Free agency or Trade???

[canuck73_3]

Yes

[Alflives]

5 minutes ago, mikeyman109 said:

He plays off side wing though he shoots left. And I agree how many teams could screw that up?

I remember the Russian teams from the 70’s.  They didn’t have any right shot players, except Tretiak.  The great Habs teams from that era had their big three on D:  Robinson, Savard, and Lapoint.  All left shot. This whole need right and left shot players is a myth.  We need the best players, regardless of which way they shoot.  

[mikeyman109]

2 minutes ago, Alflives said:

I remember the Russian teams from the 70’s.  They didn’t have any right shot players, except Tretiak.  The great Habs teams from that era had their big three on D:  Robinson, Savard, and Lapoint.  All left shot. This whole need right and left shot players is a myth.  We need the best players, regardless of which way they shoot.  

Totally agree although it doesnt hurt to have a  player play his natural side.

[aGENT]

27 minutes ago, mikeyman109 said:

No disrespect here but the Options are pure speculation as we will never know what has been or is being offered in this vein. I am more of the mindset that teams do not want to take on players that have not performed to their contract regardless of how much cap space you retain.

I have come arou8nd to the idea of selling off Sutter to the highest bidder this season, not because he hasnt worked hard or given us all he has but the injuries just keep piling up. A year long healthy Sutter would be hard to argue trading but he hasnt been that guy since he arrived here.

I like signing a top 6 winger and my pick from this years crop is Lee for NYI. I like he is a leader , not afraid to go to the net and get dirty in the corners. He would be a great fit on Peteys wing with Boeser.

As for a UFA for the D well there's a lot of folks that want a Erik Karlsson but he isnt coming here. We can sign two players for his money demands and we would be better off having the depth and not having to play Stecher and Hutton to death against the better lines in this conference. I dont see anyone trading a RHD for Hutton at this point, he has had a bounce back year but He will have to show more to attain what you are asking for him.

Of course it's all speculation...

 

Speaking of speculation...Who said anything about Karlsson?

 

What am I asking for Hutton?

[ItTakesAnArmy]

9 hours ago, Samgagner'sface said:

Any of tanev sutter or Hutton leaving would make that position weaker. That's kind of my point. Those 3 are 2 top 4 d and a pretty good centre. Internally replacing them would weaken that position immediately. The cap space thing is another option, of course,  but it's not like we are swimming in capable top 4 d. Gaudette maybe replaces sutter, but is gaudette a better player than sutter right now? 

 

 If Benning finds a way to unload players for better players I'm all for it.  I just don't expect us to come out that far ahead  in any trade player for player.  

On this team with ALL the FAAAANNNNNTASTIC prospects in the system, but they are weak already just look at how good Schenn stepped in and up the ladder. He had one foot out of the league and he was not the worst by far.

Olli Juolevi was a "positional" draft pick how is he doing eh? They bypassed Tkachuk to get him.

 

In any trade Vancouver cannot trade for another old player. They should be trying to get all the next core right around Petterson and Boeser's age, they have a start with Elias, Brok and Quinton all within 2 years of each other, Horvat is just on the fringe but his league wide trade value is disproportionately high, a 24 year old center in his prime with another 4 years at a cap of 5.5 mil and he wins most of his FO's. He is prime trade bait, the return would be way out of proportion to a one on one deal unless that was maybe for Dahlin. If a player it has to be a player in the core age group, if picks, then multiple 1rsts over a couple of years, that kid in next years draft maybe.

[mikeyman109]

11 hours ago, aGENT said:

Perhaps we trade Hutton + for an equal or better right D or another top 6 F that fills out our top 6 as well?

I think expecting to trade Hutton + for a RHD that is better than Hutton is unlikely. If teams had interest in Hutton he most likely would have had more value at trade deadline. Just my thought. and the Karlsson reference was in regards to some people expecting a big splash in Free agency to replace a Tanev. I am not saying you said we would replace Tanev with Karlsson. Its just been the prevailing wind here in CDC.

Again i think we could use our cap space to pry a young RHD from someone in Cap trouble.I wouldnt suggest Edmonton but maybe Tampa as they try to sign the aforementioned Swedish D man.

[aGENT]

24 minutes ago, mikeyman109 said:

I think expecting to trade Hutton + for a RHD that is better than Hutton is unlikely. If teams had interest in Hutton he most likely would have had more value at trade deadline. Just my thought. and the Karlsson reference was in regards to some people expecting a big splash in Free agency to replace a Tanev. I am not saying you said we would replace Tanev with Karlsson. Its just been the prevailing wind here in CDC.

Again i think we could use our cap space to pry a young RHD from someone in Cap trouble.I wouldnt suggest Edmonton but maybe Tampa as they try to sign the aforementioned Swedish D man.

If the '+' was Tanev with 50% retention? Or our 10th OA (not that I'd promote that) etc, etc. Seems more a lack of imagination

 

A forward swap for Hutton (or futures) is probably more likely though.

 

I'd be open to Karlsson if the term and cap wasn't TOO outrageous but IMO, he's a pipe dream. I'd rather see us target the likes of Stralman (speaking of Tampa).

 

And yup, I'd be happy to nab say Foote from them too if it meant one year of Callahan etc.

 

 

[Samgagner'sface]

16 hours ago, aGENT said:

I think with the option to package some of them together or with picks/prospects, retain/take back cap etc we could potentially get players or upgrade picks that better suit our needs moving forward. 

 

Then yes you replace some of that internally with the likes of Juolevi, Gaudette etc but we also have the option of signing UFA's as well to replace/upgrade on them as well. Perhaps we sign a top 6 W'er with some of Sutter's cap that lessens our need for players like him to help shelter our top 6 and upgrades our offense while also adding picks/prospects from trading him? Perhaps we trade Hutton + for an equal or better right D or another top 6 F that fills out our top 6 as well? Perhaps we sign a UFA to replace an expiring  (and half season injured) Tanev that we gain rebuild assets from?

 

There's a lot more options than you seem to think.

If any of those things happen I'd be happy 

[spur1]

Sportsnet has a story on the Canucks offer sheeting Sam Bennett. 

Why would we bother? 

[IBatch]

47 minutes ago, spur1 said:

Sportsnet has a story on the Canucks offer sheeting Sam Bennett. 

Why would we bother? 

Meat and potatoes?  No kidding hope it’s just a rumour.

 

edit:  just read it, Wild speculation...why would be need another third liner anyways?

Edited May 26, 2019 by IBatch

[khay]

UFA market first because they are free assets.

 

Depending on which holes we are able to fill through UFA, do a trade to fill the remaining holes.

 

For example, if we can sign a top 4D, then dangle Tanev + pick to acquire a top 6 forward. 

 

[mikeyman109]

10 hours ago, aGENT said:

If the '+' was Tanev with 50% retention? Or our 10th OA (not that I'd promote that) etc, etc. Seems more a lack of imagination

 

A forward swap for Hutton (or futures) is probably more likely though.

 

I'd be open to Karlsson if the term and cap wasn't TOO outrageous but IMO, he's a pipe dream. I'd rather see us target the likes of Stralman (speaking of Tampa).

 

And yup, I'd be happy to nab say Foote from them too if it meant one year of Callahan etc.

 

 

I like the idea of acquiring a Stralman or another like D man.  I would also be good with taking on Foote if it meant Callahan for a year. Tampa also has two young Russian D men that are RHD. and I am not limited to the Tampa roster i think there may be other options out there.

I am not sure losing Hutton as much as he is never going to be more than a 4-5 D man,is the right course. What value of a forward would he fetch that we cannot sign as a free agent without having to give him or any other asset up?

If the goal is just to move Hutton then that's cool , but if we can keep him and still get the same value in return by just signing someone id rather keep him.

We spend 3/4 of a season without Tanev already so trading him isn't going to leave that big a hole.

 

Edler had a better year last year than the one before but it was a contract year and he just goes like that. Perhaps the cash spent on Edler could be used to bring one of the Free agent defensemen in  , Like Myers, or a trade and sign  for a Trouba.  It just seems like there are a lot of options without spending the 11 mill it will take to get Karlsson to sign here.

In this instance i prefer the idea of signing 2 D men rather than the one for 11 million and creating instant depth.

[Me_]

On 4/27/2019 at 10:51 AM, combover said:

niether build through the draft. Get rid of the vets especially the non productive over priced ones  .. eriksdone sutter ect. 

 

 

This Teams is still to far away from being a Cup contender, just being a playoff contender is settling for medoritcy.

 

If the Canucks are as far away as this post makes sense let alone the errors in it, then may as well fold the team and call it a day.