[Proposal] Boeser + 10th for Byram + [winger]

[JM_]

57 minutes ago, Hindustan Smyl said:

Thank you guys for your feedback.

 

Im throwing in the white towel here.

 

$&!#ty proposal!!!!

 

onwards and upwards.  

sorry if I was a little harsh, its just players like Boeser are rare. 

[Joscanucks]

I first and foremost agree you cannot trade boeser unless you can get a somewhat similar player in return. I mentioned William nylander before he went and got a bunch of points for Sweden at the worlds. If we can get nylander who Toronto might be willing to let go to shed salary I say go for it. Nylander can play wing with pettersson, and we can trade boeser for a top 5 pick. Yes nylander is somewhat overpaid. But I might consider a

 

tanev + virtanen + fourth or something like that for nylander. 

 

Then trade boeser for a #3-5 overall pick. 

 

We help toronto by shedding a high salary for help on the backend and a good skater with some physicality in virtanen. 

 

We get nylander who is not as good as boeser. But still a very good young player with upside still who can play with his countryman. 

 

We can keep boeser as well. But I’m just thinking if we have to give someone up to get another early first round pick without giving up our tenth. This trade scenario netsvus two top ten picks for our draft in Vancouver, where I think Benning will want to make a splash. 

 

this might not be the way to go. But we as an organization, have to start to make trades that may make Benning sweat a bit. All we’ve done so far is the little trades that are basically neutral. 

[ChuckNORRIS4Cup]

22 hours ago, Hindustan Smyl said:

 

A few reasons why I would consider this:

 

1) For a rebuilding team, it’s more important to solidify the Center position and Defense before finishing up the wings.  This is also one reason why I would never move Horvat (as 1-2 other threads have suggested), and would be more inclined to move Boeser before moving Horvat.  With Byram and Hughes on our defense, our defense would likely be solidifed.

 

2) July 1st is just around the corner and a number of good top 6 wingers are available.......and we have cap space!    

 

Given the amount of cap space that we have, it’s extremely UNlikely that we would miss out on ALL of the following:

 

-Panarin

-Dzingel

-Duchene

-Skinner

etc. (Ferland, Connolly)

 

It would be VERY likely that we would be able to land atleast one of the above.

 

End result?

 

Defense = huge improvement.

Wings = slight downgrade....or even zero downgrade if you land a guy like Panarin.

 

Overall net gain.

Wait what did you just say????

 

I got into a mini disagreement with you a few months ago, because you had suggested trading Horvat, and I said that's not going to happen, then I come here and see you write that response to someone, yeah no that statement is a lie. I get you said in the future, but present/future you're still saying you'd trade Horvat, but saying you would never here now, yeah no.

 

On 3/25/2019 at 11:53 PM, Hindustan Smyl said:

Perhaps in the future, but it would be much wiser to see how things played out first.  

 

Kakko and Pettersson have experience playing on the wings and so those are options as well.  

 

I will have to admit however that IF Gaudette develops into 2nd line C, the Canucks could really round out their line up by trading Horvat and Gaudette......in the future.  The key word is “the future” however.  

[Hindustan Smyl]

2 minutes ago, ChuckNORRIS4Cup said:

Wait what did you just say????

 

I got into a mini disagreement with you a few months ago, because you had suggested trading Horvat, and I said that's not going to happen, then I come here and see you write that response to someone, yeah no that statement is a lie. I get you said in the future, but present/future you're still saying you'd trade Horvat, but saying you would never here now, yeah no.

 

Fair enough point and I can see how I sent some mixed messages.   Allow me to try and clarify:

 

I would be VERY hesitant to move Horvat at all.  Period.  Horvat bleeds Blue and Green, And he’s the type of guy that you win with.  The guy screams leadership through and through.

 

Now having said all that, if we ever had a situation where someone like Gaudette became an excellent 2nd line Center, or if the Canucks somehow landed a guy like Jack Hughes (which is what I think that previous thread you mentioned may have been about), and there was a huge disparity between the strength of our forwards and the impotency of our defense, then under those circumstances, I would *toy* with the idea of moving Horvat for a blue chip defenseman.  

 

I think that’s the point I was trying to make at the time, but it’s also possible that I’ve had a change of heart.  As of this writing though, I would likely never trade Horvat.

 

For whatever it’s worth, I would likely never trade Boeser either.

 

More times than not, I often like to throw ideas out there to facilitate discussion and play Devil’s advocate.

[ChuckNORRIS4Cup]

3 minutes ago, Hindustan Smyl said:

Fair enough point and I can see how I sent some mixed messages.   Allow me to try and clarify:

 

I would be VERY hesitant to move Horvat at all.  Period.  Horvat bleeds Blue and Green, And he’s the type of guy that you win with.  The guy screams leadership through and through.

 

Now having said all that, if we ever had a situation where someone like Gaudette became an excellent 2nd line Center, or if the Canucks somehow landed a guy like Jack Hughes (which is what I think that previous thread you mentioned may have been about), and there was a huge disparity between the strength of our forwards and the impotency of our defense, then under those circumstances, I would *toy* with the idea of moving Horvat for a blue chip defenseman.  

 

I think that’s the point I was trying to make at the time, but it’s also possible that I’ve had a change of heart.  As of this writing though, I would likely never trade Horvat.

 

For whatever it’s worth, I would likely never trade Boeser either.

 

More times than not, I often like to throw ideas out there to facilitate discussion and play Devil’s advocate.

I will say I guess I'm glad your opinion on Horvat has changed, but tbh the flip flop in such a short matter of time, makes it really hard for me to take your posts serious anymore going forward, and now seeing proposals for trading Boeser... I guess good luck with that 

[Hindustan Smyl]

8 minutes ago, ChuckNORRIS4Cup said:

I will say I guess I'm glad your opinion on Horvat has changed, but tbh the flip flop in such a short matter of time, makes it really hard for me to take your posts serious anymore going forward, and now seeing proposals for trading Boeser... I guess good luck with that 

It wasn’t really a flip flop on Horvat.  All I basically said was that I love Horvat and he’s the type of guy that you keep.....BUT, if there ever was a situation where the Canucks had 3 excellent centers and were still weak on D, then you’d have to explore options....and option that would include moving Bo Horvat.

 

My proposal with Boeser is just an idea......the idea being that IF we traded Boeser for a top notch prospect in Byram (or even for an guy like Zack Werenski or Charlie McAvoy), and then went HARD after the numerous top 6 wingers that will be available on July 1st (Panarin, Dzingel, etc.), the payoff could be huge.

 

1) You trade Boeser for a huge upgrade on defense.

2) You then roll the dice on July 1st and go hard after a top 6 winger.

 

End result = minimal loss up front (or even no loss at all if you land Panarin) + a massive upgrade on D.    

 

Unfortunately, the risks involved in doing that would be too great (which is ultimately why I likely wouldn’t do something like that), but that was my thought process behind the Boeser idea.

Edited May 18, 2019 by Hindustan Smyl

[mrturkish]

On 5/16/2019 at 11:55 PM, Hindustan Smyl said:

[proposal] Boeser + 10th for Byram + [winger]

 

Boeser + 10th for 3-5OA + winger.  

 

I haven’t checked the lottery draft rankings, but Chicago is 3rd right?  LA is 5th?  

 

I doubt Bryam drops to 5thOA but if he does, how about a Boeser + 10th for Toffoli + 5th OA?

 

Similar deal for 3rd or 4th overall.  Boeser + 10th for Byram + winger.    

 

On July 1st, we then go hard after Dzingel or Panarin to compensate the loss of Boeser.

 

Best case scenario:  We land a top notch defensive prospect in Byram + a decent enough replacement for Boeser in the form of Dzingel or Panarin.

 

Worst case scenario:  We land a top notch defensive prospect in Byram + a semi decent winger in return in said trade + we clear cap space by moving Boeser who will need to be reupped.

 

 

Seriously I have to question your thinking here. Boeser is a known commodity, and you want to take a chance on an unknown. Yes Byram has been great in junior, but as we are all aware that doesn’t always translate to the NHL. 

[Hindustan Smyl]

39 minutes ago, mrturkish said:

Seriously I have to question your thinking here. Boeser is a known commodity, and you want to take a chance on an unknown. Yes Byram has been great in junior, but as we are all aware that doesn’t always translate to the NHL. 

I definitely understand your point of view and have long since abandoned this idea (even though it was more of a situation of me attempting to “think outloud” as opposed to be actually supporting an idea like this going through).

 

My original plan was....

 

Boeser + 10th for Toffoli + 5th (if Byram was available).

 

Another idea that I was toying with was Boeser for the “defensive equivalent” of Boeser (ie Zack Werenski Or Charlie McAvoy), and then going HARD after a forward on July 1st (Panarin, Dzingel, or Duchene) to minimize the subtraction of Boeser up front.

[Chris12345]

Trading up is almost never worth it. You need to trade from a strength for a weakness. 

 

Vancouver's strengths: Center

Weaknesses: Everything else

 

Therefore you are trading weak to weak. No point.

[mrturkish]

7 hours ago, Hindustan Smyl said:

I definitely understand your point of view and have long since abandoned this idea (even though it was more of a situation of me attempting to “think outloud” as opposed to be actually supporting an idea like this going through).

 

My original plan was....

 

Boeser + 10th for Toffoli + 5th (if Byram was available).

 

Another idea that I was toying with was Boeser for the “defensive equivalent” of Boeser (ie Zack Werenski Or Charlie McAvoy), and then going HARD after a forward on July 1st (Panarin, Dzingel, or Duchene) to minimize the subtraction of Boeser up front.

The only one of those I’d be interested in is panarin. Put him on a line with Boeser and Pedersson would put us in a better position to make the playoffs. Downside is the money that would take to make that happen would put us on the road to be in the same position as the leafs. 

[ItsAllOursBoys]

On 5/17/2019 at 2:55 AM, Hindustan Smyl said:

[proposal] Boeser + 10th for Byram + [winger]

 

Boeser + 10th for 3-5OA + winger.  

 

I haven’t checked the lottery draft rankings, but Chicago is 3rd right?  LA is 5th?  

 

I doubt Bryam drops to 5thOA but if he does, how about a Boeser + 10th for Toffoli + 5th OA?

 

Similar deal for 3rd or 4th overall.  Boeser + 10th for Byram + winger.    

 

On July 1st, we then go hard after Dzingel or Panarin to compensate the loss of Boeser.

 

Best case scenario:  We land a top notch defensive prospect in Byram + a decent enough replacement for Boeser in the form of Dzingel or Panarin.

 

Worst case scenario:  We land a top notch defensive prospect in Byram + a semi decent winger in return in said trade + we clear cap space by moving Boeser who will need to be reupped.

 

 

8

 

[Hindustan Smyl]

1 hour ago, mrturkish said:

The only one of those I’d be interested in is panarin. Put him on a line with Boeser and Pedersson would put us in a better position to make the playoffs. Downside is the money that would take to make that happen would put us on the road to be in the same position as the leafs. 

I’d be interested in Panarin depending on the following:

 

1) What the cap will increase to for 2019-2020.

2) What cap hit Panarin would be willing to accept 

 

I’m a firm believer in proven models, and so what the last 10 years in the NHL have told me, is that 

 

1) IF any one player earns too much money relative to the cap limit

2) IF the teams’ core players are earning too high a percentage of the teams’ overall cap

 

said team will not win a cup.  Period.  Chicago, LA, Boston, Pittsburgh, and Washington all subscribed to the above model.

 

1) Cost controlled cap hits to their players (relative).

2) That extra money being invested in depth.

 

The highest cap hit percentage player to win a cup over these past 10 years I believe was Alex Ovechkin in 2017/2018.

 

So - since I’m a firm believer in PROVEN models, here is what I would offer Panarin.....and not a cent more.

 

[projected 2019-2020 cap limit] * [AlexOvechkinCapHit] / [2017-2018 cap limit]

 

Assuming that the cap limit for 2019-2020 = 83 million, I believe that the “Ovechkin equivalent” cap hit would be around 10.5-10.6 million.  

 

If that’s the case, then that is what I’d offer Panarin @6 years.