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

Phil_314

Members
  • Posts

    8,950
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Phil_314

  1. Optimally it'll be shorter, as durable as he is now it's probably not wise to assume it stays that way. Something like 5 years would be perfect IMO, then you can Lidstrom him and keep re-upping on single year deals.
  2. Zajac on a one-year term is something that I'd be down for if there's no younger 3rd C available (e.g. Copp/ Goodrow/ Coleman/ Faksa). Also like the Paquette and Hakanpaa signings, but I wouldn't offer sheet Duclair -- there's no point if we could either sign someone or make the same kind of trade pre-ED. Also I'd be open to moving Roussel if he can't make the team, not a bad drop-off from 5th to 7th round since it's all crapshoot by that time and we gain $3 million. Simple moves but I think they can be effective since (maybe besides the Duclair trade due to the price and his offensive inconsistency) they're low cost, short term and meets needs.
  3. How's everyone beating the heat?
  4. That's recency bias, but if Shaw changes the system would you not believe that he could do better? Hronek is Detroit's current top D-man out of necessity (the kids haven't earned their roster spots yet) but he's not the sizable RHD that the team should seek to pair with Hughes. If we're offering a 9th pick PLUS Schmidt (who has positive value as a top-4 D-man), I'd want some combination of Seider, Rasmussen or Soderblom coming back. Rather not add more small talent.
  5. I would probably make the trade and then try to sign Forbort (we need more grit IMO, but have enough puck-moving). Adding a 6'6" center in Brown would be great, adding that size alone already helps defensively. Good idea to trade a project from an area of abundance (LD) to address an area of need (C).
  6. I'd focus on getting centers first, though I like the idea of targeting TB. Acquire Ross Colton for a low pick for 4th line C and sign either Goodrow/ Coleman for 3rd C if others aren't available, and all of a sudden we'll have a swift, gritty two-way group in the bottom-6 (presuming we terminate/ waive Jake, could run Motte - Coleman/ Goodrow - Podkolzin and Roussel - Colton - MacEwen/ Lind as bottom 6). In fact I'd love it if, in one fell swoop, Vancouver addressed all its needs through TB (2021 1st and 5th for Cernak and Colton, then sign the 3rd C).
  7. From the Isles' perspective, they currently have ~$5 million in projected cap space for this offseason. Pelech, Sorokin and Beauvillier are all RFA's (Cizikas is UFA), and I doubt Beau gets nearly as much as Quinn would, while Dobson's on his ELC. I'm not sure I know of a situation where the cap even works out for them since their core is all locked up and I doubt they'd move any of them.
  8. If someone like TB would trade Cernak (24 years old, 6'3", $2.95 million remaining for 2 years, shutdown RHD) I'd probably swap that 1st. If no one of that caliber is available then we pick #9 and I hope we take McTavish.
  9. Let's use some reason here. Reputation aside, they benched Fabbro for the likes of Harpur (sizeable defensive defenseman), Will Carrier (who?), Gudbranson (really), and Matt Benning (do I smell some nephew-uncle collusion to lower Fabbro's value?). If that's the case, as much as he could've been productive in the regular season, if he's not a playoff performer then I don't want him when it's at the cost of Juolevi AND a 3rd. Why should Vancouver be the one to add? At least Olli is solid enough, and at this point could still become about as good of a safe defender with mobility.
  10. Quite impressed by Caufield's performance recently (and I doubt I'm the only one), he's got quite the sick set of mitts.  Sure hope that Podkolzin could make a comparable impact in his rookie season, even in a more well-rounded sense.

    1. Alflives
    2. #Canucks

      #Canucks

      Caufield had been lights out. Inside the dressing room he is a light for the guys. Always smiling and positive. Good vibes from that kid. Unreal shooter. Get this... 5'7" 162lbs!

  11. Always thought his nickname was Oreo https://www.nhl.com/canucks/news/canucks-report-oreo-to-get-physical/c-605051 https://www.nucksmisconduct.com/2011/10/4/2469467/canucks-collect-dale-weise-waive-victor-oreskovich
  12. Agreed, Roussel for him would be all that I'd do (maybe with a pick thrown in). Jake for Jake would be optimal but wouldn't mind if ours was bought out.
  13. Petey. After he uncorks a one-timer or when he hits back seemingly above his weight class. Sure hope we had someone like Gaudette still, those cellies were something. Hopefully Hoglander can take be that guy though, esp. if he starts trying more lacrosse goals (come to think of it, seeing how he's the only guy on the team who's even gotten that he already ranks high in swagger IMO).
  14. Lol now that it's a reference it's not all that bad. Try these on for size: - Jose Theodore (Threeormore) - Patrick O'Sullivan (P.O.S.) - Sam Gagner (Gags) - Darren Puppa (Leafs goalie, a.k.a. Puppa Scoopa) - Patrik Hornqvist (Horny) - Marc Pouliot (Pou => pronounced "Poo") - Kyle Cumiskey (think about it) - Jesse Puljujarvi (Poolparty) - Mikael/ Markus Granlund (Granny) Side note, how did Bieksa get the nickname Juice?
  15. I think instead of a trade-down scenario, I'd rather see if the fallout of the Kaprizov situation (if he leaves) leads to Wild players wanting out if they're back to being a grinding team. If that does transpire I'd rather spend our assets to get someone like Eriksson Ek (attain his rights) and see if we could buy low on him.
  16. Frankly not sure I'd trade Schmidt for OEL, even if the other bad contracts were also sent to Arizona. His term is just too long.
  17. If we could trade for Khaira's rights with Jake or one of our vets or someone like Michaelis then sure. Until then no thanks since (as others mentioned) he already made it through waivers. Rather trade assets like that for a difference making player or better yet develop them (e.g. Lind as 4th C with Beagle out).
  18. Gud... branson I doubt Pittsburgh lets Gaudreau walk though, he was a solid member of their 4th line.
  19. How's that going to work? If they send him one for $8,726,188 then they only have $4,359,289, with no goalies signed (Hart's an RFA and both the others are UFA), plus they're short guys in other positions (still need 2 defensemen - Sanheim's previous contract alone was $3.25 million, and re-sign Patrick or sign another 13th forward). Even if they bring back 4 guys for league min they couldn't ice a full roster either, or they bring back Hart but don't have enough players otherwise. (Could see other teams trying and would hate to see it happen, but not sure how it'd work in Philly).
  20. I think the other poster had a point too, seeing how guys like Laine and I think William Nylander threatened to sit out for awhile for negotiation leverage, though I gather that heading home is another matter altogether. Regarding the albatrosses though, I wonder if they're at least in a better condition than San Jose? If Kirill the Thrill stays then at least they have him, Fiala, Eriksson-Ek who should stay and their top-4 D (SJ's stuck with Jones, Karlsson, Vlasic, Burns; they do have some good forwards but they're basically sink or swim with them - e.g. Hertl/ Couture/ Meier/ Labanc). Regardless this just adds to the drama around the league (Eichel, Kuznetsov, the Leafs after their collapse, the Expansion Draft and who Vancouver could poach-- pretty exciting times to be a hockey fan).
  21. Unless the Blues protect Vince Dunn as their 4th D-man in Expansion and risk exposing Thomas, I doubt they would sell him, esp. if Virtanen is part of any return. If they fear that Seattle might take him for nothing, I wonder if we could acquire RT even for a 3rd. Put him in the 7th forward protection slot and we're good. Too much for Rathbone as others have said, Seattle might even poach Graves for the ED. If Edler's as good as gone I'd trade another average prospect but not Jack. (Side note, as a Canucks fan I'm both excited and prepared to be disappointed by what Benning may do during the ED).
  22. I'd want some combination of Lindgren or Hajek (both are young LD, Hajek is an RFA), or Filip Chytil (RFA) who was their 3rd line C in the return (highly doubt we'd get Adam Fox or Jacob Trouba who would've been their two top RD), and if we trade Schmidt we'd need another top-4 ready defender on the right side (even if the 3rd C spot is filled). Then again, something like Chytil and Hajek/ Lindgren for Schmidt and a pick would probably be great -- we'd get younger and cheaper and fill two major roster needs (can flip either the D-man coming over or Juolevi for a RD or sign one).
  23. I think the return might be a bit much on our end, depending on how much Reinhart can net in the market. If he wants to come home then I'd definitely still ask for their 2nd and include Roussel since then we can afford to play hardball. If he'll entertain offers from elsewhere though, we might need to settle for a 1st and 2nd + Roussel for him (the 2nd to sell Roussel's last year and the 1st to get his rights). Either way, I'm intrigued if his defensive game could hold up, or if we plan to bump Horvat to 3rd line (not sure I want Miller as a center full-time).
  24. Great that he can do something like this, making the most of his post-concussion syndrome and finding ways to help others and make his condition known to others. All the best to him.
  25. Let's play Sign-Trade-Waive, Colorado Avalanche Edition:

    Landeskog, Makar, Grubauer

    1. Show previous comments  3 more
    2. Phil_314

      Phil_314

      @-Vintage Canuck- if you'd like I wouldn't mind participating in a new version of that thread 

    3. -Vintage Canuck-

      -Vintage Canuck-

      @Phil_314: Feel free to create one. :) 

    4. Roberts

      Roberts

      better do that or it could accidentally get deleted :emot-parrot:

×
×
  • Create New...