Rodzilla131 Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 It's obvious the D is the big prob in the present (especially once Hamhuis is done) and future (nothing high end coming). Benning is not stupid. And last summer when he had players he liked available he pounced on Vrbata and Miller. Lucic seems like a given, but what about Byfuglien as a #1 dman, and Edler and Tanev as one of the best 2nd pairs in the NHL? Giordano was a Norris frontrunner till he got hurt last year (GP61-11-37-48) Byfuglien last year - (GP69-18-27-45) = 53pts in 82 games. Edler lead the Canucks last year with 31pts. Would seem like the big hard hitting Dman is exactly what Benning would like (see Pedan) Vrbata+Hamhuis cap money towards Lucic and Byfuglien new deals would certainly give the new kids coming up that "Semenko effect" What's the odds he would come here? I would've guessed earlier Kane would've been the former Jet here, but he answers alot of big questions for the Canucks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheHockeyNerds Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Tbh I like the idea, but I really doubt we can convince Buff to sign here if he hits free agency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me_ Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Yes to both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HK Phooey Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 It's obvious the D is the big prob in the present (especially once Hamhuis is done) and future (nothing high end coming). Benning is not stupid. And last summer when he had players he liked available he pounced on Vrbata and Miller. Lucic seems like a given, but what about Byfuglien as a #1 dman, and Edler and Tanev as one of the best 2nd pairs in the NHL? Giordano was a Norris frontrunner till he got hurt last year (GP61-11-37-48) Byfuglien last year - (GP69-18-27-45) = 53pts in 82 games. Edler lead the Canucks last year with 31pts. Would seem like the big hard hitting Dman is exactly what Benning would like (see Pedan) Vrbata+Hamhuis cap money towards Lucic and Byfuglien new deals would certainly give the new kids coming up that "Semenko effect" What's the odds he would come here? I would've guessed earlier Kane would've been the former Jet here, but he answers alot of big questions for the Canucks The notion of getting Lucic and Buff is a good one, but Vrbata's $5M and Hamhuis' $4.5M isn't going to get 'er done for the two of them. It's probably going to take $13M in cap space to get both. So, couple that with the Sedins, and you've got $27M tied up in four players...add Miller at $6M, Burrows at $4.5M, Edler at $5M...well, I'm sure you get the point. "Semenko Effect"? Players today aren't intimidated by much. Why do you think one dimensional fighters have gone the way of the dinosaur? Collectively, the kids coming up (Gaunce, Virtanen, Boesser, McCann, Cassels, Shinkaruk) have enough mix of attitude, size and skill that some of the kids will be the ones offering up their own brand of the "Semenko Effect". Lucic and Byfuglien will certainly make the team a "safer" working environment, but I'm sure the kids will be able to take care of themselves when they get here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Sestito Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 These guys aren't the players they were years ago. There's limited upside in signing these guys long term. Don't be shocked if Lucic trends down like Clowe does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwissCanucks Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Would rather have Big Buff than Lucic. We have enough promising prospects in the forward positions, but not on Defense. If we trade Hamhuis then i'll love the see Byfuglien come in Vancouver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirbs11 Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 How about Seabrook and Buff instead of Lucic and Buff? i would rather have a stacked D core and address the main problem head on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaku Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Great idea to add players like that but you would easily have to commit easily 6M+ each year to bring them to Vancouver, and would more than likely want a long term contract. So you're looking at probably 30-35M easily over 5 or 6 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodzilla131 Posted September 7, 2015 Author Share Posted September 7, 2015 How about Seabrook and Buff instead of Lucic and Buff? i would rather have a stacked D core and address the main problem head on Ok that would be nice. The money coming off the books each of the next 3 years will be big, just seems like Lucic is Benning guy. Oh "semenko" effect was a relative term. Big guys gotta play, and Lucic and Buff are hardly one dimensional. Seabrook ....hmmmm....Blackhawks certainly don't have cap room without dumping Kane... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gstank29 Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Personally I rather have Lucic and Seabrook, but if Kane is traded i doubt Chicago lets Seabrook go Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodzilla131 Posted September 7, 2015 Author Share Posted September 7, 2015 Great idea to add players like that but you would easily have to commit 12M+ to bring them to Vancouver. Vrbata and Hamhuis does 75% of that. Plus the cap goes up a cpl Million....that's certainly doable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodzilla131 Posted September 7, 2015 Author Share Posted September 7, 2015 Personally I rather have Lucic and Seabrook, but if Kane is traded i doubt Chicago lets Seabrook go Yup. The Canucks haven't even drafted the next Gen Defense yet. They'll have to get a cpl of "foundation" players to bridge the HUGE gap in the organization. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.DirtyDangles Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Would take Buff in a heartbeat. He has a few good years left. If he is guaranteed a D position where he is obviously the most productive he will be happy anywhere I bet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hunter.S-Kerouac Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 How about Erik Johnson and Okposo could probably be signed in the offseason for the salary of Vrbata Hamhuis Prust if they were to leave us at the deadline in return for pix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horvat Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 IMO: Trade: Prust Hamhuis Vrbata Higgins Burrows Weber Sign: Lucic Seabrook Byfuglien 1 year from now: Sedin - Sedin - Lucic/Baertschi/Virtanen Lucic/Baertschi - Horvat/Sutter - Virtanen/Hansen Kenins/Shinkaruk/Gaunce - Sutter/Horvat - Hansen/Virtanen Gaunce/Kenins - ???/Cassels - Dorsett Seabrook - Edler Byfuglien - Tanev Sbisa - Corrado Miller/Markstrom Markstrom/Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Words of advice from a Jets season ticket holder and a Canucks fan. You don't want Buff. Not because he's not a gamechanger, but for what I'll outline below. Right now, the Jets are looking to extend Andrew Ladd and Dustin Byfuglien, Ladd being priority #1. After that, it has LONG been discussed in Winnipeg that extending Byfuglien could cost in the $7-$8M range, as he's looking at Phaneuf's contract and, rightly so, believes if he can receive that, then he's worth that as well. Now, if the Jets were to give him $7M per over say, 4 years, then they are prepared to do it. However, if Byfuglien (now 30), wants more term and asks for 7-8 years, then it is believed that the Jets will then look to move him (mostly out East), as they don't want to commit to a 30 year old defenseman long term who has had conditioning and inconsistancy issues. Now, the Jets can afford to let him go because they have a plethora of NHL ready defenseman (Trouba, Myers, Enstrom, Stuart, Chiarot, Pardy, Postma, Clitsome) all on 1 way contracts. Now, Clitsome may never play again, so that takes them down to 7 defensemen without Buff. Postma, while certainly not a replacement for Buff, would fill in on the 3rd pairing as a RHD, which would leave the right side for Trouba, Myers, and Postma, leaving the left side for Enstrom, Stuart, and Chiarot/Pardy. After next season, the Jets will have Clitsome off their books, as well as Pardy and Postma, leaving spots for Morrissey and Kostalek to come in. Long story short, the Jets can afford to let him go because they are loaded on the backend. But part of the reason they are expected to let him go is that he'll cost between $7-$8M long term. Is that really a player the Canucks want? A possible $8M/year guy for 6-7 years who will only decline in production? A team that is certainly not close to competing for the Cup while Buff is in his prime? Just seems like a waste. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 IMO: Trade: Prust Hamhuis Vrbata Higgins Burrows Weber Sign: Lucic Seabrook Byfuglien 1 year from now: Sedin - Sedin - Lucic/Baertschi/Virtanen Lucic/Baertschi - Horvat/Sutter - Virtanen/Hansen Kenins/Shinkaruk/Gaunce - Sutter/Horvat - Hansen/Virtanen Gaunce/Kenins - ???/Cassels - Dorsett Seabrook - Edler Byfuglien - Tanev Sbisa - Corrado Miller/Markstrom Markstrom/Miller Nice lineup. Maybe Byfuglien and Edler? Could imagine those two doing well together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nave Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 I like the idea. I think Seabrook and Lucic is more unlikely. Buff can play up front with the Sedins on the powerplay, but D is where he should be at on our team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil_314 Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Definitely agreed with getting Seabrook if we can (not too big on Looch or Buffy). With him, even if the offensive guys aren't developed he can be a stabilizer, plus he'd fit in well with the Canucks' offense. In the video above, it's shown that he often joins the play as the shooter alongside play-makers like Kane and Hossa. With the Sedins working the puck and Burr in front, Brent's got the shot to capitalize on down-low plays like he does with the Hawks. He and Eddie would be quite the top pairing, with Brent firing off the passes he gets from #23, plus both are all-round big-minute guys. Would be seriously stoked if #7 decided to come home to play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Definitely agreed with getting Seabrook if we can (not too big on Looch or Buffy). With him, even if the offensive guys aren't developed he can be a stabilizer, plus he'd fit in well with the Canucks' offense. In the video above, it's shown that he often joins the play as the shooter alongside play-makers like Kane and Hossa. With the Sedins working the puck and Burr in front, Brent's got the shot to capitalize on down-low plays like he does with the Hawks. He and Eddie would be quite the top pairing, with Brent firing off the passes he gets from #23, plus both are all-round big-minute guys. Would be seriously stoked if #7 decided to come home to play. I'd rather have Lucic screening the goalie than Burrows. Harder to move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.