Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Enter Search Term. Use arrows to navigate between autocomplete results. If no results appear, use Enter to do a full site search.
Forum Closure ×
Canucks Community
Forum Closure

Scottydzik

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    564

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Scottydzik

    [Proposal] Proposal How to fix our defense

    in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing

    Posted

    8 minutes ago, Phil_314 said:

    Virtanen and DeBrusk have to be close-ish in value (of course our Jake is probably lesser given the legal issues), so I'm guessing that the 4th is the sweetener?  (DeBrusk underachieved in Boston this year so his value has to be at a low right now).  With that said, I think we're giving up too much (Schmidt with 30% retention which brings him down to $4 million approx. should increase his value, and he still did better than Lauzon last season, so if Boston wants to improve by getting Schmidt I'm not sure why we need to retain AND add Kole Lind.  You may be of the camp that Schmidt is done since he had an off year or that the rumors are true about him wanting out, but IDK if we need to have both the retention and the add to get Lauzon and a 2nd -- I think at $4 mil he can get that alone, since he still outproduced Lauzon and played more minutes).  I think it's close but I probably wouldn't want to do it.  

    Ya I think lauzon played really well I just don’t think they even do it unless with retain some on Schmidt 

    [Speculation] Is Schmidt on the move?

    in Trades, Rumours, Signings

    Posted

    1 minute ago, Angry Goose said:

    I'm a bit skeptical about this DP report.  Doesn't make sense to me to move on from Schmidt this quickly unless it's true he wants out.  If that's the case then sure go ahead and trade him.  That leaves a massive hole on the back end though.

     

    If the reports are just speculative, NS definitely fits the mould of what the Canucks are looking for on the back end.  Trading him wouldn't doesnt make any sense unless you can find a better upgrade.

     

    If the contract is a legit concern it would make more sense to trade him after a bounce back season or couldn't the Canucks just expose him to SEA?  

     

    I guess we will see.

    The problem is canucks defense is not gonna get better when we have 3 or 4 guys rathbone Myers Hughes Schmidt that need be sheltered and are puck movers but soft we need bigger guys that are harder play against hence why Schmidt is expandable to fill the need you’ll get almost same game out of rathbone for 900 k

    • Popular Post
    • Popular Post

    [Speculation] Is Schmidt on the move?

    in Trades, Rumours, Signings

    Posted

    10 minutes ago, J-P said:

    I personally believe that there's a solid chance we trade for a D before ED to take advantage of other teams protection problems. Myers' contract was always designed so he could be exposed, and I think the organization views that contract as neutral, meaning if Seattle takes him he can be replaced via trade or FA but if they don't there's no harm in keeping him.

     

    I don't think OJ will be exposed (too much time invested and still lots of potential and will sign a reasonable contract), but trading for a quality D and exposing Myers seems like an easy way for a much needed upgrade IMO.

    Myers has been one of our most consistent d and has height and is rhd which is really hard to find I do not ever expose Myers 

    • Thanks 1
    • Cheers 1
    • Haha 3
    • Vintage 1

    [Speculation] Is Schmidt on the move?

    in Trades, Rumours, Signings

    Posted

    1 minute ago, aGENT said:

    We can still do better than that and use our own 2nd if we want something like an 'Arvidson deal'. I'm not giving away Schmidt for peanuts just because some teams might also be giving away ED exposures for peanuts. We don't need to move Schmidt until AFTER the ED.

    So you don’t want to take advantage of someone else expansion problem with a 2nd ala Ryan graves and still have our 2nd to use to stock cupboard that is getting very thin cause I for damn sure know we’re a better team with Ryan graves and debrusk to Schmidt next year 

    [Speculation] Is Schmidt on the move?

    in Trades, Rumours, Signings

    Posted

    4 minutes ago, aGENT said:

    Rathbone has a similar ceiling/player type IMO. If management is sold on him, they may elect to move up the timeline on that succession plan and reallocate that cap elsewhere.

     

    Agreed!

     

    I doubt it either, but I just don't see much else is want from BOS. 

     

    I'd FAR rather keep Schmidt than swap him for Debrusk.

     

    No, we don't. And no he won't. He'll be making about $1m less. For an interior player, of a type we don't need. What's the point?

    Just like all people didn’t want Bennett he doesn’t pan out you let him walk next year with an extra 2nd we can go for graves or zadarov or sign oleksiak im taking combo of those 2 players for same price over Schmidt any day

    [Speculation] Is Schmidt on the move?

    in Trades, Rumours, Signings

    Posted

    1 minute ago, aGENT said:

    Suggest better then. Try starting with player types we actually have a need for.

     

    I'd we could land Carlo, even if we added, I'd be game. Otherwise not sure they have anything we really need (and would be willing give up).

    Ya I don’t think they shed Carlo but I’d much rather have debrusk graves or zadarov then Schmidt for the price 

    • Upvote 1

    [Proposal] Van/Det

    in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing

    Posted

    9 hours ago, Dixon Ward said:

    I would like to see the following:

     

    Juolevi, #9 OA + Gadjovich 

     

    For 

     

    Rasmussen + #6 OA

     

    Only if Clarke is still available at 6th.

     

    We get our huge 3rd line center and rhd prospect, they get an nhl top 4 ready lhd with big upside, Wallstedt and Gadjovich. 

     

    I think it suits both teams.

     

     

    Great proposal  they want there goalie and can move down to do it Rasmussen is gonna be good I can’t see Stevie y trading him he’s one of best ad identifying young talent I wish this happened tho 

    Elias Pettersson | Quinn Hughes - Contract Discussion Thread

    in Canucks Talk

    Posted

    23 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

    No way should the Canucks give Hughes a Chabot contract at this point. 8 mil long term for a completely one dimensional player is a bad idea.

     

    I would trade him for a true #1 dman or a package of core age young players including an offensive dman before I would lock him up for that much. He has to show he can be more than a pp/offensive specialist first and can grow defensively.

    I agree at this point if Hughes wants 8 or more his value is at real high you check market for him 3x7 pettersson similar to barzal 3x5.5 similar to mccavoy

    The future of schmidt and myers

    in Canucks Talk

    Posted

    2 minutes ago, Alflives said:

    If Boston is going for OEL won’t they want us to take back more cap than we give?  

    Maybe it’s back to Jake for Jake?  

    I doubt there worried about 1 million they have krejci coming off books and have cap if Benning could pull this trade it be slick 

×
×
  • Create New...