Has a window opened for a playoff run, and should the Canucks trade for the missing piece of the puzzle?

[bassetgreg]

A first round pick to the Leafs for Booth & Santorelli

[canucklehead44]

I hate being a buyer at the deadline unless we are getting a player back with a year on his contract or we give up something later than 3rd round pick. The only second round player we've drafted since 1999 to make the NHL was Mason Raymond - 15 drafts!!

In the 1990s alone we drafted Slegr, Cullimore, Peca, Scatchard, McAllister, Druken, and Chubarov.

A lot of this has to do with trading away our 2nd round picks.

[EdgarM]

Of course we need him, but only if we're in the position to contend. Which is what he said.

In no way does that make sense that if we don't "THINK" we are going to win we get rid of someone we need. Messed up thinking if you ask me. Is this the mentality that we need to tank if we are not contenders to get a higher draft pick? What a dumb plan. Gambling in my opinion which is not a way to run a franchise.Sure glad you are NOT the GM.

[D-Money]

Vermette is also an upgrade on offense over Richardson, a better version of what Malhotra was for us in 2010-1. I wonder what we'd have to add to get Arizona to do a Richardson + for Vermette deal? Both are UFA at the end of the season, so hopefully it wouldn't be ridiculous. If it was a 3rd or a 4th, I definitely consider it if we're still contending at the end of January.

I don't think they'll have interest in Richatdson. And even though he's lost a step, is still prefer to keep him around for depth anyways.

It would probably be just for a pick or prospect.

[tyhee]

I voted Let the Chips Fall Where They May but was uncomfortable with it. I don't mind trades so long as they aren't to the detriment of the long-term, so "No Trades" didn't seem quite right. From that it's obvious I'd agree with those who aren't in favour of rentals.

[Mathew Barzal]

In no way does that make sense that if we don't "THINK" we are going to win we get rid of someone we need. Messed up thinking if you ask me. Is this the mentality that we need to tank if we are not contenders to get a higher draft pick? What a dumb plan. Gambling in my opinion which is not a way to run a franchise.Sure glad you are NOT the GM.

I think you're thinking about it in the wrong way. If we are a bubble team we WILL keep Bones, but if for whatever reason we fall apart and end up in the 6-10 range for drafting we have some really hot commodities that could be had. Obviously in the ideal scenario we make the playoffs and don't need to consider letting them go, but theres always the opportunity if need be.

[Canucklehead420]

I think you're thinking about it in the wrong way. If we are a bubble team we WILL keep Bones, but if for whatever reason we fall apart and end up in the 6-10 range for drafting we have some really hot commodities that could be had. Obviously in the ideal scenario we make the playoffs and don't need to consider letting them go, but theres always the opportunity if need be.

Boner is locked up at 1.9 M till 2017 on pace for 25 g 67 points, yet to hit his prime and you want to trade him away? Even in the unlikelihood we fall out of play off contention unless hes part of a package for Tavares u don't trade him away.

[aGENT]

The only thing resembling a rental I want would be for bottom 6 C depth. And that should come relatively cheap (and depend on our health).

Otherwise, we need an offensive D and/or a big, mean, crease clearing SOB. Preferably in their early-mid 20's.

To get that we can afford any mix of:

Weber (we call up Sanguinetti to replace him).

One of our bottom 6 wingers.

Goalie prospect

"B" prospect.

And (if if the return is good enough) one of our "A" prospects. But only ONE and only for a damn good return.

[Canuck Surfer]

I voted add a D man.

But not so much because it would be the difference maker as a "missing piece." I am not convinced we are a contender yet.

That D man should be a building block. Definitely not a rental.

Would it help us today? Perhaps get us past the first round?? Probably that first round, yes. However, caution is still to be measured. Look at our goals for and against. We're 6th in goals for, and 18th in goals against. Clearly we are still lacking some puck skills and size on our back end watching games. Usually cup winners are top 2 or 4 in the league defensively plus also potent. One guy would have to be very good to get us from 18th to 5th or 3rd defensively. So it would help, but bar getting Pronger back healthy and in the form he was in at age 32 > the odd's of it winning us a cup are not great.

It is also worth noting we are not even prepared with enough, if any, guys who project in our prospect pool to be 1st or 2knd pairing guys. Maybe Hutton? Maybe Tryamkin? But only with very thorough development and all things going right. Hammer and Bieksa are UFA at the end of next year. Heaven forbid one of them or Edler, knock on wood re Hammer's groin injury,have any type of long term serious injury. We still need this guy just to fill roles and not regress.

The right D man, a young stalwart grade A prospect ready to make the jump to the NHL should be acquired as soon as a guy with that profile is available. For now and the future!

[Canuck Surfer]

The only thing resembling a rental I want would be for bottom 6 C depth. And that should come relatively cheap (and depend on our health).

Otherwise, we need an offensive D and/or a big, mean, crease clearing SOB. Preferably in their early-mid 20's.

To get that we can afford any mix of:

Weber (we call up Sanguinetti to replace him).

One of our bottom 6 wingers.

Goalie prospect

"B" prospect.

And (if if the return is good enough) one of our "A" prospects. But only ONE and only for a damn good return.

Perfect!

[Pimp C]

No need to make a trade unless its for a player under 24.

[Pimp C]

It would seem at this point, the Canucks are very likely to make the playoffs.

I don't know about that. We could still miss the playoffs.

[Brewmaster12]

Hah but Danny is on pace for below 15 goals this season

[alfstonker]

I was split on how to vote.

Firstly I think we saw in the 3rd period how good this Canucks team can be if we tighten it up a bit at the back. On that basis standing pat might just deny this team the tools to take it all the way.

However, how much do we have to give to get someone who would make a real difference at the back? I am not sure there is anyone out there we could realistically trade for at that level without giving up good prospects and picks.

Luckily we have JB and I have so much faith in his judgement that even if he gave up something "big" I have no doubt in his ability to make it back to replenish the missing parts again.

So basically I suppose I'm saying, go for it if we look like having a shot and if the right player is available then do whatever JB thinks is required to get him.

[alfstonker]

This

Prior to the trade deadline, they should call up Sang and Anderson to see how they perform in the show. Play them for 10 games and give them decent minutes. In fact, play them together to see how they do?

If JB doesn't tap into the depth before the trade deadline, then they need to add the "D" depth without sacrificing the future; which means, the player has to be NHL ready, young, big and can skate. The player should be part of the future plans.

No rentals.

I might add Pedan to these 2 as JB has seen something there in the 6'-4, 205 lb Lithuanian that seems to interest him. Apparently he is a good skater who has a LOT of physical upside.

[apollo]

As it stands now and as it has since 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 the canucks have been and are good enough to beat LA, hawks, ducks, San Jose... Its a matter of fair officiating.

I'd definitely go after Gregory Campbell. Benning has the connections to make this happen. This could sway the officiating in any California 7 game series and actually be fair.

Extra depth would be nice, but I firmly believe this team is the class of the nhl regardless. Vermette would be a terrific addition as well.

[aGENT]

Perfect!

@#$% I hope it happens.

We need Benning to find a "Vey" (or better) for our D core. A young guy buried behind depth that's ready to make a difference at the NHL level. We've got pieces to make it happen and there are teams that fit that bill.

Pedan's nice but realistically still a year or two out. He could surprise but I doubt he ever becomes more than a #4 guy...maybe #3. He fills a hole but we still need ready NHL depth now.

Getting Sbisa was great too but again is probably a max second pairing guy.

We need someone that could step in now at least on a bottom pairing who projects to be at least a #3 and could surprise and become a #2 or even #1 d-man as a long shot. There's a hole there in our prospects just like there was with NHL ready young forwards (Vey).

It would do wonders for our D-core (depth for injuries/awesome depth when healthy) and defensive prospect development (competition and ability to not rush any d-prospects). It also covers our arse for Bieksa/Hamhuis and their expiring contracts and not getting any younger.

Thankfully Benning already knows all this...just needs to make a deal : :D

[70seven]

Im still in the trade Kassian club, so if theres a deal out there that can get us an early-mid 20s PMD, then getter done.

The biggest missing link on the team and in the system is a true PPQB. I like Edler, but he isnt a true PPQB. Vey as a slot triggerman has been decent, but still I think the PP is far too predictable, which is where a quick PMD that can join the Sedins cycle and either make the quick back door pass or snipe in stride would really benefit the unit.

Sanguinetti had that potential, but hasn't been able to make the jump. Derrick Pouliot would be my target, and I'd be pushing HARD to make that happen.

[higgyfan]

I don't see the Canucks as a contender this year. I think JB has a plan and want him to continue with it. A good 'hockey trade,' where he can pick up a promising YOUNG player that can fill one of our various gaps for one of our vets is acceptable. No way he trades our future for a questionable PO run.

I say he waits to see how the team is doing after the break. If the team is doing poorly, he may decide to work the phone at trade deadline and get some good returns for 1 or 2 of our impending UFA's and a goalie. Might be a great time to acquire a couple of prospects/picks that will fill some holes in the prospect pool. It will also make some space for a couple of our older prospects to join the team next year.

If the salary cap remains the same, there are going to be some bargains in the off season, so JB may want to clear some cap space at the trade deadline. He also has to look at signing a large number of RFAs during the summer.

Finally, next year will be a pivotal season for the Canucks as both Hamhuis and Bieksa will be in their final year of contract. It will be interesting to see what the team looks like after next year's trade deadline.

Whatever happens, I trust JB's hockey sense and his ability to build a cup contending team. We just need to be patient.

[DownUndaCanuck]

I think we should make a trade for a young, future top-4 defence man who can put up some offence from the blue line because its the one thing we lack. Edler is on pace for 30 points if that and he's our high point man.

Even teams like LA and New Jersey who have a quite physical, tough defence that don't put up many points have at least one guy like Doughty or Severson who is going to score at least 40-50 points. We need that sort of puck mover who can blast them home and it doesn't look like Edler is that man. He and Tanev are a fantastic shutdown pairing and I'm surprised by how well Edler has played in his own zone this season, but paired with Tanev he's far more of a shutdown guy now.

If we can get a big puck mover, we could pair him with Edler and watch them put up points, or leave Edler-Tanev as our shutdown pair and get a puck mover for Hamhuis or Bieksa to play with and tutor.