Provost

Well, looking at Benning's preferences... maybe Ferlin or Camara fit his ideal player profile a little more closely. Boychuk Ferlin for Hansen any lower end prospect we want to get rid of to open up a contract. If Boston wants to dump Marchand somewhere else, Hansen is a nice piece to slot into their lineup as a replacement forward at a much smaller price tag.

Doesn't Hansen's no trade clause only kick in on July 1st with the new contract? If that is how it works, I can see him being moved in the next couple of days.

Pretty much exactly this. You can get guys on 1-3 year contracts for big money because we will have several very cheap players on the roster making cap room. You just don't want to go out and sign some old guy to a 7 year deal. If we go into the season with more than $5 million cap space, then good luck selling all those leftover tickets and luxury boxes. We are a team that makes a ton of money, so the fans expect us to spend what we are allowed. It is also about the worst message to UFAs and your own players that you aren't making all the effort possible to win. I expect to see a couple of mid range UFAs signed, as well as possibly taking on an overpaid player *(and getting a young prospect in return for that favour) that another team is trying to shed for a cap dump. Hiller, Michalek as UFAs? Someone like Boychuk as a trade to make cap space for a team needing it.

Hiller will be signed for a 2-3 year deal I suspect.

It all depends on what we get back for Kesler as to who we would pick with the #1. If we got a blue chip defensive prospect, then we pick Reinhart. If we got a blue chip young centre in return, we pick Ekblad. Being at the top spot lets us having that luxury of fitting the selection to our needs. I am fine with either of them truthfully.

Fully believe it... he held out last year for more money. He is a great player only at a certain dollar value. He is not worth near what our other top guys are making yet, but probably wants that neighbourhood. For more than $3.5 per, I am more than happy to see him go and have his ice time go to someone else.

Yep...it is a lot to give up. The media talked a lot about this being a shallow draft, but they are coming around now and realizing it is an incredibly deep draft (the #5-#20 are as solid as it has ever been... and there are guys all the way to the early 2nd round who are more than just projects), though lacking in star talent at the top end. It could be that the media/scouts have it wrong about the top end talent as well. I do think there are arguments to be made for moving both up and down from #6.

I would do Hansen, 6th, Shinkaruk for the 1st overall. I would be sorely tempted to pick Ekblad though with that pick rather than Reinhart.

Pretty much yep on all points. It think a lot of folks have quickly forgotten what it is like to have 4 contributing lines. The two bottom lines actually have similar ice time on many teams, with pairs out of them having extra time on special teams. Also the exact issue that Rypien37 had was that I had mentioned Higgins had originally been brought in for the 4th line. That is just true and there is lots of backup evidence for that. He was brought into that role because the team KNOWS that they will have injuries and attrition over the season and playoffs and they want additional players who can play higher up in the lineup. Rypien37 simply does not seem to get the concept of depth so I am not going to waste my time trying to explain basics to him. We haven't been able to roll 4 lines since 2011 when we had enough capable players. It makes it wicked hard on the opposition when you can. There are also few games where you have your full roster playing due to injuries. I even pointed out in my post what that lineup would easily turn into in a realistic scenario (one top 6 injury and one rookie being demoted because of not being ready). Higgins moved into the top 9 pretty quickly. It is the same reason we want 8 capable NHL defencemen in the organization. As we have seen every year, all 8 of them are expected to play top 4 minutes at some point due to injuries. If you have so little depth that Corrado is in your lineup as of opening night, then where to you turn when you have injuries? Sure he is probably a capable 6th D... but is is way better as an organization to have him available as an injury call up that can actually do the job.

I accept your apology, we are all fallible. In this case it happened to be you.

I know it sucks to be shown that you are wrong, but trying to weasel out of it makes you look worse. I said he was brought in to play on the 4th line and showed several articles that backed up my statement. Your comments about him not staying on the 4th line further my point and not yours. You have guys of that level on your 4th lines JUST so that you DO have the capability to move them up when needed due to injury. That happened with Higgins and that is why we went farther in the playoffs. If our 4th line was a bunch of plugs that can't play bigger roles when needed, we don't go on a long playoff run, Have you noticed how much worse our playoff success has been since we didn't have that depth? That is what we need to fix.

Yep.

I hadn't put in an actual deal since folks spend all their time focussing on the minor details of actual trades. I believe that we could easily get Nyqvuist plus a 1st round pick for Kesler (with miscellaneous spare parts going in either direction). Another alternative is trading Edler to Detroit for Nyqvuist, but what other pieces that would have to go in either direction is really completely a mystery. I think that top 4 D are worth a lot more than their equivalent forward, so it would be pretty close with just those players. Some folks think Edler will always be terrible and Nyqvuist will be a super star, so would think we would have to add a ton.

Yes, both he and Lapierre were 4th liners for us originally, I didn't have to be in the war room... that was where they were on the actual ice, and during actual games. I find it amusing that you scoffed without spending 10 seconds to google it if you didn't remember way back then. I will have to remember that lack of credibility when reading any other posts you happen to write. http://www.straight.com/blogra/vancouver-canucks-pick-chris-higgins-maxim-lapierre-ahead-nhl-trade-deadline http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/canucks-land-higgins-lapierre-in-separate-deals-1.993864 http://canuckshockeyblog.com/2011/02/trade-deadline-thoughts-canucks-acquire-maxim-lapierre-and-christopher-higgins/

I totally agree. These guys are going to get long term and big cap hit deals, there are few top free agents and lots of suitors with cap space. We shouldn't get in this frenzy. Instead target the 2nd tier of guys and try to corral them while everyone else is focused on those top 5. My targets: 1. Milan Michalek - Solid top 6 guy 2. Hiller - someone to split starts with Lack for a year or two 3. Tallinder - more of a depth guy at this point in his career, but if we end up moving Tanev or Edler he is a great and cheap option for the 3rd pairing to make up for mistakes of a young guy like Corrado.

The idea being you go into a season with a lineup like that. By the time you are ten games in, it could look significantly different. Maybe Horvat shows he isn't ready and is sent down after 9 games. Maybe Burrows gets a groin injury that puts him out a couple of months... then your lineup is suddenly. Sedin-Sedin-Michalek Draisaitl-Nyqvuist-Kassian Higgins-Matthias-Hansen Sestito-Richardson-Santorelli .... see, you have the depth and flexibility (with the extra centres in the system) to actually field a lineup still that is competitive with 4 NHL calibre lines. My point being... that is exactly how you are successful... not by slotting in players on your roster at or above their max capability right from the get go.

Short memory... Higgins was brought in to play on the 4th line. 4th lines that contribute are how successful teams are built nowadays.... not just plugs like Dalpe and whoever else was there that was so invisible I can't remember. Great teams have players of that calibre on the bottom line. If you are a deep team, each player is capable of playing a line higher than where they are slotted (because injuries and such always happen). Right now, Higgins and Hansen have had to be pushed into the top 6 when that happens where they simply aren't capable of playing. A bottom 6 that could help get you deeper in the playoffs: Matthias-Horvat-Kassian Higgins-Richardson-Hansen Now if we can only get a top 6 in place, we could be a significantly better team all of a sudden Sedin-Sedin-Michalek Draisaitl-Nyqvuist-Burrows .... that is a team that has a chance of getting past the first round.

I have no doubt that Benning will want to have the Kesler situation cleared up before the draft. Any other deals hinge on what we get as the return. For example, if we get a mid first round pick... maybe we flip that, our 6th overall, and a roster player for one of the top two picks in the draft.

Maybe read the thread if you want the answer to that question, folks have made some pretty compelling and reasonable arguments. - He is simply not good enough to be a top 6 NHLer - He does not fit the mold that Benning/Linden are going for - He takes up a contract space that could be used for another prospect - He takes up minutes on the farm that could go to another prospect who is a better organizational fit - We will almost certainly be getting several pieces back from a Kesler trade, so need to shed contracts - etc

He will have close to zero return, he will either be put in a package with another player to even out how many contracts are going each way, or be sent out for a very late round pick.

News1130 Sports @News1130Sports Follow Been told the #Canucks will try and move former 1st round draft pick Jordan Schroeder before and at the NHL Draft. Looks like Googs is off the mark on his ranting.

Ya, I am just talking in his language. Subtlety seems kind of beyond him. I doubt we qualify him, we need to shake up our system including our prospects. My more nuanced argument is: - We will be trading some of our bottom six guys in order to give some new blood and young guys a roster spot. I can see Hansen going for sure as an example. You can give that 3rd line spot to Horvat/Gaunce/Jensen/this years 1st rounder. The return for a guy like Hansen is going to be something like a decent prospect and a 2nd or 3rd round pick. We need to have contract space under the 50 contracts to make deals. - Schroeder doesn't look like he will ever be a regular NHLer, and more to the point he doesn't seem to have the toolbox to be the type of player that Linden and Benning have suggested they want. He is not good enough now to be in our top 6, and very likely will never be. He doesn't fit the mold of the grittier, bigger, meaner 3rd line that Benning said he wanted. So... we either ship out his rights as part of a trade before we have to qualify him (the day after draft day I think). Or we don't qualify him. In either case, I firmly believe that he will not be part of our organization next season. If for some reason we can't pull the trigger on the trades we need to (Benning is a new GM, so no one knows how he will be at trading)... then there is a slight chance we qualify him because we don't have better options.

I don't have to try harder... I am right and you are wrong. There are plenty of options better than Schroeder and he will not be on the team next season. At that time, you will conveniently forget that you posted all of this.

Well if Kesler is going then we are getting a significant piece back. Here is an easy to believe scenario for a new 2nd line. Kesler for Nyquist or similar quality younger player. Sign 2nd tier UFA like Michalek Draft a forward with our #6 (or even move up). New 2nd line Michalek-Nyquist-Draisaitl Any version of those types of moves give us a better line than having Schroeder. It isn't magic... it is a pretty average and realistic expectation.