[Rumour] Everyone in St. Louis is available

[EternalCanuckFan]

The "high end" guys in STL will probably be too expensive for the Canucks.

 

I'd be interested to hear what the costs of guys like Sanford, Barbashev, Sundqvist, Dunn or Schmaltz might be, if they're available.  Whether this is deserved or not, I have a feeling that Goldobin may be on the trade block.  He might be a guy that STL could have interest in if they want to exchange an "underperforming" forward of theirs for him.

[JM_]

3 minutes ago, EternalCanuckFan said:

The "high end" guys in STL will probably be too expensive for the Canucks.

 

I'd be interested to hear what the costs of guys like Sanford, Barbashev, Sundqvist, Dunn or Schmaltz might be, if they're available.  Whether this is deserved or not, I have a feeling that Goldobin may be on the trade block.  He might be a guy that STL could have interest in if they want to exchange an "underperforming" forward of theirs for him.

Goldy is still in the experimental stage right now, he's maybe part of a deal instead of getting a pick but he wouldn't be a major piece in any deal that upgrades us. 

[samurai]

1 hour ago, Tre Mac said:

Heard Dreger mention this yesterday so I believe the OP's tweet is accurate.

 

To St. Louis:

Eriksson, Pouliot, Pepsi's exclusive vendor rights, home jersey template, Francisco Aquilinni

 

To Vancouver:

Robert Thomas, Jordan Hyrou, Blues home jersey template and their organist.

the current owners are the best we ever had - they are willing to spend to win.   Not perfect but better than cash starved Blues

[oldnews]

I think the first guy I'd move would be Craig Berube.   Not sure why they didn't replace him after an 'interim' after they fired Yeo.

 

 

 

 

 

[J.I.A.H.N]

32 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

For Parayko

 

I would give up our 2020 1st unprotected, 2021 2nd, Stecher, Lind and Brisebois

 

That is a lot of futures, which is what they want

Could you imagine

 

Hughes        Parayko

Edler            Gudbranson

Juolevi         Tanev

Rathbone     Tryamkin

McEneny      Woo

Sautner

 

Instant Defence Rebuild, Move Sutter and Baertschi, draft  a  LW, sign Stone...………..rebuild done~

[Toyotasfan]

What happens when you build a team out of UFA’s ? You get a lineup full of Louie Ericksons.

[J.I.A.H.N]

6 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

Could you imagine

 

Hughes        Parayko

Edler            Gudbranson

Juolevi         Tanev

Rathbone     Tryamkin

McEneny      Woo

Sautner

 

Instant Defence Rebuild, Move Sutter and Baertschi, draft  a  LW, sign Stone...………..rebuild done~

Then I wake up as Seattle picks one of the guys we can't protect...……………..

[48MPHSlapShot]

18 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said:

I just posted Parayko is not a guy we want.

 

But if we could get him for Dahlen you would.  But we wont. 

 

 

(He was kidding about Bracco BTW. )

I'll claim ignorance on the joke (normally when the Leafs are being discussed my TV goes off, hence my unfamiliarity with their prospects).

 

But on to the main point, and again, I'm not really familiar with Parayko, but with Hughes and Juolevi both being offensive minded guys and both set to be playing in the NHL in relatively short order, would it makes sense to have a more "meat and potatoes" type of player to compliment them? Someone to throw out there to defend a one goal lead, block shots, do the dirty stuff that we don't really want Hughes or Juolevi doing? The way I see it, having a multidimensional D would give us a lot more options and make us a lot more difficult to read than a D full of plucky, offensive minded guys. 

 

Also, I just threw Dahlen's name out there as a potential piece. What would you say realistic value would be for Parayko (without obviously touching Bo, Brock, Petey, Hughes, or our 1st this year)?

[J-Dizzle]

1 minute ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

I'll claim ignorance on the joke (normally when the Leafs are being discussed my TV goes off, hence my unfamiliarity with their prospects).

 

But on to the main point, and again, I'm not really familiar with Parayko, but with Hughes and Juolevi both being offensive minded guys and both set to be playing in the NHL in relatively short order, would it makes sense to have a more "meat and potatoes" type of player to compliment them? Someone to throw out there to defend a one goal lead, block shots, do the dirty stuff that we don't really want Hughes or Juolevi doing? The way I see it, having a multidimensional D would give us a lot more options and make us a lot more difficult to read than a D full of plucky, offensive minded guys. 

 

Also, I just threw Dahlen's name out there as a potential piece. What would you say realistic value would be for Parayko (without obviously touching Bo, Brock, Petey, Hughes, or our 1st this year)?

 

Guddy....Tanev

[The Great Canucks]

No thanks. I have no interest in giving up assets to St. Louis.

[The_Rocket]

3 minutes ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

I'll claim ignorance on the joke (normally when the Leafs are being discussed my TV goes off, hence my unfamiliarity with their prospects).

 

But on to the main point, and again, I'm not really familiar with Parayko, but with Hughes and Juolevi both being offensive minded guys and both set to be playing in the NHL in relatively short order, would it makes sense to have a more "meat and potatoes" type of player to compliment them? Someone to throw out there to defend a one goal lead, block shots, do the dirty stuff that we don't really want Hughes or Juolevi doing? The way I see it, having a multidimensional D would give us a lot more options and make us a lot more difficult to read than a D full of plucky, offensive minded guys. 

 

Also, I just threw Dahlen's name out there as a potential piece. What would you say realistic value would be for Parayko (without obviously touching Bo, Brock, Petey, Hughes, or our 1st this year)?

St. Louis would want things that the Canucks can’t afford to give up. Young players and picks. If we’re not giving up our best prospects, then we have to bundle multiple pieces and it’s unlikely St. Louis Won’t get better offers than that

[MikeBossy]

1 hour ago, Rick Blight said:

If Chiarelli gave up this much for Griffin Reinhart, how much would he give up to bring local boy Parayko home?

Edmonton Oilers acquire	Date	New York Islanders acquire
Griffin Reinhart	June 26, 2015	2015 1st round pick 2015 2nd round pick

LMAO you know he would be all over this and likely give up a similar package as he did for Reinhart - and he'd probably throw in a top prospect too haha.

[48MPHSlapShot]

4 minutes ago, J-Dizzle said:

 

Guddy....Tanev

Tanev at this point is too injury prone and outside of the age group that we're looking for to be considered any kind of viable option for the future of this team going forward imho, and I just don't think Guddy is good enough to be considered a critical piece of any defensive core.

 

[oldnews]

22 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

Could you imagine

 

Hughes        Parayko

Edler            Gudbranson

Juolevi         Tanev

Rathbone     Tryamkin

McEneny      Woo

Sautner

 

Instant Defence Rebuild, Move Sutter and Baertschi, draft  a  LW, sign Stone...………..rebuild done~

That is difficult to imagine...  As is quoting oneself repeatedly haha - don't think I've seen that before.

 

If your 'instant rebuild' is done, you don't move Sutter.

[City-in-state-of-emergency]

44 minutes ago, EternalCanuckFan said:

The "high end" guys in STL will probably be too expensive for the Canucks.

 

I'd be interested to hear what the costs of guys like Sanford, Barbashev, Sundqvist, Dunn or Schmaltz might be, if they're available.  Whether this is deserved or not, I have a feeling that Goldobin may be on the trade block.  He might be a guy that STL could have interest in if they want to exchange an "underperforming" forward of theirs for him.

St Louis may have PTSD with Goldy with the last Russian project taking a dump on their carpet. 

[oldnews]

"Everyone is available" does not necessarily mean St Louis will be "rebuilding" folks......ie the assumption that they'll be selling for futures.

[Canuck Surfer]

16 minutes ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

I'll claim ignorance on the joke (normally when the Leafs are being discussed my TV goes off, hence my unfamiliarity with their prospects).

 

But on to the main point, and again, I'm not really familiar with Parayko, but with Hughes and Juolevi both being offensive minded guys and both set to be playing in the NHL in relatively short order, would it makes sense to have a more "meat and potatoes" type of player to compliment them? Someone to throw out there to defend a one goal lead, block shots, do the dirty stuff that we don't really want Hughes or Juolevi doing? The way I see it, having a multidimensional D would give us a lot more options and make us a lot more difficult to read than a D full of plucky, offensive minded guys. 

 

Also, I just threw Dahlen's name out there as a potential piece. What would you say realistic value would be for Parayko (without obviously touching Bo, Brock, Petey, Hughes, or our 1st this year)?

Yes.

 

But we already have Gudbrandson. Who is not quite as good. I wont dwell on what constitutes holding him back to being as good? But he is faster. And I don't see a need to have a second oversized body at the expense of puck movement & game pace. Look what happened to Washington when they limited themselves to Orpik as a bigger, not so fleet guy? Let Alzner go...  They became a championship team because suddenly their D could pace their forwards.

 

And secondly? We're not at the point of abundance, sell from riches in prospect wealth yet.  Getting there? But not arrived.  If guys like Lind, Dahlen, Brisbois were lighting up the AHL, Jasek, Gadgy? We could sell from strength. They all need another year and we need another blue chipper above their level to add to Hughes. Who also may need a year.  When more guys are ready for NHL jobs, than fit is when we should spend for a guy like Parayko.  Currently he'll improve us, we wont get a blue chipper as our draft position slides. And we'll have no prospects ready to surface next year or the year after. They'll be in St Louis. To take us to the next level. It will just slow down our rebuild after an initial boost. 

[VIC_CITY]

39 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

Then I wake up as Seattle picks one of the guys we can't protect...……………..

This.

 

Draft another defenseman with our 2019 1st rounder and stay the course. But whatever you do, do NOT trade futures for 25+ year old players. Two years from now (2020-2021), when we're hopefully a playoff team, that will be the time to start considering trading futures or sign big name free agents. But Benning needs to hoard all of his picks and prospects until then.

[JM_]

2 minutes ago, oldnews said:

"Everyone is available" does not necessarily mean St Louis will be "rebuilding" folks......ie the assumption that they'll be selling for futures.

thats a good point, I was just assuming it was tear down time with a move like that. Whats the best hockey trade then that you think we could make with them, if we're just talking roster players? 

[J-Dizzle]

21 minutes ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

Tanev at this point is too injury prone and outside of the age group that we're looking for to be considered any kind of viable option for the future of this team going forward imho, and I just don't think Guddy is good enough to be considered a critical piece of any defensive core.

 

I don’t disagree on Tanev in regards to injuries... I do disagree about Guddy though.  I think he’s already shown what he can be to a D-core if playing the right role.