BertaNuck Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 3 hours ago, Realtor Rod said: Bufflin (I know, I know) would be a nice addition. Stammer as a ufa at 26 is unheard of. I give him an offer, if he declines you have to go after an elite dman. I would like to see Ladd with horvat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugor Hill Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 From what I know Ladd and Buff are looking for long term contracts. They are 30 already so it might not work, especially since both are crash and bang type of guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noseforthenet Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 8 hours ago, DefCon1 said: Yes exactly, and I don't know why most people here don't think about that. IF we land Stamkos, McCann would become a huge trade bait that we could swap for a young D-man. A McCann, Burrows or Hansen packaged to Colorado for Barrie or to Blues for Shatternkirk would be huge. Then add another UFA D-man like Yandle so we don't ever hear about Weber, Bartkowski or Sbisa again. Barrie-Tanev Yandle-Edler Hutton-Biega/Pedan Weber not signed Bartkowski not signed Sbisa traded for some potato chips. I like your thinking. With Sbisa, we gotta trade him for some Cool Ranch Doritos. Otherwise, NO DEAL!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Down by the River Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 10 hours ago, DefCon1 said: You can't get those type of elite players unless you get lucky with the draft and get one with a 1st overall pick. We know the Canucks chances aren't usually good when it comes to lotto picks, so why not get someone like stammer through free agency without losing anything. None of our prospects or current players are even close to Stammers level and that includes Henrik Sedin. I completely agree and I am not at all against getting Stammer, I just think that the Canucks would be better served by signing two two-way forwards that can score 20+ goals per year than a one-way forward that can score 50. Maybe 10mil won't be enough to get two 20+ goal scores, but I'd like to see the Canucks try that route first. Okposo, Ladd, Lucic, Backes, Nielsen, Eriksson (great with Sedins), Boedker, Brouwer... none of the comparable to Stamkos, but combined would probably put up as many points, you'd get more minutes out of them, and have them tied to your team for a shorter term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 1 minute ago, Down by the River said: I completely agree and I am not at all against getting Stammer, I just think that the Canucks would be better served by signing two two-way forwards that can score 20+ goals per year than a one-way forward that can score 50. Maybe 10mil won't be enough to get two 20+ goal scores, but I'd like to see the Canucks try that route first. Okposo, Ladd, Lucic, Backes, Nielsen, Eriksson (great with Sedins), Boedker, Brouwer... none of the comparable to Stamkos, but combined would probably put up as many points, you'd get more minutes out of them, and have them tied to your team for a shorter term. With all our younger guys starting to take roster spots, we have the money to spend on Stamkos, much like the Hawks have money for Toews and Kane. If this rumor of us looking at Stamkos is true, which I doubt, we should pay whatever it takes. Pay him 12 million a season if it's needed to land him. We will have the Cap space for years to come, and we need him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 10 hours ago, DefCon1 said: Yes exactly, and I don't know why most people here don't think about that. IF we land Stamkos, McCann would become a huge trade bait that we could swap for a young D-man. A McCann, Burrows or Hansen packaged to Colorado for Barrie or to Blues for Shatternkirk would be huge. Then add another UFA D-man like Yandle so we don't ever hear about Weber, Bartkowski or Sbisa again. Barrie-Tanev Yandle-Edler Hutton-Biega/Pedan Weber not signed Bartkowski not signed Sbisa traded for some potato chips. While I don't disagree with the general sentiment of signing Stamkos and dealing some C depth for D (though I doubt we actually will).... Those are horrible D pairings IMO Barrie and Tanev are both right D (and small/would get physically destroyed) and Yandle and Edler are both lefties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Down by the River Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 51 minutes ago, J.R. said: While I don't disagree with the general sentiment of signing Stamkos and dealing some C depth for D (though I doubt we actually will).... Those are horrible D pairings IMO Barrie and Tanev are both right D (and small/would get physically destroyed) and Yandle and Edler are both lefties. Not to make fun of WD's twitching, but I'm pretty sure he'd have to seek medical attention after a shift with those two together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DefCon1 Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 1 hour ago, Down by the River said: I completely agree and I am not at all against getting Stammer, I just think that the Canucks would be better served by signing two two-way forwards that can score 20+ goals per year than a one-way forward that can score 50. Maybe 10mil won't be enough to get two 20+ goal scores, but I'd like to see the Canucks try that route first. Okposo, Ladd, Lucic, Backes, Nielsen, Eriksson (great with Sedins), Boedker, Brouwer... none of the comparable to Stamkos, but combined would probably put up as many points, you'd get more minutes out of them, and have them tied to your team for a shorter term. The thing is, its harder to find and get a 50 goal scorer as compared to a 20 goal scorer. And those 50 goal scorers are game breakers and would score goals when you need them to score goals whereas a 20 goal scorer would be less reliable and we already have that now with Hansen, Burrows, D. Sedin, Vrbata, Sutter and eventually Baertschi and Horvat. We should have a range of players in our lineup if we want to win the cup and having an elite goal scorer would compliment our lineup very well with the 2 way forwards we already have here and in the minors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DefCon1 Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 1 hour ago, Alflives said: With all our younger guys starting to take roster spots, we have the money to spend on Stamkos, much like the Hawks have money for Toews and Kane. If this rumor of us looking at Stamkos is true, which I doubt, we should pay whatever it takes. Pay him 12 million a season if it's needed to land him. We will have the Cap space for years to come, and we need him. Not to mention once the Sedins are done, we would have more than 14 million dollars to play with, so Stamkos at 10 or even 12 would be our replacement for the Sedins in the future and would ensure our continuity to be competitive every year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Down by the River Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 2 minutes ago, DefCon1 said: The thing is, its harder to find and get a 50 goal scorer as compared to a 20 goal scorer. And those 50 goal scorers are game breakers and would score goals when you need them to score goals whereas a 20 goal scorer would be less reliable and we already have that now with Hansen, Burrows, D. Sedin, Vrbata, Sutter and eventually Baertschi and Horvat. We should have a range of players in our lineup if we want to win the cup and having an elite goal scorer would compliment our lineup very well with the 2 way forwards we already have here and in the minors. Except this is just not true. If you look at the top 5 goal scorers in the NHL right now, none of them are top 5 in GWG. Almost half of OEL's goals are GWG. Same was true of Beleskey last year. Look at points last year when tied after the second... you're not going to expect a lot of names: http://espn.go.com/nhl/statistics/player/_/stat/points/sort/points/year/2015/split/269 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kragar Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 I don't know enough about what is going on with Stamkos' declining stats and his situation in TB. But the thought of him on the power play with the Sedins should put absolute fear into anyone taking a penalty against the Canucks. Think of all the one-goal games lost this year, and what a consistent PP would do to make this team contenders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DefCon1 Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 2 minutes ago, Down by the River said: Except this is just not true. If you look at the top 5 goal scorers in the NHL right now, none of them are top 5 in GWG. Almost half of OEL's goals are GWG. Same was true of Beleskey last year. Look at points last year when tied after the second... you're not going to expect a lot of names: http://espn.go.com/nhl/statistics/player/_/stat/points/sort/points/year/2015/split/269 2 minutes ago, Down by the River said: Except this is just not true. If you look at the top 5 goal scorers in the NHL right now, none of them are top 5 in GWG. Almost half of OEL's goals are GWG. Same was true of Beleskey last year. Look at points last year when tied after the second... you're not going to expect a lot of names: http://espn.go.com/nhl/statistics/player/_/stat/points/sort/points/year/2015/split/269 GWG doesn't tell anything because someone like Stamkos could score a hat trick for a tie and another teammate scores for the GWG when in reality he wouldn't have the GWG without Stamkos hat trick. So I don't really rely on GWG since some of them can be an empty netter. A player that can score multiple goals in a game is really valuable and those players win games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Down by the River Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 16 minutes ago, DefCon1 said: GWG doesn't tell anything because someone like Stamkos could score a hat trick for a tie and another teammate scores for the GWG when in reality he wouldn't have the GWG without Stamkos hat trick. So I don't really rely on GWG since some of them can be an empty netter. A player that can score multiple goals in a game is really valuable and those players win games. That's why I also cited statistics on scoring points during key times in a game... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugor Hill Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 45 minutes ago, DefCon1 said: The thing is, its harder to find and get a 50 goal scorer as compared to a 20 goal scorer. And those 50 goal scorers are game breakers and would score goals when you need them to score goals whereas a 20 goal scorer would be less reliable and we already have that now with Hansen, Burrows, D. Sedin, Vrbata, Sutter and eventually Baertschi and Horvat. We should have a range of players in our lineup if we want to win the cup and having an elite goal scorer would compliment our lineup very well with the 2 way forwards we already have here and in the minors. I tend to agree with this. We have a room full of two way guys already, and Stamkos is not a defensive liability as far as I can tell. We don't have an elite offensive talent in our system and the chances of drafting and developing one within the next couple of years is not great as the Sedins will guarantee that we won't be a basement team (and that's a good thing) drafting top 5's. We have an opportunity to turn us into a consistently competitive team for the next 7 years and all it costs is cap space. But I do share some others' concern of his declining numbers... is it because he is not happy in Tampa or is it because he has never really fully recovered from his broken leg? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boddy604 Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 I'm on board for getting Stamkos but I'd rather see us get something like Yandle + Okposo for basically the same cap hit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 26, 2016 Share Posted January 26, 2016 10 minutes ago, Boddy604 said: I'm on board for getting Stamkos but I'd rather see us get something like Yandle + Okposo for basically the same cap hit. Ditto on both counts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goblix Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 20 minutes ago, Boddy604 said: I'm on board for getting Stamkos but I'd rather see us get something like Yandle + Okposo for basically the same cap hit. probably more than Stamkos TBH, Yandle at least get 6 or 7 m and Okposo probably around the 6m area as well.. I dont really want to pay 29 year old UFA defencemen a long term premium type of contract which is why I wouldn't want Yandle or Byfuglien. Good players but not at 5-6 year terms which they are likely looking for.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Crossbar Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 If the plan is to make a cup run with the Sedins, even if they extend one or two years, landing a Stamkos caliber player is a must in the short term. So, why not make a play for him? That would put Stamkos in his prime with the Sedins on the decline but effective with guys like McCann, Virtanen, Hutton, Shink, Gaunce, Pedan, and others only getting better. That I can see as a fairly quick route to bigger contention in say 3 to 4 years. Still need to make a big FA splash if we're looking relatively short term to be a legit contender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugor Hill Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 8 minutes ago, goblix said: probably more than Stamkos TBH, Yandle at least get 6 or 7 m and Okposo probably around the 6m area as well.. I dont really want to pay 29 year old UFA defencemen a long term premium type of contract which is why I wouldn't want Yandle or Byfuglien. Good players but not at 5-6 year terms which they are likely looking for.. Generally my logic as well. Stamkos is 25 turning 26. 7 years later he will still be 32 turning 33. Whoever signs him will have him through his prime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentSam Posted January 27, 2016 Share Posted January 27, 2016 I beleive we will have serious money available to make a solid offer.. BUT,. From what ive been reading lately about the incurrence of TAXES in different states and provinces.. This may be more difficult than what it seems. Its outrageous really. Perhaps the Aquillini's have holdings in the U.S. and something somehow, money has the possibility to be deferred that way.?? I know x-ownership (Mcaw) was from Washington State.. But wasn't the ORCA BAY franchise based out of Seattle?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.