Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Trade] Canucks trade Hunter Shinkaruk to Flames for Markus Granlund


Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, GiveEmTheCan said:

Yup. Gaunce is good as gone. If JB thought Shinkaruk for Granlund is fair value, I shudder to think what Gaunce will fetch.

 

What a reckless, impatient, stupid man.

well I predict Gaunce and a 5th for Brandon Prust

 

oh wait, some one will have to sign Ol Prusty in the off season first

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Mustapha said:

Marty put up huge numbers in college.

He was small, but even if the Flames couldnt predict he was a HOF player, they made a grave error by releasing him for nothing. The guy literally cost them a Cup 4 years later

I had the misfortune of living in Calgary at both of those times.  When MSL came up originally for the Flames, the fans loved him and voiced very similar frustrations about them sending the one guy who could score on the Flames back down to the minors, never mind getting rid of him.  He actually showed quite a bit in the NHL early on but had some holes in his game and the Flames were a big goon squad in a trap league at that time.

 

Back on topic Shink seems like a nice kid.  People get emotionally attached to prospects that we draft and watch grow up.  This is why it is often referred to as doing things the right way when home grown prospects are the driving force of the team.  Again as I said before, I don't really know enough about Granlund at this point but reading this thread tells me he scored at at least as good a pace as Shink at the same age and is probably a more complete player and has more versatility as he is a centre that can play wing.

 

Hope it works out for the Canucks and Shink but not the Flames.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, WHL rocks said:

Well yah, he wasn't good enough. 

 

Why would Benning not give him a chance if he was good enough? I mean Hutton was a Gillis pick and he's been here since day 1. 

 

IF benning brought up Shink he'd be exposed for his lack of strength and lack or 2 way game. Then you'd have to trade him for nothing. At least we got a serviceable player back. 

 

Kinda like the Etem trade, at least we got something back. Look even IF a few of the other team managements thought Shink was what many on CDC believe we'd be trading him for Drouin or Jones or Eberle or Yakupov right now. 

 

Like I said a few pages back in this thread, this is the highest trade value Shinkaruk would ever have had as a Canuck. We got a  good player who will play for us in the NHL.

actually we did in the preseason two years ago....he impressed everyone... he took a small step backwards last year and surged in the ahl this year. burrows and the twins where impressed with him...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BCNeil said:

Why are people comparing AHL stats?

Because we were never givena  chance to see Shinkaruk play in the NHL

 

Screw statements about him not being able to produce against bigger bodies.

 

They said the same thing about Kane Gaudreau and more and they've done fine while being a shade smaller than Shinkaruk who would have been paired with defensively responsible line mates.

 

All we now have or will ever have at this moment is an AHL comparison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Warhippy said:

Actual comparable to within .13 ppg

 

Granlund:  Age 22:  107 gp  72 points

Shinkaruk:  Age 21:  119 gp  70 points.

 

Difference is Shinkaruk is a year younger and did last year on one leg while recovering from major surgery

right, Granlunds are better........so why is Shink going to be some sure fire offensive player, but Granlund is not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And another thing is, this organization really lacks players with huge upside.

 

I get the line of thinking at times that "well atleast this guy could be a solid two-way 3rd liner if things dont pan out, vs the boom/bust top 6 forward prospect"

 

But we have more than enough of those kind of players, you need to take a chanc e on big upside/boom-bust guys from time to time, this organization has played it safe with certain moves too many times in recent years IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not usually one to make judgments on a trade, but this one doesn't seem like a good one. 

I think Shink will turn out to be a solid top 6 player for Calgary and Granlund will be moved in a couple years for essentially nothing. I can't wrap my head around what is happening with this team. This is one of those trades that'll bite you big time in the long-term. I feel like Aquilini forced Benning to make a trade for the team short term. I highly doubt they wanted to move their best prospect (on Utica) for a maximum bottom 6 player. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Yotes said:

no rumblings of us moving granlund in that deal, he is taking mccann spot vs ottawa i assume. I dont mind getting granlund I just dont think it was wise to move our top scorer to do it, without giving him a good shot in the nhl first

I can't believe they didn't parlay that move into a defenceman.  I'm still groaning at the Grabner trade and the Weiss trade (what did we get for Diaz)?     never mind Kassian and Hodgeson, etc..

Just a long history of not really getting the bang for their buck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, stawns said:

as a poster with hockey iq, why do you think it's a horrible trade?

Because Shinkaruk is one of our best prospects right now. Granlund is a player that seems to have been sliding down Calgary's depth chart for a couple years.

 

We also don't need more centers, whereas we could use more scoring wingers. Granlund also isn't really an upgrade over McCann or Vey, so he doesn't improve that department and makes us even softer.

 

I just hate to see us develop players like Shinkaruk only to trade them before giving them a shot in the NHL. I have a feeling we just sold low on Shinkaruk which isn't gonna do much to help us in the long run.

 

Seems to me Benning was just itching to make a trade and made a bad one for the sake of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Winter Soldier said:

Remember at this time last year when people were complaining that Baertschi was damaged goods and that we should never have traded for him? I don't really see many people whistling that tune this season.

I still think Baertschi is ok, not that great yet.  He would get destroyed in the Western Conference playoffs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

For the record, people are allowed to be unhappy with this deal.

 

Assuming Granlund hits his ceiling, he may be a solid middle center in the league one day.

 

Assuming Shinkaruk reaches his ceiling, he could be a top six winger that could pop anywhere from 20-30 goals in a season when in his prime.

 

Considering what our lineup is, I know which player I'd rather have.

 

 

Also, and this is something that hasn't really been brought up, what about the marketability of each player? Virtually everyone has to agree that Shinkaruk is the "sexier" of the two players. Had he had a chance to reach his potential here, he could have been the type of player to put butts in seats and sell a ton of merch.

 

again, based on what?  Draft position?  Gut feeling?  It's certainly not actual stats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, oldnews said:

The usual suspects blowing their headgaskets.

 

Very entertaining.

I guess some of us don't always blindly agree with every trade jb or mg does/did like you always have. Shink was a speedy winger with a good shot and we traded him for a bottom 6 centre.

 

Sedin

Sutter

Horvat

 

Sure McCann can go back down but did we really trade Shink for a 4th line centre?

 

And sure we can move Granlund to the wing but if so seems like a pointless trade. There must be more to come otherwise the trade is baffling given we could have given shink a chance or at least look to add a young dman not yet another centreman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DrJockitch said:

I had the misfortune of living in Calgary at both of those times.  When MSL came up originally for the Flames, the fans loved him and voiced very similar frustrations about them sending the one guy who could score on the Flames back down to the minors, never mind getting rid of him.  He actually showed quite a bit in the NHL early on but had some holes in his game and the Flames were a big goon squad in a trap league at that time.

 

Back on topic Shink seems like a nice kid.  People get emotionally attached to prospects that we draft and watch grow up.  This is why it is often referred to as doing things the right way when home grown prospects are the driving force of the team.  Again as I said before, I don't really know enough about Granlund at this point but reading this thread tells me he scored at at least as good a pace as Shink at the same age and is probably a more complete player and has more versatility as he is a centre that can play wing.

 

Hope it works out for the Canucks and Shink but not the Flames.

trade will probably bite the Canucks in the a$$. 

 

I hope Shink does well, especially against us, so that I can see Benning's face when he realizes he's about to be fired. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • -Vintage Canuck- changed the title to [Trade] Canucks trade Hunter Shinkaruk to Flames for Markus Granlund
  • -SN- unpinned this topic

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...