Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

Van-Ott

Proposal

  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 Provost

Provost

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,907 posts
  • Joined: 05-September 03

Posted 11 January 2013 - 10:50 AM

Ottawa is desperate for defence right now (Cowen and Lundin injured). We are desperate for a top 6 forward.

Seems like a decent trading partner. We could either do a real impact trade, or a more fringe trade.

Eg.
To Van - Michalek
To Ott - Edler

or
To Van - one of Neil/Latendresse/O/Brien
To Ott - Ballard

Depending on the players involved you might need to add fringe elements to deal on either side. Neil and Latendresse just signed so are less likely to be traded.
  • 0
Protons have mass? I didn't even know they were Catholic!

#2 I Got A Boy

I Got A Boy

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 186 posts
  • Joined: 04-January 13

Posted 11 January 2013 - 10:52 AM

the thing is.. van wont give up defense for offense

once they filll their offense by giving up defense they'd need a top 6 D
  • 0

#3 Spitfire_Spiky

Spitfire_Spiky

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 763 posts
  • Joined: 28-March 09

Posted 11 January 2013 - 10:56 AM

Don't agree with the first trade but the second works for me with any of those players coming back.
  • 0
Mess with the Best, Die like the Rest

#4 I Got A Boy

I Got A Boy

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 186 posts
  • Joined: 04-January 13

Posted 11 January 2013 - 11:16 AM

second is more fair but the general structures of both fail
  • 0

#5 Provost

Provost

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,907 posts
  • Joined: 05-September 03

Posted 11 January 2013 - 01:23 PM

second is more fair but the general structures of both fail


If you don't have any actual content to back up your post, I think we can be fairly certain where the fail is...

Fact: Ottawa has a very thin blueline (Karlsson, Methot, Philips, Gonchar are the only NHLers they have) and will be adding a #3-5 guy before the season if possible.

Fact: Ballard is not terribly useful for us, he should be a top 4 somewhere and playing more minutes for that salary. Getting a replacement to play on the 3rd pairing is reasonably easy at a much cheaper cap hit via trade of UFA (eg. Vandermeer, Barker or something better). If we traded Edler we can fill the void with a Luongo trade, or promote someone.

Fact: We have a 1st line and a bunch of 3rd liners. Our team has really only been successful when we have secondary scoring... and our secondary scoring has only been there when we have had a great 3rd line taking care of the defensive responsibilities. Currently we are a one line team who can be shut down by a single solid defence pairing.

Edited by Provost, 11 January 2013 - 04:56 PM.

  • 0
Protons have mass? I didn't even know they were Catholic!

#6 Kulikov

Kulikov

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,079 posts
  • Joined: 10-April 10

Posted 11 January 2013 - 03:44 PM

Unless Zabinajihad is coming our way, no thanks to shipping Eddy to Ottawa.
  • 0

#7 Provost

Provost

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,907 posts
  • Joined: 05-September 03

Posted 11 January 2013 - 04:36 PM

DP

Edited by Provost, 11 January 2013 - 04:56 PM.

  • 0
Protons have mass? I didn't even know they were Catholic!

#8 allkill326

allkill326

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,270 posts
  • Joined: 30-May 12

Posted 11 January 2013 - 04:48 PM


Only the second option makes sense. I don't think Vancouver wants to trade Edler this coming season.
  • 0
Posted Image

#9 thad

thad

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,227 posts
  • Joined: 09-February 09

Posted 11 January 2013 - 05:24 PM

Ottawa is gonna have to do better than that
  • 0

#10 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,418 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 11 January 2013 - 05:29 PM

I kind of agree with I Got a Boy.

Edler is much more important for us than Michalek would be, no one would replace Edler's importance on the blueline, and unless we get a pretty decent defensmen I wouldn't move Ballard for more 3rd line guy's, maybe Smith because he is a center, but I doubt they trade any of those players for Ballard myself, and Ballard is great with Tanev and that makes our defense alot better. I don't see either working out.

Edited by Smashian Kassian, 11 January 2013 - 05:30 PM.

  • 0

zackass.png


#11 Dayman

Dayman

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 574 posts
  • Joined: 21-June 12

Posted 11 January 2013 - 06:05 PM

Second one is okay, just that I'm not sure OTT agrees
  • 0

#12 zombieksa

zombieksa

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,218 posts
  • Joined: 03-February 11

Posted 11 January 2013 - 08:25 PM

I am okay with the second trade as long as Franson comes back in a Lu trade. We NEED RH D. I am one of those few people that think Franson would flourish in Vancouver.
  • 0
"All religion, my friend, is simply evolved out of fraud, fear, greed, imagination, and poetry."
-Edgar Allen Poe

#13 mrsasaki

mrsasaki

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,787 posts
  • Joined: 19-May 12

Posted 11 January 2013 - 09:14 PM

Ottawa takes that first deal and runs. Second one is probably alright.

Edited by mrsasaki, 11 January 2013 - 09:15 PM.

  • 0
CDC Sim Connected: Nashville GM
LOB (PS3): Boston GM

#14 bossram

bossram

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,943 posts
  • Joined: 13-August 10

Posted 11 January 2013 - 09:44 PM

I'd do Ballard for Condra honestly.
  • 0
What is the deal with Mike Gillis, it always seems like he's sweating...





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.