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

-Article- Huge if True


CanadianRugby

Recommended Posts

Puck Daddy doesn't like Benning. 

https://ca.sports.yahoo.com/news/huge-if-true-how-will-the-canucks-get-a-scoring-winger-152749226.html

 

Huge if True: How will the Canucks get a scoring winger?

 

For some inexplicable reason, the Vancouver Canucks continue to pursue a Jay Feaster-like pursuit of “going for it.”

In this case, as in the case of the Calgary Flames several years ago, the “it” is merely making the playoffs, something more than half the teams in the league do annually. And while making the playoffs is therefore no great shakes, nor really any indicator that a team is even all that good, the Canucks still feel like they’re some ways away from even being at that point.

To that end, GM Jim Benning has recently undertaken the task of beefing up his club’s defense and trying to bolster its offense simultaneously. Benning traded picks and a promising young former first-rounder for Erik Gudbranson in May, publicly admitted to being in on the P.K. Subban trade market (and getting a tampering fine as a result), and then signing Loui Eriksson on July 1.

A few other depth players were signed as well, and Chris Higgins bought out just before the free agency period, but that’s about it in terms of changes to the roster that finished third from the bottom of the league last year.

The team’s problem (in this area, anyway) is that for a club with this bad of a roster, they Canucks aren’t exactly swimming in cap space. Right now General Fanager has them at less than $3.48 million, which isn’t enough to add much of anything to the cause.

So instead, Jim Benning understands that if he wants to add some extra top-six help on the wing, he needs to make trades to do so. Because if he doesn’t, he understands that Sven Baertschi probably isn’t up to the task.

“We’ve been talking to some teams and it would be a hockey trade,” Benning told the Vancouver Sun. “The first part of free agency was guys signing and the second layer is going to be teams wanting to move contracts or bodies. Teams know what we’re looking for and we’ll see how it goes.”

Some names have already been mentioned in certain circles who the Canucks could target, but you’ll never guess what they are…

 

The Rumor

That’s right: Nothing concrete, and highly speculative.

Let’s have a at The Hockey News’s take on the situation first. The Canucks’ current top-six is probably something like Sedin-Sedin-Eriksson and Baertschi-Sutter-Hansen, and Benning rightly believes that’s not good enough to compete with most teams in the Pacific (probably not even Edmonton at this point, even after the Taylor Hall trade).

Benning wants to add a “proven scorer with some grit” (don’t we all?) and that’s not easy to find without taking on a liability contract or giving back a player that provides significant value at his price point. So who does The Hockey News suggest?

Gustav Nyquist and Tomas Tatar from Detroit, Scott Hartnell from Columbus, Chris Kunitz from Pittsburgh, and Evander Kane from Buffalo.

And if that feels a lot like it’s just picking some names out of the “rumored for a trade hat” that’s because it probably is. As far as Nyquist and Tatar — neither of whom I’d categorize as necessarily “gritty” — go, it’s worth noting that well-connected people in Detroit think Ken Holland will deal at least one forward at some point this summer, but that while it’s a position of strength for the Wings, they’d probably only do it for a higher-end defenseman. Which is something that Benning doesn’t really have at hand for his own team, let alone someone else’s.

Hartnell certainly fits the bill, though, and Columbus has allegedly been looking to deal him since at least last year. With that contract, it’s easy to see why. Now, it’s worth asking a lot of questions here, including, “Would Hartnell waive his no-move to go to Vancouver?” But he’s exactly what the Canucks seem to be targeting “perfectly good at what he does, and on the wrong side of 30.”

As for Kane, well, that’s a lot of money for a guy who might be headed to his third club in as many years, and who apparently has plenty of trouble with the law.

If Benning is indeed “going for it,” doesn’t Hartnell seem like the logical jumping-off point for any trades here?

 

Who’s Going Where?

So here’s the big question on any Canucks trade: What is Benning willing to give up that anyone would want?

The answer probably is on the blue line, at least in terms of players who would fetch the value necessary to get a top-six winger. After all, if Adam Larsson is enough to get you Taylor freaking Hall — pretty close to a top-six winger in the entire league, let alone on any one team — the market is just screwed-up enough to get you almost anyone you want if you can offer value.

Some speculation says the Canucks might be willing to move on from Alex Edler, once a very good defender in the league who is coming off a broken leg suffered late last season. Edler, a left-shot defender, is also 30 years old and signed for three more years with a $5 million AAV but $16.5 million owed in actual money. The all-important “bonus” money in his contract is no longer an issue. That’s all worth noting given where the league is headed.

But 30 and coming off a broken leg? Nah, probably not too many takers there.

Meanwhile, there’s basically no way there’s a market for Luca Sbisa, right? And the Canucks are probably all set with the idea of trading a good young defender like Ben Hutton, or a younger, upside-ier guy like Nikita Tryamkin (he’s 6-foot-8 for crying out loud).

So the only other guy on the blue line who might be movable, and who probably does fetch you a solid price, is Chris Tanev. And Jason Botchford says it’s probable that the Canucks have at least looked at the possibility of trading him.

 

The Implications

Yeah, I mean, the Canucks need help up front, but if they trade Edler — who wasn’t very good last season even before getting hurt — that probably doesn’t end up affecting them too much. If it’s between trading him or Tanev, to me there’s not even a question. Edler is older, more expensive, and worse.

Tanev is one of the best shot-suppression defenders in the league and generally outperforms a team that, admittedly, isn’t very good to begin with. Over the last three seasons, his relative effect on adjusted shot attempts against is in the same neighborhood as Marc-Edouard Vlasic and Oliver Ekman-Larsson.

He’s ranked seventh in the league in this regard. And when it comes to relative expected goals-for, he’s third behind only Vlasic and Anton Stralman. This is over a three-year period. So while Tanev is basically a no-offense defenseman (12 goals and 43 assists over three years), even if he’s a right-shot guy, this is the kind of shutdown defender teams should be targeting left and right.

If the Canucks are this desperate to add scoring, and it costs them Tanev, they’ll add goals but probably give up more as well. It’s a real cut-off-your-nose-to-spite-your-face move from where I sit.

They’d be much better off seeing if there’s a buyer for Edler.

 

This Is So Huge, If True: Is It True?

On a B.S. detector scale of 1-5, with one being the most reasonable and 5 being the least:

The Canucks are certainly desperate to fulfill ownership demands of making the playoffs at least one more time before the Sedins sail off into the sunset, but to what end, and at what cost?

The Canucks trade for a top-six winger:

 

poop

 

(It’s far more likely than not, but nothing is guaranteed given what they could offer in trade.)

The Canucks lose either Tanev or Edler in that trade:

 

Screen Shot 2016-07-21 at 10.44.48 AM

 

(Basically the only chips they have to give away, unless they dip into the prospect pool instead.)

The Canucks miss the playoffs anyway: 

Screen Shot 2016-07-21 at 10.45.34 AM

 

(I mean come on.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trade for Hartnell and before pulling the trigger get him to agree to waive his NMC for the expansion draft. That's the only option other than trading more young talent.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The Canucks are certainly desperate to fulfill ownership demands of making the playoffs at least one more time before the Sedins sail off into the sunset, but to what end, and at what cost?

Still waiting for proof that isn't hearsay just because some people are unwilling to understand that tanking is for losers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Winter Soldier said:

Still waiting for proof that isn't hearsay just because some people are unwilling to understand that tanking is for losers.

When you sign a player on the wrong side of 30 to a six year deal you are going for it.

 

Who knows maybe if absolutely everything goes right and the team gets hot at the right time they might even go deep. That's the attitude that I have chosen to take now that it seems clear what the direction is. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Toews said:

When you sign a player on the wrong side of 30 to a six year deal you are going for it.

Yes, because iron sharpens iron. As much as the armchairs and bloggers will fight to deny it, the players want to be in the playoffs and are better for having the experience even if you don't go all the way. The players learn what it takes to win at the highest level, fans are happy and continue spending money and the city as a whole becomes more attractive for both free agents and players with no trade clauses. Rebuilding the 'right way' because 'muh draft picks' is an attitude for work-shy losers.

 

None of this constitutes a mandate from ownership stating 'make the playoffs or you're fired' as much as some on here desperately want to believe.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What in the .... has happened to journalism.

 

There is very little chance Canucks trade Tanev. I'm tempted to say zero percent chance...but Benning likes to trade.

 

If Edler gets us a decent winger around 22-27 years old, that's more than I would pay for to get Edler. I welcome it. 

 

Benning inherited a great NHL roster that had zero depth, and nothing in tradeable assets besides Kesler, Garrison, and picks. He has overturned that roster into a roster with character veterans that can teach young players how to become consistent NHL players. That's the right way to create a good NHL franchise when you core group gets too old to compete. Tanking evolves draft lottery luck; Major development luck; staff, coaches, and players losing jobs; and devoted fans willing to fork over money because their team sure won't be winning.

 

This article comes across as a sly bash of Benning just for the sake of it.

 

It's getting old, that these hockey "analysts" cannot see what Vancouver is doing. It's pretty obvious that they are drafting well and trying their best to develop prospects the right way, while also putting a competitive team on the ice that is at least entertaining.

 

Canucks lost so many 1 goal games last year and so many in the third period. Losing sucks, but last season was so much better that the late 90's and 2014 seasons. I actually really enjoyed watching Canucks this year. And they lost so many games.

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Winter Soldier said:

Yes, because iron sharpens iron. As much as the armchairs and bloggers will fight to deny it, the players want to be in the playoffs and are better for having the experience even if you don't go all the way. The players learn what it takes to win at the highest level, fans are happy and continue spending money and the city as a whole becomes more attractive for both free agents and players with no trade clauses. Rebuilding the 'right way' because 'muh draft picks' is an attitude for work-shy losers.

 

None of this constitutes a mandate from ownership stating 'make the playoffs or you're fired' as much as some on here desperately want to believe.

Well i think players even get frustrated getting punted out of the 1st round, missing the playoffs, getting close or punted out again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ice orca said:

Well i think players even get frustrated getting punted out of the 1st round, missing the playoffs, getting close or punted out again.

No one wants to lose, but everyone needs to learn what it takes to win. You don't do that by missing out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Art Vandelay said:

What in the .... has happened to journalism.

 

There is very little chance Canucks trade Tanev. I'm tempted to say zero percent chance...but Benning likes to trade.

 

If Edler gets us a decent winger around 22-27 years old, that's more than I would pay for to get Edler. I welcome it. 

 

Benning inherited a great NHL roster that had zero depth, and nothing in tradeable assets besides Kesler, Garrison, and picks. He has overturned that roster into a roster with character veterans that can teach young players how to become consistent NHL players. That's the right way to create a good NHL franchise when you core group gets too old to compete. Tanking evolves draft lottery luck; Major development luck; staff, coaches, and players losing jobs; and devoted fans willing to fork over money because their team sure won't be winning.

 

This article comes across as a sly bash of Benning just for the sake of it.

 

It's getting old, that these hockey "analysts" cannot see what Vancouver is doing. It's pretty obvious that they are drafting well and trying their best to develop prospects the right way, while also putting a competitive team on the ice that is at least entertaining.

 

Canucks lost so many 1 goal games last year and so many in the third period. Losing sucks, but last season was so much better that the late 90's and 2014 seasons. I actually really enjoyed watching Canucks this year. And they lost so many games.

And my Toyota beat a Porche 911 with a faulty gearbox. 

When will people acknowledge the kind of season we had last year and how massive injuries, unsuitable replacements and too many inexperienced prospects influenced it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the salary cap era, there will be options coming up on the waiver wire, Vancouver has the third hole for waivers this off season. 

 

Teams will want to move players they won't protect, to get something, rather lose a player for nothing. 

 

We lack any real pieces to make a trade with other than what was mentioned. If the plan was to move Tanev, Hamhuis would have been resigned. That ship has sailed. Sbisa and Elder are options, and Edler has more value than stated in the article. 

 

Sbisa has has value to a team that needs to re balance a roster, he plays both sides, can fill in the top 4 and if we retain some salary, he could appeal to a team that lacks D depth. 

 

Not an over the top article.  We are seeking another top six forward. This is looking at how this could come about. 

 

Whatever happens, we will have to wait to see how teams rosters shakedown during training camp. 

 

JB won't hesitate to make a move, as long as it improves that club. A lot of people slag JB for his trades. The only ones I question are the 2nd for Vey, the Shinkaruk deal, could we have gotten more than Granlund?  Not trading Hammer is the other one. 

 

He did OK with Kesler.  That was a trade that can keep on giving. 

 

Garrison was a cap dump, considering we signed two FA's and had a 100 OT season, equal.

 

Beiksa, meh. Would have rather traded Hammer. Beiksa is a leader and can provide some snarl, plus he plays the right side.  If we moved him, it should have been at the deadline.  If we had signed a cheaper goalie option, we could have kept Beiksa. 

 

I like the Sutter trade.  Bonino had a horrible season, followed by a great post season. Hard to evaulate the trade until Sutter gives us a body of work to assess.

 

He knocked it out of the park with Gudbranson.  All that Beiksa brought during his peak plus more.  Minus some offense with better defence, snarl and he intimidates.  Character looks close. 

 

Etem for Jensen is a win.

 

 Pedan for a 3rd and Larsen for a 5th could be wins. At least they won't really be loses. 

 

Not worried about the LW spot. There are lots of ways it can be addressed, including from within. Virtannen, Rodin and Gaunce can all be in the mix with Baer. 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, alfstonker said:

And my Toyota beat a Porche 911 with a faulty gearbox. 

When will people acknowledge the kind of season we had last year and how massive injuries, unsuitable replacements and too many inexperienced prospects influenced it?

Well if being last in goal differential didn't convince them then I don't know what will. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, alfstonker said:

And my Toyota beat a Porche 911 with a faulty gearbox. 

When will people acknowledge the kind of season we had last year and how massive injuries, unsuitable replacements and too many inexperienced prospects influenced it?

I'm not sure what you are saying in reference to what you bolded. or why am I involved.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Art Vandelay said:

I'm not sure what you are saying in reference to what you bolded. or why am I involved.

Apologies, just pointing out that there were countless unfortunate reasons as to why we lost one goal games and games in the last third.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, alfstonker said:

Apologies, just pointing out that there were countless unfortunate reasons as to why we lost one goal games and games in the last third.

No, worries. I think I read what you said differently than the way I should have. And was left confused.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well this isn't the first report of the Canucks looking for a winger. Where there's smoke there is fire. 

 

I don't like his playoff jab at the end. I mean all it does is isolate the very people reading the article. Seems like an unnecessary stab when just evaluating a potential trade for a winger.

 

What I get from it, Edler is our first choice to move, though unlikely, and real value is in Tanev. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, drummerboy said:

Jesus man.  

Why do these writers all hate the Canucks so much?

I'm OK with it.

Puck Daddy is ok in my books, but most of the Toronto based guys just parrot what they hear each other saying which is always just a broad-stroke, poor understanding of the actual team.

But I'm OK with being the maligned underdog. And someday soon we'll start our phoenix-like ascension....and all the misunderstanding outsiders will talk about how this nothing team has transformed itself and is led by these youngsters who crush and score and win. And these old vikings have somehow managed to sip from Jagr's fountain of youth and still be important on our road to legitimacy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a long post to read considering its the same drum that's been beating pretty much since Benning stated what he has been trying to make happen.  Yes Tanev is the only piece that has value, and yes he is valuable so why trade him.

Link to post
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...