Tom Sestito Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 eh gguyz lets traid edler too nEw York. day wantz a top2 dman. get okpsoso, strome and1st 4 edler guyzz!!11 GET TI DOENZ GILLIS!!1 >canucks fans some times gl getting strome lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 Agreed but as it stands the NYI are on the outside looking in. If, for case in point we managed to trade Edler to them for a pick/prospect and that pick being a 1st. They have the option of giving Buffalo the verification of this or next seasons pick. While we retain their pick. The thing about the NYI is they're perennial duds regardless of how many top 5 picks they've gotten much like Florida. This years pick, could be an outside shot or a very good shot at a top 5. If we could get next years pick, I much prefer my lottery odds at the 1st overall with a team like say NYI as opposed to Detroit. The Isles are still a team that have at least 1 capable piece via roster or prospect that could help us in almost any area we need to shore up I didn't say they wouldn't go for Edler, but Weber's price is too much both in trade and salary once they get him. I wouldn't mind getting a top prospect like Strome and a pick from them, just that there's uncertainty around what's happening with their 1st this year and next. Blockbuster.. Edler, Kassian, 1st 2014,1st 2015 for Strome, Matt Martin and a 2014 1st it's garth snow after all Ugh, an unproven prospect, a 4th liner and a pick for two of our picks in the same round, a better than 4th liner, and a proven offensive D-man? No thanks. Edler Hansen Jensen 2014 1st for Strome 2014 or 2015 first - whichever they do not give to Buffalo And that's even worse, we give up more but get back less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 Honest opinions, are these trades logical for both teams? Option 1: To Vancouver: Ryan Strome, 2014 1st (10th overall or lower) To NY Islanders: Alexander Edler Option 2: (if NYI's pick 10th overall or higher) To Vancouver: Ryan Strome, Matt Martin, 2015 1st To NY Islanders: Alexander Edler, Nicklas Jensen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkstar Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 Honest opinions, are these trades logical for both teams? Option 1: To Vancouver: Ryan Strome, 2014 1st (10th overall or lower) To NY Islanders: Alexander Edler Option 2: (if NYI's pick 10th overall or higher) To Vancouver: Ryan Strome, Matt Martin, 2015 1st To NY Islanders: Alexander Edler, Nicklas Jensen Horrible for the Islanders. Not sure if the Islanders would do Edler for Strome straight up either. That one is a maybe. Isles have Reinhart and Pulock coming up and will probably draft Ekblad as well if they get the second overall pick. Ekblad + Strome for Edler is absolutely awful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ice orca Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 The Islanders are always looking for something, same time just before Christmas..year after year after year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tangerines Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 Honest opinions, are these trades logical for both teams? Option 1: To Vancouver: Ryan Strome, 2014 1st (10th overall or lower) To NY Islanders: Alexander Edler Option 2: (if NYI's pick 10th overall or higher) To Vancouver: Ryan Strome, Matt Martin, 2015 1st To NY Islanders: Alexander Edler, Nicklas Jensen If Snow was willing to agree to that I would do in a heartbeat. Just imagine what our future forward core would look like Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoneypuckOverlord Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 I'm also not sure why we are suggesting trading Edler away when our Defence is already very weak. Canucks.com fans here really make no sense. We are trying to get our defence as strong as the 2011, ok lets not say as strong, at least depth to the same strength as the 2011, not make it weaker. It's extremely hard for me to accept trade that is trading away a defencemen without getting one back in return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollumpus Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 People should really look up the definition of what an NTC is. Well, being a seeker of knowledge that I am, I am curious as to the definition of a NTC. My inderstanding of this clause, is that the player can refuse to be traded, and therefore the NHL will void any deals until the player accepts being traded. In Edler's case, it is a "NTC", as opposed to a "limited NTC". What this says to me is that: - if Edler doesn't want to be traded at all (regardless of destination), he can refuse to accept any trade and therefore the NHL will void any deal until he says yes to being traded (as noted above). - if Edler agrees to being traded he isn't required to tell anyone to which team(s) he would accept a trade. While this might be helpful to the team, I haven't seen anything which states that Edler is required to submit a list of "X" teams should the Canucks want to trade him. Should he not want to go to a particular team, he can refuse to be traded and therefore the NHL will continue to void any deals until such time as Edler did accept to be traded to another team. - if Edler did "agree" to being traded, he might supply a list to the Canucks of teams to which he would accept being traded. Contrary to how some posters on this forum seem to think it works, this list would not necessarily consist of teams to which the Canucks would want to trade Edler (division rivals, etc). This list might also consist of teams which couldn't take Edler in a deal (cap space issues). Also, these teams might not need Edler (they already have a good top-4) and therefore they would not agree to a trade with the Canucks. Further the teams on that list might be unwilling to give up the kind of assets which the Canucks would be seeking for Edler. Maybe the Canucks want roster players, but that is a step back for the other team. Or maybe the Canucks would like picks and/or prospects, but the potential trading partner is weak in those types of assets. So, what am I missing? regards, G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry Goose Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 LOL ok people keep on discussing your Edler trade proposals assuming it can happen and we will see what happens by next season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollumpus Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 LOL ok people keep on discussing your Edler trade proposals assuming it can happen and we will see what happens by next season. Well, it could happen, assuming Edler was okay with being traded. regards, G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 Horrible for the Islanders. Not sure if the Islanders would do Edler for Strome straight up either. That one is a maybe. Isles have Reinhart and Pulock coming up and will probably draft Ekblad as well if they get the second overall pick. Ekblad + Strome for Edler is absolutely awful. Yeah, I don't know if they're desperate enough to give up a top 10 pick, but at some point they have to do something rather than keep waiting for prospects. If they want to get a top pair D, they'll have to pay. It's a point to consider though, if the Isles defer the pick they trade to Buffalo til next year, and it's at the low end of the top 10, then they won't be as worried about dealing it. A top of the order pick would be a different, but then how will they know if it will be so high a pick if they really want to make a deal like this? If they'd rather wait and risk not making the playoffs (granted they're pretty far out now after a big losing streak) to see if they get a top pick, then so be it. There's still next year they'd be risking too to wait on more young D to fill the void, and at some point they'll have to really try to win some games versus just stockpiling picks and developing their young prospects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry Goose Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 Well, it could happen, assuming Edler was okay with being traded. I think only desperate circumstances would make MG force Edler into such a position, and right now things are far from desperate. In fact, Burrows and Edler returning to the line up will make the Canucks better. But hey, I can't say it's impossible that Edler could be traded. I'm betting on unlikely though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 Horrible for the Islanders. Not sure if the Islanders would do Edler for Strome straight up either. That one is a maybe. Isles have Reinhart and Pulock coming up and will probably draft Ekblad as well if they get the second overall pick. Ekblad + Strome for Edler is absolutely awful. Typo on my part. The deal was Edler for Strome and a conditional 1st. The condition being if the pick is in the top 5-10, the Isles keep it and we get their 2015 1st. If it's in the 12th-20th overall range we get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 LOL ok people keep on discussing your Edler trade proposals assuming it can happen and we will see what happens by next season. Is it likely? No. Is it possible? Yes. Should that stop people from discussing it ever? Not at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plum Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 Looks like they need Alberts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 Typo on my part. The deal was Edler for Strome and a conditional 1st. The condition being if the pick is in the top 5-10, the Isles keep it and we get their 2015 1st. If it's in the 12th-20th overall range we get it. That wouldn't work though. One of their 2014 or 2015 1st rounders goes to Buffalo in the Vanek deal. If they choose to trade the other, it's the leavings from the first deal so we don't get much chance to put conditions on it unless we're open to deferring to 2016. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 That wouldn't work though. One of their 2014 or 2015 1st rounders goes to Buffalo in the Vanek deal. If they choose to trade the other, it's the leavings from the first deal so we don't get much chance to put conditions on it unless we're open to deferring to 2016. Ahh right forgot about that. Proposal can be scraped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 I fully expect Erhoff to be moved by Buffalo as they try to rebuild. I think he will be the first and possibly biggest name defenceman to move during the season. Now that the big dollar years are gone from his contract his $4 million price tag looks pretty good with a soon to be $70+ million salary cap... especially if any salary recapture gets tagged to Buffalo and not the receiving team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry Goose Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 especially if any salary recapture gets tagged to Buffalo and not the receiving team. I think for this reason BUF is unlikely to move him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 I think for this reason BUF is unlikely to move him They get hit with any salary recapture regardless of whether they move him or not... since they are not likely to be a cap ceiling team anytime in the foreseeable future (especially with it rising so much)... salary recapture means diddly to them. With the demand for top 4 D around the league, they can get a roster player; a solid prospect; and a 1st for him between now and the deadline. Not that I am offering this as an actual trade, but a package from us would have to look something like: Tanev Gaunce or Jensen 2014 1st round For Erhoff We would be outbid by teams who will have better prospects and higher draft picks if we offered that up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.