aGENT Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 16 minutes ago, Pete M said: Exactly...Seabrook replaces Tanev in the next 3 years and we get two stud Dmen that could step in this or next year. Chicago gets a good shutdown dman and needed cap space... The NEXT three years isn't the problem with taking on that contract. It's the three years AFTER that that are the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 1 hour ago, VegasCanuck said: Wait, are you saying he doesn't??? Then, what the hell has he been doing the last 3 years if not accumulating incriminating photos of his fellow GM's? Must I do EVERYTHING???? Do you have a donkey suit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DADDYROCK Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 Over the years the Canucks have brought in aging home boys and it seems like they think they are already retired because most have come here and been brutal. However getting a defense man with some size and talent would be a very good idea,Dobson or Bouchard could be just what we have needed for SOOOOOO LONG. A real stud defense man like Ohland was and Edler(in his prime) was,a clear the crease, knock people around, minute eating monster like all the Stanley Cup Champion teams have had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete M Posted June 15, 2018 Author Share Posted June 15, 2018 43 minutes ago, aGENT said: The NEXT three years isn't the problem with taking on that contract. It's the three years AFTER that that are the problem. therefore a sweetner to get the 8th OA but giving up Tanev....depends on how bad the Canucks want the player available at 8th and Chicago wanting to gain cap space to make trades and do signings by getting rid of a bad contract.... ...proposal may have merit if both parties need what the other is offering...giving up the 8th OA and getting a good player in Tanev and cap space to make trades might be something that Chicago wants to do...Canucks could shed an extra Dman like Hutton or Pouliot if they are getting Bouchard, Dobson and Seabrook. Seabrook is good for the next three years (maybe) and bad for year 4 to 6, which makes his contract a sweetner to the deal. I believe Seabrook's contract is something that the Hawks would like to shed and giving up an 8th OA and getting Tanev might do it (depends on how the Hawks value Tanev). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Blight Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 Seabrook has a full NMC until 2022/23 season so it may not matter how much Chicago would want to dump his salary. If Seabrook was agreeable to being moved to Vancouver I am sure he would only accept the move if Vancouver would honour his NMC for the remainder of his contract. That would result in us being forced to protect him in the next expansion draft and, for that reason, I would pass on this deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal.view Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 2 hours ago, Pete M said: Edler Gud Seabrook Stech OJ Bouchard MDZ Dobson Hutton Pouliot Biega add in 3 goalies and we are all set on the back end and we will still have room for 2 forward lines. excellent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apollo Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 2 hours ago, Top Sven Baercheese said: I could see it IF we take on Seabrook's contract too. I'd do it in a heartbeat. Brent has some good hockey ahead of him if he comes home... I'll accept this deal Tanev for + 8th Overall + Seabrook (Albeit 6 years at 6.875 million) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 29 minutes ago, Pete M said: therefore a sweetner to get the 8th OA but giving up Tanev....depends on how bad the Canucks want the player available at 8th and Chicago wanting to gain cap space to make trades and do signings by getting rid of a bad contract.... ...proposal may have merit if both parties need what the other is offering...giving up the 8th OA and getting a good player in Tanev and cap space to make trades might be something that Chicago wants to do...Canucks could shed an extra Dman like Hutton or Pouliot if they are getting Bouchard, Dobson and Seabrook. Seabrook is good for the next three years (maybe) and bad for year 4 to 6, which makes his contract a sweetner to the deal. I believe Seabrook's contract is something that the Hawks would like to shed and giving up an 8th OA and getting Tanev might do it (depends on how the Hawks value Tanev). I'd want a HELL of a lot more than 8th OA for Tanev AND taking on Seabrook's albatross contract. And as @Rick Blight points out, I don't want to have to use an ED spot him (thankfully, I doubt he waives to come here anyway). It's just a no go as far as I'm concerned. Same with Lucic. I'm all for utilizing our cap space and taking on a bad contract or two (or retaining) in an effort to further the rebuild but they need to be from 1, to no longer than 4 years remaining IMO and not be ED risks with NMC's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBH1926 Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 10 minutes ago, apollo said: I'd do it in a heartbeat. Brent has some good hockey ahead of him if he comes home... I'll accept this deal Tanev for + 8th Overall + Seabrook (Albeit 6 years at 6.875 million) Sold! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRAZY_4_NAZZY Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 Tanev for 8th and Artem Anisimov Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blömqvist Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 2 hours ago, Pete M said: Seabrook's contract is bad...Luongo bad. Would rather take Lucic's contract (5 years at $6M per) and the 10th overall pick than Seabrook (6 years at $6.875M per) and the 8th overall pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VegasCanuck Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 2 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said: Do you have a donkey suit? Is that an offer of assistance or a suggestion??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 6 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said: Is that an offer of assistance or a suggestion??? I would never interfere with such an intimate occasion..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 4 hours ago, Pete M said: Is Hossa still on the books? Sort of - three more years at $5.275 but by being on LTIR they get applied relief but it is a pain, is complicated for them and really isn't the "free ride" some think it is. If they could trade Hossa, they would find that attractive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckpuckluck1 Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 1 hour ago, Rick Blight said: Seabrook has a full NMC until 2022/23 season so it may not matter how much Chicago would want to dump his salary. If Seabrook was agreeable to being moved to Vancouver I am sure he would only accept the move if Vancouver would honour his NMC for the remainder of his contract. That would result in us being forced to protect him in the next expansion draft and, for that reason, I would pass on this deal. Well thought out good response +1 to you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naslundfan921 Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 insane that you guys are willing to take on Seabrook's Deal. Just the fact that any team is willing to eat that anchor of a contract should warrant the 8th pick let alone adding a guy in Tanev (who while may not net top value anymore is still worth assets). Seabrook has 6 (!!!) years left at a near 7 Million dollars (!!!). Sure we have cap space now but if our young guns pan out they will need new (more expensive) contracts before that mammoth Seabrook contract is up. Cap space is vital in the salary cap era we can't afford to take on a contract like that even if we get the 8th pick in return Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naslundfan921 Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 For What it's worth. The Panthers had to give Phoenix Lawson Crouse (The 11th overall pick from just the year before) in order for Phoenix to be willing to take on Bolland's contract (5.5 million for three more years from when they made the deal). Seabrook's contract has twice as long remaining and is more expensive to boot and you guys seriously would include Tanev as well?! Chicago is adding more than just the 8th pick to get rid of that contract or else Benning should just hang up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 42 minutes ago, naslundfan921 said: For What it's worth. The Panthers had to give Phoenix Lawson Crouse (The 11th overall pick from just the year before) in order for Phoenix to be willing to take on Bolland's contract (5.5 million for three more years from when they made the deal). Seabrook's contract has twice as long remaining and is more expensive to boot and you guys seriously would include Tanev as well?! Chicago is adding more than just the 8th pick to get rid of that contract or else Benning should just hang up. Arizona sent two picks the other way - a 3rd round pick in 2017 and a 2nd round pick in 2018. Florida got 66th in 2017 and is now getting 34th this draft out of that deal. Bolland was not expected to play though - he is on LTIR. The deal was about getting Crouse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 Seabrook's contract is so bad and so long it would likely effect our ability to sign this guy we'd draft with that pick. LOL. No thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naslundfan921 Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 1 hour ago, mll said: Arizona sent two picks the other way - a 3rd round pick in 2017 and a 2nd round pick in 2018. Florida got 66th in 2017 and is now getting 34th this draft out of that deal. Bolland was not expected to play though - he is on LTIR. The deal was about getting Crouse. Perhaps I'm unaware of the specifics in that case but one would assume that an 11th overall pick from just the year before would garner more than two non first round picks (one of which was conditional) so clearly taking on Bolland's contract was incentive for getting a lower return than Crouse alone would have gotten right? Again I may be ignorant to the specifics of this case but the point is the price to take on a massive contract like Seabrook's should be higher than an 8th overall pick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.