[Discussion] The perils of Off Season Trading

[J.I.A.H.N]

Yes, there are good trades...…………….

 

But, most times, trades are  made of cast offs. Very seldom are the trades made of core players that are on an upward swing, and when those are made, they are generally lateral in composition, aka Drouin for Sergachev, which in the end, has really been a win only for one team (Tampa) 

 

The reason, I say this, is that we are seeing trade threads suggesting trading for Zucker or Subban, etc. And I ask, why are they even being offered up? These are good players, who on the surface, seem to be exactly what we need. BUT! Are they? Well first of all, they are in some cases, a year away from UFA, or they are publicly in the head lines for various reason, but for what ever reason, they are becoming expendable for their clubs.....

 

I will suggest we look within, for our answer to why these types of players are available. Let's look at the Sutters, Eriksson's, Baertschi's, Tanev's for our answers to why these other guys are available. In all cases, all the Canucks mentioned have been good players at one time, and still hold some value, but have been either replaced with younger replacements, or are injury prone and are constantly injured, therefore having started to devalue, both for the club and in the eyes of the fans. Or they are a pain in the arse. (E. Kane and R.O'Rielly)

 

In essence, when trading, most likely you are getting some ones castoffs, and a player who's team feels they are expendable...….the question is why?...…..and there is a cost to trades in a reciprocal trade with assets going the other way...….at worst it is a even one for one assets of 2 unwanted players...…….

 

UFA signings on the other hand are very much different, with the player usually activating the move, and where the player most often feels he has greater value than what the team is prepared to pay...…...although that is where the trap lays with UFA's, generally you get a player that is not a cast off......and costs absolutely no assets in exchange for his signing....

Care must be taken, when signing these types of players, and a thorough evaluation of the player must be done, but generally the player is a good player that is at his peek and will have 3 or 4 very good years, followed by a decline in performance.....so buy beware!

 

Where "one for one" trades are patch work, and do not normally improve the team and come with risk, UFA's are plug and play type players, who give instant value, but in most cases have reached their ceiling. 

 

My feeling is, generally do not trade, unless you absolutely feel the trade is a lateral trade, or a trade where you are selling your spare parts, but unless you are in a bind, do not give up prospects or picks, which should be the building blocks of your franchise...…...

 

One last thought on the subject, when you are selling your spare parts, IMO, you have a player that has already taken his position, there for making him redundant, and what your goal as a GM is to get a young prospect or picks, which you can then use to shape your future team with. The most important thing to remember on those types of assets, is they have never been tried, and have never been gauged against other NHL players, there for, never have they been gauged at all, this is where a player is boom or bust, but where true diamonds are found. There for as a team, draft picks should be a primary target when trading away spare parts.....hits and misses for sure, but again, where diamonds are found.

 

Please understand, I do feel there are times, when 1 for 1 trades are valuable, and useful....aka Baertschi for a 2nd, Leivo for Carcone, and Gudbranson for Persson, but as a team comes out of their rebuild, those types of players become less and less useful, as your prospects, generally start to out perform that level of player, and or come in at ELC, there by keeping your Cap ceiling controlled. There for, IMO, when making those types of trades, it matters where you are in your rebuild and what player or position you are replacing...…..

 

As Jim Benning prepares for the next 2 to 6 weeks (June 1st to July 15th), he has one more glaring hole to fix, which is his defense, in particular his RHD,  he has many variables, which to consider. Is Tryamkin available, can Tanev stay healthy, can we do a lateral trade, can we sign a UFA? How does this affect our draft list?  Another question that affects his RHD decision, is his current LHD surplus......Is Edler signing or walking, are Juolevi and Hughes ready, can I afford to move Hutton not knowing the other LHD questions answers.

 

IMO, when looking at these last defensive questions, and knowing how hard it is to acquire or pry good defenseman from other clubs, It looks to me a lateral trade would not happen, and that the short term solution to our RHD lays with Tryamkin and/or a UFA, and long term, it lays with drafting more RHD.

 

Now you may wonder how we got from "the Perils of Off Season Trading" to talking about RHD, but as you can see, as you look down the rabbit hole, it gets deeper and deeper, with a lot of twists and turns, and it takes you in all different directions, until you exit the other side.

 

But, my bottom line is "NO Trades" unless we are dumping our redundant pieces......and then only for young assets or picks

 

 

Edited May 31, 2019 by janisahockeynut

[Fanuck]

Summary:

 

Stay the course, build through the draft. 

[Ojibwa72]

I would honestly say if we could somhow swing Tanev for Zaitsev I would be all over it. I'm sure TO would ask for a late pick or C prospect as well but for us it might also be incentive for Tryamkin to come back as well. 

[Boudrias]

45 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

Yes, there are good trades...…………….

 

But, most times, trades are  made of cast offs. Very seldom are the trades made of core players that are on an upward swing, and when those are made, they are generally lateral in composition, aka Drouin for Sergachev, which in the end, has really been a win only for one team (Tampa) 

 

The reason, I say this, is that we are seeing trade threads suggesting trading for Zucker or Subban, etc. And I ask, why are they even being offered up? These are good players, who on the surface, seem to be exactly what we need. BUT! Are they? Well first of all, they are in some cases, a year away from UFA, or they are publicly in the head lines for various reason, but for what ever reason, they are becoming expendable for their clubs.....

 

I will suggest we look within, for our answer to why these types of players are available. Let's look at the Sutters, Eriksson's, Baertschi's, Tanev's for our answers to why these other guys are available. In all cases, all the Canucks mentioned have been good players at one time, and still hold some value, but have been either replaced with younger replacements, or are injury prone and are constantly injured, therefore having started to devalue, both for the club and in the eyes of the fans. Or they are a pain in the arse. (E. Kane and R.O'Rielly)

 

In essence, when trading, most likely you are getting some ones castoffs, and a player who's team feels they are expendable...….the question is why?...…..and there is a cost to trades in a reciprocal trade with assets going the other way...….at worst it is a even one for one assets of 2 unwanted players...…….

 

UFA signings on the other hand are very much different, with the player usually activating the move, and where the player most often feels he has greater value than what the team is prepared to pay...…...although that is where the trap lays with UFA's, generally you get a player that is not a cast off......and costs absolutely no assets in exchange for his signing....

Care must be taken, when signing these types of players, and a thorough evaluation of the player must be done, but generally the player is a good player that is at his peek and will have 3 or 4 very good years, followed by a decline in performance.....so buy beware!

 

Where "one for one" trades are patch work, and do not normally improve the team and come with risk, UFA's are plug and play type players, who give instant value, but in most cases have reached their ceiling. 

 

My feeling is, generally do not trade, unless you absolutely feel the trade is a lateral trade, or a trade where you are selling your spare parts, but unless you are in a bind, do not give up prospects or picks, which should be the building blocks of your franchise...…...

 

One last thought on the subject, when you are selling your spare parts, IMO, you have a player that has already taken his position, there for making him redundant, and what your goal as a GM is to get a young prospect or picks, which you can then use to shape your future team with. The most important thing to remember on those types of assets, is they have never been tried, and have never been gauged against other NHL players, there for, never have they been gauged at all, this is where a player is boom or bust, but where true diamonds are found. There for as a team, draft picks should be a primary target when trading away spare parts.....hits and misses for sure, but again, where diamonds are found.

 

Please understand, I do feel there are times, when 1 for 1 trades are valuable, and useful....aka Baertschi for a 2nd, Leivo for Carcone, and Gudbranson for Persson, but as a team comes out of their rebuild, those types of players become less and less useful, as your prospects, generally start to out perform that level of player, and or come in at ELC, there by keeping your Cap ceiling controlled. There for, IMO, when making those types of trades, it matters where you are in your rebuild and what player or position you are replacing...…..

 

As Jim Benning prepares for the next 2 to 6 weeks (June 1st to July 15th), he has one more glaring hole to fix, which is his defense, in particular his RHD,  he has many variables, which to consider. Is Tryamkin available, can Tanev stay healthy, can we do a lateral trade, can we sign a UFA? How does this affect our draft list?  Another question that affects his RHD decision, is his current LHD surplus......Is Edler signing or walking, are Juolevi and Hughes ready, can I afford to move Hutton not knowing the other LHD questions answers.

 

IMO, when looking at these last defensive questions, and knowing how hard it is to acquire or pry good defenseman from other clubs, It looks to me a lateral trade would not happen, and that the short term solution to our RHD lays with Tryamkin and/or a UFA, and long term, it lays with drafting more RHD.

 

Now you may wonder how we got from "the Perils of Off Season Trading" to talking about RHD, but as you can see, as you look down the rabbit hole, it gets deeper and deeper, with a lot of twists and turns, and it takes you in all different directions, until you exit the other side.

 

But, my bottom line is "NO Trades" unless we are dumping our redundant pieces......and then only for young assets or picks

 

 

Nice work! I do think there are hockey trades that can be made as teams reassess how their players fit their development timelines. CAP issues also come into play. Troba is interesting as he edges towards UFA next year. The GM has to have a good understanding of the player. While the Canuck depth has improved it is still not deep enough IMHO. A strong depth chart can allow a bigger gamble but Canucks are likely another 2 years away. Stick to the timeline and acquire accordingly.

[xereau]

Scouting and development is everything in this cap era of hockey.

[PhillipBlunt]

Sign all the free agents, and trade the entire roster. NOW!

[Whorvat]

1 hour ago, Ojibwa72 said:

I would honestly say if we could somhow swing Tanev for Zaitsev I would be all over it. I'm sure TO would ask for a late pick or C prospect as well but for us it might also be incentive for Tryamkin to come back as well. 

I really hope you're joking ..but this is CDC after all.

 

Zaitsev has negative value, why would we trade someone with positive value AND add??

[DADDYROCK]

After this years playoffs where most of the top teams lost,some of which I was happy to see (Toronto) and with the cap problems some teams face just take our time and do what's best for the Canucks.

 

I would love to trade some players but if nobody is interested in them it makes it a bit difficult.We are in the bottom of the league and definitely have to build up our draft picks and if we can ever get a break with that B.S. LOTTO DRAFT,it would make it so much easier.

The bottom teams should get best picks.period,that is how you have a chance to improve.

[smithers joe]

i could see trying to move louie but imo, sutter and tanev shouldn’t be moved unless the can be replaced effectively.

when healthy, tanev is a very calming, defensively strong right side d man. 

we have 5 nhl centremen, sort of. what happens if sutter is gone and one of our centermen go down? sutter shoots right so can play right wing on the 3rd or fourth line. or gaudette could move to the wing to start the season. 

granlund isn’t the best guy to have playing centre, if he is re-signed. macewen has been playing wing as both spooner and schaller have been playing. 

macewen and brisebois might stick next year but i’m not sure we have any others ready yet. 

who do we have on the right side that can give us what tanev gives us? 

[Crabcakes]

4 hours ago, smithers joe said:

i could see trying to move louie but imo, sutter and tanev shouldn’t be moved unless the can be replaced effectively.

when healthy, tanev is a very calming, defensively strong right side d man. 

we have 5 nhl centremen, sort of. what happens if sutter is gone and one of our centermen go down? sutter shoots right so can play right wing on the 3rd or fourth line. or gaudette could move to the wing to start the season. 

granlund isn’t the best guy to have playing centre, if he is re-signed. macewen has been playing wing as both spooner and schaller have been playing. 

macewen and brisebois might stick next year but i’m not sure we have any others ready yet. 

who do we have on the right side that can give us what tanev gives us? 

I'm sure Benning gets this.

 

They need to add to the right side D, TOP 4, not subtract.  So it Tanev gets moved, they have to add 2 TOP 4 RHD!  Good luck with that.

 

Sutter, same deal.  I'm convinced that they want to develop Gaudette and the best place for him to do that is in Utica imo.  I think he goes down for half a season.  This was their plan last season and there is no reason not to follow through.  If Gaudette showed us 1 thing last season it is that he has a good shot at and NHL career and the Canucks want to make that happen.  Sutter gives them options and is still an important piece for the development of players on this team.   

 

The smart thing is to just stand pat with Sutter and Tanev.   Keep it simple.

 

 

[J.I.A.H.N]

10 hours ago, Boudrias said:

Nice work! I do think there are hockey trades that can be made as teams reassess how their players fit their development timelines. CAP issues also come into play. Troba is interesting as he edges towards UFA next year. The GM has to have a good understanding of the player. While the Canuck depth has improved it is still not deep enough IMHO. A strong depth chart can allow a bigger gamble but Canucks are likely another 2 years away. Stick to the timeline and acquire accordingly.

I have to say, this summer of all summers, I have not the foggiest idea what Benning is going to do. There are just too many variables, which start with pre-draft signings and pre-draft trades, then the draft, and then free agency...…..

 

Like I say...not the foggiest.....

[Guest]

Yes, making trades for the sake of making one is not the best idea however....  

 

Consider our acquisition of Josh Leivo!  Here's a guy that didn't have a spot on the Leafs but was clearly good enough to be in the NHL.  I'm really glad that we were able to get him from Toronto.  I could easily see him eclipsing 20 goals next year.  

 

This off-season we just need to target teams that are out of cap space.  I'd like to give Ryan Callahan a shot here in Vancouver.  He's a proven NHLer and would help us take a (small) step forward. 

[scheif16]

-Draft BPA at 10

-Stay away from Karlsson, Subban

-Try to get Anders Lee

[IBatch]

7 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:

I have to say, this summer of all summers, I have not the foggiest idea what Benning is going to do. There are just too many variables, which start with pre-draft signings and pre-draft trades, then the draft, and then free agency...…..

 

Like I say...not the foggiest.....

 

One thing you can say will happen is something.  He’s been busy most years with free agents, but we’ve reached the point where “character guys” will just be blocking and no longer placeholders, and we really haven’t managed much by flipping them at the TDL so one year deals even don’t make sense at this point.   

 

But we do need another top six forward and top four D (right side especially) ... and have cap space so something could happen there...have things gone full circle to when the re-tool was the rage?   As far as trades go we don’t have anything that’s really going to get much that isn’t a core guy already, the most I could see is a minor move when it comes to that.    Going to be a long summer after the draft and free agency is over.

[Father Ryan]

Taking a look at our roster, and who is likely available...there are not very many players that could be deemed "desirable". Most are either redundant (Granlund, Spooner, Schaller, et al) or injury prone (Tanev, Sutter, Baer). I'd say Virt is likely the one "desirable" player we have that is conceivably a trade piece. As much as I'd like to see Benning take the BPA at 10 (Caulfield, Boldy?) and then get back into the lower 1st round, say around 20, and draft Sieder...I don't see a way to get that high of a pick without sacrificing some of our youth. You have to offer quality to get quality. Let's say we try to get the 20th that the NYR have (via Winnipeg). Would a package of Tanev and next year's 2nd work? Would we have to add more to that?

I'd like to see some of the "spare parts" cast off this summer. Sure, we end up with a collection of 5th-7th picks. There may not be any viable NHL players there, but those kind of picks can be used for maneuvering in the draft...moving up a spot or three to grab someone we really want.

[IBatch]

17 hours ago, DADDYROCK said:

After this years playoffs where most of the top teams lost,some of which I was happy to see (Toronto) and with the cap problems some teams face just take our time and do what's best for the Canucks.

 

I would love to trade some players but if nobody is interested in them it makes it a bit difficult.We are in the bottom of the league and definitely have to build up our draft picks and if we can ever get a break with that B.S. LOTTO DRAFT,it would make it so much easier.

The bottom teams should get best picks.period,that is how you have a chance to improve.

I agree.   If we must have a lotto then limit it to the bottom five and the rest get what they get.   When bubble playoff teams are missing out and then getting the second overall (PHI) or teams moving up 7-10 spots the system is broken.   It will keep bad teams bad for longer and make luck too much of a factor for the rest.  

[Alflives]

5 minutes ago, Father Ryan said:

Taking a look at our roster, and who is likely available...there are not very many players that could be deemed "desirable". Most are either redundant (Granlund, Spooner, Schaller, et al) or injury prone (Tanev, Sutter, Baer). I'd say Virt is likely the one "desirable" player we have that is conceivably a trade piece. As much as I'd like to see Benning take the BPA at 10 (Caulfield, Boldy?) and then get back into the lower 1st round, say around 20, and draft Sieder...I don't see a way to get that high of a pick without sacrificing some of our youth. You have to offer quality to get quality. Let's say we try to get the 20th that the NYR have (via Winnipeg). Would a package of Tanev and next year's 2nd work? Would we have to add more to that?

I'd like to see some of the "spare parts" cast off this summer. Sure, we end up with a collection of 5th-7th picks. There may not be any viable NHL players there, but those kind of picks can be used for maneuvering in the draft...moving up a spot or three to grab someone we really want.

With Winterpig shopping Trouba, I think they are trying to get a first round pick.  Too bad Trouba is a only a rental, or I’d want JB to offer up 10 OA

[JM_]

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

With Winterpig shopping Trouba, I think they are trying to get a first round pick.  Too bad Trouba is a only a rental, or I’d want JB to offer up 10 OA

If Trouba is only willing to be a 1 year rental then WPG won't be getting a return like that. 

[qwijibo]

18 hours ago, DADDYROCK said:

After this years playoffs where most of the top teams lost,some of which I was happy to see (Toronto) and with the cap problems some teams face just take our time and do what's best for the Canucks.

 

I would love to trade some players but if nobody is interested in them it makes it a bit difficult.We are in the bottom of the league and definitely have to build up our draft picks and if we can ever get a break with that B.S. LOTTO DRAFT,it would make it so much easier.

The bottom teams should get best picks.period,that is how you have a chance to improve.

I’m ok with the draft lotto as is. It’s designed to keep teams from blatantly tanking.  

[The Lock]

Well, it's better than trade deadline trading... unless if you are the seller of a decent player or, better yet, a superstar.