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

[Proposal] Van-Dal, Van-Buf; Deadline


Recommended Posts

Both these trades are under the assumption these teams are sellers at deadline.

To Van:

Vernon Fiddler

Aaron Rome

To Dal:

3rd 2014

Adam Polasek

Andrew Alberts

Dallas gets a pick, an average prospect, and also loses a buried contract. Dallas has some good D prospects that have and will be making the jump so losing some salary in Rome and having a UFA in Alberts come off the books means they have more roster spots for up-and-coming guys.

Vancouver gets another bottom 6 center who is excellent on the draw. They also get a D man who is much more reliable in the 7th spot than Alberts or Weber. He is well liked in the dressing room and he looks like Wario.

----

To Van:

Matt Moulson

To Buf:

2014 1st, 2015 3rd, 4th (2nd if Moulson re-signs)

David Booth

---

In a season where Buffalo is failing miserably it would be in the teams best interest to get as many picks and prospects as possible. By taking on David Booth's contract and trading a player that I don't believe they ever had a plan of keeping:

Vanek trade = 2x1st, 2x2nd, 1x3rd, 1x2nd/4th, Booth

That is pretty great value.

Even a rebuilding team that is crap and have no chance at making the playoffs need guys like Booth to fill spots on the roster, Buffalo has money and is the perfect team for taking on a bad contract in their current predicament.

Vancouver gets a great sniper and lose a bad contract. It is a UFA rental but with Booth off the books there is a good chance he could re-sign if he plays well enough.

So in summary:

In:

Matt Moulson

Vernon Fiddler

Aaron Rome

Out:

Andrew Alberts

David Booth

Adam Polasek

2014 1st

2014 3rd

2015 3rd

2015 2nd or 4th

Sedin-Sedin-Kesler

Moulson-Santorelli-Burrows

Higgins-Richardson-Hansen

Archibald-Fiddler-Kassian

Schroeder, Weise

Hamhuis-Tanev

Garrison-Edler

Stanton-Bieksa

Rome-Weber

Lu

Lack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Omg hahahahahahahahaha your funny!! O wait your serious

I think my reasoning makes my argument valid for making these trades

For example:

Last year we gave up 2nd + connauton for Roy.

a 1st + 4th that can become a 2nd is very fair for Moulson especially as a rental UFA, He has scored more goals over the last 5 years than most players in the NHL, it has yet to be seen what he can do on a true Elite team.

the 3rd is compensation for taking on Booth's contract, again, I think this is reasonable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think my reasoning makes my argument valid for making these trades

For example:

Last year we gave up 2nd + connauton for Roy.

a 1st + 4th that can become a 2nd is very fair for Moulson especially as a rental UFA, He has scored more goals over the last 5 years than most players in the NHL, it has yet to be seen what he can do on a true Elite team.

the 3rd is compensation for taking on Booth's contract, again, I think this is reasonable.

You give a 1st 3rd 4th plus booth really for him hes over rated we need all the picks we can get not just give then away like there nothing like you are doing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like what Moulson has to offer, just as I like what Roy(baby) brought on paper (poss. 2nd center, depth in skill) but one major thing is that I'm unsold as to how he'll do when he's not playing next to an elite play-making center (Tavares on the Island, Hodgson and Ennis in Buffalo are admittedly pretty darn good at passing). One thing that he has going for him though is that many of our guys on lower lines are strong along the boards and can make good passes (I think he'd work well with any of Santo, Kassian, Hansen and probably Burrows as they are good along the boards), while Matt's skill of being the trigger-man who's good at finding gaps should serve him well as he can wire those passes and give this team more scoring depth (given that the passing holds up of course). I'd be even more sold if the team had a chance to re-sign him if he does well so that he's not a rental, and if the 1st rounders this year are weak I'd have no problem moving the 1st.

For the Dallas trade, I'd do it only if this team has injuries in the lower ranks, we have enough foot soldiers otherwise.

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...