Dogbyte Posted November 25, 2013 Author Share Posted November 25, 2013 I'm pretty much open to anything at this point. If Hansen is in a package for someone we better be getting a damn good young player. I'd be pissed if he traded too much future for Alex semin or something. If were goin Hansen ++ I want an evander Kane type player. Hansen is a pretty consistent player and only what? 26. He signs great contracts and exceeds them and probably still has 10 years of good hockey left in him. Any team that gets him, another player and a top prospect is making off like bandits in the trade. Kane is the player I've been targeting for a long time. Even if we slight overpay I'd be in. Edler and Hansen, or .. ouch I know Hansen Burrows 2nd Kane Pardy/Ellerby/Clitsome I like Clitsome I really do Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
70seven Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 we should consider trading everyone NOT named Sedin, Hamhuis, Bieksa, Tanev, Stanton, Lack, Corrado, and everyone from the last two drafts. Veteran leadership with a youth movement. THIS is what I want to see. IF we hang onto the current squad into next season without success... My 2nd favorite team may soon take their place in my heart. (Colorado) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogbyte Posted November 25, 2013 Author Share Posted November 25, 2013 we should consider trading everyone NOT named Sedin, Hamhuis, Bieksa, Tanev, Stanton, Lack, Corrado, and everyone from the last two drafts. Veteran leadership with a youth movement. THIS is what I want to see. IF we hang onto the current squad into next season without success... My 2nd favorite team may soon take their place in my heart. (Colorado) Exactly, there are only 30 teams. We need a new direction with room for incentive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benchsplinters Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 I don't get why have the people here think that the only players who should be traded are the ones playing poorly. This team needs a new identity, and you have to give up some of the players playing well to do that. As for the prospects? Depending on who the deal would be for, none of them are untouchable. If it's a deal for a young guy, like Kane, no one should think twice about moving any of the prospects and/or picks. Personally, my list of players I would dangle, regardless of NTC/NMC would be Kesler - not a fan and he holds a lot of value. Any deal I'd make starts with Kesler, especially if he's not playing C. Burrows - Love Burr, love his game, good contract.........other GM's will love him too Edler - Lots of upside, pretty valuable chip. has holes that aren't apparent to those who don't watch him game in, game out Bieksa - See Edler, and there seems to be a "mythology" about Bieksa across the league. Hansen - I'd hate to see it, but he's got a lot of value as part of a deal. Tanev - see Hansen, plus he's going to get seriously injured at some with the hits he takes every single game. Stanton - has worked himself into a moderately valuable chip. It would be him or Tanev in a deal, imo. Booth - someone might take a flyer on him, who knows. He's getting screwed over in Van I think. Schroeder - still a prospect at this point, but might have add in value. Shink - Only for a proven player under 24, unless its an older polayer with a good contract with consistent offense Horvat - See Shink, but not for any player over 24 Gaunce, see Horvat. C's always have more value than W's. Jensen - On the fence, but if a god young player came along and adding Jensen was a part, fine. Corrado - could be a valuable add in, bbut last resort. 4th liners - self explanatory Obviously thats not a list of players that should be traded, but I think a package of 2-3 of those players could net a good return and help change the identity and direction of the team. Losing one or two of the above could be absorbed, imo. Guys I would not move Sedins - not that I wouldn't, but there's no point even talking about it, it's never going to happen. Luongo - see Sedins. Kassian - he's going to be good and I see that more clearly now than before. MG would never swallow his pride either. Hamhuis - regardless of what people here think, he's playing well now. Plus, he's a BC boy Sante - BC boy, and I'm very impressed with him. Would be a good 2nd line C with the right wingers. Higgins - Love Higgy and love his chemistry with Sante. Give them a scoring winger and they'll be tough to play against Garrison - BC boy, more defensively reliable than Edler Richardson - I like his game, solid two way C-man and really stabilizes the bottom 6. anyway, I have no faith that MG will make a move, nor do I want him to make a foolish move, so this is all just rainbows and unicorns in the end. Following your suggestions, management might as well sell the franchise. Your list includes our entire future for a couple of blue chippers that if we got for all the trades you would make those same blue chippers would have no one that was good enough to play with. Wow. I did not realize there were so many good ideas out there that would really improve our team. Glad you came out to contribute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benchsplinters Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 Exactly, there are only 30 teams. We need a new direction with room for incentive. Have you honestly been happy with your second choice team in the past five years or is it because they have have won a few games this year and you prefer winning teams only Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonshinefe Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 1st line players: Henrik, Daniel. 2nd line players: None, imo. 3rd line players. Burrows ( Without the sedins, yes) Kesler ( Shutdown defensive forward, Not a 2nd liner imo) Hansen, Santorelli, Kassian ( as of now ) etc. Someone has probably said it already. We really dont have any 2nd line players. Those guys we think we can rely on, Kesler, Burrows. Without the sedins, arent 1st line players. And in reality, are kind of 3rd liners. Love these players, Want them on the team. But we need to consider building a team without a plethora of 3rd liners. Look how Chicagos built. They have Hossa Sharpe Toews and Kane between the top two lines. Were missing a lot of natural goal scoring skills that Kesler and Burrows just dont have. Ah yes, CDC, where people get thumbs upped for calling Kesler a 3rd liner. Classic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merci Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 Na we've built the perfect bottom 9 of Burrows Gaunce Higgins Santorelli Richardson Hansen Now when the cap goes up next year our entire team will be signed, and Horvat, Gaunce, and Shinkaruk will all be on entry level deals for 3 years. That is the Canucks official window to win the Stanley Cup Sedin Sedin Kassian Shinkaruk Horvat Kesler Burrows Gaunce Higgins Santorelli Ricchardson Hansen Archibald Sestito Edler Bieksa Garrison Hamhuis Stanton Tanev Corrado Subban Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salacious Crumb Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 Hansen provides pretty good bang for your buck as a third liner. He's likeable and serviceable, but heck ya, if you can trade up do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biasbieksa Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 If a rookie or two can surprise us next year. We will be in much better shape on that 2nd line. As I see it. Our defense has stability from each pairing. Id be interested in moving a D-man like Edler for a young forward that can help us up front I think corrado can make that jump pretty quick. Youve got to pay to get a good piece, and I think our Defense can spare more players than our forwards can, If you know what Im saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogbyte Posted November 25, 2013 Author Share Posted November 25, 2013 Have you honestly been happy with your second choice team in the past five years or is it because they have have won a few games this year and you prefer winning teams only You lost me. I play to win, every year, every second. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 Following your suggestions, management might as well sell the franchise. Your list includes our entire future for a couple of blue chippers that if we got for all the trades you would make those same blue chippers would have no one that was good enough to play with. Wow. I did not realize there were so many good ideas out there that would really improve our team. Glad you came out to contribute. did you miss the part where I said a package of 1-2 of those players could be absorbed. Kinda seems like you glossed over that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollumpus Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 Alright hear me out before you start losing your freaking minds. I have thought for years now that one of biggest problems is that Gillis doesn't pencil payers into the lineup when he is designing the team. This is a nightmare for the coaches. Torts is having just as much of a problem with it as AV. That's why he simply doesn't play the fourth line at all. A team spending to the cap should have servicable players on the 4th line and a second line with NHL goal scorers. Our top two lines could be so much better. First off we got Burrows playing right wing when he's really a left wing. I will concede he does play well with the Sedins but he doesn't score on his own when he's a second liner. In fact our first line right winger has zero goals 20+ games into the season. Problem? So our natural right wings are Hansen and Kassian. That's it folks. The problem is they're both 3rd line right wings right now. Kassian has more potential but right now the perfect place for him to play is right wing on the third line. Same position as Hansen. I love Hansen but he's not a second line player. He doesn't instill fear in anyone, he is a hardworker that does most things well. One of the hardest workers in the league. We invested a lot in Kassian so we should give him a chance to play on the third line where he is best suited, or we should trade him. Although it would be smart to get of rid Edler for a multitude of reasons I have heard the arguments of why that won't happen. Therefore, and I hate to say it, we should look into trading Hansen, Tanev, and a first for a top 6 player of proven stock to shore up this team. Edit: Sorry, many speeling mistakes. Serious question: other than making this proposal of what you'd be willing to give up, can you give us a suggestion of who would take this package, and which player they would send back in this deal? regards, G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 Serious question: other than making this proposal of what you'd be willing to give up, can you give us a suggestion of who would take this package, and which player they would send back in this deal? regards, G. posted in another thread. Hansen, Tanev, Jensen/1st 2014 Wheeler, Stuart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksSayEh Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 posted in another thread. Hansen, Tanev, Jensen/1st 2014 Wheeler, Stuart Might be a start, but would have to add just to get Wheels alone. Jets are gonna squeeze him, one of their best players this season and last. Still in his 20's. Not sure what his contract situation is though, that could change things. Peg wants to compete now, any roster player will have to be upgraded upon, or the + will have to be too good to pass on. He would be an awesome addition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollumpus Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 posted in another thread. Hansen, Tanev, Jensen/1st 2014 Wheeler, Stuart Hansen, Tanev, (Jensen/1st 2014) - $4 million caphit (for Hansen and Tanev only and using Hansen's new contract) Wheeler, Stuart - $7.3 million caphit A bit pricey for the Canucks in the caphit department. Otherwise, how would this trade help the Jets? They lose a lot of offense from Wheeler, and Stuart doesn't look to be that bad of a d-man, so does the addition of more defense from Hansen and Tanev sufficiently offset that loss to make it worth their while? regards, G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogbyte Posted November 25, 2013 Author Share Posted November 25, 2013 Hansen, Tanev, (Jensen/1st 2014) - $4 million caphit (for Hansen and Tanev only and using Hansen's new contract) Wheeler, Stuart - $7.3 million caphit A bit pricey for the Canucks in the caphit department. Otherwise, how would this trade help the Jets? They lose a lot of offense from Wheeler, and Stuart doesn't look to be that bad of a d-man, so does the addition of more defense from Hansen and Tanev sufficiently offset that loss to make it worth their while? regards, G. They also get Jensen and a first, plus a far superiror defenceman in Tanev. Stuart is a good piece but he's just a steady blueliner, kind of like Stanton, plus $3.5m in cap space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 I clicked it. I don't get it? Que? Thanks for validating my point. But to expand on that, you thinking results in a near factual statement that Gillis doesn't assess team chemistry when making trades. Clearly he'd do that, and to think it'd be obvious that any given player wouldn't fit in is much easier to say in hindsight from your armchair GM position. You don't name anyone specifically, so it's hard to give real examples why anyone you think doesn't fit easily could have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry Goose Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 You lost me. I play to win, every year, every second. from the comfort of your sofa. must be real difficult LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogbyte Posted November 25, 2013 Author Share Posted November 25, 2013 Thanks for validating my point. But to expand on that, you thinking results in a near factual statement that Gillis doesn't assess team chemistry when making trades. Clearly he'd do that, and to think it'd be obvious that any given player wouldn't fit in is much easier to say in hindsight from your armchair GM position. You don't name anyone specifically, so it's hard to give real examples why anyone you think doesn't fit easily could have. Well we have 4 top 9 LW's in Higgins, Burrows, D.Sedin, and Booth while he have 2 RW's in Kassian and Hansen that should both be playing 3rd line RW. Pretty self explanatory from the information you were given I thought. I just don't see any evidence that he's thinking about line combinations when he's putting the team together. Similarily we have had too many LD's for several years as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CowtownCanuck Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 We could trade anyone assigned to the forth line, they don't get ice time anyways. It would save a lot of cap space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.