Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Canucks - Stars (Proposal)


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, NUCKER67 said:

No way Tanev fetches us the 3rd overall plus one of their goalies.

 

There are 29 other teams to wheel and deal with, probably won't be with the Canucks. If anything, Nill would probably want Tanev and our 5th for their 3rd. The price would be outrageous.

that would be really lopsided just to move up 2 spots. Comparing Taylor Hall for Larrson deal Tanev for 3rd is close but would need something extra to sweeten the deal. Dallas is looking to unload cap space by shedding one of there goalies.

 

Vancouver trades

Tanev + Columbus 2nd

 

Dallas trades
3rd Overall + Lehtonan/Niemi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Where'd Luongo? said:

I think it's possible, Tanev might just be able to fetch that pick. If they want more, I would say switch it to Edler and add a late pick. That is what I'd be willing to give up, if they don't take it then don't do it.

Could the Tavev for 3rd overall grow (somehow) to include the rights to Nukushkin?  What would we have to add?  Would the rights to Tryamkin work?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, underrated said:

Honka is a legit top prospect.  He's honestly worth close to the #3 overall pick.  I don't think they'd part with both of their top future players for a package like Tanev and Sutter.  To be honest, I think Tanev + Sutter isn't too far off from the value for the 3rd overall pick by itself.

I see. Didn't realize Honka is that highly touted. So basically Honka is their Juolevi.

 

Thanks for the answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, khay said:

I see. Didn't realize Honka is that highly touted. So basically Honka is their Juolevi.

 

Thanks for the answer.

Honka would be near a ppg in the AHL if he played there again this season. He is GOOD. I saw him when he played on the Broncos and he absolutely dominated everyone. Heatherington would be a good one to include though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, billabong said:

1. Hischier

2. Patrick 

3. Heiskanen (van)

4. Valardi

5. Glass (van) 

 

Drool...

 

you take the D at 3 cause Why would you risk losing him at 4 to col. then you leave col to decide between valardi, glass or mittelstadt. 

that would be a fun draft party day. It makes sense for Dallas, they have their window open and finally have a real goalie, getting Tanev back there too? It has to put them in the running. If we take back Niemi then they also have the cap space to go after guys like Hanzal or Oshie and really load up.

 

How about:

 

Tanev + SJS4th = Niemi + 3oa ?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Heretic said:

I don't agree with "Hockey Feed" that often, but when I do, it's because I feel the same:

 

"It’s clear that Nolan Patrick and Nico Hischier will be selected with the first two picks but it’s quite unclear and wide open after those two amazing players."

 

So why bother try and get 3rd when we have 5th?

Because then you can draft a top level centre AND a top level defenceman, going a long ways to filling two pressing needs.

 

Unless you are looking for a less obvious answer of course....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a "wait and see" trade...meaning we wait and see what (well, who) LV grabs from us. If they grab a forward (Boucher, Gaunce, Chaput, etc) then a Tanev trade to Dallas makes a lot of sense.

Would he be worth the #3 on his own? I doubt it. My suggestion...

Tanev + Gartieg + CLB 2nd. They get the shut down D, they get a little sweetener, and they get a future (potential) goalie, someone they can develop. OR

Tanev + Pedan (rights to negotiate). Pedan becomes rather expendable with the D we would be keeping around; I'd be willing to again include the CLB 2nd.

 

#3 Heiskanen

#5 Glass or Vilardi, whichever is available.

 

Not quite like adding the Sedins back in 1999, but a (potentially) really solid draft that would satisfy a couple of needs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look what superior and/or improved D has done for Ott, Nash, Ana & Edm. Also how it's absence seems to be holding back the Pens, as series go deeper.

 

There appears to be heightening interest in this resource. If Dall makes such a bold move, other teams may also get hungrier.

 

TBay, TO, Buff & Flo come to mind. There are some other top-10 picks likely available. Wish they'd get BOTH Tanev & Edler on the market.

 

Retain Sbisa. Sign Alzner. Test out Subban, Pedan & McEneny for a serious number of NHL games(perhaps 20~40 each). Hold back OJ one more yr..unless he amazes in camp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Father Ryan said:

This is a "wait and see" trade...meaning we wait and see what (well, who) LV grabs from us. If they grab a forward (Boucher, Gaunce, Chaput, etc) then a Tanev trade to Dallas makes a lot of sense.

Would he be worth the #3 on his own? I doubt it. My suggestion...

Tanev + Gartieg + CLB 2nd. They get the shut down D, they get a little sweetener, and they get a future (potential) goalie, someone they can develop. OR

Tanev + Pedan (rights to negotiate). Pedan becomes rather expendable with the D we would be keeping around; I'd be willing to again include the CLB 2nd.

 

#3 Heiskanen

#5 Glass or Vilardi, whichever is available.

 

Not quite like adding the Sedins back in 1999, but a (potentially) really solid draft that would satisfy a couple of needs.

yah Thursday June 22nd is going to be more interesting than most trade deadline days (expansion June 21st, draft June 23rd)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Father Ryan said:

This is a "wait and see" trade...meaning we wait and see what (well, who) LV grabs from us. If they grab a forward (Boucher, Gaunce, Chaput, etc) then a Tanev trade to Dallas makes a lot of sense.

Would he be worth the #3 on his own? I doubt it. My suggestion...

Tanev + Gartieg + CLB 2nd. They get the shut down D, they get a little sweetener, and they get a future (potential) goalie, someone they can develop. OR

Tanev + Pedan (rights to negotiate). Pedan becomes rather expendable with the D we would be keeping around; I'd be willing to again include the CLB 2nd.

 

#3 Heiskanen

#5 Glass or Vilardi, whichever is available.

 

Not quite like adding the Sedins back in 1999, but a (potentially) really solid draft that would satisfy a couple of needs.

If Tanev is part of the deal, we shouldn't 'wait and see'.  Moving Tanev means we can protect another player. 

 

Dallas needs defensive help, and they also need to move one of their goalies.  That's about all they NEED at the moment.  They could always use more depth up front too.

 

Here's my thoughts:

 

Dallas receives:  Tanev, Gaunce, and one of our 2nd round picks (ideally the CLB pick)

VAN receives:  3rd OA, Niemi or Lehtonen (whichever goalie they want to dump)

 

Dallas gets some serious help on the back end with Tanev, some depth up front in an energy guy with upside in Gaunce, a 2nd round pick, and rids one of their goalie contracts that they NEED to move.

Vancouver gets that coveted 3rd OA, takes on one of their goalies (which unfortunately means Miller won't be back), but gains an extra spot to protect a defenceman for the expansion draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, underrated said:

Dallas is a lot more loaded up front then on D, I think they'd be looking for a defenseman.  However I think they could do better than Tanev personally.  We would have to put a more solid package together of Tanev, a 2nd round pick and Granlund for #3 and a goalie (cap dump) to get the third overall pick in my opinion.  I know it seems like an overpayment, but third overall picks never come cheap.

I'd rather trade Baertschi then Granlund, but I'd do that deal for sure if it means getting Liljegren. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, HKSR said:

If Tanev is part of the deal, we shouldn't 'wait and see'.  Moving Tanev means we can protect another player. 

 

Dallas needs defensive help, and they also need to move one of their goalies.  That's about all they NEED at the moment.  They could always use more depth up front too.

 

Here's my thoughts:

 

Dallas receives:  Tanev, Gaunce, and one of our 2nd round picks (ideally the CLB pick)

VAN receives:  3rd OA, Niemi or Lehtonen (whichever goalie they want to dump)

 

Dallas gets some serious help on the back end with Tanev, some depth up front in an energy guy with upside in Gaunce, a 2nd round pick, and rids one of their goalie contracts that they NEED to move.

Vancouver gets that coveted 3rd OA, takes on one of their goalies (which unfortunately means Miller won't be back), but gains an extra spot to protect a defenceman for the expansion draft.

I see your point, but...

Say that proposal goes through. Ok, we can protect Sbisa. Then we watch LV take Chaput. Um...no more 4th line center. Everyone in system is either top 9 (Granlund, Sutter, Dahlen, et al) or clearly not ready/capable (Zalewski, Cassels). Now we have to go after two more 4th line centers (starter + depth).

Also, I would imagine Dallas may likely be waiting to see what happens with whomever they lose. Say they lose a decent top 9 player. I'd rather trade Boucher than either one of Chaput/Gaunce, we could absorb that depth loss. Also, Boucher would bring more in this scenario, with Dallas suddenly being a touch needy for forwards.

I agree with the goalie dump, would be cheaper than resigning Miller. Plus, virtually guarantee a bottom 5 finish next year; neither one of those two are as capable as Miller, and Markstrom hasn't proven himself yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Father Ryan said:

I see your point, but...

Say that proposal goes through. Ok, we can protect Sbisa. Then we watch LV take Chaput. Um...no more 4th line center. Everyone in system is either top 9 (Granlund, Sutter, Dahlen, et al) or clearly not ready/capable (Zalewski, Cassels). Now we have to go after two more 4th line centers (starter + depth).

Also, I would imagine Dallas may likely be waiting to see what happens with whomever they lose. Say they lose a decent top 9 player. I'd rather trade Boucher than either one of Chaput/Gaunce, we could absorb that depth loss. Also, Boucher would bring more in this scenario, with Dallas suddenly being a touch needy for forwards.

I agree with the goalie dump, would be cheaper than resigning Miller. Plus, virtually guarantee a bottom 5 finish next year; neither one of those two are as capable as Miller, and Markstrom hasn't proven himself yet.

4th line center? Isn't that what Drew Shore is being re-signed for?? I sure hope it's not for a top-9 role...or perhaps Brendan Gaunce if we don't lose him to Vegas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well for some reason Sekeres was even suggesting that Eriksson could be of value to Dallas... a package of Eriksson that doesn't include a top pick or prospect would be ideal!

 

Alternatively if Eriksson can have a good year this year, his value would go up from the probably all-time-low that it is right now, and we could fetch a good pick for him at trade deadline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Father Ryan said:

I see your point, but...

Say that proposal goes through. Ok, we can protect Sbisa. Then we watch LV take Chaput. Um...no more 4th line center. Everyone in system is either top 9 (Granlund, Sutter, Dahlen, et al) or clearly not ready/capable (Zalewski, Cassels). Now we have to go after two more 4th line centers (starter + depth).

Also, I would imagine Dallas may likely be waiting to see what happens with whomever they lose. Say they lose a decent top 9 player. I'd rather trade Boucher than either one of Chaput/Gaunce, we could absorb that depth loss. Also, Boucher would bring more in this scenario, with Dallas suddenly being a touch needy for forwards.

I agree with the goalie dump, would be cheaper than resigning Miller. Plus, virtually guarantee a bottom 5 finish next year; neither one of those two are as capable as Miller, and Markstrom hasn't proven himself yet.

If we move Tanev because there is a good deal before expansion we clearly do it to protect Sbisa.

 

A #4-5 NHL caliber D is worth far more than a 4th line player like Gaunce or Chaput.  They are eminently replaceable off the waiver wire or UFA leftovers.  NHL level D are rare, and will be in even more in demand with LV taking a bunch of them from other teams.

 

If you can trade Tanev for the 3OA  (plus whatever other pieces go either way), then you can actually even consider trading Hutton after expansion for a good return as almost every team in the league will be looking for a top 4 guy.

 

With those two trades we still have a reasonable mix of veterans and good prospects:

 

Edler-Stecher

Juolevi-Gudbranson

Sbisa-Heiskanen?

Pedan-Biega

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Alflives said:

Could the Tavev for 3rd overall grow (somehow) to include the rights to Nukushkin?  What would we have to add?  Would the rights to Tryamkin work?

I was thinking of this exact same scenario. All these people on here saying Tanev isn't enough, Bob McKenzie just went on a TSN radio and said he's not sure if Dallas will even be able to get a top 6 forward or top 4 d man for the 3rd overall pick. 

If that's the case, then offer Tanev for the 3rd overall and Nichuskins rights and then in 3years, bring back both Nichuskin and Tryamkin when our rebuilds complete. That would be a home run.

Surely having Goldobin, Nichuskin, and Tryamkin all on the team together would make them all feel a lot more comfortable away from home. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...