[Proposal] Jamie Oleksiak

[Junkyard Dog]

Bad deal for Dallas IMO. Oleksiak is a solid prospect, maybe their second best one only behind Honka.

If I were Dallas I would want immediate help in order to make a playoff push and a run.

Hamhuis 1/2 cap retained for Oleksiak + conditional 2nd(1st if Dallas makes the playoffs).

Goligoski-Klingberg

Hamhuis-Demers

Oduya-Benn

Nemeth

Jokipakka

That's a solid D-core.

[Pears]

I would absolutely LOVE that trade. Oleksiak is dripping with potential and Dallas is loaded on the back end. Little iffy about giving up the 2nd but since it's Anaheim's it should be fairly low.

[D-Money]

Bad deal for Dallas IMO. Oleksiak is a solid prospect, maybe their second best one only behind Honka.

If I were Dallas I would want immediate help in order to make a playoff push and a run.

Hamhuis 1/2 cap retained for Oleksiak + conditional 2nd(1st if Dallas makes the playoffs).

Goligoski-Klingberg

Hamhuis-Demers

Oduya-Benn

Nemeth

Jokipakka

That's a solid D-core.

Hockeysfuture.com's top-50 prospects has Honka at #22, and Ritchie at #36. Oleksiak is not rated.

And I'm not suggesting that Oleksiak is a bad prospect - far from it. (I suggest he has top-pairing potential, and my proposal was another 1st rounder who has struggled and a 2nd round pick.) But Dallas management has quite a few young D choose from, and it seems they prefer their other options.

A Hamhuis trade is not a bad idea, but that is more likely something done at/near the deadline.

[elvis15]

Bad deal for Dallas IMO. Oleksiak is a solid prospect, maybe their second best one only behind Honka.

If I were Dallas I would want immediate help in order to make a playoff push and a run.

Hamhuis 1/2 cap retained for Oleksiak + conditional 2nd(1st if Dallas makes the playoffs).

Goligoski-Klingberg

Hamhuis-Demers

Oduya-Benn

Nemeth

Jokipakka

That's a solid D-core.

After posting I was starting to think about if they might want Hamhuis around the deadline if they think they can actually make a push as a contender, but would Hamhuis want to go there?

Assuming he would just to explore that thought, it'd give them a lot of depth and experience on the left with plenty of potential youth still to use otherwise. I doubt we'd retain 50% cap though; Dallas has $2.3M in cap space with 24 players listed on their roster, so more like $2.9-3M in space. They might need us to retain a little in cap though, depending on if they move any other cap our way as well.

We'd want Oleksiak+ (picks/prospects, but more than a conditional 2nd especially if we're retaining cap) in return in that case. Maybe one of their other young defencemen could be had (certainly not Klingberg, maybe Nemeth, Joki or even Johns depending how he turns out) depending on our needs?

[coastal1]

The Dallas Stars have been quietly been building a fantastic group of young defenders in their prospect pool. The emergence of John Klingberg and Jyrki Jokipakka was just the start. Julius Honka, Patrick Nemeth, Stephen Johns, Esa Lindell...as a Canuck fan I'm very jealous.

But the one guy I didn't mention above is Jamie Oleksiak. He is their 1st round pick from 2011 (14th overall), and is an absolute beast physically (6'7, 250 lbs). He made the team out of camp last year, but was a healthy scratch until Nemeth got hurt - and even then he wasn't the first guy inserted into the lineup. He's been a bit slow to adapt to the NHL, but showed some flashes throughout the year.

I was listening to an interview with Jim Nill (Dallas GM) recently on Marek vs. Wyshynski, and he was raving about a lot of the young defenders, but didn't mention Oleksiak. When Wysh asked about him, Jim said they see him somewhere in the #6-8 spot to start the year, depending on his camp (not exactly a thunderous endorsement to the former 14th overall pick - but it wasn't Nill's pick.) Now that he's waiver eligible, he has to be on the team, even though management seems to feel that they have better options.

Which brings me to my proposal:

To Vancouver: Jamie Oleksiak

To Dallas: Nicklas Jensen, 2016 2nd round pick (Anaheim)

Dallas has a good prospect pool, but other than Brett Ritchie has nothing at RW. Jensen gives them another option. Plus, they have been great at unearthing talent, and will probably value the 2nd rounder.

For Vancouver, we don't have a single D-man with top-pairing potential (although Oleksiak's potential is fading a bit, he still has the tools to potentially become one). With Hamhuis possible(/likely?) departure, we'll need someone ready to step into a top-4 role, and I wouldn't bank on Sbisa being up to that. The 2nd rounder may be hard to give up, but D-men are valuable, and Jensen's value low. It's likely going to be in the #55-60 range too.

I don't do many proposals on here, but this seemed like a good fit.

One failed pick for another, what is the point?

[Junkyard Dog]

Hockeysfuture.com's top-50 prospects has Honka at #22, and Ritchie at #36. Oleksiak is not rated.

And I'm not suggesting that Oleksiak is a bad prospect - far from it. (I suggest he has top-pairing potential, and my proposal was another 1st rounder who has struggled and a 2nd round pick.) But Dallas management has quite a few young D choose from, and it seems they prefer their other options.

A Hamhuis trade is not a bad idea, but that is more likely something done at/near the deadline.

With all the youth they have at D I think they'd want veteran help more so than anything else especially with just having moved Daley. Every cup winning team has a strong D-core and adding Hamhuis would help do just that.

After posting I was starting to think about if they might want Hamhuis around the deadline if they think they can actually make a push as a contender, but would Hamhuis want to go there?

Assuming he would just to explore that thought, it'd give them a lot of depth and experience on the left with plenty of potential youth still to use otherwise. I doubt we'd retain 50% cap though; Dallas has $2.3M in cap space with 24 players listed on their roster, so more like $2.9-3M in space. They might need us to retain a little in cap though, depending on if they move any other cap our way as well.

We'd want Oleksiak+ (picks/prospects, but more than a conditional 2nd especially if we're retaining cap) in return in that case. Maybe one of their other young defencemen could be had (certainly not Klingberg, maybe Nemeth, Joki or even Johns depending how he turns out) depending on our needs?

Dallas has a solid team. I don't see why Hamhuis wouldn't waive seeing how he'd play a key role on a solid team.

We can retain 2.3M for one year. It won't kill us seeing as we would be likely getting two 1st rounders out of it. Oleksiak has solid top 4 potential.

I doubt Dallas adds another young defenseman into this trade. Hamhuis is an upcoming UFA and I am expecting a Sekera-like return. Retaining half his salary could get us another small piece but I'd be happy with Oleksiak and likely a 1st.

[elvis15]

One failed pick for another, what is the point?

"I mean, like, why are we even here?"

But really, why are you here?

[Monty]

One failed pick for another, what is the point?

Your right. 22 years old is right when teams give up on prospects.

Jim Nill: Hey Jamie, can you come in my office for a few minutes?

Oleksiak: Sure, I hope everything is ok.

Nill: Well Jamie, I got some good news and bad news. The bad news is you're 22 years old and therefore a bust. We just received this news from trusted hockey guru, coastal1.

Oleksiak: Well what's the good news?

Nill: While coastal1 is a hockey guru, he also works part time at Shell, and he said he can get you a job. So all is good!

[elvis15]

...

Dallas has a solid team. I don't see why Hamhuis wouldn't waive seeing how he'd play a key role on a solid team.

We can retain 2.3M for one year. It won't kill us seeing as we would be likely getting two 1st rounders out of it. Oleksiak has solid top 4 potential.

I doubt Dallas adds another young defenseman into this trade. Hamhuis is an upcoming UFA and I am expecting a Sekera-like return. Retaining half his salary could get us another small piece but I'd be happy with Oleksiak and likely a 1st.

He might not waive because he doesn't like Dallas, or he really likes it here. Not sure, but there could be a number of reasons.

Anyway, retaining cap (or in this case, more cap) is usually only done to open up more opportunities for trading partners. Unless Dallas needs that extra space to facilitate another deal I don't see them offering up more just because we've retained more.

And my point wasn't that they would add a second defensive prospect (at least not high level) but rather as a substitution. It'd totally depend on Dallas' situation for what we could ask for, but I'm not necessarily expecting their first along with a higher end defensive prospect unless they're really motivated to deal with us.

[PhillipBlunt]

He's a monster.

Question is, can he play like one. So far...no. But if he was already a success, he wouldn't conceivably be available.

Shizer!!

Lidster did a really good job getting Edler-Tanev going as a legitimate NHL pairing. Maybe he'd be able to tap into Oleksiak's potential.

Having Trymakin and Oleksiak on the same team could be a fantastic thing, if either uses their size and has untapped skill to accompany it. But that again is an IF.

[PhillipBlunt]

Your right. 22 years old is right when teams give up on prospects.

Jim Nill: Hey Jamie, can you come in my office for a few minutes?

Oleksiak: Sure, I hope everything is ok.

Nill: Well Jamie, I got some good news and bad news. The bad news is you're 22 years old and therefore a bust. We just received this news from trusted hockey guru, coastal1.

Oleksiak: Well what's the good news?

Nill: While coastal1 is a hockey guru, he also works part time at Shell, and he said he can get you a job. So all is good!

Is coastal1 that pimply faced kid that at 41st and Granville?

[Ilya Mikheyev]

I like the idea of trying to pick up Oleksiak, let's not forget he showed a lot of potential under Desjardins and Lidster in Texas, being about a .5 PPGer, and leading the Texas Stars' defensemen in points in his first pro season.

He certainly wouldn't be the first giant defenseman having troubles adapting to the NHL level, it's a hard jump when your size becomes a lot less of an advantage playing against the best players in the world.

I don't mind giving up Jensen at this point, with the logjam on the Dallas blueline, I wonder if Jensen + 3rd + a low pick would be enough, so that the Canucks could keep their picks in the first 2 rounds, which are sorely needed.

Good proposal.

[Canuck Surfer]

How about Oleksiak for Sbisa?

[saucypass]

How about Oleksiak for Sbisa?

Sounds very very good.

[D-Money]

I like the idea of trying to pick up Oleksiak, let's not forget he showed a lot of potential under Desjardins and Lidster in Texas, being about a .5 PPGer, and leading the Texas Stars' defensemen in points in his first pro season.

He certainly wouldn't be the first giant defenseman having troubles adapting to the NHL level, it's a hard jump when your size becomes a lot less of an advantage playing against the best players in the world.

I don't mind giving up Jensen at this point, with the logjam on the Dallas blueline, I wonder if Jensen + 3rd + a low pick would be enough, so that the Canucks could keep their picks in the first 2 rounds, which are sorely needed.

Good proposal.

Thanks.

The only issue anyone seems to bring up is dealing the 2nd round pick. Anaheim will almost certainly be a top-10 team, so that pick will be in the 50's. If things pan out this year how I think they will, we'll be picking four times in the top-50 (our 1st and 2nd, plus picks from dealing Vrbata and Hamhuis), if not more. So if that happens, I don't think keeping the pick is so urgent.

Also, if we don't offer something of legitimate value, other teams will. He's a young D-man with almost certain top-4 potential, and possibly even top-2.