Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

How Dustin Byfuglien's contract affects the Canucks


Goat James

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, homersexual said:

The Canucks need Hamhuis for the playoff push. If Benning trades Hamhuis, next years D will looks like the Oilers. Does anyone here really want Sbisa to be a top 4 D?

We won't be making a playoff push (or get far if we do get in) but Hammer is still a good D and we are worse without him. We would need a young D prospect back in a trade or next year's D is even more pathetic than this year's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, steviewonder20 said:

We won't be making a playoff push (or get far if we do get in) but Hammer is still a good D and we are worse without him. We would need a young D prospect back in a trade or next year's D is even more pathetic than this year's.

Demers, Yandle, and Goligoski are all expected to reach free agency. Not to mention there's no rule against trading Hamhuis then signing him back after the season. It'd almost be irresponsible to NOT trade Hamhuis. Especially when you consider the potential return and the fact that we're a transition team with a not so impressive cupboard to transition to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lockhart said:

Some people on the radio were throwing out Hammer for Ritchie. 

I'd love to see that

Ritchie Horvat Virtanen

Talk about a tough line that's hard to contain.

True, that would be fun to watch, but I'd really like a high end defensive prospect or high pick for hammer.  That is our biggest need...imho

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ShakyWalton said:

me too...I wanted Ritchie in that draft.

is Ritchie a bit of a Dustin Penner?  I really don't know much about the guy other than he has some issues with lazy play.  Would JB be okay with Ritchie's character?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Alflives said:

is Ritchie a bit of a Dustin Penner?  I really don't know much about the guy other than he has some issues with lazy play.  Would JB be okay with Ritchie's character?  

I think Ritchies character is okay..he is just a big boy..6..2 and 230lbs...he is a devastating fighter when provoked and doing pretty good in the A this year..28 points in 32 games..played a handful on the Ducks but he is only 20....but you are right..Im sure the Canucks would put him on a wieght loss..program...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ShakyWalton said:

I think Ritchies character is okay..he is just a big boy..6..2 and 230lbs...he is a devastating fighter when provoked and doing pretty good in the A this year..28 points in 32 games..played a handful on the Ducks but he is only 20....but you are right..Im sure the Canucks would put him on a wieght loss..program...

We absolutely need to be harder to play against in our top minute guys.  It sounds like Ritchie is one of those hard to play against guys, who has the skill for the top six, that we need.  Go get him JB!  Or get Bowey?  Or, somehow, get both.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I am not for getting rid of Hammer. I seen what happens when this team loses a couple of key dmen and it is not pretty. Why get rid of something we need just to turn around and look for something we just got rid of? Does not make sense. We need to keep key players on the team until the transition to the younger players happens. Same with the twins and Miller. Vrbata and Burrows on the other hand......................

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Boddy604 said:

But Hammer didn't take a discount. He got 4.5 million to be a 2nd pairing D man. Even now (when the average contract is more than it was when he signed), that's still good money.

Him and Bieksa were our top pair, they were tasked with shutting down top lines. He was NOT a second pairing d-man nor did he sign as one. His cap hit was very friendly for us. That is a hometown discount if I've ever seen one. If we trade him then resign him this off season to 4ish mil for 2-3 years I'd say that is fair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, N7Nucks said:

Him and Bieksa were our top pair, they were tasked with shutting down top lines. He was NOT a second pairing d-man nor did he sign as one. His cap hit was very friendly for us. That is a hometown discount if I've ever seen one. If we trade him then resign him this off season to 4ish mil for 2-3 years I'd say that is fair.

How about we trade him and not resign him?  Then we have our two Russian Bears instead.  We need to become a harder team to play against.  Our current (old) core players are stale.  IMHAO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Alflives said:

How about we trade him and not resign him?  Then we have our two Russian Bears instead.  We need to become a harder team to play against.  Our current (old) core players are stale.  IMHAO

Throwing them to the wolves hardly seems like a superior idea. But if Benning and company feels it better to run with Sbisa/Hutton/Pedan in our top 4 more power to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course Ritchie or Shea Theo would be a pipedream I think Brandon Montour might be a bit more realistic. Frankly I'd be pretty stoked if JB could swing that deal.  He's 21 and ready for prime time with very good offensive skills and decent size and skating. Seems like a JB special to me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Boddy604 said:

Well maybe we're both right then. The article does say his deal was at market value. So he maybe turned down an overpayment to play in Van. Is turning down an overpayment for a market value deal on your desired team taking a discount though? That's a whole other debate lol.

Yeah it is. We got a discount on Hamhuis because other teams could/would have offered him more in FA. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...