Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

VAN/TOR & VAN/BUF

Proposal

  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 shadowgoon

shadowgoon

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 695 posts
  • Joined: 03-January 10

Posted 29 March 2013 - 05:10 PM

Let us first take a look at the needs of the Canucks, and focus on the strengths they can potentially pull from to make a deal:

Needs: T6 scoring threat, 3rd Line C, 4th line effectiveness

Strengths: Goaltending, mid level prospects, defensive depth.

1st proposal:

To VAN:
C Bozak
D Holzer
G Scrivens

To TOR:
G Luongo
Pick: 2013 3rd round

The reasoning here is simple, Kadri isn't going anywhere and Gillis isn't going to get the top flight prospect like he wants, Holzer is projected to be a steady defensive defenceman but has the size, youth (relative) and right handedness that Gillis ought to be seeking for the bottom defensive pairing with Tanev likely looking to make the T4 permanently next season.

Bozak fills in the 2C position until Kesler returns, at which point he fills out the 3C. Scrivens backs up Schneider due to Luongo's departure and is cheap for next season which ensures some insurance for Lack who is still coming back from injury.


2nd Proposal:

Buffalo should be looking to rebuild, without a doubt. Canucks need a legit T6 scoring threat in addition to the Sedin arsenal.

To VAN:

F Vanek

To BUF:

C Schroeder
Pick: 2013 1st round
Pick: 2014 2nd round

Schroeder has performed admirably and has upside yet to achieve, though with Gillis wanting to get bigger and stronger Schroeder just doesn't fit that mold. Now, Vanek isn't that mold either but what he is is a legitimate scoring threat that we desperately need to fill out the T6 ranks.

After both moves:

Sedin - Sedin - Burrows
Vanek - Bozak - Hansen
Raymond - Lapierre - Kassian
Higgins - Ebbett - Ballard/Pinizzotto/Wiese/Sestito

Hamhuis - Bieksa
Edler - Tanev
Garrison - Holzer
Alberts
Barker

Schneider
Scrivens

With Kesler back:

Sedin - Sedin - Burrows
Vanek - Kesler - Hansen
Raymond - Bozak - Kassian
Higgins - Lapierre - Ballard/Pinizzotto/Wiese/Sestito

Hamhuis - Bieksa
Edler - Tanev
Garrison - Holzer
Alberts
Barker

Schneider
Scrivens

In the off season, Amnesty buyout Ballard and Booth (if unable to trade them), let Raymond walk (he's more valuable to us this season than to trade him)

Re-sign:
Bozak (3.0 M Cap Hit)
Lapierre (1.5 M Cap Hit)
Pinizzotto (0.750 M Cap Hit)
Sestito (0.650 M Cap Hit)
Give a raise to Tanev (2.0 M Cap Hit)

Promote:
Jensen (Serious look)

Sedin - Sedin - Burrows (16.7 M)
Vanek - Kesler - Hansen (IMO he's stepped up and developed into that good 2 way RW we've needed in the T6) (13.49 M)
Jensen - Bozak - Kassian (4.77 M)
Sestito - Lapierre - Pinizzotto (2.9 M)
37.86 M

Edler - Bieksa (9.6 M)
Hamhuis - Tanev (6.5 M) <- Uber T4 shutdown line
Garrison - Holzer (5.39 M)
21.49 M

Schneider (4.0 M)
Scrivens (0.613 M)
4.613

Total Cap Hit: 63.963 M, Next year's cap: 64.3 M, just over 300K under the cap. This will allow for the Canucks to re-sign Vanek the following year at or below his existing salary, allow for a raise to Hansen, and allow for the higher salary of Lack to come on board.

Edited by Shadowgoon, 29 March 2013 - 05:12 PM.

  • 2

#2 Danthecanucksfan

Danthecanucksfan

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,306 posts
  • Joined: 08-January 12

Posted 29 March 2013 - 05:31 PM

we get raped in both

EDIT: with no lubricant

Edited by Danthecanucksfan, 29 March 2013 - 05:32 PM.

  • 0

#3 Mollyworld

Mollyworld

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 801 posts
  • Joined: 02-February 04

Posted 29 March 2013 - 05:33 PM

Let us first take a look at the needs of the Canucks, and focus on the strengths they can potentially pull from to make a deal:

Needs: T6 scoring threat, 3rd Line C, 4th line effectiveness

Strengths: Goaltending, mid level prospects, defensive depth.

1st proposal:

To VAN:
C Bozak
D Holzer
G Scrivens

To TOR:
G Luongo
Pick: 2013 3rd round

The reasoning here is simple, Kadri isn't going anywhere and Gillis isn't going to get the top flight prospect like he wants, Holzer is projected to be a steady defensive defenceman but has the size, youth (relative) and right handedness that Gillis ought to be seeking for the bottom defensive pairing with Tanev likely looking to make the T4 permanently next season.

Bozak fills in the 2C position until Kesler returns, at which point he fills out the 3C. Scrivens backs up Schneider due to Luongo's departure and is cheap for next season which ensures some insurance for Lack who is still coming back from injury.


2nd Proposal:

Buffalo should be looking to rebuild, without a doubt. Canucks need a legit T6 scoring threat in addition to the Sedin arsenal.

To VAN:

F Vanek

To BUF:

C Schroeder
Pick: 2013 1st round
Pick: 2014 2nd round

Schroeder has performed admirably and has upside yet to achieve, though with Gillis wanting to get bigger and stronger Schroeder just doesn't fit that mold. Now, Vanek isn't that mold either but what he is is a legitimate scoring threat that we desperately need to fill out the T6 ranks.

After both moves:

Sedin - Sedin - Burrows
Vanek - Bozak - Hansen
Raymond - Lapierre - Kassian
Higgins - Ebbett - Ballard/Pinizzotto/Wiese/Sestito

Hamhuis - Bieksa
Edler - Tanev
Garrison - Holzer
Alberts
Barker

Schneider
Scrivens

With Kesler back:

Sedin - Sedin - Burrows
Vanek - Kesler - Hansen
Raymond - Bozak - Kassian
Higgins - Lapierre - Ballard/Pinizzotto/Wiese/Sestito

Hamhuis - Bieksa
Edler - Tanev
Garrison - Holzer
Alberts
Barker

Schneider
Scrivens

In the off season, Amnesty buyout Ballard and Booth (if unable to trade them), let Raymond walk (he's more valuable to us this season than to trade him)

Re-sign:
Bozak (3.0 M Cap Hit)
Lapierre (1.5 M Cap Hit)
Pinizzotto (0.750 M Cap Hit)
Sestito (0.650 M Cap Hit)
Give a raise to Tanev (2.0 M Cap Hit)

Promote:
Jensen (Serious look)

Sedin - Sedin - Burrows (16.7 M)
Vanek - Kesler - Hansen (IMO he's stepped up and developed into that good 2 way RW we've needed in the T6) (13.49 M)
Jensen - Bozak - Kassian (4.77 M)
Sestito - Lapierre - Pinizzotto (2.9 M)
37.86 M

Edler - Bieksa (9.6 M)
Hamhuis - Tanev (6.5 M) <- Uber T4 shutdown line
Garrison - Holzer (5.39 M)
21.49 M

Schneider (4.0 M)
Scrivens (0.613 M)
4.613

Total Cap Hit: 63.963 M, Next year's cap: 64.3 M, just over 300K under the cap. This will allow for the Canucks to re-sign Vanek the following year at or below his existing salary, allow for a raise to Hansen, and allow for the higher salary of Lack to come on board.


I honestly think that is what Lou's value is now. You may be able to get Blacker or Percy instead of Holzer, but not much more than that.
  • 1

#4 shadowgoon

shadowgoon

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 695 posts
  • Joined: 03-January 10

Posted 29 March 2013 - 05:38 PM

we get raped in both

EDIT: with no lubricant


How about instead of issuing polarizing statements like this without any reasoning, you actually try to articulate your point?

Sometimes it's not about receiving equal value in return for what you give up, or even getting more than what you give up, but addressing the needs of the roster keeping within the context of the shrinking cap next year.

Bozak is a very good 3C for us and he's still relatively young. Holzer could be good as well. Vanek is exactly what we need, and aside from his 48 point rookie season and one 53 point season (in 71 games) he's managed north of 60 points in his other 5 seasons and is on pace for > 80 points over a 82 game season.

Schroeder will always be hampered by his size, at least so far as Gillis' vision of the team moving forward goes. Giving up a 1st in a relatively pedestrian draft and a 2nd in the following draft to me is worth almost guaranteed 30G performance, and may actually allow Kesler to focus on his playmaking instead of having to be "the guy" for the 2nd line.
  • 0

#5 CanucksFanMike

CanucksFanMike

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,524 posts
  • Joined: 28-September 11

Posted 29 March 2013 - 05:41 PM

I wouldn't do the 1st deal..... we should try to get a solid prospect and high pick for luongo

The 2nd deal I might do.... not sure either team does it though

Edited by CanucksFanMike, 29 March 2013 - 05:41 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image
Credit to -Vintage Canuck-

#6 shadowgoon

shadowgoon

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 695 posts
  • Joined: 03-January 10

Posted 29 March 2013 - 05:44 PM

I wouldn't do the 1st deal..... we should try to get a solid prospect and high pick for luongo

The 2nd deal I might do.... not sure either team does it though


The problem is that I don't think anyone in the league gets desperate enough to give that top flight prospect and high pick; most GM's are more likely to smoke Gillis out. I'd rather get a good return for Luongo instead of waiting for a GREAT return and risk getting nothing in return at all.

Sometimes you just have to hedge your bets and make the best of what you can, Bozak, Scrivens and Holzer is not a bad return at all, considering the cap implications of next season where if Gillis can't find a partner at all would be forced to use an amnesty buyout for Luongo instead of who he should use them on; plus Bozak is what we need this season and even next season moving forward, his face off ability is north of 52% this season.
  • 0

#7 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,682 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 29 March 2013 - 08:00 PM

Let us first take a look at the needs of the Canucks, and focus on the strengths they can potentially pull from to make a deal:

Needs: T6 scoring threat, 3rd Line C, 4th line effectiveness

Strengths: Goaltending, mid level prospects, defensive depth.


Your proposals address some of the team needs, but only in the short term (T6 scoring threat, 3rd Line C), or they do not address the problem at all (4th line effectiveness).

You note a team strength as being "mid level prospects". This suggests to me a lack of higher level prospects. Part of your solution to the team's needs is to trade away the team's top center prospect (yes, we are all aware of Schroeder's lack of size, etc), three higher level picks, and not bring back anything to help re-stock the cupboard.


1st proposal:

To VAN:
C Bozak
D Holzer
G Scrivens

To TOR:
G Luongo
Pick: 2013 3rd round


Issue one: too many contracts coming this way and it puts the Canucks over the 50 limit. There should be a couple of contract dumps going back to the Leafs.

Issue two: there should be "more" coming back in this deal, whether it's players, picks or prospects.

There's no guarantee that Bozak re-signs here. I would like either to have the Leafs do a sign and trade (maybe 3 years), or put in some sort of conditional clause (like the Canucks get a 2nd).

Holzer might be a good pick up, however he does nothing to fill what some see as the need for an "Ehrhoff".

Scrivens might be okay as a back-up, however I'd prefer Reimer. For one thing, he's better than than Scrivens, and for a second, he'll be a RFA in 2014 so maybe he could be moved for additional assests.



2nd Proposal:

Buffalo should be looking to rebuild, without a doubt. Canucks need a legit T6 scoring threat in addition to the Sedin arsenal.

To VAN:

F Vanek

To BUF:

C Schroeder
Pick: 2013 1st round
Pick: 2014 2nd round


Issue one: that's a whack of a lot of cap hit coming this way, and a lot the Canucks' future going the other way.

Issue two: I'm not sure that Buffalo would want/need Schroeder.

Issue three: Vanek is likely only a short term fix.


regards,
G.
  • 0
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#8 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,682 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 29 March 2013 - 08:15 PM

Sometimes you just have to hedge your bets and make the best of what you can, Bozak, Scrivens and Holzer is not a bad return at all, considering the cap implications of next season


While it can be argued that the Canucks are getting long-term gain by movoving Luongo's contract, in the short term you are bringing back over $3.5 million in additional cap with your trade proposals.

If the main pieces in these deals were to re-sign here then the cap is further stressed. You would sign Bozak for $3 million. Do you propose that the Canucks should try to re-sign Vanek? Or do you suggest that the team try to flip him at or before next year's trade deadline?


regards,
G.
  • 0
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#9 shadowgoon

shadowgoon

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 695 posts
  • Joined: 03-January 10

Posted 29 March 2013 - 08:55 PM

While it can be argued that the Canucks are getting long-term gain by movoving Luongo's contract, in the short term you are bringing back over $3.5 million in additional cap with your trade proposals.

If the main pieces in these deals were to re-sign here then the cap is further stressed. You would sign Bozak for $3 million. Do you propose that the Canucks should try to re-sign Vanek? Or do you suggest that the team try to flip him at or before next year's trade deadline?


regards,
G.


The idea behind the proposals are a Higgins/Lapierre sort of mentality; short term picks ups who ended up fulfilling a longer term purpose.

Vanek being only 29 could potentially re-sign for another 4-5 years, and Bozak could re-sign for the same term. In this regard it's worthwhile to mortgage an uncertain future (Shroeder, picks) for assets who can help the team ensure a perennial contention for the Stanley Cup.

As for contract dumps, I'm certain Gillis is more than capable of flipping some of our less promising prospects for 6/7th round draft picks to ensure that everything aligns. Regarding Reimer over Scrivens and your valuation of Holzer, you might be right; but Gillis has to tread carefully.

His poker hand isn't the strongest, re-raising too many times will lead GM's to call his bluff. As I mentioned earlier I would be content with a good return over a great return without the risk of no return.

Edited by Shadowgoon, 29 March 2013 - 08:58 PM.

  • 0

#10 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,682 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 29 March 2013 - 09:11 PM

The idea behind the proposals are a Higgins/Lapierre sort of mentality; short term picks ups who ended up fulfilling a longer term purpose.

Vanek being only 29 could potentially re-sign for another 4-5 years, and Bozak could re-sign for the same term. In this regard it's worthwhile to mortgage an uncertain future (Shroeder, picks) for assets who can help the team ensure a perennial contention for the Stanley Cup.


However, where I see your plan fall apart is that Vanek will want something in the ballpark of what he is currently making. You've already suggested that Bozak should be re-signed for $3 million (there are reports that he is seeking more than what you have suggested).

Bozak alone would be making more than both Higgins and Lapierre combined. Are you anticipating that Vanek will accept some kind of home town discount? :)


regards,
G.
  • 0
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.





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.