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

kanucks25

Members
  • Posts

    10,930
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by kanucks25

  1. There are still people on this board that defend that trade. That is all I have here. Stay safe.
  2. How hard would it have been to "deal with expansion"? We don't have enough good players to protect, it was never a problem lol. The only problem is them potentially squandering the opportunity to get out of that Myers contract (not that I'm confident Seattle would take him).
  3. The worst part about this trade is that it gives them an option to protect Myers at the expansion draft.
  4. I mean, have we had a Mantha like player available to trade? I guess not. But are you suggesting we haven't had many other opportunities to do a similar thing in all of Benning's time here? Schmidt would be the closest thing to weaponizing cap space and even that doesn't really count considering we had to let go of one of Tanev or Toffoli to fit Schmidt.
  5. Weaponizing cap space during a rebuild. Apparently it's good enough for Stevie Y, but not good enough for us. OK
  6. It's the same old story. Here's an article from 2018: https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/canucks-benning-looking-improve-impressive-draft-resume/ Dude trying to rebuild without a draft pick surplus then wonders why he has no depth lol.
  7. Yes, that is the justification of the trade. But that doesn't really have anything to do with trade value.
  8. Don't worry, I'm told the only reason we haven't won the Cup already this year is because of the hellacious all-time difficult division we're in. Next year, when we're in our normal division, I anticipate us winning 2-3 championships by Christmas.
  9. Sure. But that doesn't justify trading him for an even more bad player. So again, something smells, and it may not just be Benning this time.
  10. Something smells here for sure. I think it's pretty clear Benning wanted to get rid of him today, just don't know why.
  11. This Highmore character only has about 2 seasons' worth of pro games despite being 25, so perhaps the Canucks feel he has some untapped potential. I imagine they targeted a gritty C with Sutter being a UFA and Beagle's future in question due to injury. That is the rationale, anyway. I'm not that high on Gaudette but we lost value here.
  12. Why would we need to protect him? Why would Seattle take him? And if they did, we would be happy.
  13. Okay, so he didn't say what he really meant. So what did he really mean?
  14. He's not going to get everything right, a lot of the top national insiders miss, too. You're only dismissing it because it goes against your argument.
  15. Just doesn't make any sense. We keep getting told how hard it is to move money in the COVID/flat cap era and now lots of teams would have money to throw at a middling forward coming off a bad year? Puh-lease.
  16. He quoted Dhaliwal, who obviously has contacts in the game (at least when it comes to Canucks stuff).
  17. Hm, nobody has taken a stab at this one yet. Anyone? Perhaps @aGENT?
×
×
  • Create New...