Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

[Proposal] Vancouver and Washington


  • Please log in to reply
41 replies to this topic

#31 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,471 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 04 February 2013 - 05:11 PM

We're not talking about the past right now. This isn't the past. This is a trade I am suggesting for today.

The fact that Raymond has 1 ES G and 2 PPGs in a span of 2 games & 6 games without a single point doesn't not make him a secondary offensive threat.

Brouwer when he's not scoring he's still grinding, getting players off their game, hitting, fighting, putting pressure on the goalie on the PP, etc.

When Raymond isn't scoring he's a useful PKer. The Canucks don't need help in that area, the Caps do.

Brouwer's value NOW > Raymond's value NOW.


I know of course right now Brouwer's value is higher, I'm not arguing that. I was saying it was unfair of you to judge what Brouwer got at his most valuable state, vs what Raymond would get at his least valuable state.

And PP goals still make him a secondary scoring threat, our PP has struggled aswell and having a secondary option that can score is just as vital and has been as much an issue as 5 on 5 scoring.

I know what both do and I know what both can bring, we have differing opinions on value and where they are, so that is fine we can just agree to disagree there.

The deal simple doesn't suit us right now, we don't need to get bigger and slower. We have addressed those things and having speed is vital in our system (One of the reasons I wasn't so keen on Arnott) We have what Brouwer can bring, right now Raymond is adding some nice secondary scoring so we should just stick with what is working.

We can just agree to disagree however.

Edited by Smashian Kassian, 04 February 2013 - 05:11 PM.

  • 0

zackass.png


#32 Teemu Selšnne

Teemu Selšnne

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,199 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 06

Posted 04 February 2013 - 05:35 PM

Wow, one of the few times on CDC where a proposal isn't completely lopsided. Well done. I don't see Manny going anywhere but the idea of a Raymond for Brouwer deal is actually something I really like. Troy is someone i've always thought would be great for our 3rd line. A little fine tuning and I could see it being a possible deal for both sides.


Yeah, always hard for a 'perfect' deal .. fine tuning always needed. Thanks.

I know of course right now Brouwer's value is higher, I'm not arguing that. I was saying it was unfair of you to judge what Brouwer got at his most valuable state, vs what Raymond would get at his least valuable state.

And PP goals still make him a secondary scoring threat, our PP has struggled aswell and having a secondary option that can score is just as vital and has been as much an issue as 5 on 5 scoring.

I know what both do and I know what both can bring, we have differing opinions on value and where they are, so that is fine we can just agree to disagree there.

The deal simple doesn't suit us right now, we don't need to get bigger and slower. We have addressed those things and having speed is vital in our system (One of the reasons I wasn't so keen on Arnott) We have what Brouwer can bring, right now Raymond is adding some nice secondary scoring so we should just stick with what is working.

We can just agree to disagree however.


Well, this trade is about Brouwer's value now vs. Raymond's value now...

Brouwer has 1 less P goal and 1 more point than Raymond so far this year. So neither player is more of a secondary threat or less of one.

Anyway, I can feel this is about to go in circles. Thank you for your input!
  • 0

#33 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,471 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 04 February 2013 - 05:39 PM

Yeah, always hard for a 'perfect' deal .. fine tuning always needed. Thanks.



Well, this trade is about Brouwer's value now vs. Raymond's value now...

Brouwer has 1 less P goal and 1 more point than Raymond so far this year. So neither player is more of a secondary threat or less of one.

Anyway, I can feel this is about to go in circles. Thank you for your input!


No problem. Happy we could agree to disagree before it went too far :P
  • 0

zackass.png


#34 bossram

bossram

    Canucks Second-Line

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

Posted 04 February 2013 - 11:27 PM

Raymond for Brouwer as a basis for a trade might work out. We get more grit and the Caps need to find a way to get more creative and score goals.

Even if Manny's role is diminished, I think we need him just for faceoffs honestly. And I can't see where Fehr would fit.
  • 0
What is the deal with Mike Gillis, it always seems like he's sweating...

#35 Canuck Surfer

Canuck Surfer

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,462 posts
  • Joined: 27-December 10

Posted 05 February 2013 - 04:02 AM

"I think our physicality issues were overrated?"

Easy to make that statement after watching us play the Oilers. LOL, particularly one without Eager...

You just got the Centre Ice Pack (awsome isn't it?) yeah?

Go back and watch the two games against the Ducks. Watch also how we barely scraped through against Chicago. Thank goodness for Lou being hot!

Go back and specifically watch the first two shifts, then the balance of the San Jose game. Burrows was wiped from centre ice on the opening draw and SJ forced a face off in our end. As much as you like Schroeder, no way was AV sending his line out against Jumbo Joe and Pavelski. So the Twins got wiped (who should not be taking D zone draws), and the Sharks scored.

Yes we do need some more size to equalize match up problems, even when Kess and Booth are back.



Raymond has been playing alot better than he has over the last two years. And Raymond does bring more offense, he has a higher skill level, if you needed a top 6 forward (say both were on the 3rd) You would probably choose Raymond.

And I don't think Brouwer is a need, I think our physicality issues were overrated, but that aside we did improve physically by alot. I don't see it as an issue, our issue is offense, executing and coaching/systems. And those 1st 2 are areas in which Raymond is better IMO.


  • 0

#36 Zack_Kassians_Elbow

Zack_Kassians_Elbow

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 533 posts
  • Joined: 14-March 12

Posted 05 February 2013 - 04:40 AM

]

"I think our physicality issues were overrated?"

Easy to make that statement after watching us play the Oilers. LOL, particularly one without Eager...

You just got the Centre Ice Pack (awsome isn't it?) yeah?

Go back and watch the two games against the Ducks. Watch also how we barely scraped through against Chicago. Thank goodness for Lou being hot!

Go back and specifically watch the first two shifts, then the balance of the San Jose game. Burrows was wiped from centre ice on the opening draw and SJ forced a face off in our end. As much as you like Schroeder, no way was AV sending his line out against Jumbo Joe and Pavelski. So the Twins got wiped (who should not be taking D zone draws), and the Sharks scored.

Yes we do need some more size to equalize match up problems, even when Kess and Booth are back.


I agree on the physicality issues being overrated...

The first game against Anaheim was a case of the team not being prepared to play. The sharks are a big physical team but It didn't do them any good against the Canucks in the 2011 playoffs. They were even bigger up front that year with Heatley in the lineup but were almost swept. I don't know why you included Chicago there, we are definitely bigger AND more physical than the Blackhawks, they just have a lot of highly skilled players.
  • 0

#37 ice orca

ice orca

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,764 posts
  • Joined: 07-October 10

Posted 05 February 2013 - 07:29 AM

"I think our physicality issues were overrated?"

Easy to make that statement after watching us play the Oilers. LOL, particularly one without Eager...

You just got the Centre Ice Pack (awsome isn't it?) yeah?

Go back and watch the two games against the Ducks. Watch also how we barely scraped through against Chicago. Thank goodness for Lou being hot!

Go back and specifically watch the first two shifts, then the balance of the San Jose game. Burrows was wiped from centre ice on the opening draw and SJ forced a face off in our end. As much as you like Schroeder, no way was AV sending his line out against Jumbo Joe and Pavelski. So the Twins got wiped (who should not be taking D zone draws), and the Sharks scored.

Yes we do need some more size to equalize match up problems, even when Kess and Booth are back.

Matt Hendricks would be a nice lateral trade for Raymond he can play wing or center and hits like a truck.
  • 0

#38 Canuck Surfer

Canuck Surfer

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,462 posts
  • Joined: 27-December 10

Posted 05 February 2013 - 12:13 PM

Semi recently, we became a cup contending team when we iced a big, physical and fast 3rd line of Manny between Torres and Hansen. It was capable of taking on any and all comers as the top defensive stopper line, including lines like Getzlaf/Perry/Ryan ahead of Kesler's line. Last year our 3rd line had a scoring presence instead behind the puck distribution and scoring wizardry of Cody Hodgson. Even then, that was scrapped, in part, to ensure we could ice that physically imposing defensive 3rd line which was viewed as key. For all the support Schroeder gets on CDC, he is neither generating any offence like CoHo nor capable of lining up for a defensive draw against, say, Joe Thornton?

Ultimately when Booth and Kesler return, the logical 3rd line looks like;

Higgins/Schroeder/Hansen

Anybody want to bet we don't go to play off's with that as a defensive statement???

And even at that Raymond is currently out playing Higgins. Hey, speed to burn if we play Schroeder between Hansen & Raymond but combined they don't add up to the weight of Dustin Byfuglien or most twigs.



.

]

I agree on the physicality issues being overrated...

The first game against Anaheim was a case of the team not being prepared to play. The sharks are a big physical team but It didn't do them any good against the Canucks in the 2011 playoffs. They were even bigger up front that year with Heatley in the lineup but were almost swept. I don't know why you included Chicago there, we are definitely bigger AND more physical than the Blackhawks, they just have a lot of highly skilled players.


Edited by Canuck Surfer, 05 February 2013 - 12:44 PM.

  • 1

#39 PartyTimeWithJeffCarter

PartyTimeWithJeffCarter

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 18 posts
  • Joined: 02-February 13

Posted 05 February 2013 - 02:07 PM

Raymond wil be traded sometime this year

For future considerations? ;)
  • 0
"Well I got a bad liver and broken heart,
I drunk me a river since you tore me apart
And I don't have a drinking problem, 'cept when I can't get a drink..." - Jeff Carter (probably)

#40 Teemu Selšnne

Teemu Selšnne

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,199 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 06

Posted 05 February 2013 - 05:27 PM

Raymond for Brouwer as a basis for a trade might work out. We get more grit and the Caps need to find a way to get more creative and score goals.

Even if Manny's role is diminished, I think we need him just for faceoffs honestly. And I can't see where Fehr would fit.


I agree Manny makes a solid contribution. But, you have to give to get. WSH will look other places to make a trade (in theory) if all they can acquire from the Canucks is Mason Raymond.
  • 0

#41 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,471 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 05 February 2013 - 11:35 PM

"I think our physicality issues were overrated?"

Easy to make that statement after watching us play the Oilers. LOL, particularly one without Eager...

You just got the Centre Ice Pack (awsome isn't it?) yeah?

Go back and watch the two games against the Ducks. Watch also how we barely scraped through against Chicago. Thank goodness for Lou being hot!

Go back and specifically watch the first two shifts, then the balance of the San Jose game. Burrows was wiped from centre ice on the opening draw and SJ forced a face off in our end. As much as you like Schroeder, no way was AV sending his line out against Jumbo Joe and Pavelski. So the Twins got wiped (who should not be taking D zone draws), and the Sharks scored.

Yes we do need some more size to equalize match up problems, even when Kess and Booth are back.


I still say our physicality & toughness issues are overrated. We are like 7th in fights in the league. Even in the Boston series we out hit them just as much as they out hit us and since then we have only gotten bigger, strong and tougher. I don't think we need anymore we have covered that, we have size and grit and physicality, we just need to get healthy and see what this team can do before properly assessing anything.
  • 0

zackass.png


#42 Zack_Kassians_Elbow

Zack_Kassians_Elbow

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 533 posts
  • Joined: 14-March 12

Posted 06 February 2013 - 03:51 AM

Semi recently, we became a cup contending team when we iced a big, physical and fast 3rd line of Manny between Torres and Hansen. It was capable of taking on any and all comers as the top defensive stopper line, including lines like Getzlaf/Perry/Ryan ahead of Kesler's line. Last year our 3rd line had a scoring presence instead behind the puck distribution and scoring wizardry of Cody Hodgson. Even then, that was scrapped, in part, to ensure we could ice that physically imposing defensive 3rd line which was viewed as key. For all the support Schroeder gets on CDC, he is neither generating any offence like CoHo nor capable of lining up for a defensive draw against, say, Joe Thornton?

Ultimately when Booth and Kesler return, the logical 3rd line looks like;

Higgins/Schroeder/Hansen

Anybody want to bet we don't go to play off's with that as a defensive statement???

And even at that Raymond is currently out playing Higgins. Hey, speed to burn if we play Schroeder between Hansen & Raymond but combined they don't add up to the weight of Dustin Byfuglien or most twigs.



.


I believe that we became contenders when we acquired Hammer and Ballard giving us the deepest defense in the NHL. Not because we had Torres Manny and Hansen as our 3rd line, out of those 3 only Manny has size and only Torres is really physical. Well I'm certainly not suggesting we line Schroeder up against Big Joe, that's Kesler's job, look what he did not only to Joe's line but to Toews line as well during the playoffs. So In conclusion I still believe that our physicality issues are overrated, Also I think a logical third line would look more like.

Hansen Lappy Higgins/Kassian and I believe that the Canucks would be happy to go into the playoffs with this 3rd line.
  • 0




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.