JeremyCuddles Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 I doubt it. Unless we dump Burr and Hansen. Edler is going no where sadly. Sedins aren't going anywhere. What's Ladd's cap? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 Actually, the biggest difference is in the turnover +/-. As for your but, but point, Meh. Ladd played in Chicago, and then with players like Wheeler, Little and Kane. Those guys aint exactly chopped liver. The Canucks would be fine having to 'settle' for keeping Burrows. Yeah, I guess you're right. Burrows is just as, if not more valuable then Ladd. I mean, third line minutes 5 seasons ago on Chicago, followed by playing on a non-playoff team with questionable defense and terrible goaltending equals 5 seasons playing for a team with sometimes good to sometimes excellent defense, all while playing in front of an Olympic Gold Medalist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonshinefe Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 all while playing in front of an Olympic Gold Metalist. Man, how I wish that were an actual Olympic event. "Gold Metalist".. I'm sure it's crazier in my mind than it should be having seen Metalocalypse and similar things, hehe. Anyway, I agree Ladd > Burrows currently. He apparently isn't lifting his NTC though so people suggesting Burrows in part of a deal on here are wasting their time. I'm sure they'd be wanting Markstrom, Hansen and a pick or something. Probably not a good idea imo, even though Ladd is a nice player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 I doubt it. Unless we dump Burr and Hansen. Edler is going no where sadly. Sedins aren't going anywhere. What's Ladd's cap? $4.4 million AAV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 Man, how I wish that were an actual Olympic event. "Gold Metalist".. I'm sure it's crazier in my mind than it should be having seen Metalocalypse and similar things, hehe. Anyway, I agree Ladd > Burrows currently. He apparently isn't lifting his NTC though so people suggesting Burrows in part of a deal on here are wasting their time. I'm sure they'd be wanting Markstrom, Hansen and a pick or something. Probably not a good idea imo, even though Ladd is a nice player. Solid player. But more like a Shane Doan extra light. not a game breaker or a player you build a team around. Player you love to have but only at the right price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 Man, how I wish that were an actual Olympic event. "Gold Metalist".. I'm sure it's crazier in my mind than it should be having seen Metalocalypse and similar things, hehe. Thanks for catching that. Part of me didn't want to edit it out, but the "Grammar Police" in me had to correct it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honky Cat Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 If the Jets were serious about getting full value for Ladd...they would trade him at the deadline...He would be a short term valuable asset to any team that is a contender.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trebreh Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 I would offer Burrows + Hansen + Markstrom for Ladd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 So it's not going to happen! Eklund>Botch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFrame14 Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 As long as it didn't involve prospects or picks ..I'd be fine with it. Same. I'd do edler + for Ladd. If only he would waive his ntc. Or burr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asian player Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 Ladd wouldn't be a horrible acquisition. He's a BC boy that has won a cup and brings leadership. He plays LW so he isn't bumping any of the young guys out since none of our LW prospects are ready. The only issue would his cap hit. However, trading Markstrom would be 1.2 million gone. Sending Corrado down to Utica would be almost 600 000 gone. We really only need to shed one more player to make this work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 Yeah, I guess you're right. Burrows is just as, if not more valuable then Ladd. I mean, third line minutes 5 seasons ago on Chicago, followed by playing on a non-playoff team with questionable defense and terrible goaltending equals 5 seasons playing for a team with sometimes good to sometimes excellent defense, all while playing in front of an Olympic Gold Medalist. sarcasm and straw men don't really help your point, nor does irrelevantly over-rating Luongo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFrame14 Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 I would offer Burrows + Hansen + Markstrom for Ladd. Good deal. If burrows and Hansen didn't have ntc I could see this happening . Jets get good return. Hansen is the perfect third liner and burrows is a gritty top 6 who can score. I bet the jets would accept something like this deal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knucklehd Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 This scares me as well. I'm not scared. I see this as Benning being prudent with our youth. We finally have a decent prospect cupboard. We can't rush them. But we still have to ice a competitive lineup. This is probably where Vey comes in. Here is a rookie that was developed deliberately, 4 years in junior, 3 years in the ahl, and now finally(and earned) a chance in the nhl. He is a good quality rookie too. That is how, I believe, Benning wants youth introduced. We do not have a prospect with that kind of experience yet, Jensen is the closest, an he is still likely to start in the ahl. Without the acquisition of Vey, we would likely have no rookies in the line up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zverta Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 No. Winnipeg will be asking for a lot in return and Ladd isn't worth it. Cap wise, if the Jets were willing to do a straight Burrows for Ladd trade, then maybe we might be interested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonshinefe Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 Come on people Burrows already said no to waiving his NTC. If he said that, he almost surely won't waive it for living in Winnipeg. What incentive does he have? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asian player Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 Come on people Burrows already said no to waiving his NTC. If he said that, he almost surely won't waive it for living in Winnipeg. What incentive does he have? played for the Moose Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senpai Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 Not really. Sedin/Sedin/Vrbata Ladd/Bonino/Kassian Higgins/Matthias/Vey Sestito/Richardson/Dorsett That's a better looking line up. Assuming Burrows gets traded. Matthias is not a fourth liner. He a real good third liner. Anyways It's looking like Burrows is the odd man out if Ladd were to come. Getting rid of 4.5 mill on old and aging player(Burrows), and bringing back yet again 4.5 mill(Ladd) on a younger and better player is the way to go. Matthias is TERRIBLE at faceoffs and he hasn't been getting better through the years, so i'd assume it's a lost cause. Stick him on the wing. There's no room on the 3rd though, so he's going to have to play 4th line LW. Which, well, we do want 4 lines rolling, don't we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asian player Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 Matthias is TERRIBLE at faceoffs and he hasn't been getting better through the years, so i'd assume it's a lost cause. Stick him on the wing. There's no room on the 3rd though, so he's going to have to play 4th line LW. Which, well, we do want 4 lines rolling, don't we? The reason why Matthias requested a trade was because he wasn't getting playing time in Florida. I doubt he'll enjoy playing on the 4th line Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missioncanucksfan Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 Not really. Sedin/Sedin/Vrbata Ladd/Bonino/Kassian Higgins/Matthias/Vey Sestito/Richardson/Dorsett .soooo Sedin/Sedin/Kassian Ladd/Vey/Vrbata Bonino/Horvat/Jensen Higgins/Richardson-Matthias/Dorsett Sestito &Matthias/Richardson rotation....pressbox Horvat needs to be here. No way does going back to junior benefit him at all. He wouldve been here last year but the thinking was he will benefit by playing prominent roles in WJC and Memorial Cup. Well that part is done and he can slide in and out of 3rd/4th line. There will be injuries and plenty of spots where he is depended upon to take more ice-time.....THAT will help his developement than playing overager in London. One of Richardson or Matthias goes. I like them both but Benning wont keep both. Richadson with the slight edge in faceoffs. Hoping Desjardins can maximize both. Horvat needs to stay up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.