Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

[Rumour] Florida Panthers willing to trade almost anybody


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
144 replies to this topic

#91 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,052 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 11 March 2013 - 04:22 PM

He's on the trade block? are they having issues re-signing him?

Anyways, Filipula would be amazing centering our 3rd line, would fit right in with Higgin and Hansen.

Something like Ballard ++ for Filipula and Ferraro's son would be good.


Yep. Detroit is known for walking away from guys like this if they're asking for too much.

They have alot of good young talent coming up from the farm, so he could be seen as expendable.

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#92 PLOGUE

PLOGUE

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,188 posts
  • Joined: 07-August 03

Posted 11 March 2013 - 04:24 PM

Brian Campbell please. The cost of an overpriced defencemen, but the end result is Sedins will be 100 point players, improved power play, and overall improved offence.

BTW Nucks fans, stop asking for gudbrandon, let alone even Dimitri Kulikov. They aint going nowhere. That being said not sure if he is willing to waive his NTC to Vancouver.

If "they ain't going nowhere" then they are going somewhere, correct? The untouchable tag lasts until an unreal deal cones along. There is one untouchable in the NHL, that's Crosby, since there is no package of players that could improve a team as much on and off the ice as him. All other players can and probably would be traded. Everyone has a Price.
QUOTE (ephysdad @ Oct 26 2008, 09:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Or then of course there's always the Ferry

Also,
I'm putting together a list of the criteria to be a "real" Canuck's fan. So far I have this:

1. I cheer for the Canucks, whatever happens.
2. I never say anything bad about the Canucks.
3. I know the difference between "real" fans and posers just by how they post on the CDC or where they sit at GM Place.
4. I wouldn't dream of leaving a game before it ended, even if it meant missing a train, ferry or a threesome with the wife and her hot best friend?
5. I make 10+ posts a day and I have over 10,000 posts on the CDC, so my Canuck "street-cred" is huge. Go away noob!
6. No one F's with me. I train in MMA. I'm really tough. I'll curb stomp yo' donkey.
7. I make a tonne of $$$$.
8. I'm witty.
9. If it meant missing a game, I wouldn't study for a midterm.
10. I roll with a guy who has a wicked car.
11. I like to post "source?" a lot.


#93 wallstreetamigo

wallstreetamigo

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,751 posts
  • Joined: 01-April 07

Posted 11 March 2013 - 04:26 PM

All Gudbranson is is potential. Right now Tanev is the better player. He's playing top 4 minutes on the Canucks and is a career plus player. Gudbranson has not lived up to potential so far. Every hockey analyst will tell you this. Does Gudbranson have potential to be better than Tanev in a few years? Sure. Does that mean you should trade someone who has proven he can play consistently for someone who has potential to be better? I'm not so sure.

People are often blinded by the fact that Gudbranson was drafted 3rd overall and automatically assume he must be better than someone who went undrafted. So, I understand why you think Gudbranson is better even though he has not shown it on the ice


lol....no it would be highway robbery pure and simple. Tanev is one of the most overrated players on the Canucks right now. Not messing up defensively as much as the rest of the D while adding nothing else does not make you a franchise type player I'm afraid.

#94 Tangelos

Tangelos

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,067 posts
  • Joined: 16-April 12

Posted 11 March 2013 - 04:31 PM

You pay for potential. The kid just turned 21. There is not a single analyst who believes that Gudbranson is a letdown thus far, his career hasn't even started.

I'm not blinded by anything, I've watched both of them play plenty. Tanev has been defensively consistent and at this point is more defensively consistent than Gudbranson, but at over two years younger (which is a huge gap at that age) Gudbranson is better offensively, will learn the defensive game, has more size, makes huge hits and brings energy. Tanev is consistent, great. Gudbranson has the potential to be a franchise D-man.

Let's put it this way; would you trade Willie Mitchell for Gudbranson? How about even Mitchell at the peak of his career for Gudbranson today? I'm assuming you would, and if you wouldn't then there's really no point in continuing this conversation because you're delusional. Tanev's career ceiling is a poor man's Willie Mitchell, and his type of game is easily replaceable. Gudbranson's game is not.


Hang on so you're comparing Mitchell to 23 year old Tanev? And I'm delusional. Right... Tanev is still young and also has potential to get better just like Gudbranson. You pay for potential if you're giving up someone who has peaked sure, but Tanev is not only better than Gudbranson right now, but he also has the potential to continue to get better for 4 more years. You say Gudbranson is more physical, well Tanev is a better skater. And are we talking about the same Gudbranson here? How many points does he have? Not exactly Karlsson on the blue line.

(Sig removed by mod)
Previously Doug The Thug Glatt


#95 Yotes

Yotes

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,687 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 11 March 2013 - 04:31 PM

Yep. Detroit is known for walking away from guys like this if they're asking for too much.

They have alot of good young talent coming up from the farm, so he could be seen as expendable.


Like i started in the proposal forum trying to ge Filpulla.

also lets keep a deal with florida simple like the higgins one. Mattias/goc for a 2nd and ebbett/any other tweener as we need to move a contract

#96 Gustavo Fring

Gustavo Fring

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,527 posts
  • Joined: 02-July 11

Posted 11 March 2013 - 04:36 PM

All Gudbranson is is potential. Right now Tanev is the better player. He's playing top 4 minutes on the Canucks and is a career plus player. Gudbranson has not lived up to potential so far. Every hockey analyst will tell you this. Does Gudbranson have potential to be better than Tanev in a few years? Sure. Does that mean you should trade someone who has proven he can play consistently for someone who has potential to be better? I'm not so sure.

People are often blinded by the fact that Gudbranson was drafted 3rd overall and automatically assume he must be better than someone who went undrafted. So, I understand why you think Gudbranson is better even though he has not shown it on the ice


You pretty much summed up the hodgson/kassian trade. Lol
Posted Image

#97 Kyosama

Kyosama

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 602 posts
  • Joined: 26-June 09

Posted 11 March 2013 - 04:41 PM

Hang on so you're comparing Mitchell to 23 year old Tanev? And I'm delusional. Right... Tanev is still young and also has potential to get better just like Gudbranson. You pay for potential if you're giving up someone who has peaked sure, but Tanev is not only better than Gudbranson right now, but he also has the potential to continue to get better for 4 more years. You say Gudbranson is more physical, well Tanev is a better skater. And are we talking about the same Gudbranson here? How many points does he have? Not exactly Karlsson on the blue line.


What? Did you even read what I said? I said Tanev's ceiling is a poor man's Willie Mitchell. As in he'll be good defensively (but will very likely never be as good as Willie Mitchell, hence the "poor man's") while bringing little to no offense. If you can't bother to read then there's no reason to debate.

I also didn't compare Gudbranson to Karlsson, I said he's better offensively than Tanev right now. That is all I said about his offense. So yeah, I'm just going to assume you didn't read my post and are just blindly firing, feel free to re-read my post and work out a better argument.

#98 Alexander 7he Great

Alexander 7he Great

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 60 posts
  • Joined: 25-January 13

Posted 11 March 2013 - 04:58 PM

Agreed. And the only way I would want to trade Schneider is if another up and coming goalie comes back to us. This fits almost all our needs.

Why the bloody hell would you trade Tanev? LOL

#99 Gonz

Gonz

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 715 posts
  • Joined: 08-March 11

Posted 11 March 2013 - 05:13 PM

No thanks. Versteeg is not what this team needs... nor is another LH dman. Glad they're willing to trade everyone except their promising young prospects.

**Canucks willing to trade everyone except: Schneider, Kesler, Sedins, Kassian, Jensen, Burrows, Bieksa, Hamhuis, Edler, Bieksa, Garrison....


Oh how do you know these are the untouchables?

#100 Tangelos

Tangelos

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,067 posts
  • Joined: 16-April 12

Posted 11 March 2013 - 05:22 PM

What? Did you even read what I said? I said Tanev's ceiling is a poor man's Willie Mitchell. As in he'll be good defensively (but will very likely never be as good as Willie Mitchell, hence the "poor man's") while bringing little to no offense. If you can't bother to read then there's no reason to debate.

I also didn't compare Gudbranson to Karlsson, I said he's better offensively than Tanev right now. That is all I said about his offense. So yeah, I'm just going to assume you didn't read my post and are just blindly firing, feel free to re-read my post and work out a better argument.


At least I have an argument. You're claim that Gudbranson is better than Tanev is only based off potential. Tanev has actually proven that he is capable of stepping into a top 4 role. Maybe Gudbranson has slightly more points, but 12 points in 89 career games is nothing to prance around about. A comparable to Gudbranson in terms of draft position is Doughty. Doughty broke out in his first year; whereas, Gudbranson who was drafted 3 years ago has yet to earn a full time position on the Panthers.

Ultimately it would be nuts to trade Tanev for Gudbranson (hypothetically) when we're trying to win now, are low on right handed d-men, and there's really no guarantee Gudbranson doesn't just turn into another Bryan Allen. Both big guys drafted high but have not lived up to their potential.

Oh and Tanev is more like a future Hamhuis than Mitchell. Both Hammer and Tanev are very similar in their own end and are much better skaters than Mitchell. Mitchell relies on his long twig and can't skate. Tanev just has to learn the offensive side of the game which he can, but he's smart enough to know that playing under AV, defense has to be his priority if he wants to stay on the team. His offense will come with the years.

Edited by Doug The Thug Glatt, 11 March 2013 - 05:33 PM.

(Sig removed by mod)
Previously Doug The Thug Glatt


#101 Canucks_Hockey_101

Canucks_Hockey_101

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,195 posts
  • Joined: 05-November 12

Posted 11 March 2013 - 05:23 PM

Players like Versteeg have performed on every team they've played for. Kulikov has top 2 d-men potential.

Neither Sturm nor Samuelsson are Panthers anymore.



...Campbell for Luongo? Get a PMD with a cup ring and a similar contract. :lol:


Schneider+ for Campbell. Kid ain't ready to carry a Cup contending team yet but ready enough to be sent to Florida and develop as part of their future core.

Edited by Canucks_Hockey_101, 11 March 2013 - 05:23 PM.


#102 CB007

CB007

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,661 posts
  • Joined: 23-October 03

Posted 11 March 2013 - 05:25 PM

Why the bloody hell would you trade Tanev? LOL


He is just about the smallest Dman in the league. He plays a cool game, yes, but that alone doesn't make him untradable.

Edited by CB007, 11 March 2013 - 05:25 PM.

Posted Image

#103 Gonz

Gonz

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 715 posts
  • Joined: 08-March 11

Posted 11 March 2013 - 05:25 PM

Why the bloody hell would you trade Tanev? LOL


If you getting a d similar to him but more nastiness and size, why not?

#104 Tangelos

Tangelos

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,067 posts
  • Joined: 16-April 12

Posted 11 March 2013 - 05:25 PM

lol....no it would be highway robbery pure and simple. Tanev is one of the most overrated players on the Canucks right now. Not messing up defensively as much as the rest of the D while adding nothing else does not make you a franchise type player I'm afraid.



But how? What has Gudbranson done to prove he's better than Tanev? Drafted 3rd overall I'll give you that, but Bryan Allen was also drafted high and look how he turned out.

(Sig removed by mod)
Previously Doug The Thug Glatt


#105 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,751 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 11 March 2013 - 05:28 PM

Schneider+ for Campbell. Kid ain't ready to carry a Cup contending team yet but ready enough to be sent to Florida and develop as part of their future core.

You're bashing your head against a cement wall with these Schneider to Florida proposals.

THEY HAVE JACOB MARKSTROM. THEY'RE INTERESTED IN LUONGO, NOT SCHNEIDER.

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


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


#106 Tangelos

Tangelos

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,067 posts
  • Joined: 16-April 12

Posted 11 March 2013 - 05:29 PM

dp

Edited by Doug The Thug Glatt, 11 March 2013 - 05:29 PM.

(Sig removed by mod)
Previously Doug The Thug Glatt


#107 Caboose

Caboose

    Marlies Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,896 posts
  • Joined: 01-September 10

Posted 11 March 2013 - 05:31 PM

This fits almost all our needs.


Too bad a trade needs to fit the needs of two teams.

kb71ZMt.jpg

 


#108 allkill326

allkill326

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 11 March 2013 - 05:33 PM

We need to talk to them. However, most likely, they will not be hearing on Booth.
Posted Image

#109 Caboose

Caboose

    Marlies Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,896 posts
  • Joined: 01-September 10

Posted 11 March 2013 - 05:35 PM

Tanev > Gudbranson


Posted Image

kb71ZMt.jpg

 


#110 Tangelos

Tangelos

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,067 posts
  • Joined: 16-April 12

Posted 11 March 2013 - 05:43 PM

Posted Image


Solid argument. You should write a research paper and stop jerking it to Jennifer Lawrence.

(Sig removed by mod)
Previously Doug The Thug Glatt


#111 Everybody Hates Raymond

Everybody Hates Raymond

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,653 posts
  • Joined: 06-November 11

Posted 11 March 2013 - 06:09 PM

The injury-ravaged Florida Panthers have to start thinking about next season. Two veteran forwards the Panthers will listen to offers for before April 3 are Kris Versteeg and Tomas Fleischmann.


http://espn.go.com/b...season-just-yet

#112 Hunter.S-Kerouac

Hunter.S-Kerouac

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,113 posts
  • Joined: 20-October 11

Posted 11 March 2013 - 06:11 PM

booth for samuelsson and sturm...not kidding, get some experience back in the dressing room!

They don't have samuelson

#113 Hunter.S-Kerouac

Hunter.S-Kerouac

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,113 posts
  • Joined: 20-October 11

Posted 11 March 2013 - 06:13 PM

Solid argument. You should write a research paper and stop jerking it to Jennifer Lawrence.


I agree with Caboose. What she said.

#114 Monty

Monty

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,165 posts
  • Joined: 20-July 05

Posted 11 March 2013 - 06:13 PM

Drafted 3rd overall I'll give you that, but Bryan Allen was also drafted high and look how he turned out.


Turned out better than Chris Tanev.

Can you imagine drowning AT a KK Rev concert?

  


i'm pretty sure that's how zombies are born.


#115 Tangelos

Tangelos

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,067 posts
  • Joined: 16-April 12

Posted 11 March 2013 - 06:15 PM

Turned out better than Chris Tanev.


Tanev is 23 :picard:

(Sig removed by mod)
Previously Doug The Thug Glatt


#116 Hunter.S-Kerouac

Hunter.S-Kerouac

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,113 posts
  • Joined: 20-October 11

Posted 11 March 2013 - 06:15 PM

You're bashing your head against a cement wall with these Schneider to Florida proposals.

THEY HAVE JACOB MARKSTROM. THEY'RE INTERESTED IN LUONGO, NOT SCHNEIDER.


I don't understand why they wouldn't be interested in the C Wall. Their main issue with Luo is contract. If Markstrom is the future C Schnide would make sense.

#117 Everybody Hates Raymond

Everybody Hates Raymond

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,653 posts
  • Joined: 06-November 11

Posted 11 March 2013 - 06:38 PM

I don't understand why they wouldn't be interested in the C Wall. Their main issue with Luo is contract. If Markstrom is the future C Schnide would make sense.


Stop trying to make C Wall happen. It's not going to happen.

#118 Justin6Schultz

Justin6Schultz

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 218 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 12

Posted 11 March 2013 - 06:39 PM

I agree with Caboose. What she said.

That's cute you agree with caboose. Tanev was quoted by Ryan Kesler as " looking so cool out there he could've had a smoke hanging out of his mouth"
Sounds like Tanev is worth more to the Canucks, as a Canuck, than EG could ever be. Tanev may not have "scoring success" but hes got experience and appears to be soaking it up and appears to be translating it better than gudbranson, gaining invaluable regular season and playoff success is on a cheaper contract to boot, all within a Canuck system.
Tanev>Gudbranson and the best part is, Tanev is now performing in a top 4 role, something he wasn't supposed to do!

Edited by Justin6Schultz, 11 March 2013 - 06:47 PM.


#119 CB007

CB007

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,661 posts
  • Joined: 23-October 03

Posted 11 March 2013 - 07:03 PM

I don't understand why they wouldn't be interested in the C Wall. Their main issue with Luo is contract. If Markstrom is the future C Schnide would make sense.


Markstrom is very very unproven. They would consider Lou if they give us a contract back.

Edited by CB007, 11 March 2013 - 07:08 PM.

Posted Image

#120 missioncanucksfan

missioncanucksfan

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,620 posts
  • Joined: 25-February 12

Posted 12 March 2013 - 10:29 AM

Schroeder for Matthias+Jovanoski(buy out)..

Can you imagine Gillis and Gilman going into Aqualini's office for this proposal?

"Umm, we traded out 2009 1st round pick, for a plug 3rd line center and a guy who we think that YOU can just buy out at the end of the year"?
"whaddya say Frank? Huh?, Lawrence here feels its a great idea too, right? Tell him Lawrence"




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.