Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * * * - 1 votes

If you could reverse one Canucks trade, which would it be..........


  • Please log in to reply
90 replies to this topic

#31 coryberg

coryberg

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 349 posts
  • Joined: 30-January 12

Posted 10 February 2013 - 01:10 PM

I'm under the impression that Florida would have liked to reverse the Ballard trade.

They had to pay bernier's overpayed salary. Never even got a game out of grabner and quinton howden is a long ways away from becoming an NHL forward if ever.

I'm 100% certain that they could have made a better deal. I do recall that there were 5-6 teams inquiring about Ballard who had stellar numbers before comming to Vancouver.
  • 0

#32 coryberg

coryberg

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 349 posts
  • Joined: 30-January 12

Posted 10 February 2013 - 01:21 PM

I'd do the Hodgson trade over again. I think Cody can be a Brendan Morrison, andrew castles type player. Very dependable for putting up points and a smart player.

Kassian could be a bertuzzi, maybe a lucic, maybe a buffuglien (if he gains 40lbs) or maybe a clowe. At worst he is a bigger Chris Neil.

I'd rather have a big mean 20g 50pt winger than a small soft 20g 70pt center. Especially when our first 2 centers were set.
  • 0

#33 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,352 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 10 February 2013 - 01:49 PM

I'd do the Hodgson trade over again. I think Cody can be a Brendan Morrison, andrew castles type player. Very dependable for putting up points and a smart player.

Kassian could be a bertuzzi, maybe a lucic, maybe a buffuglien (if he gains 40lbs) or maybe a clowe. At worst he is a bigger Chris Neil.

I'd rather have a big mean 20g 50pt winger than a small soft 20g 70pt center. Especially when our first 2 centers were set.

Dude. You just contradicted yourself. You said you would reverse the Kassian-Hodgson deal, saying Cody could be a Bmo-type player, then you said you would rather have a big 50 point winger than a small 70 point center.
  • 1

In my eyes drouin is overrated he can score in the qmjhl but did nothing in last two gold medal games that canada lost. Fox will be better pro than him talk to me in five yrs

Gaudreau has one NHL goal whereas all your "prized" prospects have none.

   ryan kesler is going to the chicago blackhawks ...       quote me on it


#34 Niloc009

Niloc009

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,757 posts
  • Joined: 12-October 09

Posted 10 February 2013 - 01:51 PM

Dude. You just contradicted yourself. You said you would reverse the Kassian-Hodgson deal, saying Cody could be a Bmo-type player, then you said you would rather have a big 50 point winger than a small 70 point center.


He said he'd do it over agian. So that means he wouldn't reverse it. It's a bit of tricky wording, but I think that's what he means.
  • 1

Posted Image


STHS Hockey League - Brooklyn Beavers GM


#35 marleau_12

marleau_12

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,286 posts
  • Joined: 03-April 04

Posted 10 February 2013 - 04:27 PM

Of the three above, I would give us back Cody............5 goals, 5 assists in 10 games...........he'd be our leading scorer right now

He's also playing with the leading scorer in the NHL but w.e lollll

WORST RE-SIGNING: BIEKSA @ $4.6m

:picard:

Like many have said, the Ballard trade. Really liked Grabner. Umberger for Rucinsky maybe.
  • 0
Posted Image

#36 marleau_12

marleau_12

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,286 posts
  • Joined: 03-April 04

Posted 10 February 2013 - 04:32 PM

Just searched up Canucks history of transactions. They traded a 2nd (Wayne Simmonds) and a 4th to LA for Sopel. Lame.

Sulzer for Gragnani sucked too.
  • 1
Posted Image

#37 brewdog

brewdog

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 356 posts
  • Joined: 30-June 12

Posted 10 February 2013 - 04:49 PM

It's not reasonable to complain that it's a bad trade just because Cody is on pace for about 70 points (pro-rated). He's getting 18-20 minutes a night as the #1 center, feeding a legit 40-goal scorer. On the Canucks (with healthy Kesler), he's the #3 center feeding two 15-goal grinders. With Hank and Kes very likely our 1A and 1B centers for the next 4 years, there was never going to be a place for Cody that met his expectations.

Edited by brewdog, 10 February 2013 - 04:49 PM.

  • 0

#38 hudson bay rules

hudson bay rules

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,386 posts
  • Joined: 03-November 10

Posted 10 February 2013 - 05:04 PM

I'm still unsure if I'd undo the Peca/ Mogilny trade. Leaning towards a yes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YG-zHaPjB5Q


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wclnrrir0T0


Edited by hudson bay rules, 10 February 2013 - 05:26 PM.

  • 1
I love rock and roll, just put another dime in the juice box baby.

#39 GLASSJAW

GLASSJAW

    LEGENDARY POSER

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,697 posts
  • Joined: 21-February 04

Posted 10 February 2013 - 05:13 PM

Man, I loved Mogilny back in the day. Does anyone remember the conditions which lead to his being traded? Was he (knowingly) unhappy here? Contract issues? What?

As exciting as the West Coast Express was, I'd have loved to see Mogilny stick around.
  • 1
Posted Image

 
i'm not alone; i'll never be
 

#40 Venom52

Venom52

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,865 posts
  • Joined: 25-August 07

Posted 10 February 2013 - 05:16 PM

Cam Neely obvioiusly.

Probably the Grabner and 1st for Ballard trade as well, but at the time it made sense..
  • 0

Posted Image


#41 DSVII

DSVII

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 207 posts
  • Joined: 05-September 11

Posted 10 February 2013 - 05:50 PM

Cam Neely. If we had him for the 94 cup run we probably wouldn't be talking about getting our first cup now. :bored:
  • 1

"The Canucks, are like North America, many of us have it so much better than others around the world or NHL, and we don't properly appreciate what we have."

"If Canucks fans hate Mason Raymond so bad, then you should have said something before the trade deadline! Because the Leafs would have totally taken him. I mean, can he score? Can he play a HINT of defense? WE'LL TAKE HIM! WE'LL TAKE TWO!"

- Steve Dangle (Leafs Fan Reaction - youtube)


#42 Jägermeister

Jägermeister

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,786 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 12

Posted 10 February 2013 - 05:56 PM

Stojanov for Naslund.
  • 0
Posted Image

#43 rkoshack

rkoshack

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,444 posts
  • Joined: 17-October 03

Posted 10 February 2013 - 07:34 PM

People just looking at stats on nhl.com and using that as their argument for wanting Hodgson back for Kassian instead of actually watching him play. He's looked decent but he's definitely benefitting from playing with the hottest player in the league right now. Defensively he's still lost many times and has had a few real bad giveaways a couple that led directly to goals. He also has a lot of work to do in the face off circle.

Buffalo has allowed more goals than any other team in the league this season. Yes more than Florida, yes more than Columbus. They're brutal defensively and also dead last in faceoff %. I'm not saying that's all because of Hodgson but he's certainly not helping in those areas.
  • 0

#44 kmotamed

kmotamed

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,025 posts
  • Joined: 24-October 06

Posted 10 February 2013 - 07:47 PM

I would have never traded Bure!
  • 0

#45 honey badger36

honey badger36

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,503 posts
  • Joined: 20-October 11

Posted 10 February 2013 - 08:00 PM

OK, the obvious one is out (Neely for Pederson+)..............

Of the rest (during my lifetime at least), the three that come to mind for me are.........

Rick Vaive and Bill Derlego for Tiger Williams and Jerry Butler (I think this was the deal).

Bure for Jovo, Gagner and ???? was it Morrison?

Kassian for Hodgson


If you can think of one better than the three above, please let me know and add it to the list.

Of the three above, I would give us back Cody............5 goals, 5 assists in 10 games...........he'd be our leading scorer right now


No he wouldn't because he wouldn't be on the first line playing 20mins a game with the most on fire player in the NHL. Kassian is the better player for our team. If we needed a first line center Cody might have been that guy but we have 2 better centers on our team. It is what it is. Cody's FO% is awfull If you haven't noticed the Canucks play a style where FO% is really important to our system. Or Malhotra would be playing soccer for the white caps right now. http://www.vancouver...9520/story.html

Edited by honey badger36, 10 February 2013 - 08:09 PM.

  • 1

#46 Gumballthechewy

Gumballthechewy

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,905 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 11

Posted 10 February 2013 - 08:14 PM

Neely.

Most of these other trades brought something that the Canucks needed at the time or pieces or player that are with the team today, however the Neely trade was a dud all around for the Canucks, and we would have had a 1st round pick, Boston used it to pick Glen Wesley, 3rd overall. I mean we did get Barry Pederson and yeah was good for the first two years, but he didn't exactly get us anywhere.

And like someone said above me, 94 would have been ours, just imagine the first two lines like this:

Bure - Linden - Neely
Courtnall - Ronning - Adams

Mmmmm..... Tasty....

Edited by Gumballthechewy, 10 February 2013 - 08:23 PM.

  • 0

Don't take anything I say seriously! EVER!


#47 thema

thema

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 993 posts
  • Joined: 23-June 12

Posted 10 February 2013 - 08:19 PM

WORST UN-RE-SIGNING: WIllie Mitchell @ $3.5m


This I agree with. Had we have had Willie against the Bruins I feel we would have won the Cup. Pity he was too much of a captain for the powers that be. Not that he cares; he has HIS Cup ring.
  • 0

#48 Jai604

Jai604

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,039 posts
  • Joined: 14-October 10

Posted 10 February 2013 - 08:23 PM

Another pathetically thinly veiled Cody Hodgson thread.


Garbage.
  • 1

RIP LB RR PD


#49 bloodycanuckleheads

bloodycanuckleheads

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 438 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 08

Posted 10 February 2013 - 08:24 PM

Here's something you young kids don't seem to understand...

Imagine you have two teams. Equal in every way. Equal in scoring. Equal in defense. Equal in intangibles... The only difference between the two is that one team is big and strong - and the other is small and weak.

Now, which team is going to win in the long run?

Now, logically, you'd think they'd be equal - but you'd be wrong. The big/strong/mean team will win WAY more than the other. And, there's a simple reason: when the big team hits the smaller team, the smaller team gets hurt more. Big things tend to break little things. Not always, but the majority of the time. In a series of games (like the playoffs for instance), the bigger team will hurt the smaller team more than the smaller team hurts the bigger team. By the end of the series, the bigger team will have more un-injured players - AND - they will be in better physical shape. And, that translates into more goals and more wins. This is why big, bruising teams have a MUCH greater tendency to win the Stanley Cup than smaller teams (and it's why we lost in the finals to Boston).

So, even if Hodgson and Kassian are equally talented players - Kassian is WAY better to have on our team.
  • 0
Posted 08 October 2008 - 07:41 PM by BloodyCanuckleheads

I could definitely see Grabner going. He seems to have done his best to play his way out the door (and Gillis seems to be the smartest GM we've ever had, so, put two and two together)...

#50 Gumballthechewy

Gumballthechewy

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,905 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 11

Posted 10 February 2013 - 08:27 PM

Another pathetically thinly veiled Cody Hodgson thread.


Garbage.


Maybe, but only if people make it into that, don't talk about Cody and it won't be about Cody.
  • 0

Don't take anything I say seriously! EVER!


#51 hudson bay rules

hudson bay rules

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,386 posts
  • Joined: 03-November 10

Posted 10 February 2013 - 08:45 PM

So, even if Hodgson and Kassian are equally talented players - Kassian is WAY better to have on our team.


But he'd be in the penalty box and Hodgson would score. :)
  • 0
I love rock and roll, just put another dime in the juice box baby.

#52 CptCanuck16

CptCanuck16

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 255 posts
  • Joined: 30-October 09

Posted 10 February 2013 - 08:46 PM

Ballard for Micheal Grabner....without a doubt, this was a terrible trade by the Canucks. The guy scored 34 goals in his first full NHL season with the Islanders. Imagine if he was playing right wing on our second line.

Grabner+ Vancouver= Stanley Cup

Edited by CptCanuck16, 10 February 2013 - 08:49 PM.

  • 0

#53 Westcoasting

Westcoasting

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,329 posts
  • Joined: 29-March 10

Posted 10 February 2013 - 08:52 PM

I would have never traded Bure!


Yeah just have him sit out multiple seasons until his contract is up.. brilliant!
  • 0

#54 ThaBestPlaceOnEarth

ThaBestPlaceOnEarth

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,079 posts
  • Joined: 13-June 07

Posted 10 February 2013 - 09:55 PM

McLean and Gelinas for Sanderson, Burke and Ciccone. If that trade doesn't happen, Gelinas doesn't score in OT for Calgary to eliminate us, and who knows, maybe it's the Canucks in the Finals against Tampa that year.
  • 1

Ceterum censeo Chicaginem delendam esse


#55 riffraff

riffraff

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,068 posts
  • Joined: 10-April 07

Posted 10 February 2013 - 10:01 PM

None of those trades are ones I'd reverse.

I would not have put the Williams trade on the list. Much like how Kassian has brought a change of attitude and confidence in the play of the team, Williams did the same thing for the Canucks back in the early 80's. Toronto may have gotten more goals with Vaive and Derlago, but it didn't do much, if anything, to improve their regular season and playoff results. The Canucks actually went to a Cup final with Williams.

The Jovanovski deal is one I may have tinkered with, in 20/20 hindsight. I'd still have traded Bure. He wanted out and Jovanovski as the main piece coming back was pretty darn good. I was sorry to see Hedican go, and I might have tried to hold on to him.

The Kassian deal is a no-brainer. We have seen what Kassian has done for this team with his offensive production, his sound defensive play, his physical play, and most importantly, the change of attitude he has inspired in his team mates. Hodgson was always touted as being a leader and "future captain" on this team. Kassian has actually gone out and led by example.

If you want to ride the points hobby-horse you have to take the good with the bad. The Canucks might not get as many goals or points from Kassian as they may have gotten from Hodgson, but they also wouldn't have had the increased number of goals scored against, which is a good thing. Currently, Kassian may only have 5g 1a to Hodgson's 5g 7a, but he is also +2 to Hodgson's -2. This is a -4g difference in team production, and looking at the team results this year, could have resulted in fewer wins.

Yeah, I'll keep the big guy who hits, fights when needed, skates well, has a great pass, has good hockey sense, is versatile and can play on any line, can score goals, and inspires his team over Hodgson.





I would want to tinker with the Ballard trade. I'm not sure that I'd want to give up a 1st, but that was the price for a top-4 d-man. We are only now seeing what Gillis got in that deal, and Ballard is looking pretty good. Sadly, his contract is a bit high for where he plays and the new CBA may well mean that the Canucks will have to move Ballard.

I regret moving Bernier more than I regret trading Grabner. To be blunt, I don't think you could get anything more for Grabner than what Gillis did manage to achieve. Grabner just couldn't get his head screwed on right, and it took him being traded and then waived (with the intent of sending him to the minors) before he finally woke up. What more do you think Gillis could have gotten for Grabner? This is meant as a serious question, not an attack :).

As I see it, the other teams would know what Grabner could potentially do on offense, but would also be aware of his short-comings in other areas of the game. They would also know that the Canucks were very close to the cap ceiling and couldn't afford to keep Grabner up here sitting in the press box. They'd also know that the Canucks were (and still are) a very deep team and that Grabner very likely would not be kept up on the merits of his play. This, along with the cap considerations, meant the Canucks would have to waive Grabner in order to return him to the minors, and he would very likely have been claimed which would mean the Canucks would lose him for nothing in return, other than they'd have a freed up contract space.

So, if you were Tallon, and you saw the Grabner situation unfolding as it was, would you really have paid more for Grabner? And were Gillis to try and trade Grabner on his own what would inspire another GM to offer more than a low pick or prospect in return for Grabner? He was an asset the Canucks could likely not keep, and it was questionable that he would make it to the NHL, so they would know that they had Gillis over a barrel.

This season looks like Grabner may be making a bit of a return to his scoring results of two years ago, however, his -3 says he's still playing like he did last year (where he finished -18).




Meh, Ehrhoff wanted to take his "best chance to win a Cup" with Buffalo. The fact that they were offering more money and term than what the Canucks could reasonably afford is beside the point, of course.

Salo went with longer term and more money as well. This being said, who would the Canucks not have with the money going to Salo (or Ehrhoff)? Garrison, Schneider, Burrows, Edler, all of those guys were signed in place of Salo (and no, you can't count all of the depth guys as you'd need to take out about a half a dozen to equal the money Salo did sign for in TB). And where would he have played this year? Ahead of Ballard or Tanev, perhaps?

And then there's the thing of the 35+ contract which would make signing Salo a very risky proposition what with his injury history.


regards,
G.


Your assessment if the co/kass trade is absolutely right on the money.

Anyone who doesn't see this as it stands right now either hadn't really payed attention to the Canucks dynamic over the the past few seasons....and really doesn't exactly understand the game or maybe hasn't played competitively.

Not to say coho will not benefit a team needing a player of his skillet.
  • 1
Posted Image


CanucksSayEh, on 12 March 2013 - 10:12 PM, said:
When the playoffs come around, nobody is scared of getting in a fight, but every night, they get their mom to check under the bed for Raffi Torres.

#56 cIutch

cIutch

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,285 posts
  • Joined: 13-April 12

Posted 10 February 2013 - 10:01 PM

why even make a thread like this if your intent is to say you want cody back

no one cares you

codys a little girl

kassian would foligno him in a playoff series



stop wishing this fairy was on our team

Edited by cIutch, 10 February 2013 - 10:01 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image

#57 riffraff

riffraff

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,068 posts
  • Joined: 10-April 07

Posted 10 February 2013 - 10:03 PM

Ballard for Micheal Grabner....without a doubt, this was a terrible trade by the Canucks. The guy scored 34 goals in his first full NHL season with the Islanders. Imagine if he was playing right wing on our second line.

Grabner+ Vancouver= Stanley Cup


Wow.

Boston craps bigger than grabner.

Hilarious buddy.
  • 0
Posted Image


CanucksSayEh, on 12 March 2013 - 10:12 PM, said:
When the playoffs come around, nobody is scared of getting in a fight, but every night, they get their mom to check under the bed for Raffi Torres.

#58 cIutch

cIutch

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,285 posts
  • Joined: 13-April 12

Posted 10 February 2013 - 10:03 PM


Stojanov for Naslund.

ya we got robbed!
  • 0
Posted Image

#59 Peaches

Peaches

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,633 posts
  • Joined: 03-February 12

Posted 10 February 2013 - 10:20 PM

To everyone still whining about the Hodgson trade (which has been beaten to death already) :

GET OVER IT.
  • 0

Feminism will be outlawed. Mostly because it's a backwards idiotic viewpoint that doesn't serve any real progressive purpose.


Nobody breaks from Mafia... Mafia breaks YOU!


CDCFL - Montreal Canadiens GM
CDCEHL - Winnipeg Jets AGM


#60 Ray_Cathode

Ray_Cathode

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,813 posts
  • Joined: 07-September 07

Posted 10 February 2013 - 11:28 PM

Recently: BALLARD TRADE

In History: CLEARLY NEELY

Personal Annoyance: BALLARD TRADE

WORST RE-SIGNING: BIEKSA @ $4.6m

WORST UN-RE-SIGNING: WIllie Mitchell @ $3.5m

Recently: BALLARD TRADE

In History: CLEARLY NEELY

Personal Annoyance: BALLARD TRADE

WORST RE-SIGNING: BIEKSA @ $4.6m

WORST UN-RE-SIGNING: WIllie Mitchell @ $3.5m


"WORST RE_SIGNING: BIEKSA?" ?????????????????????
2nd most even strength points for a D in the entire league last year, while going +12 - Would have had a ton more points had he played on the first unit PP or had first unit minutes. One of the toughest SOBs in the league and plays on the unit that checks the other teams top lines and is on the first string PK. Your statement might actually be the dumbest thing posted on here in the last five years... so you have really beaten down some amazing competition. I think yiou should take up a new sport to watch... like tiddly winks or ice dance.
  • 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.