Patrick Kane Posted May 8, 2017 Share Posted May 8, 2017 I know some are unrealistic (such as the Sedins waiving) but hey, it's all in good fun. To Edmonton: Henrik Sedin (50% retained) Daniel Sedin To Vancouver: Ryan Nugent-Hopkins Jordan Eberle --- To Detroit: Erik Gudbranson To Vancouver: Gustav Nyquist --- To Dallas: Jakob Markstrom To Vancouver: Stephen Johns 2018 Dallas 1st Kari Lehtonen Antti Niemi -- Nyquist - RNH - Boeser Baertschi - Horvat - Eberle Granlund - Sutter - Eriksson Rodin - Chaput - Dorsett Edler - Tanev Hutton - Johns Sbisa - Stecher Lehtonen Niemi Flip Eberle & Nyquist the year after (final year of contract), bring up Goldobin/Dahlen, 2017/18 1st rounder, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThaManbeast Posted May 8, 2017 Share Posted May 8, 2017 Not enough value coming back to the Canucks imo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jono2009 Posted May 8, 2017 Share Posted May 8, 2017 To whoever: Patrick Kane's trade idea In return: Future proposals Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurt Nirvanagut Posted May 8, 2017 Share Posted May 8, 2017 The Sedins trade definitely sounds like a move I would make in NHL 16. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lock Posted May 8, 2017 Share Posted May 8, 2017 Edmonton's unlikely to trade for a couple of potential retirees that could leave them with nothing in the end. The only time the first trade might be feasible would be at the trade deadline in order for a cup run. Even then, would the Sedins in their age provide more punch than RHN and Eberle in a cup run? From Edmonton's perspective, it would be a waste of 2 good trading chips for temporary help. In my opinion, with Tryamkin gone and the need for more defensive prospects, I think we stand a better chance of holding onto Gudbranson (we haven't really seen what he's like yet) than trading for another forward. Edmonton wasn't good for example until they started to get better defense even though they had all the offense in the world. The 3rd trade makes so little sense to me with Demko and Garteig in the pipeline. We don't really need another goalie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockey Stache Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 2 hours ago, Patrick Kane said: I know some are unrealistic (such as the Sedins waiving) but hey, it's all in good fun. To Edmonton: Henrik Sedin (50% retained) Daniel Sedin To Vancouver: Ryan Nugent-Hopkins Jordan Eberle --- To Detroit: Erik Gudbranson To Vancouver: Gustav Nyquist --- To Dallas: Jakob Markstrom Stephen Johns 2018 Dallas 1st To Vancouver: Kari Lehtonen Antti Niemi -- Nyquist - RNH - Boeser Baertschi - Horvat - Eberle Granlund - Sutter - Eriksson Rodin - Chaput - Dorsett Edler - Tanev Hutton - Johns Sbisa - Stecher Lehtonen Niemi Flip Eberle & Nyquist the year after (final year of contract), bring up Goldobin/Dahlen, 2017/18 1st rounder, etc. What's happening with that Dallas trade? Vancouver trades Johns and Dallas' 2018 1st round pick to Dallas along with Markstrom for their 2 current goalies?????? Even if that were a typing error (which I know it is), it still makes 0 sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Neilsons Towel Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 4 hours ago, Patrick Kane said: I know some are unrealistic (such as the Sedins waiving) but hey, it's all in good fun. To Edmonton: Henrik Sedin (50% retained) Daniel Sedin To Vancouver: Ryan Nugent-Hopkins Jordan Eberle --- To Detroit: Erik Gudbranson To Vancouver: Gustav Nyquist --- To Dallas: Jakob Markstrom Stephen Johns 2018 Dallas 1st To Vancouver: Kari Lehtonen Antti Niemi -- Nyquist - RNH - Boeser Baertschi - Horvat - Eberle Granlund - Sutter - Eriksson Rodin - Chaput - Dorsett Edler - Tanev Hutton - Johns Sbisa - Stecher Lehtonen Niemi Flip Eberle & Nyquist the year after (final year of contract), bring up Goldobin/Dahlen, 2017/18 1st rounder, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baer. Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 Great trades, why aren't the Canucks doing this?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Kane Posted May 9, 2017 Author Share Posted May 9, 2017 4 hours ago, The Lock said: Edmonton's unlikely to trade for a couple of potential retirees that could leave them with nothing in the end. The only time the first trade might be feasible would be at the trade deadline in order for a cup run. Even then, would the Sedins in their age provide more punch than RHN and Eberle in a cup run? From Edmonton's perspective, it would be a waste of 2 good trading chips for temporary help. In my opinion, with Tryamkin gone and the need for more defensive prospects, I think we stand a better chance of holding onto Gudbranson (we haven't really seen what he's like yet) than trading for another forward. Edmonton wasn't good for example until they started to get better defense even though they had all the offense in the world. The 3rd trade makes so little sense to me with Demko and Garteig in the pipeline. We don't really need another goalie. Unlikely yes, but given how good they have been this year, they do have a window to win the cup within the next year or two. Eberle and RNH have been nonexistent in the playoffs, and a determinant to the team. If Sedins have a good 40-50 games under Travis Green, it could amplify their value as rentals. Edmonton dumps two big, bad contracts, before the McDavid extension. I do believe the Canucks would need to sweeten the pot in this deal. Maroon - McDavid - Draisaitl D.Sedin - H.Sedin - Lucic Pouliot - Caggiula - Puljujarvi Slepyshev - Letestu - Kassian Trade two, I don't like Gudbranson at all, just personal preference. Especially if he's going to get a 4M+ deal. Could probably sign a UFA defenseman who could do his role, or at the very least, play reliably - for a fraction of the price. Detroit needs defenders, especially RHD - and have been looking to move Nyquist/Tatar. 3rd trade DOES make sense. Think Teravainen+Bickell for picks. Taking on two bad contracts (with 1 year left) and getting a solid defender in his prime (to replace Gudbranson) and a 1st round pick. Demko can play another year in the A, and will still likely get 10-15 games at the NHL level due to how injury prone Lehtonen is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckmen84 Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 I can't believe you would even suggest the Sedins to Edmonton...barf . Eberle and RNH are softys, trade Guddy aswell and you have the softest team in the NhL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Kane Posted May 9, 2017 Author Share Posted May 9, 2017 1 minute ago, canuckmen84 said: I can't believe you would even suggest the Sedins to Edmonton...barf . Eberle and RNH are softys, trade Guddy aswell and you have the softest team in the NhL. There's no quick fix, whats the point in being physical next year? Lol. Eberle is going to be moved regardless. RNH could rebound to 55-65 pts playing in home town, and even if he doesn't, you're getting 10+ years of him vs 1 year of the Sedins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckmen84 Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 1 minute ago, Patrick Kane said: There's no quick fix, whats the point in being physical next year? Lol. Eberle is going to be moved regardless. RNH could rebound to 55-65 pts playing in home town, and even if he doesn't, you're getting 10+ years of him vs 1 year of the Sedins. I'm too loyal of a fan to be able to stomach the Sedins in an Oilers jersey . I also hate Eberle and RNH and would never want to see them in a canucks jersey. Thankfully your trade proposals are so far fetched that i don't have to worry about either scenario happening Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freeridebc Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 1. Only way Sedins get traded is our season is another top 5 pick, and they produce. 50% retained and you'd get a 1st round pick and a prospect(s). 2. We traded McCann for Guddy. A 1 year deal is a waste. My opinion. You either sign and trade him, or lock him down and keep him, hoping he becomes what we want him to be. 3. Really no interest in any soft shell EDM or DET prospect. Give Green the reigns and see what happens with what we have. There's a lot of decent talent just starting to poke through. 4. There's no 2 trade fix n flip for this team. Bring these guys in together. Develope chemistry. Hopefully we draft and sign well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KKnight Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 I did Acid once.... everything seems plausible on acid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheHitman Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 Detroit would never take that deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lock Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 2 hours ago, Patrick Kane said: Unlikely yes, but given how good they have been this year, they do have a window to win the cup within the next year or two. Eberle and RNH have been nonexistent in the playoffs, and a determinant to the team. If Sedins have a good 40-50 games under Travis Green, it could amplify their value as rentals. Edmonton dumps two big, bad contracts, before the McDavid extension. I do believe the Canucks would need to sweeten the pot in this deal. Maroon - McDavid - Draisaitl D.Sedin - H.Sedin - Lucic Pouliot - Caggiula - Puljujarvi Slepyshev - Letestu - Kassian Trade two, I don't like Gudbranson at all, just personal preference. Especially if he's going to get a 4M+ deal. Could probably sign a UFA defenseman who could do his role, or at the very least, play reliably - for a fraction of the price. Detroit needs defenders, especially RHD - and have been looking to move Nyquist/Tatar. 3rd trade DOES make sense. Think Teravainen+Bickell for picks. Taking on two bad contracts (with 1 year left) and getting a solid defender in his prime (to replace Gudbranson) and a 1st round pick. Demko can play another year in the A, and will still likely get 10-15 games at the NHL level due to how injury prone Lehtonen is. If we have to sweeten the pot to trade the Sedins, then we're doing something wrong in my opinion. Especially if we'd supposedly trading them away for "bad contracts". Honestly, I think it's quick to judge on Gudbranson at this point when we haven't seen him for most of the season. A lot of people seem to want to analyze his performance with a limited number of games shown and some of those recovering from injury and from being on a new team. If you don't like Gudbranson, that's your opinion, but I think it would be a big mistake to trade a player who we haven't really seen play yet. If he was injured for multiple seasons like this then sure, but it seems like almost all players go through at least 1 season of injuries, so that's not much in the grand scheme of things if he can get back to being healthy. Overall though, I see your second trade as a personal preference, which is fine, but I would be quite against it. When I first read your Dallas trade I saw Johns and the pick going Dallas' way (and I've had a bad day so wasn't really thinking about there being an error in the typing). I still don't think your 3rd trade though would work to be honest. It's almost like a similar trade to how we got Christian Ehrhoff. Giving up very little to get a lot. Is Dallas really going to be that desperate to get rid of Lehtonen and Niemi? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyoung Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 8 hours ago, Patrick Kane said: To Dallas: Jakob Markstrom To Vancouver: Stephen Johns 2018 Dallas 1st Kari Lehtonen Antti Niemi What the **** lol I'm beyond confused. Markstrom for Johns alone is never gonna happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skolozsy2 Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 So, Dallas is giving up two weak starting goalies for one weak starting goalie, and they have to throw in a very good young defenseman and 1st rounder to get him. Seriously? Would you have traded a 1st, Stetcher, Markstrom, and Miller for Scott Darling? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Kane Posted May 9, 2017 Author Share Posted May 9, 2017 10 hours ago, canuckmen84 said: Thankfully your trade proposals are so far fetched that i don't have to worry about either scenario happening As are 99% of the proposals on here. 8 hours ago, TheHitman said: Detroit would never take that deal. Actually many Detroit fans believed that it was a fair deal. Nyquist isn't a 30 goal scoring, 70 point winger. 8 hours ago, The Lock said: Is Dallas really going to be that desperate to get rid of Lehtonen and Niemi? They make a combined 10.4M. The freed up cap allows them to add significant upgrades to their team. Markstrom is already an upgrade, they could also add a 1B option such as Elliott, and make a run for a UFA defender. 4 hours ago, skolozsy2 said: So, Dallas is giving up two weak starting goalies for one weak starting goalie, and they have to throw in a very good young defenseman and 1st rounder to get him. Seriously? Would you have traded a 1st, Stetcher, Markstrom, and Miller for Scott Darling? Jakob Markstrom - 27 years old 16-17: 2.63 GAA, .910Sv% 15-16; 2.73 GAA, .915Sv% Kari Lehtonen - 33 years old 16-17: 2.85 GAA, .902Sv% 15-16: 2.76 GAA, .906Sv% Antti Niemi - 33 years old 16-17: 3.30 GAA, .892 Sv% 15-16: 2.67 GAA, .905 Sv% So, no, Dallas gives up two HORRIBLE goaltenders, not even backup worthy, with a combined cap hit of 10.4M, for a 27 year old potential starter who has put up much better numbers over the last 2 year on a bottom 3 team and free up around 6M~ cap in the process. You can't compare this deal to the one you suggested. Markstrom and Miller are good goaltenders, and the Canucks aren't even competing. Lehtonen and Niemi have wasted 2 years of Dallas' cup window, and cost them many regular season and playoff games. Stetcher >>> Johns Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurt Nirvanagut Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 10 hours ago, KKnight said: I did Acid once.... everything seems plausible on acid. Acid is great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.