canucklehead80 Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 2 hours ago, Pears said: Seabrook and DeBrincat or Bondra? DeBrincat please. Only watched Bondra play once this past season, but was not very impressed. If he didn't have the puck, I didn't even realize he was on the ice. Looked like a bottom 6 future if he were to make the bigs. At least with DeBrincat, he may be small but he's got some skills which we really need in our forward group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agoork Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 It sounds like a horrid trade idea! Panarin + Seabrook for Tanev + would be WAAAAAAY more interesting from a Canucks stand point! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris12345 Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 11 hours ago, Nuxfanabroad said: WHY the Hell would we help out hated rivals?! They wanna pay their 2 stars 20 mill, that's their problem. This is freeken'asinine! Can you take me for a rip in the time machine? It's 2017 our rivals are Colorado and the Yotes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklehead80 Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 3 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said: Rebuilding teams have cap space if they have a true rebuilding plan (e.g. several years) and will take on some bad contracts in exchange for something....in this case it wouldn't be Seabrook alone but would need to include something like either pick(s) or prospect(s) that Canucks feel can contribute to their rebuilt team in a few years. That is the only way "now" makes sense. If this were just to get the player, I would 100% agree with you as the "now" makes absolutely zero sense. If Seabrook were coming our way (which I would have my doubts), then Tanev is on the way out. Length of term is brutal, but when you look at the fact Edler's contract is up in 2 seasons, then in the long run, this acquisition shouldn't really hold up any prospects coming up, especially if Sbisa is taken by LV. DeBrincat and a 1st is where I'd start the conversation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KKnight Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 For me the deal would have to look like at minimum. Van: Seabrook (1 million retained) Schmaltz & their second. Chi: Tanev & lower tier prospect if nothing retained. The first and second would have to be included. But this isnt going to happen. If Tanev gets dealt its to Dallas or Buffalo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 23 minutes ago, Warhippy said: Now I actually love Seabs. Saw him play while he was younger. Always enjoyed him as a Hawk because he was simply quiet, did his job and did it well. Now, while I'd actually love him on the Canucks. one HAS to wonder, WTF does Chicago have to give this team that this team can use now or in the future to take that contract off his hands? Schmaltz? Pokka? DeBrincat? Motte? Forsling (LOL) To eat THAT contract alone would be worth a first with nothing going across short of a 5th round pick or later (sorry I know, but really that's a massive long term contract) Canucks would anchor themselves with that and the Eriksson contract for the next 5 years or so. So what do we stand to gain in any fashion that helps this team? Seabrook, Debrincat and their 1st. That's what I'd want for like SJS 4th. Then move Tanev for a high first or mid first and prospect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conscience Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 When he retires the cap comes off, no penalty? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanisleryan Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 Why do we have to be linked or in on every local guy....bringing Seabrook here accomplishes nothing but put us in cap trouble down the road....no more NMC either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairy Kneel Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 12 hours ago, khay said: 7 years remaining? No way. I would rather offer big 5 year money to Tryamkin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickels Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 Tanev should not be included in any potential acquisition of Seabrook (which I think is insane BTW) Tanev and Edler are only chances to acquire any sort of 1st round picks (which is the one and only way you build a championship team!!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green Building Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 Yuck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
10pavelbure96 Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 If we could off load Tanev and Edler in seperate deals for the cap relief and picks/prospects and Chicago retained salary and also included picks/prospects for the cap dump then I would be ok with it. Seabrook is miles better than any dman we have and would be a great mentor at this stage in his career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCNate Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 12 hours ago, 70seven said: just for the sake of discussion... so they can trade Tanev for futures, and not throw their kid Dmen to the wolves. Theyll have a veteran leader to absorb the heavy minutes still. I dont understand why people think since its a rebuild, they should just play their developing kids above their heads minutes. Its more likely to ruin their development than help it. FWIW Id have no interest in adding seabrook either. This, for sure. Trade Tanev for a solid asset or 2, pick up seabrook and another asset with little return going the other way. Seabrook would help fill the gap that Tanev leaves, so that we are not a complete tire fire on D for the next few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklehead80 Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 1 hour ago, aliboy said: JJ on Hockeybuzz is reporting the deal would be Seabrook and Forsling for Tanev and a pick. The only response Bowman would get from Benning......"CLICK" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quantum Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 If there is any truth in this rumor, it means the Canucks are gonna have a big offseason. 1) This rumor likely means the Canucks are planning on dealing Tanev. 2) The Canucks believe they're losing Sbisa in the expansion draft. 3) Chicago is in a bigger bind than we all thought. 4) If Ryan Miller is being brought back, it's for a steep discount. 2 mill max, most likely. 5) I guess Vancouver is on Seabrook's can trade to list which is nice especially given the state of the team, right now. The pros of a trade like this is that it will likely yield a field day for the Canucks. If they agree to this cap dump they're likely going to be reeling in a good pick and a higher end prospect. The contract, even though it's long, isn't that bad. With Sbisa and Tanev presumably off the books, that's approx 7-9 mill freed up to take the contract. Miller's deal expiring also gives us breathing room too. That and with the Sedins set to have expiring contracts next year that opens up (in theory) another 14 mill giving us plenty of wiggle room. (Even if the Sedins re-sign, they'll only make a quarter of their current salaries at best)... Dorsett and Sutter's deals also end soon too. We do have RFAs to worry about but there is room to take the contract of Seabrook on in both the short and long term. That said, Seabrook's age worries me as does the wear and tear he's endured playing so much over the last few years. I doubt he makes it through his whole contract without being severely injured at some point. I do think Toronto makes more sense in a deal like this but if Benning can fleece the Blackhawks in a Seabrook trade... I wouldn't be too sad about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SedinMadness Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 we are rebuilding..however we need effective players as well. can't be finishing last or close too. we have too much bad luck in the lotto draft. perhaps benning and linden knows this and are trying to ice a more competitive team while building up a couple players at a time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crabcakes Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 13 hours ago, The Weasel said: why would we take on old man seabrook when we're rebuilding? Because of the way Benning likes to structure his team while rebuilding. Like it or not, to date, Benning has had a veteran top line, a veteran top pair and a veteran goalie. The reamining group can be developing while vets take the tough match ups and provide mentorship. So, if Tanev gets shipped out, Benning needs a competent veteran to take his place on the top pair. As for Seabrook, that's a worse albatross than Eriksson's. He's 32 with 7 years remaining @ 6.875. Eriksson has the same birth year but only 5 @ 6.0 remaining I'll believe the Tanev rumours if he ever gets moved. The reason why Tanev is so attractive to other teams is the same reason why they should keep him. top pair capability good defensively can move the puck veteran, entering his prime at age 27 good contract with the right term (3 more years at 4.45) Additionally, Seabrook's actual salary for this year and next is 9 mil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Outsiders Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 It would have to be a sweet deal for us because after 34/35/36 it will be tough contract to take. Also we have to think if we are going to competitive again during the final years of his contract. If we believe we will be the contract will be deadly. I just don't see the Seabrook, Schmaltz, 2018 1st for Sbisa, Boucher, 4th type of deal working out Only thing I can think of that would work is. Eriksson for Seabrook straight up They let Eriksson but up 50-60 points for a year or two and then they trade him. It'll be much much easier to trade him once he produces again which he will on CHI high flying offence and only has 3-4 years left on his contract. They have a better shot at trading Eriksson and getting value than Seabrook IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairy Kneel Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 Seabrook and a prospect for Edler? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crabcakes Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 12 hours ago, 70seven said: just for the sake of discussion... so they can trade Tanev for futures, and not throw their kid Dmen to the wolves. Theyll have a veteran leader to absorb the heavy minutes still. I dont understand why people think since its a rebuild, they should just play their developing kids above their heads minutes. Its more likely to ruin their development than help it. FWIW Id have no interest in adding seabrook either. FWIW this is the way Benning thinks. Who knows what happens in the next month. Maybe a desperate team offers way too much for Tanev. Bringing in Seabrook could be a contingency plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.