Warhippy Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 20 hours ago, Provost said: Yes he is offense oriented... that is kind of the point. if your remaining D are Edler, Gubranson, Sbisa, Tryamkin, and Stecher... your need is more offense from the back end and not more stay at home defensive play. Barrie is exactly the type we should go for I think. Improve our PP and boost all of our forward'S offensive output. Addibg Landeskog as well means that between those two players we are adding between .25-.5 goals per game to the roster... that is big. Or, save the cost and play a defensively deficient Subban for free! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 1 hour ago, Warhippy said: Or, save the cost and play a defensively deficient Subban for free! Ya.. a 50+ Point NHL defenseman with pedigree and an AHL prospect (with how many NHL goals?) are pretty much the same things... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 5 minutes ago, Provost said: Ya.. a 50+ Point NHL defenseman with pedigree and an AHL prospect (with how many NHL goals?) are pretty much the same things... Stecher will continue to develop and we wont have the need for Barrie. Even watching the Av's broadcast the other night, it was none stop about how Stecher reminds them of Barrie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 11 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: Stecher will continue to develop and we wont have the need for Barrie. Even watching the Av's broadcast the other night, it was none stop about how Stecher reminds them of Barrie. Considering everyone on our defence except Stecher are not even expected to provide much offence and will be stay at home kind of guys (Tanev, Edler, Sbisa, Gudbranson, Tryamkin)... ya, we could still absolutely use a legit 40-50 plus guy on our team. Even Juolevi isn't predicted to be an offensive dynamo, more a solid guy who can play both ends. Stecher also owns exactly 1 NHL goal in his first 33 games even with a lot of premium PP and first pairing offensive minutes.... he is a long way from a 50+ point PP quarterback. He never even hit the double digits in goals in college or junior. To suggest that having more offence from the blue-line is redundant because we now have a guy with a single goal to his career? Seems like jumping the gun to me.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted January 9, 2017 Share Posted January 9, 2017 5 minutes ago, Provost said: Considering everyone on our defence except Stecher are not even expected to provide much offence and will be stay at home kind of guys (Tanev, Edler, Sbisa, Gudbranson, Tryamkin)... ya, we could still absolutely use a legit 40-50 plus guy on our team. Even Juolevi isn't predicted to be an offensive dynamo, more a solid guy who can play both ends. Stecher also owns exactly 1 NHL goal in his first 33 games even with a lot of premium PP and first pairing offensive minutes.... he is a long way from a 50+ point PP quarterback. He never even hit the double digits in goals in college or junior. To suggest that having more offence from the blue-line is redundant because we now have a guy with a single goal to his career? Seems like jumping the gun to me.... Tyson Barrie had 2 goals in his first 42 games and only 13 points. Stecher has 11 points in 33 games. Barrie currently only has 3 goals in 39 games. If were going by goals Hutton has 4. Having Troy Stecher makes Barrie a useless pick up. Both are 5.10, 190lbs, pmd with a right handed shot. Heck they grew up less 100km from each other. Barrie is also 25 turning 26 this year. By the time canucks core is in their prime (another 5 years) barrie is 31 and on the later half of his career. Barrie doesn't make a lot of sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 Lots of talk from different sources that the Bruins are going hard and heavy for Landeskog right now. Tough deal to make with cap implications as I don't see Sakic eating salary for that duration of a contract. The Bruins don't have space now and certainly won't have space once Marchand's new deal kicks in, no big money coming off the books for next season to make up for it. The return would have to be ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoosierdaddy Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 1 hour ago, Provost said: Lots of talk from different sources that the Bruins are going hard and heavy for Landeskog right now. Tough deal to make with cap implications as I don't see Sakic eating salary for that duration of a contract. The Bruins don't have space now and certainly won't have space once Marchand's new deal kicks in, no big money coming off the books for next season to make up for it. The return would have to be ridiculous. This is where I'd like to see a sly move from GMJB. Canucks jump in as third team and end up with picks/prospects while the Bruins and Av's end up with the pieces they really want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 16 minutes ago, Hoosierdaddy said: This is where I'd like to see a sly move from GMJB. Canucks jump in as third team and end up with picks/prospects while the Bruins and Av's end up with the pieces they really want. Possible Vancouver-Colorado-Boston 3-way deal or a couple seperate transactions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insomniac604 Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 Colorado is an absolute mess. They had a good, young core so yes, let's sign Iginla and rid ourselves of Stastny. Next up R'OR should go and how about Nick Holden, who everyone (besides Col management) could see was underrated. That didn't work? How about we examine our top 3 players, and try to trade 2 of them.. because I guess MacKinnon is getting younger? If I were Roy I would have flat left too. They were just about to exit their re-build phase and within 2 years have started a new one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me_ Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 44 minutes ago, Hoosierdaddy said: This is where I'd like to see a sly move from GMJB. Canucks jump in as third team and end up with picks/prospects while the Bruins and Av's end up with the pieces they really want. A mere elaborate way to say tank; sell the vets. Vancouver is pushing for a playoff spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 45 minutes ago, Hoosierdaddy said: This is where I'd like to see a sly move from GMJB. Canucks jump in as third team and end up with picks/prospects while the Bruins and Av's end up with the pieces they really want. I have no idea how that would work since Avs want the picks and Bruins want the player.... they don't need us in the middle as they are already good partners. The only way a 3rd party gets in the middle of that is by agreeing to take on a ton of Bruins salary so they can afford to fit Landeskog in... that isn't us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 13 hours ago, Provost said: Lots of talk from different sources that the Bruins are going hard and heavy for Landeskog right now. Tough deal to make with cap implications as I don't see Sakic eating salary for that duration of a contract. The Bruins don't have space now and certainly won't have space once Marchand's new deal kicks in, no big money coming off the books for next season to make up for it. The return would have to be ridiculous. The Avalanche want Carlo and Friedman said that is a non-starter. Adrian Dater tweeted a few days back "LA Kings with heavy interest in Landeskog, I'm told". Also By the way Dater was asked via tweeter if Vancouver is on anything and his answer was "not that I've heard". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted January 10, 2017 Share Posted January 10, 2017 5 minutes ago, mll said: The Avalanche want Carlo and Friedman said that is a non-starter. Adrian Dater tweeted a few days back "LA Kings with heavy interest in Landeskog, I'm told". Also By the way Dater was asked via tweeter if Vancouver is on anything and his answer was "not that I've heard". There has been a new round of talk about the Bruins since that Carlo thing. Presumably there is another package on the table and Salic is weighing different options and trying to up the market. if I were him I would move fast. The later it goes, 5the more teams will gal out and decide to become sellers. A deal with LA would be as tough as a deal with the Bruins... where the heck do they find cap space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigturk8 Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 Canucks scout at the Avs game tonight. Probably just due diligence, but I figure it's relevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheHockeyNerds Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 Not calling duchene old by any stretch but if he was even landeskogs age, that would be perfect for us. A deal revolving around tanev would be what I would go with! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldoescobar Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 46 minutes ago, Bigturk8 said: Canucks scout at the Avs game tonight. Probably just due diligence, but I figure it's relevant. Yeah probably just seeing what all the excitement is about.. The Nucks dont have the assets (they can afford to lose) to compete with any other teams in the bidding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 2 minutes ago, Ronaldoescobar said: Yeah probably just seeing what all the excitement is about.. The Nucks dont have the assets (they can afford to lose) to compete with any other teams in the bidding. Prices would certainly have to come down a ton (which they will) for us to be in the mix. Hanging around sometimes turns into "other" deals. I don't mind us exploring and making offers. We need a ton of help up front, and we have some depth on D (if they are every healthy). One of Tanev, Hutton, Sbisa can be moved out in a trade (any trade, not specifically this one) and we aren't dramatically worse off... and may even net out ahead with extra scoring up front. If you are getting a young top 6 guy in return, any prospect not named Boeser, Demko, or Juolevi should also be up for grabs as part of a package. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
250Integra Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 I feel Duchene is more expendable than Landeskog, simply because they will have Jost who is a similar player. Landeskog brings a lot of those intangibles that make him an effective two-way player, especially in the playoffs. They need to trade Duchene for a top 4 defenseman and then draft a top defensive prospect with their bottom-5 pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missioncanucksfan Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 Hopefully this is for Landeskog and not for Iginla Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missioncanucksfan Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 2 hours ago, Bigturk8 said: Canucks scout at the Avs game tonight. Probably just due diligence, but I figure it's relevant. It's that time of year where bloggers and the like all spin in their swivel chairs in laughter as they see outcry reactions from sites such as this when they post BS stuff like this. Canucks also play AV'S next week so there's that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.