[Proposal] Tanev to DAL

[theminister]

7 minutes ago, oldnews said:

We could also simply retain on Edler - that is unless Callahan is willing to waive period moving forward so that we expose him - if protecting him is necessary, I'd say that's a non-starter (and could cause collateral damage for us).

 

Another possibility is taking back Coburn in a deal - of course depending on how Tampa values him.

Should have clarified.

 

Yes, it would require being contingent on that.

 

They're going to expose one of Garrison or Coburn now anyway even if they don't acquire a D before the ED. They might rather keep both as a hedge against the other being taken if they did acquire and protect Edler. Just a thought.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

22 minutes ago, theminister said:

It was an odd decision to be sure.

 

I'm just not convinced that spending 4 mil on Niemi over Lehtonen would be their preference right now. Either way it will be an expensive tandem any way they go.

I think Nill really loves the idea of the two goalie system, and now with Hitch I think that's the way they will try to go, but that usually only works when you got an upcoming goalie on a ELC or low bridge contract. (ie, Fluery/Murray, Bishop/Vas, Miller/Marky, Luongo/Schnieder, Tukka/Thomas)

 

With a salary cap, teams can't afford to have 10 mill locked up in two goalies.  I think they will look to move one of those two goalies and then either trade/sign another one in the summer.  Maybe Mason, goes there since he's familiar with Hitch, maybe they throw money at Bishop, or even go after Elliot (again familiar with hitch). But I think the goalie they go after will likely be the #1 goalie with the goalie they don't move to remain the back up...

 

If i'm the stars, i'm trying to move both goalies.  And start fresh, get/sign a #1 goals and a young upcoming back up.

 

for the #1 they should:

trade for Fluery, or sign Bishop, or sign Mason, or sign Elliot

 

for the young back up they should

trade for Anton Forsberg from CBJ

 

They'd then only have 5-7 mill locked up in goal tending rather than 10-12 million. and at least have a #1 goalie in their system

[theminister]

4 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

I think Nill really loves the idea of the two goalie system, and now with Hitch I think that's the way they will try to go, but that usually only works when you got an upcoming goalie on a ELC or low bridge contract. (ie, Fluery/Murray, Bishop/Vas, Miller/Marky, Luongo/Schnieder, Tukka/Thomas)

 

With a salary cap, teams can't afford to have 10 mill locked up in two goalies.  I think they will look to move one of those two goalies and then either trade/sign another one in the summer.  Maybe Mason, goes there since he's familiar with Hitch, maybe they throw money at Bishop, or even go after Elliot (again familiar with hitch). But I think the goalie they go after will likely be the #1 goalie with the goalie they don't move to remain the back up...

 

If i'm the stars, i'm trying to move both goalies.  And start fresh, get/sign a #1 goals and a young upcoming back up.

 

for the #1 they should:

trade for Fluery, or sign Bishop, or sign Mason, or sign Elliot

 

for the young back up they should

trade for Anton Forsberg from CBJ

 

They'd then only have 5-7 mill locked up in goal tending rather than 10-12 million. 

Can't argue with any of that. They certainly should be aggressive in remaking that backend now. Maybe winning the lottery gives them the assets that allow them to do things they might not have a week ago?

 

It will be an expensive proposition for them to divest themselves of both goalies now with no cap and no bad contracts coming back their way. So few buyers willing to do that. That may play into the Canucks hands, as you all suggest.

 

Korpisalo should be their target though IMO, not Forsberg.

[oldnews]

1 minute ago, theminister said:

Should have clarified.

 

Yes, it would require being contingent on that.

 

They're going to expose one of Garrison or Coburn now anyway even if they don't acquire a D before the ED. They might rather keep both as a hedge against the other being taken if they did acquire and protect Edler. Just a thought.

True - I think Tampa would probably prefer to add a D without subtracting, and have a viable protection spot to upgrade - Coburn has been solid for them - they'd probably prefer to move forward cap or take Eddie with retention.

 

[oldnews]

8 minutes ago, J.R. said:

Don't disagree.

we could still make them pay to dump Niemi on us though - whether or not there's a D included in the deal.

[aGENT]

Just now, oldnews said:

we could still make them pay to dump Niemi on us though - whether or not there's a D included in the deal.

Absolutely! They do have two 2nd's this year...

[ForsbergTheGreat]

9 minutes ago, theminister said:

Can't argue with any of that. They certainly should be aggressive in remaking that backend now. Maybe winning the lottery gives them the assets that allow them to do things they might not have a week ago?

 

It will be an expensive proposition for them to divest themselves of both goalies now with no cap and no bad contracts coming back their way. So few buyers willing to do that. That may play into the Canucks hands, as you all suggest.

 

Korpisalo should be their target though IMO, not Forsberg.

yeah my line of thinking on that was, I think Korpisalo might be a good target for vegas and if they trade for Fluery they'd only be able to protect one and could end up loosing Korpisalo in ED.  where Forsberg is less likely to be claimed.  But if they go the free agent signing route (bishop/mason/Elliot) then definitely Korpisalo should be the main target. 

 

If some how the stars were able to get a hold of Murray and Korpisalo that would be a major boost to their back end. Just spit balling but..

 

Lehtonen + 2018 first round pick for Tanev (package)

Honka + Tufte/Gurianov + DAL 2nd round pick for Murray + Korpisalo

Buyout Niemi

Sign UFA Mason July 1

 

Protect *

 

*Murray *Klingberg

Hamhuis *Tanev

Lindell Oleksiaki

 

Mason

*Korpisalo

 

 

[ChampStatus]

As much as it pains me to say this. I don't think Tanev will ever go to Dallas.

Do you really think Tom Gaglardi would let this trade go through.

Even if it is an even trade.

The only time Tom Gaglardi will make a trade with the Canucks it would have to be along the lines of the San Fransisco 49ers trade with Chicago Bears.

[ice orca]

3 hours ago, ChampStatus said:

As much as it pains me to say this. I don't think Tanev will ever go to Dallas.

Do you really think Tom Gaglardi would let this trade go through.

Even if it is an even trade.

The only time Tom Gaglardi will make a trade with the Canucks it would have to be along the lines of the San Fransisco 49ers trade with Chicago Bears.

Gagliardi was probably grinning like a big fat cat when they moved up like they did at this draft. Aquaman probably just blew out a massive haemeroid 

[Angry Goose]

3 hours ago, ChampStatus said:

As much as it pains me to say this. I don't think Tanev will ever go to Dallas.

Do you really think Tom Gaglardi would let this trade go through.

Even if it is an even trade.

The only time Tom Gaglardi will make a trade with the Canucks it would have to be along the lines of the San Fransisco 49ers trade with Chicago Bears.

Like one wise man once said: "&^@# 'em"

[messier's_elbow]

10 hours ago, theminister said:

Or.... you load up on a few Russians and make it a more comfortable room to be in 2 years from now with Goldy, Nich, and Tree.

 

Hire Bure or someone to come over as a special adviser. Problems solved?

I hope your joking.

[goblix]

9 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

yeah my line of thinking on that was, I think Korpisalo might be a good target for vegas and if they trade for Fluery they'd only be able to protect one and could end up loosing Korpisalo in ED.  where Forsberg is less likely to be claimed.  But if they go the free agent signing route (bishop/mason/Elliot) then definitely Korpisalo should be the main target. 

 

If some how the stars were able to get a hold of Murray and Korpisalo that would be a major boost to their back end. Just spit balling but..

 

Lehtonen + 2018 first round pick for Tanev (package)

Honka + Tufte/Gurianov + DAL 2nd round pick for Murray + Korpisalo

Buyout Niemi

Sign UFA Mason July 1

 

Protect *

 

*Murray *Klingberg

Hamhuis *Tanev

Lindell Oleksiaki

 

Mason

*Korpisalo

Expansion draft occurs on June 21rst and the Entry draft occurs on June 23rd. Seeing as Dallas isn't trading expansion players that they care about if claimed there is no reason for them to make that trade before the expansion draft.

For the Canucks... Well we have Edler, Tanev, Gudbranson, Sbisa and Biega where we can protect 3/5... Whilst I like Sbisa I think Tanev will be more desirable after the expansion draft where teams don't need to protect them and if we lose Sbisa or Biega in the draft then that means we didn't lose Gaunce.

It's a luxury we can look to exploit for this reason.

 

Goalie wise I agree with you, Korpisalo would be a great pickup as a backup // developing starter.

 

Anyways overall there will be alot of interested parties for Tanev, guy eats top minutes, has great fancy transition stats and is on a wicked contract for the next 3 years. Only detractor is his injury history which hopefully teams ignore

[Ronaldoescobar]

17 hours ago, ice orca said:

Gagliardi was probably grinning like a big fat cat when they moved up like they did at this draft. Aquaman probably just blew out a massive haemeroid 

LOL i think Gagliardi has been laughing ever since he lost the court battle to get the Nucks... He has won a Stanley Cup with Dallas and they jhave been in the past and are currently a far far superior team to Vancouver (goaltending aside). He probably looks back now thinking it was the best thing that ever happened and the joke is most certainly on FA.

[Lastresort318]

On 4/26/2017 at 1:07 PM, NUCKER67 said:

I don't know, I think we'd be pretty lucky with this

 

to DAL: Tanev

to VAN: 1st (2017) and Lehtonen

 

Lehtonen only has 1 year left on his $5.9 mil contract. Why does he have negative value? He's younger than Miller. Who would DAL replace him with?

 

DAL is also a poor team and not contending, you would think they'd highly value that 8th overall this year (or whatever they get).

 

I still think TOR is the perfect trading partner for Tanev. They want to win now, need a good, experienced RHD, and would probably be on board giving up their 1st +

 

 

 

 

We shouldn't trade one of the best shut down defensemen in the NHL to a team that has a super powered offence and needs defence. You are literally just building up a championship team for the leafs while we would not be able to get any similar in value to Tanev back.

[aGENT]

I'm liking TM's proposal from elsewhere:

 

Quote

 

Tanev + CLB 2nd to DAL for 3rd OA, Lehtonen and Oleksiak.

 

Draft one of Mittel/Glass/Vilardi (or slim chance of Patrick falling) at 3 and Liljegrin at 5.

 

 

[Hugor Hill]

54 minutes ago, Lastresort318 said:

We shouldn't trade one of the best shut down defensemen in the NHL to a team that has a super powered offence and needs defence. You are literally just building up a championship team for the leafs while we would not be able to get any similar in value to Tanev back.

We should make the trade that's most valuable to us. If we help a team in the east to become a contender, so be it. We have Edmonton, Calgary, Anaheim, Chicago, Nashville etc, to worry about here.

 

 

[oldnews]

Ok so that Anaheim 1st to Dallas changes things....

 

To Dallas

Edler

 

To Van

Anaheim 1st

Lehtonen

Oleksiak

Dallas 3rd

[Alflives]

6 minutes ago, oldnews said:

Ok so that Anaheim 1st to Dallas changes things....

 

To Dallas

Edler

 

To Van

Anaheim 1st

Lehtonen

Oleksiak

Dallas 3rd

Then take our two firsts and move up into the top 2?

[oldnews]

1 minute ago, Alflives said:

Then take our two firsts and move up into the top 2?

Not something I personally would do.

I'd take Mittelstadt, Liljegren or Glass at 5 and then Robert Thomas or perhaps Brannstrom late in the first.

Or perhaps even trade down to 7th and take the Yotes late first in the process....

 

[Alflives]

1 hour ago, oldnews said:

Not something I personally would do.

I'd take Mittelstadt, Liljegren or Glass at 5 and then Robert Thomas or perhaps Brannstrom late in the first.

Or perhaps even trade down to 7th and take the Yotes late first in the process....

 

More picks the better then?  Like more swings?