J.I.A.H.N Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 As many of you aware, I am of the opinion that Vancouver should move aging assets to acquire picks,, I am not of the opinion of a full out tank, and would argue with anyone, that moving aging assets is the most intelligent plan of action. I also, am of the mind that redundant prospects and redundant positional prospects are worth moving, for Organizational needs. I have made a claim that moving McCann, and to a lesser extent Jensen, Gaunce and Shinkaruk in package deals could be very valuable. What I am not saying is, Trade young assets for older players, which would most definitely be the wrong thing to do. Benning has gone and traded/picked players that will increase the internal competition of our parent and farm team clubs, which really means in our case that he went out and acquired available 3 and 4th line type players, Baertschi being the potential exception. There are trades out there that could help us, if the Canucks want to take the jump, and accept that you have to give to get. Trades that would not be acceptable to CDC, yet if you look at the entire move, are not negative moves, would be: Hamhuis, Lack and B_Prospect to Edmonton to Edmonton for 2015 1st (15 OA) + 2015 2nd (33 OA) Edler , McCann, J. Subban and Hansen/Vey to Phili for 2015 1st (7 OA) and Sanhiem This sounds drastic, and although we gain in young strong prospects, in both cases, I think the trades go ahead. Yes, there might be some adjustments, but not large ones. Consider that Vancouver goes out and get 2 UFA defensemen, equal or close to equal, as the ones we trade..........say for argument sake, it is Franson and Andrej Sekera, then the question is more like this................ Is Hamhuis, Lack and B-prospect > Sekera, a 2015 1st (16th OA) + a 2015 2nd (33 OA) ? I think it is not, and it is a good hockey deal for us. Same thing goes for the other move......... Is Edler, MCann, J.Subban, and Hansen/Vey > than Franson, 2015 1st (7 OA) + Sanhiem ? In both cases, I think we win, we gain valuable assets, rid ourselves of Cap, and take no real step back. These are the moves we need to make.........This can also be done with Bieska, Burrows, and Higgins, to move cap and allow us to sign those UFA...... To me, CDC are afraid to make moves, but all I am saying, is that it could be done Bite the bullet, change the culture, and look at the overall objective.....I think it is a win! And don't get hung up on the trades as they are only an example of what needs to happen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilbur Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 Problem is I don't think Edmonton and Philly go for those deals. Depth at this time of year can be gotten for just money in free agency so why would either team give up high potential assets for it now? I don't disagree in swapping prospects to fill organizational needs. Benning made a few moves trading picks/prospects to fill out prospect depth on the back end this year. You could see him trade away some of the forward depth soon, but it could be just as easily for picks rather than defense if nobody is willing to part with anything that wouldn't be an upgrade on what we have now. We'll see what Benning comes up with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
70seven Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 I think youre on the right track, but also consider that Philly or Edmonton mat also rather to sign some UFAs rather than giving up 1st rounders for signed veterans. It should be interesting, but I dont think youll be seeing McCann go anywhere. I agree that theres potential to package young assets for an upgrade of similar age, but how many teams really want to be on the other end of that kind of deal? Also considering that part of the vision is to establish an identity of depth throughout the organization and I find it difficult that theyll give up anything more than a straight across deal involving young players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilbur Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 I think youre on the right track, but also consider that Philly or Edmonton mat also rather to sign some UFAs rather than giving up 1st rounders for signed veterans. It should be interesting, but I dont think youll be seeing McCann go anywhere. I agree that theres potential to package young assets for an upgrade of similar age, but how many teams really want to be on the other end of that kind of deal? Also considering that part of the vision is to establish an identity of depth throughout the organization and I find it difficult that theyll give up anything more than a straight across deal involving young players. The Canucks do have a lot of prospect depth at centre, a position that isn't always easy to come by like defense. So, you never know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frazzy Desjardins Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 Whatever the deal we gotta get rid of Miller. We can draft and develop goalies. We have seen that in the past years... but goalies come here to die, as far as trades go we are a goalie graveyard. The experiment is over, Lack is clearly ready to take the reigns. Miller and a b level prospect to SJ for couture or hertl or someone of similar calibre. No more goalie situations, a bona-fide number 1 please Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canut Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 I like those ideas... I would rather see us resign Eddie Lack and move Miller to Edmonton or Philly.... But thats unlikely. We absolutely need a couple solid defencemen. Franson and Sekera would be nice but are likely to get huge salaries next year on the open market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 http://forum.canucks.com/forum/33-proposals-and-armchair-gming/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox Mulder Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 Jan, why wouldn't philly or Edmonton keep their picks/prospects and try to sign franson, sekera, or a goalie like Martin jones/cam talbot on their own. I'm all for good trades but if we made them there's no guarantee we could sign those free agents. On the flip side there's no guarantee philly or Edmonton could either. Free agents get to decide where they want to play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russ Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 Whatever the deal we gotta get rid of Miller. We can draft and develop goalies. We have seen that in the past years... but goalies come here to die, as far as trades go we are a goalie graveyard. The experiment is over, Lack is clearly ready to take the reigns. Miller and a b level prospect to SJ for couture or hertl or someone of similar calibre. No more goalie situations, a bona-fide number 1 please Miller is the bona-fide number 1, just look at his contract. And no way SJ would trade either for Miller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Mahla Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 let benning think about that...we all have seen what he can do.so sit back watch him play his game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 As many of you aware, I am of the opinion that Vancouver should move aging assets to acquire picks,, I am not of the opinion of a full out tank, and would argue with anyone, that moving aging assets is the most intelligent plan of action. I am of the mind that redundant prospects and redundant positional prospects are worth moving, for Organizational needs. I have made a claim that moving McCann, and to a lesser extent Jensen, Gaunce and Shinkaruk in package deals could be very valuable. What I am not saying is, Trade young assets for older players, which would most definitely be the wrong thing to do. Benning has gone and traded/picked players that will increase the internal competition of our parent and farm team clubs, which really means in our case that he went out and acquired available 3 and 4th line type players, Baertschi being the potential exception. There are trades out there that could help us, if the Canucks want to take the jump, and accept that you have to give to get. Trades that would not be acceptable to CDC, yet if you look at the entire move, are not negative moves, would be: Hamhuis, Lack and B_Prospect to Edmonton to Edmonton for 2015 1st (15 OA) + 2015 2nd (33 OA) Edler , McCann, J. Subban and Hansen/Vey to Phili for 2015 1st (7 OA) and Sanhiem This sounds drastic, and although we gain in young strong prospects, in both cases, I think the trades go ahead. Yes, there might be some adjustments, but not large ones. Consider that Vancouver goes out and get 2 UFA defensemen, equal or close to equal, as the ones we trade..........say for argument sake, it is Franson and Andrej Sekera, then the question is more like this................ Is Hamhuis, Lack and B-prospect > Sekera, a 2015 1st (16th OA) + a 2015 2nd (33 OA) ? I think it is not, and it is a good hockey deal for us. Same thing goes for the other move......... Is Edler, MCann, J.Subban, and Hansen/Vey > than Franson, 2015 1st (7 OA) + Sanhiem ? In both cases, I think we win, we gain valuable assets, rid ourselves of Cap, and take no real step back. These are the moves we need to make.........This can also be done with Bieska, Burrows, and Higgins, to move cap and allow us to sign those UFA...... To me, CDC are afraid to make moves, but all I am saying, is that it could be done Bite the bullet, change the culture, and look at the overall objective.....I think it is a win! And don't get hung up on the trades as they are only an example of what needs to happen LOL, LMAO actually. You are not of the opinion we should all out tank in the first breath? We should consider redundant and excess prospect depth (I don't disagree with this statement at all btw) as assets that might help lure what we do need to trade for in the second breath... Then propose trading 2 or our 3 best defenseman in the third breath, plus Eddie Lack. And some of the more valuable (McCann) not excess prospects who could actually make a difference to our re-tool. Moving 2 of your best 3 D is absolutely blowing it up. Pack our bags for a site seeing tour shovelling snow in Buffalo and Edmonton at the bottom of the standings. Your true colours are not hidden at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.I.A.H.N Posted May 9, 2015 Author Share Posted May 9, 2015 Is Hamhuis for Sekera that much of a down grade? Hamhuis played like crap this year IMO, and my wifes, for that matter Is Edler for Franson that much of a change? Would Franson like to come home? Just asking It is a weigh off, and you have to be able to judge if your are winning or loosing the entire trade or rather adjustment. People are right to ask if the other teams would accept those trades and they are only suggestions, but I think they are as good as any! As for McCann........................ "IF" we got the 7th OA, I would assume we would take Brazal, which would immediately make McCann redundant........take a little leap of faith Canuck Surfer Here is our Center depth at the moment........... Hank, Horvat, Bonino,McCann, Cassels, Vey, Gaunce and the way Cassels is playing right now, he could move up by himself Here is our Depth with Brazal Hank, Brazal, Horvat, Bonino, Cassels, Vey and Gaunce.......which one would you choose. I would give more if needed to get Brazal.........but that is me Still, I can't figure out how you don't see this a win, and at no real cost? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
48MPHSlapShot Posted May 10, 2015 Share Posted May 10, 2015 No to trading McCann. Just...No Luckily, Jim Benning agrees with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox Mulder Posted May 10, 2015 Share Posted May 10, 2015 No to trading McCann. Just...No Luckily, Jim Benning agrees with me. I can confirm this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirbs11 Posted May 10, 2015 Share Posted May 10, 2015 I understand your idea and point but its still hard to justify overpaying for a pick. CDC will still want to obtain the most you can get out of a player. I would def. do the deal with Philly Edler, MCann, J.Subban, and Vey to philly for 2015 1st (7 OA) + Sanhiem If we got Franson, him and Edler would be a wash IMO, Sanhiem > Subban, McCann and Vey= Barzal (assuming thats who we draft) And on the flip side we still have assets in Vrbata+Miller, we signed them for nothing got good playing time out of them and can flip them for other pieces, if we move Vrbata next trade deadline much like Vermette he could possibly fetch a 1st round pick, Miller in the right package can get us a 1st or 2nd and a B level prospect Im all for making any realistic move that can bring in our future core, most ppl think we are going to magically get the next Crosby, Toews or Taresenko for a worthless package of players Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOHORVAT53 Posted May 10, 2015 Share Posted May 10, 2015 Eddie Lack and Kevin Bieksa for Justin Schultz and 63rd overall pick Trade our 1st for a 1st pick 5 spots lower and get a late 2nd in return Matt Beleskey 4yrs 16mil. Reunite him with Bonino on the Vrbata line Mark Letestu 3yrs 6mil. Reunite him with Dorsett n have a 4th line with Kenins that every team hates Adam Mcquaid 3yrs 10mil. He and Sbisa replicate LA's bottom pair of Mitchell/Regehr and Greene Shawn Matthias 1yr 2.5mil. Promise him a long term contract at Christmas if he shows consistancy Draft Vince Dunn or Thomas Chabot with our 1st pick Draft Nick Betz in the 7th round and watch him make our team in 2016 Sign Viktor Tikhonov, as well as twins Jan and Jakub Kovar from KHL Sign Cameron Gaunce and Travis Morin from Willie D's Texas Stars cup team Try resigning O'Reilly, Sanguinetti, Conacher, Biega Ryan Stanton signed on a way deal, if he doesnt make it, send him down after training camp Linden Vey goes to Gary Roberts camp this summer Invite Anton Rodin and Bill Sweatt to training camp Invite Tim Mcauley and Cole Martin to camp Invite veteran dmen Olle Kristian Tollefson and Sami Lepisto to camp Invite Kaspers Daugavins and Mattias Olimb to camp Invite Dustin Penner and Bryan Allen to camp Hire Manny Malhotra as a faceoff coach Hire Marc Crawford as a 3rd Associate coach. Specifically designated to special teams Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirbs11 Posted May 10, 2015 Share Posted May 10, 2015 Eddie Lack and Kevin Bieksa for Justin Schultz and 63rd overall pick Trade our 1st for a 1st pick 5 spots lower and get a late 2nd in return Matt Beleskey 4yrs 16mil. Reunite him with Bonino on the Vrbata line Mark Letestu 3yrs 6mil. Reunite him with Dorsett n have a 4th line with Kenins that every team hates Adam Mcquaid 3yrs 10mil. He and Sbisa replicate LA's bottom pair of Mitchell/Regehr and Greene Shawn Matthias 1yr 2.5mil. Promise him a long term contract at Christmas if he shows consistancy Draft Vince Dunn or Thomas Chabot with our 1st pick Draft Nick Betz in the 7th round and watch him make our team in 2016 Sign Viktor Tikhonov, as well as twins Jan and Jakub Kovar from KHL Sign Cameron Gaunce and Travis Morin from Willie D's Texas Stars cup team Try resigning O'Reilly, Sanguinetti, Conacher, Biega Ryan Stanton signed on a way deal, if he doesnt make it, send him down after training camp Linden Vey goes to Gary Roberts camp this summer Invite Anton Rodin and Bill Sweatt to training camp Invite Tim Mcauley and Cole Martin to camp Invite veteran dmen Olle Kristian Tollefson and Sami Lepisto to camp Invite Kaspers Daugavins and Mattias Olimb to camp Invite Dustin Penner and Bryan Allen to camp Hire Manny Malhotra as a faceoff coach Hire Marc Crawford as a 3rd Associate coach. Specifically designated to special teams Some of this is crazy....but i like crazy lol Any insight on some of the KHL players and what they would bring to the team? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.