Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

2016 NHL Entry Draft [June 24-25th || Buffalo, New York]


Recommended Posts

HERPNDERPZZ OMGZZZ TRADEEZZZ TAAANEV 

 

 

Sorry for that.

 

On a serious note, Chris Tanev is not going to be traded.  If you can't understand why it's a horrible move for the franchise, well then you likely shouldn't be commenting publicly.

 

 

No offense intended.  More like a polite slap in the face to wake you from your daydream.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, DeNiro said:

Tkachuk has great hands but his skating is definitely an issue. He doesn't seem to have that separation speed right now.

 Lots of elite players lack separation speed - ie, the Sedins, Benn, Tavares, etc..., I'm not too worried about Tkachuk's skating. He gets where he needs to be just fine. 

 

IMO, he's the best in this draft class at protecting the puck and making plays along the wall, which is pretty much key to having success in the West. 

 

I think his style of play is perfect to play the next two seasons alongside the twins. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Toews said:

There is no way the Devils are giving up a future top pairing RHD to move up 6 spots. Sbisa is also a cap dump. He is overpaid for what he brings something a budget conscious Devils will not want. 

 

If Severson were available the Oilers would swoop in and blow that offer out of the water.

 

Your first point is HIGHLY debatable. It costs to get in the top 5. Always has, always will.

 

Sbisa is not a cap dump. He's a quality 4/5 D with good speed and physicality. He simply needs to be paired with a more cerebral/good puck handling partner (hence why he pairs well with Tanev, Hamhuis and Hutton). While his contract is by no means a bargain, it's not horrible either (contrary to CDC's cataract blurred vision of it).

 

I could also see us adding some of our overflowing, middle 6 winger/C depth to sweeten as well.

 

Oilers may very well swoop in and as they'll have to overpay to get anything done, they could very well beat us. Never denied that.

 

I have yet to see this happen though and people have been talking about it for years... I think you're also discounting the value of that 5th here. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, J.R. said:

 

Your first point is HIGHLY debatable. It costs to get in the top 5. Always has, always will.

 

Sbisa is not a cap dump. He's a quality 4/5 D with good speed and physicality. He simply needs to be paired with a more cerebral/good puck handling partner (hence why he pairs well with Tanev, Hamhuis and Hutton). While his contract is by no means a bargain, it's not horrible either (contrary to CDC's cataract blurred vision of it).

 

Oilers may very well swoop in and as they'll have to overpay to get anything done, they could very well beat us. Never denied that.

 

I have yet to see this happen though and people have been talking about it for years... I think you're also discounting the value of that 5th here. 

 

 

Yes it may cost to get into the top 5 but that doesn't mean that a team will trade their 21 RHD potential top pairing defenseman to do it.

 

We will agree to disagree here. I am not a fan of Sbisa and I would rather be rid of him and his contract even if the return were minimal. To me he is overpaid and paying that much money to a bottom pairing defenseman is not good cap management. If the Canucks were contenders that Sbisa contract would be sucking at our souls like the anchor that it is.

 

Why would the Oilers have to overpay any more than the Canucks will? As long as their offer is better than everyone else's and makes sense for the Devils a trade is doable.

 

The Devils RHD depth is currently Larsson and Severson and a bunch of magic beans in Santini and Jacobs. Like@ForsbergTheGreat said, you are advocating for them moving a defenseman who has played 123 NHL games for players who have played 2 games of pro hockey between them. Maybe one day those guys will prove that they are better than Severson until that day comes the Devils won't plug one hole by creating another. They can still take one of the players available at 11 like Mcleod, Brown, Keller or Jost. All of which are still fantastic prospects. They also have a ton of cap space to go after a forward in free agency.

 

That proposal like many that get made on CDC only works for the Canucks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 70seven said:

HERPNDERPZZ OMGZZZ TRADEEZZZ TAAANEV 

 

 

Sorry for that.

 

On a serious note, Chris Tanev is not going to be traded.  If you can't understand why it's a horrible move for the franchise, well then you likely shouldn't be commenting publicly.

 

 

No offense intended.  More like a polite slap in the face to wake you from your daydream.

Yea, getting a big piece for the rebuild would be a horrible idea. Tanev is Lidstrom, he's key to us winning the cup...

 

The real problem is fans overhype our players too much on here. They think we can dump all of our spare parts and get good pieces back while holding onto our valuable pieces. Happens every year.

 

If a deal for another top 5 pick was there involving Tanev, Benning would obviously strongly consider it. Any GM would be an idiot not to. But no that would be a horrible move for the franchise to attempt to try and start replacing the Sedins now that they're 35. Lets wait until they're retired and we have no first line talent and are forced to tank for 3 seasons cause we can't compete.

 

Maybe you should wake up from your daydream if you think this team is competing for a cup while Tanev is in his prime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Toews said:

Yes it may cost to get into the top 5 but that doesn't mean that a team will trade their 21 RHD potential top pairing defenseman to do it.

 

We will agree to disagree here. I am not a fan of Sbisa and I would rather be rid of him and his contract even if the return were minimal. To me he is overpaid and paying that much money to a bottom pairing defenseman is not good cap management. If the Canucks were contenders that Sbisa contract would be sucking at our souls like the anchor that it is.

 

Why would the Oilers have to overpay any more than the Canucks will? As long as their offer is better than everyone else's and makes sense for the Devils a trade is doable.

 

The Devils RHD depth is currently Larsson and Severson and a bunch of magic beans in Santini and Jacobs. Like@ForsbergTheGreat said, you are advocating for them moving a defenseman who has played 123 NHL games for players who have played 2 games of pro hockey between them. Maybe one day those guys will prove that they are better than Severson until that day comes the Devils won't plug one hole by creating another. They can still take one of the players available at 11 like Mcleod, Brown, Keller or Jost. All of which are still fantastic prospects. They also have a ton of cap space to go after a forward in free agency.

 

That proposal like many that get made on CDC only works for the Canucks.

'As long as their offer is better'... is that not 'overpaying'? ;) 

 

The Oilers will have to overpay on any trade because one, being Edmonton they have trouble attracting/retaining talent. And two, because of the way and type of players they've drafted and their inability to develop anyone outiside of a top 10 pick has left them skill/forward heavy and grit/leadership/defense etc light. Other GM's know this and will leverage them to overpay in any trade they need to make to shore up their deficits. This is why the Oilers have been paralyzed for what 3+ years now from making ANY moves. They're going to 'lose' any deal they make to form a competitive roster. Other GM's will do them no favours. As yet, they've evidently been unwilling to do so. We'll see if that changes...

 

Sbisa would be taking Severson's spot on the right side allowing Santini/Jacobs to continue their development.

 

Sure they can take one of those forwards but they're clearly a notch down from Tkachuck/Dubois in either talent and/or higher risk. If they weren't, they'd be getting picked higher. You want a quality forward at the draft, you pay.

 

Given their lack of forward options, it would be in their interest to both sign a UFA and draft a high ceiling/low risk forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, J.R. said:

'As long as their offer is better'... is that not 'overpaying'? ;) 

 

The Oilers will have to overpay on any trade because one, being Edmonton they have trouble attracting/retaining talent. And two, because of the way and type of players they've drafted and their inability to develop anyone outiside of a top 10 pick has left them skill/forward heavy and grit/leadership/defense etc light. Other GM's know this and will leverage them to overpay in any trade they need to make to shore up their deficits. This is why the Oilers have been paralyzed for what 3+ years now from making ANY moves. They're going to 'lose' any deal they make to form a competitive roster. Other GM's will do them no favours. As yet, they've evidently been unwilling to do so. We'll see if that changes...

 

Sbisa would be taking Severson's spot on the right side allowing Santini/Jacobs to continue their development.

 

Sure they can take one of those forwards but they're clearly a notch down from Tkachuck/Dubois in either talent and/or higher risk. If they weren't, they'd be getting picked higher. You want a quality forward at the draft, you pay.

 

Given their lack of forward options, it would be in their interest to both sign a UFA and draft a high ceiling/low risk forward.

I disagree with the bolded. GMs especially those that are in another conference are going to be more concerned with improving their own teams rather than pilfer the Oilers. If a team wants Eberle they will negotiate a price that they can afford to pay. After that it is counterproductive to reject a deal you know makes your team better just to try and screw the Oilers. It isn't about "doing any favors" to the Oilers but it is about improving your own team. Being a GM in a competitive environment it is possible that your rival swoops in because you did not want to be perceived as having aided the Oilers.

 

Sbisa is not an adequate top 4 defenseman. He has proven that both with the Ducks and with the Canucks. It's time to call a spade a spade.

 

Of course but your asking price is outlandish and makes the Devils a worse team.

 

That is debatable. Maybe a guy like Keller who they had ranked much higher falls to them at 11. The Devils certainly don't "need" to pay a king's ransom for that pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, J.R. said:

'As long as their offer is better'... is that not 'overpaying'? ;) 

 

The Oilers will have to overpay on any trade because one, being Edmonton they have trouble attracting/retaining talent. And two, because of the way and type of players they've drafted and their inability to develop anyone outiside of a top 10 pick has left them skill/forward heavy and grit/leadership/defense etc light. Other GM's know this and will leverage them to overpay in any trade they need to make to shore up their deficits. This is why the Oilers have been paralyzed for what 3+ years now from making ANY moves. They're going to 'lose' any deal they make to form a competitive roster. Other GM's will do them no favours. As yet, they've evidently been unwilling to do so. We'll see if that changes...

 

Sbisa would be taking Severson's spot on the right side allowing Santini/Jacobs to continue their development.

 

Sure they can take one of those forwards but they're clearly a notch down from Tkachuck/Dubois in either talent and/or higher risk. If they weren't, they'd be getting picked higher. You want a quality forward at the draft, you pay.

 

Given their lack of forward options, it would be in their interest to both sign a UFA and draft a high ceiling/low risk forward.

I disagree with the bolded. GMs especially those that are in another conference are going to be more concerned with improving their own teams rather than pilfer the Oilers. If a team wants Eberle they will negotiate a price that they can afford to pay. After that it is counterproductive to reject a deal you know makes your team better just to try and screw the Oilers. It isn't about "doing any favors" to the Oilers but it is about improving your own team. Being a GM in a competitive environment it is possible that your rival swoops in because you did not want to be perceived as having aided the Oilers.

 

Sbisa is not an adequate top 4 defenseman. He has proven that both with the Ducks and with the Canucks. It's time to call a spade a spade.

 

Of course but your asking price is outlandish and makes the Devils a worse team.

 

That is debatable. Maybe a guy like Keller who they had ranked much higher falls to them at 11. The Devils certainly don't "need" to pay a king's ransom for that pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

Yea, getting a big piece for the rebuild would be a horrible idea. Tanev is Lidstrom, he's key to us winning the cup...

 

The real problem is fans overhype our players too much on here. They think we can dump all of our spare parts and get good pieces back while holding onto our valuable pieces. Happens every year.

 

If a deal for another top 5 pick was there involving Tanev, Benning would obviously strongly consider it. Any GM would be an idiot not to. But no that would be a horrible move for the franchise to attempt to try and start replacing the Sedins now that they're 35. Lets wait until they're retired and we have no first line talent and are forced to tank for 3 seasons cause we can't compete.

 

Maybe you should wake up from your daydream if you think this team is competing for a cup while Tanev is in his prime.

Dont be a tool.  I dont have delusions ( A delusion is a belief, out of keeping with the individual's cultural origins, that is held with strong conviction despite superior evidence to the contrary.) of this team winning a cup.  

 

Adding pieces is a good thing.  But unless youre living under a rock, you've heard that this team is NOT rebuilding.  They plan to do whatever they can to be competitive, including being aggressive at UFA time.  Theyre doing that because they're belief is that developing competitive culture is far more important than throwing in the towel in hope that a kid will come in and save the day. HENCE they wont be trading away their best player at a position that they have little to no depth at. Its counterproductive.

 

Thats the daydream...  Armchair GMing.  If youd stop to listen to what their actually doing, theres no chance in hell Tanev is getting traded.  It's irrelevant whether or not you agree with what theyre doing.  It's REALITY.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Toews said:

I disagree with the bolded. GMs especially those that are in another conference are going to be more concerned with improving their own teams rather than pilfer the Oilers. If a team wants Eberle they will negotiate a price that they can afford to pay. After that it is counterproductive to reject a deal you know makes your team better just to try and screw the Oilers. It isn't about "doing any favors" to the Oilers but it is about improving your own team. Being a GM in a competitive environment it is possible that your rival swoops in because you did not want to be perceived as having aided the Oilers.

Of course they won't nix a deal that improves their team. I'm simply pointing out that with any 'fair' deal, you could likely find another dance partner willing to pay in the same range. GM's have leverage on the Oilers and they know it. Hence they will likely have to pay more to make a deal. They will HAVE to outbid rather than simply make a 'fair' deal.

 

As for the rest, I think we'll have to agree to disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, J.R. said:

'As long as their offer is better'... is that not 'overpaying'? ;) 

 

The Oilers will have to overpay on any trade because one, being Edmonton they have trouble attracting/retaining talent. And two, because of the way and type of players they've drafted and their inability to develop anyone outiside of a top 10 pick has left them skill/forward heavy and grit/leadership/defense etc light. Other GM's know this and will leverage them to overpay in any trade they need to make to shore up their deficits. This is why the Oilers have been paralyzed for what 3+ years now from making ANY moves. They're going to 'lose' any deal they make to form a competitive roster. Other GM's will do them no favours. As yet, they've evidently been unwilling to do so. We'll see if that changes...

 

Sbisa would be taking Severson's spot on the right side allowing Santini/Jacobs to continue their development.

 

Sure they can take one of those forwards but they're clearly a notch down from Tkachuck/Dubois in either talent and/or higher risk. If they weren't, they'd be getting picked higher. You want a quality forward at the draft, you pay.

 

Given their lack of forward options, it would be in their interest to both sign a UFA and draft a high ceiling/low risk forward.

For some reason you just aren’t understanding it.

 

Yes Jost, Keller, and Brown are a notch below Tkachuk and Dubois (depending on which scout you talk to).  But is it that much of a drop off that it’s worth trading a “future top pairing D” and an additional 2nd for?

 

The devils would be putting a huge risk on hoping Santini and Jacobs develop into be better players than Severson.  They haven’t even played 15 minutes in the NHL combined but somehow that make Severson expendable?

 

So as I said yesterday.  Unless the devils are completely sold on Dubois/Tkachuk being top line, foundational players (players you’d build around), and at the same time not being sold on the future of Jost, Keller, or Brown, this deal doesn’t make sense for them.  They take on too much risk for a borderline 1st/2nd liner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, J.R. said:

'As long as their offer is better'... is that not 'overpaying'? ;) 

 

The Oilers will have to overpay on any trade because one, being Edmonton they have trouble attracting/retaining talent. And two, because of the way and type of players they've drafted and their inability to develop anyone outiside of a top 10 pick has left them skill/forward heavy and grit/leadership/defense etc light. Other GM's know this and will leverage them to overpay in any trade they need to make to shore up their deficits. This is why the Oilers have been paralyzed for what 3+ years now from making ANY moves. They're going to 'lose' any deal they make to form a competitive roster. Other GM's will do them no favours. As yet, they've evidently been unwilling to do so. We'll see if that changes...

 

Sbisa would be taking Severson's spot on the right side allowing Santini/Jacobs to continue their development.

 

Sure they can take one of those forwards but they're clearly a notch down from Tkachuck/Dubois in either talent and/or higher risk. If they weren't, they'd be getting picked higher. You want a quality forward at the draft, you pay.

 

Given their lack of forward options, it would be in their interest to both sign a UFA and draft a high ceiling/low risk forward.

I get what you're saying, but it's not a slam dunk just because the Devils want a good forward prospect. Sbisa's a downgrade for them even at this point, and while we have been hearing a number of hockey people saying spots 4 and 5 are locks to be Tkachuk and Dubois because they've separated themselves from the pack somewhat I'm not sure the perceived upgrade is enough for the Devils to move the rest of the deal. It'd have to be a situation where they're worried about re-signing Severson combined with them being quite high on their other RHD prospects to be able to make a similar impact (or close enough) soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Smashian Kassian said:

 

 

I'm not really a fan of the trading Edler idea.

 

Especially if it includes taking on a cap dump and giving up pick #33 aswell as another decent prospect in either Grenier or Brisebois to make it happen.

 

The player you will draft at #9 you HOPE will become as good as an Edler caliber player.

 

Edler for Emelin & the Pick seems more than fair to me.

 

Personally I think MTL should be adding another piece not us. But even then I think the goal has to be making the playoffs next year and our biggest weakness is definitely defense so I don't see how trading a top pairing defenseman makes sense for us right now.

 

As nice as another 1st round pick would be, I don't know that this is the right draft or the right time to be making a deal where we have to add to Alex Edler to get it. 

 

He is our best D but he’s isn’t the one piece that is making us a playoff team verse non-playoff team.  Moving Edler allows us to pursue other options, like resigning Hamhuis or going after a UFA, that can’t happen with Edler on the books.  Moving him also opens up more opportunity for are young players to grow into. Moving Edler and signing a short term stop gap might mean we take a slight downgrade on our D core, but it’s not make or break.

 

Your exactly right, that trading Edler for a draft pick in hopes that the pick turns into a player that reaches Edler’s level seems like a lateral move.  But the thing is, were rebuilding.  We need to find a suitable replacement for Edler so that when the new core (Horvat, Baertschi, Virtanen, Demko, McCann, Hutton) hit their prime, we aren’t left with a massive hole.  Top pairing D, don’t grow on trees and they aren’t cheap /easy to acquire.    

 

So do we make preemptive decision while this team is in the middle of rebuilding.  Or do we hope that a Edler level replacement falls into our laps when our new core is ready to truly compete. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Smashian Kassian said:

 

 

I'm not really a fan of the trading Edler idea.

 

Especially if it includes taking on a cap dump and giving up pick #33 aswell as another decent prospect in either Grenier or Brisebois to make it happen.

 

The player you will draft at #9 you HOPE will become as good as an Edler caliber player.

 

Edler for Emelin & the Pick seems more than fair to me.

 

Personally I think MTL should be adding another piece not us. But even then I think the goal has to be making the playoffs next year and our biggest weakness is definitely defense so I don't see how trading a top pairing defenseman makes sense for us right now.

 

As nice as another 1st round pick would be, I don't know that this is the right draft or the right time to be making a deal where we have to add to Alex Edler to get it. 

 

He is our best D but he’s isn’t the one piece that is making us a playoff team verse non-playoff team.  Moving Edler allows us to pursue other options, like resigning Hamhuis or going after a UFA, that can’t happen with Edler on the books.  Moving him also opens up more opportunity for are young players to grow into. Moving Edler and signing a short term stop gap might mean we take a slight downgrade on our D core, but it’s not make or break.

 

Your exactly right, that trading Edler for a draft pick in hopes that the pick turns into a player that reaches Edler’s level seems like a lateral move.  But the thing is, were rebuilding.  We need to find a suitable replacement for Edler so that when the new core (Horvat, Baertschi, Virtanen, Demko, McCann, Hutton) hit their prime, we aren’t left with a massive hole.  Top pairing D, don’t grow on trees and they aren’t cheap /easy to acquire.    

 

So do we make preemptive decision while this team is in the middle of rebuilding.  Or do we hope that a Edler level replacement falls into our laps when our new core is ready to truly compete. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 70seven said:

 

Adding pieces is a good thing.  But unless youre living under a rock, you've heard that this team is NOT rebuilding.

 

Thats the daydream...  Armchair GMing.  If youd stop to listen to what their actually doing, theres no chance in hell Tanev is getting traded.  It's irrelevant whether or not you agree with what theyre doing.  It's REALITY.

 

Benning is that you?

 

Don't pretend you know what they would or wouldn't do anymore than the next guy.

 

Not rebuilding? Lol okay. I guess some Canucks fans are more naive than I realized. The reality is a rebuild is unavoidable at this point. You don't lose the Sedins to retirement and magically replace them with free agent signings. It's gonna take a few years of being really bad. Sure they may try to make some signings to remain somewhat competitive, but that will only do so much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

For some reason you just aren’t understanding it.

 

Yes Jost, Keller, and Brown are a notch below Tkachuk and Dubois (depending on which scout you talk to).  But is it that much of a drop off that it’s worth trading a “future top pairing D” and an additional 2nd for?

 

The devils would be putting a huge risk on hoping Santini and Jacobs develop into be better players than Severson.  They haven’t even played 15 minutes in the NHL combined but somehow that make Severson expendable?

 

So as I said yesterday.  Unless the devils are completely sold on Dubois/Tkachuk being top line, foundational players (players you’d build around), and at the same time not being sold on the future of Jost, Keller, or Brown, this deal doesn’t make sense for them.  They take on too much risk for a borderline 1st/2nd liner.

According to a good chunk of CDC the difference from even 5 to 7/8 is a vast chasm :lol:

 

Santini and Jacobs are somewhat secondary in that regard IMO. Larsson, Miller and Moore are more of what make him more 'expendable' and I'd say they're fairly comfortable with Santini/Jacobs projections for further down the line. They have major pieces for a solid, future top 4 already in place even without Severson.

 

Of course this would all be dependent on how NJ feels about all the players involved. We're just spit-balling here.

 

You also seem pretty stuck as a 'negative' connotation on this borderline 1st/2nd liner remark here. We're basically talking about the level of NHL'er comparable to a future 'Kesler' (MT/PLD) compared to a D comparable in value to a future 'Edler' (Severson). IMO that's a pretty fair swap that helps fill both teams needs. And like I said above, perhaps we need to sweeten that with one of our overflowing/current middle 6 forwards as well but I think the basic framework is there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

He is our best D but he’s isn’t the one piece that is making us a playoff team verse non-playoff team.  Moving Edler allows us to pursue other options, like resigning Hamhuis or going after a UFA, that can’t happen with Edler on the books.  Moving him also opens up more opportunity for are young players to grow into. Moving Edler and signing a short term stop gap might mean we take a slight downgrade on our D core, but it’s not make or break.

 

Your exactly right, that trading Edler for a draft pick in hopes that the pick turns into a player that reaches Edler’s level seems like a lateral move.  But the thing is, were rebuilding.  We need to find a suitable replacement for Edler so that when the new core (Horvat, Baertschi, Virtanen, Demko, McCann, Hutton) hit their prime, we aren’t left with a massive hole.  Top pairing D, don’t grow on trees and they aren’t cheap /easy to acquire.    

 

So do we make preemptive decision while this team is in the middle of rebuilding.  Or do we hope that a Edler level replacement falls into our laps when our new core is ready to truly compete. 

Wait, I'm not sure what you're saying here.  Can you reply again?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, elvis15 said:

I get what you're saying, but it's not a slam dunk just because the Devils want a good forward prospect. Sbisa's a downgrade for them even at this point, and while we have been hearing a number of hockey people saying spots 4 and 5 are locks to be Tkachuk and Dubois because they've separated themselves from the pack somewhat I'm not sure the perceived upgrade is enough for the Devils to move the rest of the deal. It'd have to be a situation where they're worried about re-signing Severson combined with them being quite high on their other RHD prospects to be able to make a similar impact (or close enough) soon.

Nobody's claiming a slam dunk. Trades rarely are. I don't think I'm that far off on the basic framework though.

 

I'd say at this point Sbisa/Severson are a fairly lateral move. Severson certainly projects to be better in the future but right now they're fairly on par as ~4th D's IMO. 

 

For sure they'd have to feel comfortable with Santini/Jacobs being able to start to contribute in ~2 years and IMO, perhaps more importantly, that they're comfortable with Larsson, Miller and Moore as 3 of their top 4 in a few years with Sbisa filling in throughout their bottom 4 in that time frame as guys come on line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • b3. unpinned this topic

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...