• 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.
CRAZY_4_NAZZY

[Speculation/Rumor] Canucks on the twins future and Gudbranson

Recommended Posts

Thank you so much for the point form! An art that is definitely lost these days.  On topic, at least we have some insight as to what is going down with EG. I am fine with keeping him as we have nothing really ready to replace him with. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am all for keeping Gudbranson. Perfect 4-6 guy on a good team IMO. Just sucks that because he is tall, he will end up with a non-team friendly contract. 

 

Not really sure the twins should have to give the Canucks notice for when they will retire. Regardless of the twins future, Canucks should be selling this deadline. Not making the playoffs.

Edited by Art Vandelay
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Trade deadline would be better to decide so JB can adjust his strategy.

th (5).jpg

  • Like 1
  • Hydration 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m all for keeping GUd At the right price but he makes salo look like an iron man.i like what he brings when heathy its too bad that’s not very often.

Don’t really get the strategy of waiting till the 11th hour, talks could have started Jan 1st.

The pressure is now all on the Canucks, Gud will play and get paid either way but vancouver can’t afford to lose him for nothing and van  doesn’t have a lot of time to negotiate anymore or find the best deal.

I feel like Gud should have been  signed or put up for auction by this point. 

Benning doesn’t like the uncertainty with his contract  and how it has effected his family yet he hasn’t had any formal talks with Gud.

Deal with the sedins in the summer or after the TDL  besides It shouldn’t matter  to the Canucks what   their plans are.a low priority, Love em but that’s just the reality.

 

 

 

 

Edited by combover
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, The 5th Line said:

Pretty scared to think what JB might be willing to pay EG

6 x 6?  :bigblush:

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, The 5th Line said:

Pretty scared to think what JB might be willing to pay EG

TO be honest he has be so injured I dont think Guddy has much leverage to ask for some sort of absurd contract. The 1 dimensional shutdown physical D are still relevant in the NHL but they arent going to cash in like Bogosian did imo. Guddy @ 4yr 16m is more than fair. He can be on the 2nd pair until a different RHD drops him out of that role. And with our depth I dont see that happening anytime soon.

 

Just need Big E to stay healthy for us!

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gudbranson should be on a playoff team. And like most people are saying; he will be too expensive considering what he brings to the table. Sure crushing hits and swagger personality is awesome. But only useful if in the playoffs. Trade him while he has some decent value. Let's call Tryamkin back to replace him. Besides, I think Biega is more effective overall despite his size. And I'm concerned with Gudbranson's durability due to his style of play... Two seasons with us so far: 30 games played last season, 32 games played so far this season. If we can get a 1st+, take it. JB's drafting ability is on point.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Silky mitts said:

Anything over 4 would be a brutal mistake 

Anything over 3.5 is bad imo but it's the term that scares me the most.  Hoping for at most 3.5 x 3 and even 3 years seems to long, this guys legs could fall off any day now and he's never healthy.  3.75 x 4 seems plausible

Edited by The 5th Line

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, CRAZY_4_NAZZY said:
 

 

 

 

 


The problem remains that he's making $3.5M and will want a raise.

How much is the issue.
If it's $5M+ Benning should immediately walk and flip him for something else we need.

There are a lot of good defencemen (better, more mobile, tougher, and with more scoring touch than Guddy) in the $4-5M  range on this list.... 

http://www.spotrac.com/nhl/rankings/cap-hit/defenseman/

I mean if the guy could put up 15 or 20 points a season I could see it. But he's only put up 52 points in SEVEN YEARS. (7 points per year)

Not 100% against him staying but if Dorsett hadn't been forced to retire I think Guddys gone at the deadline. His only leverage the way I see it, is that he brings some "toughness" to a team that's now softer than an old man's peekaboo

 

Share this post


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

6 x 6?  :bigblush:


4953790.jpg?size=640x420

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, MikeyBoy44 said:

Thank you so much for the point form! An art that is definitely lost these days.  

 

  • you're one of those
  • crazy
  • list people
  • aren't you
  • lol


     
  • Like 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.