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

(PROPOSAL/suggestions) Hansen/PITT


Recommended Posts

We've seen his name surfacing in rumours, as of late. Probably safe to say that we all do LIKE Jannik, but our squad has a surplus of bodies,(especially with pending returnees), up front.

Great skater, diligent & rugged. Versatile to utilize. Demerits would be so-so hands, & he'll never drop the gloves(unlike a Weise-type). I think we need to have toughness by committee, almost every depth(bottom two liners) guy willing to drop the mitts, if necessary.

I know our GM doesn't like sign & trades, but he might have to make the occasional exception(good of the team). The Pens are also a rather desired destination amongst players(I'll assume). Pitt has been hit by a slew of injuries. Hansen's attributes(& contract) would probably be just what they need.

They've got a mitt-full of solid D prospects. If we could get one, + a 2014 1st do we go for it? Is that unrealistic? Any suggestions?

I'm also assuming we'd try to deal Edler(seperately) for a TOUGH fwd, + prospects. I don't want a dirty, gooning-team; but would like a younger, bigger, HARD, rugged team, that can't/won't be pushed around.

So:Dumoulin/Bortuzzo & 2014 1st, for Jannik Hansen.

Then:Edler, Schroeder, Corrado, to Philly: 2 Schenns & 2015 2nd rounder.

Daniel -Henrik -Burrows/Kassian

Higgins -Kesler -Santorelli

Booth -Schenn -Burrows/Kassian

Archibald -Richardson -Weise ...xtras: Sestito, Dalpe, Welsh

on D:

Hamhuis- Schenn

Garrison -Tanev

Stanton- Bieksa ...xtras:Alberts, Weber, Pitt acquisition

So we'd add a 1st & 2nd over next two drafts; with a gritty NA'n lineup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No way Hansen gets a first.

That's ok. IF Pitt gets hit with another injury or two, then their young guys might start running out of steam. Our injured start coming back. IF we have something(in excess) that they really need, we only move IF they overpay.

Even if we have to add a middling pick/avg prospect, in this case, we'll only deal from strength, & only accept something that makes sense.

Our GM's brilliant summer of work set the table to pounce on some desperate team. If not Pitt, I believe there will be a similar opportunity by deadline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think people need to remember the following two things.

1. Pittsburgh is a 2 line team and a guy like Hansen or Burrows would be very well received and flourish on the team

2. Dupuis is gone all season and they'll need a guy to either move up the depth charts or shore up the bottom 6.

Hansen or Burrows to the Pens makes a lot of sense for various reasons for the Pens and I won't even speculate on the return

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think people need to remember the following two things.

1. Pittsburgh is a 2 line team and a guy like Hansen or Burrows would be very well received and flourish on the team

2. Dupuis is gone all season and they'll need a guy to either move up the depth charts or shore up the bottom 6.

Hansen or Burrows to the Pens makes a lot of sense for various reasons for the Pens and I won't even speculate on the return

Yeah, basically what I was thinking..seems a good match. We send an established fwd; return is some of their enviable D-prospect depth. It makes sense.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think people need to remember the following two things.

1. Pittsburgh is a 2 line team and a guy like Hansen or Burrows would be very well received and flourish on the team

2. Dupuis is gone all season and they'll need a guy to either move up the depth charts or shore up the bottom 6.

Hansen or Burrows to the Pens makes a lot of sense for various reasons for the Pens and I won't even speculate on the return

Would Pittsburgh even be willing to give up what we would want for Burrows though? I stand by my Hansen for Harrington proposal/idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They need serious help with Malkin, Bennett, Dupuis on IR. They have Vitale on their top line with Kunitz and Crosby.. Hansen can easily fit in their top 6 and replace either Vitale or Connor.

I'd give Hansen + 4th round pick 2015 + for Simon Despres or one of their D prospects.. This is one of the better ideas I've seen and I can see this making sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree strongly Hansen would be of good benefit to the flightless birds who seem to fly anyway.

But I dont see the match with Harrington, Dumoulin and Bortuzzo. They are similar players, perhaps bigger versions of Stanton and Corrado who we already have in our system. Mobile two way D. Are they actually better? I could only see a role for Bortuzzo (a righty who can fight) if Edler was traded and we moved Garrison back to the left. I do suggest drafting guys like this instead of trading all our 2knds? And then having them in our pocket down the line. But why not just bring up Corrado and spend assets on something we need directly?

Nor am I a fan of a big slow guy, L Schenn, just because he's big and can fight. That hurts our team.

The point is if we're going to make a trade we should be bringing in guys who bring talents and skills we don't have. None have slick puck skills and high end speed. We need a guy who can rush the puck and trigger / anchor the transition and PP games. Those are our team weaknesses on D.

What is proposed on D fills our system up with guys exactly like we've already got, and does not fill immediate needs!

I bet Philly would love Edler, and I would like B Schenn? A simpler deal without his crappy brother is a lot more attractive. But they have to move some bodies and cap first to make room. And our strength in prospects is at C. Attractive, but a bit too messy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would Pittsburgh even be willing to give up what we would want for Burrows though? I stand by my Hansen for Harrington proposal/idea.

I'd rather Hansen for Rundblad. Or Orlov. Phoenix in particular could also use a winger. I'd do Hansen plus even... These guys have better offensive skills and would bring a new dimension to our D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree strongly Hansen would be of good benefit to the flightless birds who seem to fly anyway.

But I dont see the match with Harrington, Dumoulin and Bortuzzo. They are similar players, perhaps bigger versions of Stanton and Corrado who we already have in our system. Mobile two way D. Are they actually better? I could only see a role for Bortuzzo (a righty who can fight) if Edler was traded and we moved Garrison back to the left. I do suggest drafting guys like this instead of trading all our 2knds? And then having them in our pocket down the line. But why not just bring up Corrado and spend assets on something we need directly?

Nor am I a fan of a big slow guy, L Schenn, just because he's big and can fight. That hurts our team.

The point is if we're going to make a trade we should be bringing in guys who bring talents and skills we don't have. None have slick puck skills and high end speed. We need a guy who can rush the puck and trigger / anchor the transition and PP games. Those are our team weaknesses on D.

What is proposed on D fills our system up with guys exactly like we've already got, and does not fill immediate needs!

I bet Philly would love Edler, and I would like B Schenn? A simpler deal without his crappy brother is a lot more attractive. But they have to move some bodies and cap first to make room. And our strength in prospects is at C. Attractive, but a bit too messy!

Surfer, there's one other aspect I don't see anyone factoring in. What if after the 2015 PO's there's an expansion draft?(I'm assuming it's going to happen). If we can transition some of our surplus(yet talented players); I'd like to have an excess of younger guys on ELC's(on farm, you needn't protect); and/or extra top picks. With the overall depth our GM is establishing, we'll likely be a team that can't protect everyone. We shouldn't lose assets for nothing; & I bet MG is already positioning for this. Transition/recycle into assets that'll help the franchise, perhaps starting a half-decade later,(which don't require protection).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surfer, there's one other aspect I don't see anyone factoring in. What if after the 2015 PO's there's an expansion draft?(I'm assuming it's going to happen). If we can transition some of our surplus(yet talented players); I'd like to have an excess of younger guys on ELC's(on farm, you needn't protect); and/or extra top picks. With the overall depth our GM is establishing, we'll likely be a team that can't protect everyone. We shouldn't lose assets for nothing; & I bet MG is already positioning for this. Transition/recycle into assets that'll help the franchise, perhaps starting a half-decade later,(which don't require protection).

Geez your up early! (We're in the same time zone as I recall, me Perth, you Japan?)

Your point is a possibility. I am admittedly looking for trades to advance the team right now. I dont want to trade assets that can play now for ones who will only win spots in 2 or 3 years. Well, I would if said pickup was a player we could project into a skillset / role we cannot currently fill.

My belief is that we have two glaring opportunities to improve (lets call them that versus weaknesses). One rests in that we don't have a premium winger to pot goals off the Sedins passing wizardry. More foundational, we need a fleet footed D man who can handle and rush the puck. That would help more, as it would improve our power play and critically our transition game. We have lots of fast forwards who would score if we had more time and space for them.

My goal is to acquire a premium puck moving D and a legit top line scoring RW. We cannot afford these as established all stars. My belief is our assets can afford one as an establishing young player (say Simmonds) and the other as a top prospect (say Rundblad). Or if we go top shelf (E Kane), we probably can only afford one.

An interesting conversation would be what could we protect in an expansion draft? 8 forwards, 4 D and 1 goalie? And would NTC's protect a player from being unshielded? I would gamble a cpl of quasi expensive contracts might not get picked up.

Protect;

Sedins, Kesler, Horvat, Shinkaruk, Kassian, Cassells, Gaunce Hamhuis, Garrison, Tanev, Corrado Lack.

But who knows? Last expansion i think ELC's were automatically protected. So your concept would have merit.

But I still would rather win now, greedy bugger that I am!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^On the expansion issue, I'd emphasize protecting most every big/young/speedy player we can. I think preparing for it, is maybe as important as your chosen list of players. Would suggest trading numbers..say 2 for 1's; or 3 players for 2. Excess value(we receive) should be translated/parlayed into picks, wherever possible. This way we can target a precise 14( 15, or 16 players, whatever # it will be?). Ensure they're the right character guys, on good contracts. If our contracts & prospects are excellent, we'll always attract good college, EU & NHL FA's to fill out our needs.......(Damncursor won't shift down/wall of text)! I think this IS a factor today(guessing our mgt will try to plan/adjust earlier than rivals), as they build the NHL & AHL rosters to precision, as MG & LG are rather meticulous, thorough dudes.

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...