a Fool Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Edler for ROR seems to make sense for both teams. I'd do it straight up. Guy is only 22 and will be part of the new core along with Tanev/Kass/Horvat. Avs get a great D-man and try to push for the Cup in the next few years. ROR also will help in the short term, he's already a really solid player. Can't have enough guys like him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 I don't think ROR is worth NEAR what his demands are going to be. He's a fairly decent takeaway force, yes. But he's not a real center. He doesn't take enough draws and he has little playmaking ability. He also doesn't hit or play on the PK enough to be considered a legit defensive specialist. He has ZERO penalties. To me it looks like Colorado is just trying to boost his value as much as possible by giving him cushy ice time like Chris Stewart, another big-scoring power myth. If we trade for him, we're just going to be stuck watching another guy with tunnel vision who can't find any chemistry with any linemates, nor score big goals against big teams. (Virtually all of ROR's offense has come against weak opposition.) So why trade massive assets and pay big money for that? Esp. when he's already shown massive entitlement issues. No to ROR! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 We aren't getting rid of Tanev. We would only have one right handed defenseman if we did and we would be over the cap. We have a surplus in left handed defenseman so to me Edler is the one to go. Stanton, Hamhuis and Garrison have all outplayed Edler in my opinion and Edler still has good trade value. If we do trade for O'Reilly we should try and snag a reliable top 6/depth dman while we are at it. Edler, Weise, Jensen and a 2nd/3rd for O'Reilly and Sarich(Veteran right handed top 6 D with size) . I don't think Edler straight up is going to get O'Reilly, who is 22, has played amazing so far and still has a ton of potential. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thad Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Well, technically thad and I don't agree. We think Colorado would likely have to add rather than it being one for one. No kidding, they're going to take back Booth and retain 50% of Campbell's deal? I think they should have to add but I'm not so sure I would turn down the one for one deal if it was take it or leave it. At some point we need to make a splash and this would be a hard opportunity to pass up. Parting with edler blows but if we can flip one of our impact players into a significantly younger impact player, I say do it and don't look back. This kid is way better than Kesler was at 22, who knows how good he'll end up in the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Well that's where we have to be careful. Kesler went from a 30 point guy to a 70 point guy, does that mean O'Reilly goes from a 50 point guy to a 90 point guy? I don't think we can overlay quite the same projection. I still think we'd be better going after a more dynamic offensive player if we start giving up major pieces. There's only so many options, and O'Reilly isn't a bad one, but 16 hits in 45 games and being less of a guy who creates offence gives me some pause if he'd be the answer. Now, if we got O'Reilly plus Kane or Wheeler, and were able to do it without trading much of our youth (i.e. Tanev, Horvat, etc.) then I don't see any reason not to be adding from both perspectives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 We aren't getting rid of Tanev. We would only have one right handed defenseman if we did... Corrado say's hi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Corrado say's hi. Torts says AHL. Canucks with Tanev > Canucks without Tanev. Do you want Corrado playing 10 minutes here or 25 minutes in the AHL? Torts seems to think AHL and I agree with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Corrado say's hi. So does Weber. And with Garrison able to play right side it's not that insane if we did have to move a right handed shot in trade. Hamhuis Bieksa Edler Weber Stanton Garrison Alberts Corrado Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jejejester Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Well that's where we have to be careful. Kesler went from a 30 point guy to a 70 point guy, does that mean O'Reilly goes from a 50 point guy to a 90 point guy? I don't think we can overlay quite the same projection. I still think we'd be better going after a more dynamic offensive player if we start giving up major pieces. There's only so many options, and O'Reilly isn't a bad one, but 16 hits in 45 games and being less of a guy who creates offence gives me some pause if he'd be the answer. Now, if we got O'Reilly plus Kane or Wheeler, and were able to do it without trading much of our youth (i.e. Tanev, Horvat, etc.) then I don't see any reason not to be adding from both perspectives. Now that would be the best case for this team. A line of RoR Kesler Wheeler, would be very nice. Could you move edler for RoR+ And use that + and a few pieces from our roster to get wheeler is the question, without sacrificing youth As far as edler's NTC, i believe if the right deal came buy, Canucks would ask him to waive, it is a business and players know that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me_ Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 O'reilly would be great but would he re sign? Or just another rfa rental? Yes.... Because RFAs are rentals.... Yes... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me_ Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Torts says AHL. Canucks with Tanev > Canucks without Tanev. Do you want Corrado playing 10 minutes here or 25 minutes in the AHL? Torts seems to think AHL and I agree with him. 25 minutes in Colorado? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ilya Kovalchuk. Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 He has 18 goals now. Which would lead all Canucks..He's got 70 points in him one day, maybe as early as next year. Yea he helps us offensively. Comparing any player to Canucks players numbers is not a fair assessment. Mason Raymond would be tied with Ryan Kesler and 3rd on team points. Raymond would also be #2 in PPG for the team. So I should take it from you that O'Reilly has got 70 points in him one day eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dragon4401 Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 25 minutes in Colorado? No Utica...He was talking about Frankie Corrado Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shane1733 Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 its nice to dream. colorado will not be trading him, we all know this deep inside. And if they did, it would be next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metroneck Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Avs are not going to trade ROR for anything less than a top 2 D + high draft pick or solid prospect. They chose him over 2 lotto picks. They are not going to give him away for anyone who is remotely underachieving. Not saying it's a good deal for the Canucks, but it would take Tanev (not a top 2), Horvat + another pick or prospect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thad Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 You definitely got a point, Elvis. Perhaps we could be better going after a more dynamic goal scorer but the consistent ones are few and far between when it comes to trades. Waiting for that deal could be the death of us. I'm also thinking adding a guy like O'Reilly could be what pushes Kassian to really break out. It would be nice to have another option at centre on the second line for our prospects to find success with. When they slide in with Kesler, their success is at the mercy of Kes not going one man army and the torts giving up on them with the lack of chemistry. Part of me thinks going after a top six centreman over scoring winger gives guys like Kass Jensen shinkaruk grenier fox all a greater chance of success. It also opens up the possibility of moving Kesler eventually. If ROR shines and More prospects crack the top six, we can maybe look at prying a sweet package outta Detroit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Actually, looking at it again, O'Reilly wasn't that far off of where Kesler started. Kesler started in the NHL a few years older, but his first seasons of 23, 27 (82 game pace), 37 and 59 aren't that far behind O'Reilly's 26, 26, 55 and 56 (82 game pace). Kesler did more in a defensive role than I think O'Reilly does now and certainly Kesler hit more than O'Reilly ever has so there's a reasonable comparison there. What I'm saying is that O'Reilly shouldn't be overhyped at this point to be worth his qualifying offer of $6.5M in cap hit. Very good player, sure, as Kesler has been for us but let's not go crazy at giving up the farm and prepping him as our marquee player or the face of this franchise if we did indeed trade for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Here's some more reality to the discussion: Pierre LeBrun @Real_ESPNLeBrun People asking me about Ryan O'Reilly. I know this: given how much I know Patrick Roy loves that player, would need to be mega mega offer... Never say never, but odds are O'Reilly stays put unless Avs are blown away big time... If they aren't blown away by Edler or Tanev+ then we aren't likely to add much to entice them. I do think they would look to move a center, which leaves Stastny, but then they'd have more onus to make an enticing deal if they truly want a big piece in return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thad Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Ya I'm not really buying they actually want to move him either. I'm thinking it's more media hype because he's finally going to be eligible for trade. I'm sure they'll listen to offers but I think it's going to take at least edler to get em close to pulling the trigger. I wouldn't be adding picks or prospects either Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Habitat Posted January 17, 2014 Share Posted January 17, 2014 Canucks ain't getting him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.