Gaudette Celly Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 For those advocating not protecting Edler, Gudbranson, or Sutter, have you not considered that they would bring back more in trade than the value of those you would protect (Sbisa, Gaunce)? For example, you could trade Edler for a Sbisa-like player PLUS a high pick. Then even if that traded-for player is taken you still have the other asset. Giving guys like that away for nothing is the poorest form of #assetmanagment there is. Now if it was a Dustin Brown and that horrible contract; sure, expose him with extreme prejudice and spotlights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 4 minutes ago, Horvats_Big_Head said: Your argument would make logical sense if your premise was correct. We clearly don't have the same opinion as Sbisa. There is no way he is a 3-4 D on a good team. Maybe our team but not a good one. He is good for at least one boneheaded play a game, ala Edler. Yes, he is physical but that is all he brings to the table. Hardly any offense, and is just not good with the puck in general. Yes I am saying let Sbisa walk so we can keep Gaunce. Essentially, I am saying trade Sbisa for the right to keep Gaunce. You want to trade Sbisa while knowing that Gaunce is likely the odd man out. So you are saying trade Sbisa for pennies (Probably a 4th rounder) and let risk letting Gaunce go. To summarize: My idea: Give Sbisa up for Gaunce retention. Your idea: Get a draft pick for Luca and still not protect Gaunce, losing him. Remind me who EA17 is laughing at? 3-6 D man. Reading comprehension sir typewriter genius Maybe you should watch him play instead of commenting. He's doing nothing but improving on a bad team. Trading Sbisa means we expose someone else instead, means we GET AN ASSET IN RETURN and still possibly keep Gaunce or flip said return to ensure we keep him. Now, keeping in mind that Gaunce will most certainly be exposed but there is NO guarantee he even gets selected. BUT!. Both Sbisa and Gaunce will possibly be exposed. You can lose one and get 0 return. Or you can lose one and ensure you get a return while risking the other If you like just giving away things that's cool. But to say just let him walk is sheer idiocy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsurrey Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 5 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said: For those advocating not protecting Edler, Gudbranson, or Sutter, have you not considered that they would bring back more in trade than the value of those you would protect (Sbisa, Gaunce)? For example, you could trade Edler for a Sbisa-like player PLUS a high pick. Then even if that traded-for player is taken you still have the other asset. Giving guys like that away for nothing is the poorest form of #assetmanagment there is. Now if it was a Dustin Brown and that horrible contract; sure, expose him with extreme prejudice and spotlights. Edler has a no trade so not super easy to move him. I agree though. Best case scenario would be be move one of Edler, Guddy or Sbisa. Preferably Edler. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsurrey Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Looks like the NHL may/will not make teams protected player lists public for the expansion draft.Pierre LeBrunVerified account @Real_ESPNLeBrunThe NHL also discussed with GMs whether or not they would reveal each team's protected list ahead of expansion draft. GMs said No. (con't)Pierre LeBrunVerified account @Real_ESPNLeBrun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Standing_Tall#37 Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 24 minutes ago, kingofsurrey said: Looks like the NHL may/will not make teams protected player lists public for the expansion draft.Pierre LeBrunVerified account @Real_ESPNLeBrunThe NHL also discussed with GMs whether or not they would reveal each team's protected list ahead of expansion draft. GMs said No. (con't)Pierre LeBrunVerified account @Real_ESPNLeBrun Good. Players should not even know unless they are selected. And the ones reamaing will have absolutely no trade value if it is revealed. I mean if you were a rival gm and you knew a week earlier that the Canucks were willing to give up ___________ for nothing but Vegas passed... I mean would you not go to Benning and say "hey, I'll give you a 7th for him... after all last week you were willing to risk losing him for nothing" there'd be 150 players like this throughout the league and how akward would it be to know that your gm didn't think you were valuable enough to protect? 4th liners and 3rd pairing would expect it, but there will be some top 6 guys and top 4D and the odd starter exposed... they'd have hurt feelings most likely. Nhl would do the whole league and 30 teams a favour by not exposing draft lists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xereau Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Expose Edler, save Gaunce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 1 hour ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said: On the contrary, I could see them picking the exposed Sedin just to spite us, with the added benefit of currying the league's favour for doing so (not that they'd need it, since they're the league's New Shiny Thing™). there's zero chance of that happening.......GM's aren't in the business of spite. If they do, oh well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the harry Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 19 minutes ago, Standing_Tall#37 said: Good. Players should not even know unless they are selected. And the ones reamaing will have absolutely no trade value if it is revealed. I mean if you were a rival gm and you knew a week earlier that the Canucks were willing to give up ___________ for nothing but Vegas passed... I mean would you not go to Benning and say "hey, I'll give you a 7th for him... after all last week you were willing to risk losing him for nothing" there'd be 150 players like this throughout the league and how akward would it be to know that your gm didn't think you were valuable enough to protect? 4th liners and 3rd pairing would expect it, but there will be some top 6 guys and top 4D and the odd starter exposed... they'd have hurt feelings most likely. Nhl would do the whole league and 30 teams a favour by not exposing draft lists. This looks right. But then there will be a lot, I mean A LOT of speculation. Is this really better? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsurrey Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 2 minutes ago, the harry said: This looks right. But then there will be a lot, I mean A LOT of speculation. Is this really better? What about corruption / fairness / tampering... ? ? Will certain clubs / teams with insider NHL corporate connections get insider info to the protected player listings.... That would be pretty unfair if was to happen.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erkayloomeh Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 I must be greedy. I don't want to lose anyone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xereau Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Gaunce has trade value too, so don't be surprised to see the Canucks protect the organization by trading for picks. A low 1st (where he was taken), to a contender seems like a reasonable return to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erkayloomeh Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 5 minutes ago, xereau said: Gaunce has trade value too, so don't be surprised to see the Canucks protect the organization by trading for picks. A low 1st (where he was taken), to a contender seems like a reasonable return to me. That would be great Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeneedLumme Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 2 hours ago, Hutton Wink said: For those advocating not protecting Edler, Gudbranson, or Sutter, have you not considered that they would bring back more in trade than the value of those you would protect (Sbisa, Gaunce)? For example, you could trade Edler for a Sbisa-like player PLUS a high pick. Then even if that traded-for player is taken you still have the other asset. Giving guys like that away for nothing is the poorest form of #assetmanagment there is. Now if it was a Dustin Brown and that horrible contract; sure, expose him with extreme prejudice and spotlights. That's right of course. But most of the posters who suggest not protecting those players dislike them and feel that they have no value because they are Canucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Let's protect ALL youngins from disturbing Sin city, in a disturbing country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Aquamen Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Gaunce should absolutely not get protected, my God are we kidding? The guy isn't very good and never will be. This actually made me mad, he will never even hit a 10 goal season. The experiment is over. #moveon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frail Granny Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 What do people see Gaunce's ceiling as? I see a poor mans Brandon Sutter the more I think about it. I like what Gaunce can bring at his price, but we'll have equivalent prospects in the pipeline to replace him (Gaudette as a Center, and Lockwood as a depth Winger). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsurrey Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 2 minutes ago, The Aquamen said: Gaunce should absolutely not get protected, my God are we kidding? The guy isn't very good and never will be. This actually made me mad, he will never even hit a 10 goal season. The experiment is over. #moveon Gaunce is a former first round pick and 22 yrs of age. Are you kidding ? Gaunce has produced at every level of hockey on his way to the NHL. He is a great skater. Very sound defensively. He is not fully NHL developed . He is exactly the kind of player you need to hold on to for a bit to see what he will do at the NHL level. I say Gaunce is a keeper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsurrey Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 1 minute ago, Frail Granny said: What do people see Gaunce's ceiling as? I see a poor mans Brandon Sutter the more I think about it. I like what Gaunce can bring at his price, but we'll have equivalent prospects in the pipeline to replace him (Gaudette as a Center, and Lockwood as a depth Winger). I see Gaunce having a very similar ceiling to Sutter. In fact Gaunce outscored Sutter in Jr hockey stats. Yes, Sutter moved to the NHL a bit quicker... But Gaunce is a very highly ranked prospect and we need to see what he can do. Look for Gaunce to have a great season next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockhart Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 I'd trade Baer just so we can protect Gaunce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 9 minutes ago, Lockhart said: I'd trade Baer just so we can protect Gaunce. Baer & Tanev might net a sexy return?. Perhaps Rhino in Buffalo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.