Kanucklehead10 Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 http://www.tsn.ca/radio/vancouver-1040-i-1410/mckenzie-canucks-listening-but-not-actively-shopping-fifth-pick-1.504395 Pretty interesting interview on 1040 today about the Canucks and what they might do with the 5th pick, but even more interesting when Bob Mckenzie mentioned that CBJ aren't exactly "set" on picking Puljujarvi at 3rd, mentioning that the "Finnish connection" between the GM and the player doesn't really mean anything, while saying that they would prefer a center (which makes sense after the gaping hole Johansen left). Mckenzie mentions Logan Brown, Keller...etc. Maybe they'd be interested in Dubois? With the 5th pick that the Canucks have (which you would be able to select a good center with), do you think the Canucks could possibly package our pick somehow to attain the 3rd overall from CBJ? I thought it was set that 1,2 and 3 would for sure be Matthews, Laine, and Puljujarvi. Again, this could mean nothing and very well could turn out with CBJ picking Puljujarvi at 3rd, but nevertheless pretty interesting especially coming from Mckenzie. Can't wait until the draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintPatrick33 Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 Man, Pooljarvi IMO is a much more complete player than Matthews or Laine, this dude has the playmaking ability and size to compete in the big leagues. I have been impressed with him for the past 2 years, it is a pipe dream that we get him, but hey what can you do when you cheer for a team continually f#)%*#$ by the league! If we ever get Pooljarvi, watch out he is one heck of a hockey player, the kind we need to take over for the Twins! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honky Cat Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 11 minutes ago, Kanucklehead10 said: http://www.tsn.ca/radio/vancouver-1040-i-1410/mckenzie-canucks-listening-but-not-actively-shopping-fifth-pick-1.504395 Pretty interesting interview on 1040 today about the Canucks and what they might do with the 5th pick, but even more interesting when Bob Mckenzie mentioned that CBJ aren't exactly "set" on picking Puljujarvi at 3rd, mentioning that the "Finnish connection" between the GM and the player doesn't really mean anything, while saying that they would prefer a center (which makes sense after the gaping hole Johansen left). Mckenzie mentions Logan Brown, Keller...etc. Maybe they'd be interested in Dubois? With the 5th pick that the Canucks have (which you would be able to select a good center with), do you think the Canucks could possibly package our pick somehow to attain the 3rd overall from CBJ? I thought it was set that 1,2 and 3 would for sure be Matthews, Laine, and Puljujarvi. Again, this could mean nothing and very well could turn out with CBJ picking Puljujarvi at 3rd, but nevertheless pretty interesting especially coming from Mckenzie. Can't wait until the draft. I would be all over that deal if the Canucks could get the 3rd..TBH..I don't think that we have the assets to make it work..(we can't give up any more prospects or picks). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 Can he play left wing? Cause that's the position we need to fill most right now up front. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TmanVan Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 Whats with all the talk this year of making a deal to swap the 5th to Edmonton for the 4th, or make a deal with Columbus to get the 3rd.... or ORRRRR make a trade with Arizona to drop down to 7th!! We have a top 5 pick. Everyone needs to calm down. PUljujarvi, Dubois, or Tkachuk, Just take whoever is left at 5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quantum Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 If the Canucks have an opportunity to move to the #3 spot and for Columbus to move up to #5 spot, I would absolutely do it. The Blue Jackets may have soured on Puljujarvi for some insane reason, but he's the type of player the Canucks need. Sure, one of Dubois, Tkachuk, Jost, Fabbro, or Brown would be a nice consolidation prize -- I honestly believe Puljujarvi would be a major coup for the Canucks. (Especially since my gut says that if the Canucks miss out on Dubois, they'll likely shock some people by drafting Dante Fabbro high). If the Canucks could make some sort of move like: TO CBJ Dorsett Hansen #5 TO VAN #3 Hartnell I'd do it. (BTW, Hartnell is someone CBJ wants to move out and would bring a nice scoring touch/replace the veteran prescence lost by Hansen being dealt. Although it would be slightly weird to see Dorsett going back to CBJ, he did play for Torts and thrived under him in New York. Would be a solid move for both sides... also, opens up a roster spot for a young guy like Grenier or Zalewski on the bottom line for the Canucks). You may have to throw in some other picks/prospects in there but the Canucks are giving up 3 roster players for 2 rosters next year. However, they're going to immediately boost there scoring ability with this deal and sell high on Hansen while throwing Dorsett in as a way to equalize taking on Hartnell's contract/salary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khay Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 19 minutes ago, SaintPatrick33 said: Man, Pooljarvi IMO is a much more complete player than Matthews or Laine, this dude has the playmaking ability and size to compete in the big leagues. I have been impressed with him for the past 2 years, it is a pipe dream that we get him, but hey what can you do when you cheer for a team continually f#)%*#$ by the league! If we ever get Pooljarvi, watch out he is one heck of a hockey player, the kind we need to take over for the Twins! Yeah man. Laine may have more flash and end up scoring more goals than Puljujarvi but Puljujarvi is the very definition of heavy player with playmking abilities that we need on this team. I was hoping for us to win the 3rd overall pick as winning 1st or 2nd overall means we would pick Matthews or Laine. I know those two players are special but somehow I really like Puljujarvi. If we can somehow get Puljujarvi, the team would improve instantaneously. I'm imagining the line of Baertschi-Horvat-Puljujarvi and can't help but get excited. We just need to sign one UFA instead of two to be competitive. The 3 lines would be, Sedin-Sedin-Eriksson Baertschi-Horvat-Puljujarvi Gaunce-Sutter-Hansen Virtanen-Granlund-Etem If we learned anything from this playoffs, it's the depth that is headache for the opposition to match and rolling all 4 lines. I think we can do that with the above lines. I doubt CBJ would trade their pick though. Highly doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khay Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 26 minutes ago, DeNiro said: Can he play left wing? Cause that's the position we need to fill most right now up front. How so? I thought RW is the position we need to fill most right now. LW: Daniel, Baertschi, Virtanen, Gaunce. RW: Hansen, Etem, Virtanen (can play both), Dorsett. I love Hansen but if your first option at RW is Hansen, there is a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jock Cousteau Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 5th OA Tortellini Conditional 2nd for 3rf OA Solid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 7 minutes ago, khay said: How so? I thought RW is the position we need to fill most right now. LW: Daniel, Baertschi, Virtanen, Gaunce. RW: Hansen, Etem, Virtanen (can play both), Dorsett. I love Hansen but if your first option at RW is Hansen, there is a problem. We have a potential first line right winger in Brock Boeser, too. If we somehow add Puljujarvi, it would be: Puljujarvi Boeser Virtanen Etem ...on the right side in the future. Instead, we could definitely use a left winger, I think that is what DeNiro meant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 6 minutes ago, khay said: How so? I thought RW is the position we need to fill most right now. LW: Daniel, Baertschi, Virtanen, Gaunce. RW: Hansen, Etem, Virtanen (can play both), Dorsett. I love Hansen but if your first option at RW is Hansen, there is a problem. Virtanen is primarily a right winger. I'm thinking more ahead we've got Virtanen, Hansen, Rodin?, Boeser, Etem, Dorsett on the right wings Left wing we've got Daniel, Baertschi, and Gaunce. Once Daniel retires there's not a whole lot of talent on the left side outside of Baertschi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odd. Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 1 minute ago, -Vintage Canuck- said: We have a potential first line right winger in Brock Boeser, too. If we somehow add Puljujarvi, it would be: Puljujarvi Boeser Virtanen Etem on the right in the future. We could definitely use a left winger, I think that is what DeNiro meant. Virtanen was a LW until he was converted to the RW. He's familiar with the LW, played a little bit this year on the leftside. Maybe we can move him back to the LW position? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 Yeah, already talked about and potentially debunked in the draft thread. Just a heads up as well, OP, you need to put a tag on any thread in this forum. For instance, this might make sense as a [Speculation] tag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dura_mater Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 25 minutes ago, Jock Cousteau said: 5th OA Tortellini Conditional 2nd for 3rf OA Solid This is exactly what I was thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintPatrick33 Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 13 minutes ago, elvis15 said: Yeah, already talked about and potentially debunked in the draft thread. Just a heads up as well, OP, you need to put a tag on any thread in this forum. For instance, this might make sense as a [Speculation] tag. Just a heads up Elvis, quit telling newer posters what to do. The OP brought up some newer info which may have been lost in that previous thread you referred to. Let new posters spill their beans! What else is a forum for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 Just a heads up, but yeah... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 I don't see them passing on him... but if they do, we are the perfect trading partner. I mentioned it in another thread, but we have the capability of eating one of their terrible NMC contracts. They are in cap hell right now and also NEED to unload a couple before expansion as they will otherwise have to expose some excellent young talent they want to keep. Hartnell is kind of the obvious choice, he is a decent player but the term on his contract make it awful. Just taking him back in trade is enough of a return for dropping down two spots (if they didn't want Puulujarvi of course)... we wouldn't have to sweeten it aside from maybe giving them back their 2nd pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goal:thecup Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 Scotty looked like a triplet with the Sedins at the All Star game a few years ago too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Top_Shelf Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 2 hours ago, Kanucklehead10 said: http://www.tsn.ca/radio/vancouver-1040-i-1410/mckenzie-canucks-listening-but-not-actively-shopping-fifth-pick-1.504395 Pretty interesting interview on 1040 today about the Canucks and what they might do with the 5th pick, but even more interesting when Bob Mckenzie mentioned that CBJ aren't exactly "set" on picking Puljujarvi at 3rd, mentioning that the "Finnish connection" between the GM and the player doesn't really mean anything, while saying that they would prefer a center (which makes sense after the gaping hole Johansen left). Mckenzie mentions Logan Brown, Keller...etc. Maybe they'd be interested in Dubois? With the 5th pick that the Canucks have (which you would be able to select a good center with), do you think the Canucks could possibly package our pick somehow to attain the 3rd overall from CBJ? I thought it was set that 1,2 and 3 would for sure be Matthews, Laine, and Puljujarvi. Again, this could mean nothing and very well could turn out with CBJ picking Puljujarvi at 3rd, but nevertheless pretty interesting especially coming from Mckenzie. Can't wait until the draft. With 13 days to go until draft I expect more juicy speculations/predictions like this one but at the end of the day my money is on Columbus keeping its pick and we still pick PLD or Tkachuk. I'd be surprised if that changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-AJ- Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 1 hour ago, Quantum said: If the Canucks have an opportunity to move to the #3 spot and for Columbus to move up to #5 spot, I would absolutely do it. The Blue Jackets may have soured on Puljujarvi for some insane reason, but he's the type of player the Canucks need. Sure, one of Dubois, Tkachuk, Jost, Fabbro, or Brown would be a nice consolidation prize -- I honestly believe Puljujarvi would be a major coup for the Canucks. (Especially since my gut says that if the Canucks miss out on Dubois, they'll likely shock some people by drafting Dante Fabbro high). If the Canucks could make some sort of move like: TO CBJ Dorsett Hansen #5 TO VAN #3 Hartnell I'd do it. (BTW, Hartnell is someone CBJ wants to move out and would bring a nice scoring touch/replace the veteran prescence lost by Hansen being dealt. Although it would be slightly weird to see Dorsett going back to CBJ, he did play for Torts and thrived under him in New York. Would be a solid move for both sides... also, opens up a roster spot for a young guy like Grenier or Zalewski on the bottom line for the Canucks). You may have to throw in some other picks/prospects in there but the Canucks are giving up 3 roster players for 2 rosters next year. However, they're going to immediately boost there scoring ability with this deal and sell high on Hansen while throwing Dorsett in as a way to equalize taking on Hartnell's contract/salary. I'd take that in a heartbeat, but I'm quite sure Columbus wouldn't. Hartnell tends to be a fan-favourite type of player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.