BabychStache Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 Columbus is in a pickle. They have cap issues, as well as they will lose one of Boone Jenner, William Karlsson, Matt Calvert, Alex Wennberg to the expansion draft. They need to move out some salary and protect their core. I propose to CBJ: CBJ 2nd round pick + one of the forwards the Canucks have that can be exposed. to Van: Boone Jenner Is that enough to get Boone Jenner? No, not in a regular situation. If you're CBJ and you are looking at losing one of him, Karlsson, Calvert or Wennberg for nothing, at least this way you protect the players you want and get back a draft pick you're gonna need. Jenner was in Torts dog house for part of the season as well. EDIT: Sorry forgot to Tag the title. I didn't know we had to do that in this section. My apologies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adarsh Sant Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 Won't we have to protect Jenner in the expansion draft now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
higgyfan Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 I would be ecstatic if the Canucks somehow acquired Boone Jenner! Having a 1-2 punch of Boone and Bo as the top Cs would be amazing. Boone plays a 'heavy' game and can score +++ goals. Acquiring Boone would allow the Canucks to use their 1st pick on a dman as I don't see any of the Cs being a better option than Jenner. The only problem with the trade is that BJs wouldn't want a protected player in exchange, so the Canucks would be looking at trading picks or prospects. This would be tough to swallow, as it would likely be a player or pick that has solid value. I am interesting in seeing what other fans come up with. Really like the idea of Jenner. Good one, OP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coryberg Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 43 minutes ago, BabychStache said: I propose to CBJ: CBJ 2nd round pick + one of the forwards the Canucks have that can be exposed. to Van: Boone Jenner So this deal is basically... Gaunce, a 2nd and one of baer or granlund (one would have to be exposed to protect jenner) for Jenner who produced a lower point per game last season. Makes zero sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaerToBo Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 Would do if were exposing Sutter to expansion but if not it's not worth it to lose a Baertschi or Granlund Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 Jenner is one of my favourite underrated players in the league. I was so chapped when we picked a different Oshawa player in the draft that year. Unfortunately, the logistics of the trade don't really work out as we would have to end up exposing Sutter, Granlund, or Baer if we acquired Jenner, which in the end doesn't make it an overly favourable move for us. If we were to swing Sutter (or pipe dream Eriksson) away in a trade beforehand however, I would be all for picking up Jenner in a deal like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BabychStache Posted May 2, 2017 Author Share Posted May 2, 2017 22 minutes ago, coryberg said: So this deal is basically... Gaunce, a 2nd and one of baer or granlund (one would have to be exposed to protect jenner) for Jenner who produced a lower point per game last season. Makes zero sense. I did not really think of it that way. Great point. This is why i love how active this forum is, allows for some really good and thorough discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
higgyfan Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 1 hour ago, coryberg said: So this deal is basically... Gaunce, a 2nd and one of baer or granlund (one would have to be exposed to protect jenner) for Jenner who produced a lower point per game last season. Makes zero sense. As far as I'm concerned, Jenner would be an upgrade over any of those players. The guy is a beast; especially when it comes to playoff type hockey. He is built for the aggressive and rough game. Yeah, yeah...he has struggled under Torts this season, but the season before he had 30 goals. He'd be a great fit for our team. Just the right age as well. My gosh! Toughness and scoring for the Vancouver Canucks! The only reason this trade doesn't work is because BJs won't take back a protected player. It defeats their purpose in trading Jenner in the first place. Canucks would have to up the anti with another pick or a decent prospect, which is tough for a rebuilding team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scheif16 Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 If would like to see a trade with CBJ involving Pierre-Luc DuBois. I know its unlikly that a 3OA is dealt, but if there is interest (maybe Tanev) from CBJ we could make a package. It would solve our Center problem and we could pick either a defensman, center or wing at the draft.. Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldoescobar Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 3 hours ago, higgyfan said: As far as I'm concerned, Jenner would be an upgrade over any of those players. The guy is a beast; especially when it comes to playoff type hockey. He is built for the aggressive and rough game. Yeah, yeah...he has struggled under Torts this season, but the season before he had 30 goals. He'd be a great fit for our team. Just the right age as well. My gosh! Toughness and scoring for the Vancouver Canucks! The only reason this trade doesn't work is because BJs won't take back a protected player. It defeats their purpose in trading Jenner in the first place. Canucks would have to up the anti with another pick or a decent prospect, which is tough for a rebuilding team. This... Jenner is a huge upgrade over Granlund and Baer combined, unfortunately the nucks would have to add far more valuable pieces to get him from Columbus. The time to get Jenner was 2-3 years ago. Jenner reminds me a lot of Horvat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldoescobar Posted May 2, 2017 Share Posted May 2, 2017 4 hours ago, coryberg said: So this deal is basically... Gaunce, a 2nd and one of baer or granlund (one would have to be exposed to protect jenner) for Jenner who produced a lower point per game last season. Makes zero sense. Doesnt make sense for Columbus Ill give you that. If it were an option (not even close imo) and Vancouver turned it down, now that would make zero sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morrissex95 Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 We could just protect Jenner instead of Sutter. Jenner is younger and will be better than Sutter. Makes perfect sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phat Fingers Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 22 hours ago, BabychStache said: Columbus is in a pickle. They have cap issues, as well as they will lose one of Boone Jenner, William Karlsson, Matt Calvert, Alex Wennberg to the expansion draft. They need to move out some salary and protect their core. I propose to CBJ: CBJ 2nd round pick + one of the forwards the Canucks have that can be exposed. to Van: Boone Jenner Is that enough to get Boone Jenner? No, not in a regular situation. If you're CBJ and you are looking at losing one of him, Karlsson, Calvert or Wennberg for nothing, at least this way you protect the players you want and get back a draft pick you're gonna need. Jenner was in Torts dog house for part of the season as well. EDIT: Sorry forgot to Tag the title. I didn't know we had to do that in this section. My apologies. I think you may be on to something, but we don't even need to offer up a player. Just trade the second for whomever CBJ chooses to expose, say Jenner, then expose say, Baer. If LV takes Baer, then the deal is our 2nd and Baer for Jenner. I would strongly consider that deal. CBJ is at an extreme disadvantage with the expansion and would be getting a second for essentially nothing. We may aviod losing Sbisa as a result, meaning that Tanev could be dealt for another asset or a high first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phat Fingers Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 Heck we could use the expansion to improve aspects of our roster, just by trading some of our exposed players for other teams exposed players... Follow this, team 1 has a better goalie than we do, one that is likely to be taken. They would prefer a different, less valuable peice of their roster gets drafted, but their goalie has to be exposed and will be picked. That goalie is better than Markstrom. We trade Markstrom for team 1's goalie. As a result, LV takes the one of the team 1's exposed players at a different position as they don't want Markstrom. Team 1 gets to keep Markstrom as their backup, a downgrade, but better than losing their better goalie for nothing, plus they were able to shed another player that they kinda wanted to get rid of and gain a boatload of cap space. We could trade one of our d men, doing the same thing. Maybe throw in a low pick or tier two prospect along the way. Same with forward. Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coryberg Posted May 3, 2017 Share Posted May 3, 2017 Never really took a look at the blue jackets cap situation before just now. They have 3 million in cap space for next season with a 21 man roster under contract and no big contracts to re-sign. As far as expansion their biggest problem isn't at forward it is on D where they will have to choose between Johnson or savard. My protection list would be... Folingo* Dubinsky* Hartnell* Saad Atkinson Jenner Wennberg Jones Murray Savard Bobrovsky That leaves Calvert (15 points) and Karlsson (25 points) available. I think they would be fine losing one of them over Jack Johnson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BabychStache Posted May 3, 2017 Author Share Posted May 3, 2017 6 hours ago, coryberg said: Never really took a look at the blue jackets cap situation before just now. They have 3 million in cap space for next season with a 21 man roster under contract and no big contracts to re-sign. As far as expansion their biggest problem isn't at forward it is on D where they will have to choose between Johnson or savard. My protection list would be... Folingo* Dubinsky* Hartnell* Saad Atkinson Jenner Wennberg Jones Murray Savard Bobrovsky That leaves Calvert (15 points) and Karlsson (25 points) available. I think they would be fine losing one of them over Jack Johnson. Wennberg is RFA isn't he? I suspect he will be re upped for north of 4M per. Which sucks up all their available space. As it sits right now they will be exposing 2 great players in Johnson and Karlsson. If they do a deal like the one i proposed above, they would lose Jenner, but keep Karlsson, and get a 2nd rd pick. For them its a 2nd + Karlsson for Jenner. That seems reasonable. From the Canucks they lose a protected slot which would probably cost Granlund, but Jenner is an upgrade over him anyway. This expansion draft makes this off season very interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.