Lui's Knob Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 Doing a bit of 'armchairing'.... There's obvious optomism with the team and their strong start. There's still some holes to fill and Benning loves depth at all positions. The team sorely needs a boost on D and wingers for Bonino (the 1st line of Sedin-Sedin-Vrbata, the 3rd line of Kass-Richardson-Mattias and the 4th of Hansen-Horvat-Dorsett appear set). Are the Canucks preparing for a multi-player deal to help not only this year but the future and fill some very obvious holes? Players that could be dealt in a multi-player deal: - Bieksa/Weber - Either Burrows/Higgins - an ahler (Jensen/Gaunce/Shinkaruk) - picks and lower prospects (McNally, Biega) Who could be the other team? I could see struggling Eastern teams like Philly (B.Schenn/Coburn/Simmonds), Ottawa (Methot, Chiasson) and Buffalo (Myers, Stewart, Girgensons/Grigorenko) being the dance partner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mackcanuck Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 Burrows and Bieksa have full NTC's , they are going nowhere Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goalie13 Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 What evidence do you have that they are lining themselves up for a deal? Unless I'm missing something, the only moves I've seen are ones to fill spots due to injuries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonMexico Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 I don't see a hole on defence and even if there is one in other ppl's eyes, you can't always make trades to fill a hole. You have to rely on organizational depth sometimes too. It's a foreign concept for Vancouver fans. They are used to having zero depth so there was no reserves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herberts Vasiljevs Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 come on man! ya dun goofed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRussianRocket. Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smithers joe Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 i think, if they are going to trade a player, it would be kassian or jensen....or corrado or weber on defense.... unless jb is lying, he won't make any trades that won't make us better....he has always said if a trade came up that made sense, he would do it. the trouble with cdc, all their trade proposals are one sided...i'ld like to know how he learned that the canucks are likking themselves up to make a block buster trade....have you been talking to mr, benning or linden or ekland? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firestorm238 Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 Burrows and Bieksa have full NTC's , they are going nowhere Not that the OP is necessarily correct, but so did Jason Garrison (and technically Ryan Kesler)... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lui's Knob Posted December 9, 2014 Author Share Posted December 9, 2014 What evidence do you have that they are lining themselves up for a deal? Unless I'm missing something, the only moves I've seen are ones to fill spots due to injuries. No evidence; this is 'proposals' and 'armchairing'.... looking at the team, Benning came in to make lineup tweaks Gillis was reluctant to do. I still think they've been reviewing how good the roster actually is and how it competes against the rest of the West. If they make the playoffs, what are they missing to actually compete? They are missing a real 2nd line threat (Higgins/Burrows are not 2nd line consistent secondary scorers), and a stay at home or puck moving D (this is 50/50 which people think the team needs). Kesler when he was dealt suggested the team wanted to 'retool' on the fly or get younger. JB and co have suggested they continually review their lineup against other teams. My armchairing suggests a 2-3 player multi deal could be possible to add depth and continue the retooling... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 I still believe a package of Lack, Hansen, Jensen and a 1st or 2nd will be used to land another top 4 defenceman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluesman60 Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 I still believe a package of Lack, Hansen, Jensen and a 1st or 2nd will be used to land another top 4 defenceman. Losing our future #1 goalie would be a huge setback and the days of trading your picks (especially 1st and 2nd) should be a thing of the past. Sure we could use a top 4 d...who couldn't but there are other options like moving pending FA's or vets to get one without sacrificing the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
73 Percent Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 Not that the OP is necessarily correct, but so did Jason Garrison (and technically Ryan Kesler)...luongo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goalie13 Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 No evidence; this is 'proposals' and 'armchairing'.... looking at the team, Benning came in to make lineup tweaks Gillis was reluctant to do. I still think they've been reviewing how good the roster actually is and how it competes against the rest of the West. If they make the playoffs, what are they missing to actually compete? They are missing a real 2nd line threat (Higgins/Burrows are not 2nd line consistent secondary scorers), and a stay at home or puck moving D (this is 50/50 which people think the team needs). Kesler when he was dealt suggested the team wanted to 'retool' on the fly or get younger. JB and co have suggested they continually review their lineup against other teams. My armchairing suggests a 2-3 player multi deal could be possible to add depth and continue the retooling... OK, sure. But your original point was that they were lining themselves up for a deal. To me, that insinuates that they have made moves in order to facilitate a larger move, like a multi-player swap. For example, if they called up Markstrom, that might be a signal that a deal including Lack was in the works. Speculate all you want, it's what people do around here. I was just trying to figure out what you were getting at with the statement that they were lining things up. I thought maybe it was going to be... they called up Jensen so they can trade Higgins or something like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 I still believe a package of Lack, Hansen, Jensen and a 1st or 2nd will be used to land another top 4 defenceman. I still believe if that package only lands a top 4 defenceman Linden and benning should be taken out back and shot Remember, Bernier, Grabner and a 1st for Ballard.....Ballard being a once upon a time top 4 d man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex425 Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 Won't happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draxxilla Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 To say we don't have a problem on defence is so wrong, admittedly if Sbisa can figure out that in fact he is playing hockey, and not ring around the rosie ( the man has the foot speed of Dana Murzyn), and that piece of wood they make him carry has a use, who knows the problem may be solved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ossi Vaananen Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 Very misleading title. These are merely your ramblings, nothing speculative about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 I don't see a hole on defence and even if there is one in other ppl's eyes, you can't always make trades to fill a hole. You have to rely on organizational depth sometimes too. It's a foreign concept for Vancouver fans. They are used to having zero depth so there was no reserves. Sorry man. We are 19th in goals against. And there is a definite hole in terms of puck skills, another in terms of size and physicality! I desperately hope are not set on D! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YEGCanuck Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 I think the speculation is relevant. A better winger for the second line and NHL tested defensive depth would be smart moves. I would not be inclined to trade Higgins or Shink. I would however package Markstrom in a deal if necessary. If we are in a strong playoff position come March, serious consideration of trades that strengthen the team make sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 Losing our future #1 goalie would be a huge setback and the days of trading your picks (especially 1st and 2nd) should be a thing of the past. Sure we could use a top 4 d...who couldn't but there are other options like moving pending FA's or vets to get one without sacrificing the future. You could also use that trade for a young D; see Derrick Pouliot and Mark Tinordi in diff categories of D we could use. And argue you are enhancing the future! Remember, Markstrom and Demko also have future starter potential. That loss is at least covered. But I do agree with Warhippy that if such package ONLY lands a top 4 D someone should be used to ferment the fertilizer behind the outhouse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.