jejejester Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 I'd be totally fine with trading Gaunce Tanev and Hansen for Kane...hear me out - We would be getting the best player in the deal, and while Kane is certainly not elite scoring, he certainly improves our scoring depth, which is something we desperately need - Gaunce is kind of redundant given we already have Sedin, Kesler Horvat Richardson and Schroeder (actually, they can have Schroeder instead of Gaunce heh) - as much as I like Tanev, we already have 4 top-4 defensemen with NTC so we can't really afford giving him a raise and pay him like a top-4 to be a #5 guy...and for the record, I don't mind trading Edler instead but I suspect the Jets would want Tanev > Edler - if we get Kane, then Hansen becomes redundant on RW since we would have Burrows Kane and Kassian So trading 3 redundant pieces with trade value for a piece we actually need sounds pretty good to me You make good points, But gaunce is the size we need in the future and most likely our next 3rd line C while horvat plays center beside kesler. Tanev is our best right side D and I think it would leave a huge whole in our D core. Also Win does not want edler. I agree that hansen does become redundant if we get Kane because he is almost a wasted asset playing on the 4th line Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Luongo Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Kane is just the type of warrior we need. I bet Kane would really step up his game in Vancouver! Give them Edler, hansen and a prospect if need be obviously when Edler gets healthy. Gillis needs get something for the top 6 even if he claims they're fine when healthy. The only way this current top 6 is fine is if you count squeeking into the playoffs and needing a miracle to get through a couple of rounds lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackberries Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 I dont know how many times its been said in this thread. But I feel like bashing my head against the wall every time its suggested. THE JETS DON'T NEED DEFENSEMEN. EDLER WOULD NOT BE A CENTERPIECE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColinP Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 I don't care if Winnipeg's GM has been fielding calls for Kane, every GM listens because there is a chance that a deal that comes along will make the team better. It's like Tyler Seguin all over again, even though Seguin is a better player than Kane, Seguin is playing very well in Dallas and it's looking like the Bruins could be regretting that trade soon despite getting Erikson back. If the Jets do start trading their key players away, I can almost guarantee that Ladd, or Wheeler will be traded before Kane. Kane is only 22, I highly doubt the Jets are going to trade him anytime soon. Besides, there's other teams that could offer an even better package than the Canucks, and since Kane doesn't have a NTC it doesn't matter if he wants to come here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green Building Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 I dont know how many times its been said in this thread. But I feel like bashing my head against the wall every time its suggested. THE JETS DON'T NEED DEFENSEMEN. EDLER WOULD NOT BE A CENTERPIECE You must get a lot of headaches 'round this place. If the Jets do start trading their key players away, I can almost guarantee that Ladd, or Wheeler will be traded before Kane. Kane is only 22, I highly doubt the Jets are going to trade him anytime soon. I agree, unless of course, Kane requests to be traded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 THE JETS DON'T NEED DEFENSEMEN. EDLER WOULD NOT BE A CENTERPIECEWhile Edler has a ntc and I doubt he'd be involved in a trade for Kane, it's not like Winnipeg couldn't use Edler. With Edler, they could stop pretending Buff is a defenseman, for starters. (Already done, but you know what i mean.) Then add Stuart being a UFA coming up. Then add the potential of and Elder/Enstrom combo boosting Enstrom's value to the team. At the moment Enstrom looks fairly overpaid. If the Jets are keep on Sheifele now and Petan will be around too, then perhaps Kane can move on. Truth is the Jets need depth in every position. A Kane for depth trade would serve to help them more than hurt them, esp. if he has requested a trade. Kane on this team would work out for him much better than it has for him in Winnipeg, where he'll likely never reach the next step. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 That's just it, unless Kane does request a trade, they aren't forced to take a swap like Edler for Kane. And I don't think they need Edler more than they do Kane at this point so I don't see why they'd do that type of deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Jamie McLennan on That's Hockey suggested Winnipeg should build around Ladd, Scheifele, and Trouba and trade everyone else if they can. IMO, here's what they should do: Keep: Ladd, Kane, Scheifele, Bogosian, Trouba, Pavelec Trade: Wheeler, Little, Byfuglien etc. Once the season is over their line up should look something like this: Kane - _____ - ______ Ladd - Scheifele - ______ Frolik - ______ - Setoguchi Thorburn - _____ - Halischuk _____ - Bogosian Enstrom - Trouba Stuart - _____ Pavelec ______/Montoya Needs: - 2 top six forwards - 2nd line RW - 3rd line center - 4th line center - Top pair defenceman - Bottom pair defenceman - Back up goalie Jets are gonna have a busy summer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Vanderhoek Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 You make good points, But gaunce is the size we need in the future and most likely our next 3rd line C while horvat plays center beside kesler. Tanev is our best right side D and I think it would leave a huge whole in our D core. Also Win does not want edler. I agree that hansen does become redundant if we get Kane because he is almost a wasted asset playing on the 4th line Vancouver has a top four defense full when healthy not including Tanev. He was playing as a bottom pairing defenseman and there is no room for him to remain in Vancouver if he wishes to get top four minutes steadily. Being that his contract is up and the Canucks top four defensemen have movement clauses I would have to think Tanev is the odd man out. Perhaps not ideal and the coach loves the kid, but he is steadily increasing his value and unless one of the other defense actually asks to get out of Vancouver then there will be no spot for him while he becomes more and more attractive to other NHL clubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canadiangunner Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 You got to give up something of good value to get something of good value. Canucks position of strength is D and canucks position of weakness is goal scoring. Its natural to trade from a position of strength to improve areas of weakness. Trading a top Dman for a goal scorer makes way too much sense for Vancouver. Plus, us as canucks fans always overvalue our young talent. Give it one more year and all those individuals that hated the Cody for Zach trade will be loving it...book it! A trade of Tanev, Gaunce, Hansen or pick for E. Kane would be unbelievable for Vancouver. Guys like Kane don't come around too often and become available in a trade even less frequently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 You got to give up something of good value to get something of good value.Not really. However in this case we would. Say, David Booth could pan out there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkstar Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 I'd be totally fine with trading Gaunce Tanev and Hansen for Kane...hear me out - We would be getting the best player in the deal, and while Kane is certainly not elite scoring, he certainly improves our scoring depth, which is something we desperately need - Gaunce is kind of redundant given we already have Sedin, Kesler Horvat Richardson and Schroeder (actually, they can have Schroeder instead of Gaunce heh) - as much as I like Tanev, we already have 4 top-4 defensemen with NTC so we can't really afford giving him a raise and pay him like a top-4 to be a #5 guy...and for the record, I don't mind trading Edler instead but I suspect the Jets would want Tanev > Edler - if we get Kane, then Hansen becomes redundant on RW since we would have Burrows Kane and Kassian So trading 3 redundant pieces with trade value for a piece we actually need sounds pretty good to me This rumour/proposal is still one of the more ridiculous things I've seen on this board. If any of you guys actually understand the needs of any other team besides the Canucks, you will see that this is a ridiculous proposal that the Jets would laugh their a**es off at. The Jets don't need Tanev, or Edler. In fact, they have one of the best defensive pools in the league going forward. Enstrom, Byfuglien, Trouba, Morrissey, Bogosian, Postma, etc. The Jets need a top-end centre. Gaunce and Hansen aren't of any use to them either since they have tons of similar depth players on their team. An offer for Kane starts with Ryan Kesler or Bo Horvat and goes from there. If at least one of those two pieces don't go back, the Canucks won't see Kane on their team for a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 I dont know how many times its been said in this thread. But I feel like bashing my head against the wall every time its suggested. THE JETS DON'T NEED DEFENSEMEN. EDLER WOULD NOT BE A CENTERPIECE Don't you think there'd be takers(in spades) if Winn put Buff on the market(after acquiring Edler)? Maybe he's not much of a leader, & they want to reshuffle the deck? It's prob a market most of their guys wouldn't mind escaping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 In fact, they have one of the best defensive pools in the league going forward. Enstrom, Byfuglien, Trouba, Morrissey, Bogosian, Postma, etc.With all due respect, that is not one of the best defensive pools in the league going forward. Enstrom's taken a big step back. Buff isn't even a d-man. Bogosian has yet to jump to the next level. Trouba looks good now, but is still raw. And the rest of the guys are mid-level junior guys who may or may not pan out. If that's one of the best 'defensive pools' in the league going forward, then the league is ultra-weak. Time for all Canadian fans to wake up a bit, imho. Not just us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cube` Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 Sounds like WPG is putting big Buff up front as a forward so that should tell you guys what there needs are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 If Buff is moved back to forward full time Winnipeg's defence would look like: Enstrom - Bogosian Stuart - Trouba Clitsome - Postma You're lying if you say that's a playoff calibre defence. Bogo and Enstrom are the only proven top 4 defencemem in that top six, put Edler in there and it looks a lot better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cube` Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 Not the point I was trying to convey but I guess that's one way to look at it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L. Stanley Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 I don't care if Winnipeg's GM has been fielding calls for Kane, every GM listens because there is a chance that a deal that comes along will make the team better. It's like Tyler Seguin all over again, even though Seguin is a better player than Kane, Seguin is playing very well in Dallas and it's looking like the Bruins could be regretting that trade soon despite getting Erikson back. If the Jets do start trading their key players away, I can almost guarantee that Ladd, or Wheeler will be traded before Kane. Kane is only 22, I highly doubt the Jets are going to trade him anytime soon. Besides, there's other teams that could offer an even better package than the Canucks, and since Kane doesn't have a NTC it doesn't matter if he wants to come here. Ladd is the captain and has in previous years been vocal about how much he likes winnipeg and being the captain of a franchise in canada - not that he is nit sick of losing but, if I was a gm I would get rid of my problem child first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L. Stanley Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 If I am the canucks, I do not give up edler or Tanev in a trade for Kane. Good d men that can play >20 minutes a night and contribute at both ends are harder to come by then forwards who can score - every off season there are a handful of forwards who can give you 20+ goals but almost no top 4 d men. Not saying I want him for nothing, but I would rather part with futures for any player than trade d men who will be difficult to replace. 2014 st, 2015 1st, Jensen, schroeder, Booth (+ Hansen if you want) for Kane Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MayRayDown Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 when all their D are healthy - Tanev could easily be top 4 for them Corrado, Jensen, schroeder, 2014 1st 2014 2nd, Hansen, Booth for Kane 2015 2nd Um..... I don't even know what to say. Whrn have you seen 6 pieces and a cap dump for a single player and a pick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.