jonnycanuck46 Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sedin's 6th Sense Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Yes.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garrison Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 This completely confused me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Weber to Van the way Garrison to Van and similar to Suter/Parise to Minnesota. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sedin's 6th Sense Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 This completely confused me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BraveHart Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Yes.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksFanMike Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 It makes me sick to the stomach to see Carle earnng almost $1 mil more than Garrison for the next six years... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFastOne21 Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 It makes me sick to the stomach to see Carle earnng almost $1 mil more than Garrison for the next six years... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonnycanuck46 Posted July 5, 2012 Author Share Posted July 5, 2012 This completely confused me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Magician Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Van 1st 2013, Schroeder, Sauve, Raymond, Ballard ~ Columbus 1st overall pick 2013 (assuming) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mpt Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 This completely confused me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustJokinen! Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dorrcoq Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forklift_ole Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 But either way we still trade away prospects. (Schroder, Sauve, and our 2013 Prospect) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canIcrytoo Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Should have....do have, well done chap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smithers joe Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 i think i'll trust gillis' decisions.....he knows more about the business, than all the rest of us put together.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NightHawkSniper Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIPRYP Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Hold on, you didn't sign off on your post... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jai604 Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 I'm glad I'm not the only one who had no idea what the OP was trying to say, hahaha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.