Gandhi Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 First post, may be something like it already, didn’t check tbh and don’t know how to navigate the site as fluently as others, but anyways, to the point: With the Canucks being in a transition, pass-the-torch kind of situation the trade deadline offers a chance for the Canucks to get pieces vital to their future progress because of the augmented value placed on players with teams seeking specific needs. Last year the prize of the deadline was Antoine Vermette, a perennial 3rd liner for which the Coyotes received a 1st round pick, albeit an expected late 1st rd pick, and mid-range prospect. With the Canucks aging core and modest expectations the time is now for trading away some of the vets that are still worth something on the market. A reasonable Canucks fan doesn’t expect this team to compete for a cup this year or next and admits that high-end franchise players are almost exclusively obtained through the drafting process, with some obvious exceptions (see Tyler Seguin) but I won’t hold my breath for a deal like that to present itself. IMO I see three veteran players on the Canucks roster that could potentially be moved for a substantial return helping us in obtaining the highly-valued first round picks every team seems so keen on, especially in a deep draft year as ’16 is expected to be. These three players are, as sad as it may be, Hamhuis, Vrbata, Edler. Trading all three may be unnecessary but two of the three is plausible and obligatory if we accept the premise that drafting is the key to success in the current NHL. I don’t like to speculate as to what we could get in return as factors like production this year come into play but let’s say we deal Hamhuis and Vrbata, the elders of the three, a return of a first and a prospect for each seems reasonable, pending this year’s supply and demand. The only dilemma this approach presents is waiting until the deadline to dish these players may be too long as they help the Canucks win, driving our own pick down the draft order. Lastly, the Canucks glaring need is Dmen and with highly touted Dmen such as Chychrun (one can dream right?) and a deeper draft than previous years, it seems this is the path to success for the Canucks. For discussion I’m just looking for thoughts, agree/disagree, and speculation on potential return (let’s be reasonable now) as the Canucks enter a new and exciting chapter in the organization’s history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbark95 Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 Thats your 10th post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJDDawg Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 Just an FYI OP, but this will probably get moved to the Proposals and Armchair GM'ng section of the board. But I agree with you, we should be dumping pending UFA's for high draft picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollumpus Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 First post, may be something like it already, didn’t check tbh and don’t know how to navigate the site as fluently as others, but anyways, to the point: With the Canucks being in a transition, pass-the-torch kind of situation the trade deadline offers a chance for the Canucks to get pieces vital to their future progress because of the augmented value placed on players with teams seeking specific needs. Last year the prize of the deadline was Antoine Vermette, a perennial 3rd liner for which the Coyotes received a 1st round pick, albeit an expected late 1st rd pick, and mid-range prospect. With the Canucks aging core and modest expectations the time is now for trading away some of the vets that are still worth something on the market. A reasonable Canucks fan doesn’t expect this team to compete for a cup this year or next and admits that high-end franchise players are almost exclusively obtained through the drafting process, with some obvious exceptions (see Tyler Seguin) but I won’t hold my breath for a deal like that to present itself. IMO I see three veteran players on the Canucks roster that could potentially be moved for a substantial return helping us in obtaining the highly-valued first round picks every team seems so keen on, especially in a deep draft year as ’16 is expected to be. These three players are, as sad as it may be, Hamhuis, Vrbata, Edler. Trading all three may be unnecessary but two of the three is plausible and obligatory if we accept the premise that drafting is the key to success in the current NHL. I don’t like to speculate as to what we could get in return as factors like production this year come into play but let’s say we deal Hamhuis and Vrbata, the elders of the three, a return of a first and a prospect for each seems reasonable, pending this year’s supply and demand. The only dilemma this approach presents is waiting until the deadline to dish these players may be too long as they help the Canucks win, driving our own pick down the draft order. Lastly, the Canucks glaring need is Dmen and with highly touted Dmen such as Chychrun (one can dream right?) and a deeper draft than previous years, it seems this is the path to success for the Canucks. For discussion I’m just looking for thoughts, agree/disagree, and speculation on potential return (let’s be reasonable now) as the Canucks enter a new and exciting chapter in the organization’s history. 1.) So anyone who agrees with you is "reasonable", while anyone who doesn't isn't? 2.) I think it's too early to throw in the towel on this season. 3.) Have you considered the cap hit issues of moving these guys? 4.) Isn't it the general wisdom that guys like these get a higher return when you're closer to the trade deadline? regards, G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 I don't quite know what the entire point of your post was, but I will say that it was very well written. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockhart Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 Hamhuis and Vrbata will both be worth a 1st round pick at the deadline, but the problem is that we will most likely be in the playoff race so I don't know if ownership or management will want us to be sellers at the deadline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VegasCanuck Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 Could we at least get through the first month of the new season before we start really getting into trade deadline stuff? Maybe?? Please???? Can't we just enjoy hockey being back for a few weeks??????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erkayloomeh Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 Hamhuis and Vrbata will both be worth a 1st round pick at the deadline, but the problem is that we will most likely be in the playoff race so I don't know if ownership or management will want us to be sellers at the deadline.and that's the trick isn't it. Tough pill to swallow to let those two go when playoffs are going to happen. We will be in the playoffs this year and if virtanen McCann and Hutton work out then we can do without those two. It's my wish that vrbata and Hamhuis are both dealt. That would give us 3 first round picks in the next draft likely all between 20 and 30 overall That could be the key to drafting the defenseman we have been talking about. Just out of curiosity sake. What does cdc think 3 first rounders between 20 and 30 overall could get us to move up? A top 3???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frazzy Desjardins Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 i say no to moving edler, he is still only 29 and has great chemistry with the sedins and tanev. He is the perfect age to become one of the new vets, a foundational player like sutter. I am on the fence with Hamhuis, he has definitely lost a lot of his phsycial game but is still an effective stay at home defenceman, i say we only keep him if he agrees to a discounted price, he is not worth his cap hit anymore imo. I would say that Vrbata is as good as gone this year. If a replacement for Hamhuis is picked up either in another trade or the draft then I would be more incline to move him as well. Im sure they have it all planned out, Linden and Benning know what they are doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6YPE Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 Really? Trade deadline discussions the day after the first game of the season???... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jiggs50 Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 Edler just signed that huge extension and Linden loves him. Vrbata and Hamhuis could be moved but what if the Canucks are in a playoff position? What if they're in the upper half of the West? Or on the brink? These decisions will come down to management and I don't think Benning moves anyone if the Canucks are in the playoff run. I would sell high on Vrbata for sure. Regardless of where we are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lock Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 I'd rather watch the team first and see where we're at rather than assuming our situation at the trade deadline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 Finally get the regular season underway and we are talking Trade Deadline, not the game, not the game. Trade deadline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckylager Posted October 8, 2015 Share Posted October 8, 2015 Benning was wise to not sign Hammer and Vrb over the summer. I see it going one of two ways: 1)Come December, if the Canucks appear to be a playoff lock, both Hammer and Vrb get resigned, hopefully to short term, 1-2yr contracts. or 2)The Canucks are painfully inconsistent and seem to be a bubble team at best, JB starts looking to move both Hammer and Vrb. No matter what, Edler stays. I don't see him waiving that NTC, that, and he's still our best Dman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gandhi Posted October 9, 2015 Author Share Posted October 9, 2015 To address a couple common thoughts brought forward: Perhaps too early to be discussing any trade dealine talk, and I apologize for that, it’s just been on my mind as I’ve been watching this new era start to take shape. Our team is younger and the youthful energy is nice and I don’t wish to take away from that A few people suggested our actions at the deadline will be circumstantial, depending on our position at the time, which very well may be true but I don’t personally agree. I feel we cannot compete against the cup favorites in the west right now when it comes to a playoff series and our vets are only getting older, likely not being the players we know them today by the time we are ready to make a run. This is why, regardless of standings, I feel we should trade vets for assets and begin/continue the longer-term approach instead of settling for a playoff exit. Perhaps I’m a bit pessimistic about our current roster but bold decisions are required when assembling a contending roster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted October 9, 2015 Share Posted October 9, 2015 I think Washington is going to go all in if the are contenders by the deadline. If so, Vrbata would be a great fit there. Would they covet him enough to give up Bowey Edler Tanev Sbisa Hutton Bart Bowey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gandhi Posted October 9, 2015 Author Share Posted October 9, 2015 Just out of curiosity sake. What does cdc think 3 first rounders between 20 and 30 overall could get us to move up? A top 3???? Good thinking, great way to get a stud Dman for sure. Might be unrealistic and I've just played too much ea sports nhl in my days but you'd think a team may go for that, especially in a good draft year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shift-4 Posted October 9, 2015 Share Posted October 9, 2015 Really? Trade deadline discussions the day after the first game of the season???... yeah..........deadline is 'upcoming' lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rollieo Del Fuego Posted October 9, 2015 Share Posted October 9, 2015 First post, may be something like it already, didn’t check tbh and don’t know how to navigate the site as fluently as others, but anyways, to the point: With the Canucks being in a transition, pass-the-torch kind of situation the trade deadline offers a chance for the Canucks to get pieces vital to their future progress because of the augmented value placed on players with teams seeking specific needs. Last year the prize of the deadline was Antoine Vermette, a perennial 3rd liner for which the Coyotes received a 1st round pick, albeit an expected late 1st rd pick, and mid-range prospect. With the Canucks aging core and modest expectations the time is now for trading away some of the vets that are still worth something on the market. A reasonable Canucks fan doesn’t expect this team to compete for a cup this year or next and admits that high-end franchise players are almost exclusively obtained through the drafting process, with some obvious exceptions (see Tyler Seguin) but I won’t hold my breath for a deal like that to present itself. IMO I see three veteran players on the Canucks roster that could potentially be moved for a substantial return helping us in obtaining the highly-valued first round picks every team seems so keen on, especially in a deep draft year as ’16 is expected to be. These three players are, as sad as it may be, Hamhuis, Vrbata, Edler. Trading all three may be unnecessary but two of the three is plausible and obligatory if we accept the premise that drafting is the key to success in the current NHL. I don’t like to speculate as to what we could get in return as factors like production this year come into play but let’s say we deal Hamhuis and Vrbata, the elders of the three, a return of a first and a prospect for each seems reasonable, pending this year’s supply and demand. The only dilemma this approach presents is waiting until the deadline to dish these players may be too long as they help the Canucks win, driving our own pick down the draft order. Lastly, the Canucks glaring need is Dmen and with highly touted Dmen such as Chychrun (one can dream right?) and a deeper draft than previous years, it seems this is the path to success for the Canucks. For discussion I’m just looking for thoughts, agree/disagree, and speculation on potential return (let’s be reasonable now) as the Canucks enter a new and exciting chapter in the organization’s history. winning's a batch... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crabcakes Posted October 9, 2015 Share Posted October 9, 2015 First post, may be something like it already, didn’t check tbh and don’t know how to navigate the site as fluently as others, but anyways, to the point: With the Canucks being in a transition, pass-the-torch kind of situation the trade deadline offers a chance for the Canucks to get pieces vital to their future progress because of the augmented value placed on players with teams seeking specific needs. Last year the prize of the deadline was Antoine Vermette, a perennial 3rd liner for which the Coyotes received a 1st round pick, albeit an expected late 1st rd pick, and mid-range prospect. With the Canucks aging core and modest expectations the time is now for trading away some of the vets that are still worth something on the market. A reasonable Canucks fan doesn’t expect this team to compete for a cup this year or next and admits that high-end franchise players are almost exclusively obtained through the drafting process, with some obvious exceptions (see Tyler Seguin) but I won’t hold my breath for a deal like that to present itself. IMO I see three veteran players on the Canucks roster that could potentially be moved for a substantial return helping us in obtaining the highly-valued first round picks every team seems so keen on, especially in a deep draft year as ’16 is expected to be. These three players are, as sad as it may be, Hamhuis, Vrbata, Edler. Trading all three may be unnecessary but two of the three is plausible and obligatory if we accept the premise that drafting is the key to success in the current NHL. I don’t like to speculate as to what we could get in return as factors like production this year come into play but let’s say we deal Hamhuis and Vrbata, the elders of the three, a return of a first and a prospect for each seems reasonable, pending this year’s supply and demand. The only dilemma this approach presents is waiting until the deadline to dish these players may be too long as they help the Canucks win, driving our own pick down the draft order. Lastly, the Canucks glaring need is Dmen and with highly touted Dmen such as Chychrun (one can dream right?) and a deeper draft than previous years, it seems this is the path to success for the Canucks. For discussion I’m just looking for thoughts, agree/disagree, and speculation on potential return (let’s be reasonable now) as the Canucks enter a new and exciting chapter in the organization’s history. Actually, this very subject was discussed at length on CDC a number of months ago. It came out of the problem with the lack of defensive prospects depth to succeed the present D corps. The options were: Trade Free Agency Draft 1 and 2 are difficult and expensive. 3 is viable but D take time to develop. Nothing is perfect. The thought was to trade Vrbata and/or Hamuis at the trade deadline as rentals when the return would be at it's highest point in the season. Similar to the Vermette trade last season. Edler doesn't fit as a rental because he has 3 years remaining on his contract, he has a NTC and he has said that he would not waive. The return on Vrbata and Hamhuis would likely be 1st rounders. This would leave the Canucks with 3 first rounders who could be packaged together to get a very high pick and select the top defenseman in the draft. In the Bob MacKenzie interview before training camp, Benning admitted to Bob that he had been selecting BPA's in the draft. He said that he may have to change this tactic because there are no top D prospects in the system (Hutton excepted). So, it's possible that a scenario like this actually happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.