Canucks Curse Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 Tanev + Virtanen + 2017 2nd + Hansen for duchenne and lAndeskog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 8 minutes ago, Canucks Curse said: Tanev + Virtanen + 2017 1st + Hansen for duchenne and lAndeskog and a mob of pitchforks for Benning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks Curse Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 3 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said: Just think of giving up Horvat and Boeser for Soderberg, Wiercoch, Comeau, Colborne, and 1st and 2nd round picks. That would be about the equivalent. Colorado is going pick first overall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks Curse Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 3 minutes ago, oldnews said: and a mob of pitchforks for Benning. Why? Canucks get the two best players in the trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 5 minutes ago, Canucks Curse said: Why? Canucks get the two best players in the trade. seems like you must not have been paying much attention around here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Boudreau Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 12 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: Those would be just future lines. In the mean time we'd still have plekanec, Rodin edler, eriksson Hansen dorsett. Which would make us just as competitive as we currently are. This is the reason Benning said he is not moving guys like Burrows and Hansen and the Sedins their intangibles mean more as role models for young guys than what they would get back as trade bait in the form of draft picks and prospects since they are not getting a good young player back for any of the NTC guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 1 hour ago, oldnews said: I think you have a point there Alf. A career minus player - and a perenial loser. Yikes. Sounds like a cap dump to me. What do you think they'd give us to take that contract off their hands? you're the best ON. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silky mitts Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 Either of those players is going to cost a lot more than the proposals being thrown around on here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklehead44 Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 I think people are really undervaluing Landeskog. He is only two years older than Horvat, and the youngest captain in NHL history. He has four 20 goal seasons under his belt (would have 5 if not for the lockout) including one year with 65 points. He also brings size & physical play. While not quite a "star" I would say he is a very good 1st line LW. I would love to see a top line in 2 or 3 years of Landeskog - Horvat - Boeser. If it was Landeskog for Tanev & Baertschi I would do that trade in a heartbeat. If we were sitting top three in the west maybe not, but where the team is at now it would be a good trade for both teams. I doubt Colorado does it. They seem to be the one team with an abundance of RH dmen (Johnson & Barrie). The only 1-1 player they would consider is Horvat. We would have to likely package a couple of our top prospects. I don't think Hutton & Virtanen would get it done. It would have to be Juolevi & Virtanen, which I wouldn't go near. I wouldn't mind us picking up Soderberg, he and Eriksson had a pretty epic bromance back in Boston. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklehead80 Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 On December 22, 2016 at 9:29 PM, Roger Neilson's Towel said: I disagree. Larsson got Taylor Hall. ......but, it was the Oilers after all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 Duchene neigh!, Landeskog yay! Landeskog brings a valued type of game, fits our age group and fills a need at LW. Idk if the price would be worth it though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 3 hours ago, Junkyard Dog said: Duchene neigh!, Landeskog yay! Landeskog brings a valued type of game, fits our age group and fills a need at LW. Idk if the price would be worth it though. We need Duchene more, and we could get a guy like Kane for a lot less than Landeskog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tas Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 5 hours ago, Pears said: We need Duchene more, and we could get a guy like Kane for a lot less than Landeskog. that's because kane absolutely sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phat Fingers Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 10 hours ago, canucklehead44 said: I think people are really undervaluing Landeskog. He is only two years older than Horvat, and the youngest captain in NHL history. He has four 20 goal seasons under his belt (would have 5 if not for the lockout) including one year with 65 points. He also brings size & physical play. While not quite a "star" I would say he is a very good 1st line LW. I would love to see a top line in 2 or 3 years of Landeskog - Horvat - Boeser. If it was Landeskog for Tanev & Baertschi I would do that trade in a heartbeat. If we were sitting top three in the west maybe not, but where the team is at now it would be a good trade for both teams. I doubt Colorado does it. They seem to be the one team with an abundance of RH dmen (Johnson & Barrie). The only 1-1 player they would consider is Horvat. We would have to likely package a couple of our top prospects. I don't think Hutton & Virtanen would get it done. It would have to be Juolevi & Virtanen, which I wouldn't go near. I wouldn't mind us picking up Soderberg, he and Eriksson had a pretty epic bromance back in Boston. Soderberg would be a good pick up, but who do we give up going back to other way? Granlund? Do we have cap space? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 6 hours ago, Pears said: We need Duchene more, and we could get a guy like Kane for a lot less than Landeskog. Agreed. Tanev for Duchene, and Torts second + Gaunce for Evander. GET OFF YOUR A$$ JB AND MAKE IT FRIGGIN HAPPEN! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phat Fingers Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 I think Landeskog could be had for a up trade other than Horvat, Boeser or Juolevi. We one defender that should absolutely be traded prior to the expansion draft. One of Tanev, Edler, Sbisa or Gudbranson. With Hutton, Stecher and Trymakin making a case for a top 4 spot, we need to make room. There are playoff teams that would love to aquire some top four playoff depth that is more than a rental. A three way trade would be a possibility. Say Montreal gets Edler, trades a prospect (Juulsen and a first?) to the AV's and unloads a cap dump in Vancouver. Vancouver adds their 2nd to the AV's and Landeskog heads our way. So in Summary, Montreal gives up Juulsen and their 1st to Colorado and a cap dump to Vancouver. Montreal gets Edler (we may have to add). Colorado gives up Landeskog and gets Juulsen, a 1st and a high 2nd. Vancouver gives up Edler and their second, not CBJ's and takes on a cap dump from Montreal. We land Landeskog. EW ps the following link was accidentally added, but if you want to know how to save your pets life, read on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABNuck Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 Couple points: 1/ Tanev is a RHD (AVs have Barrie + Johnson) 2/ When the thought of moving either Douche or Landy came up at the beginning of the season, a lot of teams were more willing to see how their own players panned out (why trade for something when you might already own it)...but now...there will be a lot more potential trading partners...drives price up (probably beyond what we could comfortably afford). 3/ One of our most valuable trading pieces is that 2017RD1...but it's in a year that's not as deep as past 2...and then there's that pesky cap thing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lionized27 Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 10 hours ago, Junkyard Dog said: Duchene neigh!, Landeskog yay! Landeskog brings a valued type of game, fits our age group and fills a need at LW. Idk if the price would be worth it though. I'm curious to know how Landeskog's game is more "valued" thank Duchene's. Keep in mind the Canucks are desperate for top tier Centers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal.view Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 if people really want landeskog and duchene let's put together a realistic package of top tier younger players so the avs consider trading i think the package has to include bo, one of hutton, tryakim, gud, 1st overall in 2017, virtanen, and erikssson (to make the salaries work). We'd also need to take two garage players from the avs to balance out the bodies being moved so the avs do not have to give up any additional roster spots for this trade. I think that this trade still might be a bit lopsided in favour of the nucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyoung Posted December 24, 2016 Share Posted December 24, 2016 No interest at all in trading our assets.... Teams pushing for a cup will give up way more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.