JamesB Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Sorry for creating yet another thread dealing with the Canuck/Kane situation but this is a bit different, as it also includes some commentary on Canucks prospects and players. The question is: what deal could the Canucks have offered Winnipeg of similar value to what Winnipeg got from Buffalo? I break the deal down piece by piece: 1. Exchange on D of Bogosian for Myers. Both are big, good, and young. Both are signed for three more years after this year at similiar cap hits (4 million for Bogosian and 5 million for Myers). Both guys have similar numbers this year (13 pts each). This is fairly even but I am sure Winnipeg is happy as Myers is generally thought to have a higher ceiling than Bogosian. I am going to assume that if the Canucks had been involved there would have been no trade on D, but that means the Canucks would have to add a sweetener somewhere else to make up for this component in the Buffalo deal. 2. Winnipeg gets Stafford. This is short term. Stafford is a legitimate top 6 forward scoring at the rate of about .5 PPG. He is a UFA. The Canucks have no UFA as good to offer. Probably the closest would be Matthias. (Richardson would be possible except that he is injured and Winnipeg wants help now). Either way, but the Canucks would have to add a sweetener somewhere else. Or maybe Winnipeg would have taken Higgins instead. 3. Winnipeg gets Buffalo's lowest first round pick, which could be in the mid 20s. The Canucks first round pick has an expected value in the mid teens. The second round pick has an expected value in the mid-40s. I am going to assume Vancouver's second round pick would go, but the Canucks would need to offer a further sweetener. 4, Winnipeg gets former 2nd round draft pick Brendan Lemiuex, now in the OHL. He is doing well, scoring better than a point per game and is "hard to play against". Relative to Canuck prospects he is not as good as McCann but ahead of Cassels. Winnipeg would have wanted McCann but maybe Cassels would have been enough with another sweetener somewhere. 5. Winnipeg gets former first round pick Joel Armia, who is doing well in the AHL -- considerably better than any Canuck prospect with Utica. And the Canucks owe a lot of sweeteners to make up for the previous parts of the deal. This means either Horvat or Virtanen have to be included. I am going to assume Virtanen. This is the absolute minium package the Canucks would have needed to offer to match the Buffalo deal (but probably not enough): Virtanen Cassels Matthias 2nd round pick in the 2015 draft. A package that would probably have been enough would be Virtanen McCann Matthias 2nd round pick in the 2015 draft. A package that certainly would have been enough would be Virtanen Cassels Matthias 1st round pick in the 2015 or 2016 draft. Personally I hate all these deals, so I am breathing a sigh of relief. (And I suspect Horvat, Virtanen, and McCann feel the same way.) I am not saying these are the only possible packages, but I think they come closest to what Buffalo gave up and therefore help us calibrate the bullet we just dodged. Buffalo can afford the deal as they have lots of picks and prospects. It is obvious the Canucks are not in that position and we can see that the pipeline is still pretty thin. We only have a few good prospects and cannot trade away the best two best prospects not currently in the NHL (Virtanen and McCann) for a question mark like Kane (who also has a high cap hit). We need another good draft this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Well here's the thing. People keep suggesting what benning and Linden would have offered for Kane and bogosian. The issue is NONE of them seem to take into account the $10 MILLION in cap the Nucks would have been bringing back. If we did that deal we'd be $5-$10 million over the cap at seasons end with something like 9 RFA's to qualify and 3 or 4 UFA's to sign. Benning was doing what a good GM does in trying to make his club better. But really Dodge a bullet? Bah we were never staring at the gun IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c00kies Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Virtanen is worth more than any of those Buffalo players. Armia is already 21, so his value is quite a bit lower than Virtanen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Virtanen is worth more than any of those Buffalo players. Armia is already 21, so his value is quite a bit lower than Virtanen. how do you compute that? At 21 Armia is building a solid rep as pro already and looks like he's going to be making the jump to the NHL next season. Virtanen is playing against boys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dral Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 It's been a while since I've had a reason to +1 a post in Canucks talk, thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nino Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 I didn't hear virts name in any rumors or reported offerings, are you just assuming or is there something I don't know? Kane would have been a great pickup at the right price but it looks like the price was too high. Hey if he really wants to play here we may be seeing him in a few years, that may be a point when we are ready to compete and the twins are stepping down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHodgson9 Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 the kind that comes out of a gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesB Posted February 11, 2015 Author Share Posted February 11, 2015 I didn't hear virts name in any rumors or reported offerings, are you just assuming or is there something I don't know? Kane would have been a great pickup at the right price but it looks like the price was too high. Hey if he really wants to play here we may be seeing him in a few years, that may be a point when we are ready to compete and the twins are stepping down. Yesterday's poll question on TSN 1040 was "would you include Virtanen in a trade for Kane?". And his name was frequently mentioned as someone Winnipeg wanted. This is what Benning said today, however: "The players we wouldn’t include in the deal were the Horvats, the Virtanens, the McCanns (Canucks first-round picks Bo Horvat, Jake Virtanen and Jared McCann),” said Benning. “I think we made a fair offer. But they ended up making a big deal and we didn’t have the players to match that deal.” (See http://blogs.theprovince.com/2015/02/11/benning-on-kane-canucks-werent-willing-to-trade-horvat-virtanen-or-mccann/). This quote makes me happy about Benning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sting Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 I'm of the belief that the combo of Canucks a rival Western team and Kane's desire to play in Vancouver W innipeg was trying to pry more from Vancouver than what they settled for from Buffalo. I don't see Bogosian as a player in a Canuck trade. I feel this component was explored due to Myers desire to leave Buffalo and Bogosian being a good fit in his home State. Your evaluations are pretty good. Safe to say McCann or Virtanen were requested as starters for Wpg. The deal breaker was probably the pick.....No way that JB could offer a 1st that could have Lottery implications. My take on how this is going to go down is......Buffalo gets 3 great years from Kane, at the end of which (unless Kane is extremely happy) he will explore free agency. When/if this happens JB will have the Sedin's 14 million to offer a substantial deal. I can guarantee this negotiation starts with. I tried really hard to get you last time. Zach Parise 2.0. Yeah...we just got better long term Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dasein Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Rental middle 6: Matthias - lesser than Stafford 2011 1st round prospect: Jensen - lesser than Armia, but similar size and similar goal production Former NHLer's son: Cassels - better than Lemieux and further along in his development 2015 1st round pick: Vancouver's - better than STL or NYI's Top 4 defenseman: Tanev - lesser than Myers I think that our package is up there with BUF through 1-4 - we give a lesser top prospect and rental, but better 1st rounder and center prospect - we don't need to give up Horvat or Virtanen because BUF didn't give up their top prospects in Reinhart or Grigorenko Where we get destroyed is the disparity between Tanev and Myers - IMO that's why we would have had to sweeten the deal with a Virtanen or a Horvat or a McCann instead of Jensen - because BUF had Myers and we have Tanev The only thing I would be hesitant about trading away from the package above is our own 2015 1st round pick - if we had two, I wouldn't mind but we can't afford to take a risk on Kane by including our only 2015 1st rounder We didn't dodge a bullet - JB was never going to move Horvat, Virtanen or McCann Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JC2 Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 I think the big gamble on Buffalo's part is if kane will be happy to play there long term. Winnepeg is at least capable of fighting for a playoff spot and even with kane Buffalo is years away from being good. I wouldn't be surprised to see Kane hit the free agency market when his contract expires and the Canucks sign him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesB Posted February 11, 2015 Author Share Posted February 11, 2015 I'm of the belief that the combo of Canucks a rival Western team and Kane's desire to play in Vancouver were trying to pry more from Vancouver than what they settled for from Buffalo. I don't see Bogosian as a player in a Canuck trade. I feel this component was explored due to Myers desire to leave Buffalo and Bogosian being a good fit in his home State. Your evaluations are pretty good. Safe to say McCann or Virtanen were requested as starters for Wpg. The deal breaker was probably the pick.....No way that JB could offer a 1st that could have Lottery implications. My take on how this is going to go down is......Buffalo gets 3 great years from Kane, at the end of which (unless Kane is extremely happy) he will explore free agency. When/if this happens JB will have the Sedin's 14 million to offer a substantial deal. I can guarantee this negotiation starts with. I tried really hard to get you last time. Zach Parise 2.0. Yeah...we just got better long term I was thinking the same thing. JB is playing the long game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N4ZZY Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Sorry for creating yet another thread dealing with the Canuck/Kane situation but this is a bit different, as it also includes some commentary on Canucks prospects and players. The question is: what deal could the Canucks have offered Winnipeg of similar value to what Winnipeg got from Buffalo? I break the deal down piece by piece: 1. Exchange on D of Bogosian for Myers. Both are big, good, and young. Both are signed for three more years after this year at similiar cap hits (4 million for Bogosian and 5 million for Myers). Both guys have similar numbers this year (13 pts each). This is fairly even but I am sure Winnipeg is happy as Myers is generally thought to have a higher ceiling than Bogosian. I am going to assume that if the Canucks had been involved there would have been no trade on D, but that means the Canucks would have to add a sweetener somewhere else to make up for this component in the Buffalo deal. 2. Winnipeg gets Stafford. This is short term. Stafford is a legitimate top 6 forward scoring at the rate of about .5 PPG. He is a UFA. The Canucks have no UFA as good to offer. Probably the closest would be Matthias. (Richardson would be possible except that he is injured and Winnipeg wants help now). Either way, but the Canucks would have to add a sweetener somewhere else. Or maybe Winnipeg would have taken Higgins instead. 3. Winnipeg gets Buffalo's lowest first round pick, which could be in the mid 20s. The Canucks first round pick has an expected value in the mid teens. The second round pick has an expected value in the mid-40s. I am going to assume Vancouver's second round pick would go, but the Canucks would need to offer a further sweetener. 4, Winnipeg gets former 2nd round draft pick Brendan Lemiuex, now in the OHL. He is doing well, scoring better than a point per game and is "hard to play against". Relative to Canuck prospects he is not as good as McCann but ahead of Cassels. Winnipeg would have wanted McCann but maybe Cassels would have been enough with another sweetener somewhere. 5. Winnipeg gets former first round pick Joel Armia, who is doing well in the AHL -- considerably better than any Canuck prospect with Utica. And the Canucks owe a lot of sweeteners to make up for the previous parts of the deal. This means either Horvat or Virtanen have to be included. I am going to assume Virtanen. This is the absolute minium package the Canucks would have needed to offer to match the Buffalo deal (but probably not enough): Virtanen Cassels Matthias 2nd round pick in the 2015 draft. A package that would probably have been enough would be Virtanen McCann Matthias 2nd round pick in the 2015 draft. A package that certainly would have been enough would be Virtanen Cassels Matthias 1st round pick in the 2015 or 2016 draft. Personally I hate all these deals, so I am breathing a sigh of relief. (And I suspect Horvat, Virtanen, and McCann feel the same way.) I am not saying these are the only possible packages, but I think they come closest to what Buffalo gave up and therefore help us calibrate the bullet we just dodged. Buffalo can afford the deal as they have lots of picks and prospects. It is obvious the Canucks are not in that position and we can see that the pipeline is still pretty thin. We only have a few good prospects and cannot trade away the best two best prospects not currently in the NHL (Virtanen and McCann) for a question mark like Kane (who also has a high cap hit). We need another good draft this year. I would do none of those deals. The Canucks are in no position to give away their draft picks and prospects. This franchise does not have enough prospect depth to be able to do that. And we won't for a few years. I'm glad that Benning didn't pull the trigger on this one - or else that would have meant that Horvat, Virtanen, and/or McCann would have been gone by now. That's a big no. We haven't had a rookie play like Horvat since the days of Linden. Let's keep our prospects, they're going to be fine players in the NHL in a number of years. Kane, granted, is a great athlete. But he's scored 30 goals ONCE in his career, so far. And there's nothing to say that he'll get there again (maybe never the rest of his career, who knows). He's got the potential to score 40. The question is, will he ever get there. Giving up Horvat, Virtanen, etc is a lot for potential. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesB Posted February 11, 2015 Author Share Posted February 11, 2015 the kind that comes out of a gun. "Dodging a bullet' is like, you know, a metaphor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nino Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 "Dodging a bullet' is like, you know, a metaphor. What's the point of explaining yourself to a smart ass? He knows what you mean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kloubek Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 Clearly, what Buffalo gave up is more than we were able to (or wanted) to give up. And that's fine with me, because I think Buffalo got fleeced on this deal - especially if Kane's attitude issues persist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaBamba Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 This reminds me of me being married. I'm commited, but once in a while I'm tempted by an exotic beauty that makes fire in my slacks. Then I sometimes even talk to her and test her interest in some "LaBamba" Then I think about what I have at home, wife, kids, a stupid cat that I hate. And I say to myself, do I really wanna give all that up for this 1 nice piece of a**? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canorth Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 This reminds me of me being married. I'm commited, but once in a while I'm tempted by an exotic beauty that makes fire in my slacks. Then I sometimes even talk to her and test her interest in some "LaBamba" Then I think about what I have at home, wife, kids, a stupid cat that I hate. And I say to myself, do I really wanna give all that up for this 1 nice piece of a**? Probably cost you one kid, a stupid cat and a 1st. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sting Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 Probably cost you one kid, a stupid cat and a 1st. Plus half the franchise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dasein Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 And a house. Definitely a house. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.