[Discussion] Quantity for quality

[babalu]

2 hours ago, Hairy Kneel said:

Sutter I can see but not the other 2

 

 

 

 

[skolozsy2]

This is kind of my point.

 

Soooooo, the Hawks are looking into Del Zotto, Patches, Skinner, Faulk, Gagner, and possibly Panarin according to these reports?  That list seems, well, a bit extensive to be taken too seriously. 

[timberz21]

The thing  with Quantity vs Quality types of deal, is, even if your unloading quantity, you still need to put significant pieces in the deal.  You can't just unload marginal, unwanted players for a top 6 or top prospect.

 

Usually, how it goes, is you offer a pretty good prospect (Juolevi, Lind, Woo, Dahlen), coupled with guys like Sutter, Gagner, Hutton, Guddy and either get a legit top 3 D or top 6 F, or a better prospect.  You won't get away with trading these name you mentionned and getting a significant upgrade.  You still need to put something substantial.

[SingleThorn]

6 hours ago, babalu said:

Then why have there been reports of interest in MDZ, Sutter, and Gagner?

Please expand. Have heard vague ( minor bloggers ? ) stuff about Gagner, nothing in a while about Sutter and MDZ nothing. I just assume that this is the usual dart throwing from the semi-pro bloggers that are infecting too many outlets. On the other hand, it might just be the newish 'trade Sutter' blah, blah from CDC now that the 'trade Tanev' garbage has slowed down.

[smithers joe]

would you trade boeser for 2 fourth liners and a bottom pair d man? 

[Rob_Zepp]

10 hours ago, babalu said:

As we have a log jam of players I would like to see if fans think we could unload some of these players in a quantity for quality kind of move.

 

Players who could be moved:

 

Sutter

Gagner

MDZ

Gudbranson

Hutton?

 

Do you think we could move some combination of these players to upgrade our top 6?

 

Possibly retaining sallary on some of them.

EVERY NHL has this situation so making that sort of move is extremely difficult as number of professional contracts any team can take on is usually carefully balanced and close to the maximum pretty much at all times (hence can only take so many contracts in versus the number you give up in a trade).

 

That and give your head a shake if you want to get rid of Guddy in a "bulk" sale.   Canucks need Guddy more than ever with the emergence of even more youth the next season or three.

 

Sutter?   He is coveted by many around the league.   Why include him here with the spare parts?   

[wildcam]

10 hours ago, babalu said:

As we have a log jam of players I would like to see if fans think we could unload some of these players in a quantity for quality kind of move.

 

Players who could be moved:

 

Sutter

Gagner

MDZ

Gudbranson

Hutton?

 

Do you think we could move some combination of these players to upgrade our top 6?

 

Possibly retaining sallary on some of them.

Also might have to add Goldobin to your list and possibly Tanev..

Edler is on last year of contract UFA at end of season? I would try and trade one of Edler or Tanev..

 

[The Beagle had landed]

11 hours ago, babalu said:

As we have a log jam of players I would like to see if fans think we could unload some of these players in a quantity for quality kind of move.

 

Players who could be moved:

 

Sutter

Gagner

MDZ

Gudbranson

Hutton?

 

Do you think we could move some combination of these players to upgrade our top 6?

 

Possibly retaining sallary on some of them.

Anyone can be had for the right price.  Out of the players you've mentioned, I can see Sutter and Del Zotto moving at the deadline for picks and or prospects.  I'd like Gagner traded before the season starts for anything really, just to clear up some roster space.  Hutton could get moved at the dead line as well if he has a decent season, but wouldn't mind keeping him if he's shown improvement.  At the moment, Gudbranson is the only player on your list I would keep.  We need the physicality he brings on the defensive end and he would compliment some of our D prosepects coming in through the pipe line.

[higgyfan]

How does Sutter and Guddy end up on a list with Gags, Hutton, MDZ (and Raymond, Ballard and a 3rd)?

 

Beagle is a 4th line C, who is NOT a replacement for Sutter.  Guddy is the only physical presence on a d that is filling up with non physical, young dmen.  The team needs these guys.

 

The other bits a pieces, yeah trade away.  I doubt you get anything substantial in return though.

 

Pettersson and possibly Hughes are quality players joining the team this season and there are other prospects on the way.

 

 

[SabreFan1]

7 hours ago, babalu said:

I wonder if Carolina might be a good partner as they are looking for roster players rather than picks and prospects.

Depending on the ask though, the Canucks may have to give up a first or second round pick as well as players.  The Canucks are not in a position to play with their future like that especially with the Sedins now retired.  For JB to do an ROR-like trade, he'd be needing to get back a couple of quality players.  One of whom would need to be in his early 20's.

[SabreFan1]

7 hours ago, babalu said:

I wonder if Carolina might be a good partner as they are looking for roster players rather than picks and prospects.

I'm sure Waddel and JB have talked on the phone during the off-season.  GM's of non-contending teams call other GM's, especially during the off-season, and go down their rosters with them looking for trade possibilities.  It was rumoured that during these calls other GM's did not like talking to Buffalo's former GM Darcy Regier because he had a reputation for asking too much for his players and not being willing to be flexible.

[J.I.A.H.N]

1 hour ago, wildcam said:

Also might have to add Goldobin to your list and possibly Tanev..

Edler is on last year of contract UFA at end of season? I would try and trade one of Edler or Tanev..

 

I tend to agree with Wildcam on this issue.

Yes, there is reason to put these names forward as trade possibilities, but it does not mean all would be traded.

It is in reasonable to make a strategic move, where some are moved for the continuance of our rebuild.

But the fact remains, we will not be able to make a trade where we sell our veterans for elite younger players

which is what most proposals suggest... it will not happen unless we include prospects or picks, as well

Which is not what a rebuild normally does (Nor what I would want)

This is why I always suggest trading vets for picks....it is always preferable to get upgrades, but not reasonable

Picks give you "futures" for the "now", meaning we are getting futures, the other team gets the now

So we have a traffic jam in some area's (LW + LD + and to a lesser degree C), but none are of those potential players of trade are elite

I think it reasonable to think that when we do move a veteran, we may suffer a small reduction in ability of his replacement

But, to me, that is a cost of a rebuild, as the veteran has reached his ceiling, where as the replacement should not have reached his

So long term, as in a rebuild you are planning for the future and the team can take that small decline in the short term

This then allows Teams (Canucks) to put out a list of veterans for trade...…………..

My belief is that the Canucks could move "some" of the following, without really hurting our rebuild over the next 6 months

 

MDZ...………….short and long term replacements...……..Hughes, Juolevi, Sautner, Brisebois

Pouliot...……….. same as above

Baertschi...……..short and long term replacements...……..Pettersson, Goldobin, Granlund, Dahlen

Granlund...……..same as above

Hutton...………...short and long term replacements...……..Hughes, Juolevi, Sautner, Brisebois and McEneny

Sutter............…..short term Beagle...……..long term Gaudette, MacEwen

Gagner...……….????

 

Special consideration to Edler, who would garner more of a return. again note* (it is not my expectation everyone would be moved)

 

But a package for either a later 1st, of a 2nd would be reasonable to expect in return..I just do not know who Benning would choose to move

 

Short version......yes we should move some of them......

[Ajax-]

15 hours ago, babalu said:

As we have a log jam of players I would like to see if fans think we could unload some of these players in a quantity for quality kind of move.

 

Players who could be moved:

 

Sutter

Gagner

MDZ

Gudbranson

Hutton?

 

Do you think we could move some combination of these players to upgrade our top 6?

 

Possibly retaining sallary on some of them.

I don't think we have a serious log jam of defencemen? MDZ and Guddy will start the year with the team and I think Hutton will come back with a better attitude and conditioning. Come trade dedline and we're near the bottom, then yes dump for what ever you can get.

 

I can't see them moving Sutter unless for a really really good return.

 

Gagner i would trade for a bag of pucks and new stick boy.

[RonMexico]

8 minutes ago, AbrasiveAjax said:

I don't think we have a serious log jam of defencemen? MDZ and Guddy will start the year with the team and I think Hutton will come back with a better attitude and conditioning. Come trade dedline and we're near the bottom, then yes dump for what ever you can get.

 

I can't see them moving Sutter unless for a really really good return.

 

Gagner i would trade for a bag of pucks and new stick boy.

Yep no log jam. Just good depth. Injuries happen and I'd rather have capable replacements when needed.

[Alflives]

7 minutes ago, RonMexico said:

Yep no log jam. Just good depth. Injuries happen and I'd rather have capable replacements when needed.

Totally agree.  When Hughes signs (and he will) that pushes another D down to Utica.  I see Biega for sure going down, and would add one of Hutton or Pouliot.  

Edler, Hughes, and MDZ will be our Left side D.

Guddy, Tanev, and Stecher will partner up with them.

I see either Hutton or Pouliot being the extra guy.

[babalu]

8 hours ago, smithers joe said:

would you trade boeser for 2 fourth liners and a bottom pair d man? 

Obviously I am not talking about a Boeser caliber player. I am talking about a skilled player who can play in the top 6. Obviously were not acquiring an elite player for these guys. Possibly someone who has fallen out of favor or is burried by another teams depth. Also, maybe we just dump some of these players for whatever and we pick up someone who is a cap dump from a team (like if Karlsson ends up in tampa or how we got Erhoff etc).

[babalu]

1 hour ago, RonMexico said:

Yep no log jam. Just good depth. Injuries happen and I'd rather have capable replacements when needed.

I am not suggesting we completely gut our depth or that we should trade all of these players. I think if we could trade maybe 3 of these guys and acquire 1 that could play in our top 6.

[Alflives]

3 minutes ago, babalu said:

I am not suggesting we completely gut our depth or that we should trade all of these players. I think if we could trade maybe 3 of these guys and acquire 1 that could play in our top 6.

I’d love that too, but what GM would take that deal?  We would likely be adding a guy, who is a 5-7 D man, but he comes with a nasty contract.

i say put any guy who requires waivers, that isn’t good enough, on waivers.  Likely they will clear, and can play in Utica until injuries happen.

[babalu]

1 minute ago, Alflives said:

I’d love that too, but what GM would take that deal?  We would likely be adding a guy, who is a 5-7 D man, but he comes with a nasty contract.

i say put any guy who requires waivers, that isn’t good enough, on waivers.  Likely they will clear, and can play in Utica until injuries happen.

If thats what we end up doing we may end up losing players like goldobin and granlund who I think still have potential.

[Alflives]

Just now, babalu said:

If thats what we end up doing we may end up losing players like goldobin and granlund who I think still have potential.

I can see Goldy on .waivers, but not Ganny.