whytelight Posted July 24, 2016 Share Posted July 24, 2016 I find it entertaining that some posters suggest trading the likes of Burrows, Gaunce, Dorsett, Grenier, etc to land us a Landeskog. In reality, we only have 4 players that other teams MIGHT want: Tanev Hansen Horvat Virtanen Tanev would land us a forward that can pop in 50-60 points a year....not a Hall Hansen would get us a 2nd round pick or a prospect Horvat and Virtanen have size, skill, and speed. Something that we need.....but also things that other teams covet....again, they'll fetch us a high 1st round or a prospect. We have the assets to make a solid hockey trade that benefits both teams.....but can you stomach losing Tanev and Horvat in a deal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
73 Percent Posted July 24, 2016 Share Posted July 24, 2016 4 players? That's it? No team would be interested in Henrik Daniel Eriksson Baertschi Edler Hutton Tryamkin Markstrom Gudbranson ???? I get what you're trying to get at, but you are just as bad when you make a topic like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 24, 2016 Share Posted July 24, 2016 Tag. Tanev is a RELIABLE top 2 dman on almost any team. Ask almost anyone and they would prefer Tanev over Larsson. Doesn't that mean that we would get at least Landeskog? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naslund.is.king Posted July 24, 2016 Share Posted July 24, 2016 I find it entertaining how you made a topic for this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cripplereh Posted July 24, 2016 Share Posted July 24, 2016 I agree there are so many other topics close to this yet you never searched for one!We have 8 players or so other teams want badly,but I think one or a combo of others can get us what we need! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odd. Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 Those 4 players shouldn't be up for sale unless teams are willing wanting to acquire them in which case they'd need to pay significantly. Hansen is super valuable, many here don't understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 2 hours ago, whytelight said: I find it entertaining that some posters suggest trading the likes of Burrows, Gaunce, Dorsett, Grenier, etc to land us a Landeskog. In reality, we only have 4 players that other teams MIGHT want: Tanev Hansen Horvat Virtanen Tanev would land us a forward that can pop in 50-60 points a year....not a Hall Hansen would get us a 2nd round pick or a prospect Horvat and Virtanen have size, skill, and speed. Something that we need.....but also things that other teams covet....again, they'll fetch us a high 1st round or a prospect. We have the assets to make a solid hockey trade that benefits both teams.....but can you stomach losing Tanev and Horvat in a deal? Tanev is a better player than Larson, and is worth Landescog. IMHAO, of course. Either Hall has a lot less value than we all realize, or Chirelli did another Seguin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBatch Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 18 minutes ago, Alflives said: Tanev is a better player than Larson, and is worth Landescog. IMHAO, of course. Either Hall has a lot less value than we all realize, or Chirelli did another Seguin. I agree, too bad EDM wouldn't trade Hall for him. EDM likely didn't want Hall playing in the same division or we may have had a chance at him. Oilers overpaid for to fill a desperate team need. No other team has such a glut of young talent upfront and a huge lack of defense, so we can't keep assuming Tanev is going to get us a 50-60 pt 200 foot Selke considered forward in Landeskog. Also I am not sure it would be the right move, Tanev is young and getting better every year, one of the World Championships most valuable defenseman (Team Canada) and we just started to fix our own defensive issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBatch Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 Why would Horvat get us only a high 1st rounder or a prospect? He is a proven NHLer and should get better over the next couple years, 50% of first rounders don't play as many games as he has already so maybe re-think that. Virtanen as well, his play didn't wow us, but he has played and shouldn't be ruled out as a roster player just yet. Hansen's stock is high now given that he had a career year playing with the Sedins, and that he has a very cap friendly hit, and comes with some intangibles. He should be shopped IMO if Benning is trying to make a hockey trade with a team up against the cap and wishing to shave 2-3mill (say trade us a 5mil player for Hansen) and we give them a prospect/pick to go with it we might be able to come out smelling like roses. Won't repeat what others have said - but will say since Gretzky, anyone can be traded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crabcakes Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 On 24/07/2016 at 3:50 PM, whytelight said: I find it entertaining that some posters suggest trading the likes of Burrows, Gaunce, Dorsett, Grenier, etc to land us a Landeskog. In reality, we only have 4 players that other teams MIGHT want: Tanev Hansen Horvat Virtanen Tanev would land us a forward that can pop in 50-60 points a year....not a Hall Hansen would get us a 2nd round pick or a prospect Horvat and Virtanen have size, skill, and speed. Something that we need.....but also things that other teams covet....again, they'll fetch us a high 1st round or a prospect. We have the assets to make a solid hockey trade that benefits both teams.....but can you stomach losing Tanev and Horvat in a deal? On 24/07/2016 at 3:55 PM, Gooseberries said: 4 players? That's it? No team would be interested in Henrik Daniel Eriksson Baertschi Edler Hutton Tryamkin Markstrom Gudbranson ???? I get what you're trying to get at, but you are just as bad when you make a topic like this. Sure this is a list of players who may be of interest to various teams. Consider this, take Tanev off the list and add Hall. What have you got? D is screwed. Take Hansen off and the 2017 1st and add Kane. Now there is no 1st next year and they're missing a 2RW and they're in cap trouble. Horvat, Virtanen, Baertschi etc.....that's the future. Patience people...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
73 Percent Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 7 hours ago, Crabcakes said: Sure this is a list of players who may be of interest to various teams. Consider this, take Tanev off the list and add Hall. What have you got? D is screwed. Take Hansen off and the 2017 1st and add Kane. Now there is no 1st next year and they're missing a 2RW and they're in cap trouble. Horvat, Virtanen, Baertschi etc.....that's the future. Patience people...... Are you actually defending OP that we only have 4 players on our team that others would want? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crabcakes Posted July 28, 2016 Share Posted July 28, 2016 3 hours ago, Gooseberries said: Are you actually defending OP that we only have 4 players on our team that others would want? No, that is why I quoted your list too. I wasn't clear about that. The OP's list is very short (and incomplete). I wanted to combine both lists to make it more complete, but I really don't think that they can move any of them without creating problems. The OP is right that spare parts aren't going to land a top 6 player but I would stop there. The Canucks can't afford to move quality. I accept that with a rebuilding team, depth is an issue. The Canucks are in a better position depth wise going into this season than last. Benning is leaving us with good goaltending, a complete and competent top 4, pretty good up the middle and a legit top line. There are holes in other positions but over all, there are fewer flaws in this team. The hole that they have a 2LW, is one that I can live with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.