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

CBJ/Van #3 OA(Proposal/Discussion)


Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, coastal1 said:

All non sense, will NOT happen. And by the way, Clarkson's contract is structured so he can't be bought out because the cost is very high but the salary cap relief is minuscule. Such shenanigans as are suggested here is not the way you build a winner. Can you immagine a team for the next 3-4 years with a bunch of overpaid old players not interested in anything but their paycheque! That would be great for Virtanen, Horvat, Hutton and all the other young players.

Bury Clarkson's then or pay him to sit at home if he is a distraction on the ice or play him in 4th line role, if it is even Clarkson that the deal is for. Hartnell and Johnson would be no worse than Higgins, Vey, Vrbata taking a roster spot and would Johnson not compare to Weber's ice time?

 

Hartnell and Johnson's still save the BJ's over 10 mil a year in cap space and salary, maybe throw in the 2nd and a prospect.

Clarkson could end up sitting half the season like he did last years, he has some serious injury problems

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks gents for the input.

 

Wasn't hard-selling this at all. As per my first post, just looking for insights on what it may take to make this target doable.

 

CBJ has obvious weaknesses/troubles that another GM could help them out of(acting as further incentive), if they ensure it's worth the effort.

 

It's not just a fixation on #3OA, either. Perhaps Jones, Wennberg..don't know? Would simply figure something young(& valuable) from their team could be had, IF you take on some of their NMC-strife.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TheGuardian_ said:

Puljujarvi was mentioned by both Nylander and Laine in an interview to do with flashing their abb's, they both said Puljujarvi had the best abb's and that he is a work out machine. They both said it almost in unison so he must have impressed the hell out of them.

They said he was an animal.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TheGuardian_ said:

Bury Clarkson's then or pay him to sit at home if he is a distraction on the ice or play him in 4th line role, if it is even Clarkson that the deal is for. Hartnell and Johnson would be no worse than Higgins, Vey, Vrbata taking a roster spot and would Johnson not compare to Weber's ice time?

 

Hartnell and Johnson's still save the BJ's over 10 mil a year in cap space and salary, maybe throw in the 2nd and a prospect.

Clarkson could end up sitting half the season like he did last years, he has some serious injury problems

I would love Puljujarvi.

Moving up from Tkachuk/Dubois to Puljujarvi isn't worth Clarkson's contract in return.

Clarkson got:

4 points in 23 games last year

15 points in 61 games previous year

11 points in 60 games the year before that.

 

That cap money could go towards a solid free agent. 

I think Dubois/Tkachuk + one of FA Ericksson/Lucic/Okposo/1/2 of Stamkos is superior to;

Puljujarvi + Clarkson.

 

When I look at it this way, there is just no way I do that trade.If we also have to ad Hansen, or picks it just makes it way more hard to swallow.

 

No bloody way i even think of #5 + Horvat straight up for Puljujarvi. I would have a hard time even trading Horvat straight up for Puljujarvi (I'd still do it, but it would hurt). Yes that's crazy and you can call me a homer, I just don't want to lose Horvat. Once some dirty bastard gives Horvat a nasty cheap shot, his dark side will awaken. I notice he circles out of a lot of potential opportunities to lay a big hit, probably to hurry back into the play for defensive responsibilities. 

 

I would not want to play against a pissed off Bo Horvat. I think opponents will treat him like they used to treat Iginla...don't piss him off, not worth it. Nice guy, but he'd cave your face in if you cross the line.

 

You wait, it's coming, especially with Gudbranson, Tryamkin as back up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think people understand just how valuable the top 3 actually are.

 

There is no guarantee that Winnipeg selects Laine, as they also love from what they have seen from Puljujarvi. It's not as if there is a monster difference in talent between 2 & 3. However, there is a HUGE difference between 3 & 5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Monty said:

I don't think people understand just how valuable the top 3 actually are.

 

There is no guarantee that Winnipeg selects Laine, as they also love from what they have seen from Puljujarvi. It's not as if there is a monster difference in talent between 2 & 3. However, there is a HUGE difference between 3 & 5.

I'd bet my wife and children that Laine is picked by Winnipeg if available at #2. No way Winnipeg passes on Laine, why would you think this is a realistic possibility? It's like saying there is no guarantee Laine goes in the first round, which is true, but,it's that ridiculous of a statement to me.

He's the purest sniper prospect since Ovechkin.

He is more marketable than Puljujarvi, and that is very important to Winnipeg.

Winnipeg would take Laine #1 in my opinion, and it wouldn't shock me at all if Toronto did the same.

When an 18 year old wins MVP in a men's world tournament, and hates losing so much that he doesn't enjoy the personal honour, that says a sh*t load to me.

IMO the gap between 3&5 has closed, the gap between 1&2 has closed, the gap between 2&3 has opened. Not to mention Puljujarvi just had a knee surgery, which is probably very minor mind you.

 

Laine has Sakic's wrister, and Brett hull's one timer.

He's a nightmare, was created in HELL, and was made of METAL.

You can't kill the METAL.

 

So jealous of the two teams that might get Laine.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Cowichan Canuck said:

I'd bet my wife and children that Laine is picked by Winnipeg if available at #2. No way Winnipeg passes on Laine, why would you think this is a realistic possibility? It's like saying there is no guarantee Laine goes in the first round, which is true, but,it's that ridiculous of a statement to me.

He's the purest sniper prospect since Ovechkin.

He is more marketable than Puljujarvi, and that is very important to Winnipeg.

Winnipeg would take Laine #1 in my opinion, and it wouldn't shock me at all if Toronto did the same.

When an 18 year old wins MVP in a men's world tournament, and hates losing so much that he doesn't enjoy the personal honour, that says a sh*t load to me.

IMO the gap between 3&5 has closed, the gap between 1&2 has closed, the gap between 2&3 has opened. Not to mention Puljujarvi just had a knee surgery, which is probably very minor mind you.

 

Laine has Sakic's wrister, and Brett hull's one timer.

He's a nightmare, was created in HELL, and was made of METAL.

You can't kill the METAL.

 

So jealous of the two teams that might get Laine.

Haha, so you're a Laine superfan. I think most agree that Laine has superstar written all over him but most see as Puljujarvi as a sure thing, if that makes sense.

Different phrasing, the upside is higher with Laine but Puljujarvi is less likely to bust.

 

Anyways I agree Laine will go #2. I have no clue what CBJ is going to do though. Puljujarvi is good but if they think the 3-5 is close then maybe they want to trade down? maybe they straight up want young good players now that can contribute aka Horvat++

 

I could see Canucks inquiring about either possibility but definitely not both in the same deal.

Horvat + Hansen + CBJ 2nd (give back) ?? 

Would they do it? Would we do it?

Is that fair?

 

i dunno lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, goblix said:

Haha, so you're a Laine superfan. I think most agree that Laine has superstar written all over him but most see as Puljujarvi as a sure thing, if that makes sense.

Different phrasing, the upside is higher with Laine but Puljujarvi is less likely to bust.

 

Anyways I agree Laine will go #2. I have no clue what CBJ is going to do though. Puljujarvi is good but if they think the 3-5 is close then maybe they want to trade down? maybe they straight up want young good players now that can contribute aka Horvat++

 

I could see Canucks inquiring about either possibility but definitely not both in the same deal.

Horvat + Hansen + CBJ 2nd (give back) ?? 

Would they do it? Would we do it?

Is that fair?

 

i dunno lol

I'm not a fan of his at all, but it sure looks that way by my words.

Everytime I have seen him play I have been cheering for the opposite team (I'm one of the few who will cheer for the US over any EURO teams) as i see Finland as the biggest threat to Canada internationally.

 

WHC Team Canada, which is obviously much stronger than any NHL club, had to game plan to contain Laine, an 18 year old.

If team Canada has to do that, so will every NHL club, which will trickle down and make every other Winnipeg forward have more space or a weaker defensemen checking them. What will he be like as a 24 year old?

 

I don't see Laine being a bust, to me he is as sure fire as anyone I have ever seen. You don't lose those tools. He's huge. He is elite already. I can't remember being so impressed, and feared,  with an 18 year old undrafted player.

 

I think CBJ would take Horvat, Hansen and a 2nd. I wouldn't give that for Puljujarvi myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cowichan Canuck said:

I'd bet my wife and children that Laine is picked by Winnipeg if available at #2. No way Winnipeg passes on Laine, why would you think this is a realistic possibility? It's like saying there is no guarantee Laine goes in the first round, which is true, but,it's that ridiculous of a statement to me.

He's the purest sniper prospect since Ovechkin.

He is more marketable than Puljujarvi, and that is very important to Winnipeg.

Winnipeg would take Laine #1 in my opinion, and it wouldn't shock me at all if Toronto did the same.

When an 18 year old wins MVP in a men's world tournament, and hates losing so much that he doesn't enjoy the personal honour, that says a sh*t load to me.

IMO the gap between 3&5 has closed, the gap between 1&2 has closed, the gap between 2&3 has opened. Not to mention Puljujarvi just had a knee surgery, which is probably very minor mind you.

 

Laine has Sakic's wrister, and Brett hull's one timer.

He's a nightmare, was created in HELL, and was made of METAL.

You can't kill the METAL.

 

So jealous of the two teams that might get Laine.

 

 

 

 

Holy-Hyperbole, with a dash of tabasco!

 

Agreed, nostalgic for Salami, they won't go for Pulled-jerky. Winnipeg takes a trip down memory-Laine.

All this after TO selects Elmer Fudd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cowichan Canuck said:

I'm not a fan of his at all, but it sure looks that way by my words.

Everytime I have seen him play I have been cheering for the opposite team (I'm one of the few who will cheer for the US over any EURO teams) as i see Finland as the biggest threat to Canada internationally.

 

WHC Team Canada, which is obviously much stronger than any NHL club, had to game plan to contain Laine, an 18 year old.

If team Canada has to do that, so will every NHL club, which will trickle down and make every other Winnipeg forward have more space or a weaker defensemen checking them. What will he be like as a 24 year old?

 

I don't see Laine being a bust, to me he is as sure fire as anyone I have ever seen. You don't lose those tools. He's huge. He is elite already. I can't remember being so impressed, and feared,  with an 18 year old undrafted player.

 

I think CBJ would take Horvat, Hansen and a 2nd. I wouldn't give that for Puljujarvi myself.

It's unlikely that he'd bust but I guess what I'm truly getting at is that Laine has to be a scorer, he doesn't have any other intangible to the game. He's not a checker, known for his passing or his defensive prowess. Puljujarvi is known to be more cerebral and a better overall toolset. Same reason why Matthews will go #1.

But in terms of scoring Laine is hands down the best and that is far and away the best which makes him worth while.

 

Puljujarvi could likely be a successful 3rd liner. Laine wouldn''t be.

 

I think I would do the trade if we actually have a shot at Stamkos, but that would be a big leap of faith. We also would have our 5th pick for Dubois//Brown to refill the centre position. But that would still sting as we know Horvat can play

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, goblix said:

It's unlikely that he'd bust but I guess what I'm truly getting at is that Laine has to be a scorer, he doesn't have any other intangible to the game. He's not a checker, known for his passing or his defensive prowess. Puljujarvi is known to be more cerebral and a better overall toolset. Same reason why Matthews will go #1.

But in terms of scoring Laine is hands down the best and that is far and away the best which makes him worth while.

 

Puljujarvi could likely be a successful 3rd liner. Laine wouldn''t be.

 

I think I would do the trade if we actually have a shot at Stamkos, but that would be a big leap of faith. We also would have our 5th pick for Dubois//Brown to refill the centre position. But that would still sting as we know Horvat can play

I think he is an under-rated play maker. Yes you are correct that the two other top 3's are more cerebral and complete.

But offensively, 

As of right now, the NHL is extremely hard to score.

There are a bunch of really good 200 foot players, but Laine is a rarity in the offensive zone, you can't teach what he has, you can't create it.

He is gifted like very few. (Ovechkin, Sakic, Hull, Selanne gifted)

He will only get stronger.

He is overly comfortable in his own skin and seems to have the drive to be the best in the world.

He has the compete of a Canadian, the skill of a Russian, the pride of a world beating small nation underdog. 

He will take 2 players to contain him, but only your best two will do.

He will be Toronto's "Babe Ruth" Curse, preventing a cup until 2035 at minimum. 

 

Looking back at the draft, it could have been so much worse. Imagine if Edmonton got Laine, with McDavid? Might as well hybernate from hockey for a dozen years.

 

Im as confident in Laine as Laine is. He's the hockey rebirth of Cassius Clay. When he renames himself Muhammed Laine, I'll just shrug and say to myself "I get it."

 

I hate him, because I can't have him, that good. 

 

He has to be a scorer, and he will score, like a monkey in a monkey house with a basket full of bananas.

 

Not talking about Laine anymore, it hurts too much.

 

Hyperboles?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Kraken70 said:

I like the pick we have. We're still going to get a great player, no matter how it shakes out, and we don't have to pick up any crap contracts. Sounds like a win.

Its interesting, in a normal draft year, the guy that we pick at #5 this year, would probably have a good chance of going 1st overall! Really deep 1st round!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, VegasCanuck said:

Its interesting, in a normal draft year, the guy that we pick at #5 this year, would probably have a good chance of going 1st overall! Really deep 1st round!

I remember when we dropped to 5. Everyone was so bummed but it didn't bother me at all. Puljajrvi, Dubois, Tkachuk; Doesn't matter, we get a future star. I'm really excited about this draft. I think there's going to be a lot of action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as I'd love to see JP in a Canucks uni, I just don't see how it happens without being a huge overpayment. If we take on a contract like Clarkson that's hobbling them, how does it not hobble us? 

 

I'd be better with a deal like Hutton+? to Edmonton for their 4th, and get both Tkachuck and Dubois. a Tkachuck Dubois Boeser line would do more damage than JP alone. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK up until Bob McKenzie's report today that indeed the #3 is in play I would have thought this impossible.

 

I think this would get it done:

 

Leaving Van: #5 overall, 2nd round 2017, 2nd round 2018 (Torts pick), Cole Cassels (CBJ hometown kid, non-roster so no cap hit)

Coming to Van: #3 overall, Scott Hartnell

 

Rationale: If Bob Mac is right, CBJ wants a centre. Plus they need cap space to keep Seth Jones, and that comes from moving Hartnell, and they can't take salary back. They also rid themselves of a NMC anchor which they really need to do with expansion coming.

 

Before freaking out over Hartnell, his buyout cap hit is only 1.4 mil... but for 6 years.  He has a NMC so it would all have to go down in time time to put him on waivers for the buyout window, so this would have to happen quick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Cowichan Canuck said:

 

I think CBJ would take Horvat, Hansen and a 2nd. I wouldn't give that for Puljujarvi myself.

I think a deal involving picks, non-roster prospects and taking a salary back is more likely. With the big cap crunch coming - they need big  $$ to keep Seth Jones. I think we actually might have a shot at this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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