Bur14Kes17 Posted August 8, 2016 Share Posted August 8, 2016 Anahiem is up tight against their internal cap and need to shed salary in order to re sign Lindholm. Speculation is they will need to move out Folwer in order to do that. What do you guys think of a straight up, Fowler to Van, Tanev to Ana swap? Anahiem sheds 1 Million in salary Vancouver gets two years younger and more mobile with more offensive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jono2009 Posted August 8, 2016 Share Posted August 8, 2016 No way Anaheim or Vancouver does that trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Jay 22 Posted August 8, 2016 Share Posted August 8, 2016 Not a bad idea, but if (when?) Anaheim moves Fowler, it's going to be for a top 6 forward. The point of moving him is not financial. It's that they have an excess amount of young Dmen that they need to protect from expansion, that Fowler would most likely be the one moved so that they wouldn't lose him for free. I see him going to Detroit for 1 of Nyquist/Tatar with other smaller pieces involved perhaps for both sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted August 8, 2016 Share Posted August 8, 2016 7 minutes ago, Bur14Kes17 said: Anahiem is up tight against their internal cap and need to shed salary in order to re sign Lindholm. Speculation is they will need to move out Folwer in order to do that. What do you guys think of a straight up, Fowler to Van, Tanev to Ana swap? Anahiem sheds 1 Million in salary Vancouver gets two years younger and more mobile with more offensive Why do so many posters want to trade Tanev? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knucks16 Posted August 8, 2016 Share Posted August 8, 2016 2 hours ago, Bur14Kes17 said: Anahiem is up tight against their internal cap and need to shed salary in order to re sign Lindholm. Speculation is they will need to move out Folwer in order to do that. What do you guys think of a straight up, Fowler to Van, Tanev to Ana swap? Anahiem sheds 1 Million in salary Vancouver gets two years younger and more mobile with more offensive We need to do something, idk if Fowler is that guy? But we do need number one defencemen! to quarter back our power play! aswell add more scoring dept like Evander Kane. If we can do that I'm loving Canucks chance to go deep in the playoffs. And that's the damn truth! How long since Canucks had a power play defencemen who can score 15-25 goals , 50+ points? Way to long that's what we are missing! There's gotta be a way to make it reality! Weather it be moving couple players or giving up high draft picks! I know it! we all know it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HerrDrFunk Posted August 8, 2016 Share Posted August 8, 2016 20 minutes ago, Alflives said: Why do so many posters want to trade Tanev? Sell high? I honestly don't know. I like him right where he is. Trading Tanev for Fowler seems like a weird, lateral move to me. Yeah, they're different kinds of D-Men but I can't see either team going for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted August 8, 2016 Share Posted August 8, 2016 1 minute ago, HerrDrFunk said: Sell high? I honestly don't know. I like him right where he is. Trading Tanev for Fowler seems like a weird, lateral move to me. Yeah, they're different kinds of D-Men but I can't see either team going for it. I was attempting sarcasm, as I often propose trading Tanev for Landeskog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Vandelay Posted August 8, 2016 Share Posted August 8, 2016 Anaheim would owe Tanev $3mil left this year while Fowler is owed $4mil. In the following years they would be paying a lot more as Tanev's salary is going up to $5mil/$5.25mil. Anaheim wouldn't want to do a somewhat lateral move and pay more. If they trade a Dman, it will be for a forward (especially with the expansion coming and having 4 guys(Fowler, Lindholm, Vatanen, Manson) currently needing protection that will be claimed by Vegas, and that's not including the mandatory protection of Bieksa). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaner Posted August 9, 2016 Share Posted August 9, 2016 From a Canucks point of view, I wouldn't touch that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucker 67 Posted August 9, 2016 Share Posted August 9, 2016 1 hour ago, Alflives said: Why do so many posters want to trade Tanev? Good question. He's our best D, and a RHD entering his prime. The only way I'd be in favour of trading Tanev is if a Landeskog type player comes back. Fowler? Nah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BowtieCanuck Posted August 9, 2016 Share Posted August 9, 2016 2 hours ago, Blue Jay 22 said: Not a bad idea, but if (when?) Anaheim moves Fowler, it's going to be for a top 6 forward. The point of moving him is not financial. It's that they have an excess amount of young Dmen that they need to protect from expansion, that Fowler would most likely be the one moved so that they wouldn't lose him for free. I see him going to Detroit for 1 of Nyquist/Tatar with other smaller pieces involved perhaps for both sides. This off-season has made it abundantly clear that a top-4 defensemen is worth more than a top 6 forward right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairy Kneel Posted August 9, 2016 Share Posted August 9, 2016 If Tanev puts on 10-15 lbs of muscle watch out. We may see more out of him yet. As his confidence grows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toews Posted August 9, 2016 Share Posted August 9, 2016 Tanev is much better than Fowler, so no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.