VanGnome Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 So hearing on the Team 1040 that LeBrun is saying the Canucks are demanding a second line centerman around the age of 25 in any Kesler deal. LeBrun apparently hearing this from team sources around the league. This is exactly what I was worried about with Gillis, limiting his trade options with very specific and high demands. Why do we need a 25 year old second line centerman? Why would teams want to trade a young quality second line centre for a older quality second line centre? Wouldn't Gillis be able to get better and potentially higher quality prospects from teams that would look at Kes as the missing piece of a Stanley Cup run, in which case, why would those teams give up their current younger centerman? Wouldn't Gillis consider parting with Kes if he could get a future number one stud d-man? Instead of sitting back and waiting for offers, I would hope that Gillis is proactively trying to find solutions to get some quality young players, including packaging other players (Edler, Garrison, Hansen...), instead of waiting for the best offer. I realize that it's LeBrun hearing from league sources, but he's pretty well connected so I don't really doubt his info. What you're missing the point on, is that if not for the Sedin's and their perennial 80 point campaigns (this year is not the norm) Kesler would be the 1C on this club. I can think of about 20 teams in the league, roughly speaking in which Kesler would be the 1st line center, so therefore if Gillis is asking for a younger 2nd line center in exchange for a slightly older 1st line caliber centerman with a Selke to his list of achievements, then I say Gillis is setting the bar high, so as to leverage other deals by comparison to get a better breadth of return. IE, Team A and B are interested, both have 2C's in the 23-25 year old range, but one is not willing to give him up, or neither are but one team is willing to give higher end prospects. Gillis could also very easily use these demands to parlay the above scenario, while then turning around and trading Edler for the 2C that he is "demanding" from a Kesler trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theminister Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Yeah I know. Realistically it would be Kesler + just for Johansen. Or not Johansen at all. Frankly, we'd be better off getting 3 pieces to develop and stack our system with momentum than going all-in for a single player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JE14 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Or not Johansen at all. Frankly, we'd be better off getting 3 pieces to develop and stack our system with momentum than going all-in for a single player. Debatable. Don't want the Canucks to trade for a bunch of potential second liners. Would rather get the potential first line center. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frazzy Desjardins Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Lp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 You're not doing yourself any favours thinking like that. It'll only set you up for disappointment. Jenner, Anisimov, 1st would closer. Anisimov, ironically, is 25 years old (re Lebrun). That deal would be hard to turn down as well. Anisimov isn't as physical as Dubinsky, and isn't as strong in the faceoff circle, but he's a pretty steady two way center. Jenner and a 1st or a puck mover like Erixon would make that deal hard to turn down imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theminister Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Debatable. Don't want the Canucks to trade for a bunch of potential second liners. Would rather get the potential first line center. Then we're better off looking around for one that isn't already the leading scorer on his team. Buy low, sell high. Kesler + for Johansen is a worse strategy for us than say Kesler for B Schenn+. It's also more realistic. A player like Jenner, or the 30+ other great prospects around the league, that are younger in their development cycle come cheaper and can have a great impact on the ice. If you can get 2-3 of those and let them mature over a year or two then you'll be in a stronger position come a year from now. These players aren't far off from being impact but are just not there yet. What was the comparable difference in trade value between Johansen this year and 12 months ago? Those are the players we should be seeking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AppleJack Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 What about edler to chicago for sadd, shaw, and kes and 1st to chicago for jonathan toews!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunningWild Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 I'm still confused why Ryan Johansen is off the table - according to some people. When M. Richards was traded, all the insiders kept saying "LA's not trading their top prospect. He's untradeable. He's off the table". Then he got dealt. Is it a case of, CBJ thinks he's better than Kesler (despite this being his only good season)? Or that Kes wouldn't waive to go play with Umberger? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Truckin Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Or not Johansen at all. Frankly, we'd be better off getting 3 pieces to develop and stack our system with momentum than going all-in for a single player. Two ways of thinking and I would rather not go that route with our history as a organization. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theminister Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 I'm still confused why Ryan Johansen is off the table - according to some people. When M. Richards was traded, all the insiders kept saying "LA's not trading their top prospect. He's untradeable. He's off the table". Then he got dealt. Is it a case of, CBJ thinks he's better than Kesler (despite this being his only good season)? Or that Kes wouldn't waive to go play with Umberger? Because he's 21 years old and is the leading scorer on his team. Richards also was not packaged up, he was moved for multiple pieces just as we should be doing with Kesler if he's moved at all. At the time, Schenn was in Manchester, Simmonds was a 2nd-3rd line tweener and a pick. Not a comparable situation. It doesn't make sense for Columbus. You have to have empathy for your trading partner's needs to get a good deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doobiedoodoo Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Can see him moving to pens, but hope he goes to philly for B. Schenn or Couturier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hsedin33 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 I swear, Mike Gillis is absolutely obsessed with centres. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theminister Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Two ways of thinking and I would rather not go that route with our history as a organization. I'm not even sure what that means but every time we've made a similar move it hasn't been awful for us. Linden was a good trade, Bure though by necessity helped us down the road, Mogilny was decent considering his contract…. all of these deals helped shape the future teams. I can't think of one like that where we completely blew it. Many teams have though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AppleJack Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Why does everyone think Kes is going waive his no trade clause to go to the bluejackets off all places? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksSayEh Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 No problem with Kesler+Edler for Johansen,1st. We have an army of potential 2nd liners, we need a high end player, otherwise the future is full of the same problems we have today. A team that can't score. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatsPajamas Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 lol TOMaplelaughs calls into Team1040? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Truckin Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 I'm not even sure what that means but every time we've made a similar move it hasn't been awful for us. Linden was a good trade, Bure though by necessity helped us down the road, Mogilny was decent considering his contract…. all of these deals helped shape the future teams. I can't think of one like that where we completely blew it. Many teams have though. Just meaning that I rather see us go after a decent player than hope for 2 out of 3 prospects to turn out. We are talking about Gillis and that worries me more than if it was another GM with some intelligence in the trade arena. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksSayEh Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Why does everyone think Kes is going waive his no trade clause to go to the bluejackets off all places? They may look bad now, but add Kesler to them, and they'll be in the playoffs this year and the next 2. Then again probably not if we are getting Johansen...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJDDawg Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 What you're missing the point on, is that if not for the Sedin's and their perennial 80 point campaigns (this year is not the norm) Kesler would be the 1C on this club. I can think of about 20 teams in the league, roughly speaking in which Kesler would be the 1st line center, so therefore if Gillis is asking for a younger 2nd line center in exchange for a slightly older 1st line caliber centerman with a Selke to his list of achievements, then I say Gillis is setting the bar high, so as to leverage other deals by comparison to get a better breadth of return. IE, Team A and B are interested, both have 2C's in the 23-25 year old range, but one is not willing to give him up, or neither are but one team is willing to give higher end prospects. Gillis could also very easily use these demands to parlay the above scenario, while then turning around and trading Edler for the 2C that he is "demanding" from a Kesler trade. I hear ya. I guess I'm really concerned that Gillis will not be capable of pulling this off and will end up settling for quantity over quality. I would take having a hole at second line centre (i.e. not getting back a centerman in any Kesler deal) in the very short term if it meant we got back a future #1 D-man or a couple of top flight forward prospects (such as a Mantha) that are younger but have a high probability of being stars 5 years down the road. Outside of the twins and Kes, this team has nothing but third and fourth line players. We need quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trebreh Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Edler + Higgins for Couturier + Read Kesler + Schroeder for Johansen + Anisimov Luongo + Richardson for Bjugstad --- D.Sedin - H.Sedin - A.Burrows H.Shinkaruk - R.Johansen - N.Jensen A.Anisimov - S.Couturier - Z.Kassian M.Read - N.Bjugstad - J.Hansen D.Hamhuis - J.Garrison K.Bieksa - C.Tanev R.Stanton - F.Corrado E.Lack L.Eriksson Rebuild complete in a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.