oldnews Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Who does Burrows play with again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck or Die Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Why the hell would we sign Nash with his cap hit, when we asked our big players to take discounts? We would have to sell the farm for Nash, and only idiots seem to be willing to do that. No, I would not give up Nash for either Higgins or Burrows. You losers can facepalm all you want, the only idiots here are the ones suggesting we should even bother with Nash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armada Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Luongo for Nash. Straight up, both equal price, otherwise I'm not taking that massive contract. Both players would help their new teams A LOT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckbeliever Posted June 17, 2012 Author 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...
DeNiro Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Sedin Sedin Nash Higgins Kesler Burrows Raymond Malhotra Hansen Kassian Lapierre Jensen Hamhuis Bieksa Edler Schultz Ballard Tanev Luongo Lack Dream lineup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Right because I clearly said giving up 4-5 assets makes sense right. READ THEN WRITE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KING ALBERTS Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Why the hell would we sign Nash with his cap hit, when we asked our big players to take discounts? We would have to sell the farm for Nash, and only idiots seem to be willing to do that. No, I would not give up Nash for either Higgins or Burrows. You losers can facepalm all you want, the only idiots here are the ones suggesting we should even bother with Nash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
northernnuckfan Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 How about trade Luongo to Toronto for the 5th over all pick, then trade the Booth, Ballard and the 5th over all pick for Nash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 players like nash only come around every once in a while, there aren't many power forwards in this league that can put up 30 goals a season consistently... someone with that much size and that level of finishing would turn the sedin line into the biggest threat in the league Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tangelos Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Schneider is our guy, and theres no way Luongo would fetch us Nash straight up. Realistically, Kesler would probably have to be thrown into the deal somehow. So assuming Luongo would want to live in Columbus Ohio which is pretty far-fetched: Luongo, Kesler, Tanev for Nash, Brassard. Personally I don't consider Nash to be a superstar, or even a top 50 player but for some reason he is extremely hyped up. Probably cause he was a 1st overall pick. But, the fact is many teams will be bidding for him so we would probably have to overpay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckbeliever Posted June 17, 2012 Author Share Posted June 17, 2012 That's pretty ironic. You jumped in suggesting my post was "typical CDC idiocy", trying to school me as to why Higgins must be sent to Columbus, when what I was disagreeing with were proposals including Luongo, Higgins/Burrows, a 1st rounder and defensive prospect for Nash. Higgns and Burrows are not toss-ins in 4 or 5 piece deals for one over-rated, overpaid asset. Not to mention that the Sportingnews source above clearly states that "Howson still is asking for "four or five major pieces" for the big winger." "READ THEN WRITE" - or read before you start calling throwing around terms like "idiocy". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avicii 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...
DeNiro Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Booth would have to be involved in any trade for Nash because they are gonna need a right winger to replace him. Schneider, Booth, and two 1sts. That's a fair trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Yet you cleverly ignored the fact that I posted that link. Also the fact that if that is indeed the asking price then the Canucks should not go after him. Thanks for proving my point. Anyways carry on with your day. I don't like to have arguments with people who can not comprehend information. It just leads to a very one sided winner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UFCanuck Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Booth would have to be involved in any trade for Nash because they are gonna need a right winger to replace him. Schneider, Booth, and two 1sts. That's a fair trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 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. 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...
Systemaddict Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 I like Nash. I love watching him play for Canada. But what I can't understand is how many people believe he's the answer to the cup and that it'd take MORE than Luongo to net him. The man makes 7.8 a year and has cracked 70 pts just ONCE in his career. Heck, even Kesler has done that twice. Of course there's intangibles and the like...and whether you factor in goals being the be all and end all...but the notion that you sell your best assets (read: Schnieder + more) for that type of contract just doesn't make sense to me. It's too risky. Maybe I'm crazy. If it were straight up Luongo for Nash (which I doubt would happen)...it'd make some hockey sense for sure. But no way there's other pieces unless they're small or picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
komodo1970 Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 I think Lou would waive it as long as he heard the right things from Howsen. Lou wants out of Vancouver; he'll look at any new situation favorably. Let's face it; No matter where he goes, their chances of making the playoffs get much greater. Maybe he becomes the start of renewed hope in Columbus. He's not gonna be the only piece in the deal. If Nash comes to Vancouver, we will have parts to spare. I think Jensen is getting his shot next season. If this happens, Booth becomes expendable. We all know Raymond needs a new address even though they're taking him to arbitration. Can't blame them. Get his salary down and then see who's interested. And last but not least, Ballard needs to go. I think he and J.Johnson could work well together. Columbus is just above the cap floor and could accomidate the contracts. Add a draft pick or two to a couple of the choices above and something could happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 I like Nash. I love watching him play for Canada. But what I can't understand is how many people believe he's the answer to the cup and that it'd take MORE than Luongo to net him. The man makes 7.8 a year and has cracked 70 pts just ONCE in his career. Heck, even Kesler has done that twice. Of course there's intangibles and the like...and whether you factor in goals being the be all and end all...but the notion that you sell your best assets (read: Schnieder + more) for that type of contract just doesn't make sense to me. It's too risky. Maybe I'm crazy. If it were straight up Luongo for Nash (which I doubt would happen)...it'd make some hockey sense for sure. But no way there's other pieces unless they're small or picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GHL Posted June 17, 2012 Share Posted June 17, 2012 Thank you. What the hell is it with people wanting to throw Higgins into deals like a spare part? And adding a 1st round pick with a goaltender to take on an underachieving gargantuan cap hit? Non-merci. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.