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

-Article- Huge if True


CanadianRugby

Recommended Posts

These news writers are no better than the fair weather fans who buy the jersey and cap of whoever won the Cup the previous year. Whatever's popular today I guess. Players like McDavid and Matthews are all the rage these days, so those teams must be doing something right? Not really. Both teams are still terrible, but does the media say that? No, they're so fixated on the new high draft picks in those lineups they're blinded at how bad they still are. I think Hall will have a huge year, but the media will ignore that, because they're probably rooting for McDavid's team.

 

The Canucks still have the Sedins, the best brother tandem to ever wear an NHL jersey. They continue to lead the Canucks in points every year, and now they have a fellow Swede on their line. So what if they're "on the wrong side of 30". They still produce. Look at Jagr, he's on the wrong side of 40! The Canucks will have Sutter and Tryamkin for a full year too. Also, not a lot of mention that the Canucks have beefed up and really improved their D by bringing in Gudbranson. I think JB has done a great job so far, and I'm pretty confident that the Canucks will beat McDavid's and Matthews' teams in the standings next season. Canucks will still continue to get zero respect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, PlanB said:

Trading for EG  = filling a glaring organizational hole with a great player/character person in exchange for an expendable asset.

Signing LE = solidifying the top 6 with one of the best UFAs available whose universally regarded as a character person/player. 

Making Playoffs = the exact same thing every single other GM in the league is, and should be, trying to do.

Puckdaddy = self anointed Internet hack with more time than hockey knowledge trying to drum up traffic on his site in off season. 

I think the Guddy trade was a Gud trade, but McCann was not "expendable".  We need scoring.  I'm still glad we did it, but I don't agree that McCann was expendable. 

 

The Eriksson signing was 2 years too long.  That cap hit will bite us for his last two seasons.  Still, I agree it gives a chance to win now while the Sedins still have some juice.  I think it will handcuff us a bit when we are rebuilding after the Sedin legacy ends. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, CanadianRugby said:

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.)

That's all just opinion and barely readable!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said:

These news writers are no better than the fair weather fans who buy the jersey and cap of whoever won the Cup the previous year. Whatever's popular today I guess. Players like McDavid and Matthews are all the rage these days, so those teams must be doing something right? Not really. Both teams are still terrible, but does the media say that? No, they're so fixated on the new high draft picks in those lineups they're blinded at how bad they still are. I think Hall will have a huge year, but the media will ignore that, because they're probably rooting for McDavid's team.

 

The Canucks still have the Sedins, the best brother tandem to ever wear an NHL jersey. They continue to lead the Canucks in points every year, and now they have a fellow Swede on their line. So what if they're "on the wrong side of 30". They still produce. Look at Jagr, he's on the wrong side of 40! The Canucks will have Sutter and Tryamkin for a full year too. Also, not a lot of mention that the Canucks have beefed up and really improved their D by bringing in Gudbranson. I think JB has done a great job so far, and I'm pretty confident that the Canucks will beat McDavid's and Matthews' teams in the standings next season. Canucks will still continue to get zero respect.

You can't read that and call them writers......they're not writers, theyre "fans".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Winter Soldier said:

You aren't making it as a lawyer, I'm afraid.

I have no desire to be a lawyer. You can choose to disbelieve that but there have been numerous rumours such as ownership nixing the Kesler trade or ownership having a big hand in the Luongo contract. Mike Gillis saying that Tortorella was never his guy. Where there is smoke...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Toews said:

I have no desire to be a lawyer. You can choose to disbelieve that but there have been numerous rumours such as ownership nixing the Kesler trade or ownership having a big hand in the Luongo contract. Mike Gillis saying that Tortorella was never his guy. Where there is smoke...

Too bad I asked for something beyond hearsay, eh? 'Where there's smoke...' means nothing in a world where people can say anything they want on Twitter and people will believe it as gospel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, stawns said:

That's all just opinion and barely readable!

I don't know if the Tanev rumors for a top six forward are more than just rumors, but he really is our only valuable chip, that is somewhat redundant - since the acquisition of Gudbrandson.  The author did speculate about Tanev's value, considering the Hall/ Larson deal.  

If Hall = Larson, then Tanev =

Landescog?

E. Kane?

RNH?

Duchene?

others?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Winter Soldier said:

Too bad I asked for something beyond hearsay, eh? 'Where there's smoke...' means nothing in a world where people can say anything they want on Twitter and people will believe it as gospel.

Ok? Mike Gillis wasn't just some random nobody. He specifically said that Torts was not his choice. That is straight from the horse's mouth. Do you need a quote from Aquaman admitting to interfering? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Winter Soldier said:

Too bad I asked for something beyond hearsay, eh? 'Where there's smoke...' means nothing in a world where people can say anything they want on Twitter and people will believe it as gospel.

We have (often) been through this concept.  Before we listed reliable sources, who suggested our current owner is involved in hockey opps: Mackenzie, Freidman, Dregger, and Ferraro to name just a few.  Gillis even suggested as much in his final 1040 interview prior to his release from the team.  The direction of our team rebuilding or retooling is the issue.  The owner CLEARLY wants the retool, as evidenced by JB's work to this point.  

 

Is is the philosophy bad or good?  Only time will tell, but IMHAO, it's clear our owner is pushing his agenda, whether it's best or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Pears said:

If Detroit still thinks highly of Edler would him for Tatar be enough?

That was my thought as well, but would Edler waive to play in DET? I can see a trade with NYR. Edler would probably love living in New York and playing for AV again.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trash article written to get responses and hits.  Utter garbage.  I believe this team as currently constructed is going to surprise some people, if they remain relatively healthy.

 

There is alot of character and experience in that room.  Obviously a top six LW would be a huge bonus.  The season hasn't started and teams will be waiving and trading players yet before it does start.  There will be opportunities.

 

I also don't believe Tanev gets traded unless a team overpays.  If that's the case, go ahead and trade Tanev.  We have 2 really good top 4 RH defenseman.  It took a long time to get there and every team has this as a priority.  It's not easy to accomplish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trading Tanev is such a terrible idea especially after letting Hamhuis walk. One defensive defencemen did not solve Edmontons issues. How much better will we fare with just one? 

 

If we do end up trading Tanev we better be getting a bonafide first liner replacement for the Sedins. Anything else hurts our team and Benning would be a fool to trade Tanev "to try and make the playoffs" while turning our d into instant AHL level. 

 

In this case the best move Benning can make is to make no move. 

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...