Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Trade] CHI acquire Kruger, Entwistle, Maletta, Campbell, '19 5th from ARZ for Hossa, Hinostroza, Oesterle, '19 3rd


Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

something has to happen there.... they only have 9 Fs and 6 D on the regular roster with 47/50 contracts in place: https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/blackhawks

 

and now just over 9 mil in cap space. I can't see them going into next year with just the depth in their farm system but who knows, maybe thats the plan. 

 

We have some cheapy Fs and defensemen. Its possible we could trade them some of that. Del Zotto on a retained deal, maybe Granlund? 

Wow, I didn't realize how few 1 way contracts they had. They essentially need to fill 6 spots with depth or trade. This is the team Jim should be targeting if making room for rookies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pears said:

What exactly was Chicago thinking? They only gained like $2 million in cap space. 

I imagine they were thinking "woot woot we found someone to take three years of Hossa's 5+ off our hands in exchange for....volume of marginal assets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So anyone wanna tell me how Luongo's contract was circumventing the cap, but this isn't?

 

There's a cap floor for a reason. If a team can't make the cap floor with legit contracts, they shouldn't be in the league.

 

Oh and not surprised the NHL owned Coyotes are helping out another league favorite...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, oldnews said:

Maybe the Hawks noticed how easy it was for the Wings to dump Datsyuk's contract on Chayka.....?

 

15 million of cap hit over 3 years.....and a salary of 1 miillion and then 750k....

 

Is Hinostroza enough to take that off the Hawks?

 

 

And Oesterle, still offensive upside and the 3rd. Not exactly like this deal but was really hoping Vancouver could utilize capspacexand make a similar type deal to add another pick or upgrade. Now the time while it won't hurt you.

 

Arizona did very well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

So anyone wanna tell me how Luongo's contract was circumventing the cap, but this isn't?

 

There's a cap floor for a reason. If a team can't make the cap floor with legit contracts, they shouldn't be in the league.

 

Oh and not surprised the NHL owned Coyotes are helping out another league favorite...

Sadly and simply because Gary Bettman said so. The joke lives on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Quantum said:

Wish Benning was creative with his trading too!

 

15 minutes ago, Mike Vanderhoek said:

Not exactly like this deal but was really hoping Vancouver could utilize capspacexand make a similar type deal to add another pick or upgrade.

 

Clearly the package of scrubs Arizona offered up was better than ours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Mike Vanderhoek said:

And Oesterle, still offensive upside and the 3rd. Not exactly like this deal but was really hoping Vancouver could utilize capspacexand make a similar type deal to add another pick or upgrade. Now the time while it won't hurt you.

 

Arizona did very well.

That post was prior to Oesterle being reported to be in this deal.

 

And still, I dunno MV.

 

Oesterle is a 26 year old who has played 80 NHL games.   The majority of them with Duncan Keith last year.   I don't find him a particularly compelling asset - with one year to UFA - not very good underlying numbers.

 

The market value to move 5+ million cap dumps - never seemed this low - but that was before Chayka....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, skolozsy2 said:

I don't think you've seen enough of Hinostrosa play.

 

He's a hardworking, gritty, bottom six winger/center who can kill penalties, play solid defense, and pitch in 35-40 points.  And he only makes 1.5 million. 

 

When it comes to value, he's actually a really good player.

sure but who is he an upgrade on, one thats worth Hossa's contract? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Coyotes not done.   Next up are trades for Seabrook and Luongo - the latter they have described as their “goalie of the future”.

anyone but Lu. He doesn't deserve that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The cap space obviously helps Chicago, but they really don't have much NHL depth - unless they plan on using a bunch of their AHL / ELC contracts to fill up the rest of their roster.

LW - Saad, Kunitz,

C - Toews, Anisimov, Kruger, Schmaltz

RW - Kane, Sikura, DeBrincat

LD - Keith, Manning, Gustafsson

RD - Seabrook, Murphy, Rutta

G - Crawford, Ward

 

My guess would be two-three contracts for a medium salary player - I wonder if the Canucks could convince them to take Gagner and/or Pouloit/Hutton in exchange for some of their young players.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, zombieksa said:

Wow, I didn't realize how few 1 way contracts they had. They essentially need to fill 6 spots with depth or trade. This is the team Jim should be targeting if making room for rookies.

I'm sure he's trying, they did make the one minor deal this year already with Kero for Chaput. Now that Hossa is out of the way I could see something around Del Zotto, he'd help their left side D and add a bit of scoring. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Coyotes not done.   Next up are trades for Seabrook and Luongo - the latter they have described as their “goalie of the future”.

No reason for Florida to trade Luongo - they barely have a penalty if he retires early.  It's 1M next year and then drops to 60K in 2020 - the risk is with Vancouver.


Chicago is a different situation - it's 4.3M in penalty to Chicago if he retires early.   Chicago better hope that Arizona doesn't convince him to give up his 3x 1M and retire early.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Pears said:

What could we get for taking Seabrook off their hands?

6.9m for 6 years is asking a lot of the owner.  I think the term is way too long and would end up leading to salary cap issues when dealing with RFAs in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

sure but who is he an upgrade on, one thats worth Hossa's contract? 

Only my opinion, but I personally think Hinostrosa is an upgrade over anyone on the Canucks bottom six.  He is pretty much has all the elements a good bottom six player should have...plus he's cheap, young, and under control contract wise.

 

As for Hossa....it wasn't just Hinostrosa.  It was Hinostrosa, Oesterle (a 3rd pairing dman who played 1st pair with Keith last season), and 3rd round pick.  And they gave up dogs**t in return....2 career AHL'ers and a "B" prospect. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, higgyfan said:

6.9m for 6 years is asking a lot of the owner.  I think the term is way too long and would end up leading to salary cap issues when dealing with RFAs in the future.

3 or 4 years is fine, but 6 puts us into that trouble alright, not to mention the blocking of younger dmen coming in.  Would definitely expedite the exits of Edler and/or Tanev, but who would you rather have long-term?  Don't think Chicago would be willing to give up enough to make the deal doable.

 

 

But would be happy to help them fill out their roster with veterans in a Gagner and MDZ, for a reasonable return.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, skolozsy2 said:

Only my opinion, but I personally think Hinostrosa is an upgrade over anyone on the Canucks bottom six.  He is pretty much has all the elements a good bottom six player should have...plus he's cheap, young, and under control contract wise.

 

As for Hossa....it wasn't just Hinostrosa.  It was Hinostrosa, Oesterle (a 3rd pairing dman who played 1st pair with Keith last season), and 3rd round pick.  And they gave up dogs**t in return....2 career AHL'ers and a "B" prospect. 

anyone? thats pretty high praise. I could see over Granny, Gaunce, Leipsic, but not worth taking on the contract. But thats why we have discussion boards ::D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...