(Proposal - 3 Veterans)

[J.I.A.H.N]

If this years has shown us anything is that we are not as bad as we thought and that our depth and resilience is much better than we thought.

My proposals are a rehashing of old proposals, which now after our depth has shown us that they can handle it, make good sense for the future.

Before the 2015 draft

Trade #1 Miller to San Jose for 2015-2 rounder + 2016-2nd rounder

Trade #2 Hamhuis + 2015 1st rounder to Dallas for 2015-1st + 2015-2nd

Trade #3 Higgins to Edmonton for 2015-2nd

We improve our 2015-1st round pick, and add 4 second round picks, as well as get rid of approx. 13 million dollars in cap space. we may have to retain a little of Millers salary for 2 years, but it would be well worth it.

We have to move players because of the pressure from below, and the need to resign our UFA's, not to mention, maybe going after another one ourselves.

We would still have plenty of veteran leadership and could add more if needed through free Agency.

[canuktravella]

hamhuis wont waive ntc

miller would get us a second rounder

higgins would not waive limited no trade to play for oilers

[Odd.]

hamhuis wont waive ntc

miller would get us a second rounder

higgins would not waive limited no trade to play for oilers

I actually agree with this.

[JAVA-1]

Higgins to a New York area team for a 3rd

Miller to San Jose for a 3rd and prospect (2nd if they go for it)

Hammer won't wave, so Bieksa to T.O. for a 3rd and prospect (2nd if they go for it)

[A NEW BEGINNING]

I don't know about Hamhuis not waving.....many players have waved their NTC and I suspect Hamhuis would be no different, besides, I think Dallas could persuade him. I think Hamhuis would go, he is that type of guy. We could argue whether he would or wouldn't but if he did, I would be happy with the trade. Gottta think Cap relief as much as anything.

Miller to San Jose .......my thought is that taking part of his contract might need to happen to get it all, but Miller would love it and San Jose, and San Jose would love Miller finishing off his career there. Maybe 1.5 million per year buys a piece of that 2016 2nd you guys don't think would be coming......again Cap relief

I don't know about not being worth a 2nd. He is a second line player on the Canucks and PKer and a very stable influence, something Edmonton needs desperately....Edmonton would take him in a heart beat.

[Phil_314]

The Miller deal could work if Niemi leaves, though Markstrom remains a question mark at backup (sign a reliable vet?)

Don't know I want to trade Hammer. Dallas has been weak in their own end but Sbisa has his own question marks and Hammer should be the guy to run with ahead of Luca. Rather, I think trading Higgins to Dallas could work, as they don't really have a 2nd line quality L.W. either. After Captain Benn they have Eaves, Roussel and other lower guys (sure they have Nichushkin but they're not very strong in either wing, after Hemsky and Benn respectively). Maybe get a Trevor Daley and a 3rd for Higgins and Sbisa, and then trade Juice and sign McNally? That'd be an offensive upgrade for the back end while trimming forward depth.

Danny - Hank - Kass

Bear - Bones - Verb
Burr -Matthias - Vey
Kenins - Horvat - Hansen

Edler - Tanev
Hammer - Daley
McNally - Stanton
Weber

Alternatively we could buy low on Oleksiak, and trade Higgins for him and a 2nd. We wouldn't upgrade as much on the back end though we'd get a project in Jamie who they'd lose to waivers if they tried to send him down next season. At worst he'd be a mammoth 7th.

[tyhee]

hamhuis wont waive ntc

miller would get us a second rounder

higgins would not waive limited no trade to play for oilers

I actually agree with this.

So do I, except that given Miller's contract I don't think he'd fetch a 2nd unless Canucks retain a fair chunk of his salary.

[elvis15]

San Jose has stated they want a top, younger goalie. Miller doesn't fit that bill for them at all, and I doubt they pay for the privilege.

Hamhuis isn't likely to waive for Dallas, even if they could use him, and Higgins is even less likely to waive for Edmonton.

Why do these deals make sense as plausible for the people proposing them, except as ways for us to move pieces deemed extras to try and get picks and prospects back?

[Canuck Surfer]

I applaud that the OP is no longer posting the sky is falling, OMG we're desperate threads. But;

Whether Hamhuis would waive to Dallas is probably irrelevant? They are a non play off team. I personally doubt they will trade young assets for what will be a rental player. They can just sign a veteran UFA if they want this sort of player.

Lack or Markstrom would be a more likely target for a team like SJ. In the middle of a what the frack were u thinking re-build. (Its very :whacko: )

I agree with those above that suggest Higgins isn't that likely to waive to go to Deadmonchuck.

Honestly, proposals should represent what types of targets our trade partners, and players with options, would be looking to take on. Values are probably realistic though.

[A NEW BEGINNING]

Disagree with you Big Surf

Here is my thinking on it. First off, the NHL is changing to a young man's sport, and older players are a little easier to get, because they are becoming dispensable at an earlier age...aka Vrbata. Which ordinarily would argue in your favor, but Dallas is looking for a player exactly like Hamhuis, as is Edmonton looking for a player like Higgings. Both of these trades give the teams exactly what they need, at a fair price. Character is a premium and these 2 players have it in spades.

As for why I think Miller will go to SJ., well their goalie sounding like he will leave, Miller fills a short term need, while filling in a support role in a few years. If they do want a young goalie, it will cost them more......or guess what? You could get what you pay for, that is exactly why Miller is a perfect fit for SJ

The reason Vancouver does this is because it moves a lot of Cap and allows them, to go after a top end UFA.....aka Vrbata or replace Hamhuis short term with a over paid UFA defensemen.

You are most likely right, but I agree with Jan on this one. You know the one that could really work is the Dallas one, as both have needs the other can help with.

PS... It sure is funny that with all the NTC's moved throughout the league, and especially with our Canucks and as recent as last summer....people can't wrap their heads around how movable they really are......aka Garrison

[Nuxfanabroad]

Lastly, if they EVER get around to an expansion draft, you'll want to reduce any NMC's you can.

Believe I read teams are compelled to include such players in their protected list. Could wind up losing more valuable assets, due to this factor.

[Crabcakes]

Hamhuis has a serious groin injury that he decided to treat with therapy rather than surgery because recovery from surgery may have caused him to miss the playoffs this year. This is how he feels about playing for the Canucks. If he is asked to waive, I think he may just retire.

[coryberg]

people can't wrap their heads around how movable they really are......aka Garrison

Garrison shot down to separate deals before finally agreeing on Tampa. It was no walk in that park trading a guy with a no trade... ask lu and kes.

[J.I.A.H.N]

I think that aging veterans under contract have a conflicting reality these days, on one hand they have the contract and on the other hand they have the "New Reality" of the league getting younger.

To me, Hamhuis is probably the only one that has real say in where he lands. In Dallas he takes his family to a warmer climate, and a team that really only needs to shore up its defense.

There is no question that Hamhuis is a family man and that he moved here on a discount but, that was then, this is now. Vancouver is not in the same position with Hamhuis as they were with Kesler and Luongo, for obvious reasons.

Would Hamhuis retire? I don't think so. From the pros I know, their inner drive and abilities are the only reasons they retire. When they retire it is their compete level or motivation that are deciding factors for them.

(Excluding career ending injury)

Dallas is a very strong religious area, if that is his motivation, he will be going to the right area. I just don't see him not going. Hamhuis is 32 sometime this year, with one year on is contract. I would think he want to go to some place he is wanted, and if leaving Vancouver was a option in a year, then it would be an option now.

I could be wrong and my argument does come with pitfalls, but I think it could happen.

As for the 3 trades, I think they would be fair trades and the Miller trade to San Jose could happen as San Jose doesn't have an answer if Niemi leaves, I don't believe Stalock is the answer, and young goalies that are starters don't grow on trees. Miller is certainly an option for San Jose. I think it will involve salary retention and maybe SJ giving up a 2015 2nd and either a 2 or a 3 in 2016, after all Miller is a number one type, salary retention is worth something, and this will give SJ options moving forward. It is probably a better option for SJ to take Miller then resigning Niemi.

[Kesler+Horvat]

I like this.

Hamhuis+Jensen/Gaunce for Dallas 1st

Miller for San Jose 2nd 2015+3rd 2016

Vey+ for Merrill

Draft Provorov/Barzal

Sign Soderberg+M.Green

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows

Higgins-Bonino-Vrbata

Baertschi-Soderberg-Kassian

Virtanen-Horvat-Hansen

Kenins

Edler-Tanev

Merrill-Green

Sbisa-Bieksa

Stanton/Weber

Lack

Markstrom

McCann

Shinkaruk

Provorov/Barzal

Waiting.

[Pimp C]

Trade #1 Miller to San Jose for 2015-2 rounder + 2016-2nd rounder

San Jose says no

Trade #2 Hamhuis + 2015 1st rounder to Dallas for 2015-1st + 2015-2nd

Canucks say no

Trade #3 Higgins to Edmonton for 2015-2nd

Higgins says no

[canacks1970]

I think that aging veterans under contract have a conflicting reality these days, on one hand they have the contract and on the other hand they have the "New Reality" of the league getting younger.

To me, Hamhuis is probably the only one that has real say in where he lands. In Dallas he takes his family to a warmer climate, and a team that really only needs to shore up its defense.

There is no question that Hamhuis is a family man and that he moved here on a discount but, that was then, this is now. Vancouver is not in the same position with Hamhuis as they were with Kesler and Luongo, for obvious reasons.

Would Hamhuis retire? I don't think so. From the pros I know, their inner drive and abilities are the only reasons they retire. When they retire it is their compete level or motivation that are deciding factors for them.

(Excluding career ending injury)

Dallas is a very strong religious area, if that is his motivation, he will be going to the right area. I just don't see him not going. Hamhuis is 32 sometime this year, with one year on is contract. I would think he want to go to some place he is wanted, and if leaving Vancouver was a option in a year, then it would be an option now.

I could be wrong and my argument does come with pitfalls, but I think it could happen.

As for the 3 trades, I think they would be fair trades and the Miller trade to San Jose could happen as San Jose doesn't have an answer if Niemi leaves, I don't believe Stalock is the answer, and young goalies that are starters don't grow on trees. Miller is certainly an option for San Jose. I think it will involve salary retention and maybe SJ giving up a 2015 2nd and either a 2 or a 3 in 2016, after all Miller is a number one type, salary retention is worth something, and this will give SJ options moving forward. It is probably a better option for SJ to take Miller then resigning Niemi.

Just because we are in a transition period doesn't mean we have to get rid of all our Vets. Dan also has a strong ties to B.C. If Management and Dan are happy with each other then there is no point of him going anywhere. Now it would have been different if he was treated the same way as Garrison and management felt they no longer wanted Hamhuis service.

S.J is looking to get younger just like Vancouver. They're not looking to take on a 34 year old 6 million dollar contract. Again Lack been in the NHL for only two seasons. It took Goaltenders like Schnieder a little more then 2 years years in the league to feel comfortable, And he had to Loungo to learn from. Markstrom hasn't proven to be a capable back up yet in the NHL. There is a reason why Benning signed Miller to a three years IMO. They want Lack to developed and gradually give him the starting role. Not like last year where Tortorella just thrown him to the wolves.

[J.I.A.H.N]

First off, I have to say I really enjoyed the game last night. What a great pass and goal from Danny and Hank. Gotta say, it was a fun game to watch and I just knew they would find a way to win it. Horvat's line was energizing and the deapth really showed.

But back to my post!

The purpose of these trades is to get younger, and I do not believe you can get something for free......Hamhuis to Dallas is not for free, and there is cost and pain, but Hamhuis is replaceable and there will be UFA's which will be comparable, for not too much more......the point of the trade is to get in better draft position, and better financial position, to keep our younger UFA's which to me is a good thing.

Someone suggested in another post that if there was expansion, that teams will have keep their NTC players as part of the new CBA. If that is the case, it will not be good to carry too many of them. ( Just saying!)

We all have different opinions of whether trading Hamhuis is a smart thing or not, but what about the trade values? Are they close in value? Would you take them if the other teams agreed?

As for Miller, if we didn't have Lack, I wouldn't be in too much of a hurry to Trade Miller, and keeping him for all three years,would be a good thing (Even at 36). Then as I suggested he could slide into a back up role for a few years......I think he can handle that...as for SJ......it ok for everyone to say that SJ wants to get younger in goal, but that is easier said than done.....

Let me ask you a question..............what young Goalie that is ready to be a starter and is available...name him for me, please and place a value on him.......it is easy to say SJ wants to get younger.....go ahead and make a trade suggestion, because there are not a lot of them out there.