BoKnows Posted March 28, 2015 Share Posted March 28, 2015 This offseason I'd like the Canucks to trade three players, I think we can get something good from all of these players, plus they're starting to get old now. I think we should trade Hamhuis, Bieksa, and Burrows (Yes Burrows). Hamhuis is 32 years old and getting slow now. His season hasn't been all that great this seaon. I believe we can trade him and our 1st round draft pick for a higher pick and B Prospect. We can also trade him for another veteran aswell. Bieksa is 33 years old and this season hasn't been all that great. We can probably get a low pick and a half decent prospect for him. This will get rid of some of our age on our roster and make more room for developing rookies like Corrado and Clendening. We can also package up Hamhuis and Bieksa and get a good draft pick, low pick, and a rookie. This will also free up some cap space for free agents. Burrows(33)... This is one person that could stay or go, either or it'll be a good decision. I think we can get a good prospect for him and maybe a medium draft pack (3rd or 4th round). If we trade him this will clear up a lot of cap for future trades, drafts, signings. There would also probably be a lot of teams interested in him. Overall I think we need to trade Hamhuis and Bieksa, and maybe Burrows. I'm wondering what you guys think and what we can get for the three players. Whatever JB does I hope it's the right decision, who knows maybe Hamhuis is just having an off year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted March 28, 2015 Share Posted March 28, 2015 Hammer or Bieksa might just go, might just NEED to go. But you're not getting rid of Burrows. Even if he lacks the production he had from 2010 to 2012, he's still the lay down and die player we need on thsi tea and his work ethic is second to none. THAT is the kind of guy we need assisting in mentoring younger players. Plus we don't have any serious amount of qualifiable RW depth of that skill set, he's gonna stay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoKnows Posted March 28, 2015 Author Share Posted March 28, 2015 THAT is the kind of guy we need assisting in mentoring younger players. Plus we don't have any serious amount of qualifiable RW depth of that skill set, he's gonna stay Vrbata and the Sedins can always assist in mentoring. If we do trade him I think we would pick up a rookie RW. I think we should trade Burrows for Valentin Zykov, a young RW that has potential. That way LA has a RW that can help them win another Stanley Cup next season before their window of opportunity closes. This is a deal that I'd love to see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted March 28, 2015 Share Posted March 28, 2015 Vrbata and the Sedins can always assist in mentoring. If we do trade him I think we would pick up a rookie RW. I think we should trade Burrows for Valentin Zykov, a young RW that has potential. That way LA has a RW that can help them win another Stanley Cup next season before their window of opportunity closes. This is a deal that I'd love to see. No chance Burrows goes to LA for anything, both the NTC and LA's massive cap issues. Also a rookie RW does us no good as then that leaves us with Vrbata and Kassian as our only true RWs with Grenier and Jensen as the available call ups. You'll see Bieksa and hammer go first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoKnows Posted March 28, 2015 Author Share Posted March 28, 2015 No chance Burrows goes to LA for anything, both the NTC and LA's massive cap issues. Also a rookie RW does us no good as then that leaves us with Vrbata and Kassian as our only true RWs with Grenier and Jensen as the available call ups. You'll see Bieksa and hammer go first. All true but what can we get for Bieksa and Hammer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted March 28, 2015 Share Posted March 28, 2015 All true but what can we get for Bieksa and Hammer?cap relief and a pick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoKnows Posted March 28, 2015 Author Share Posted March 28, 2015 cap relief and a pick Sounds good to me, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbadcanucks Posted March 28, 2015 Share Posted March 28, 2015 The following are only my opinions, and you know what they say about opinions, right? (In case you don't, "they" say opinions are like @$$ holes...everyone has one). I'm going to make a bold prediction and say that none of the 30-somethings are going to be traded anytime soon. The earliest any of the core are going to be traded will be March 2016 (i.e., next trade deadline) and that's only going to happen if the Canucks are out of the playoff race at that time. The only new face you will see in the lineup next season will be Sven Baertschi. I see JB re-signing all three of Matthias (2-3 years X $3.0M), Dorsett (2-3 years X $2.5M), and Richardson (2 years X $1.5M). The RFAs who spent anytime with the Canucks this season will be signed to Qualifying Offers...all @ one year terms (Sbisa $2.9M, Vey $772K, Kenins $971K, McMillan $688K, Weber $893K, Stanton $605K, Markstrom $1.4M, Clendening $859K, Corrado $633K, Baertschi $875K. I have a sneaky suspicion that Hamhuis will go under the knife to fix his groin in the off season, which probably means he won't be back until November of next season. This will create the need for players like Sbisa, Stanton and Clendening. I also have a sneaky suspicion that Kassian may go under the knife for his back in the off season as well, meaning his start to 2015-16 will be delayed as well. This will create space for someone like Vey and a need for players like Richardson and Dorsett. My rationale for my opinions is that Linden, Benning and Willie all love the core, and though they realize that the core isn't going to win them the cup, they believe that the core will be instrumental in shaping the next generation of players that will form the core. As well, the decision makers probably don't see players like Gaunce, Shinkaruk, and Jensen to be ready to make the jump to the NHL yet. And Gillis (yes, Gillis) and Benning have done a nice job of structuring the contracts so that when the highly touted prospects are ready to make the jump (including Virtanen, McCann and Cassels, plus whoever else JB picks up in this coming draft), the contracts belonging to Burrows, Higgins, Bonino and Miller will be expiring, and will allow management to make low risk decisions on who to move forward with. If the Canucks clean house now and trade a combination of any of Higgins, Burrows, Hamhuis, Bieksa, Hansen, etc., they will be doing so from a position of weakness. These guys are all depreciating assets in a trade market, but on the Canucks roster, they are still valuable and contributing members (i.e., worth more as roster players than as trade baits). I like the way Gillis and Benning have stockpiled a bunch of players in the 21-25 year old cohort. These guys all need time to develop and it will take another year or two before they are ready. In the meantime, I say ride the vets (and accept that this group isn't going to win the cup) and let the vets help develop the next wave of core players. EDIT: had a closer look at the cap situation. Come to the conclusion that the Canucks can sign only two of Matthias, Dorsett and Richardson. Looks like one of those three will have to walk. That Luongo contract does suck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.I.A.H.N Posted March 29, 2015 Share Posted March 29, 2015 Bigbadcanucks I come in peace! Matter of fact, I would like to commend you for your post and have to say, that after the deadline, I changed my mind in a " after the fact" manner. I honestly didn't think the Canucks would still be in the running, and most, if not all my posts were directed to moving vets at the deadline because of that...I was wrong In saying that, and agreeing with your very well thought out post, I wonder for discussion purposes, if waiting until next March (which makes sense) doesn't just postpone the completion of our next "new" core, and that waiting only lessens our vets value, as they get older? It is a trap, and either could be right. I am just wondering. I was on HF Boards and suggested Hamhuis+ for Pittsburghs 1st and Edmonton 2nd and for the most part their fans were all over that, to the extent that I thought I under valued Hamhuis. Some actually said they would accept that deal with no +. But I will admit I am not a good evaluator of trades. I still must admit, that I am of the thought, that moving the above mentioned players is a smart move. Nothing says we can't get a new UFA that has character. Burrows has great attributes, but there are other that have those as well. "If" we were to move 2 or 3 vets this year, for picks in this and 2016 draft, I wouldn't necessarily want any more moves. One thing I have pondered is "IF" we moved Burrows this or next year, how does Vrbata staying or leaving affect that decision? Like you said, we have only so many RW's.......and if you will indulge me for one brief minute, maybe it would be better to move Vrbata and keep Burrows just for that reason. One thing I know from all these posts is that we have to keep building our new core every year, how fast we do it is what seems to be the question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pimp C Posted March 29, 2015 Share Posted March 29, 2015 That would be pretty dumb trade either of these 3 guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crabcakes Posted April 5, 2015 Share Posted April 5, 2015 The Canucks are looking at about $10M free cap space before the signings they have to make in the summer. Obviously, they can't do it all so they will have to move 1 or 2 contracts. This can be done by not resigning UFA's or RFA's, or by moving contracts with term or a combination of the above. The larger contracts at issue are: Matthias, present cap hit 1.75, future 2.5 - 3.0 Dorsett, 1.6, future 2.2 Richardson 1.15, future 1.5 Sbisa 2.175, future 3.0 There is obviously a whole laundry list of RFA's to be signed which has been outlined in Bigbadcanucks post above. The options for the above are sign and keep, sign and trade or let them walk. Barring cap issues, I think that Benning would rather keep them all. Cap relief may also come from moving players with term left on their contracts which is easier to execute than sign and trade. Much speculation here: Higgins (2.5), Burrows (4.5), Kassian (1.75), Bieksa (4.6), Hamhuis (4.5) etc. Some are easier to move than others, there are pro's and con's for them all To my point: If cap relief is the goal, most moves will be made to acquire draft picks or prospects, not roster players (at the very least, lower salaries) To try to figure out what might actually be done consider, when a player is moved out, who among the Canuck prospects will fill the vacated roster spot? Ready prospects are: Baertchi and Clendening will start because they have to clear waivers. Kenins, Corrado, and Biega are viable options. Other prospects are long shots and are more likely to be a year away: Shinkaruk, Jensen, Grenier, Gaunce, Hutton, Pedan etc So, who from the list of "moveables" could be replaced reasonably by the "ready" prospects? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.