Gstank29 Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 So unless you have been living under a rock, you know that Edmonton some how got the first overall pick. With this pick they are obviously going to pick Mcdavid, and like many people have said that problem with Edmonton is that the room is the craps (see Snypers the Attitude of the team can effect a players development) and there is has to be some changes in their room otherwise Mcdavid may not do has well as he could, and other prospects like Nurse won't be as good as he could be. My solution to this is Edmonton needs to bring in some Veteran who can change the character of the room, and teach this kids that they need to earn ever second of ice time. As pointed out by various media outlets Edmonton down the middle has; RNH, Mcdavid, Draisalti and on the wing they have Hall, Eberle, Yapkov. So someone has to go. Lost in all this is that Edmonton also has Pittsburgh's first round pick (acquired in the Perron trade) This is probably they most attainable piece in my mind because it could be had for a reasonable price unlike Draisaitl, Eberle, Hall ETC. Now to the Canucks we have a abundance of defenceman and it's becoming more and more apparent that Benning is going to have to trade a couple of forwards and a defenceman or two in order to accomendate Corrado and Clendening I know These players has a NTC/NMC so this is why i post it in the proposal section. Van Pitts 2015 first Edmonton Bieska Markstrom Higgins? Discuss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Sestito Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 2015st lol also, edmonton will trade that pick for a proven goaltender or a prime aged defenseman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gstank29 Posted April 20, 2015 Author Share Posted April 20, 2015 lol also, edmonton will trade that pick for a proven goaltender or a prime aged defenseman. I was in the middle of an edit sorry for that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirbs11 Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 TBH, I think next trade deadline Bieksa could probably fetch a first on his own so i would wait to move him If we do trade with EDM, i would forego trying to get a 1st overall pick, but rather put a package together using, Sbisa, Kassia, Jensen and Gaunce as possible players involved and try to get Draisaitl If no trade there with EDM i think possibly a Jensen for Grigorenko swap (maybe need to add some other pieces or picks) Both Grigorenko and Draisaitl IMO are going to end up in situations Similar to what Jordan Staal was in, in Pittsburgh and i think they need to be moved before that happens In my perfect world we do Sbisa, Kassian and Gaunce for Draisaitl+a 4th or Jensen and a 5th for Grigorenko Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyLow_ Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 We don't need their pick, we need their Draisaitl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drummer4now Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 TBH, I think next trade deadline Bieksa could probably fetch a first on his own so i would wait to move him If we do trade with EDM, i would forego trying to get a 1st overall pick, but rather put a package together using, Sbisa, Kassia, Jensen and Gaunce as possible players involved and try to get Draisaitl If no trade there with EDM i think possibly a Jensen for Grigorenko swap (maybe need to add some other pieces or picks) Both Grigorenko and Draisaitl IMO are going to end up in situations Similar to what Jordan Staal was in, in Pittsburgh and i think they need to be moved before that happens In my perfect world we do Sbisa, Kassian and Gaunce for Draisaitl+a 4th or Jensen and a 5th for Grigorenko Bieksa is not worth a 1st on his own lol... Maybe 3 years ago when he had good offensive numbers. He's an ageing veteran defensmen whos value is going down year by year. Also IMO he's forever a Canuck and will not be traded ever... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Magician Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 lol also, edmonton will trade that pick for a proven goaltender or a prime aged defenseman. AKA Ryan Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fateless Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 Let me get this straight. You want to trade Bieksa (top 4 D), Markstrom (young back-up goaltender) AND Higgins (2nd/3rd liner) for Late 1st rounder? What are you smoking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gstank29 Posted April 20, 2015 Author Share Posted April 20, 2015 Let me get this straight. You want to trade Bieksa (top 4 D), Markstrom (young back-up goaltender) AND Higgins (2nd/3rd liner) for Late 1st rounder? What are you smoking. As of now it is 16 overall... I doubt Pitts makes it past the second round so it will be in the high teens low twenties.... Beiska isn't a top 4 defence man. Markstom isn't excatly young at 25..... Better question, what were you smoking when you posted Bieska is a top 4 defenceman? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A NEW BEGINNING Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 for me Pittsburgh 1st and Edmonton's 33 OA for Dan Hamhuis + Stanton...........Edmonton would do it in a second Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirbs11 Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 Bieksa is not worth a 1st on his own lol... Maybe 3 years ago when he had good offensive numbers. He's an ageing veteran defensmen whos value is going down year by year. Also IMO he's forever a Canuck and will not be traded ever... At a trade deadline where a team trying to bolster there lineup for a playoff run?? LA just gave up Roland Mackeown and a first round pick for Sekera...Bieksa has better stats over the years compared to Sekera, so Yes at a deadline where teams pay a higher price he can fetch a 1st round pick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BI3KSA- Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 As of now it is 16 overall... I doubt Pitts makes it past the second round so it will be in the high teens low twenties.... Beiska isn't a top 4 defence man. Markstom isn't excatly young at 25..... Better question, what were you smoking when you posted Bieska is a top 4 defenceman? Bieksa is a top 4 defensemen and 25 is very young for a goalie. Wtf are you even saying Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks Curse Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Lack, Jensen for Draisatle and EDM 2nd Lacks the young number 1 they need Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gstank29 Posted April 21, 2015 Author Share Posted April 21, 2015 Bieksa is a top 4 defensemen and 25 is very young for a goalie. Wtf are you even saying Not on other team's in the league 25 years old, for a goalie is when he will be entering his prime. 25 years old IS NOT VERY YOUNG FOR A GOALIE it's is about average for a goalie, maybe a bit above average. Plus since the season for Edmonton is over and Markstrom is a Jan birthday, he will basically be 26+ before you will see him start a significant amount of games. The type of games that are considered starter/good backup numbers (30+ games). With Lack and Miller (27 and 34, soon to be 35) it would be best to sign a backup goalie until Demko is ready. Having Lack in his prime while Markstrom is in his prime, is not going to work in the long run. You could argue that markstrom should be kept and we should try and rise his value, but he is a RFA this year and probably won't sign with a team that already has two goalies. Lack has the must value as of now but i can't see the Canucks trading him. He makes 1.15 million next year and is a steal at that price. Most #1 goalies get around 5 million. You guys are overvalving a 33 (soon to be 34 year old) who seems to be on his last leg, and will probably play 3 years before he retires. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baer. Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 I think Edmonton would do it. Could possibly gouge their 4th as it would almost be like a 3rd rounder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greene02 Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Markstrom doesn't have the value he once had. Im not even sure he'd be an upgrade on Scrivens. Markstrom would be exposed behind the terrible defence in Edmonton just like Scrivens has been. And Bieksa is regressing. He's not the Dman the Oilers want. Plus, a lot of people outside of the Canucks fan base don't respect Bieksa. He's one of those guys you like when he's on your team, but the rest of the league thinks he's a spot picker. It's hard to argue with it at this point too. He didn't exactly seem tough when he went after Hudler at the end of Game 3. Then throwing a bunch of sucker punches when Ferland was looking the other way didn't help things either. I bet the Oilers would rather package the pick for a Bieksa-type that is 25-28 years old Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks Curse Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 IMO we lack a future 1C and future 1D so now that EDM has the 1st overall pick for McJessus this can actually help us. We have a surplus of goalies and although I love Lack more than all of them, he is no cory schneider and we NEED to move him to get a 1C or 1D out of all of edmontons top picks, they are most likley to move Draisiatl, more so than (yakupov bc his value is so low) To EDM Lack Jensen Bonino TO VAN Draisaitl EDM 2nd 2015 we can take 2 d men at 23 and 31 - that is pretty nice Future Beartschi Draisaitl Kassian Shinkarurk Horvat Virtanen Gaucne McCann Cassels Kenins Vey Kylington/Roy/Charbot Carlo Tanev corrado subban Tryamkin Hutton Pedan Markstrom Demko see - this one move makes the future really bright!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greene02 Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 No offence to Jensen but he's a 22 year old winger scoring at half a point per game in the minors. He's a dime a dozen player that we know the name of because he was a 1st round pick. And goalies don't have a ton of value either. There are a few in free agency that can be picked up for nothing. Would you trade Horvat for that package?...Draisaitl is is better than Horvat. And you think the Oilers will add a 2nd? Not a chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orka Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 a gun or a knife? just spitballin here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BI3KSA- Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 Not on other team's in the league 25 years old, for a goalie is when he will be entering his prime. 25 years old IS NOT VERY YOUNG FOR A GOALIE it's is about average for a goalie, maybe a bit above average. Plus since the season for Edmonton is over and Markstrom is a Jan birthday, he will basically be 26+ before you will see him start a significant amount of games. The type of games that are considered starter/good backup numbers (30+ games). With Lack and Miller (27 and 34, soon to be 35) it would be best to sign a backup goalie until Demko is ready. Having Lack in his prime while Markstrom is in his prime, is not going to work in the long run. You could argue that markstrom should be kept and we should try and rise his value, but he is a RFA this year and probably won't sign with a team that already has two goalies. Lack has the must value as of now but i can't see the Canucks trading him. He makes 1.15 million next year and is a steal at that price. Most #1 goalies get around 5 million. You guys are overvalving a 33 (soon to be 34 year old) who seems to be on his last leg, and will probably play 3 years before he retires. 25 is considered young for any role especially goalie and D. Blows my mind that you would even argue that. I'm not "overvalving", Bieksa is a top 4 D on Edmonton easily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.