Discussion - Should the Canucks explore trading the Sedins to Montreal

[Baggins]

10 hours ago, Eastcoast meets Westcoast said:

Hank has publicly alluded that they would be open to anything if would help the team. By eating half their cap hit we would be dangling pretty tasty bait for the cup contenders. We aren't really going to need the extra cap space for a few years. 

 

Gotta think Montreal, The Caps, Rangers would all be interested. 

 

Well he said if asked to move they would look it if it helped the team. But he also said he'd prefer to retire a Canuck in that same interview. He even said they may be staying here after retirement.

 

So if the Sedins won't ask for a trade and Benning won't ask them to waive......I wonder what that means......

[Gollumpus]

6 minutes ago, Baggins said:

 

Well he said if asked to move they would look it if it helped the team. But he also said he'd prefer to retire a Canuck in that same interview. He even said they may be staying here after retirement.

 

So if the Sedins won't ask for a trade and Benning won't ask them to waive......I wonder what that means......

 

Players with NTCs get traded all the time and management just has to get tough, so what the above means is that the Sedins have to get tough with Benning and demand that he demand that they should demand a trade, or something like that. And since the Sedins deserve a shot at the Cup the trade should be to a team who is getting a lottery pick, who will also trade away their top prospect, and that's just for Daniel. It gets more expensive for Henrik. And then the Canucks will sign them back for one year at league minimum so they can retire Canucks, cuz they deserve a shot at the Cup and should be respected by this team.

 

I think I got that right.

 

                                                    regards,  G.

[Moonshinefe]

So what amazing deal are people actually envisioning that'd make the Sedins waive their NTCs + management to agree? Also Linden said he isn't trading them just the other day...

 

This entire thing seems incredibly delusional and quite frankly, wishful thinking. Assuming the stars align and the Sedins waive and management do the opposite of what's expected, what will we get for a couple of 36 year olds who will be lucky to hit 60pts with literally all the O zone faceoffs in the world, near top minutes and PP time? They're insanely slow now, and would get like 35-40pts if they weren't massively favoured and put into a top role to succeed by the coach. They aren't huge assets anymore, like at all.

[Phat Fingers]

9 hours ago, Bobby_Lu1ngo said:

Exactly. It doesn't make sense this year at all. Between having another year left at big money for older guys, needing to take both, only being able to retain 3.5 max, their desire to stay, and the expansion draft it incredibly unrealistic.

 

However, next year if we are in the same boat at the trade deadline wouls make too much sense not too. By then the expansion draft would be behind teams, they would be much more manageable with the cap, would likely be open to another crack in the playoffs on a cup favorite. They could re-sign and I am sure there would be plenty of teams willing in that circumstance.

 

I think it will be a huge step in shortening the rebuild making this move next year.

 

 

You are right. This is a harder sell during an expansion year. We can look to move a player or two to protect assests this year. Hansen is the one that comes to mind.  We need to keep our younger players. Unfortunately Dorsett will not be on the block for his horrible injury. 

 

 

The Twins are with us this year, and could be moved next season. With the way Wilie coaches we will likely still end up with a high pic and retain assests!!

 

[Phat Fingers]

5 hours ago, Baggins said:

 

Well he said if asked to move they would look it if it helped the team. But he also said he'd prefer to retire a Canuck in that same interview. He even said they may be staying here after retirement.

 

So if the Sedins won't ask for a trade and Benning won't ask them to waive......I wonder what that means......

 

 

I am not advocating that we trade them, just commenting on how it would work if we trade them. I have posted on this board that it would be up to the Twins where they play and when to hand up the skates. They have earned that right. 

 

If they decided it, or if management asked, and the twins said yes, I think there would be interest from clubs trying to win it all this season. 

 

EW

[IbanezRG]

Having both twins as a third scoring line on a contender... the habs would have so much offense they would overwhelm almost any team.

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, IbanezRG said:

Having both twins as a third scoring line on a contender... the habs would have so much offense they would overwhelm almost any team.

If it happens, won't the Twins being traded happen TDL 2018 and not 2017?  

[IbanezRG]

2 hours ago, Alflives said:

If it happens, won't the Twins being traded happen TDL 2018 and not 2017?  

 

 

Ideally but it's not like we can't afford to retain 1 million for next year as well.

[Gollumpus]

2 hours ago, Eastcoast meets Westcoast said:

 

 

You are right. This is a harder sell during an expansion year. We can look to move a player or two to protect assests this year. Hansen is the one that comes to mind.  We need to keep our younger players. Unfortunately Dorsett will not be on the block for his horrible injury. 

 

 

The Twins are with us this year, and could be moved next season. With the way Wilie coaches we will likely still end up with a high pic and retain assests!!

 

 

2 hours ago, Eastcoast meets Westcoast said:

 

 

I am not advocating that we trade them, just commenting on how it would work if we trade them. I have posted on this board that it would be up to the Twins where they play and when to hand up the skates. They have earned that right. 

 

If they decided it, or if management asked, and the twins said yes, I think there would be interest from clubs trying to win it all this season. 

 

EW

 

I acknowledge that there might be/certainly are teams out there which would like to acquire the Sedins. I haven't been able to find one that would be able to do so  for 2017 without screwing over their own team in the attempt to make it better by taking on the Sedins. I tried using your list (Montreal, Washington and the Rangers) and couldn't come up with a satisfactory solution.

 

https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/canadiens

https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/capitals

https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/rangers

 

Factors to consider:

1.) I'm assuming that at least two contracts have to come back to the Canucks, just to balance things out on the 50 limit. They could be NHL (or AHL buried contracts?), but I'm thinking that there has to be (at least) two coming back here which means that they will fill the empty roster spots (unless the team tries to move them somewhere). Does this impact on playing the younger guys currently on the Canucks' roster? I suspect that it could (assuming that these aren't AHL contracts), in that these new additions might get some (a lot?) of the Sedin's time. I don't see a situation where people will be saying, "Oh it's so nice that the Canucks can play the kids so much more with the Sedins gone...". It could happen, but I don't believe it will be as rosy a situation as some believe, at least for the current season.

 

2.) Caphit. An additional $7 million, assuming 50% retention, is going to the other team. Some teams have a bit of cap space, but not a lot. Who gets moved to Vancouver to allow for the intake of the Sedin's caphits? Keep in mind that the other team doesn't want to screw themselves by losing anyone from their top-6/top-4, which potentially means none of their high caphit contracts get moved.

 

Who are the two guys that you see being the likely candidates to come back to Vancouver. (Assuming moving two contracts for two contracts.) In my scenario, these guys won't big contract types unless they are bad contract type of players, probably in the AHL. So who comes back here to dump the additional $5 to 7 million from the other team's cap?

 

3.) The upcoming draft for Vegas. As previously noted, I'm assuming  the other team does not want to trade anyone of significance from their current team (top-6 players) and might be reluctant to lose anyone from their top-9. Included in this is that they would not want to lose anyone from their top-4, unless the trade is expanded to include a younger Canuck d-man going back to the other team (no, not Edler). The Canucks' d-man would also have to be factored in for potential draft protection, cap, etc. but this would open up options for cap to be returned to the Canucks.

 

This other team now has to protect the Sedins due to their NMC clauses, which means that now two other assets must be left exposed who previously might have been protected. This is a pretty big issue.

 

4.) Picks. What's available? A lot of people are assuming that it is practically a sure thing that the other team will be a lock to win the Cup with the addition of the Sedins. A 1st round pick is nice, but a pick at 30 is not as nice as one in the 20's and so on. So is this as big a part of the deal as some are saying?

 

All three of the sample teams have their 1st round picks for 2017 and 2018. Washington has moved their 2nd from 2017 to Montreal, and the Rangers have moved their 2017 2nd to Carolina. In 2018, the Rangers have an additional 2nd (from Chicago) while Montreal has an additional 2nd (from Washington - Eller deal).

 

So, what amounts of picks do people see coming to Vancouver? Some suggest at least one 1st and a 2nd, I'm assuming both from from 2017, so this leaves Montreal as the only candidate. If we expand to 2018 picks then the Rangers become a bit more interesting (Ottawa's 2nd) over Montreal (Chicago's 2nd, Washington's 2nd - also Eller deal). 

 

Personally, I'd let the other team hold on to their 1st(s) and try to get an additional prospect or two in its place.

 

5.) Prospects. (See Upcoming Draft as well as what gets moved to Vancouver). Lots of people have suggested what I believe are very unrealistic lists of names of prospects. I'd prefer a greater emphasis on prospects over picks, but I also realize that there are time factors related to having too many prospects in your system at one time which could mean selling short on some guys rather than lose them for nothing. For some teams this could be a positive. I won't go into this beyond the above statement. 

 

 

Assuming the Canucks traded the Sedins (with their consent etc) then I believe the return will be one 1st, a 2nd (2017 or 2018), one or two very good prospects and two other players who fit the bill for caphit. This is for both of them, not just one. No more than that. If the Canucks can get more then I'll be very happy with that return, but I don't see it happening.

 

                                                    regards,  G.

[Gollumpus]

1 minute ago, IbanezRG said:

 

 

Ideally but it's not like we can't afford to retain 1 million for next year as well.

 

But what about the other team's cap? Can they afford it is the question.

 

                                    regards,  G.

[IbanezRG]

8 minutes ago, Gollumpus said:

 

But what about the other team's cap? Can they afford it is the question.

 

                                    regards,  G.

 

 

Correction btw my post should read "retain 7 million for next year" and no, unless we took players back who were ending contracts this offseason. 

[Gollumpus]

3 minutes ago, IbanezRG said:

 

 

Correction btw my post should read "retain 7 million for next year" and no, unless we took players back who were ending contracts this offseason. 

 

I assumed your intent was $7 million.

 

My point was that the other team has to deal with an additional $7 million for 2017 - 18. The Canucks cap should probably be okay regardless.of moving the Sedins and retaining $7 million.

 

We have to look further than $7 million in, $7 million out for 2017 - 18. What about RFA contracts? In some cases there might be guys currently on the roster who will be starting new contracts, possibly with a significant raise (eg. the Rangers with 9 RFA currently on the NHL roster). Assuming they were counting on the $7 million caphit for 2017 - 18 from these UFA's, moved out in a Sedin deal to pay for these new contracts, how do they now pay these younger guys, only a couple of which might be moved to Vancouver? They are into next season with this season's cap.

 

                                                              regards,  G.

[erkayloomeh]

13 hours ago, Moonshinefe said:

So what amazing deal are people actually envisioning that'd make the Sedins waive their NTCs + management to agree? Also Linden said he isn't trading them just the other day...

 

This entire thing seems incredibly delusional and quite frankly, wishful thinking. Assuming the stars align and the Sedins waive and management do the opposite of what's expected, what will we get for a couple of 36 year olds who will be lucky to hit 60pts with literally all the O zone faceoffs in the world, near top minutes and PP time? They're insanely slow now, and would get like 35-40pts if they weren't massively favoured and put into a top role to succeed by the coach. They aren't huge assets anymore, like at all.

Im saying this with a bit of a smirk.

How badly do the kings want to get rid of brown and his contract. 

[Phat Fingers]

6 hours ago, Gollumpus said:

 

 

I acknowledge that there might be/certainly are teams out there which would like to acquire the Sedins. I haven't been able to find one that would be able to do so  for 2017 without screwing over their own team in the attempt to make it better by taking on the Sedins. I tried using your list (Montreal, Washington and the Rangers) and couldn't come up with a satisfactory solution.

 

https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/canadiens

https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/capitals

https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/rangers

 

Factors to consider:

1.) I'm assuming that at least two contracts have to come back to the Canucks, just to balance things out on the 50 limit. They could be NHL (or AHL buried contracts?), but I'm thinking that there has to be (at least) two coming back here which means that they will fill the empty roster spots (unless the team tries to move them somewhere). Does this impact on playing the younger guys currently on the Canucks' roster? I suspect that it could (assuming that these aren't AHL contracts), in that these new additions might get some (a lot?) of the Sedin's time. I don't see a situation where people will be saying, "Oh it's so nice that the Canucks can play the kids so much more with the Sedins gone...". It could happen, but I don't believe it will be as rosy a situation as some believe, at least for the current season.

 

2.) Caphit. An additional $7 million, assuming 50% retention, is going to the other team. Some teams have a bit of cap space, but not a lot. Who gets moved to Vancouver to allow for the intake of the Sedin's caphits? Keep in mind that the other team doesn't want to screw themselves by losing anyone from their top-6/top-4, which potentially means none of their high caphit contracts get moved.

 

Who are the two guys that you see being the likely candidates to come back to Vancouver. (Assuming moving two contracts for two contracts.) In my scenario, these guys won't big contract types unless they are bad contract type of players, probably in the AHL. So who comes back here to dump the additional $5 to 7 million from the other team's cap?

 

3.) The upcoming draft for Vegas. As previously noted, I'm assuming  the other team does not want to trade anyone of significance from their current team (top-6 players) and might be reluctant to lose anyone from their top-9. Included in this is that they would not want to lose anyone from their top-4, unless the trade is expanded to include a younger Canuck d-man going back to the other team (no, not Edler). The Canucks' d-man would also have to be factored in for potential draft protection, cap, etc. but this would open up options for cap to be returned to the Canucks.

 

This other team now has to protect the Sedins due to their NMC clauses, which means that now two other assets must be left exposed who previously might have been protected. This is a pretty big issue.

 

4.) Picks. What's available? A lot of people are assuming that it is practically a sure thing that the other team will be a lock to win the Cup with the addition of the Sedins. A 1st round pick is nice, but a pick at 30 is not as nice as one in the 20's and so on. So is this as big a part of the deal as some are saying?

 

All three of the sample teams have their 1st round picks for 2017 and 2018. Washington has moved their 2nd from 2017 to Montreal, and the Rangers have moved their 2017 2nd to Carolina. In 2018, the Rangers have an additional 2nd (from Chicago) while Montreal has an additional 2nd (from Washington - Eller deal).

 

So, what amounts of picks do people see coming to Vancouver? Some suggest at least one 1st and a 2nd, I'm assuming both from from 2017, so this leaves Montreal as the only candidate. If we expand to 2018 picks then the Rangers become a bit more interesting (Ottawa's 2nd) over Montreal (Chicago's 2nd, Washington's 2nd - also Eller deal). 

 

Personally, I'd let the other team hold on to their 1st(s) and try to get an additional prospect or two in its place.

 

5.) Prospects. (See Upcoming Draft as well as what gets moved to Vancouver). Lots of people have suggested what I believe are very unrealistic lists of names of prospects. I'd prefer a greater emphasis on prospects over picks, but I also realize that there are time factors related to having too many prospects in your system at one time which could mean selling short on some guys rather than lose them for nothing. For some teams this could be a positive. I won't go into this beyond the above statement. 

 

 

Assuming the Canucks traded the Sedins (with their consent etc) then I believe the return will be one 1st, a 2nd (2017 or 2018), one or two very good prospects and two other players who fit the bill for caphit. This is for both of them, not just one. No more than that. If the Canucks can get more then I'll be very happy with that return, but I don't see it happening.

 

                                                    regards,  G.

 

 

G,

 

Well put.  Agreed that if the Twins are moved, the Expansion draft year is likely the worst one to try to make a deal. Added to that the Twins would have to ask/demand the move. I would love to see them ride it out here, but I wouldn't mind having more prospects/picks to build the next team. 

 

Who knows what influence they are also having on the young players like Horvat. 

[MiloFrenzy]

  Luongo wasn't going anywhere either  , So button it and let us DREAM .

[Me_]

What is the cost of a rental player? Pick and prospect?

 

The Sedins will not win a Cup with Vancouver,

 

The Sedins would never have and will never garner full value for two players; they must be regarded as one $14.000 MIL superstar player.

 

The receiving team is playoff bound, therefore the pick is mid to low range.

 

Many players have been traded as pure rentals and then re-signed with their team. Some went through that process twice for their team.

 

NHL

Daniel

Henrik

 

VAN

1st round pick

Highest team prospect

Salary dump

[Me_]

10 hours ago, MiloFrenzy said:

  Luongo wasn't going anywhere either  , So button it and let us DREAM .

The glowing 33 is Godly.

[Ghostsof1915]

Anywhere but the Rangers please. Bad enough Naslund ended his career there. 

[EdgarM]

On ‎2016‎-‎12‎-‎09 at 4:37 PM, erkayloomeh said:

Im saying this with a bit of a smirk.

How badly do the kings want to get rid of brown and his contract. 

 

Its funny you named LA as they have some extremely long contracts which probably has them handcuffed a bit. Getting Brown's contract off the books would help them in the future and I would assume that with all those big contracts they would want to win a cup sooner rather then later.

Not saying that Vancouver could gain anything from this but I could see LA having interest. They would give themselves a better chance at winning the cup in the next 2 years while giving themselves more cap space to sign their young up and comers after next season.

[coolboarder]

1 hour ago, Me_ said:

What is the cost of a rental player? Pick and prospect?

 

The Sedins will not win a Cup with Vancouver,

 

The Sedins would never have and will never garner full value for two players; they must be regarded as one $14.000 MIL superstar player.

 

The receiving team is playoff bound, therefore the pick is mid to low range.

 

Many players have been traded as pure rentals and then re-signed with their team. Some went through that process twice for their team.

 

NHL

Daniel

Henrik

 

VAN

1st round pick

Highest team prospect

Salary dump

 No I disagree.  Deal with them individually just like other teams do with their traded superstars.  If we do your way, we'll be fleeced.   I'll use this idea assuming that they have asked the Canucks to trade them this season.   First, I'll deal with them individually then combine and compare.

 

NHL

Daniel

50% salary retention

 

VAN

1st round pick (31 overall first round protected) in other word, the Canucks would rather to have higher pick than 31st overall pick so if they win the cup, it will be deferred to 2018 or 2019)

2nd round pick, conditional (if they win the cup)  No 62th overall pick with Vegas in 2nd round.  so In other word, 2018 pick or 2019 pick, depend on which year they win the cup.

1 top prospect

 

NHL

Henrik

50% salary retention

 

VAN

1st round pick with same condition above with 2019 or 2020 pick.

2nd round pick, conditional (if they win the cup, the same as above, 2019 or 2020 draft)

1 their next top prospect

Salary dump expires the same year the Sedin's contract wherever is possible.

 

So to combine this trade, 2 for 1 deal.

:

NHL

Daniel

Henrik

50% salary retention

 

VAN

2 1st round pick with conditions.

2 2nd conditional round pick if they win the cup with no 62nd overall 2nd round pick.

2 top prospects

1 Salary dump

 

This is only fair, imo.