JC2 Posted September 13, 2016 Share Posted September 13, 2016 14 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said: What part of stay at home defensemen do people not understand? If Tanev is so useless why do people think we can get Landeskog for him? Is he the best d-man on the Canucks? No. Most physical? No. Does he do his job? Absolutely. With the addition of Gudbranson, Tanev can be our #2 RHD. We have other RHD prospects to provide offence. Maybe lets stabilize our defence first and find someone to outplay him, before starting to move guys around. Landeskog is a pipe dream, unless we are giving up on something major. He's gotten 20 goals plus in 4 out of 5 years. The Av's aren't going to give him away for nothing. I agree with this, if it were just Tanev and a pick I would be all for it. Tanev is a very solid defenseman and I think he is definitely underrated for what he does but to think he could get landeskog is wishful thinking. The Avs would probably want Horvat or virtanen plus a high pick thrown in and that is just too much. I'd rather be patient and wait one more year for Boeser and whoever else hits the free agent market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cripplereh Posted September 13, 2016 Share Posted September 13, 2016 it won't be for Marleau unless they want to take a 4th liner and late pick.Benning wants younger NOT older players! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deus.ex.makina Posted September 13, 2016 Share Posted September 13, 2016 Landeskog to van for Edler, Virtanen and 17' 1st. or Landeskog to van for Tanev, Baerstchi and torts's 2nd. the worst offer for us would be Tanev, Virtanen and 17's 1st, but even tho it should be studied. Landeskog is just a capitaine 1st line winger. nothing less. off the radar, what about the benning's plan A two seasons ago? get Iginla for a reasonable price (aka Sbisa and middle prospect or torts 2nd) ? he could still put up points, and this is his final year so no risk... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drakrami Posted September 13, 2016 Share Posted September 13, 2016 Landeskogs gonna cost us... I dont even think we have the right pieces for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Putgolzin Posted September 13, 2016 Share Posted September 13, 2016 This is awesome. It's like saying, I need a new car...I can't decide between the new Tesla that's coming out next year, or I know a guy who's got a 1978 F-150 he'd give me cheap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timberz21 Posted September 13, 2016 Share Posted September 13, 2016 4 hours ago, canuktravella said: tanevs value will never be higher and he brings no physicality or offense i say we trade him gives a spot for youngsters if we can get landeskog and a third for tanev and jackets 2nd and hansen jump on it and run by deadline sedin sedin eriksson 1a line baertchi sutter rodin speedy skill 2nd line landeskog horvat virtanen 2b rough shutdown libe gaunce granlund grenier 3gs line big mean skilled edler guddy hutton tryamkin juolevi stecher pedan markstrom/demko trade miller burrows sbisa at deadline for teams that need vets for playoff drive we can leave dorsett explosed at expansion draft. next yr boeser plays top six and youth will be great Great...we finally win a trade and bring in a scoring winger with 4x20 goals and were going to stuff him on a 3rd line behind the almighty Baertschi and Rodin and ask him to be a shutdown guy....that makes sense. Why bother making the trade at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BabychStache Posted September 13, 2016 Share Posted September 13, 2016 18 minutes ago, timberz21 said: Great...we finally win a trade and bring in a scoring winger with 4x20 goals and were going to stuff him on a 3rd line behind the almighty Baertschi and Rodin and ask him to be a shutdown guy....that makes sense. Why bother making the trade at all. Exactly! It seems people like to "spread the scoring" but the Canucks best seasons were when the twins were deployed in the best offensive opportunities. Let your scorers score. Race horses can ploy, but it's a waste. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklehead44 Posted September 13, 2016 Share Posted September 13, 2016 3 hours ago, Ghostsof1915 said: What part of stay at home defensemen do people not understand? If Tanev is so useless why do people think we can get Landeskog for him? Is he the best d-man on the Canucks? No. Most physical? No. Does he do his job? Absolutely. With the addition of Gudbranson, Tanev can be our #2 RHD. We have other RHD prospects to provide offence. Maybe lets stabilize our defence first and find someone to outplay him, before starting to move guys around. Landeskog is a pipe dream, unless we are giving up on something major. He's gotten 20 goals plus in 4 out of 5 years. The Av's aren't going to give him away for nothing. I believe he is. Tanev is phenomenal defensively. I think he is on par overall with Tyson Barrie but with offensive and defensive abilities switched. I have a mutual friend with Gabriel Landeskog. This was a few months ago, but his agent was saying there were four teams pushing hard for him. Toronto was one, I think (can't remember fully) two of the others were Montreal and Columbus. I pretty much stopped listening when Vancouver wasn't one of the four. Pacioretty for Landeskog straight-up would make a tonne of sense. I would put their value pretty close to par. Both are young captains who look to need a change of scenery: http://www.hockeyfeed.com/nhl-news/rumor-nhl-coach-calls-his-captain-the-worst-in-the-team-s-history Montreal is close to Toronto and probably the closest NHL city to Sweden. Pacioretty is an American might appreciate going to a US market, and Colorado is a pretty good spot as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HorvatToBaertschi Posted September 13, 2016 Share Posted September 13, 2016 27 minutes ago, timberz21 said: Great...we finally win a trade and bring in a scoring winger with 4x20 goals and were going to stuff him on a 3rd line behind the almighty Baertschi and Rodin and ask him to be a shutdown guy....that makes sense. Why bother making the trade at all. I agree I would see it more like Sedin sedin eriksson Landeskog horvat virtanen Baertschi sutter Etem Rodin granlund burrows Grenier Which is à phenomenal group of 12 not in thé superstar sensé but in thé team aspect. I would feel comfortable deploying any of thèse lines in any situation at any time of the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBatch Posted September 13, 2016 Share Posted September 13, 2016 6 hours ago, Chip Kelly said: Even Don Cherry's gotta respect a Euro like Landeskog who plays a gritty North American style game. Yes to Landeskog for sure. Hell no to Marleau. Hate players who have size but don't use it. For a guy who is 6 foot 2 and 220 Marleau plays more like he is 5 foot 10 and 180 pounds. It's a contact sport little guys gotta play big. Big guys though can't play small!! Remember when Bieksa, all 5'11 1/2, 190lbs dripping wet - speed bagged Mareau into oblivion? That was funny given the size difference. NO way to Marleau, Yes if we were talking Palvelski or Couture. Tanev for Landeskog is would be ok...Tanev for Edler would be awesome. For your viewing pleasure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sedin Brothers Posted September 13, 2016 Share Posted September 13, 2016 Marleau would be great if we had a bit better team. Considering we think we are a playoff team, he would be the perfect addition for a playoff team. I would trade Landeskog for Tanev and change any day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kloubek Posted September 13, 2016 Share Posted September 13, 2016 Marleau might not be quite as bad as some are saying. Overpriced for what he brings? Yes. But we really need to shore up that 2nd line, and he is still producing. He's not a supreme hitter or anything, but he does bring some size to that line. Best of all, he's unrestricted at the end of the season so I imagine he could be had for a very reasonable price. Though I'd expect if he continued his career he'd go back to San Jose, it also gives us a foot in the door to extend him for a cheap contract for a couple of years, and he could be an extremely serviceable 3rd liner at that point. As for Landeskog, that would be amazing, but as I've said many times I just don't think we have the assets; at least not the assets we would want to give up for what it takes to acquire him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riffraff Posted September 13, 2016 Share Posted September 13, 2016 48 minutes ago, IBatch said: Remember when Bieksa, all 5'11 1/2, 190lbs dripping wet - speed bagged Mareau into oblivion? That was funny given the size difference. NO way to Marleau, Yes if we were talking Palvelski or Couture. Tanev for Landeskog is would be ok...Tanev for Edler would be awesome. For your viewing pleasure. Yeah i remember. being somewhat embarrassed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted September 13, 2016 Share Posted September 13, 2016 Did't we just put this chump to rest? The lawn bowling playing winga from down unda who was a freelance golf reporta for years? Yes....will certainly believe him As well in the article it does not note once that the canucks are looking at anyone, only that some guy named Aly Dhanani thinks Landeskog is a good idea or fit... This is not a rumour or speculation. it is a fat balding guy who couldn't hack the golf beat learning lawn bowling looking for clicks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted September 13, 2016 Share Posted September 13, 2016 3 hours ago, deus.ex.makina said: Landeskog to van for Edler, Virtanen and 17' 1st. or Landeskog to van for Tanev, Baerstchi and torts's 2nd. the worst offer for us would be Tanev, Virtanen and 17's 1st, but even tho it should be studied. Landeskog is just a capitaine 1st line winger. nothing less. off the radar, what about the benning's plan A two seasons ago? get Iginla for a reasonable price (aka Sbisa and middle prospect or torts 2nd) ? he could still put up points, and this is his final year so no risk... So...we give Col EVERYTHING they need plus a pick olus a player for Landeskog alone? If any of those deals presented themselves Sakic would hand us the lube and whisper thank you in our ear. Hall=Larson Landeskog= Top D Blue chip + pick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Standing_Tall#37 Posted September 13, 2016 Share Posted September 13, 2016 16 minutes ago, riffraff said: Yeah i remember. being somewhat embarrassed. Hi Patrick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky Balboa Posted September 13, 2016 Share Posted September 13, 2016 Thankfully, there are laws preventing CDCers from doing actual trades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alfstonker Posted September 13, 2016 Share Posted September 13, 2016 What you guys fail to realize is if GL was being traded there are teams with much more to offer than we do. That alone kills this cr-p stone dead in the water. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Crossbar Posted September 13, 2016 Share Posted September 13, 2016 When a reporter suggests something, it's not a rumor. It's a reporter suggesting something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HC20.0 Posted September 13, 2016 Share Posted September 13, 2016 Marleau would set us back. He's old and slowing down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.