Patel Bure Posted February 1, 2020 Share Posted February 1, 2020 Rafferty replaces Stecher in the line-up. Losing Stecher would suck obviously, but the Canucks would get a proven playoff performer, and a good two way center that could also help set up Brock on the 3rd line (or Jake if the Canucks went back to putting Brock on the top line). With JPG in the line-up, you’d have to think that the Canucks would have three dangerous scoring lines. With our upcoming cap crunch, the Canucks will likely lose Stecher anyways (via trade or choosing not to qualify). While it’s true that JPG would become a UFA at season’s end (and we likely wouldn’t be able to afford him), my proposed deal would allow us to move two assets (Baertschi and Stecher) that likely won’t be in our future plans anyways. And so essentially - the trade would boil down to a 2nd for JPG as a rental. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patel Bure Posted February 1, 2020 Author Share Posted February 1, 2020 JPG + Roussel = some serious French bromance on that 3rd line. Not to mention, smart two way hockey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drive-By Body Pierce Posted February 1, 2020 Share Posted February 1, 2020 I think its legit value equality, but I don't see why Ottawa does this trade instead of looking for early picks and highend prospects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwijibo Posted February 1, 2020 Share Posted February 1, 2020 I don’t see why Ottawa takes a 2 year cap dump in order to move a valuable asset. They’ll do better than this on the open market Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patel Bure Posted February 1, 2020 Author Share Posted February 1, 2020 11 minutes ago, Drive-By Body Pierce said: I think its legit value equality, but I don't see why Ottawa does this trade instead of looking for early picks and highend prospects. I’m probably being too optimistic but I figured that JPG might have some diminished value due to his Upcoming UFA status. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6string Posted February 1, 2020 Share Posted February 1, 2020 I don't see Benning disrupting the energy in the locker room, he'll save his trades for the offseason. He's pulling players up from within the organization to close out the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 1, 2020 Share Posted February 1, 2020 I really like the trade and I think it's fair, however I think that Benning has stated that he won't be trading away draft picks and that he'll be giving our players on the farm a chance to show their game with the big club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildcam Posted February 1, 2020 Share Posted February 1, 2020 (edited) Never trade for Pageau, 5'10, 180lbs, 27, league for 6, look at previous 5 years? Big Big No This player is not consistent look at his stats 27 yrs old small forward... 19-20 - GP 48 - G 20 - 32 Pts 18-19 - GP 39--G 4 -- 12 Pts 17-18 - GP79- G 16 - 29 Pts 16-17 - GP 82 -G 12 -- 33 Pts Pageau is not a top 7 forward on Canucks roster....Pettersson, Miller, Boser, Horvat, Pearson, Virtanen, Ferland are all better then Pageau.. Leivo, Roussel, Gaudette, Trading away a 2nd rounder and Stetcher never never do this.. Big No to Pageau...Don't trade for guy because of one good season in 5 years..WE have enough 3rd line forwards already.. Edited February 1, 2020 by wildcam 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabbit Posted February 1, 2020 Share Posted February 1, 2020 1 hour ago, wildcam said: Never trade for Pageau, 5'10, 180lbs, 27, league for 6, look at previous 5 years? Big Big No This player is not consistent look at his stats 27 yrs old small forward... 19-20 - GP 48 - G 20 - 32 Pts 18-19 - GP 39--G 4 -- 12 Pts 17-18 - GP79- G 16 - 29 Pts 16-17 - GP 82 -G 12 -- 33 Pts Pageau is not a top 7 forward on Canucks roster....Pettersson, Miller, Boser, Horvat, Pearson, Virtanen, Ferland are all better then Pageau.. Leivo, Roussel, Gaudette, Trading away a 2nd rounder and Stetcher never never do this.. Big No to Pageau...Don't trade for guy because of one good season in 5 years..WE have enough 3rd line forwards already.. Totally agreed with Wildcam. Pegeau should not be our target. I think Benning will save the assets and draft picks (I think late round) for his targets. or he might trade the assets for draft picks. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanukfanatic Posted February 1, 2020 Share Posted February 1, 2020 3 hours ago, DarkIndianRises said: Rafferty replaces Stecher in the line-up. Losing Stecher would suck obviously, but the Canucks would get a proven playoff performer, and a good two way center that could also help set up Brock on the 3rd line (or Jake if the Canucks went back to putting Brock on the top line). With JPG in the line-up, you’d have to think that the Canucks would have three dangerous scoring lines. With our upcoming cap crunch, the Canucks will likely lose Stecher anyways (via trade or choosing not to qualify). While it’s true that JPG would become a UFA at season’s end (and we likely wouldn’t be able to afford him), my proposed deal would allow us to move two assets (Baertschi and Stecher) that likely won’t be in our future plans anyways. And so essentially - the trade would boil down to a 2nd for JPG as a rental. Why would the Canucks do this? Seriously. Why? Pageau has the same points as our 6th best forward - Virtanen. We need Stecher more than Pageau. No thanks. No reason for the Canucks to do this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drakrami Posted February 1, 2020 Share Posted February 1, 2020 Decent proposal Pageau seems like a good add. We will have to waive some players though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patel Bure Posted February 1, 2020 Author Share Posted February 1, 2020 1 hour ago, Kanukfanatic said: Why would the Canucks do this? Seriously. Why? Pageau has the same points as our 6th best forward - Virtanen. We need Stecher more than Pageau. No thanks. No reason for the Canucks to do this. Playmate for Boeser: Miller-Pettersson-Virtanen Pearson-Horvat-Eriksson Roussel-Pageau-Boeser Ferland-Beagle-Gaudette Hughes-Tanev Edler-Myers Tryamkin-Fantenberg Sutter can’t make plays out of a wet paper bag, while Gaudette and Boeser dont really mix. The Canucks 3rd line scoring is a bit weak. They need a guy that is offensively gifted enough to play with Boeser, but can also play very well defensively. Pageau is a proven playoff performer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crabcakes Posted February 1, 2020 Share Posted February 1, 2020 Centre is the least of the Canucks worries and having Boeser on the 3rd line is temporary while they ride out Eriksson's hot hand. Assuming Rafferty can play at the NHL level. Until he does, we don't know. How many players have we had in Utica who did very well in the AHL but couldn't make the jump to the NHL? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostsOf1994 Posted February 2, 2020 Share Posted February 2, 2020 1) pageau is not what is needed. 2) canucks likely have what we need in the cupboard of shiny prospects, see oj Podkolzin hoglander lind etc lesser extent Goldobin Bailey Macewan... 3) if the canucks trade a RHD it will be part of a package to ugrade RHD. 4) Gaudette has taken Sutter's 3rd Line C position, he will not be on the 4th line RW. 5) Canucks won't be trading in more picks, if anything it will be hockey trades, extra forwards for extra D perhaps? 6) pageau ewww yuck gross, i need a bleach shower nao Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now