What is your thought of what the canucks should do? should we tank or consider shopping guys and pick up via waviers.

[Brocklovich]

On Monday, December 21, 2015 at 9:13 AM, smokes said:

When was the last time a team delt out 6 players on one trade deadline?

Not to be a stickler but i mention 5 guys as possible trade bait and also say that not all of these guys will get moved & indicated that NTC/NMCs will be a problem.

To answer your charge though my best guess would have been buffalo a year or so ago didnt they move Miller, Ott, Moulson, Vanek and possibly some other players? Either way they maxed out what they could have

[westcoast]

On December 21, 2015 at 0:01 PM, smithers joe said:

people have to realize that being a gm and making trades is not the same as being a cdc gm and making a trade....benning has said he won't trade his youth for short term help and that other gm's only want young prospect and those playing on their team...eg horvat and hutton....before guys like higgins, burrows and even vrbata, get moved, a team has to want them and be willing to give something back...it would be great to trade them all for 1st or 2nd rounds picks...but ask yourselves, if i'm a rival gm, what am i willing to give up for aging vets...?...and if all benning could get for vrbata was a 3rd round pick and a bad contract, you'ld all be saying, what poor gm he is...he wants to make deals that help this team...neither does he want to rush young players into situations, they are not ready for yet....he is banking on the core being competitive, while the future of the team, learns to take over the ship...he wants to build through the draft and through trades that make sense for the team...he needs to stick to his plan, and build a team that can be competitive for years to come....it will take time...

At some point the Canucks have to unload some assets that are a tough decision ,It would make a huge difference to the next core getting some more high picks and filling out depth for them.

[Canucklehead73]

I would make it look like we are going to tank, ship out our dead weight, and then try to pick some other teams bones and stay in the hunt as a wildcard team. The key is to rid ourselves of the Higgins/Weber/Hamhuis type of players...

[Curmudgeon]

Every single player in the NHL understands how hard it is to even make it to the league. Not a single one of them would ever go into a game intending to lose in order to improve the team's draft position. That would require losing, and hockey players who lose games are easily replaceable. So would you, as a player, deliberately lose when you know there's a chance the team will draft your replacement? That's why all this talk of tanking is so much hot air.

Now, if you want to talk about trading away talent at the deadline, then that's on the GM, who would rather be the replacer than the replaced.

[billabong]

Sell off as many assets as possibly going into the final few days before the deadline and suck for 20 games than draft a high pick (Matthews possibly) plus possibly a big fish free agent like lucic and come reloaded for next season when all your youngsters are a year stronger and more mature and boom were back in the playoffs 

[wai_lai416]

just let the season plays out and see where it takes us.. unless itès a good hockey trade or waiver pickup.. i just sit idle and evaluate what we have.. please don't do anything stupid and try to make a push for the playoff only to miss it or get bounce in the first round and be stuck with a middling pick year in year out.. 

[alfstonker]

Tanking is for losers, whether they are fans, owners, coaches or GMs.

It teaches all the wrong things and tends to be suggested by those who haven't the guts to stick it out with their team. The type I mean is the guy who has no real interest in the team unless they are sitting high in the league, probably doesn't even watch entire games and just want a top 3 pick so they can  be one up on their "school buddies" or sadly their work mates.

These types are better off with their x-box where they don't have to deal in hard reality or real sporting endeavour.

[Boudrias]

8 minutes ago, alfstonker said:

Tanking is for losers, whether they are fans, owners, coaches or GMs.

It teaches all the wrong things and tends to be suggested by those who haven't the guts to stick it out with their team. The type I mean is the guy who has no real interest in the team unless they are sitting high in the league, probably doesn't even watch entire games and just want a top 3 pick so they can  be one up on their "school buddies" or sadly their work mates.

These types are better off with their x-box where they don't have to deal in hard reality or real sporting endeavour.

Usually agree with your posts but this one is a pretty narrow prospective. Using your logic one might hang on to vets who are ending their careers and possible trade some youth to try and make playoffs. This is a worst case scenario IMHO.

This topic is getting a little long in the tooth. 'Tanking' has become a generalized term for limiting discussion of certain Canuck realities. My point about all this is that the Canuck timeline has a top heavy group of vets who have to be moved out to allow younger players to development. If this means tanking then so be it. My idea of a successful season for this group was rotating Utica prospects through the season, trading vets for prospects and draft picks, and yes finishing in a top 3 draft position. Perhaps Benning will surprise with some kind of deal but my preference is as above.

Take it easy as I don't want any 'guts' on my recliner!  

[alfstonker]

6 hours ago, Boudrias said:

Usually agree with your posts but this one is a pretty narrow prospective. Using your logic one might hang on to vets who are ending their careers and possible trade some youth to try and make playoffs. This is a worst case scenario IMHO.

This topic is getting a little long in the tooth. 'Tanking' has become a generalized term for limiting discussion of certain Canuck realities. My point about all this is that the Canuck timeline has a top heavy group of vets who have to be moved out to allow younger players to development. If this means tanking then so be it. My idea of a successful season for this group was rotating Utica prospects through the season, trading vets for prospects and draft picks, and yes finishing in a top 3 draft position. Perhaps Benning will surprise with some kind of deal but my preference is as above.

Take it easy as I don't want any 'guts' on my recliner!  

I'm not disagreeing with any of that but my point is nothing good comes out of anything gained easily in my experience. It sounds so enticing to just give up and get high picks, for some people. However there are no guarantees in hockey or in life.

I would far rather read about how well we have managed despite all the negative factors and have people saying they appreciate what is being fought for.

I look forward to every game and while I sometimes doubt we will win, I hope like hell that we do or at least get something out of a game. I have always believed, since the start of the season that when we play and work together as a team, we are far better than many (even our own fans) give us credit for.

Even when we lose I look for possible reasons and positives.

Not reasons that necessarily place blame but things like long road trips, injuries, players coming back after injury who haven't settled in yet, players slumping, outstanding opposition goalies, our lack of size, players up from the AHL, who don't know their line mates or the systems. For me hockey is a lot more complex than many on here seem to realise. I just love the game and as I said on another thread I believe that when a club is being run and coached properly, good things will surely not be far away. I am beginning to see them here already.

You're right though, more vets will have to leave, some have difficulty in getting it done now, on a consistent basis that is. However we must be careful and not throw out the glue that holds the team together because imo that can't always be replaced from the UFA lists and we can't, yet at any rate expect rookies to supply it.

I don't like losing any more than anyone else but a loss is just an outcome for me, it doesn't describe a game, or the players performance. Though you would think it did going by some on here.

[Guest]

As the team sits right now, we seem to have the following vets that we are (pretty much) all agreeing either need to go, or can go: Higgins, Vrbata, Weber, Hamhuis (the first ones out), then Burrows, Miller, one of Prust or Dorsett, and quite possibly Edler. The only ones of these players that will net us much of anything are Edler, Vrbata and Miller. The rest, combined, will likely not get us more than a second, a third, and maybe a couple of 5th/6th round picks. If we want to go after someone like Hamonic, then Edler is the most likely trade bait, sweetening it with, say, Jensen. Vrbata and Miller go for picks, say another 2nd/3rd for Miller, and a low first to some team needing some instant offense for the playoffs for Vrbata.

So we do this. Now we need to reload with: Shinkaruk, Gaunce, Grenier, Biega and maybe Pedan. Sure, we'll have the cap $$$ to pursue, say, Lucic, and maybe some other D-man UFA. But...this is a really young team overall. If you think we are inconsistent this year, well...this year will seem almost steady compared to this hypothetical team.

Not that Benning had much choice to start with. He gets here, and finds that Tortella was actually more correct than we wanted to acknowledge; an old, somewhat stale team, with a major gap between age (a lot) and youth (almost none). From what  we've all heard by now, they tried to move Higgins. No takers. I doubt the market for Burrows would be lucrative, too big a salary cap hit for a declining player, that never really was more than a marginal 2nd/regular 3rd line player that benefited from playing with the twins; unlike Anson Carter, Burrows can and readily did play a two-way game.

My personal opinion would be this; attempt to trade Higgins, Weber and Friesen in some package. If no takers, waive Higgins outright. See about getting maybe a 4th/5th for Weber. Next; Edler goes to the Islanders for Hamonic, along with someone on Utica that is highly unlikely to ever make it here, like Jensen, Labate, Fox or Zalewski. We may have to take back someone to even the cap numbers, so send him to Utica, they will need some warm bodies by the time this is over. Extend Burrows one more year, but play with the contract to lower the cap hit. I am a firm believer that there are certain players you don't "discard" when they are on their way down; potential free agents looking for longer term deals look at "loyalty" to players as an unwritten benefit. Burrows has given this franchise just about everything a player can give, and I would like to see him retire a Canuck, and get a place on the team in some capacity after, like maybe coaching in the ECHL/AHL, or scouting the Quebec league. One of Prust or Dorsett gets traded, likely Dorsett stays (he can penalty kill and skates quite well). We do NOT trade Vrbata; this one is tricky. Yes he's a little older, but...since he has never been accused of playing a hard physical game, he has a little more left in the tank than his years would suggest. He is the closest thing the team has to a pure goal scorer, Lord knows we need as many of those as we can get. I would get him to the bargaining table, with a 3-4 year deal, but smaller numbers, say around 3-3.5M versus the 5M he is at right now. This runs the risk of losing him for nothing, I know. But, is he going to get a 3-4 year deal anywhere else, even at a lower cap $$? He now is in the 2yr deal age, and get rid of him quick if it doesn't turn out. No, keeping Vrbata and Burrows will help the transition, same as Dorsett helped Bo so much last year. Bartkowski; if he is about equivalent to everyone else, keep him, he is at least a good skater and familiar with the team. Lastly, Miller; I am in the crowd that HATED trading Lack away. Miller goes at the trade deadline, say to LA or San Jose. We get what we can for him. Markstrom looks like he  has finally figured out the NHL; keep him and bring up Bachman. And oh yeah, I would rather not go after Lucic; he would be too costly.

This leaves some holes:

Sedin - Sedin - Hansen (no changes at all)

Sutter - McCann - Vrbata 

Baertschi - Horvat - Virtanen (Sven cuts it, or he's gone, and insert Shinkaruk)

Dorsett - Cracknell - Burrows (or Gaunce in place of Cracknell)

Kenins - (bring up Grenier; if Gaunce replaces Cracknell, then one of Kenins or Grenier goes on the block)

Hamonic - Tanev

Hutton - Sbisa

Biega - Bartkowski

____ - Pedan (UFA)

Markstom - Bachman

Not the greatest team of all time, but...there's cap room to acquire at the deadline and/or re-up some of the younger players; some of the deadwood is gone, and at least the new players will give full effort, even if the skills aren't fully developed yet. Couple/few years down the road, when Boeser and Demko get here and the young guys are now vets, it will be a much stronger team. By then, Burrows should likely be retired, Vrbata somewhere else as a PP specialist, and the twins should know if they have enough left in the tank to re-up or retire.