Ryan Strome Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 19 minutes ago, Warhippy said: It's sarcasm, simply pointing out the foolishness of people that make grand sweeping statements one day only to change them the other. I think almost everyone on the forum is of the same mind. Edler + a 2nd for Niemi and 3rd OA or Tanev for Niemi and 3rd OA. I also say again I see Jersey and Winnipeg the dark horses to be involved with moving up to 3rd or 2nd Man if Dallas would take Edler for that pick I would be loving it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 30 minutes ago, VIC_CITY said: I think that would be a very good deal for us. Not sure if Dallas accepts though. Weak draft or not, 3rd OA is a huge asset. Yup I agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 1 hour ago, Ryan Strome said: Who has said this? The consensus seems to be Tanev for the 3rd oa and Niemi. Actually, some have suggested trading Tanev just to move up 2-3 spots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattrek Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 16 hours ago, EagleShield said: The market for a legit top pairing Dman (and Tanev is just that - firmly in the conversation for best defensive Dman in the league) is small. Edmonton gave Hall for Larsson. Washington gave a 1st, a 2nd, a 7th, a B prospect and a journeyman for Shattenkirk (who is now a pending UFA). I'd like to see something like Tanev + Dahlen + 33rd overall for Nylander + Kapanen + 17th overall. Why the &^@# would you trade Dahlen? Seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dreckis123 Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 No doubt , thank god this guy isn't our GM. Mine gillis 2.0 here lol 1 hour ago, Mattrek said: Why the &^@# would you trade Dahlen? Seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook007 Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 5 hours ago, Hutton Wink said: Actually, some have suggested trading Tanev just to move up 2-3 spots. Yes shocking.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 6 hours ago, Hutton Wink said: Actually, some have suggested trading Tanev just to move up 2-3 spots. That's just stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theminister Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 12 hours ago, Alflives said: Dhalen is ripping it up as a number one centre. Dahlen is a winger. His centre is Elias Pettersson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 1 hour ago, theminister said: Dahlen is a winger. His centre is Elias Pettersson. "You see the comparisons to a guy like Forsberg and his position listed at centre on Hockey DB and it’s pretty easy to get excited and think that the Canucks have found their future replacement for Henrik Sedin, the young centre who will eventually provide a one-two punch down the middle with Bo Horvat." http://www.vancourier.com/pass-it-to-bulis/is-jonathan-dahlen-the-canucks-future-first-line-centre-1.10613571#sthash.3co0ty1J.dpuf True, but he is a naturally gifted centre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theminister Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 18 minutes ago, Alflives said: "You see the comparisons to a guy like Forsberg and his position listed at centre on Hockey DB and it’s pretty easy to get excited and think that the Canucks have found their future replacement for Henrik Sedin, the young centre who will eventually provide a one-two punch down the middle with Bo Horvat." http://www.vancourier.com/pass-it-to-bulis/is-jonathan-dahlen-the-canucks-future-first-line-centre-1.10613571#sthash.3co0ty1J.dpuf True, but he is a naturally gifted centre. That only speaks to Daniel Wagner's competency to comment on such things. He clearly hasn't watched him play. He played some centre two years ago, he played none this year, and projects as a winger. His listing as a centre was always marginal. I mean, you can argue this all you want but you'll be wrong. Edit: I'll be more fair to Wagner....i read the article...the very next paragraph after the one you quoted is this.... "Unfortunately, that’s not going to happen. Dahlen hasn’t played centre for at least two seasons, at least at the highest levels he’s played. He lined up at left wing for Sweden at the World Junior Championships and has been doing the same for Timra IK in the Allsvenskan. So Betteridge’s Law of Headlines still holds true: no, Dahlen won’t be the Canucks future first line centre. But Dahlen is still a very good prospect that has the potential to be a top-six left winger, which is a position of weakness among Canucks prospects." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 1 minute ago, theminister said: That only speaks to Daniel Wagner's competency to comment on such things. He clearly hasn't watched him play. He played some centre two years ago, he played none this year, and projects as a winger. His listing as a centre was always marginal. I mean, you can argue this all you want but you'll be wrong. He's a naturally gifted centre. Where do some centre play to shelter them, as they develop? Is Sam Reinhart a winger? He played there this season. Or how about Nathan Mackinnon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theminister Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 Just now, Alflives said: He's a naturally gifted centre. Where do some centre play to shelter them, as they develop? Is Sam Reinhart a winger? He played there this season. Or how about Nathan Mackinnon? See my edit, Alf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 3 minutes ago, theminister said: See my edit, Alf. Point taken...as Alf tucks his furry tale and wanders back to his spaceship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 18 hours ago, Hutton Wink said: That has a few repercussions, such as Miller not returning. It also implies that a player of Tanev's profile isn't worth a 3rd overall in this draft. I don't claim to know his market value but suspect it's more (at least, his value to the Canucks is) which is why I also proposed a swap of their other first (28-31) with the Torts second, or the equivalent value of a prospect. They hold more value to us than them right now. It's an interesting question actually, this year particularly, IMO. In a more historically 'good' draft, I'd probably peg Tanev's value in the 5-10 range and Edler's in the 12-18 range +/-. This draft you could arguably bump those up 3+ spots. Then you factor in how 'flat' it is from 3-10 or 12 and the 3rd isn't really worth that much more than the 8th or 10th etc. Then there's the ED putting a premium on D value. Teams in the top 3 who (should) fancy themselves playoff teams etc. Perhaps Tanev alone IS worth (or darn close to) 3rd OA in THIS draft, with the ED and the team's involved. Perhaps we really don't need to add much to Edler to get there too. Maybe just taking on Niemi or Lehtonen is enough? It will be interesting to see what (if anything) shakes out in the next month. As for Miller, I'm fine having him back but I'm also fine having Markstrom firmly be given the reigns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 1 hour ago, J.R. said: Perhaps Tanev alone IS worth (or darn close to) 3rd OA in THIS draft, with the ED and the team's involved. Perhaps we really don't need to add much to Edler to get there too. Maybe just taking on Niemi or Lehtonen is enough? Part of my rationale is based on my read of Benning, in that he values Tanev very highly. I just don't see him trading him for nothing more than a pick, save maybe for a shot at a franchise player he covets. In the least, he'd want a second asset, likely a prospect but perhaps another pick. As for taking on a bad contract, Benning said last year they weren't really interested in that. Things can change of course, but I think they also really like Miller and would rather have him back than take on one of Dallas' anchors and fully give the reins to Markstrom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
messier's_elbow Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 21 hours ago, Hutton Wink said: Actually, some have suggested trading Tanev just to move up 2-3 spots. Yeah they are called idiots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 12 hours ago, theminister said: Dahlen is a winger. His centre is Elias Pettersson. Is Pettersson projecting as an NHL centre, or will his lack of size (mass, and gaining potential) possibly hinder that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theminister Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 On Sun May 21 2017 at 7:36 PM, Hutton Wink said: Is Pettersson projecting as an NHL centre, or will his lack of size (mass, and gaining potential) possibly hinder that? He reminds me a lot of Lindholm. Take from that what you will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flickyoursedin Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 Toronto would have to add a lot onto their first this year to make me bite on a Tanev deal. Kapanen scored a couple goals in the playoffs and now he's untouchable by their fans lol. I'd think at the very least it'd be their 1rst plus Kapanen. Canucks have enough depth in the bottom lines so 3 b prospects instead of an 1 A prospect should be a no go from us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckpuckluck1 Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 I think it's a simple case of need. The Canucks have someone that other teams need...and those teams need that role filled now if they want to get the prize. Whereas the Canucks don't need anything right now. I am sure they would like a prospect or picks but they don't need them now. On that basis alone if it was me I would say to anyone wanting Tanev or Edler whats your offer, then I would push it to the next level. If the deal gets done its a win for the Canucks, if it doesn't then its still a win for the Canucks. Only way its a losing deal is if you take the first low ball offer. It's one of the first times in 3 years that Benning is actually in the drivers seat and can play hard ball for a winning deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.