[Proposal] Van-Tor (probably not a popular one but hear me out!)

[Hamhuis2]

I should start off this proposal by saying that I am aware that any trades between the Canucks and Leafs are highly unlikely after the Luongo debacle.

To Van: Phaneuf (@ $5.5m)

To Tor: Bieksa (@ $4.5m)+ Grenier+2nd 2014

Yes, it's Dion Phaneuf. As much as he is ragged on by fans and by the media, he is not as bad as people make him out to be. Dion can be extremely good or extremely bad (both seen in these playoffs), but overall, he is an upgrade on Kevin Bieska.

I think Phaneuf is very similar player as Bieksa, except for a couple of things:

-Phaneuf is bigger

-Phaneuf is more physical/aggressive

-Phaneuf has a harder shot (better PP option perhaps)

-Phaneuf is younger, and has a MUCH higher upside

It may just be me, but Phaneuf just seems like a Torterella type player. He is much bigger than Bieksa (6'3 vs. 6'1 and has roughly 30 lbs on him) yet has about the same foot speed. He is also a full 4 years younger. Although he is many years removed from being touted as a future Norris winner, Phaneuf is still a very solid 3 (maybe 2) blueliner and I believe he still has upside to perhaps one day reach #1 status (or at least a very good 2).

Acquiring Phaneuf also matches the plan Gillis has talked about, getting both younger and bigger.

It should also be noted that Phaneuf has scored or paced for more than 10 goals every year of his career, including pacing for 15 goals/82 games this year (had 9 in a shortened season!). This could perhaps allow us to trade Edler for more of a puck mover/rushing d man to feed Phaneuf/Garrison. Since Edler's NTC has kicked in however, it would probably be better to keep him and see if he can bounce back this year.

Also, Phaneuf would not be relied on to be the #1 guy here, and could thrive playing in a #2/#3 spot.

As I stated before, I believe that Phaneuf and Bieksa play quite a similar game, so having a solid d partner in Hamhuis should help Phaneuf play better in turn.

Why Vancouver does this trade: Pretty much everything I described. Phaneuf is an upgrade on Bieksa and I believe he can patch up his defensive game under Torts/with Hammer.

Why Toronto does this trade: Free up some cap space to give them some flexibility (currently about 2m over the cap after resigning everyone based on my estimates). Also allows them to change the face of their franchise, perhaps giving Lupul the "C".

In this deal I have Toronto retaining $1m of Phaneufs cap (he's worth about $5m but they won't retain any more than $1m i'm guessing, so take him at $5.5m) and Vancouver keeping 100k of Bieksa's cap (just to keep the numbers even of a $1m gain/loss).

D pairings after the trade for Vancouver(assuming we bring Alberts back as rumoured):

Hamhuis-Phaneuf

Edler-Garrison

Corrado-Tanev

or

Hamhuis-Garrison

Phaneuf-Tanev

Edler-Corrado

Alberts

with PP options of Garrison, Edler, and Phaneuf, pretty deadly IMO.

Anyways, sorry for the lengthy read. I haven't made a proposal in a while so I'd really appreciate any feedback. What do you guys think of Phaneuf? Would he be a good fit here? I think that his defensive game could improve with a steady partner and with Torts. What do you guys think of the value of the trade? Thanks!

P.S. Bieksa waives his NTC clause because he's from Ontario and Phaneuf is an UFA next season so the risk is minimal if he tanks this year (we'll have cap space to get a replacement top-4 d).

[Canucks fan in chicago]

Over-payment by Vancouver. Take out the second rounder, and Toronto retains 2 million salary on Phaneuf's contract.

[Drouin]

I wouldn't take Phaneuf. We finally have a good amount of RH D-men.,

[The Magician]

Meh Phaneuf is overated, bit of overpayment by us

[Pears]

I'm a big Bieksa fan and doubt he ever gets traded, however if we could then package Edler for Shea Weber

Phaneuf - Weber

Hamhuis - Garrison

Tanev - Corrado

That could quite possibly be the best defense in the NHL. And we could then make a couple more trades and/or signings to fill out the forward group.

[Warhippy]

Ok honestly this is a very well thought out proposal. You've identified both the strengths and weaknesses involved and managed to make a case where very visibly this works except for one thing.

We have a Phaneuf type player on the blue line. Edler. They are almost identical players same phenotype same rushing type of play some hard shot they pinch the same way and generally just do the same things. Both also have the dubious distinction of ending playoff runs via boneheaded plays.

Bieksa on the other hand brings an identifiable quality to the D corp. That snarl intensity and that frigging smirk. We don't have that kind of grit oin our top 6 let alone elsewhere in our blueline. He is the exact type of player we need with a viable cap hit for production and our record with/without him in our line up over the last few seasons speaks volumes of the visible and intangible benefits of having him in our line up.

I really do approve of the thought put into this proposal but I have to say I prefer to keep Bieksa both at that price and any price Toronto would throw at us unless we had that exact type of guy coming back for our top 9, which Toronto doesn't have now outside of Clarkson and I will pass.

So great idea, bit of an overpayment for the trade on our part towards Toronto but I'm going to keep Bieksa and possibly trade Grenier and absolutely hold onto that 2nd round pick for once and move forward with him until a better deal overall came up or Bieksa wanted to move on.

[Tearloch7]

The thought of Phaneuf on the Canucks makes me puke into my mouth just enough to have to swallow .. please God, NO!!!!!

[slappipappi]

If Toronto wanted to move Phaneuf they certainly won't have to keep any salary to do so.

[TACIC]

Phaneuf-Bieksa would be a nice pair so I don't think we should trade Bieksa for Phaneuf

[Hunter.S-Kerouac]

no to Phagoof!

[Hunter Horvat]

I would do this deal anyday if i was MG.

[bigpush]

Phaneuf Hamhuis pairing is two lefties playing together again I doubt that works too well. I think Phaneuf is better than Bieksa for sure but not sure that Toronto would want to move him.

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

I think that Vancouver's cap situation makes this proposal unlikely if not impossible. It would put Vancouver at about only $3.25 million is cap space with only 19 players signed (and that's without Chris Tanev under contract--who in Bieksa's absence becomes the Canucks #1 RH shooting defenseman and, as such, could probably squeeze a lot more money out of the current negotiations than he'd get with Bieksa ahead of him on the depth chart)

Toronto would need to retain about $2 million of Phaneuf's $6.5 million AAV to make this work financially. While they could afford it, they'd still want compensation for sweetening the deal on a player who's currently earning market value (the Leafs would not consider Phaneuf a salary dump).

Toronto would not do this without a significant overpayment in assets coming back--there's no way Vancouver wins this kind of a trade.

As far as the player swap, independent of salary/cap, I can see the value here for Vancouver as Phaneuf would be the consensus "better player" on most people's lists (even given the knocks against "Phagoof"). However, the Canucks would be giving-up their only veteran RH shooting D with proven offensive ability from the blue line. We've seen just how crucial RH shots are to the Canucks' defensive unit and on the power play. In that respect, Bieksa has more team value in Vancouver than his individual player value dictates (and even that value is significant as he's actually a very good Dman, all things considered).

Trading Bieksa for Phaneuf makes sense only when you look at things in a vacuum. However, once you bring in the salary cap and the Canucks' team needs and overall structure, it just doesn't work very well.