(Discussion/Proposal) VAN Trade Deadline

[Sedinery33]

First time post, so flame away.

 

With approx. 30 of the final games on the schedule against playoff teams, I think the Canucks will have a hard time making up any ground in the standings. That said come trade deadline day we will be far enough back management may pull the trigger on some move. Here are my proposals

 

Burrow to MTL for a conditional 3rd round pick. Becomes a 2nd if Montreal advances to conference finals. Burrows has always dreamed about playing in Montreal, if management said there was an offer on the table I'm sure Burrows would jump at the chance. It's not really asking him to waive his NTC

 

Miller and Hansen to LA for Zatkoff and a conditional 2nd, becomes a first if LA makes the conference finals. If Miller was informed there was a trade offer I'm sure he would waive to go to LA, closer to his wife and a chance at playoffs.

 

Hutton and Subban to TBL for Koekkoek and a 4th or 5th, there is no room on the right side for Subban and TBL might just be dumb enough to fall for this deal as I don't think Hutton is as good as he has been made out to be.

 

Any of Megna, Chaput, Utica players that never have a chance to crack the lineup anywhere for picks

 

Thought, feedback?

 

[Pears]

That is a horrible return for Miller AND Hansen. Miller's been one of the best goalies in the league over the last little while and you give him away for that??? Same with that Hutton proposal. 

[Alflives]

I like it, but I think you need to go even further with the moving out older players.  Tanev needs to go too.  The return for Tanev to TO could be a first and two seconds.  

[zzbottom]

31 minutes ago, Sedinery33 said:

First time post, so flame away.

 

With approx. 30 of the final games on the schedule against playoff teams, I think the Canucks will have a hard time making up any ground in the standings. That said come trade deadline day we will be far enough back management may pull the trigger on some move. Here are my proposals

 

Burrow to MTL for a conditional 3rd round pick. Becomes a 2nd if Montreal advances to conference finals. Burrows has always dreamed about playing in Montreal, if management said there was an offer on the table I'm sure Burrows would jump at the chance. It's not really asking him to wave his NTC

 

Miller and Hansen to LA for Zatkoff and a conditional 2nd, becomes a first if LA makes the conference finals. If Miller was informed there was a trade offer I'm sure he would wave to go to LA, closer to his wife and a chance at playoffs.

 

Hutton and Subban to TBL for Koekkoek and a 4th or 5th, there is no room on the right side for Subban and TBL might just be dumb enough to fall for this deal as I don't think Hutton is as good as he has been made out to be.

 

Any of Megna, Chaput, Utica players that never have a chance to crack the lineup anywhere for picks

 

Thought, feedback?

 

Why would the Kings want Miller when Quick is nearing a return and Budaj has played out of his mind this season?

[goalie13]

46 minutes ago, Sedinery33 said:

It's not really asking him to wave his NTC

If Miller was informed there was a trade offer I'm sure he would wave to go to LA, closer to his wife and a chance at playoffs.

First off, the word you are looking for is waive.

 

Next, it really is asking him to waive his NTC.  Burrows has the NTC in his contract so the only way to trade him is to have him waive that clause.

 

I agree with other posters that you aren't getting near enough value for Miller and Hansen.

 

As for the TBL deal, since Mike Milbury isn't the GM, you can't count on making a deal based on the other GM being 'dumb enough'.  The deal has to make sense or why bother even proposing it.  Rationale for why the other side would do the deal would greatly help your proposals.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

1 hour ago, Sedinery33 said:

Hutton and Subban to TBL for Koekkoek and a 4th or 5th, there is no room on the right side for Subban and TBL might just be dumb enough to fall for this deal as I don't think Hutton is as good as he has been made out to be.

 

 

So we trade a 23 year old left handed, ben hutton who's put up 36 points in 116 career NHL games,

 

for a 22 year old, left handed Koekkoek who's put up 5 points in 41 career NHL games

 

All because you don't "think hutton is as good as he's made out to be"?  And you add in Subban?  What a terrible idea.  And that ignores the fact that Koekkoek requires protection in the upcoming expansion draft while Hutton doesn't.    No thanks, i'll keep our future 40+ point D man. 

[Father Ryan]

1 hour ago, Sedinery33 said:

First time post, so flame away.

 

With approx. 30 of the final games on the schedule against playoff teams, I think the Canucks will have a hard time making up any ground in the standings. That said come trade deadline day we will be far enough back management may pull the trigger on some move. Here are my proposals

 

Burrow to MTL for a conditional 3rd round pick. Becomes a 2nd if Montreal advances to conference finals. Burrows has always dreamed about playing in Montreal, if management said there was an offer on the table I'm sure Burrows would jump at the chance. It's not really asking him to wave his NTC

 

Miller and Hansen to LA for Zatkoff and a conditional 2nd, becomes a first if LA makes the conference finals. If Miller was informed there was a trade offer I'm sure he would wave to go to LA, closer to his wife and a chance at playoffs.

 

Hutton and Subban to TBL for Koekkoek and a 4th or 5th, there is no room on the right side for Subban and TBL might just be dumb enough to fall for this deal as I don't think Hutton is as good as he has been made out to be.

 

Any of Megna, Chaput, Utica players that never have a chance to crack the lineup anywhere for picks

 

Thought, feedback?

 

The Burrows deal...not bad, but per Benning's statement Montreal would have to make the offer first (or Burrows go to management). The return is about right

 

Miller and Hansen...nowhere near enough. I could see Miller going to LA, or San Jose, or Dallas; anyone of the clubs that need a dependable #2 (or in Dallas' case a dependable anything!). I would ask for consecutive 3rds for Miller alone, with one of them going to a 2nd if the team in question goes far enough. Hansen also...again, there's an NTC and Hansen has openly stated no desire to go anywhere. If he did...I would try to get a bidding war going on between, say, Pittsburgh and Washington, see which one would want him more. Maybe get up to a 2nd + a mid grade prospect...maybe.

 

Hutton and Subban...um NO. I'm all for trading Subban, I have been vocal about him not having a place in our organization, and I'm sticking with it. We have Stetcher, we have Juolevi coming in, we have plenty of other talent to choose from to afford keeping around a small Dman that will just get pushed around in his zone. Hutton...we have him for a couple more years on his new deal. He's young, has size and has already proven he's NHL material. Let him get through his current deal, then see. Right now, he's not playing overly good (when he was healthy), but our depth is enough that he can be on the 2nd or 3rd pairing and play with less stress. Sure worked for Sbisa!

 

I could see some 4th line players moved, like Megna/Chaput/Skille/Grenier/Labate/Gaunce. If Benning got more than a 4th for any one of them...his initials would need to be JC, not JB.

 

One trade not discussed...who is more important to the club long term; Granlund or Baertschi? Neither one has an NTC, both are young, both would likely command a 2nd each. One of them likely needs to go, or he will go for nothing to Vegas. No way Vegas turns their nose up at one of these guys.

[Sedinery33]

12 minutes ago, Father Ryan said:

The Burrows deal...not bad, but per Benning's statement Montreal would have to make the offer first (or Burrows go to management). The return is about right

 

Miller and Hansen...nowhere near enough. I could see Miller going to LA, or San Jose, or Dallas; anyone of the clubs that need a dependable #2 (or in Dallas' case a dependable anything!). I would ask for consecutive 3rds for Miller alone, with one of them going to a 2nd if the team in question goes far enough. Hansen also...again, there's an NTC and Hansen has openly stated no desire to go anywhere. If he did...I would try to get a bidding war going on between, say, Pittsburgh and Washington, see which one would want him more. Maybe get up to a 2nd + a mid grade prospect...maybe.

 

Hutton and Subban...um NO. I'm all for trading Subban, I have been vocal about him not having a place in our organization, and I'm sticking with it. We have Stetcher, we have Juolevi coming in, we have plenty of other talent to choose from to afford keeping around a small Dman that will just get pushed around in his zone. Hutton...we have him for a couple more years on his new deal. He's young, has size and has already proven he's NHL material. Let him get through his current deal, then see. Right now, he's not playing overly good (when he was healthy), but our depth is enough that he can be on the 2nd or 3rd pairing and play with less stress. Sure worked for Sbisa!

 

I could see some 4th line players moved, like Megna/Chaput/Skille/Grenier/Labate/Gaunce. If Benning got more than a 4th for any one of them...his initials would need to be JC, not JB.

 

One trade not discussed...who is more important to the club long term; Granlund or Baertschi? Neither one has an NTC, both are young, both would likely command a 2nd each. One of them likely needs to go, or he will go for nothing to Vegas. No way Vegas turns their nose up at one of these guys.

Fair points... As for the trade not discussed I believe Benning will talk with McPhee and make a trade, conditional pick, or one of the above AHL players for Baertschi or Granlunds protection. Since the Golden Knights may have the ability to start talking as soon as the trade deadline that give Canucks management lots of time to figure that out

[Alflives]

4 minutes ago, Sedinery33 said:

Fair points... As for the trade not discussed I believe Benning will talk with McPhee and make a trade, conditional pick, or one of the above AHL players for Baertschi or Granlunds protection. Since the Golden Knights may have the ability to start talking as soon as the trade deadline that give Canucks management lots of time to figure that out

Seriously, if we give up a draft pick (a second maybe?) to keep either of these two it's a mistake.  With Boeser, Lockwood, and Gaudette coming soon, Granlund and Bear will be gonners anyway, so just let Vegas take one.  

[GrizzlyAdams]

18 minutes ago, Father Ryan said:

 

I could see some 4th line players moved, like Megna/Chaput/Skille/Grenier/Labate/Gaunce. If Benning got more than a 4th for any one of them...his initials would need to be JC, not JB.

 

Thats where you're wrong bud. Megna's a first line stud.

[Sedinery33]

Just now, Alflives said:

Seriously, if we give up a draft pick (a second maybe?) to keep either of these two it's a mistake.  With Boeser, Lockwood, and Gaudette coming soon, Granlund and Bear will be gonners anyway, so just let Vegas take one.  

2nd, that's crazy, no one has said give up a second to protect them, conditional pick in the 4th to 7th round maybe. Though I would expose Hansen and keep both before that ever happened. If the idea is to get younger why keep Hansen?

[Sedinery33]

3 minutes ago, Mr53 said:

Thats where you're wrong bud. Megna's a first line stud.

My first thought was Megna straight up for Landeskog, but then I thought Avs would have to add to that. So I just decided to go with whatever others thought we could get

[Father Ryan]

10 minutes ago, Mr53 said:

Thats where you're wrong bud. Megna's a first line stud.

Oh my G....

I think I just acquired a hernia laughing!!!

[Sedinery33]

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

I like it, but I think you need to go even further with the moving out older players.  Tanev needs to go too.  The return for Tanev to TO could be a first and two seconds.  

A 1st and 2 seconds. By the time Lou is done dealing with you, you will be begging him to give you a 2nd...

[ice orca]

45 minutes ago, Sedinery33 said:

Fair points... As for the trade not discussed I believe Benning will talk with McPhee and make a trade, conditional pick, or one of the above AHL players for Baertschi or Granlunds protection. Since the Golden Knights may have the ability to start talking as soon as the trade deadline that give Canucks management lots of time to figure that out

I'm pretty sure that Vegas can't do squat until the last payment on the entry is made to the league. McPhee will be bomb barded with calls from every team in the league as well.

[Alflives]

49 minutes ago, Sedinery33 said:

2nd, that's crazy, no one has said give up a second to protect them, conditional pick in the 4th to 7th round maybe. Though I would expose Hansen and keep both before that ever happened. If the idea is to get younger why keep Hansen?

Hey! That's a great idea!  Expose Hansen to keep the younger guys.  If that's JB's plan, then he better try and trade Hansen before the coming TDL.

[hammertime]

I'd pass on the Hutton for Kok deal as it doesn't really make sense from the canucks side to give up a exempt D for one who will be eligible.

 

Why are you so high on Zatkoff? I'd put Millers value at a late 1st and a 3rd however since there will be few suiters we will have to take what we can get I'd settle for Kemp Budaij and hope for more I have no interest in Zatkoff. 

[Sbriggs]

2 hours ago, Alflives said:

Seriously, if we give up a draft pick (a second maybe?) to keep either of these two it's a mistake.  With Boeser, Lockwood, and Gaudette coming soon, Granlund and Bear will be gonners anyway, so just let Vegas take one.  

I don't think so, Sven and Grandlund are progressing well and I dont see them going anywhere anytime soon.

[Alflives]

4 minutes ago, Sbriggs said:

I don't think so, Sven and Grandlund are progressing well and I dont see them going anywhere anytime soon.

True they both have been looking better and better this year.  

[Sbriggs]

22 minutes ago, Alflives said:

True they both have been looking better and better this year.  

Thank you