Cameron88188 Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Have the Canucks ever really traded a veteran for a pick at or near the deadline? Over the past 20 years this is what I've found: 1996 - To Tampa Bay: Adrien PlavsicTo Vancouver: 5th round pick in 1997 1997 To Pittsburgh: Josef BeranekTo Vancouver: future considerations To Philadelphia: Frantisek KuceraTo Vancouver: future considerations 1998 To Philly: Dave BabychTo Vancouver: 5th round pick in 1998 1999- To Buffalo: Geoff SandersonTo Vancouver: Brad May and a 3rd round pick. March 23, 1999: Vancouver traded C Peter Zezel to Anaheim for future considerations. 2001 - Vancouver traded Felix Potvin to Los Angeles for a conditional pick in 2001 or 2002. 2004 - Vancouver traded Jiri Slegr to Boston for future considerations. The best we've done is a third round pick? I'm not sure if we should get our hopes up that Vrbata, Hammer, Hansen, Dorsett or Sbsica will be dealt for a first or second rounder... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugor Hill Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Yeah I don't ever remember this happening. Good subject. Good post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimberWolf Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 At this point I would call any trades where we don't give up picks a win Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokes Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 To be fair, the Canucks have not had to be sellers for a while cause they've always been chasing the cup. My nightmare is how many good prospects did we give up for vets who only played a few games for the Canucks, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 I think part of the reason is that the drafting here has been historically awful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil_314 Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 1 hour ago, smokes said: To be fair, the Canucks have not had to be sellers for a while cause they've always been chasing the cup. My nightmare is how many good prospects did we give up for vets who only played a few games for the Canucks, My thoughts exactly. They've always dealt minor guys and picks for guys to help the team now, and I for one feel lucky that the team has remained competitive for so long (as indicated by these kinds of trades). Also, regarding your next point, I'm not sure how many guys we would've gotten with those picks would've panned out under Ron Delorme anyways (e.g. for the Brent Sopel trade would we really have picked and developed Wayne Simmonds, or would we end up with Ruslan Bashkirov, or even Yannick Weber???), so it's probably a good idea that we didn't keep them (or trade a vet to get them) in the first place! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slegr Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 We shouldn't have settled for anything less than a first rounder for the Slegr trade. Future considerations?! I'll give you future considerations! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimberWolf Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 1 minute ago, Slegr said: We shouldn't have settled for anything less than a first rounder for the Slegr trade. Future considerations?! I'll give you future considerations! Clearly you were not a fan of the Roman Oksiuta era? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Losing With Pride Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Yeah I don't remember a trade involving a veteran for a solid draft pick at the deadline... ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boddy604 Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 1 hour ago, Cameron88188 said: Have the Canucks ever really traded a veteran for a pick at or near the deadline? Over the past 20 years this is what I've found: 1996 - To Tampa Bay: Adrien PlavsicTo Vancouver: 5th round pick in 1997 1997 To Pittsburgh: Josef BeranekTo Vancouver: future considerations To Philadelphia: Frantisek KuceraTo Vancouver: future considerations 1998 To Philly: Dave BabychTo Vancouver: 5th round pick in 1998 1999- To Buffalo: Geoff SandersonTo Vancouver: Brad May and a 3rd round pick. March 23, 1999: Vancouver traded C Peter Zezel to Anaheim for future considerations. 2001 - Vancouver traded Felix Potvin to Los Angeles for a conditional pick in 2001 or 2002. 2004 - Vancouver traded Jiri Slegr to Boston for future considerations. The best we've done is a third round pick? I'm not sure if we should get our hopes up that Vrbata, Hammer, Hansen, Dorsett or Sbsica will be dealt for a first or second rounder... Hamhuis is the only one of them potentially worth a 1st. And that's only if he comes back and looks 100 percent. I don't understand the trade Hansen thing. We'd get a 2nd or 3rd at best for him cuz everyone knows he's a 3rd liner if he's not with the Sedins. I'd rather 4 or 5 more years of Hansen than a pick in the 50-90 overall range, thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Neilsons Towel Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 2 minutes ago, Boddy604 said: Hamhuis is the only one of them potentially worth a 1st. And that's only if he comes back and looks 100 percent. I don't understand the trade Hansen thing. We'd get a 2nd or 3rd at best for him cuz everyone knows he's a 3rd liner if he's not with the Sedins. I'd rather 4 or 5 more years of Hansen than a pick in the 50-90 overall range, thanks. Agree 100%. In my opinion it's not worth what we would get in return for him. He is the kind of player that leads by example and should be kept to show the kids the type of players we want in this organization. He is strong overall, both offensively and defensively, and is also a bargain for his salary. It makes more sense to keep him than trade him IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theminister Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 1 hour ago, smokes said: To be fair, the Canucks have not had to be sellers for a while cause they've always been chasing the cup. My nightmare is how many good prospects did we give up for vets who only played a few games for the Canucks, The Internet is right in front of you. Show me this list of good prospects we gave up in the last 20 years for short term fill-ins. I'd bet it's one piss poor roster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 1 hour ago, TOMapleLaughs said: I think part of the reason is that the drafting here has been historically awful. Keywords: Has been Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boddy604 Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 4 minutes ago, theminister said: The Internet is right in front of you. Show me this list of good prospects we gave up in the last 20 years for short term fill-ins. I'd bet it's one piss poor roster. I'd bet it's still better than the Derek Roy's and such who played a couple weeks for us and were then gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 1 minute ago, PhillipBlunt said: Keywords: Has been So does our recent drafting make it clear that Benning should sell? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ButcherG Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 We never keep a GM long enough to see if his drafting pays off. But we have never had a good drafting GM in our history. One could argue Quinn and Burke had one good draft each, but in 45 years that is brutal. I think it is vital to sell Hamhuis and Vrbata this season at the deadline. Losing expiring assets, as a non contending team, is asinine. And we did that last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 11 minutes ago, TOMapleLaughs said: So does our recent drafting make it clear that Benning should sell? Shouldn't you know this answer already? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Fig Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 16 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said: Keywords: Has been Blunt = on-point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukoncanuck87 Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 What about Snepts n rich Sutter n a second we got a first second n adrian plasvic though it was a fail we did get a first a the deadline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 11 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said: Shouldn't you know this answer already? I'm absolutely not certain what Benning will do at the deadline though. Leaning towards nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.