Boddy604 Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 1 minute ago, Hutton Wink said: Certainly not Shultz -- going to be $4mil+ to just qualify him next year. Give us the Oiler's 2nd pick along with him for our waiver boys. Schultz and Edmonton's 1st for Hamhuis. Lol. If we take him and his pending 4 million contract, we gotta get something extra in return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riffraff Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 Just now, KelownaCanucksFan said: The radio station in Edmonton here is saying that it's Vancouver Honestly if it's true I'll be waiting for jb to make a subsequent move that proves he's not retarded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrible.dee Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 The Oilers are one of the few teams I can think of who would actually benefit from having Higgins around, he's the consummate professional who can be counted on to do his job night after night, just the kind of guy they want influencing their juvenile roster, Weber? Could possibly be a killer on the PP with all the great play makers they have on that team. We get to check out a project D-man for a couple of months, Not sure if the dollars add up, but on paper I don't think this is too far fetched. It could be us, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KelownaCanucksFan Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 3 minutes ago, Boddy604 said: Schultz and Edmonton's 1st for Hamhuis. Lol. If we take him and his pending 4 million contract, we gotta get something extra in return. They can sign him to another contract without qualifying him for less money FYI on the FA market he would be lucky to get 1.5 edit: FYI the qualifying offer is only the cost to retain the players rights Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darius Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 There is a reason the oilers stink, and have stunk for a while, he has been a critical component on their D core - he cant play D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 Maybe Chiarelli is serious about the playoffs -- trading away Schultz could end their tank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrible.dee Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 56 minutes ago, CeeBee51 said: The big question would be..... What do we have to give up to get him? Higgins and Weber It's obvious And whoever is saving the other team money gets a 3rd or somthing This is not an earthshaker, Van doesn't want players hanging around that know they aren't going to play, And Edmonton has seen enough of Shultz, JB and TL on the other hand get to see if he's salvageable, The deal is obvious and painless, why wouldn't they? Unless the money doesn't work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KelownaCanucksFan Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 7 minutes ago, riffraff said: Honestly if it's true I'll be waiting for jb to make a subsequent move that proves he's not retarded. If it gets Higgins and Weber out of here would you say the same thing? I think not Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
86Viking Posted February 9, 2016 Author Share Posted February 9, 2016 link to this so called edm radio stirring the pot of Schultz going to Van? Also why are people so against it? yes the cap hit, yes the turnovers and D issues, but a 25 yr old rhd that we could use to help our PP. Especially if we can move out higgins, which like another poster said could benefit the oilers team. I am not advocating giving up alot. Provost- we wound be sending cap back and if they really want to move him they may retain part of it? We have had injuries and are likely making moves so I am sure we will and can easily make room for his 3.9m cap hit for this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Off_The_Schneid! Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 If it is to Vancouver they would have to wait for Hamhuis to be moved cap reasons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KelownaCanucksFan Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 6 minutes ago, Yotes said: link to this so called edm radio stirring the pot of Schultz going to Van? Also why are people so against it? yes the cap hit, yes the turnovers and D issues, but a 25 yr old rhd that we could use to help our PP. Especially if we can move out higgins, which like another poster said could benefit the oilers team. I am not advocating giving up alot. Provost- we wound be sending cap back and if they really want to move him they may retain part of it? We have had injuries and are likely making moves so I am sure we will and can easily make room for his 3.9m cap hit for this year. I was driving and heard it, they said it was from 2 reputable sources within the organization, it was TSN1260 (which the guys they have are 1000x better then Vancouver's, sucks to hear oilers crap but they do a great job of covering the league) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 21 minutes ago, terrible.dee said: Higgins and Weber It's obvious And whoever is saving the other team money gets a 3rd or somthing This is not an earthshaker, Van doesn't want players hanging around that know they aren't going to play, And Edmonton has seen enough of Shultz, JB and TL on the other hand get to see if he's salvageable, The deal is obvious and painless, why wouldn't they? Unless the money doesn't work Benning has proven to be a GM that respects players regardless of their place in the team. He'd prefer to keep a player playing in the league by trading them versus burying them in the minors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 If it did involve moving two of Higgins, Prust, and Weber as a cap swap, then it could be worthwhile. As a couple have alluded above, audition Schultz for the rest of the season and see if there's anything worth pursing. If not, then let him go -- same effect as not resigning Weber and Higgins (although Higgins has a year remaining) and near identical cap, or a bit over for Weber/Prust. I suspect they'd rather take Higgins, even with the extra year. He's be a useful add for them. Would also mean we're expecting to move at least one roster D-man shortly. In that regard, sure -- gitterdun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
86Viking Posted February 9, 2016 Author Share Posted February 9, 2016 I wonder since its tsn radio, would the word not get back to the big twitter guys in Bob, dreger etc? They usually post rumblings of guys on the move Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 31 minutes ago, KelownaCanucksFan said: The radio station in Edmonton here is saying that it's Vancouver What you actually heard was an ancient troll dialect commonly spoken in Edmonton and other parts of Alberta. They tend to leave the security of their underbridge lairs to permeate the airwaves with their lunacy. This too shall pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentSam Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 ... 1 minute ago, Hutton Wink said: If it did involve moving two of Higgins, Prust, and Weber as a cap swap, then it could be worthwhile. As a couple have alluded above, audition Schultz for the rest of the season and see if there's anything worth pursing. If not, then let him go -- same effect as not resigning Weber and Higgins (although Higgins has a year remaining) and near identical cap, or a bit over for Weber/Prust. I suspect they'd rather take Higgins, even with the extra year. He's be a useful add for them. Would also mean we're expecting to move at least one roster D-man shortly. In that regard, sure -- gitterdun. ... Move Shultz and Tanev ..to Isles for Hamonic or Toronto for 1st rounder Or Florida for Gudbranson or St Louis for Shattenkirk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beni Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 He's bad.. no thanks. Looks terrible on Edmonton, not an upgrade of what the canucks have had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugor Hill Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 Getting Schultz would be filling one piece of the puzzle moving forward. I wouldn't give more than a 2nd rounder though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 41 minutes ago, Warhippy said: The sad thing is, edmonton and the terrible track record they have, he should be a stand out for his apparent skill on more nights than not, he should be a point producer at the very least yet he's not. he's an average player on a bad terribly bad team. as such no interest I'd argue he's a decent point producer for his salary. At 30 to 40 pts per season average for a defenceman, he isn't bad at all in terms of production. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noseforthenet Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 10 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said: If it did involve moving two of Higgins, Prust, and Weber as a cap swap, then it could be worthwhile. As a couple have alluded above, audition Schultz for the rest of the season and see if there's anything worth pursing. If not, then let him go -- same effect as not resigning Weber and Higgins (although Higgins has a year remaining) and near identical cap, or a bit over for Weber/Prust. I suspect they'd rather take Higgins, even with the extra year. He's be a useful add for them. Would also mean we're expecting to move at least one roster D-man shortly. In that regard, sure -- gitterdun. That is the rub right there. That extra year on Higgins' contract. Canucks take the RFA rights and lose him for nothing if there isn't much to salvage. Higgins on 1 year remaining at 2.5 is better than a Schultz at 3-4mil + who you don't know what to do with. For us, we need the cap relief for next year. That loses 2.5 and then another bit for the rest of the year with Weber. Yeah, I would buy that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.