[Report] Benning willing to get nothing in return for Hamhuis/Vrbata if it means getting kids playoff expereience

[Boudrias]

25 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Benning is more into the 22-26 age range though. If he takes guys in his usual age range for vets he will be taking on lower ceiling types. There is nothing to suggest that Benning will make a trade for anyone who he does not think can play on our roster right away. He just really has no history of doing so.

 

Benning is very much in right now mode in his mindset. That much should be obvious to everyone. Pretty much every trade he has done is for a player or project that he thought could play on our team right away.

Highly doubt Benning doesn't take the BPA on any deal. The org had a brutal timeline development inventory when he took over. I can understand why he has to pick up players more ready to play. If the Twins surprised either by chosing to retire or were injured the Canucks would be in very tough shape, far more than what fans seem to think right now. That said if a draft prospect was on their radar as a possible pick I suspect they would go that route. The risk is always that the draftee might not be there or that they do not develop well. The older prospect has a far better/safer evaluation estimate.

[wallstreetamigo]

3 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

Highly doubt Benning doesn't take the BPA on any deal. The org had a brutal timeline development inventory when he took over. I can understand why he has to pick up players more ready to play. If the Twins surprised either by chosing to retire or were injured the Canucks would be in very tough shape, far more than what fans seem to think right now. That said if a draft prospect was on their radar as a possible pick I suspect they would go that route. The risk is always that the draftee might not be there or that they do not develop well. The older prospect has a far better/safer evaluation estimate.

Having a higher floor is not always better than having a higher ceiling though. I don't think it is prudent to ignore either side of that equation. The true saving grace for this organization - and probably a defining factor in whether or not a mini rebuild like this is successful - is still going to come down to adequately replacing the Sedins as top line players at some point. I see no one currently in our system or on our NHL team who is anywhere near a sure thing to do so although I am hopeful.

 

This team likely needs one or two of those cant miss type players through the draft (ideally a top line forward and a true elite level #1 dman) if they truly want an accelerated rebuild to be successful. I just don't see any of these guys Benning is picking up as being the answer to those two significant holes that are only going to get bigger over the next few years.

 

I am not trying to suggest anything other than taking the safe route every time often leads to mediocrity. Game breaking players are still the difference makers in the NHL. And we need a few of those imo.

[Boudrias]

18 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Having a higher floor is not always better than having a higher ceiling though. I don't think it is prudent to ignore either side of that equation. The true saving grace for this organization - and probably a defining factor in whether or not a mini rebuild like this is successful - is still going to come down to adequately replacing the Sedins as top line players at some point. I see no one currently in our system or on our NHL team who is anywhere near a sure thing to do so although I am hopeful.

 

This team likely needs one or two of those cant miss type players through the draft (ideally a top line forward and a true elite level #1 dman) if they truly want an accelerated rebuild to be successful. I just don't see any of these guys Benning is picking up as being the answer to those two significant holes that are only going to get bigger over the next few years.

 

I am not trying to suggest anything other than taking the safe route every time often leads to mediocrity. Game breaking players are still the difference makers in the NHL. And we need a few of those imo.

I totally agree about the top draft picks but I don't consider a 5th round pick for a d-man who is playing well in the KHL as an abandonment of that idea. I fully expect 2 First Round picks this summer. Hamhuis will get us that pick. Hopefully we get the #5 pick using the Van pick and who knows where the other will be. I also expect that the 5th rounder will be replaced with vet movement by TDL.

[wallstreetamigo]

Just now, Boudrias said:

I totally agree about the top draft picks but I don't consider a 5th round pick for a d-man who is playing well in the KHL as an abandonment of that idea. I fully expect 2 First Round picks this summer. Hamhuis will get us that pick. Hopefully we get the #5 pick using the Van pick and who knows where the other will be. I also expect that the 5th rounder will be replaced with vet movement by TDL.

I already stated I thought this was a good low risk high potential reward trade. Of course, the most being possibly given up here being a 4th or 5th is a bit different than 2nds too. 

 

Benning said today he is not looking at moving vets for picks, just "hockey trades". I doubt he picks up another 1st although it would buy him more time with the players he picks than it will with guys who are waiver eligible next year.

[Barry_Wilkins]

This Monday will give us the best indication yet of Benning's mid- to long-term focus.

 

He has to go for draft choices over higher-floor, more developed picks. As wallstreet correctly points out, we need game changers. Those are almost always undeveloped quantities (the draft). GMs don't usually trade away 21 or 22 year-olds who have high ceilings, and who have been trending upwards in their development.

 

It'll most likely delay further the chance for a competitive team, but that's the bullet management (and fans) have to bite. I just hope Benning and Linden aren't looking over their shoulders at ownership,  opting for the accelerated, "safe" route to a rebuild.

[Gaudette Celly]

14 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Benning is very much in right now mode in his mindset. That much should be obvious to everyone.

If that were true he'd be trading for proven players like Ladd and resigning Hamhuis.  The players he's been getting are not NHL-established but very near -- Baertschi, Etem, Vey, Pedan, Granlund, etc. -- all guys with the equivalent of a year or less NHL experience.

 

So pretty obviously NOT "right now mode".

[86Viking]

Vrbata would garner some interest from nashville I presume. I wonder if a vrbata for rights to Vesey swap could happen. they risk losing him if he walks as a FA. We risk that also, but maybe Benning or Weisbrod have some inclination they can sign him.

 

If he walks we get a 3rd round pick in 2017

[Hugor Hill]

With the way things are going, we might just not get anything for Hamhuis and Vrbata because they might not get traded at all.

 

Well done.

[Canorth]

1 minute ago, Hugor Hill said:

With the way things are going, we might just not get anything for Hamhuis and Vrbata because they might not get traded at all.

 

Well done.

Or they DO get trade and we get EVERYTHING for them.

 

So many options right now

[SealTheDeal]

. . .

 

Current chance the Canucks make the playoffs based on sportsclubstats projections is 5.8%. That's after the odds went up 2.1% following the win over Ottawa.

 

Not dealing players for picks and prospects is bad asset management. At least in Vrbata case. Hamhuis may not want to move, in which case I hope they are trying to extend him for cheap.

[hockeyking]

On 2016-02-25 at 10:27 AM, wallstreetamigo said:

Hopefully that means prospects for vets. If we keep Hamhuis and Vrbata to watch them walk away for nothing I am not sure my heart can take it lol

It means prospects that can play in the nhl this year or next like baert, Ganlund, ect. So Hamhuis for a 1st and 2nd no go but hamuis for pokka yes. Similarly for Vrbata.

[wallstreetamigo]

23 minutes ago, hockeyking said:

It means prospects that can play in the nhl this year or next like baert, Ganlund, ect. So Hamhuis for a 1st and 2nd no go but hamuis for pokka yes. Similarly for Vrbata.

Dangerous to pile on more waiver eligible type prospects so at the very least I hope the prospects have a year or two of waiver exempt status left in case they aren't ready.

[Mike Vanderhoek]

1 hour ago, SealTheDeal said:

. . .

 

Current chance the Canucks make the playoffs based on sportsclubstats projections is 5.8%. That's after the odds went up 2.1% following the win over Ottawa.

 

Not dealing players for picks and prospects is bad asset management. At least in Vrbata case. Hamhuis may not want to move, in which case I hope they are trying to extend him for cheap.

I agree that in the case of pending free agents if you don't obtain an asset for them it is poor asset management, in regards to players with clauses like Hamhuis you also can't hold it against them for declining to waive a clause.

 

I don't think Hamhuis is in the team's plans moving forward anyways, as much as I can't get a good read on whether he will be traded or not I think it's a mistake to keep him for the remainder of the season if he is not coming back next season.

[hockeyking]

Just now, wallstreetamigo said:

Dangerous to pile on more waiver eligible type prospects so at the very least I hope the prospects have a year or two of waiver demotion left in case they aren't ready.

We don't have many on defense as much as I love bega he would clear waivers. We aren't going to resign bart and weber so no problem.

 

If we trade hamhuis next year we have like 4 roster spots open. Assuming we carry 8 defense-man. If you say pedan and larsen have to make the team that leaves 2 spots between begia, Tryamkin and who ever we acquire. Which is an reasonable amount of competition in my opinion.

 

As vey, cracknal and kenins are on the way out opens a roster spot for waiver eligible type prospect we might acquire for vrbata. It will only leave gernier as the sole prospect no waiver eligible (that might not clear waivers). But if he impresses we could easily just trade burrows.

 

[wallstreetamigo]

2 minutes ago, Mike Vanderhoek said:

I agree that in the case of pending free agents if you don't obtain an asset for them it is poor asset management, in regards to players with clauses like Hamhuis you also can't hold it against them for declining to waive a clause.

 

I don't think Hamhuis is in the team's plans moving forward anyways, as much as I can't get a good read on whether he will be traded or not I think it's a mistake to keep him for the remainder of the season if he is not coming back next season.

I agree Mike.