Lonny_Bohonos_14 Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 18 hours ago, Hoosierdaddy said: Pry Stone from Ottawa and then offer him to the Peg to play with Scheifele. They are clearly great together. Or we could just keep Stone. The guy is slick with the mitts. Creates lots of turnovers and that shot. He's signed cheap right now, so I doubt we could pry him away, but he would look good in blue and green Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownUndaCanuck Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 Probably 5th overall pick + A-grade prospect + top-6 winger. For example, 5th + McCann + Hansen for the 1st overall pick. I'd do that in a heartbeat for Matthews. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green Building Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 4 minutes ago, DownUndaCanuck said: Probably 5th overall pick + A-grade prospect + top-6 winger. For example, 5th + McCann + Hansen for the 1st overall pick. I'd do that in a heartbeat for Matthews. Lamoriello just blocked JB's number. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 23 minutes ago, DownUndaCanuck said: Probably 5th overall pick + A-grade prospect + top-6 winger. For example, 5th + McCann + Hansen for the 1st overall pick. I'd do that in a heartbeat for Matthews. Not bad, but two things. 1) I think it would take a little more than that, say...the 33rd pick also. And 2) Hansen is likely only a top 6 winger for us, not anyone else. Right now, the only true top six winger we have is Daniel, though Baertschi could get there with another year of similar improvement. Realistically, acquiring that pick would be more costly than we could afford. D**n it!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Putgolzin Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 2 hours ago, Green Building said: Lamoriello just blocked JB's number. Yup. For #1 or #2 I think the only way we could do it is 5th overall plus massive overpayment to the tune of Virtanen and McCann. For those who want to say that's massive overpayment, I've already agreed. But that's the scale of what it would take. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoosierdaddy Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 3 hours ago, Lonny_Bohonos_14 said: Or we could just keep Stone. The guy is slick with the mitts. Creates lots of turnovers and that shot. He's signed cheap right now, so I doubt we could pry him away, but he would look good in blue and green Agreed. I was just thinking what might entice Winnipeg. I'd be happy with Stone in the Canucks mix. Never know ... new gm and new coach. They may want to put their stamp on things. Not sure what we could offer to get the conversation going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 22 hours ago, Hoosierdaddy said: Pry Stone from Ottawa and then offer him to the Peg to play with Scheifele. They are clearly great together. Jets will not be trading the second overall. When you have two players that are being debated who should go 1st overall, the Jets are looking at an elite prospect coming in. And aside from just the pure talent they would be missing out on, there is a HUGE factor that people, in general, neglect to see; and that's the added merchandising revenue that will be brought in for said team (in this case, Winnipeg). The amount of jerseys that will be sold in the off-season for Laine (or Matthews if for some reason Toronto doesn't select him) is astronomically more than what Mark Stone (or any other player for that matter) would bring in. Not happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoosierdaddy Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 25 minutes ago, Monty said: Jets will not be trading the second overall. When you have two players that are being debated who should go 1st overall, the Jets are looking at an elite prospect coming in. And aside from just the pure talent they would be missing out on, there is a HUGE factor that people, in general, neglect to see; and that's the added merchandising revenue that will be brought in for said team (in this case, Winnipeg). The amount of jerseys that will be sold in the off-season for Laine (or Matthews if for some reason Toronto doesn't select him) is astronomically more than what Mark Stone (or any other player for that matter) would bring in. Not happening. Obviously Stone on his own would not seal the deal. Stone, the 5th and something gets you talking. The Jets won't be making a decision based on merchandising though. It'll be a hockey decision. They are hugely popular and extremely well supported in their community. They will make the best move for their on ice product. If marketing was a consideration then you could easily argue they'd make the move to pick up another piece of two AND add Tkachuk. They'd sell more Tkachuk jerseys than Laine jerseys if marketing was a factor! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 9 minutes ago, Hoosierdaddy said: Obviously Stone on his own would not seal the deal. Stone, the 5th and something gets you talking. The Jets won't be making a decision based on merchandising though. It'll be a hockey decision. They are hugely popular and extremely well supported in their community. They will make the best move for their on ice product. Yup, which is why I didn't say merchandising alone, let alone was it my first point. Matthews/Laine>>>>>>>>>>>>>anything the Canucks could offer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 The only real chance Vancouver has at a top-3 pick is to suck again next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 43 minutes ago, Hoosierdaddy said: They'd sell more Tkachuk jerseys than Laine jerseys if marketing was a factor! As for this, FALSE. It's funny how everyone outside of Manitoba believes Winnipeg has this huge hard-on for Keith Tkachuk; and therefore, must have one for his son. NOTE: People in Winnipeg actually hate Keith Tkachuk. The guy was a massive d-bag when he was out in public, and word spread like wildfire about his antics. This was before social media. Also, the Jets don't need Tkachuk, as they are set on LW. Take one look at their RW depth, and they are in serious trouble. That is, until Laine drops in their lap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green Building Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 5 hours ago, nzan said: Yup. For #1 or #2 I think the only way we could do it is 5th overall plus massive overpayment to the tune of Virtanen and McCann. For those who want to say that's massive overpayment, I've already agreed. But that's the scale of what it would take. Agreed. He'd possibly ask for more even. That's why those high picks are moved so infrequently, and even less so when there are no rumours of the team that owns them putting the feelers out, let alone actively shopping them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Putgolzin Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 13 minutes ago, Green Building said: Agreed. He'd possibly ask for more even. That's why those high picks are moved so infrequently, and even less so when there are no rumours of the team that owns them putting the feelers out, let alone actively shopping them. If we could do 5th-McCann-Virtanen for Laine I'd probably pull the trigger (understanding that a line of Dubois-McCann-Virtanen could be a HUGE force in 3 years). They'd probably ask for Horvat as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowichan Canuck Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 On May 10, 2016 at 2:21 PM, nzan said: If we could do 5th-McCann-Virtanen for Laine I'd probably pull the trigger (understanding that a line of Dubois-McCann-Virtanen could be a HUGE force in 3 years). They'd probably ask for Horvat as well. If Laine was a projected #1C I would, but I wouldn't for Laine as a winger...just not worth a whole group of top prospects in my opinion. I don't even think I would for Matthews. Potential 2018-19 L1. Tkachuk/Dubuois-McCann-Boeser L2. Baerschi-Horvat-Virtanen That's lot to give up for anyone, leaving more holes. If Stamkos signs with us, that would help me accepting an overpayment for Laine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Putgolzin Posted May 17, 2016 Share Posted May 17, 2016 22 minutes ago, Cowichan Canuck said: If Laine was a projected #1C I would, but I wouldn't for Laine as a winger...just not worth a whole group of top prospects in my opinion. I don't even think I would for Matthews. Potential 2018-19 L1. Tkachuk/Dubuois-McCann-Boeser L2. Baerschi-Horvat-Virtanen That's lot to give up for anyone, leaving more holes. If Stamkos signs with us, that would help me accepting an overpayment for Laine Yeah, I guess my reasoning has more to do with getting one incredibly gifted top-line superstar; and would it be worth giving up three potential stars to get that. I guess I just think back ten years and think about comparables. If you were to dream that Laine could become Ovechkin-esque and the three aforementioned could become what they'll realistically become...I think you'd take Laine. If Laine were only to become Rick Nash and Tkackuk became Tkachuk, McCann became Sakic and Virtanen became Lucic...I guess you'd stick with what you've got! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GB5 Posted May 18, 2016 Share Posted May 18, 2016 I like how well Tampa Bay is playing this year without Stamkos in the lineup.....what I'm getting at is that you don't need a superstar player to win the cup but you do need some pretty good players. Tampa has Hedman, no equivalents available in the draft and a great goalie who we may already have so we need to stay the course and continue to develop the depth in our youth. Therefore, no to trading depth, just keep building a core of very good young players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nergish Posted May 18, 2016 Share Posted May 18, 2016 On May 17, 2016 at 9:46 AM, Cowichan Canuck said: If Laine was a projected #1C I would, but I wouldn't for Laine as a winger...just not worth a whole group of top prospects in my opinion. I don't even think I would for Matthews. Potential 2018-19 L1. Tkachuk/Dubuois-McCann-Boeser L2. Baerschi-Horvat-Virtanen That's lot to give up for anyone, leaving more holes. If Stamkos signs with us, that would help me accepting an overpayment for Laine No guarantees McCann becomes a 1C, he has a long way to go before we can start thinking that way. But Dubois/Tkachuk and Boeser on either wing looks pretty nice. I guess it's the same for any team trying to transition to a younger core... but we just simply don't know what we have yet in guys like McCann and Boeser, etc. They do look nice though. But Brock's frame and skills should translate to the NHL, I just want to see him play pro hockey so we have a better idea of how good he really is. He makes college hockey look pretty easy though... and that's no small feat. Signing Stamkos would change everything for us, of course. So unreal to imagine Stammer on a line with the twins in year 1, trading off the 1C role with Henrik. I don't know how we'd sell him on Vancouver though, as any potential linemates would be super young and need a lot of developing outside the Sedins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowichan Canuck Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 On May 18, 2016 at 0:29 PM, nergish said: No guarantees McCann becomes a 1C, he has a long way to go before we can start thinking that way. But Dubois/Tkachuk and Boeser on either wing looks pretty nice. I guess it's the same for any team trying to transition to a younger core... but we just simply don't know what we have yet in guys like McCann and Boeser, etc. They do look nice though. But Brock's frame and skills should translate to the NHL, I just want to see him play pro hockey so we have a better idea of how good he really is. He makes college hockey look pretty easy though... and that's no small feat. Signing Stamkos would change everything for us, of course. So unreal to imagine Stammer on a line with the twins in year 1, trading off the 1C role with Henrik. I don't know how we'd sell him on Vancouver though, as any potential linemates would be super young and need a lot of developing outside the Sedins. Definitely no guarantee McCann becomes a #1C (I said potential 2018-19) but he is the closest thing to a #1C prospect we have at this moment. Even if we draft Dubois, I think a line with McCann as the two way/playmaking centre between Dubois and Boeser, as those two seem to have more of a shoot first mentality. I don't know Dubois' game enough if he can play-make at centre, or will he limit Boeser. Personally i don't think shoot first centres mesh well with sniper wingers. Either way, all three can really shoot the puck, and I think McCann is the best passer of the three, so this only makes sense to me. Obviously all these young prospects need to reach their potential and we all know that is usually unlikey. If we sign Stamkos, I think that makes McCann expendable. If we signed Stamkos, I would also prefer Tkachuk. Unfortunately the draft is one week before free agency opens, so that is backwards to plan. If we sign Stamkos, splitting the twins would only make sense. Massive chance this never happens, but for 2016-17... Daniel-Stamkos-Hansen Baerschi-Hank-Sutter Etem-Horvat-Virtanen I like it personally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 On May 10, 2016 at 5:19 AM, DownUndaCanuck said: Probably 5th overall pick + A-grade prospect + top-6 winger. For example, 5th + McCann + Hansen for the 1st overall pick. I'd do that in a heartbeat for Matthews. I think it's for the third pick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowichan Canuck Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 On May 18, 2016 at 10:24 AM, GarthButcher5 said: I like how well Tampa Bay is playing this year without Stamkos in the lineup.....what I'm getting at is that you don't need a superstar player to win the cup but you do need some pretty good players. Tampa has Hedman, no equivalents available in the draft and a great goalie who we may already have so we need to stay the course and continue to develop the depth in our youth. Therefore, no to trading depth, just keep building a core of very good young players. Tampa has not won the cup though. They have only beat Detroit and NYI, who were probably two of the worst teams in the playoff picture. In my opinion the last time a team without a superstar won the cup was Carolina in 2006, and they had E Stall who had 100 points that season. 2006 Stall? 2007 Pronger/Neidermayer/Selanne 2008 Lidstrom/Zett/Datsyuk 2009 Crosby/Malkin 2010 Toews/Kane/ etc etc etc 2011 Chara/Thomas (arguable, but dominant)/Bergeron 2012 Doughty/Kopitar 2013 Chicago again 2014 La again 2015 Chicago again 2016 Probably SJ or Pitt both have superstars (STL and TB not so much) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.