Archived

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

jonnycanuck46

Canucks approach to getting their stars

28 posts in this topic

Just a thought that has been building while I've been watching playing getting thrown silly money (Salo, Carle, Parise, Suter, etc).

If at any point in time we decide to trade a "Cody" or a "Jordan" or something like that to get better at a certain position, wouldn't it be smarter to build for the future now? I think we have all the pieces in place for the next couple years at least.

This isn't a proposal thread, but ill give an example to illustrate the approach I think we SHOULD have as opposed to the approach I think we currently have.

should have:

Van 1st 2013, Schroeder, Sauve, Raymond, Ballard ~ Columbus 1st overall pick 2013 (assuming)

do have:

Van 1st 2013, Van 1st 2014, van 1st 2015, The earth, the moon and the stars ~ Shea Weber

Just saying, This next years draft will feature what many consider the next Sidney Crosby. Nathan Mackinnon is the REAL DEAL. I don't want to sound naive or like an "NHL 12 junkee" but i'd be throwing assets around to try and get this kid or someone close in the top 5. Because those top players usually make an impact early on anyway, not in like 5 years like the players we continuously draft..

Edit: The Sedins say hello: in 1999, then Canucks GM Brian Burke dealt away assets to draft both of the Sedins consecutively. they now lead the team's offence.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Weber to Van the way Garrison to Van and similar to Suter/Parise to Minnesota.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It makes me sick to the stomach to see Carle earnng almost $1 mil more than Garrison for the next six years...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It makes me sick to the stomach to see Carle earnng almost $1 mil more than Garrison for the next six years...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Van 1st 2013, Schroeder, Sauve, Raymond, Ballard ~ Columbus 1st overall pick 2013 (assuming)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This completely confused me :frantic:

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is very hard to understand, but I'm guessing you are saying the Canucks should rebuild?

If you are saying that it still doesn't make sense. Rather than trade the farm for one prospect, a better approach would be to trade away the current stars for assets and tank for that pick.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You maybe "jus sayin"...whatever that means in English. But really, did you say anything that made any sense? Maybe in your brain addled world.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Teams in a position to actually tank this season are likely aware that the first overall pick will be very valueable.

Should be able to get via trade or free agency: Weber

Won't be able to get via trade: A 1st overall draft choice.

Anyone remember when i said we should've tanked for Stamkos? I was being half-serious, or half-baked, but... Yep. We should've tanked for Stamkos.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But either way we still trade away prospects. (Schroder, Sauve, and our 2013 Prospect)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should have....do have, well done chap

39dc8d25.gif

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think i'll trust gillis' decisions.....he knows more about the business, than all the rest of us put together....

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Teams in a position to actually tank this season are likely aware that the first overall pick will be very valueable.

Should be able to get via trade or free agency: Weber

Won't be able to get via trade: A 1st overall draft choice.

Anyone remember when i said we should've tanked for Stamkos? I was being half-serious, or half-baked, but... Yep. We should've tanked for Stamkos.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hold on, you didn't sign off on your post...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad I'm not the only one who had no idea what the OP was trying to say, hahaha

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.