L. Stanley Posted December 25, 2013 Share Posted December 25, 2013 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. would not have done that trade back then. Steen is having a season for the ages now, he was always a good player but at that time he sure was not worth bieksa. Bieksa - R shot d man two way, top 2-3 on any team in the nhl for a guy who whad a couple 35-40 point seasons and it was unclear if he was going to be a third liner. Typical Toronto, trying to trade a third liner for a top pairing young d man (Right shot d man are hard to come by), who is a head of him developmentally. That is like us trying to trade Kassian for OEL this year would have been the first year wear the canucks would have 'won' this trade and even then, Bieksa is critical to our team. He was huge part of our run to the cup Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Absent Canuck Posted December 25, 2013 Share Posted December 25, 2013 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. No way I ever trade Juice. He is worth way more to our fanbase than they could ever pay us for in trade. It would have to be something like pretty lopsided. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SamJamIam Posted December 25, 2013 Share Posted December 25, 2013 No way I ever trade Juice. He is worth way more to our fanbase than they could ever pay us for in trade. It would have to be something like pretty lopsided. Agreed. There is no way I'd want to give up Juice just because of his quotability and personality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legend Killer Posted December 25, 2013 Share Posted December 25, 2013 stilll wouldn't do it. juice has intangibles that steen will never have Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoneypuckOverlord Posted December 25, 2013 Share Posted December 25, 2013 I'm glad it's declined. Thankful Mike gillis is the GM. GM's around the leauge know how good he is, although at times he will struggle. The importance of having a Player like Bieksa is much more important to us then having a player like Alex Steen who might not be as good with us then with the Blues. Thank you Mr. Gillis. But that is a generous offer though. BTW...... This is the 2nd time apparently Mike Gillis turned down a Bieksa trade. I think a few years ago he also declined Nikita Filatov for Bieksa. What a Genius. I would have accepted at the time, but looking at it now, Filatov is in the KHL, Bieka kinda like a heart and soul for the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Canucks Fan Posted December 25, 2013 Share Posted December 25, 2013 Why is this a good trade? Let's see what we missed out on 3 years of mediocrity versus 3 years of a quality top 4 defenceman. If Steen goes on after this year and continues to have this kind of production for the next 3 years then this trade might make sense. But if he goes back to what he was after this year, then we lose this trade hands down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted December 25, 2013 Share Posted December 25, 2013 I'm glad it's declined. Thankful Mike gillis is the GM. GM's around the leauge know how good he is, although at times he will struggle. The importance of having a Player like Bieksa is much more important to us then having a player like Alex Steen who might not be as good with us then with the Blues. Thank you Mr. Gillis. But that is a generous offer though. BTW...... This is the 2nd time apparently Mike Gillis turned down a Bieksa trade. I think a few years ago he also declined Nikita Filatov for Bieksa. What a Genius. I would have accepted at the time, but looking at it now, Filatov is in the KHL, Bieka kinda like a heart and soul for the team. Bieksa for Filatov. Oh the memories. CDCers would've done that trade in a heartbeat haha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awalk Posted December 25, 2013 Share Posted December 25, 2013 Let's see if he repeats this breakout season…until then…meh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFrame14 Posted December 25, 2013 Share Posted December 25, 2013 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. I agree. I wouldn't do it. Beiksa Is one if our best d man and has heart and a gritty game needed for playoff success. There is a reason why cherry likes Him so much and thinks he's a Norris caliber d man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UFCanuck Posted December 25, 2013 Share Posted December 25, 2013 Bieksa for Filatov. Oh the memories. CDCers would've done that trade in a heartbeat haha There was also Bieksa for Derek Joslin and CDC was heavily in favour of the trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogbyte Posted December 25, 2013 Share Posted December 25, 2013 Steen is a great player. Bieksa is our identity though even though he's all risk/reward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted December 26, 2013 Share Posted December 26, 2013 All things aside.. would you make the deal today? Today? Yes! People should not forget he has been a Canuck killer for years. This type of year (perhaps he's a bit over his head?) has been brewing for a while. And he's doing it on offensively challenged St Lou without anyone like Hank to dish him the jam. Would we have dismantled our D (ramping up to a cup contending team) for a prospect at the time? No! Timing is everything... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morrissex95 Posted December 26, 2013 Share Posted December 26, 2013 I'd trade Bieksa now, but not back then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BI3KSA- Posted December 26, 2013 Share Posted December 26, 2013 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. I'd be sad af to trade Bieksa. Bieksa is my favorite Canuck by far and brings so much to this team that a lot of people don't realize. Our D would be a crap ton worse without him, but making that trade today would make this team better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanuckRow Posted December 26, 2013 Share Posted December 26, 2013 I'd trade Bieksa now, but not back then. Agreed. If it wasn't for his NTC, i'd use him as a big piece to get a much needed quality goal scorer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted December 26, 2013 Share Posted December 26, 2013 This is the first season where trading Bieksa for Steen would be in our favor. So I'm definitely glad it wasn't done many years ago. But arguing over taking that deal now is stupid, because it's definitely not on the table. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fozzy Posted December 26, 2013 Share Posted December 26, 2013 .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fozzy Posted December 26, 2013 Share Posted December 26, 2013 . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fozzy Posted December 26, 2013 Share Posted December 26, 2013 A few years back Bieksa was the CDC whipping boy and you all wanted him traded. And Rey is correct, these comparisons to Cheechoo are unfair, the guy had serious knee injuries which ruined his career. respect to the guy for trying to come back from injuries such as that. As for this trade I can see why some of you wouldn't of done it back then as Steen wasn't fully developed. If that trade was offered now I would do it. Bieksa is an ok defenseman who does get sheltered by his partners. And keep him because of his toughness? He hasn't shown toughness consistently for quite a while (pick and chooses his moments) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fozzy Posted December 26, 2013 Share Posted December 26, 2013 A few years back Bieksa was the CDC whipping boy and you all wanted him traded. And Rey is correct, these comparisons to Cheechoo are unfair, the guy had serious knee injuries which ruined his career. respect to the guy for trying to come back from injuries such as that. As for this trade I can see why some of you wouldn't of done it back then as Steen wasn't fully developed. If that trade was offered now I would do it. Bieksa is an ok defenseman who does get sheltered by his partners. And keep him because of his toughness? He hasn't shown toughness consistently for quite a while (pick and chooses his moments) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.