Sbisa put on IR

[theminister]

I'm all over the Damon Severson train. 

And, yes, I would give up Shinkaruk plus an enticement to get it done. LW are easier to find than D.

He's exactly what we need and would look great with Hutton on our 2nd pairing.

 

[aGENT]

I'm all over the Damon Severson train. 

And, yes, I would give up Shinkaruk plus an enticement to get it done. LW are easier to find than D.

He's exactly what we need and would look great with Hutton on our 2nd pairing.

 

I actually hope Baer gets in a groove this season. Not only would that make him more of an NHL 'sure thing' to other GM's and likely more valuable in a trade but while I think both guys are going to be talented forwards, Shink IMO has that extra 'something'. Gotta give to get though and if he's the cost...

Grab Lucic in the summer (though I'm not entirely sold on him) and this team looks might scary with really good LW depth. 

Sedin, Lucic, Shink/Baer, Gaunce, Kenins doesn't look bad at all. Add a legit partner for Hutton (Severson, Theodore, Bowey etc) and this team looks a bit scary next year.

As I say, not sure I'm a fan of Lucic's speed, likely price tag (or attitude) but there's other options like Peron (injury history though), Boedker...maybe Okposo for wingers though somebody might have to play off-wing.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

There's already been tons of rumours Benning is going after Lucic (a LW'er) FWIW this summer. Winger's are also far, FAR more plentiful as UFA's Lucic or otherwise.

It's always going to be easier to find a winger later than a top 4 D if we do happen to move one of Baer, Shink etc. They also tend to be NHL ready sooner if we draft one now (AKA a winger drafted this year is far more likely to be ready/close in ~three years than a D).

So basically I diagree with your entire first paragraph. Yes you do trade a winger for a righty, top 4 D now.

Bartowski and Weber are our stop gaps. Clendening and Corrado are not top 4 D prospects.

FIne, 20-26 then...the '~' was there for a reason.

 

It wasn't about the age either.  Theodore is Left handed Bowey and Pulock are not current top 4 D and NJ has no reason to trade one of their up and coming D. Hammer and Vbrata would have zero impact on the Devils or are going to waive to go their.  

As for finding a top 6 LW.  Baertschi and Shinkaruk haven't proved anything at the NHL level.  But you're willing to remove one, hope the other one pans out and then hope that Lucic signs or another UFA (which by my count only 3 upcoming LW fit a top 6 role, if they don't resign with their team).  If Lucic doesn't sign, and Baertschi doesn't pan out...  Lets not take the high risk of ending up with have zero replacement for daniel and no top 6 prospects in the LW pool. 

So tell me have come up with a proposal?  Remember you have to fit other teams needs.  Because if you haven't, you're living in Raymond, Ballard and a first pipe dream.  I've listed the only two players that make somewhat any sense in you're age/skill level range.  Until you come up with this proposal it's pointless to discuss, ....you presented nothing more than an unfinished thought, and so far the answer to that thought is... No

[Stierlitz]

Irfaan GaffarVerified account ‏@sportsnetirf 4m4 minutes ago

Luca Sbisa (ankle) still a couple weeks away. Will not travel on this seven game road trip. #Canucks

[apollo]

Well couple weeks is better than couple months. 

He'll be one of our best dman down the stretch... I can feel it. 

[aGENT]

 

It wasn't about the age either.  Theodore is Left handed Bowey and Pulock are not current top 4 D and NJ has no reason to trade one of their up and coming D. Hammer and Vbrata would have zero impact on the Devils or are going to waive to go their.  

As for finding a top 6 LW.  Baertschi and Shinkaruk haven't proved anything at the NHL level.  But you're willing to remove one, hope the other one pans out and then hope that Lucic signs or another UFA (which by my count only 3 upcoming LW fit a top 6 role, if they don't resign with their team).  If Lucic doesn't sign, and Baertschi doesn't pan out...  Lets not take the high risk of ending up with have zero replacement for daniel and no top 6 prospects in the LW pool. 

So tell me have come up with a proposal?  Remember you have to fit other teams needs.  Because if you haven't, you're living in Raymond, Ballard and a first pipe dream.  I've listed the only two players that make somewhat any sense in you're age/skill level range.  Until you come up with this proposal it's pointless to discuss, ....you presented nothing more than an unfinished thought, and so far the answer to that thought is... No

lol...you're like a dog with a straw-bone.

I would tend to agree that while, like TheMinister, I quite like Severson, NJ is not likely going to be a good match for the assets we have to trade. The only way I see that maybe working is if we move Hamhuis/Vrbata/Higgins/Prust for picks that we could send them some combination of, along with a prospect that fills one of their organizational needs. Still not sure they move him though.

Yes, I'm willing to trust in Benning's expertise, faith in those players and the fact that it's far, FAR easier to obtain and quicker to develop wingers than top 4 D, to move one for a far bigger, harder to fill hole. That's how this NHL asset management thing works. You draft and develop the BPA to either utilize or deal from a position of strength to fill organizational holes. What did you think was going to happen when we kept drafting forwards early and ignoring D?

No, as I've repeated numerous times, I haven't come up with a proposal. I'm not making a proposal and this is not the proposal section. It would also be a silly waste of time at this point given that it will depend highly on teams injuries, prospects not developing as hoped etc to see who might be in need of a top 6 veteran scoring forward or a veteran top 4 D. Or whether they might prefer a forward prospect or perhaps a younger D prospect to 'replace' the older one they'd be trading (perhaps Subban+). If, they want a D, do they have a wealth of lefties or righties? Do they already have a bunch of smaller offensive guys and would prefer some bigger more physical D...etc, etc. Far too many unknown variables at this point to make anything resembling a rational proposal.

As for your silly Raymond, Ballard nonsense.... Vrbata is a far better player than Raymond. Same with Hamhuis/Ballard and Shink/Baer (if it came to them) and a pick are better than (what was at the time of RB1st proposals) a very late 1st. So perhaps we can skip all your 8 million straw man tangents you seem hell bent on veering off on and focus on my supposed 'unfinished thought' which basically boils down to:

We need a right side D who is young and can play in the second pair in and around the next year give or take. Ideally with the promise/projection of hopefully moving up to the top 2 in around 5 years (even if Tanev technically still holds that spot). Organizationally we currently do not have that player. It's likely too late to draft that player (short of a fluke) and finding that player via UFA would be very challenging. It is IMO, our organizations biggest hole.

Secondly, we have depth at forward, particularly at LW and can afford to move both veteran and prospect depth there. We can also draft/develop, trade or sign UFA's far easier to fill any future need in that position.

How Benning addresses the issue should reveal itself soon enough. Happily, he's shown the willingness and ability to go after and obtain his desired target and I'd expect we'll see the same here.

 

[snipes2539]

Ah Sbisa I think we fans will be debating his value and effectiveness for a long time.  Fans will always be split on a player who's a threat at both ends of the ice.

[alfstonker]

Well it is no coincidence that since he went down we have looked a mess at the back. He seemed to be glueing us together at the back and he, Hutton and Tanev have been the stabilising anchor to the team so far this season. 

He can't come back soon enough for me. I am finding it hard to take the performances we have had from the D over the last 2 games and we won one of these 4-1.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

lol...you're like a dog with a straw-bone.

I would tend to agree that while, like TheMinister, I quite like Severson, NJ is not likely going to be a good match for the assets we have to trade. The only way I see that maybe working is if we move Hamhuis/Vrbata/Higgins/Prust for picks that we could send them some combination of, along with a prospect that fills one of their organizational needs. Still not sure they move him though.

Yes, I'm willing to trust in Benning's expertise, faith in those players and the fact that it's far, FAR easier to obtain and quicker to develop wingers than top 4 D, to move one for a far bigger, harder to fill hole. That's how this NHL asset management thing works. You draft and develop the BPA to either utilize or deal from a position of strength to fill organizational holes. What did you think was going to happen when we kept drafting forwards early and ignoring D?

No, as I've repeated numerous times, I haven't come up with a proposal. I'm not making a proposal and this is not the proposal section. It would also be a silly waste of time at this point given that it will depend highly on teams injuries, prospects not developing as hoped etc to see who might be in need of a top 6 veteran scoring forward or a veteran top 4 D. Or whether they might prefer a forward prospect or perhaps a younger D prospect to 'replace' the older one they'd be trading (perhaps Subban+). If, they want a D, do they have a wealth of lefties or righties? Do they already have a bunch of smaller offensive guys and would prefer some bigger more physical D...etc, etc. Far too many unknown variables at this point to make anything resembling a rational proposal.

As for your silly Raymond, Ballard nonsense.... Vrbata is a far better player than Raymond. Same with Hamhuis/Ballard and Shink/Baer (if it came to them) and a pick are better than (what was at the time of RB1st proposals) a very late 1st. So perhaps we can skip all your 8 million straw man tangents you seem hell bent on veering off on and focus on my supposed 'unfinished thought' which basically boils down to:

We need a right side D who is young and can play in the second pair in and around the next year give or take. Ideally with the promise/projection of hopefully moving up to the top 2 in around 5 years (even if Tanev technically still holds that spot). Organizationally we currently do not have that player. It's likely too late to draft that player (short of a fluke) and finding that player via UFA would be very challenging. It is IMO, our organizations biggest hole.

Secondly, we have depth at forward, particularly at LW and can afford to move both veteran and prospect depth there. We can also draft/develop, trade or sign UFA's far easier to fill any future need in that position.

How Benning addresses the issue should reveal itself soon enough. Happily, he's shown the willingness and ability to go after and obtain his desired target and I'd expect we'll see the same here.

 

You just don’t get it do you.  Until you come up with a  proposal you’re basically just stating a Christmas wishlist.  What I’m trying to explain to you and unfortunately its not getting through is that canucks don’t have the assets required to obtain the player you are asking for.  I shouldn’t say don’t, they do and it’s not worth the price.  We don’t have the LW depth to replace Daniel in 3 years.  We are hoping Baertschi works out but we still have Shinkaruk as a backup.  Neither could work out or both could and fit into our top 6 and Shinkaruk could turn out to be way better than Baertschi or the other way around.  

Canucks do have a need to fill a top 4 right handed shot but you’re wishing for something more than it has to be.  Settle your expectations down, don’t expect a top upcoming D coming back for a UFA (with little playoffs success) and a prospect. A Forsberg/Erat trade are extremely rare.  There are plenty of other options for us that cost less..Less risk and less assets.  Types of assets that give us a stop gap to develop our own D prospect pool. Assets that give us time to see how the prospects we currently have continue to develop,  

[aGENT]

I disagree