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

Rugged scoring winger via trade??


Recommended Posts

The Canucks dont have the available pieces to land a Landeskog, Kane, or Kreider.

 

They will have to either take a bad contract or a reclamation project.

 

I nominate Hartnell as the primary target.  Hes a lock for 20-25 goals and 40-60 points.  He plays hard, tough, and can take care of himself in a scrap.  The risk is that his contract is for another 3 seasons that takes him to the age of 37.  Given his consistency throughout his career, I think that he could be a worth while gamble. 

 

Another issue in this transaction is CBJ doesnt want to recieve much in the way of salary.  I think this rules out Sbisa.  Dorsett is possible, but removing an attribute (grit) in order to get more seems slightly redundant.  IF CBJ is willing to eat 20% bringing Hartnells aav down to 3.8M, Id consider moving Cassels or a mid round pick.  Hed be a solid addition to the top 6.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, aqua59 said:

Trolls? I'm calling you out after you try passively avoiding being held accountable on your judgement. You can't have it both ways. You day you were joking, you were being classic passive aggressive. 

I'm just joking so you're not offended. 

LOL I'm totally willing to be accountable for my opinions... Do you even know what my opinion is? Seems like you have no clue. The nature of trolling and taking jabs at people to some extent is passive-aggressive... That's how you have fun with it... 

 

Anyways, you totally missed the point of all my posts... The reality is the Evander Kane thread goes something like this, "We should get Evander Kane." followed by, "No, he's a locker room cancer." followed by, "No... he just has off-ice issues, he's probably good in the locker room." followed by, "Remember #TracksuitGate?", followed by, "We need winning culture..."

 

It's pages and pages of the same thing back and forth.. it was more so commentary on that fact. While I do think that this is completely not thread-worthy.... I don't really care... I'm still going to take jabs at the OP for doing it though. That comes with the territory of making really pointless threads. You call me the grammar police, but you are the passive-aggressive police, the problem is you have no ability to comprehend the intention of posts.

 

EDIT: also... "You day you were joking" ????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, 70seven said:

The Canucks dont have the available pieces to land a Landeskog, Kane, or Kreider.

 

They will have to either take a bad contract or a reclamation project.

 

I nominate Hartnell as the primary target.  Hes a lock for 20-25 goals and 40-60 points.  He plays hard, tough, and can take care of himself in a scrap.  The risk is that his contract is for another 3 seasons that takes him to the age of 37.  Given his consistency throughout his career, I think that he could be a worth while gamble. 

 

Another issue in this transaction is CBJ doesnt want to recieve much in the way of salary.  I think this rules out Sbisa.  Dorsett is possible, but removing an attribute (grit) in order to get more seems slightly redundant.  IF CBJ is willing to eat 20% bringing Hartnells aav down to 3.8M, Id consider moving Cassels or a mid round pick.  Hed be a solid addition to the top 6.

Or we don't ask them to retain salary or cap, but we want a pick or prospect added in which they will do as they want to shed his salary. We shouldn't be paying much of anything for Hartnell, whom I believe would fit in well here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Aircool said:

LOL I'm totally willing to be accountable for my opinions... Do you even know what my opinion is? Seems like you have no clue. The nature of trolling and taking jabs at people to some extent is passive-aggressive... That's how you have fun with it... 

 

Anyways, you totally missed the point of all my posts... The reality is the Evander Kane thread goes something like this, "We should get Evander Kane." followed by, "No, he's a locker room cancer." followed by, "No... he just has off-ice issues, he's probably good in the locker room." followed by, "Remember #TracksuitGate?", followed by, "We need winning culture..."

 

It's pages and pages of the same thing back and forth.. it was more so commentary on that fact. While I do think that this is completely not thread-worthy.... I don't really care... I'm still going to take jabs at the OP for doing it though. That comes with the territory of making really pointless threads. You call me the grammar police, but you are the passive-aggressive police, the problem is you have no ability to comprehend the intention of posts.

 

EDIT: also... "You day you were joking" ????

lol 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If a trade is the way JB is going to go, then it's going to be one of Edler or Tanev.  Obviously most, if not all, would prefer edler, but he's going to be tough to move and wouldn't bring as much back as tanev might.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was always thinking McGinn but he was signed by Arizona my next choice was Matt Martin but TO signed him. But here's the catch the roster is looking pretty full right now so some one will need to be AHL bound to sign any more FA's we're at 22 now so maybe one more player from either Larson, Rodin or Grenier

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, kenhodgejr said:

Benning said that they are still looking to acquire a rugged fast scoring winger through trade. I think Evander Kane could be a good fit. What other options for players who fit this profile are out there?

Hartnell, I think he is our best fit right now. Reasonable price he's offensive and tough and on a good term for us to find a younger replacement and move him out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brett Ritchie from Dallas maybe? Can play bottom 6 with some grit and skill.

 

 The peg seem to have quite a few heavy wingers. Maybe make a play for a bottom 6 guy from there with limited upside?

 

Lowry might not fit the bill too a T though. Hmm what about Drew Stafford at a reduced rate? I'm not sure just throwing names out to be discussed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Aircool said:

Its just not thread-worthy. But I was being very sarcastic and exaggerating....  I really don't care if 20 people on these forums make redundant threads every day.... Those people have problems, I don't need to be another one of them.

Aircool eh.

 

As in no cooling system. 

 

No wonder you have a blown head gasket.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Shiftynifty said:

He could be a bargain bin "scoring" winger, but he's far from rugged. If the price is right, I could see Benning trying him out.

I don't, I know we are trying to add character but we aren't trying to add characters

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kane - definite NO as the last thing we want to do is bring in the worst example of a character for our young guys to look up to.

 

 

Hartnell?  Most likely, but we will have to see how the numbers work out as he has to be protected in the expansion draft because of his NMC contract. That is the whole reason that CBJ wants to move him. 

 

Hartnell and a pick for Sbisa sounds fair. There isn't a big lineup of teams willing to take the salary and lack of flexibility in next year's expansion draft. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Aircool said:

LOL.... Here's an interesting idea... Asking this question in the Evander Kane thread? Formed in such a way as, "Since many people here think Evander Kane is pure cancer and should go freeze to death in the arctic, who should we trade for instead that plays similarly?"

 

And then people would reply and talk about the various ways they would imagine Evander Kane dying, and CDC would be a much more cancerous place for it... See? Everyone wins!

What th f_ck? I didn't really understand any of that. I assume its because it was written in douche bag and I'm not fluent. Anyone else having trouble here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, davydgoliath said:

What th f_ck? I didn't really understand any of that. I assume its because it was written in douche bag and I'm not fluent. Anyone else having trouble here?

Actually it was written in sarcasm and troll... It's similar to douche bag I can understand your misunderstanding... If you ever need lessons, I'm sure I could give you some, seems like you were trying to communicate with me in sarcasm and troll... Just not very good yet, but with a master like me... I'll have your writing poems in no time!!! <3 < 3 <3 Love U Bae!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I came from the Kane thread where two posters were insuting each other back and forth.  I thought it would be better here....I was wrong....maybe Ill make another redundant thread since this one has soured so quickly....hope Benning does something soon. ...the children are getting restless. 

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...