• Announcements

    • StealthNuck

      All Threads Must Contain Tags!   07/25/2017

      ALL THREADS MUST CONTAIN TAGS   All threads in this forum must contain tags prefixed to topic titles. The purpose of the tags is to eliminate confusion in recent threads lists, and to create an organized and consistent environment. Moderators may immediately lock and thread that does not contain tags.    Tags must be placed at the start of your thread title, following this exact formatting:    [Tag] Thread Title   Here are some of the most used popular tags:    [Proposal]
      A trade, or trades, for next season, or even the off-season.
      [Off-Season]
      FA signings, off-season trades for RFA's, UFA's rights etc...
      [Value Of]
      (A question regarding a players worth, whether from another team, or the Canucks)
      [Speculation] Posting a rumor (with a source of course), but providing why it could be possible for the Canucks to land that player.   [Discussion]
      Thoughts on team trading strategy and composition.   Please feel free to create your own tag if none of these suit your thread.   
NaveJoseph

[Discussion] What Would it Take to Trade Up to the #3 Pick?

Recommended Posts

This draft may be the first in years where there's actually movement in the top 10, and a team that's seems likely to trade down is Montreal. They need a center most of all, and there isn't a pure center projected to go in the top 5, unless they look at Tkachuk or Wahlstrom as potential centers. However, Kotkaniemi is said to be the only 'pure' center that will go high, but he seems to be a reach at #3.

 

I'm wondering what the price would be if Montreal wanted to trade down with us and still get their guy in Kotkaniemi. 

 

We could have our pick of a defenseman, or just go ahead and draft Zadina or Svechnikov. Hughes and Tkachuk probably won't fall to us... we can go ahead and draft them too. 

 

Would you trade up if the opportunity is there? Or would you stay where we are and hope someone falls to us?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to use assets to move up as it would cost too much.

We will have some excellent choices available at #7.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well...what about Tanev?  Just kidding, we need defenseman and we'd be giving one up to draft Zadina or BT who are projected to go 3, 4....

 

If for some reason Benning is really high on Svecknikov than could see maybe going for that, but it would take what Smithers say above to that...steep price.  

 

There should still be some very good options at 7, one of these guys could fall which would make it harder to choose if it comes to BPA or drafting a defensemen,  just as some of these guys won't be as good or will be better than projected too.  It will probably come down to Dobson or Whalstrom.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Raymond, Ballard and a 3rd. :ph34r:

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too much,and  Beregvin has no love for Jim either. Better to wait and see who falls to 7, we might get another Pettersson. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it Would take not going on pointless winning steaks at the end of the season when the rest of the league stops playing because they don’t want to get hurt (playoff team)  or they want a better draft position. (Everyone else......well except Vancouver. )

 

so why tade picks and prospects for something you had in your hand and in your control and already  gave   away. 

hope Judd Bracket can find/draft another diamond he’s been this teams saving grace we finally a scout that can find talent. 

 

 

 

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Way to much imo.

 

7th overall + 37 Overall + a prospect better then Lind. Unless we can convince them to take Baertschi.

 

It just makes more sense to stand Pat at this stage unless they are willing to accept a roster player over a prospect. Ideally a roster player over the age of 24-25.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, NaveJoseph said:

This draft may be the first in years where there's actually movement in the top 10, and a team that's seems likely to trade down is Montreal. They need a center most of all, and there isn't a pure center projected to go in the top 5, unless they look at Tkachuk or Wahlstrom as potential centers. However, Kotkaniemi is said to be the only 'pure' center that will go high, but he seems to be a reach at #3.

 

I'm wondering what the price would be if Montreal wanted to trade down with us and still get their guy in Kotkaniemi. 

 

We could have our pick of a defenseman, or just go ahead and draft Zadina or Svechnikov. Hughes and Tkachuk probably won't fall to us... we can go ahead and draft them too. 

 

Would you trade up if the opportunity is there? Or would you stay where we are and hope someone falls to us?

Likely, much more than its worth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RNH and Edmonton's 1st...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, NaveJoseph said:

This draft may be the first in years where there's actually movement in the top 10, and a team that's seems likely to trade down is Montreal. They need a center most of all, and there isn't a pure center projected to go in the top 5, unless they look at Tkachuk or Wahlstrom as potential centers. However, Kotkaniemi is said to be the only 'pure' center that will go high, but he seems to be a reach at #3.

 

I'm wondering what the price would be if Montreal wanted to trade down with us and still get their guy in Kotkaniemi. 

 

We could have our pick of a defenseman, or just go ahead and draft Zadina or Svechnikov. Hughes and Tkachuk probably won't fall to us... we can go ahead and draft them too. 

 

Would you trade up if the opportunity is there? Or would you stay where we are and hope someone falls to us?

NO, THE COST WILL BE TOO HIGH . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, MJDDawg said:

Raymond, Ballard and a 3rd. :ph34r:

How bout Goldobin, Hutton and a 3rd?

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, combover said:

it Would take not going on pointless winning steaks at the end of the season when the rest of the league stops playing because they don’t want to get hurt (playoff team)  or they want a better draft position. (Everyone else......well except Vancouver. )

 

so why tade picks and prospects for something you had in your hand and in your control and already  gave   away. 

hope Judd Bracket can find/draft another diamond he’s been this teams saving grace we finally a scout that can find talent. 

 

 

 

well said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're going to get roughly the same value player at 7, not worth it IMO.

 

If we're going to sell players etc for draft assets, I'd FAR prefer we try to get a package together for one of NYI's or PHI's two mid 1sts or say CHI's #8 pick. 

 

Given the cap hell CHI is in and that they likely have little choice to attempt another run with Toews, Kane, Keith and Seabrook all under contract, I'd look long and hard at selling them Tanev with 50% cap retention and possibly taking some salary back. Say Anisimov (assuming he'd waive) in exchange for one of our cheaper RFA's (Baer/Granlund) or heck, maybe they'd have interest in Gagner at 50% as well. Gives them two years of solid, cheap, veteran, in their prime depth to attempt to compete with their current core.

 

In exchange we take 8th OA (not likely to do them much good in those two years) and perhaps a prospect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, aGENT said:

We're going to get roughly the same value player at 7, not worth it IMO.

 

If we're going to sell players etc for draft assets, I'd FAR prefer we try to get a package together for one of NYI's or PHI's two mid 1sts or say CHI's #8 pick. 

 

Given the cap hell CHI is in and that they likely have little choice to attempt another run with Toews, Kane, Keith and Seabrook all under contract, I'd look long and hard at selling them Tanev with 50% cap retention and possibly taking some salary back. Say Anisimov (assuming he'd waive) in exchange for one of our cheaper RFA's (Baer/Granlund) or heck, maybe they'd have interest in Gagner at 50% as well. Gives them two years of solid, cheap, veteran, in their prime depth to attempt to compete with their current core.

 

In exchange we take 8th OA (not likely to do them much good in those two years) and perhaps a prospect.

 

Chicago has cap space this off-season with Bowman saying that they have flexibility to make moves.  They are looking for a top-4 D but the different articles suggests more free agency.  Chicago talks of rebuilding their group and having their young players taking an increased role.


They apparently have a crowded roster.  Schmaltz should be C2 next season - so Anisimov could be available and replaced in free agency but probably a different profile.  Jurco is a 2011 draftee - they traded a 3rd round pick for him a year ago.

 


Lazerus writes: 

Jurco wants to return and was solid down the stretch, but the Hawks have enough younger forwards in their system that should be playing ahead of him. With Sharp retiring, it’s possible the Hawks will try to bring back versatile veteran Tommy Wingels for a bottom-six role. Anisimov’s no-movement clause becomes a partial no-trade July 1, and it’s possible the Hawks will trade him and pursue another forward in free agency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, mll said:

 

Chicago has cap space this off-season with Bowman saying that they have flexibility to make moves.  They are looking for a top-4 D but the different articles suggests more free agency.  Chicago talks of rebuilding their group and having their young players taking an increased role.

Yes, you were chasing your tail on this in another thread. They want to rebuild but they're still competing and they're not moving vets. They say they have cap space but they actually have very little. They're signing Top4 D UFA's but they don't actually have cap....

 

They're not going to do any better in free agency than Tanev at $2.225 (top 4 D) and Gagner at $1.575. And replacing Anisimov might actually free up enough cap to let them fill/tweak a couple other holes this summer on top of bringing in Scmaltz etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, NaveJoseph said:

What Would it Take to Trade Up to the #3 Pick?

brass-balls-250x250.jpg

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.