(Proposal) 2nd line

[Gretzky to Lemieux]

Trade 1:

To Van: 2015 3rd round pick

To a contender: Brad Richardson

Trade 2:

To Van: Wayne Simmonds

To Philly: Lack, Sbisa/Stanton, Mccann and 2015 3rd round pick

Trade 3:

To Van: 2015 3rd round pick

To NYR: Chris Higgins

Trade 4:

To Van: Tyler Bozak

To Tor: Nick Bonino and a 2015 3rd round pick

Philly has lots of fire power up front but not enough defenders and goaltenders. Lack and Sbisa/Stanton givies them exactly what they need while Mccann and the 2015 3rd just helps them rebuild. I know that a lot of you don't want to give up Mccann but I honestly think that he's the odd man out since we already have Horvat, Gaunce and Cassels as our centers for the future and he's the only one with decent value other then Horvat. I think that Higgins would waive to be trade back to his hometown under Alain Vigneault. Bonino isn't much of a downgrade from Bozak but Toronto would obviously want a pick coming back their way to help speed up their rebuild.

Thoughts?

[48MPHSlapShot]

Bozak and Bonino are essentially interchangeable players. No point.

And OBVIOUSLY a big fat no to trading one of our very best prospects, and the only center prospect we have that has (potentially) the offensive instincts to be a number 1 center.

Every time I see a proposal involving McCann my rage meter fills up a little bit more.

[Skirbs11]

Trade 1- Sure why not UFA at end of season might as well get something now

Trade 2- NO, Philly dosnt need anymore d-men, And i dont want to give up on McCann early kid has potential

Trade 3- Yes, but i would try to move him for a 2nd round pick, sheds some cap space for us frees up a roster spot for younger player next year

Trade 4- Makes no sense, Practically the same player except Bonino is 2 years younger and has a good cap hit at 1.9 mil for 2 more years while Bozak is 4.2 for 3 more, reather keep Bonino and Spend the money else where

[thejazz97]

We don't have a 3rd Rd. Pick until 2017.

2015 is in Anaheim (Thanks, Ryan Kesler.)

2016 is in New York (Thanks, Alex Mallet.)

I'd rather not make it a habit of giving away our 3rds for mediocre players.

Every time I see a proposal involving McCann my rage meter fills up a little bit more.

I know how you feel, buddy. I get riled up too.

[smithers joe]

richardson is an ufa at year end...

AV might be happy to have higgy...he knows how good defensively he is...

i like symmonds but that's too much to give up...

let's not ship bonino out yet...he will be better going forward...

trade kassian if you need to trade someone...maybe lack.

[Mr.Plow]

Wayne Simmonds is a stud, it would take a lot more then that. But he is the ideal top 6 player our team needs

[48MPHSlapShot]

I know how you feel, buddy. I get riled up too.

It just angers me to no end.

"Hey, this kid that was an absolute steal in the draft is having a great season in Jr and looks to be a big part of our future. Let's trade him!"

Ugh

[VanIsleCanucks]

I like trades 1 and 3 as for addressing the second line...would rather deal Tanev and Kassian to Colorado for ROR....don't get me wrong I really like Tanev but we have a ton of Dmen and our other big 3 are not going anywhere. ROR would be a beauty on our second line.

[Pears]

I think if we want Simmer, we're gonna need to include Kassian, which I'd be ok with. So something like Lack, Kassian, Corrado, 2016 1st might get them interested.

[thejazz97]

I like trades 1 and 3 as for addressing the second line...would rather deal Tanev and Kassian to Colorado for ROR....don't get me wrong I really like Tanev but we have a ton of Dmen and our other big 3 are not going anywhere. ROR would be a beauty on our second line.

ROR could be our backup goalie and he'd still be a beauty. Do it, GMJB.

[thejazz97]

I think if we want Simmer, we're gonna need to include Kassian, which I'd be ok with. So something like Lack, Kassian, Corrado, 2016 1st might get them interested.

First Forsling, now Corrado? Our fifth round picks are going like none other

[tyhee]

I have to hand it to G to L, you've done a job of filling some current Canucks needs. I could see quite a few people liking these proposals.

Trade 1-I may be alone but think Hansen has slightly more value than that. Still, a 3rd would be nice as we don't have one. However, I don't want the 3rd for what is done with it in Trade 4. Obviously this hurts the team at present-I don't know if you're suggesting this for now or for this summer. I think Vancouver wouldn't make it unless and until they're not looking at this season's playoffs.

Trade 2-Obviously Wayne Simmonds is a fine player. He would provide 2nd line scoring and from an age group we don't have scoring from. In fact, from a value standpoint this trade may favour the Canucks and Simmonds is good enough and young enough to be tempting.

But I think Simmonds is worth more to the Flyers than he is to the Canucks. That opinion is based on age and how long the Canucks will take to re-tool.

Right now the Canucks have no forwards in their mid-20's that have shown the ability to be good enough to be the core of a winning team. They have precious little in the way of anybody at any position who has shown the ability to be good enough to be the core of a good team. Edler and Tanev on defence are really about it for the Canucks for players in that age group who can form a good core, and they're good but not stars. Canucks have essentially a huge void where their new core should be and are hanging on with old players who are still useful but are past their prime, mid-20's players who for the most part are bottom-6 forwards and bottom-pair level defencemen, and a 27 year old goalie who starts every couple of weeks.

The age group that should be players in their prime is the one where the Canucks have a void.

The Flyers don't have such a void. At forward in that age range they start with their top 3 scorers, Voracek (25), Girous (27) and Simmonds (26.) By comparison the Canucks top FIVE scorers are in their 30's. and their top 3 are 34, 34 and 33.

So the Flyers, though they have their share of older players, mostly don't have those players at their core. The Flyers, even though their team isn't as good as the Canucks, aren't in the same position of having an aging core that is past its prime. They don't have nearly as severe an age-related need for a rebuild. If the Flyers prospects come through, they could be ok in a year or two. Simmonds is a core player for them and age-wise their core is in its prime. I doubt, actually, that the Flyers would be interested in Trade 2. Simmonds is probably more important than that to them.

What about the Canucks? Next season, the players that are the Canucks' top scorers now will be 35, 35, 34, 32 and 34. Their production rates to fall even further. There is nobody in his mid-20's that has shown he can take over. There are a couple with the talent, but so far they haven't done it. In fact, there's probably nobody on CDC who would be overly shocked if next season the only scorer in the Canucks' top 6 who is under the age of 32 is a 20 year old. That's perhaps extreme, but it wouldn't be that shocking.

So, the next question is, are the Canucks a realistic contender with a team of former stars who can still play but clearly not at the level of their prime years, a group of mediocre players in their prime years and some talented youngsters most of whom aren't ready to take over the core responsibilities yet?

I think most, though certainly not all, would say no. Certainly there is some variation in the extent of optimism about what the current core can still do, but my sense is that most fans don't have particularly high expectations this year or next. After that it gets fairly even. My own view is that the Canucks may be able to hang on as a playoff bubble team but being an elite team is several years away.

I'm proceding on the basis the team is several years away. Those that disagree with that opinion will disagree with much of what follows.

The next question is how to approach the current situation. Does one do as this proposal suggests and try to fill in the void in top-6 quality forwards and top-4 defencemen by trading good prospects and picks, or does it make more sense to develop those draft picks and better prospects, staying the course and trying to end up with a good core of players in the 22-28 age group in 5-7 years?

I personally believe the most likely result of trading several pieces, including really promising very young pieces, for a single very good player that fills a present need is that the Canucks can continue to hang on with a competitive team but lose the chance to be good when the new core is in its prime. Essentially the new core will have been traded. In 6 years I'd rather take the chance that McCann can be a good part of the new core at 24 and that a 3rd round pick might have developed into something than that the Canucks can win with a core that includes a 32 year old Simmonds instead of those pieces.

Yes, it is possible that Simmonds is good, it is possible that McCann never becomes what the Canucks hope for him, that the 3rd round pick from Trade 1 doesn't ever play a game in the NHL. But it is also possible that in 6 years McCann may be a top-6 Center, or that the 3rd rounder has developed into a useful player, or both. Canucks could have a strong core of Horvat, McCann, Virtanen, Tanev, Markstrom or Demko, a couple of other players in the system now who show promise but need to develop, and some draft picks from 2015-2017. It would be core of young veterans that if they develop well could be strong for years to come.

But that won't happen if the Canucks trade the players likely to form that core for players that will be in their 30's just as the core is coming of age.

So, my opinion is that the Flyers might want more for Simmonds, but that giving up McCann as part of the package doesn't fit for the long-term good of the franchise. But it's sure tempting.

Trade 3-very similar to Trade 1-nothing to add

Trade 4-Bonino is younger and comes at less than half the cap hit of Bozak. Bonino scored early in the season and last season with Anaheim, but not much recently. He's been an important part of a successful penalty killing unit. Bozak is a better offensive player, a couple of years older and carries more than double Bonino's cap hit.

Player-wise, Bozak is probably worth at least Bonino and the 3rd. As with Trade 2, the trade is focussed on filling current needs. Going forward imo the difference between Bozak and Bonino is less than the cap hit difference and that some time down the road a better use can be found for that cap difference. It also makes the Canucks older and introduces a player likely to be no longer very good useful in 5-7 years.

The chance of the 3rd rounder (presumably from trade 3, or possibly from trade 1) being a good NHL player isn't very good but again could turn into a player who would be useful in a few years when the Canucks core could be coming of age.

This one, too, is tempting. On balance, I'd be slightly against it because I don't like adding age, a pick and a much higher cap hit.

It's also likely that Toronto could find a team that would make a better offer for Bozak.