nameci

It drives me crazy that after we are able to create some cap space, people have plans on how to spend it right away, putting us back in the same cap hell that we are enduring right now. Let the kids play and develop. When we are truly a cup contender, sure, spend the money to fill in the missing pieces. This spend it now mentality reminds me of the times I would give the kids their allowances on a Saturday and they would blow it all that day on impulse purchases and have to wait miserably for the next Saturday when they received their next allowance. Fortunately they finally figured it out. Let's hope Canucks' fans and management figure it out as well.

Two screw ups on one line. Sorry I forgot the tag and it should read Selling High, Clearing Cap space. My apologies to all. That’s what happens when you do something in a hurry. Mea culpa.

To Chicago: 11OA Silovs TWO of Myers, Garland, or Boeser To Vancouver: 19 OA 2023 second round pick Conor Murphy We sell high on Silovs, get back a second round pick, get a serviceable RHD (yes, I know he is older), retain a pick in the first round, and gain cap space.

After an initial bevy of free agent signings, activity seems to have dropped off to a trickle. I remember reading that the Canucks were interested in three RHD Filip Burglund, Jacob Bengtsson and Samuel johannesson. Is there any recent news about any of them? Would the lack of activity be the result of cap concerns or using up their allotted number of roster spots? Any insights or info would be appreciated.

AI have some questions which someone will be able to answer for me 1. Is there any update on the status of Filip Bergland, Jacob Bengtsson or Samuel Johanneson? 2. There has been very little talk about 1 for 1 trades. Do you think the Canucks would be able to acquire a player like top 4 RHD Matt Roy? The Kings have a wealth of RHD and may be prepared to move a player like Roy for some help on the wings and allow younger players the opportunity to fill that role? 3 Would it not be to our financial advantage to determine a realistic evaluation for OEL’s salary and pay the receiving team the balance until his contract expires, rather rhan trying to find a suitable “sweetener” to complete a trade or buying him out? 4. if the Penguins were offering two first round picks and a bad contract for J.T. Miller, why didn’t we jump on that offer as it would have added two players to our prospect pool and made us cap compliant? Any insights would be appreciated. Thanks.

I have long hoped to that the Kings would approach the Canucks regarding Thatcher Demko as ,the Kings could well be our ideal trading partner. They seem to have an abundance of center and Rhd prospects to facilitate a trade that would fill in some holes in our roster. When the Kings were talking to Arizona about Chychrun they made the Coyotes aware that Byfield and Clarks were not happening but that still leaves them with lots of other intriguing options for us to consider. In the last Hockey News magazine they list 6 center prospects in their system. Also they seem to have a number of rhd prospects in their system. So that if they are really interested in a player that we don’t really need/want to trade, their offer would have to be significant and fill our needs as well. Here is my proposal: Thatcher Demko ( no retention) to the Kings for Helge Grans, a center prospect and top 4 rhd Matt Roy. Anything less and Demko stays in Vancouver. So who becomes our number one goalie for the rest of the season? How about Khudobin? And next season? That’s where Alvin earns his money. We would certainly have a great opportunity to acquire Tristan Jarry.

Then you are missing out in an affordable rhd in Roy.

I have several trade suggestions that may fill in some of the holes on our roster: 1. Boeser to Pittsburgh for Jarry. I don’t envision that the trade would be a simple one for one. This is only meant to be the starting point in a trade discussion between the Canucks and the Penguins. Feel free to modify it for cap compliance and additional pieces to make this a workable trade. 2. Myers for a second round pick. While we may have grown increasingly frustrated by his play, he does seem to have some value to other teams and competing bids may drive his price up. 3. Schenn to Boston for Lorei. If we can’t get a suitable rhd prospect for Schenn, don’t trade him. 4. Demko to LA for Roy, Turcotte and Grans. Hopefully Chychryn doesn’t end up in LA. No other NHL team has as many center and rhd prospects as L.A. 5. 2023 first round pick. If we move up in the draft lottery, then swing for the fences and choose one of the studs at the top of the draft. If not, trade down to receive extra compensation. There are no defensemen in the top tier of the draft, so we can drop back a few spots, receive an additional pick, and still grab one of the defensemen available later in the first or second rounds, 6. 2023 first round pick. As above, to receive additional compensation. Almost all of the stud rhd prospects in other organizations were chosen in the second round, Lorei, Grans, Iorio, Morrow and others. 7. During free agency sign Graves from NJ as our second pairing lhd and move OEL to the third pairing where his misplays will hopefully be less damaging. 8. Resign Schenn during free agency. 9. Explore what it would take to acquire Connor Murphy from Chicago. 10. Move on from Stillman, Rathbone, Poolman, Burroughs and Studnika

In response yo Kenny Powers, I would want Turcotte, Roy, Grans and a pick. I have always hoped that LA would be Bo’s destination.

The more I think about it, the more I am convinced that Bo will not be traded. Somewhere, some how the team will mysteriously find the money to resign Bo. While most fans will be happy that Bo is returning, others will feel that by taking on another bloated, long term contract we will have lost our great opportunity to acquire help on defense and we will again be in cap hell for the foreseeable future. I am definitely in the latter group. I truly think Bo is a key member of the Canucks, but unfortunately, the team’s financial mismanagement has put us in a position where we cannot afford to resign our captain without major subtractions to our roster

I just finished reading that the Canucks have NOT given other teams permission to talk to Bo’s agent about a new contract. I find this to be extremely confusing and counter productive. It seems that Bo will be moving on next season as either a free agent or a sign and trade player. To maximize his return it makes more sense that he be a sign and trade candidate rather than just a rental player. Doesn’t it make more sense to let any potential trade partner speak with Bo’s camp to find out just what signing Bo will entail costwise? Knowing that they have those important details in place will make them more willing to trade for someone who they can count on for a specified time rather than simply a rental, thereby maximizing our return. And if we do trade Bo, we had better maximize our return or this will become just another Canucks “tire fire” that we will have to live with.

No

As a Canuck fan from the very beginning, I remember their first goal scored by Barry Wilkins in a 3 - 1 loss to the Kings, I am very much in favor of trading Bo. It has nothing to do with Bo’s play, but after the fiasco of the Miller signing. I don’t think that we can afford another huge multi year contract and still have the money to afford the huge contracts we will be facing in the near future. Bo will be a casualty of the stupidity of the current Canucks’ management. Aside from that, the team is stale and needs a shake up. Even with Bo this is not a playoff calibre team. Let’s sell high and hopefully the pieces brought in from the Horvat trade might fill some holes and breathe a little life into this hapless franchise. Love Bo, but he’s got to go.

I don’t think that Miller, at 7x8, is tradeable. Especially since is so poor on defense and a disruptive influence on the team. When I did my “Who’s In, who’s out “ proposal, I didn’t even mention Miller as a tradeable asset because I think that the Canucks would be able to find a trade partner for Miller.

Never, ever would the Flyers go for that deal.

Don’t want Dumba with an extension in place, but Dumba on an expiring contract looks good to me. Trade for him and flip him at the deadline. Another trade I would like to see is Boeser for Lucic and a second. Again, Lucic is on an expiring contract and somebody might be crazy enough to give us something for him at the trade deadline. I think the money saved would help us resign Kuzmenko. I hope Bo goes, not because of his play, but to get new blood in our farm system, fill some holes in our roster and to shed even more salary. If we resign Bo for the salary and length of contract that he is looking for that will end up being just another bloated, long term contract that will keep us in cap hell for the foreseeable future and may cause us to struggle to sign EP when his current contract expires. Happy New Year everyone!

I apologize for not listing my post as a proposal. I don’t know how to go back and edit my post.

Who stays: Mikheyev Petterson Kuzmenko Miller ? Hoglander ? ? Podkolzin Joshua Lazar ? Hughes ? ? Bear Dermott Burroughs Rathbone Schenn Martin Who goes: Garland and Pearson for picks/prospects Myers at the trade deadline for picks/prospects. Myers’ value as a trade chip will definitely increase after the five million dollar payout Boeser for a bad expiring contract and a prospect Demko and Ekman Larson packaged together for a bad expiring contract and picks/prospects Schenn and Burroughs at the TDL for picks/prospects Horvat (love Horvat’s game, but we can’t afford another long term expensive contract. For a windfall of talent Who goes but comes back: Aside from resigning Kuzmenko, Canucks should resign Burroughs and Schenn (our next captain) during FA. I welcome any constructive criticism about these proposals. Have at her gang!

VancouverHabitant, Thanks for your supportive post. Loved your quote, “ you just do it and figure the details out later!” That was exactly my point. All of the lesser trade candidates mentioned as part of a Horvat trade package would be Canucks for two or three years and then just fade away. Gavrikov could be a franchise player who could well be one of the core defencemen in Vancouver for the next decade. I don’t want to trade Horvat, but if we have to, Gavrikov would certainly lessen the hurt.

I don’t know is they have the cap space to do that. That’s why I proposed a one for one trade wherethe money for the new contracts would be roughly the same for both teams.

There have been a number of trade options with Columbus. To me the focus of many of these options is we give up quality (Horvath) for quantity (Bean, Roslovic, a pick) or some similar combination. What about trading value for equal value?How about a Horvath for Gavrikov trade? Govrikov is a legitimate top pairing, minute eating defenseman. He brings size, 6’3 214 pounds, and some snarl to to an otherwise undermanned defense. It’s true that he is a left side dman, but at 26: years of age he would be a cornerstone on defense for a number of seasons. Do the Blue Jackets want to trade him? Most assuredly not. But if they are indeed interested in acquiring Bo Horvath, this seems to me to be a fair asking price.

Provost, while I respect you as a knowledgable hockey fan, I disagree with the premise of your position. Who we get back is not as important as moving these guys (for a reasonable return) as soon as possible. Let’s get rid of the negative influences first and let the remaining players see what happens to those players who put their personal priorities ahead of team success. This is a simple case of addition by subtraction. If it is Boeser, for example, get him out of town for someone who is a team player. What you lose by trading a little below market value will be more than made up for by acquiring players who can work as a cohesive, supportive unit. It is equally important for Canucks’ management to be aware of the character as well as the talent of incoming players obtained through trades

For several seasons Canuck fans have read about the country club atmosphere some of the team members exhibit. Now we read that there is a divide in the dressing room between some of the star players and the rest of the team. I have no idea who the players are that are causing the problem, but I am sure that management and the coaching staff are aware who is responsible for these issues. Thus, my proposal is a simple one with no specific names involved. Identify the malcontents and ship them out. Stars or journeymen, it doesn’t matter. Move them for the best possible offer of players without personal agendas who are committed to the success of the team. Firing Bruce Boudreau will accomplish little. He has been successful during his coaching career and I don’t believe that the problem will go away (unless we hire Torts) with a new coach. We are a more talented team than a number of teams ahead of us in the standings (but then everybody is ahead of us), perhaps they are achieving some degree of success while we aren’t because they are playing as a team, outworking their opponents to make up for a lack of talent. We have more talent, but we are a team with a divided locker room. The Canucks stand little chance of future success until the players work together, playing as a team and standing up for each other when necessary.

Would much rather see a Garland for Pesce trade with Carolina. He would be the defensive conscience for Hughes and would allow the Canucks to play Meyers with OEL, allowing OEL to re-establish his offensive game with Meyers around to back him up. The Canucks actually have too many forwards and could stand to move one out so potential top six forwards are not pencilled in for fourth line duty. Why settle for Ethan Bear, when you could pay a little more for a quality defender who could play with Hughes for the next five to six seasons?

According to the latest Hockey News publication, Lassi Thompson is tenth on the Senators’ depth chart and their fifth rated prospect.