Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

48MPHSlapShot

Members
  • Posts

    10,827
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Everything posted by 48MPHSlapShot

  1. I can't think of a better idea for a rebuilding team than to trade a top 10 draft pick for a 27 year old winger that scored at a half PPG clip last season, disappears in the playoffs and carries a 5.5 million dollar cap hit until 2023. Good stuff.
  2. I'm betting that Madden ends up playing wing with us. I base this on absolutely nothing.
  3. Agree with @N7Nucks. Eriksson has negative value. The only way we get rid of him is is we take a bad contract back or eat a significant amount of his salary. Even if a team needs to reach the floor, there are much better ways to do it. Overpay for a free agent that can actually add something to the lineup and put some butts in seats. Also, NJ overpays for Hughes and Tanev. Even if they wanted to get the brothers together, there's no way they agree to that deal. Not too mention I'm not too fond of giving up Hughes either, considering he's exactly what our blueline needs and the type of proactive playmaker that we haven't had on our blueline in forever. Whether or not he "wins a Norris", he's exactly what we need to bolster our popgun offense.
  4. Lievo's production was basically identical to Burr's last year in terms of PPG average when he got here, and Pearson's was significantly better. Burr is a more developed product than Gaudette, but as of this point he's a 3rd liner, and there are no guarantees he gets past that point, especially considering he's been trending downward for two seasons now. He's simply not worth that much. Maybe to a contending team that needs a middle six winger to fill out their roster, but not for a rebuilding team.
  5. It just doesn't make much sense for a rebuilding team to give up 3 young assets for 1 asset in return, especially when the asset coming back isn't a sure thing. It's way too high a price to pay, especially when cheaper options are available. Again, Pearson and Lievo were acquired for virtually nothing. I'll also add that we have a logjam of middle six players on the left side as is. Pearson, Lievo, Baer and Goldobin/Burr. Not saying that you can have too many decent players, but coughing up a significant asset that fills a need like Gaudette for a somewhat redundant piece seems like a mistake.
  6. Don't get me wrong, Burr would be a nice get, but he's still been trending downward for the last couple of seasons, and guys in his age bracket can be gotten for relatively cheap. Hell, we landed Lievo for virtually nothing. We landed Pearson for someone that most thought had virtually no (or even negative) value in Gudbranson. It's not worth it to overpay for someone that isn't a proven commodity when there are cheaper options available. Even if Burr does take the step you think he will, if just one of Gaud/Tree/Goldy pan out, that makes the deal even. If Burr doesn't pan out and just one of those three guys makes it, it's a loss for us. If Burr doesn't pan out and two or more of the three players going the other way pan out, it's a disaster for us. There's only one scenario in which we would win this deal (Burr pans out, Tree/Gau/Goldy don't), two scenarios in which the deal comes out even (None of them pan out, Burr pans out and one of Gau/Goldy/Tree pan out), and numerous scenarios in which we lose the deal. The math just doesn't make sense.
  7. Tree for sure won't be coming back if we trade his rights. The beautiful thing about centers is that they can play wing as well, whereas wingers typically can't play in the dot. As it sits right now we need a 3C, as Sutter and Beagle aren't going to be part of our long term future, and Gaudette should fit the bill. Even if someone like Madden surprises and makes the NHL within a year or two as a center, Gaudette can still be moved to wing. Goldi is still obviously a huge question mark, which is why I would make the deal 1 for 1 and maybe even add a piece to get the deal done, but Goldy, Tree's rights AND Gaudette? That's way too much to pay for a 3rd line winger.
  8. Not a chance. Burakovsky hasn't solidified himself as any more than a 3rd line winger at this point, and he's been trending downward for a couple of years now. Goldobin on his own beat Burakovsky in both points and PPG average, and is himself a year younger. Add to that Gaudette, who despite underperforming somewhat in his rookie year is still a pretty highly regarded young player, and the rights to Tryamkin, who could end up making his way back to the NHL after this season and will instantly be able to step into an NHL lineup, and that's a significant overpayment for a 3rd line winger (of which we already have plenty).
  9. I'd be game for a 7x7 contract. He's just going to demand more as the team gets better, the cap goes up, and we continue to add high end players to compliment the ones we already have.
  10. Arnie be like "What was that, a gust of wind?"
  11. Yeah, two Calder candidates in two years (with one likely to win) and another frontrunner coming next season. What a hack!
  12. I don't see us being willing to move the assets we would have to in order to land him. We're still at a point where gathering young, high end assets to the top priority, so the idea of moving our 10th overall + for a player on the wrong side of 30 doesn't make any sense. Also, we're not far enough along in our rebuild to be considered anything close to a cup contender. We'd need a lot more than an over-the-hill Subban to get us to that point, so unless we load up on free agents as well, it would probably take us a few years to gather the assets we need to become contenders, at which point Subban will be even older and Petey and Hughes will be off of their entry level deals anyways. So yeah, it's a big nope from me. A big one.
  13. Are people going to be trading away our best young players in their proposals every single time we're near a draft? If that's the case, these offseasons are going to be &^@#ing LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG. Can't wait for the inevitable "Petersson + our first for 2nd overall" type proposals next year.
  14. We interviewed him. Did our due diligence (supposedly), and he &^@#ed off when $&!# didn't go his way right off the bat because he knew he had a viable alternative to the NHL. It's not a risk worth taking. Even if there's just a 10% chance that he bolts, with so many other good players available, it's a deal breaker.
  15. No. You don't take a gamble on a guy that's tied up for two more years in Russia and may not ever even want to play in the NHL with a top ten pick.
  16. I do wonder what it would take to get Panarin to sign. Benn is making 9.5 and to land him we'd have to cough up significant assets. Panarin in younger than Benn and wouldn't cost us any assets. Methinks he wouldn't be any more coin than Benn either.
  17. USA defeats France 7-1. Hughes with great assist on White's goal.
  18. Who's the idiot that suggested Horvat? Complete non-starter,
  19. Hoping for one of (assuming none of the top guys fall)... Boldy Newhook Zegras However, my prediction is Soderstrom.
×
×
  • Create New...