BuretoMogilny Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 Some people confuse me. They say they want size but then they are like no Nichuskin why would we ever pick him, he is Russian. Get over it, he will be a good hockey player if you put him in the top six and if someone gets him outside of the top ten that team will be lucky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bossram Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 Personally I think the Canucks should be adding more picks, not packaging them to move up. The Canucks lack depth in their prospect pool. This is a deep draft. They should be trying to add more 2nd/3rd rounders to fill out their utter lack of prospects. At this point it should be more about quantity than quality. There will still be a lot of talented players who slipped in the middle rounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 Personally I think the Canucks should be adding more picks, not packaging them to move up. The Canucks lack depth in their prospect pool. This is a deep draft. They should be trying to add more 2nd/3rd rounders to fill out their utter lack of prospects. At this point it should be more about quantity than quality. There will still be a lot of talented players who slipped in the middle rounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted June 6, 2013 Share Posted June 6, 2013 Ya, I'm not seeing it. Gillis is going to give up considerable assets for a Russian player? The only GM who's never drafted a single Russian player, never traded for a Russian player is gonna sudden trade up to draft a Russian player? I can't imagine that ever happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pumpkins Posted June 6, 2013 Share Posted June 6, 2013 trade the sedins for some 1st round picks. cause as long as we have sedins we are not going to win a cup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkstar Posted June 6, 2013 Share Posted June 6, 2013 Some people confuse me. They say they want size but then they are like no Nichuskin why would we ever pick him, he is Russian. Get over it, he will be a good hockey player if you put him in the top six and if someone gets him outside of the top ten that team will be lucky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brocklovich Posted June 6, 2013 Share Posted June 6, 2013 Personally I think the Canucks should be adding more picks, not packaging them to move up. The Canucks lack depth in their prospect pool. This is a deep draft. They should be trying to add more 2nd/3rd rounders to fill out their utter lack of prospects. At this point it should be more about quantity than quality. There will still be a lot of talented players who slipped in the middle rounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted June 6, 2013 Share Posted June 6, 2013 We do need a couple of top level prospects injected into the organization, getting journeymen picks and college UFAs is only going to get you so far. We need to make a couple of serious moves as our roster isn't getting closer to a Cup right now as is. Edler and Kesler would have huge trade value and bring back a lottery pick plus a useful roster player... as well as freeing up cap space to go after a top flight UFA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted June 6, 2013 Share Posted June 6, 2013 We do need a couple of top level prospects injected into the organization, getting journeymen picks and college UFAs is only going to get you so far. We need to make a couple of serious moves as our roster isn't getting closer to a Cup right now as is. Edler and Kesler would have huge trade value and bring back a lottery pick plus a useful roster player... as well as freeing up cap space to go after a top flight UFA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicky Posted June 6, 2013 Share Posted June 6, 2013 yup, both players would be at the top of my trade list if I were MG. Kesler might like to return to Ohio to play for a young up and coming team where he can have a fresh start closer to his home Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canadiangunner Posted June 6, 2013 Share Posted June 6, 2013 I wouldn't mind that but I also wouldn't mind (probably not likely) moving some veterans (I've posted ample times a potential deal w/ NYI & flipping Edler for picks) for picks due to this being a deep draft. I can see why folks want to move into the top 5 but I am thinking the canucks would be better off trying to get some mid round 1sts (if possible) to try and restock the pool with some legit potential top 6 forwards. Not sure who / what they could move to also land some 2nds or 3rds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
"Bull" Horvat Posted June 6, 2013 Share Posted June 6, 2013 Not exactly against this--I'm pretty open to sending out almost anyone to change the composition of the team, but there is a NTC that'd have to be waived. May not be a big thing if the other team was from Michigan or Ohio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted June 6, 2013 Share Posted June 6, 2013 You want to flip edler for some late 1st round picks? Are you serious? Do you have any understanding of hockey at all? Why on earth would any team move a d-man that is top 10 in scoring, 6'4", entering prime of his career and signed for a hometown discount for the next 5 years? How does that trade make nucks better, they would be lucky if any of the picks you want to trade him for are any better then edler. I'm not against moving edler but not for some late 1st round picks...no way.Edler for a top 6 forward like a bobby ryan, simmonds, skinner i can deal with or a package of top young player and pick...like couterier and first. But not for a bunch of flippin late 1st round picks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brocklovich Posted June 6, 2013 Share Posted June 6, 2013 You want to flip edler for some late 1st round picks? Are you serious? Do you have any understanding of hockey at all? Why on earth would any team move a d-man that is top 10 in scoring, 6'4", entering prime of his career and signed for a hometown discount for the next 5 years? How does that trade make nucks better, they would be lucky if any of the picks you want to trade him for are any better then edler. I'm not against moving edler but not for some late 1st round picks...no way.Edler for a top 6 forward like a bobby ryan, simmonds, skinner i can deal with or a package of top young player and pick...like couterier and first. But not for a bunch of flippin late 1st round picks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canadiangunner Posted June 6, 2013 Share Posted June 6, 2013 You may have misunderstood me I am wanting to try to flip Edler for a pick in the 11 - 15 range, which as I have stated many many times, helps restock the prospect cupboard with potential top 6 forwards or top 4 dmen - I am hoping the Canucks either try to do a rebuild ala San Jose more than anything but if they need to do a complete rebuild nothing wrong with that either as evidenced by chicago and pittsburgh. Your right though, my hockey understanding is fairly limited as I understand you need to score to be able to beat teams in the post season and the last 2 playoffs, to my limited knowledge the team had a bit of a tough time scoring. From other sports I am used to dealing from a position of strength to help strengthen other of your weaker areas as well as the old saying you have to give up something to get something. But please tell me what my obviously limited hockey sense is missing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brocklovich Posted June 6, 2013 Share Posted June 6, 2013 Considering this draft is considered similar to 03 in regards to depth - I'd say one of a carter / brown / seabrook type player would be able to make an impact wouldn't you agree? Just because phoenix was asking for that doesn't necessarily mean the Canucks should (also note how Yandle is still with the Coyotes?) also Edler is coming off a pretty significant back injury, whereas as far as I know Yandle has been relatively healthy his whole career, I am sure GMs would use that as a way to leverage Edlers value down a little bit. Who knows I also said Carolina could be an interesting team come the draft since they moved the 8th for Jordan Staal they may or may not move the 5th for something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canadiangunner Posted June 6, 2013 Share Posted June 6, 2013 Yeah good point i guess you can ask whatever you want doesn't mean you get it. Still think Edler doesn't move unless the return is more than a draft pick outside of top 10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brocklovich Posted June 6, 2013 Share Posted June 6, 2013 Yeah good point i guess you can ask whatever you want doesn't mean you get it. Still think Edler doesn't move unless the return is more than a draft pick outside of top 10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 Yeah good point i guess you can ask whatever you want doesn't mean you get it. Still think Edler doesn't move unless the return is more than a draft pick outside of top 10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R3aL Posted June 7, 2013 Share Posted June 7, 2013 The key word is WANT, Canucks want a lot of things, everyone WANTS to have a top 3 or 5 pick in this draft, everyone WANTS to win the cup, everyone WANTS a chara or crosby on there team,,, The reality of the matter is the Canucks are not going to move up dramatically in this draft as the cost would outweigh the benefit. I could see us acquiring a few more later picks and maybe even a second but def. not a top ten or even 15 pick I see in our distant future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.