Mighty Walrus Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 I'd rather get evander. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckbeliever Posted June 16, 2012 Author Share Posted June 16, 2012 Also the asking price is slightly albatross at this point. Howson isnt learning his mistakes yet. http://aol.sportingnews.com/nhl/story/2012-06-16/rick-nash-trade-rumors-new-york-rangers-2012-nhl-draft-flyers-red-wings-sharks Howson still is asking for "four or five major pieces" for the big winger, according to Newsday's Arthur Staple. Staple covers the Rangers, who were discussing a trade with Columbus in February but balked at the asking price, which reportedly included Chris Kreider. Kreider, of course, emerged as a star during the Rangers' run to the Eastern Conference finals. Rick Nash requested a trade out of Columbus during the season. (AP Photo) Echoing Staple is Andy Strickland, an NHL reporter and radio host in St. Louis, who said that "two roster players and two prospects" are Columbus' starting point Read more: http://aol.sportingnews.com/nhl/story/2012-06-16/rick-nash-trade-rumors-new-york-rangers-2012-nhl-draft-flyers-red-wings-sharks#ixzz1y0DeLReI Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 I'd throw Burrows into a package deal for Nash rather than Higgins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 Just look at what CBJ is reportedly asking for from PHI. They want Couterier, or Schenn and JVR. The Canucks don't have anything close in terms of young talent to match a package like that. If we want Nash I think people would have to be willing to move Burrows or Edler (or both) because CBJ will be asking for those guys I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 Typical CDC idiocy. You do realize 10 teams have contacted Howson already with 6 engaging in serious talks. Howson is a winning position right now contrary to what you think. Nash is also not an underachieving forward. He has produced 30+ goals 7 of 9 seasons and the only reason he has not hit more than 40 is because his centers have sucked. The best center he has had has been ANTOINE FREAKING VERMETTE. Nash has had an absolute crap team and has maximized what he could do. The reason we RIP on Luongo is because he has done the least he could do with an absolutely great time. It is a different end of the same stick. Also Rick has only 6 seasons remaining instead of 10. He is also only 28 years old and about to hit his prime rather than out of it. Also I will explain the Higgins thing to you. Teams want players they like when they trade really good players. You are not going to get a great player like Nash by giving up a Mason Raymond. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanKeslord17 Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 Higgins proposals...really? I wouldn't trade Higgins for Nash straight up. Higgins has been the most consistent player all season. Even if he didn't score or get PTS he was at least putting together a solid effort when others looked tired, slow, lazy, in a slump, etc. Higgins is a hugely valuable guy and I wouldn't even consider trading him. He will be huge for our next cup run in 2013 haha why not add Marchand while we're at it. Just imagine doing a trade with the Bruins. Just be like the Messier move all over again (to a certain degree). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoKnows53 Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Just look at what CBJ is reportedly asking for from PHI. They want Couterier, or Schenn and JVR. The Canucks don't have anything close in terms of young talent to match a package like that. If we want Nash I think people would have to be willing to move Burrows or Edler (or both) because CBJ will be asking for those guys I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 As a Canuck fan, I like that goalie tandem more than the Blackhawks used to like seeing Lou in the play off's each year! If he goes to Toronto, we'll have to see him every Saturday night on CBC. DO NOT WANT! Panthers have Clemmensen and Markstrom. And the Blackhawks have Crawford and Emery as a tandem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Franz Liszt Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Would a 3-way trade be possible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 It's what i was saying awhile ago. Schneider, not Luongo, would have to be moved for Nash. The Thomas situation eliminates Boston from the mix, leaving the Rangers and Philly and whoever else. However, the Rangers and Philly don't have a star goalie that they can part with. Does Nash to Vancouver count as a 'bold move'? Anyone? Quit your daydreaming, melonhead. Cheers. TOML Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mighty Walrus Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 When Philly asked about Schneider, Gillis wanted Giroux in return. But blue jackets have to trade him and they won't get equal value back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Would a 3-way trade be possible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NP-4815162342 Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Wow !!! That has got to be the most delusional statement EVER! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merci Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Why I think Columbus has as much chance as anywhere. Toronto would eat him alive if he played poorly.TB doesn't want himColumbus is in between Florida and MontrealLuongo is only 33 he still has time to get his elite game back, Columbus could just be a refocus period before he goes to a contenderMaybe Gillis says that the Nash deal is by far the best offer he is gettingFor some reason he doesn't want to touch Florida If we acqured Nash we would essentially need a tough 3rd ine grinder to replace Higgins, and hopefully sign Garrison and Shultz. Sedin Sedin Burrows Booth Kesler Nash Ott Lapierre Kassian Moen Pallson Hansen Hamhuis Bieksa Edler Garrison Ballard Schultz/Tanev Schneider Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Nash, Parise, Weber...these guys could all cause locker-room chaos. These guys are big fish and team captains. Suddenly you throw them into the Nucks locker room with its core leadership, egos etc (Hank, Bieksa, Kesler) and who is captain? who is the real leader? Think Bieksa's leadership role will be in tact if Weber signs? How about Hank with Nash on the team (makes more money and is more of a physically dominating, carry the team on his back type)? These big acquisitions can cause issues within the team which is partly why they often don't make the huge difference everyone expects. Players are forced to take on different roles and lose influence. It can be tricky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 I would'nt even do Burrows for Crosby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ButterBean Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Higgins proposals...really? I wouldn't trade Higgins for Nash straight up. Higgins has been the most consistent player all season. Even if he didn't score or get PTS he was at least putting together a solid effort when others looked tired, slow, lazy, in a slump, etc. Higgins is a hugely valuable guy and I wouldn't even consider trading him. He will be huge for our next cup run in 2013 haha why not add Marchand while we're at it. Just imagine doing a trade with the Bruins. Just be like the Messier move all over again (to a certain degree). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ButterBean Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 I'd take Burr over Higgins anyday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primal Optimist Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 yeah.. i don't care how much you think you know about hockey... if you deal Schneider for Nash you go over the cap and handicap your own team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ṣpiderman Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 "Higgins is good he's the only winger asset we have that we can part with." Burrows - the other toss in in this thread, has 89 goals in the last three years - Nash had 95. Burrows scores them all five on five. Burrows kills penalties. Higgins is also an all around stud. Together they make exactly half what Nash does. Building a winner is about getting the best value dollar for dollar under the cap - not chasing after every shiny overvalued asset on the market - which is where the CDC idiocy lies. Feel free to get in line with the other sheep willing to sell the farm. Four or five assets - crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.