Baggins

He's throwing the most hits per 60 played omong our forwards. The disappointment is his production. Far less than expected.

Even without the war that's not happening. He could have come over before signing his current deal there and just used the threat of coming here to get a better contract there. A contract that is less than half of what Benning offered him to stay here in the first place. He and his wife (in particular I believe) want to stay in their homeland. Write him off.

It took overtime for Calgary to beat Buffalo.... Calgary sucks...sell!!!

Too Much whine....

If he's asking too much and your'e not going to re-sign him..... They also replaced him "for this season" with pending UFA Richardson for free! This isn't rocket science.

He also said the team was underperforming and believed they were better than the first 20 games showed. He also said he thought Green was a good coach but sometimes a team just needs a new voice. He said he would wait to assess the team under Boudreau. Patience Alf. He moved the one player with some value that could walk away at the end of the season. The rest there is no panic at all to move.

Who cares if we're re-signing him?

Building, rentals, selling, you don't make moves simply to make moves. You do it with purpose.

With another year on Millers contract he can't be re-signed until after this season over. CBA rules, you can't extend a player before he's in the final year of his contract.

How is it waving the white flag? Dermott is cheaper and younger than Hamonic. I see that as an upgrade. Richardson is a no risk, no cost versatile replacement for moving Motte that is on an expiring contract. You wanted something big. Too bad so sad. There's no panic at all to move guys that can't just walk away at the end of the season. If the offers aren't there why do it? There's still the draft and summer to make moves. I actually think Boeser will have better value at the draft. Think about it. For a team out of the playoffs a 25 year old goal scorer has value. But do you want to take his 7.5m salary and lower your draft position adding him at the deadline? For us it means the posiblity of a higher draft pick than we'd get moving him to a contender. The bottom line: you don't make moves simply to make moves.

A temporary no cost replacement to move Motte. Richardson is a low contract pending UFA that plays C or wing. A free Motte replacement to finish the season. Not doing what YOU want doesn't mean they don't have a plan. Even then plans should always be fluid based on what comes your way.

I think that's the crux of it. I suspect Motte was asking for more than they were willing to pay and he wasn't budging. I also think when they got Richardson for free they went there's his replacement for now, let's just get what we can for Motte. Moving Motte does create a pssoble opening for the cheaper Lockwood next year if his defensive game has improved. He's like Motte in that he's fast and plays bigger than his size. But he needed to improve his defensive responsibility. I like Motte, but at the wrong price he was expendable.

You don't think that's true? They moved the one pending UFA with "some" value. They rest weren't essential trade deadline moves. So if the offer wasn't great, why do it? It's not like Miller, Boeser, Garland, Myers, or Pearson are in position to just walk away after the season. There will be deals to be had before the draft and then again before free agency, and then again during the summer for those guys. You don't makes trades for the sake of making trades, or to simply appease fans wanting something to happen.

Apparently Notte. I figured a 3rd at best, and a 4th as ok. He's a good bottom end forward but still a bottom end forward. He'd likely be worth more if he had the size to go with his tenacity and play. He plays bigger than he is, which is good, but he does lose some battles because of his size.

I think they were looking for a 3rd for Motte and it wasn't coming. When Richardson came available on waivers they likely looked at as Richardson for free allows us to move Motte for what we can get.

This wasn't the deadline for either of those guys. Garland is signed for another 4 years at a very reasonable salary. Why even look to move him? You only move him if there's an offer comes in too good to turn down. It would need to be a great offer and it could still happen at the draft or offseason. Boeser could be dealt at the draft. Teams out of the playoffs (meaning a pick in the top half of rounds), would have interest in Boeser, but from the other teams perspective why take on his salary now and likely lower your draft position dealing for him now. For a playoff team Boeser is a high cap hit with a higher salary who has underperformed. The upside is he's RFA and they could re-sign him if they have a high cap UFA they plan to let walk. From a Canucks perspective his cap versus performance lowers his trade value for the deadline. If he produces well down the stretch his value could be higher at the draft, and get a better return than he'd get now. Buying or selling? Building. A 30+ defensive d-man out and a 25 yr old defensive d-man in at half the price. That's a building move. This team isn't rebuilding (a seller). We're on this very ice for the playoffs, so not a buyer.

Boeser is 25. You don't think non-playoff teams would have any interest in him?

For Ehrhoff the right was his natural side. He played there since he was a kid. Salo grew up playing both sides and brought it to the NHL. I do believe that's the key to players having success on their off side. They started at an early age and adapted very well to it. That's not to say I want 3 lefties on the right side but was Ehrhoff a hindrance there? The big advantage to a right side righty is taking the puck off the boards on the forehand. Being a lefty for Ehrhoff was an advantage for one timers from Edler passes. It's just a trade off.

With a pair of two way beasts, one a high end playmaker and the other a good shooter/playmaker, and both play physical, Boeser easily has ppg potential and it would be a great line. He's a great complimentary player on a solid line but he's not a line driver or particularly good defensively. It's unfortunate he doesn't use his size more. He'd be a much better top line asset if he at least did that. Goal scorers do have great value if with the right linemates.

He plays either side. Many forget Ehrhoff was a LHD that played the right side. Salo was a RHD that was just as good on the left side. Some guys just have that skill.

Well, if you're desperate or injury riddled.

There's a reason we let him walk and he only got a 7th in trade return.

Anaheim gave up a future star (2nd rounder) for a declining 5th round pick (Bieksa).

Actually many here hated giving up a 2nd for Vey. Many were crying that we gave up a future star for a guy that was drafted in the 4th round. I thought it was a good risk/reward move. Vey was miles beyond any of our AHL prospects.