[Proposal] Draft Trade

[aGENT]

4 minutes ago, Roger Neilson's Towel said:

Sorry to derail your thread. My sincere apologies.

 

As to your proposal, now that I have read your first proposal correctly, I agree your proposal is sound, however I don't believe Arizona would be interested in Sbisa, as they already have comparable pieces in place.

 

As for the second part of your proposal, Edler is a tough piece to move, although he may waive for Montreal. What would your intention be with the caps of Emelin or Markov? Buy out the contract? I noticed they were not included in your defensive lineup.

Goodness, you HAVE been smoking haven't you?! 

 

26 minutes ago, J.R. said:

Hutton, Gudbranson

Emelin, Tanev

Hamhuis, Tryamkin

 

Pedan, Larsen

Moving up to 5th would let ARZ possibly take hometown boy Tkachuck if still there or all but ensure they have their pick of the top 3 D. Sbisa gives them added depth on D (which they do in fact need IMO).

 

Edler would certainly be iffy, he'd of course have to waive. But one would think that a better than VAN shot at a cup and playing as Subban's partner in one hell of a hockey town (that's also very metropolitan/cultured...which seems to be to his likeing) would at least pique his interest.

[Mr.DirtyDangles]

3 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

I'd still be curious to see how the acquisition of Gudbranson affects Edler's game this coming season.

 

Would it light a fire under his ass to grab the reigns and return the support that both Benning and Linden have shown him? If so, having a consistent Edler who plays hard and smart night in and out, would far outweigh the trade outcome.

 

or

 

Would he continue his inconsistent play? If so, this would be a great trade to move Edler, and acquire not only a physical defender back, but one with some wheels to him. And the picks.

 

And the dutchie. Must never forget the dutchie.

Fully agree, something we need to see in Camp before we move him. Unless the return is to good to pass up.

[TimberWolf]

25 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Pass it here first. I'll be the judge on the potency of the dutchie.

 

Since you got the stupid song stuck in my head then everyone gets it too

 

 

[PhillipBlunt]

Just now, TimberWolf said:

 

Since you got the stupid song stuck in my head then everyone gets it too

 

 

Hahahahahaha. Well played.

[aGENT]

3 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

I'd still be curious to see how the acquisition of Gudbranson affects Edler's game this coming season.

 

Would it light a fire under his ass to grab the reigns and return the support that both Benning and Linden have shown him? If so, having a consistent Edler who plays hard and smart night in and out, would far outweigh the trade outcome.

 

or

 

Would he continue his inconsistent play? If so, this would be a great trade to move Edler, and acquire not only a physical defender back, but one with some wheels to him. And the picks.

 

And the dutchie. Must never forget the dutchie.

I think the addition of E.G. will greatly help all our D (hell, the entire team), including Edler. He'll have a lot of weight lifted off his shoulders IMO.

 

That said, he's still not going to become the #1D everybody seems to want him to be. He has limits. This trade would be far more about the future than this year but would still leave us in ok shape this year IMO (and still better than last year). Emelin/Markov next year would certainly be a step down from Edler but the future would look a lot brighter IMO.

[Roger Neilsons Towel]

17 minutes ago, J.R. said:

Goodness, you HAVE been smoking haven't you?! 

I'm sorry. My reading comprehension has failed me on both counts. Embarrassing.

I have edited my post to properly convey what I am trying to ask about your proposal (see below)

 

And no, not today. I am at work and that would probably be frowned upon. 

 

26 minutes ago, Roger Neilson's Towel said:

Sorry to derail your thread. My sincere apologies.

 

As to your proposal, now that I have read your first proposal correctly, I agree your proposal is sound, however I don't believe Arizona would be interested in Sbisa, as they already have comparable pieces in place.

 

As for the second part of your proposal, Edler is a tough piece to move, although he may waive for Montreal. If Montreal sent Markov instead of Emelin, what would your intention be with Markov's cap? Buy out the contract? Or play him as a depth defenseman? I think his play will decline sharply soon.

Edited 8 minutes ago by Roger Neilson's Towel
fixed an error

 

[khay]

27 minutes ago, J.R. said:

Sbisa and our 5th for Arizona's 7th, 20th and 37th.

 

Edler  + for Montreal's 9th (Emelin or Markov caps coming back).

 

Draft one of the three D (Juo/Serg/Chych?) 7th , Jost 9th, McAvoy (or Fabrro if by some fluke he's still there) at 20th and Mascherin/Jones/Benson at 37...?

 

Re-sign Hamhuis.

 

Hutton, Gudbranson

Emelin, Tanev

Hamhuis, Tryamkin

 

Pedan, Larsen

 

I might try flip say Vey/Grenier+ plus the ARZ 20th to see if I could move closer to 15th to nab Fabbro though.

I don't think that is a playoff defence.

 

Thrusting a sophomore, Hutton, into 1st pairing duties is not something a playoff team would do. And a new comber Gudbranson, who I like, but we don't know how he will adapt yet. Too many question marks with that defence.

 

I think the right way to build the team right now is to build stability in the defence core. In fact, since we do not have a true #1D, we need to do everything by committee (both scoring and defending) and that means we need to share the duties around instead of having a single source of failure. For example, if Hutton f*cks up/injures, then we have no offence coming from our defence.

 

Having Edler, assuming that he is healthy, means Hutton is not the only player with offensive capabilities. In your D, no one other than Hutton is capable of hitting 25 points.

 

Edler-Tanev (30-40 points + 15-20 points = 45-60 points)

Hutton-Gudbranson (25-35 points + 15-20 points = 40-55 points)

Hamhuis-Tryamkin (around 20-30 points)

 

The reason why I like Gudbranson signing was because he gives our defence balance that it lacked. Now, we don't have to give Edler-Tanev all those hard minutes. They can be shared by whatever pairing Gudbranson is on. I think we are going to see Edler play to his strength next season. Also, by the second half of the season, there is a good chance that Tryamkin improves (much like Bo Horvat), which would mean that tough defensive minutes can be shared around even more. If all things go well, we might get back to the 2008-2013 Canucks defence where all 6 defenders are top 4 calibre.

 

I do like the idea of getting a top defence prospect plus Jost and another top prospect, as well as a second round pick. But this team is about making the playoffs next season, otherwise, why would we trade for Gudbranson? And it is indeed true that Sbisa is expendable if we re-sign Hamhuis. So trading him for a 2nd round pick is still a good idea.

Good idea, but if I'm the GM of the Canucks, I don't these trades. 

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, khay said:

I don't think that is a playoff defence.

 

Thrusting a sophomore, Hutton, into 1st pairing duties is not something a playoff team would do. And a new comber Gudbranson, who I like, but we don't know how he will adapt yet. Too many question marks with that defence.

 

I think the right way to build the team right now is to build stability in the defence core. In fact, since we do not have a true #1D, we need to do everything by committee (both scoring and defending) and that means we need to share the duties around instead of having a single source of failure. For example, if Hutton f*cks up/injures, then we have no offence coming from our defence.

 

Having Edler, assuming that he is healthy, means Hutton is not the only player with offensive capabilities. In your D, no one other than Hutton is capable of hitting 25 points.

 

Edler-Tanev (30-40 points + 15-20 points = 45-60 points)

Hutton-Gudbranson (25-35 points + 15-20 points = 40-55 points)

Hamhuis-Tryamkin (around 20-30 points)

 

The reason why I like Gudbranson signing was because he gives our defence balance that it lacked. Now, we don't have to give Edler-Tanev all those hard minutes. They can be shared by whatever pairing Gudbranson is on. I think we are going to see Edler play to his strength next season. Also, by the second half of the season, there is a good chance that Tryamkin improves (much like Bo Horvat), which would mean that tough defensive minutes can be shared around even more. If all things go well, we might get back to the 2008-2013 Canucks defence where all 6 defenders are top 4 calibre.

 

I do like the idea of getting a top defence prospect plus Jost and another top prospect, as well as a second round pick. But this team is about making the playoffs next season, otherwise, why would we trade for Gudbranson? And it is indeed true that Sbisa is expendable if we re-sign Hamhuis. So trading him for a 2nd round pick is still a good idea.

Good idea, but if I'm the GM of the Canucks, I don't these trades. 

I tend to agree...to a point. Especially with insulating Hutton! As I said earlier, I recognize our D core would take a hit this year. I still think we could manage to be a playoff bubble team with that D (as I believe it's still better than what we had last year) but it's certainly a step down from what keeping Edler would be. This very much would be more of a move for the future designed to have as small of an impact now as possible.

 

Another option would be to also target a UFA like Yandle, rather than bringing back Hamhuis. No guarantees but that would certainly address some of your concerns.

 

Yandle, Tanev/Gud

Hutton, Gud/Tanev

Markov/Emelin, Tryamkin

 

Pedan, Larsen

[aGENT]

11 minutes ago, Roger Neilson's Towel said:

I'm sorry. My reading comprehension has failed me on both counts. Embarrassing.

I have edited my post to properly convey what I am trying to ask about your proposal (see below)

 

And no, not today. I am at work and that would probably be frowned upon. 

 

 

I addressed Edler earlier but as for Markov, yes, I play him as depth on the third pair with Tryamkin. His age (and failing knees) would likely mean a steady rotation in of a Tryamkin/Larsen 3rd pair as well (which is hardly a bad thing) but otherwise I think he would make an excellent mentor/partner for Tryamkin with conservative use.

 

Emelin I play on the 2nd with Tanev.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

Would Sbisa and a 5th be enough for all those picks?  I'd be ok with just the 7th and 20th.

 

I think the + with Edler would likely be a Brisebois + a RFA (grenier/Vey) and the player coming back would likely be markov since his cap hit this year will allow MTL to go out and pick up a scoring forward this year (maybe even Vbrata).

 

I'd probably go Nylander/Keller at 7, Sergachev at 9, and McAvoy/Rubstov at 20.  Skill/OFD/BPA

 

Hamhuis Tanev

Hutton Guddy

Markov Tryamkin

 

Minutes would be distributed fairly evenly, no one would be the all situations go to guy. Markov and Hutton get the PP zone time, while Hamhuis and Tanev get the line matching play.

[manroth19]

Is hansen enough of an add to land hoffman from ottawa and swap picks? Our 1st + hansen for ott 1st + hoffman.....i feel lile we fleece them a bit but im not sure

[aGENT]

18 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Would Sbisa and a 5th be enough for all those picks?  I'd be ok with just the 7th and 20th.

 

I think the + with Edler would likely be a Brisebois + a RFA (grenier/Vey) and the player coming back would likely be markov since his cap hit this year will allow MTL to go out and pick up a scoring forward this year (maybe even Vbrata).

 

I'd probably go Nylander/Keller at 7, Sergachev at 9, and McAvoy/Rubstov at 20.  Skill/OFD/BPA

 

Hamhuis Tanev

Hutton Guddy

Markov Tryamkin

 

Minutes would be distributed fairly evenly, no one would be the all situations go to guy. Markov and Hutton get the PP zone time, while Hamhuis and Tanev get the line matching play.

I'd certainly be asking for the 2nd...

 

Agree on the '+'. Something like Edler, Vey/Grenier and a 'B' prospect like Brisebois gets it done IMO. Would depend what the small pieces are that interest Montreal. Grenier and Brisebois sure have last names that fit! I think the more we add though, the more I want Emelin over Markov and it would allow us more flexibility in arranging our D.

 

I'm not convinced Serg is still there at 9 but the actual players drafted I'd defer to Benning and co to make the right call on who to grab at 7, 9, 20 etc. Getting the picks is the proposal, Benning making them count is up to him. I do like Jost (and Serg) though!

[Raymond Luxury Yacht]

1 hour ago, thejazz97 said:

We can probably get Rubtsov at 20.

At 20 there was no way I would get Rubtsov. 

 

I would like to see any higher 1st round picks be for D.

[Kurt Nirvanagut]

2 hours ago, J.R. said:

Our 5th alone is pretty close to being worth the 2 firsts. Sbisa gets the second.

Vancouver is probably the only team in the league stupid enough to trade a 2nd round pick for Sbisa. 

[qwijibo]

I can't see Montreal having any interest in Edler at the cost of the 9th overall.   Markov may be older but over the last 4 seasons he's been way healthier than Edler and put up at least 40 points a season. Emelin doesn't bring the offence that Edler potentially does. But his physical play is something Edler can't or won't bring. Unless the + from Vancouver is something incredibly substantial I don't see why Montreal makes this deal 

[aGENT]

5 minutes ago, qwijibo said:

I can't see Montreal having any interest in Edler at the cost of the 9th overall.   Markov may be older but over the last 4 seasons he's been way healthier than Edler and put up at least 40 points a season. Emelin doesn't bring the offence that Edler potentially does. But his physical play is something Edler can't or won't bring. Unless the + from Vancouver is something incredibly substantial I don't see why Montreal makes this deal 

Because Markov is 37 going on 38, has no knees and is likely to retire. Edler would make a STELLAR partner for Subban at a very reasonable cap hit that's locked in for 3 more years (while Montreal is very much in win-now mode). Along with getting additional pieces like Grenier, Brisebois etc to help renew their prospect pool/depth.

[qwijibo]

2 minutes ago, J.R. said:

Because Markov is 37 going on 38, has no knees and is likely to retire. Edler would make a STELLAR partner for Subban at a very reasonable cap hit that's locked in for 3 more years (while Montreal is very much in win-now mode). Along with getting additional pieces like Grenier, Brisebois etc to help renew their prospect pool/depth.

Since when does Markov have knee issues? That was never one of his injuries. Once again, he's been far more consistent over the last number of seasons than Edler has been. Defence isn't Montreal's primary concern right now. It's getting another legit scoring top 6 winger. I can't see them wasting the 9th on an player that doesn't address that CURRENT pressing need. 

[ForsbergTheGreat]

1 hour ago, J.R. said:

I'd certainly be asking for the 2nd...

 

Agree on the '+'. Something like Edler, Vey/Grenier and a 'B' prospect like Brisebois gets it done IMO. Would depend what the small pieces are that interest Montreal. Grenier and Brisebois sure have last names that fit! I think the more we add though, the more I want Emelin over Markov and it would allow us more flexibility in arranging our D.

 

I'm not convinced Serg is still there at 9 but the actual players drafted I'd defer to Benning and co to make the right call on who to grab at 7, 9, 20 etc. Getting the picks is the proposal, Benning making them count is up to him. I do like Jost (and Serg) though!

I like the Idea of Markov more.

 

One year left on contract. Next year his contract and roster spot comes off the books.  Gives room for Pedan to become 5-6 rather than stay 7-8.  

 

He can still put up the offense in a limited role (so that it's not entirely on the shoulders of Hutton). 

 

And he's been in the league long enough to give tip to his fellow russia D partner Tryamkin. 

 

[aGENT]

3 minutes ago, qwijibo said:

Since when does Markov have knee issues? That was never one of his injuries. Once again, he's been far more consistent over the last number of seasons than Edler has been. Defence isn't Montreal's primary concern right now. It's getting another legit scoring top 6 winger. I can't see them wasting the 9th on an player that doesn't address that CURRENT pressing need. 

Quick google search:

 

http://www.dailyfaceoff.com/26240/andrei-markov-still-recovering-from-torn-acl

 

http://www.aprja.net/?p=14

 

Markov also plays with Subban. Pretty sure I could put up 30+ points playing with Subban 

 

He'll also likely be retiring next year. They're going to need a partner for Subban if they hope to contend. Seems pretty pressing to me.

[qwijibo]

2 minutes ago, J.R. said:

Quick google search:

 

http://www.dailyfaceoff.com/26240/andrei-markov-still-recovering-from-torn-acl

 

http://www.aprja.net/?p=14

 

Markov also plays with Subban. Pretty sure I could put up 30+ points playing with Subban 

 

He'll also likely be retiring next year. They're going to need a partner for Subban if they hope to contend. Seems pretty pressing to me.

Key word NEXT YEAR. Right now they need scoring. Not a redundant defenceman who isn't as good as the guy you suggest they replace