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

[Report] Canucks Aggressively Pursuing Trade (Interested in Steve Ott & Derek Roy)


Recommended Posts

Is it a necessity to undervalue other players and overvalue Canucks when making a proposal on CDC? I never said Ott would go for Schneider one-for-one, but if the Sabres even think about trading Ott, it's going to be in a package deal for someone like Schneider. What is the reasoning to trade the hardest working player and arguably the biggest leader on the team for a 2nd round draft pick?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I under value a player, quote me and ask. You over value a third line center on any good team and say a deal needs to include a number one goalie or no deal would happen. That is WAY over valuing his worth.

0.39 ppg average over his career and you still think Schneider is mentioned in the same sentence? Maybe if the conversation is "hey how about Ott & ____+ ___ " for Schneider. Ott is a good third line center/wing. Any reasonable person would look at ayers of equal/more value and say Ott goes for a 2nd and a 4th if he goes at all, and that is the desperate to add a guy at deadline price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

100% spot on.. This is the absolute worst time to get rid of a prospect like him. This is where the scales tip, does he take the next leap and keep progressing or does he slightly improve and plateau. If you give up on players this early all the time, you miss out and turn into the nyi islanders. We gotta see what Schroeder brings unless we get better stud center prospect, otherwise we move forward with a huge hole in our long term centre depth. We just can't afford it after trading Cody.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ott would be nice, but thats what I said last year, and we should have up'ed the anti when Dallas was trying to unload him, instead we'll have to over pay to pry him from a team that likes what theyve got. Doubtfull that this one pans out.

Roy on the other hand might be had for a decent price, and he could be a nice depth scoring piece, but lacks physicality and is mediocre on the draw. Would be interesting to have a playmaking center with experience though, as it could help in using Kesler as a primary matchup against the oppositions best, and take some pressure off him to produce while in that checking role.

Id still prefer a guy like Dubinsky, if we're going all in here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you been a fan for a while?

Just last season after the deadline we were in the doldrums. Burrows was pulled from the 1st line, not because he was playing bad. to give our 2knd and 3rd lines a boost. Burrows single handidly put the work rate and effort back in to both lines and got us back on track where we won the Prez trophy. He proved he could kick start other lines!

And he was a superb player with Kesler dating back years... He has always been a "glue" guy, the type who does so many good things opportunities are created for everyone on his line. He may not be the 2knd coming of Mogilny who could score 100 points; but he is a great player.

Selective memory...

There is no evidence that Burrows is a 2nd line player without the Sedins. When separated from them, he has looked bad. Currently with them, he hasn't been so great in production. (48, 52 pts last two years, 14 pts in 26 gp this year WITH the Sedins, imagine without them)

My main point is, you need 4 offensive juggernauts, 2 on each line, then you can slot your Booth/Higgins/Raymond/Hansen/Kassian

Unless Booth returns to his 30/30 Florida days, and Raymond returns to 25g/50pt form, then I guess we can get away with it. But then you see these guys trail off in the playoffs against tight checking defense due to lack of natural offensive talent.

Sedin - Sedin - Burrows

Raymond - Kesler - XXXXX

Higgins - XXXXXX - Hansen

Booth - Lapierre - Kassian

Two pieces away IMO.

That's scary, Chicago 2010-esque depth, assuming we grab solid players to fill in those roles. But does Vancouver have the assets?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody can definitively say Kesler is a first line center without seeing him play there on a regular basis -- and nobody has. I don't doubt he can fit there short term but there's no real evidence definitively saying he would succeed in that role. I think Max can play the third line on a regular basis as long as he is supported by a couple guys that can finish once in a while too. He's posted some solid numbers before, even with us, and those obviously weren't in fourth line roles.

The Canucks really need to go for a legitimate top six player. Ideally a center at this point. If either Henrik or Kesler go down in the playoffs - that's it, game over. This team doesn't have the center depth to slot someone in someone to fill that void. Assuming either Kesler or Henrik go down in the playoffs, do you really think Steve Ott is going to fill that hole effectively? I sure as hell don't. With the rumors of Roy floating around, he more than has that ability. Plus, it makes us a greater offensive threat three lines down if we decide to spread them out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...