[Report] Duchene and Landeskog could be hitting the market

[oldnews]

1 hour ago, Zoolander said:

Landeskog and Bo would look good down the middle. Just Sayin.

if Landeskog were a center that would look good, yeah.

[oldnews]

18 minutes ago, Butters Stoch said:

Could someone explain why the Avs want to trade Landeskog? I just don't get why bottom team would trade away a young excellent all around player that you would want to build around.

It's Darren Dreger.  Take it with a grain of salt.  Any opportunity that Toronto can take to make another team look desperate and weak, Dreger is there to lighten the load that his Leafs bear.

 

This is Dreger saying that the Avs struggles will result in speculation around these players - what he's not saying is that he actually has a source with the Avs suggesting these guys are on the market.

 

Is it possible that the Avs entertain offers on these guys?  Yes.  But unfortunately the likes of Dreger have devolved the trade of reporting and blurred/muddied it with the practice of speculating, with the odd trolling mixed in, so I personally take this for what it is - noise that may or may not have any value.

[Aircool]

3 hours ago, Roger Neilson's Towel said:

IMHO Tanev should be enough to get either of them in the current market considering the value of top line defenseman. I wouldn't add much more then that. Definitely no young prospects. 

 

Tanev isn't a top line defenseman..... I mean honestly.... I like Tanev a lot, but name me a shutdown defenseman in the NHL who is even a #2? If you don't score, you aren't a top line defenseman... There is a reason that teams have "shutdown pairs" and it's not their 1st pairing.... These are fundamentally opposite things.

[Pears]

20 minutes ago, Aircool said:

 

Tanev isn't a top line defenseman..... I mean honestly.... I like Tanev a lot, but name me a shutdown defenseman in the NHL who is even a #2? If you don't score, you aren't a top line defenseman... There is a reason that teams have "shutdown pairs" and it's not their 1st pairing.... These are fundamentally opposite things.

So going off that logic, Marc-Edouard Vlasic, who many consider to be a #1-#2 defenseman,  isn't a "top-line" defenseman because he doesn't score enough?

[MoneypuckOverlord]

Baertchi for Landeskog

 

hey... Baertchi has more points and from the same draft year.

 

Tanev and Baertchi for

Landeskog and Duchene.

[Derp...]

I can see JB pulling the trigger on a deal here. My guess is he would give up something along the lines of:

 

Baertschi/Granlund, Sbisa, and Subban or Cassels For Landeskog

 

Tanev, Granlund/Bae + Pedan for Duchene

Sibsa, Sutter, and a second maybe?

 

No matter how it would go, or D depth would take a hit. 

 

He definitely waits until Edler is back though, and probably Guddy too if possible.

[ice orca]

7 hours ago, Roger Neilson's Towel said:

 

I disagree. Larsson got Taylor Hall. 

That trade has worked out great for both teams Larsson has been a monster for the Coil, very underrated d-man who has been punishing guys in the corner. He is a bigger Tavev who hits like a truck, just watch the next couple of years who actually won that trade.

[Nicklas Bo Hunter]

Honestly Landeskog is the perfect Player for the nucks to target. They should be willing to pony up to get him. 

[D.B Cooper]

45 minutes ago, Derp... said:

I can see JB pulling the trigger on a deal here. My guess is he would give up something along the lines of:

 

Baertschi/Granlund, Sbisa, and Subban or Cassels For Landeskog

 

Tanev, Granlund/Bae + Pedan for Duchene

Sibsa, Sutter, and a second maybe?

 

No matter how it would go, or D depth would take a hit. 

 

He definitely waits until Edler is back though, and probably Guddy too if possible.

Would you take that mixed bag of pooh for Horvat?

i sure wouldent.    Why would the avs take that pooh for an even better player?   

They wouldent.  

These trade proposals are brutal.  

Ask yourself, who would you want for Horvat, then make it even more.

 That's what it would take to land either of these guys.  

[ForsbergTheGreat]

6 hours ago, Chip Kelly said:

 

Sounds like the Canucks become the new young rebuilding team and pile up the losses.

 

Something Benning would never do and ownership would never agree to a true strip it down rebuild.

 

This retool going on right now is as good as it gets...

Those would be just future lines. In the mean time we'd still have plekanec, Rodin edler, eriksson Hansen dorsett. Which would make us just as competitive as we currently are. 

[timberz21]

8 hours ago, Roger Neilson's Towel said:

 

I disagree. Larsson got Taylor Hall. 

Larsson was 23 at the time of the trade, obviously Hall, was the better player, but Edmonton was counting on the former 4th overall's potential and expecting him to keep getting better.   Similar to Hedman, who took a while to get going.

 

Tanev is 27, and basically in his prime.  That the best he's ever going to get...plus seems like injury are starting to take it toll.

 

IMO their value is not comparable.  Tanev has higher value in Vancouver, for what he achieved for an undrafted player, like Burrows in his best years.   But around the league, they only see him, at best as a defensive top 4 defenseman.  Pretty sure, Larsson was a coveted asset, if he was shopped around the league.

[Noseforthenet]

If we want Landeskog. we should be ready to include Virtanen. I am actually okay with this TBH.

[Bissurnette]

7 hours ago, oldnews said:

It's Darren Dreger.  Take it with a grain of salt.  Any opportunity that Toronto can take to make another team look desperate and weak, Dreger is there to lighten the load that his Leafs bear.

 

This is Dreger saying that the Avs struggles will result in speculation around these players - what he's not saying is that he actually has a source with the Avs suggesting these guys are on the market.

 

Is it possible that the Avs entertain offers on these guys?  Yes.  But unfortunately the likes of Dreger have devolved the trade of reporting and blurred/muddied it with the practice of speculating, with the odd trolling mixed in, so I personally take this for what it is - noise that may or may not have any value.

 

Exactly. He's never said the Avs are interested in trading these guys so I don't buy too much into this.

 

That said, it's fun to speculate so I'll take a crack at it and add fuel to the fire.

 

I think a trade that both teams would be willing to do is something like Virtanen + Baertschi + Van 2nd for Landeskog.

 

They would need a blue chip prospect in Virtanen coming back in Virtanen. Baertschi replaces Landeskog's offensive production and a 2nd added because Virtanen has slipped and so I imagine they would insist on a good pick coming back (Van 2nd will most likely be a high pick), in case Virtanen never pans out. Just as important of a factor is the expansion draft, so they would not be getting back an excess amount of players they would need to protect - only Baertschi who they would protect in place of Landeskog.

 

Vancouver does this because they get a young top 6 player with the intangibles JB is looking for. Grit, strength, decent 2way player with good offensive production who is still getting better. Captain material. They might be nervous about Virtanen panning out, so they could turn him into something special in Landeskog. Baertschi seems to always be going on hot and cold streaks offensively, and something you look for in top 6 production is consistency. I'm not sure he has that. 2nd round pick in a crappy draft year - while it's most likely a high 2nd rounder - would be something they might be willing to part with. Although JB did say he does not want to trade picks this year.

 

Would I do this? No. It's a little steep from Van's perspective. I don't want the team to give up on Virtanen so early, he might still turn into a new age powerforward (blazing speed and physicality) who's good for about 45 points a season (25G, 20A range). I'm ok with giving up Baertschi for someone like Landeskog. I trust JB with drafting so even though it's a crappy draft year, I still think he might be able to get something special with that 2nd rounder.

[D-Money]

10 hours ago, Roger Neilson's Towel said:

I disagree. Larsson got Taylor Hall. 

 

The circumstances and desperation behind that situation were unique. Saying that now every young top-4 D-man is now worth a Hall - because it happened once - is ridiculous.

 

Regardless, going after a Duchesne or Landeskog makes sense for a team that is close to contending, with a surplus of youth/picks/prospects to offer up (see: 2011/12 Los Angeles Kings). The Canucks are not even close to contending, and although they have a few very good bluechip studs, their actual prospect depth is one of the weakest in the league.

 

[Boudrias]

6 minutes ago, D-Money said:

 

The circumstances and desperation behind that situation were unique. Saying that now every young top-4 D-man is now worth a Hall - because it happened once - is ridiculous.

 

Regardless, going after a Duchesne or Landeskog makes sense for a team that is close to contending, with a surplus of youth/picks/prospects to offer up (see: 2011/12 Los Angeles Kings). The Canucks are not even close to contending, and although they have a few very good bluechip studs, their actual prospect depth is one of the weakest in the league.

 

This why any Canuck deal sending 2 or 3 players out for one back is not happening. As you said the pool is pretty much empty of quality players. Any suggestion that either Landeskog or Duchesne are available suggests, if true, that the Av's have a problem with their game or attitude. Don't see them play enough to have an opinion about their games. Landeskog has had a couple of concusions I think.

[Wilbur]

11 hours ago, Fanuck said:

True.   Worst thing to happen to CDC in quite some time imo - has given a lot of people false hope. 

 

But hey,  Christmas miracles and what not,  no?

Just too bad trades can't happen over Christmas, no chance of a miracle. 

[Putgolzin]

I wonder something everytime it's suggested we should make a lopsided deal because Larssen - Hall.

 

I wonder why it's assumed that we would be the huge winner in the deal, isn't it just as likely that we would be the huge loser?

[BertaNuck]

Ericksson guance 5th

[Standing_Tall#37]

4 hours ago, ice orca said:

That trade has worked out great for both teams Larsson has been a monster for the Coil, very underrated d-man who has been punishing guys in the corner. He is a bigger Tavev who hits like a truck, just watch the next couple of years who actually won that trade.

Exactly... I'm wondering what the hell do people see if they think Larsson is an awful D-man. Look at where Edmonton is in the standings. Huge improvement. 

 

 

Also if people are seeious about landeskog then they better start thinking Virtanen+2017first or Oj+2018firsf, 2017 2nd. 

 

After all would we be willing to trade Henrik for Bouma & Stajan. Cuz that's equivalent to 95% of proposals here.

[Provost]

9 hours ago, Aircool said:

 

Tanev isn't a top line defenseman..... I mean honestly.... I like Tanev a lot, but name me a shutdown defenseman in the NHL who is even a #2? If you don't score, you aren't a top line defenseman... There is a reason that teams have "shutdown pairs" and it's not their 1st pairing.... These are fundamentally opposite things.

 

That doesn't hold up.

Defende pairs are generally mixed so you have one defensively responsible one on each pairing and a guy that can provide some offense.

 

Tanev is a pretty ideal complementary top pairing guy who would fit with a young scoring sensation. 

not only would Tanev cover for mistakes, but he is also really good at making a first pass to get out of trouble and break out of the zone.

 

If you are talking about those two players from the Avalanche you have to consider names like: Tanev, Hutton, Virtanen, etc as options for pieces going the other way.

A top 3 protected 1st round pick also looks pretty attractive to other teams.  Even if we are one do the worst three teams in the league, it would very result in that pick being #4 or #5. 

 

Colorado is in a weird spot where they need to show progress and make the playoffs as a more important goal than trying to blow it all up and try to contend years down the road.  I see them getting a mix of veteran roster players and young NHL ready prospects/players.