but I think you need to factor in Richard's colossal contract. That was a serious risk that LA took, one that Gillis has stated he doesn't want to go for.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stopped reading at 'Mason Raymond'.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It drives me nuts when people suggest we put Kesler on the wing. It is like suggesting people put Toews or Datsyuk on the wings, "because they can then focus only on scoring". These are not 1-dimensional guys. Rather, they're the most reliable defensive players in the league, and they're all really good at taking faceoffs. MG58, it's not personal, but you armchair GM all the time so I don't know why you'd suggest this. It's madness to take one of the league's best defensive centres (last year's top guy, mind you) out of his natural position. Simply put, it is NOT worth the extra 10 goals and 10 assists he'll get.

In relation to your proposal, it's crazy to put the less reliable centre there. Unless he's improved, he's never had a very good f/o%, and I don't think he's gotten a single Selke nomination. It made sense for Cody Hodgson to replace Malhotra's role. It makes absolutely no sense for Richards to replace Kesler's role. I think you are underestimating his defensive capabilities and the value that brings to the team's success.

The proposal itself seems sound, but I think you need to factor in Richard's colossal contract. That was a serious risk that LA took, one that Gillis has stated he doesn't want to go for.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mike richards for mason raymond, cody hodgson, andrew alberts

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if Kesler works on his passing this summer if he's not doing his normal rehab offseason.that is. When he worked on his shot a few offseasons ago it became 5 times better.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're Mike GillIs, you tell us...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, maybe we should just trade for every guy who scores a goal. Richards had a brutal regular season, but now that he's scored a couple in the playoffs suddenly he would be the saviour of our team? Ridiculous.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ahh the age old classic tale of "what if" helping people not solve problems since day 1.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if Kesler works on his passing this summer if he's not doing his normal rehab offseason.that is. When he worked on his shot a few offseasons ago it became 5 times better.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kesler's ego has gotten to big to pass the puck. Let alone bringing in a player to usurp is 2nd line centre spot.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

$6,600,000 for 18-26-44. I don't think fans here would have been happy with that.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No thank you!!!

His contracts is for another 40 years.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could make 15 of these could of should of threads

#butIwon't

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.