EP40.
-
Posts
496 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by EP40.
-
-
25 minutes ago, canuck2xtreme said:
TRADE: The Tampa Bay Lightning have made a trade with the Columbus Blue Jackets.
To CBJ:
TB 2020 1st Round Draft Selection (15th overall)
To TB:
David Krejci ($3 million salary retained in 2020-21)
Nick Cousins
ANA 2020 2nd Round Draft Selection (47th overall)
Tampa is excited with the acquisition of Krejci!David is a respected veteran who’s done it all and still capable of putting up productive numbers. Organizationally, we felt this was a move which will take us another step forward and put pressure on the teams ahead of us in the standings.
...having a stock of prospect+picks, we deemed it doable to be able to drop out of the 1st round in order to bolster the NHL roster.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, Mike Vanderhoek said:
I think honestly its a matter of Benning being patient, real life vs fantasy or armchair GM'ing where they had a player in Eriksson under contract who is a serviceable NHLer and while the team could pay another club to move on him they have decided to utilize him in a bottom six role mainly over these past few seasons saving themselves of moving out another pick or young player in the process.
The Canucks over the past couple of seasons were not in a cap crunch so to speak, they have been patient as their ELC players and the Sedins moving on have allowed for it. It doesn't hurt them to have Eriksson in the bottom six, its just horrible optics seeing the $ 6 million on paper. If the team feels they need to move out money this offseason as they now truly have added quality scoring like Toffoli for example then I am 100% certain the Canucks could find a taker.
In regards to Sutter maybe again its the cap that causes fans to clench but in all honesty he was and can be a top nine forward who can pot 20 goals in the right situation, he has Playoff experience, plays bigger than he is and along with Beagle was paramount in playing those defensove minutes to allow Bo and the top six to play a more offensive game.
I think its fan and media generated that the Canucks have been stuck with Eriksson and Sutter's contracts vs having two serviceable NHLers on their squad. I bet you see the Canucks move from one or two contracts this offseason and make those targeted contracts fit in with no issue.
Now this is where I think me and everyone else knows you’re being oblivious to the fact there are contracts like Eriksson that prevent teams from bettering themselves in other areas of the ice. They didn’t move him because there were no takers combined with management likely weren’t willing to give away a lot to move him out. But in Loui’s case, maybe that changes now since most of his real money is paid as he only has $5M left to pay over the next 2 years ($2.5M per) while stole holding a $6M cap hit which makes it a lot easier now for cheaper owned teams to take on. Same can’t be said for the dmen Florida has locked up, they’re still owed big chunks of real dollars. And the Canucks have been forced to use Loui. Green’s decision to not play him these playoffs says everything there is to say and even when he did get games later on, 0pts in 10gp.I’d argue it already has hurt them. Brock wasn’t able to be signed long term because the Canucks didn’t have the flexibility to pay him more to secure term. And for sure it’ll effect them this off season and going forward. Sure but the problem is the “optics” with the real life cap hit we have to live with. And yea like mentioned above, I’m hopeful they’re able to find a suitor now that his real dollars have been mostly paid and little money is left which he is owed.
Ehhh sure but the 2 do go hand in hand. Like I wouldn’t mind the Canucks throwing a 7x$10M at Pietrangelo to secure a “serviceable” player. It’s not just about that, it’s about how the finances ripple down the rest of the team.
-
17 minutes ago, BigTramFan said:
Ekblad available? Haha you guys crack me up!
As if bigger named players in history and recent history haven’t been dealt
-
10 minutes ago, peaches5 said:
Johansen is a topline centre. That is huge difference. Centre's are worth way more than wingers. If Johansen was a winger there is no chance that deal happens. Florida doesn't have a surplus of Dmen. Ekblad is by far the best D-man on Florida it doesn't make a ton of sense as to why they would consider trading him unless they were getting a pretty decent return for him.
I’d argue Boeser is more of a 1st line winger than Johansen is a 1st line centre. Brock has better production (p/g) and Johansen didn’t sustain the 70pt pace/season he had in Columbus. Never fully transferred over to Nashville. I’d still say he’s a 1C a part from the down year he had this season.
-
6 minutes ago, oldnews said:
Actually - I think Friedman's "Canucks looking to overhaul blueline" comment may trump the Ekblad idea for stupidity - so scratch my comments about bloggers or credible sources - clearly it's no longer a thing in the hockey world.
Isn’t it already in the process of an overhaul with Myers brought in as a new face? It would just be continuing it.
If one of Tanev/Stecher or even both leave, and a Cernak and/or Ekblad are brought in, that’s half the defense infused with new faces.
I’d say it’s overhauling. Considering Hughes a new face too. That’d be 4/6 dmen. Fantenberg will probably be replaced with one of the prospects so that’s another. Leaving on Edler as the only for sure long term face who we know will be around for the new season.
-
2
-
-
13 minutes ago, peaches5 said:
Even if he is a top-line winger, which is questionable - he is definitely borderline, a top-line winger isn't worth nearly as much as a top pairing dman. A few b grade prospects and mid range picks isn't going to cut it. Why is Florida compromising? They have something you want and most teams want. They have no reason to compromise.
I wouldn’t say they’re compromising. It’s not like they’d trade him for the sake of trading him. They need help upfront. Kinda like the Jones-Johansen trade that I’ve referred to in previous posts.
Turns out CBJ won that deal with Jones being the better player but not like it didn’t help both teams. In the same way, I don’t see how this sort of trade wouldn’t help both teams needs. Florida is scarce upfront and have surplus dmen. The opposite is true for the Canucks.
...appreciate the honest opinions we shared :]
-
18 minutes ago, peaches5 said:
I am not devaluing Boeser. He is a top 6 winger. Ekblad is a top 2 dman who is 24 and under contract for 5 more years. There is no way Boeser alone is close to being enough. Juolevi could possible play in the NHL next season but is a complete wildcard with his injuries and slow development he isn't worth a 1st anymore maybe a 2nd. Adding a 1st which will likely be a 16+ and possibly 24+ pick is just the cost of business unless you want to add in another solid prospect which I would not want to do I'd rather give up the mid to late first. That is bareminium what a young top 2 dman is going to cost that is under contract on a fair deal.
So yea this is where and why I think you are devaluing Boeser.Labelling him as a top6 forward is doing him a disservice. That’d be like calling Ekblad a top4 dman. Very broad and both players easily surpass such tiers. As such, Ekblad is a top2 dman as you say and imo Boeser is very easily a 1st line scoring winger.
And yea I’m agreeing Boeser alone doesn’t cut it. However Florida wouldn’t get the world from us either. Would be a comprise in the middle. The way I see it, we wouldn’t give them some A grade + nor would they accept a below value. Why I think a B grade prospect/middle round pick(s) would be a fair compromise for both sides and fair value.
-
7 minutes ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:
Myers is "only" 1.5 million cheaper. His contract isn't that bad. Look at the offensive production of both players with their current respective teams.
Except Myers is a “bad” contract. He’s grossly overpaid.
-
5 minutes ago, peaches5 said:
Not a chance. This is a young D-man signed for another 5 years - his contract is really not that bad. He is big, strong and can skate. The only reason I can think of as to why Florida wants to potentially trade him is he has a NMC kicking in and it will last until his final year which it then converts to a NTC so they might be thinking let's tradef him before that kicks in. He isn't going to be traded without a big return and really if he's on the market then almost every team in the league should be inquiring about him. He has the potential to be a number 1 at the very least he is like Edler and is a very strong number 2 guy.
Yep I’m not denying that. If anything, you’re devaluing Boeser. It would never be Boeser/Juolevi/1st. That’s 3 1sts. Florida would jump on that lol.
-
16 minutes ago, peaches5 said:
I think the bare minimum for Ekblad will be Boeser + Juolevi + 1st
I don’t think so, not at all. Will be more a secondary tier +. Maybe a B level prospect and or mid pick like a 3rd/4th/5th...Ekblad’s contract is pretty hefty in itself and he hasn’t produced to what the organization expected him to when they signed it.
-
4 minutes ago, Mike Vanderhoek said:
Its the same nonsense we hear in Vancouver " Vancouver is in Cap trouble " by some members of the media. You don't trade your top defenseman when 3 others make a large salary who are nowhere near him in terms of importance.
It’s not that easy tho. If it was, the Canucks could move out Eriksson’s contract and/or Baertschi’s, Sutter’s, etc...so they could comfortably retain each one of Marky Toffoli Tanev Stecher and not have to let any of them walk.
But as we know that’s just not how things work for us. And other teams such as Florida in this instance.
-
4 minutes ago, John_Guest said:
I'm thinking more the "trade Boeser' insanity in general. Check out the proposals in the Proposal forum, here, for example. Try the Boeser for Jack Eichel one, for example, if you think nobody would suggest adding Podkolzin.
Hypebole here maybe, but there's a point to be made.
Sorry but I don’t get any connection you’re trying to make here as it does not apply whatsoever in Boeser+ for Ekblad.-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, John_Guest said:
It's not so much Boeser as the +s. I've been seeing. Podkolzin, 2021 1st and 2nd and list of anything young that's shown promise and would have to be replaced to quick fix RHD.
If people were just talking say Boeser for Ekblad right across that would be an even trade and my point is that's the kind of thing the Canucks can afford to wait for because at one time we were expecting the rebuild to go into 2021 when all the dead weight is gone, the stars are signed, we know what we've got, what we can get and what's expendable.
Let's say Podkolzin is an immediate star and Boeser is 15 points better as he approaches his ceiling would that be worth waiting for before you start wanting to make a gift of both of them and throwing in half the existing youth and prospects?
I don’t think anyone’s saying or has said Podkolzin would be included as a +-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
8 minutes ago, John_Guest said:I don't get what the TRADE BOESER NOWWW!!! (then add every 2021 pick, Virtannen, Motte, Stecher, Podkolzin, BC Place and Pettersson's first boy child) rush is.
Relax...
Not too long ago we were comfortable waiting to see what would become of Juolevi, Rathbone and such - what would happen when the dead weight contracts end and how would new forwards like Podkolzin and Hoglander affect things.
Remember when we thought we were in a rebuild? Have things really changed so much you want to trade away what's working so far for exorbitant, quick fix tweaks?
How would getting Ekblad be a quick fix if he’s the same age as Boeser?-
5
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
7 minutes ago, Mike Vanderhoek said:can we please stop with the Boeser crap before it starts to be a problem for the player in the city ? the team needs to recoup picks if anything else and continue developing who they have. It makes zero sense to trade an up and coming offensive forward when the team is finally getting the depth they need in that regard. Loading up for Ekblad would be a waste if it involved any of the key forwards. Vancouver's tradeable strength is most likely in goal and that is not a need of Floridas.
I hear ya but disagree. Look at how Jones propelled CBJ to the next level. Ekblad would be that all around top dman. I feel our team has a much bigger glaring need on the backend and are surplus organizationally upfront.
So it’s a very sensible sacrifice to make to improve overall team balance.
-
1
-
4
-
1
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/31-thoughts-matt-dumba-next-wild-trade-block/
3. As part of this, the Canucks want to begin an overhaul of their blue line. One coach said it was noticeable how differently Dallas could handle Vegas as opposed to Vancouver. The Stars have a big, strong, mobile defence that consistently broke down the Golden Knights’ offence. After he said this, I spent some time re-watching the games, and you can definitely see it. The Canucks clearly felt they had to pack in the middle and defend from there, while Dallas felt very comfortable aggressively challenging Vegas and were successful doing it. The contracts and free agency get the headlines, but this will be a critical part of Vancouver’s planning. (This coach, by the way, also said another difference between Dallas and Vancouver was the Stars sustained pressure in the offensive zone, which forced Vegas’s best forwards to change instead of rushing the puck up ice. Small thing, but a big thing.)
13. My guess: Zito’s going to be asked about Barkov (no chance), Aaron Ekblad and Jonathan Huberdeau. He’s going to explore moving one of the big tickets on his blue line to create flexibility. All he would answer is, “I’m going to listen to anything. But I’m going to say no to most things.”
> Harman mentions Florida is depleted of a 2nd line with Hoffman & Dadonov heading to free agency which is where a possible Boeser move would make sense...according to Friedman, Panthers new GM will look to move out a “big ticket” blue line contract to which Harman says Ekblad is the only one with positive trade value. (other dmen/contracts are essentially unmovable)> A speculative deal would have to be Boeser+ simply due to the fact top dmen are valued more than top forwards. Maybe the only hockey deal I can remember in recent memory happening regarding a top D for top F was the Seth Jones for Ryan Johansen trade. Arguable no plus was needed with the forward because Johansen is a centre. (bit more valuable)
> Harman says the Canucks can look to target Erik Cernak from Tampa like we did with JT Miller. He’s 23, Tampa is in a cap crunch and won’t be able to afford him. If offer-sheeted at ~$4M, compensation would be a 2nd rounder. Cernak is a big body and already a better rated dman than Tanev whose declined has begun. Canucks can look to offersheet or go down the trade route and pay similar/possible even slightly less value to acquire him.
...what I’m getting from this is JB wants to better equip the Canucks backend and rightfully so. They were bombarded in the playoffs and held hostage in many sequences.
There’s a few scenarios I see:
A.) Canucks simply re-sign both Tanev & Stecher keeping them for the right side (but that doesn’t change anything or improve the blueline if it’s looking to be “overhauled”)
B.) Canucks keep one of Tanev/Stech and bring in a Cernak type dman
C.) Canucks keep one of Tanev/Stech and bring in an Ekblad (who JB has historically been looking to add, a true top pair RHDman, as he’s been reported attempting to trade for dmen like Subban and Karlsson in the past)
D.) Canucks keep none of Tanev/Stech and bring in both an Ekblad and Cernak replacing the would be ex-Canucks.
Quite frankly I’d be pleased with anything other than scenario A. There’s no sense in keeping the same dcore if we’re truly looking to take the next steps to compete even more. It was evident this current d group won’t get the job done. If that means moving on from Tanev who has been so valuable for us, then so be it as long as it’s for improvement.
-
2
-
1
-
8
-
1
-
1
-
Didn’t know there were 2 Trump threads on the forum lol
...just like Biden’s town hall yesterday, anything related to him somehow ends up concluding to Trump.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, RUPERTKBD said:
I made no mention of "doctored". Merely that we were only seeing the portion of the video that they wanted us to see.
The backpedaling is real lol.If you can, please tell us what “video editing software” was used in that uploaded video. I’m sure we’d all love to know and be enlightened so we know moving ahead to be aware of such shambolic deceitful content...
-
1 minute ago, BoKnows said:
I guess everything is edited then. I guess we're all Trump supporters too for raising questions about Biden.
The questions are edited...
Lol but seriously, that means every video I’ve ever made at a Canucks game is edited because I didn’t record the whole game. And every quote ever which wasn’t from A-Z.
What an unnecessary and dumb thing to say. Let alone use as some sort of hill to die on
-
6 minutes ago, BoKnows said:
What the point of saying that the video was edited? I acknowledge that EP said something along the lines "yes, all videos are edited" but that wasn't the editing he was talking about IMO.
Yeah I don’t know what the point in saying that was because clearly the video was not doctored in any way which is what Rupert clearly made it seem like happened. “Video editing software”...whatever that was supposed to mean.
And using Rupert‘s logic, every video or article ever uploaded or published is deemed “edited” unless what was referenced was the full entire thing. Even if said thing was not rearranged or doctored (edited) not having used some sort of video edit software.
-
1
-
-
Just now, RUPERTKBD said:
I'm pointing out the irony of trying to convince us that Biden is mentally deficient by posting edited videos of gaffes, while ignoring the myriad gaffes that Trump has made.
Not edited, I think the words you’re looking for is “video editing software”.
Because those videos are edited like a Marvel movie producer made em
-
3 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said:
Yes. It is. That's why we have what's called "Video Editing Software".
Are you trying to make the case that Biden's entire speech was 28 seconds long? No? Then the video is edited.....
I hope I made that simple enough for a Trump fan to understand.
1) whoever posted that video didn’t use “video editing software”, they simply recorded a clip and uploaded it. Not rocket science.
2) are you insinuating I did say that? No. And the video is not edited. I don’t think you know what that word means. It’s a clip that’s recorded and uploaded.
3) I’m not a “Trump fan” but I wouldn’t expect anything less from the tolerant left and outrage mob when views against their own are brought up.
-
4 minutes ago, nuckin_futz said:
Thanks so much for your expertise on the subject. FYI, I overcame a childhood stutter. You have no clue what you're on about. Making a tonne of irresponsible assumptions. I'll go by my own personal experiences rather than your YouTube sleuthing thanks. Biden has been the same for decades. The guy rambles on, always has. Ever heard Pelosi speak? She rambles on worse than he does.
I couldn't help but notice you had nothing to say about the unauthorized sterilizations.
I’m glad to hear you were able to overcome it.Sorry but that’s just flat out wrong. He’s not the same person he was 2 years ago let alone during his days as VP or decades ago as you claim. Again, just a bit of common sense shows there’s been an inarguable medical decline which has lingering effects and continues to effect him. Don’t be that blind apologist who will defend such lengths haha.
And well if you haven’t noticed, I didn’t chime in this thread about sterilizations.
-
3
-
-
3 hours ago, oldnews said:
Debrusk
19 g, 16a, 35 pts, 65 games
35 hits
15 blocked shots
161 shots, 11.8%
26 takeaways, 21 giveaways
59.2% ozone starts
2:33 /g powerplay ice time, 7 powerplay goals
16:03 ice time/game
DeBrusk/Krejci/Kase-Kuhlman
Virtanen
18 g, 18a, 36 pts, 69 games
102 hits
28 blocked shots
150 shots, 12%
37 takeaways, 31 giveaways
47.5% ozone starts
0:52 /g powerplay ice time, 6 powerplay goals
13:05 ice time/game
Roussel Sutter-Gaudette Virtanen
Don’t want to be that guy, but this was Debrusk’s worst NHL campaign p/g wise whereas it was Virtanen’s career year which was unquestionably unsustainable and proved true in the bubble/playoffs once things started up again.
/ Debrusk is an every day top6 PWF. Same can’t be said for JV. Even Benning voiced his disappointment in him after being eliminated. And he’s been his biggest advocate hoping he’d prove him right for drafting him.
But yea, that’s just the reality sadly. Comparing JV-Debrusk is a bit silly without context
-
2
-
[Friedman] Canucks looking to “overhaul blue line” ...Ekblad & Cernak could be available
in Trades, Rumours, Signings
Posted
I’ll say this: not every teams situation is the same. For the Canucks, they’d be looking for that all scenarios #1 dman in Ekblad. That’s what they lack. Blues had a #1C #1D #W #1G, all of the things which are hardest to gather.
And you kind of make my point for me, they weren’t in cap trouble then but are now as they’ve had to continue to pay their key players. It’s at a point where they can’t afford Pietrenagelo now and are letting him go for nothing in FA.