Bur14Kes17 Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 The idea of trading Hutton away for Evander Kane just about killed me last night. If one of Hutton Tryamkin or Stetcher, or one of our blue chip prospects were traded for Kane, that might be the last straw for me with this management. But I tweeted Botchford before the game started last night asking what his thoughts were on trading Gudbranson for Kane instead. Not that I'm in favour of trading for Kane at all, but if they were gonna do it, I'd rather it be Gudbranson since we have Tryamkin now and Pedan in Utica who play a similar game. He didn't think they'd go for it, but another Vancouver Buzz writer i exchanged with thought the deal would make a lot of sense. Following that, Gary Valk actually suggested the same deal during the 1st intermission. When you look at the scenario though, Gudbranson has not lived up to his billing thus far as a tough nasty stay at home d man who clears the crease. Maybe he need a more time to fit in, but Hutton has not been the same since being paired with Guddy and I think I've only seen him clear the crease once this year against the Leafs. He also wants a multiple year 5 million dollar contract after this year and we would escape that. With the emergence of Tryamkin, can he not do Guddys job and do it better? He's bigger, nastier, hits more, has a massive reach, and is about 3 million cheaper as is. When Tanev returns out D lines could look like: Edler Stetcher. Edler Stetcher Tryamkin Hutton Or. Tanev Hutton Sbisa Tanev. Sbisa Tryamkin i know Tanev is a righty, but maybe he could work on the left side? Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captaincowbasher Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 No way should this management trade for E.Kane if they have to give up either, Stetcher, Hutton or Gudbranson. Only guys they should consider is Edler, Tryamkin or Tanev. If Tanev is Buffalo's target then they Must include their 1st 2017. Otherwise no deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'NucK™ Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 Would do that in a heartbeat, but don't think Buffalo bites unless they still see a lot of potential in Guddy. Theoretically, I don't think they'd do it for McCann and a 2nd either right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RetroCanuck Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 Just now, captaincowbasher said: No way should this management trade for E.Kane if they have to give up either, Stetcher, Hutton or Gudbranson. Only guys they should consider is Edler, Tryamkin or Tanev. If Tanev is Buffalo's target then they Must include their 1st 2017. Otherwise no deal. You did not just say tryamkin... i would be done with this team if they trade they're best D prospect right now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 Botchford is the broken clock that just happens to be right at that moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bur14Kes17 Posted November 17, 2016 Author Share Posted November 17, 2016 Just now, 'NucK™ said: Would do that in a heartbeat, but don't think Buffalo bites unless they still see a lot of potential in Guddy. Theoretically, I don't think they'd do it for McCann and a 2nd either right now. Exactly. Ask yourself that too, would trade McCann and a 2nd for Kane? He's going to be in the AHL soon with Jake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captaincowbasher Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 Stetcher, Hutton are ahead of Nikita Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'NucK™ Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 8 minutes ago, captaincowbasher said: No way should this management trade for E.Kane if they have to give up either, Stetcher, Hutton or Gudbranson. Only guys they should consider is Edler, Tryamkin or Tanev. If Tanev is Buffalo's target then they Must include their 1st 2017. Otherwise no deal. IMO all 6 of those dmen have similar value.. I would switch Gudbranson and Tryamkin in your list of who to keep/potentially trade Tanev for Kane and a 1st - now there's a deal that may actually benefit both sides; but it's always hard to part with a 1st rounder (especially when they may finish near the bottom) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captaincowbasher Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 yes but Tanev is the only certain piece in that deal, who knows if Kane will work out it's a huge gamble, Buffalo knows this so in order to get a guy like Tanev, we need a back up piece thus the 1st. Good trade for Buffalo they shed 5 or so million and headache galore for a 1st pair defender. No brainer for both clubs. Canucks brass can sell that deal no problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captaincowbasher Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 6 minutes ago, 'NucK™ said: I'd give up Hutton or Guddy way faster than Tryamkin or Tanev myself... Tanev for Kane and a 1st - now there's a deal that may actually benefit both sides but it's always hard to part with a 1st rounder (especially when they may finish near the bottom) If JB gives up Hutton, Guddy or Stetcher then the owners should fire him on the spot. Hutton could be a number one and so could Stetcher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captaincowbasher Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 11 minutes ago, oldnews said: Botchford is the broken clock that just happens to be right at that moment. Botchford is reaching, Guddy has been just fine, he's done well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'NucK™ Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 Just now, captaincowbasher said: If JB gives up Hutton, Guddy or Stetcher then the owners should fire him on the spot. Hutton could be a number one and so could Stetcher Yeah I reconsidered that comment actually. edit from above "IMO all 6 of those dmen have similar value.. I would switch Gudbranson and Tryamkin in your list of who to keep/potentially trade" cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 Bogo and Risto our on sabres right side. They need left hand D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 3 minutes ago, captaincowbasher said: Botchford is reaching, Guddy has been just fine, he's done well. If by "they're not doing that" he means the Canucks - which is how I would read that - then I agree with him. The Canucks are not moving Gudbranson - certainly not for Evander Kane. But I misread his comment - apparently he thinks Tryamkin makes Gudbranson expendable. Would not have made sense to agree with Botchford - I was wrong - the guy is a broken clock that is wrong as usual. I'm not sure what GValk was smokin' last night, but he was not on his game - and this idea that Gudbranson could be shopped is deluded imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckistani Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 A trade that would help both sides would be : To Van: E.Kane To Buffalo: B.Hutton + Greenier + 2nd/3rd R draft pick We would get a bona-fide 20 goals/year guy, Buffalo gets a defence man who in 2-3 years can be a 3/4 D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bur14Kes17 Posted November 17, 2016 Author Share Posted November 17, 2016 15 minutes ago, canuckistani said: A trade that would help both sides would be : To Van: E.Kane To Buffalo: B.Hutton + Greenier + 2nd/3rd R draft pick We would get a bona-fide 20 goals/year guy, Buffalo gets a defence man who in 2-3 years can be a 3/4 D. GTFO!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaku Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 Y'all spelled Sam Reinhart wrong I don't know, Evander Kane sounds like a problem child, he may not be the best fit for this team simply based on his attitude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckistani Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 Just now, Bur14Kes17 said: GTFO!!!!!! Yeah, i think it is underpayment from us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'NucK™ Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 14 minutes ago, canuckistani said: A trade that would help both sides would be : To Van: E.Kane To Buffalo: B.Hutton + Greenier + 2nd/3rd R draft pick We would get a bona-fide 20 goals/year guy, Buffalo gets a defence man who in 2-3 years can be a 3/4 D. Maybe the most realistic of them all, but ouch... 1 year later Kane is in rehab, while we are down yet another 2nd/3rd rounder and happy-go-lucky Ben Hutton is ripping it up elsewhere.. Buffalo are the ones that should be sweetening the Kane deal with a pick.. especially if Canucks are trading someone like Hutton with potential we are the ones who need some potential coming back in the form of a pick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'NucK™ Posted November 17, 2016 Share Posted November 17, 2016 3 minutes ago, Jaku said: Y'all spelled Sam Reinhart wrong I don't know, Evander Kane sounds like a problem child, he may not be the best fit for this team simply based on his attitude. I think we're just being realistic. a deal involving Reinhart would be a blockbuster and I don't see the nucks pulling it off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.