• Announcements

    • StealthNuck

      Forum-specific Rules   07/11/2017

      These are board specific rules for the Trades and Rumors forum designed to provide organization and a better experience for everyone. Please review these rules before posting new threads. 
        THREAD ETIQUETTE   1. Please search for an existing thread before posting. This forum can be very fast moving, so it's understandable if redundant threads are inadvertently posted. In such a case, please use the report feature to request removal of redundant threads.    2. Provide a clearly identifiable topic title so that users can readily understand the content. The title should include any and all teams involved, as well as player names or other personnel involved as appropriate.   3. All trades, signings, rumors and other news MUST include a linkable source. Simply posting the name of the source is not enough. Effort should also be made to copy and paste the full article, or at the very least the relevant portion of text from the source to the first post of the thread. Moderators may remove low-quality threads in favour of high-quality threads. 

      Affixed to the front of your title should be a label that identifies the type of transaction that is taking place. For all trades use [TRADE]. For all signings use [SIGNING]. For all waiver-wire transactions use [WAIVERS]. For all rumours use [RUMOUR].
      For articles or news items that don't fit into the above categories, affix an appropriate label of your choice such as [NEWS], [ARTICLE] or [MISC].   4. When the status of a thread changes a new thread can be created. The new thread should reflect the change and help focus the discussion on current events. e.g. Someone may create a new thread when a rumor becomes a trades. The old thread will be locked by the moderating team.    5. Do not misrepresent the contents of your thread or post false trades or rumors. Trolling will result in a permanent suspension. 

      SOURCES   The following source types are considered INVALID. Any links to posts or threads on other message boards Any links to personal blogs Any news heard on the radio that does not have a link to an audio vault or podcast Any news seen on television that does not have a link to online video Any news spread by word of mouth
      Additionally, certain sources may be be blacklisted due to poor credentials, clear traffic-mongering etc. Blacklisted sources will be posted here. 
      Thank you for your co-operation and please PM the Administrator or Moderators if you have any questions, concerns or suggestions regarding this forum.
70seven

(Rumour) Canucks and Seabrook

Recommended Posts

Lots of smoke around the Hawks tonight. Texts w several sources have me in "hold on to your butt" mode. Good chance core guy is moved soon.

 

 

 

 

 

John Jaeckel @jaeckel

 Follow
More

Hearing Seabrook to one of 2 Canadian teams possible, LOTS of rumors out there, Kruger to LV for a pick also close

 

 

 

John Jaeckel @jaeckel

 Follow
More

Two Canadian teams I heard re: 7 are VAN and TOR, for the record

 

 

Repeating, all I've heard re: Seabrook are discussions. Kruger deal much more likely, FWIW

 

 

 

 

 

 

Random stupid rumor, (and Im bored so lets talk about it lol)but Ive said all along that if the Canucks move Tanev, thered likely have to be some kind of top pairing replacement. Hes 32, and hes got a massive 6.875M cap hit for another 7 years.  Full NTC, but he's from Richmond, and may consider playing at home even within a rebuild.

 

This would be a massive cap dump for the Hawks.  Could Van take the bad contract, effectively replace Tanev, and move him for a youthful return??  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by 70seven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Better be as a cap dump incentive with us getting a solid piece for taking on that insane contract. 

Edited by RRypien37
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The Weasel said:

why would we take on old man seabrook when we're rebuilding?

If it includes a prospect then maybe JB will bite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL,  this off season fabrication is getting ridiculous,  I mean even worse than Tanev for two firsts and a first born son ridiculous. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Take Seabrook and a top prospect or 1st (for taking on that contract), then it frees up moving Tanev

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could see Seabrook possibly waiving his NTC to come home. He's won a few cups and international championships, and is on the tail end of his career. Not saying he doesn't want to win anymore, but maybe he really wants to raise his children (I'm guessing he has some) at home where his friends and family are. 

 

On the Canuck side it would make sense as well, as that would free up our dependence on Tanev and allow us to trade him for a solid piece that would go towards our rebuild. 

 

The thing is, with our team not set to win anytime soon, and with Seabrook's brutal contract, I personally wouldn't give up much for him. Maybe a second, but you would think that Chicago would probably find that insulting for a player of his calibre, because let's not forget just how good of a player he is (even though I really don't like him lol)

Edited by Canuck Drogo
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, The Weasel said:

why would we take on old man seabrook when we're rebuilding?

I have no problem with it as long as the return for Tanev is good and Benning doesn't overpay for Seabrook. The Canucks would be doing the Hawks a huge favour acquiring Seabrook and he could log big minutes for at least another 3 years.

Edited by Pickly
.
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Be interesting if this had a cap dump angle and a moving Tanev angle. Otherwise, not really interested.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It better be one hell of a return if his contract has 7 years remaining.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have enough faith in Benning to think Seabrook won't be coming to Vancouver if he does get moved.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, khay said:

7 years remaining? No way.

Ya,  cap dump that goes into the range where we might actually need cap space is dumb.

 

A 1-3 year bad contract is do-able.

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, RRypien37 said:

Better be as a cap dump incentive with us getting a solid piece for taking on that insane contract. 

If that is the case then guaranteed Seabrook won't be coming to Van. The was Toronto needs a bonafide defenceman, the Hawks would actually get something for him in Toronto.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There'd better be MINIMUM 1.5 mill annually being carried by them dirtbags, AND a brilliant prospect included.

 

No..don't touch this!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.