• Announcements

    • StealthNuck

      Forum-specific Rules   07/11/2017

      These are board specific rules for the Trades and Rumors forum designed to provide organization and a better experience for everyone. Please review these rules before posting new threads. 
        THREAD ETIQUETTE   1. Please search for an existing thread before posting. This forum can be very fast moving, so it's understandable if redundant threads are inadvertently posted. In such a case, please use the report feature to request removal of redundant threads.    2. Provide a clearly identifiable topic title so that users can readily understand the content. The title should include any and all teams involved, as well as player names or other personnel involved as appropriate.   3. All trades, signings, rumors and other news MUST include a linkable source. Simply posting the name of the source is not enough. Effort should also be made to copy and paste the full article, or at the very least the relevant portion of text from the source to the first post of the thread. Moderators may remove low-quality threads in favour of high-quality threads. 

      Affixed to the front of your title should be a label that identifies the type of transaction that is taking place. For all trades use [TRADE]. For all signings use [SIGNING]. For all waiver-wire transactions use [WAIVERS]. For all rumours use [RUMOUR].
      For articles or news items that don't fit into the above categories, affix an appropriate label of your choice such as [NEWS], [ARTICLE] or [MISC].   4. When the status of a thread changes a new thread can be created. The new thread should reflect the change and help focus the discussion on current events. e.g. Someone may create a new thread when a rumor becomes a trades. The old thread will be locked by the moderating team.    5. Do not misrepresent the contents of your thread or post false trades or rumors. Trolling will result in a permanent suspension. 

      SOURCES   The following source types are considered INVALID. Any links to posts or threads on other message boards Any links to personal blogs Any news heard on the radio that does not have a link to an audio vault or podcast Any news seen on television that does not have a link to online video Any news spread by word of mouth
      Additionally, certain sources may be be blacklisted due to poor credentials, clear traffic-mongering etc. Blacklisted sources will be posted here. 
      Thank you for your co-operation and please PM the Administrator or Moderators if you have any questions, concerns or suggestions regarding this forum.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Strombone1

[Report] Canucks Declined Kevin Bieksa for Alexander Steen

Recommended Posts

From Elliote's 30 thoughts

11. The Toronto trade always comes up whenever Steen is mentioned. But Vancouver was apparently another team the Maple Leafs targeted as a possibility. The ask? Kevin Bieksa. It's totally understandable why the Canucks didn't do it. While everyone was still figuring out Steen's potential - he had four points in 20 games at the time - Bieksa was en route to a 43-point season and a pivotal role on the club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still would not make that trade. Bieksa is our snarl on the blue line. Steen is en route to a single career year and now has alrge contract to show for it.

No Bieksa, no clinching game 5 series winner against San Jose in 2011.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still would not make that trade. Bieksa is our snarl on the blue line. Steen is en route to a single career year and now has alrge contract to show for it.

No Bieksa, no clinching game 5 series winner against San Jose in 2011.

Agreed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In before GMMG out GM'd yet again :lol:

At that time, why in the right mind would MG trade a player who was en-route to 40+ points for a guy who only scored 4 in 20...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what is the point of this thread again?

I always find this stuff interesting. Don't know why you commented if you don't care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still would not make that trade. Bieksa is our snarl on the blue line. Steen is en route to a single career year and now has alrge contract to show for it.

No Bieksa, no clinching game 5 series winner against San Jose in 2011.

Seriously? I understood why the Canucks said no at the time before Steen really reached his potential but to say you wouldn't trade Kevin "Giveaway" Bieksa for a guy whose scoring goals faster than anyone not named Ovechkin is just crazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know, Steen is alot older than I imagined.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad the trade was declined. Steen is having a career year, and I don't see him keeping up this 50 goal pace. Bieksa is part of our core and a great leadership

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All things aside.. would you make the deal today?

Nope. Steen is having a great year but nobody knows if he can keep this up for the rest of the year, and next year, and the year after that. If anything he's a 2nd liner at best if he was on the Canucks.

Seriously? I understood why the Canucks said no at the time before Steen really reached his potential but to say you wouldn't trade Kevin "Giveaway" Bieksa for a guy whose scoring goals faster than anyone not named Ovechkin is just crazy.

Still no. He's having a career year yes but is he gonna keep it up for the rest of the season and next year and the year after that? Maybe, maybe not. I much rather have a defenceman that can be relied on on most nights

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always find this stuff interesting. Don't know why you commented if you don't care.

interesting how? the proposal was half a decade ago and the only reason the OP bring this up again is to try to stir up controversy against our gm. There are no content in this thread other than a copy and paste of part of an article. Ffs the op didn't even leave any meaningful comment when he paste the thing.

threads like this is an eyesore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what is the point of this thread again?

What's the point of your comment?

I always find this stuff interesting. Don't know why you commented if you don't care.

quote's 2 and 3, well said!! Papayas, give your head a shake and grow up!

as for the original thread, no way would I do that deal.....GMMG got that one right!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The trade for Stempniak made little sense then and certainly looks bad now.

Elliott speculating that TO once asked for Bieksa accomplishes what, exactly?

Full hindsight dictates that they should not have put Steen on the table at all.

But whatever. Steen is a good player, but this season so far has led to him being massively overrated to star status.

But then again, TO thinks Kessel is in the elite superstar range, so it's all relative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.