J-Dizzle Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 14 hours ago, Monty said: If he goes, knowing Chevy's track record in the few trades he's done, he'll get a great return for him. In the current NHL you don't have to work overly hard to get a great return for a young defenceman :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 Just now, J-Dizzle said: In the current NHL you don't have to work overly hard to get a great return for a young defenceman :D Very, very true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 5 hours ago, Warhippy said: No question out of nowhere Chevy is getting max value for almost every move he makes. It's really impressive for a guy who was rumoured to be on the hot seat for inactivity last year and I am envious at the crazy wealth the Peg is building. Arguably the most skilled and deepest prospect pool of kids under 22 in the entire league If the rumours are true though and he is really pushing that hard I cannot see GMs willing to pay that premium even for that coveted RHD. People here still seem to believe that tanev or Edler or scraps will do it which obviously won't happen. But I don't see that amazing return happening again unless it's another package with these rumours out there Trouba for Rnh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldoescobar Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 2 hours ago, J.R. said: Good player and all and should continue to improve but yeah...solid #2-3 in his prime if he reaches his ceiling. Good player but nothing we need to go all gangbusters for and overpay in trades with Tanev + Boeser proposals for etc. And we already have a bunch of guys who project or are in that wheelhouse. I think Trouba would automatically be the #1 here (until Juolevi is ready) no questions. Actual team needs aside I think it would take at least a Tanev +Boeser to get it done and I would actually consider that deal from Vancouver's prospective. What worries me with Boeser is that if the Canucks dont drastically improve in the next year or two he will go FA Vesey style. Again, needs aside, no way does Tanev get you anywhere close to Trouba unfortunately. He is one of those guys that is far far more valuable to Vancouver than any other team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 1 minute ago, Ronaldoescobar said: I think Trouba would automatically be the #1 here (until Juolevi is ready) no questions. Actual team needs aside I think it would take at least a Tanev +Boeser to get it done and I would actually consider that deal from Vancouver's prospective. What worries me with Boeser is that if the Canucks dont drastically improve in the next year or two he will go FA Vesey style. Again, needs aside, no way does Tanev get you anywhere close to Trouba unfortunately. He is one of those guys that is far far more valuable to Vancouver than any other team. You overrate Trouba IMO. (And worry far too much about Boeser). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldoescobar Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 14 minutes ago, J.R. said: You overrate Trouba IMO. (And worry far too much about Boeser). While we differ on Trouba. You are correct in that I probably worry more than I should about Boeser, and that is the sole reason I put him in the deal. I sure hope I am wrong and he sticks with us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xbox Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 6 hours ago, Sedin Brothers said: If you didn't trade Tanev for Trouba, you would be idiotic. Hopefully you were saying "lol" because Tanev alone would not get the deal done. no sh*t Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xbox Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 2 hours ago, GarthButcher5 said: Care to extrapolate a bit? Tanev for Trouba is certainly a conversation starter so feel free to converse any time. No it's really not. Trouba is miles ahead and has a much higher ceiling. He's a future captain and elite defenceman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 5 minutes ago, Xbox said: No it's really not. Trouba is miles ahead and has a much higher ceiling. He's a future captain and elite defenceman. I'll grant you he has a higher ceiling but he's currently neither miles ahead or elite IMO. He'll likely be a really good #2D in his prime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 Bill Watters isn't worth the listen. Next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plaguez Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 18 minutes ago, Xbox said: No it's really not. Trouba is miles ahead and has a much higher ceiling. He's a future captain and elite defenceman. Based on what information? I've seen him play, I've seen his stats, I see his early regression..I don't see future captain material in a RFA who thinks he's in the 8 year 56mil with 1 30 point season under his belt. Sure he's a decent skater but he is neither a shutdown capabe guy nor an elite PMD. I'd rather have Tanev than Trouba. Tanev is more effective at his position and will cost much less over his career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VIC_CITY Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 56 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said: Trouba for Rnh? It would take quite a bit more than RNH. Probably RNH plus their 2017 1st for Trouba and Winnipeg's 2017 2nd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 37 minutes ago, J.R. said: I'll grant you he has a higher ceiling but he's currently neither miles ahead or elite IMO. He'll likely be a really good #2D in his prime. Chychrun reminds me of Trouba to some extent - tremendous natural talent - all the gifts you could ask for - but will he have/develop the mental side of the game it takes to be truly elite. I wouldn't be too quick to let go of Trouba though - imo both sides should settle on a bridge contract and enable each to revisit his true market value at a reasonable interval - perhaps two years. Tanev - whatever people may think of him, one thing is undeniable imo - he thinks the game at an elite level - his anticipation, reading of the play, is a step ahead - and imo, the brain is the most important muscle. I simply do not consider moving Tanev unless you're dealing with a GM that truly values that to the extent it should be, otherwise I doubt Tanev returns his true value, which imo exceeds his underlying numbers and the fact he's a darling of the analytics community. I also think that Tanev has the tools to emerge as a greater offensive factor and that having a deeper bottom 4 could impact him in very positive ways. His puck moving is outstanding imo, and his shot is probably under-rated - once he's freed up a bit in a role/matchup sense, we could see his production jump - and it's already been 22 pts per 82 over the past three seasons, in less than conducive conditions. Given his cap hit, his intangibles and what I think is even more latent potential, (unless his value is realized in the way Larsson's was) Tanev would be on my virtually untouchable list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuckles80 Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 7 hours ago, ABNuck said: I love CDC for it's ridiculous player value assessments. Roberto Luongo wants out of Vancouver (and for a GOOD reason, not a bad attitude reason). Here's a guy who was a team leader (he was our captain), was the active career leader in SV% in the NHL, had a good cap hit for a starting goalie, was a core player and had one terrific attitude about the whole way he was treated. Folks on here thought we'd be lucky to get a 2nd for him. Along comes Jacob Trouba who also wants out of his own city due to playing time (what else would it be other than who the heck wants to live in the PEG). He has yet to play a full season in the NHL (came close last year), hasn't broken 30 points yet (and seems to be in steady decline since his rookie year) and is demanding a salary equivalent to players that have proven much more than he has (a little over-valuing himself?)...and CDC wants to send our top defenseman + a top prospect + 40 picks + your wife to get him. I just don't get the valuation criteria on here. Grass is greener Shiny new toy sydrome NHL 16 be a GM I want what that kid has cause I am a sucky baby, and when I get it, I don't want it anymore, I want the other thing (participation ribbon long term impact) There's your reasons! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuckles80 Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 2 hours ago, Ryan Strome said: Trouba for Rnh? Yes that would likely work for both Teams. Winnipeg gets a Number 2 behind Schiefle who's young, Edmonton gets an experienced by young dman with size who have play a solid all around game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 16 minutes ago, Nuckles80 said: Yes that would likely work for both Teams. Winnipeg gets a Number 2 behind Schiefle who's young, Edmonton gets an experienced by young dman with size who have play a solid all around game. EDM would have to add IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VIC_CITY Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 24 minutes ago, Nuckles80 said: Yes that would likely work for both Teams. Winnipeg gets a Number 2 behind Schiefle who's young, Edmonton gets an experienced by young dman with size who have play a solid all around game. RNH has never scored more than 56 points, has a history of injury and is getting paid $6M. So Trouba holds more value than RNH, even though he is still relatively unproven. Some would argue that Trouba is also better than Adam Larsson, who yielded a player that is far superior to RNH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuckles80 Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 3 minutes ago, VIC_CITY said: RNH has never scored more than 56 points, has a history of injury and is getting paid $6M. So Trouba holds more value than RNH, even though he is still relatively unproven. Some would argue that Trouba is also better than Adam Larsson, who yielded a player that is far superior to RNH. Trouba is not better than Larson - Trouba has done nothing other than have one good year and since then he's had numbers pretty much even to tanev without tanev's top 5 NHL defensive defenseman type play Trouba still has potential but so does RNH and 56 pts on EDM is nothing to sneeze at. As for his $6 mil well have you seen what Trouba wants for his pitiful output? I think you're ignoring alot of facts here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 10 minutes ago, J.R. said: EDM would have to add IMO. Yup. RNH, while a talented player and actually underrated in his two way game, is also overpaid. Trouba has and can play 25 minutes a night, and thrives in those minutes as well. Edmonton would definitely have to add, a lot. If it took them Hall to get Larsson, a trade outside the Conference, getting Trouba inside the Western Conference would cost the Oilers a ransom. I'm no expert, but I would say the Oilers would have to ditch the idea of RNH in a trade and think about either Draisaitl or Puljujarvi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted August 25, 2016 Share Posted August 25, 2016 Watters helped make the Leafs the running joke they remain today. Was also they guy that called Cody Franson "more of a 3rd of July parade guy." My money would be on Brian Burke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.