canuck73_3 Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 1 minute ago, Down by the River said: Not everyone can be Dylan Larkin. We've learned over the years the importance of patience and allowing prospects to develop. McCann and Virtanen were victims of the system (too good for CHL, too young for AHL). A chance for McCann to bulk up over the summer and transition between NHL and AHL this season would have been much more informative of his future success than a rookie season that really shouldn't have been his rookie season. Not saying he has to be Dylan Larkin at all, just severely overrated on cdc. He'll be a good player in time Gudbranson is a better player in a position we need to fill. We had the depth at C to make this move and traded a quality player and a lottery ticket for a better player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrago Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 1 minute ago, iinatcc said: But isn't that a bit redundant? The team still needs an offensive defenseman or, at least, an offensive minded one. Redundant I don't think so. We still need a offensive defenseman but offwnsive defenseman are usually smaller would be nice to pair them with a beast of a defensive defenseman to keep players honest. Benning is not afraid to make trades so if he can find an offensive defenseman he will move whomever he needs to to make room I'm sure. For now our defense is harder to play against. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maniwaki Canuck Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 7 minutes ago, TheSnipeshow91 said: Very similar to the Griffin Reinhart trade. 16th OA (Barzal) + 33rd OA to NYI for a young top 4 shut down dman in Reinhart. McCann (24th OA) + 33rd OA for a similar player in Gudbranson. Late rnd picks are there to even the trade out. In my opinion, we did better than the Oilers because a RHD is harder to find nowadays. Gudbranson fits our youth movement as he is still only 24, only a year older than Hutton. At his peak he can possibly be a top pair shut down dman who can add 20-30 points from the blueline. Tanev 2.0 anyone? Agreed because Griffin Reinhart will never be as good as Gudbranson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreyHatnDart Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 1 minute ago, thrago said: Redundant I don't think so. We still need a offensive defenseman but offwnsive defenseman are usually smaller would be nice to pair them with a beast of a defensive defenseman to keep players honest. Benning is not afraid to make trades so if he can find an offensive defenseman he will move whomever he needs to to make room I'm sure. For now our defense is harder to play against. It's obviously a big ask, but Hutton was extremely good last year for his rookie campaign in that regard. Gudbranson fills a giant hole on our d line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Western Red Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 7 minutes ago, cbdoubleu said: Now can we force Edler to waive and get a 2016 2nd back? Edler is worth much more than that. If anything, he's worth way more to us now as that 1D. Maybe he isn't going to be asked to play away from his nature, he can focus on the 40pt. thing again. He and Benny. Loving our D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 6 minutes ago, TheSnipeshow91 said: Very similar to the Griffin Reinhart trade. 16th OA (Barzal) + 33rd OA to NYI for a young top 4 shut down dman in Reinhart. McCann (24th OA) + 33rd OA for a similar player in Gudbranson. Late rnd picks are there to even the trade out. In my opinion, we did better than the Oilers because a RHD is harder to find nowadays. Gudbranson fits our youth movement as he is still only 24, only a year older than Hutton. At his peak he can possibly be a top pair shut down dman who can add 20-30 points from the blueline. Tanev 2.0 anyone? Gudbranson > Reinhart though... One made the NHL at 19. Is now a solid player at 24. The other at 22 still has yet to find & deal with NHL game speed. Plus Reinhart is not as physical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maniwaki Canuck Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 2 minutes ago, numb3r 16 said: Here I'll take Willie's word for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guntrix Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 4 minutes ago, Fanuck said: Canner was unlikely to ever play here as a center and as a winger both Virts and Boeser are ahead of him on the depth chart imo when speaking of younger wingers. JB, as strange as it sounds, actually traded from a position of slight strength and got back an asset this franchise doesn't have at any level. I find this reason hard to justify. He's 19! In in the centre role, Henrik is gone in a few years and Granlund is easily passable. We also dont have very many good young wingers. Virtanen is passable and please tell me how Boeser is ahead of him on the depth chart when he's never played for the Canucks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollumpus Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 31 minutes ago, LolClarkson said: This is without Hamhuis too.. So we traded Hodgson, Mallet and Howden for a top 4 25 year old NHL D man Win! regards, G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonecoldstevebernier Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 I don't mind the player exchange here, Gudbranson fills a big need on the team going forward. What I don't like is how we keep having to chip in draft picks in all of these trades. For a team that's supposed to be rebuilding and accumulating young talent, giving away picks in every trade to sweeten the deal isn't a good way to do it. Especially when you consider that the 2nd is pretty much a low first this year. But, given the relative logjam on defense now, maybe there's a way there for JB to recoup some picks before the draft. I wouldn't hold my breath though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twilight Sparkle Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 5 minutes ago, sexpanther said: Really like this trade. Addresses a need and who know what the 2nd would have brought. Excited for the off season!! exactly. last year everyone was crying that we need defense and now we got a guy who can play top minutes, he's young, tough, can skate and move the puck. i'm also excited for what's more to come. i'm sure benning's not done Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selkirkcraig Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 1 hour ago, Derp... said: The reason Florida traded Gudbranson is because of the play of Matheson, so clearly they think this guy is or will be the better player, otherwise they could have just traded him no http://www.eliteprospects.com/player.php?player=76333 I don't understand how either side is thinking at this point hahaha... haha. baha. wah if you read the link to the panther's gm's response, he mentioned money a few times, so perhaps that also was a big factor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby_Lu1ngo Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 having a guy like gudbranson allows us to give a guy like subban a look and protect his deficiencies. you have to wonder.... benning and chiarelli are friends. mybe chiarelli was honest in saying he wants tkachuk if he keeps pick. At the lottery he had high rise for MT and said they need a cerebral net front guy like him and spoke of him ahead of others. Edm may be deciding between tkachuk and joelevi meaning we are looking at dubois which makes mccann even more expendable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 So; is this basically a vote of confidence for Granlund? Who we paid Shinkaruk > a near identical early 20's 1st round draft pick for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FijianCanuck Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 1 minute ago, selkirkcraig said: if you read the link to the panther's gm's response, he mentioned money a few times, so perhaps that also was a big factor. Read that gudbranson looking near 5mil a season! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guntrix Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 Just now, FijianCanuck said: Read that gudbranson looking near 5mil a season! With Jim's salary negotiating abilities, we'll give him 7! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Western Red Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 1 minute ago, FijianCanuck said: Read that gudbranson looking near 5mil a season! We can afford it. Clearly a huge factor in why we got him for so little. Benning is amazing for getting this done now, before the draft. I'm shocked and want to send him flowers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selkirkcraig Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 1 minute ago, guntrix said: With Jim's salary negotiating abilities, we'll give him 7! haha. that sounds about right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck73_3 Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 1 minute ago, guntrix said: With Jim's salary negotiating abilities, we'll give him 7! Based on what exactly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 It's definitely harder to judge these trades from an outsiders perspective when you have followed guys like Shinkaruk and McCann since they were drafted. I think that's the difference between people who can look at this trade with an even keel and those who can't. For me I remember watching these guys play all the way from junior, and rooted them on all the way to the NHL. As a fan it's hard to invest that much to see them continually dealt before they really get a chance to shine here. Maybe i should just stop following our prospects so closely... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.