[Speculation] Tanev to Toronto (Scott Cullen)

[VIC_CITY]

1 hour ago, Sweathog said:

You might be right, but if that's the case then forget Duchene. If we have to add on to Tanev to get a deal done, I'd rather go for someone like Sam Reinhardt.

Totally. We need to be looking at guys that will be hitting their prime in 3-4 years. Duchene is a good player but he's better suited for a team that can compete now. 

[Boudrias]

9 hours ago, VIC_CITY said:

Totally. We need to be looking at guys that will be hitting their prime in 3-4 years. Duchene is a good player but he's better suited for a team that can compete now. 

Duchene has been struggling for 2 season now. He did not look all that great at Worlds. He strikes me as a player who has lost his game and confidence. Your point about the time line is very important. Canucks are 4 - 5 years away. Pass on Duchene.

[messier's_elbow]

22 hours ago, Borvat said:

I would trade Tanev to Colorado straight up for Duchene.  I think a change of scenery would help Duchene as he has struggled a bit, but Colorado has been a mess from what I read.  Both about the same age.  A 1 -2 of Duchene and Horvat is a good start.  Surround them with our young wingers.  The Avalanche would still have MacKinnon, Grigorenko,  Jost and Colborne as their Centers.  I think Jost will jump straight into the NHL especially on that team.  They need D especially RH'ers.

I'd rather try for Dallas 3rd overall. Tanev for the 3rd pick would help both teams immensely. We could draft Vilardi at 3 then take a Dman at 5 and our rebuild is looking a lot better.

[Borvat]

15 hours ago, Harvey Spector said:

So who would be dumb enough to take on Johnson's contract?  Is Mike Milbury affiliated with any team?  

Vegas possibly.  Or another team that needs salary to meet the floor.....Phoenix.  I'm sure if you can trade contracts of retiring or injured players for cap purposes someone would take it on for an actual player still in the league, even if Colorado had to sweeten it a bit.

[Borvat]

2 hours ago, messier's_elbow said:

I'd rather try for Dallas 3rd overall. Tanev for the 3rd pick would help both teams immensely. We could draft Vilardi at 3 then take a Dman at 5 and our rebuild is looking a lot better.

Not a bad idea but the Canucks need a center that has proven he can play in the league, Duchene has done that and he is only 26.  I think Roy and the subsequent gong show hurt Duchene's confidence.  I think a change of scenery would help.   

[JustABandwagoner]

2 hours ago, messier's_elbow said:

I'd rather try for Dallas 3rd overall. Tanev for the 3rd pick would help both teams immensely. We could draft Vilardi at 3 then take a Dman at 5 and our rebuild is looking a lot better.

DAL wont take it. sry

[VIC_CITY]

47 minutes ago, Borvat said:

Not a bad idea but the Canucks need a center that has proven he can play in the league, Duchene has done that and he is only 26.  I think Roy and the subsequent gong show hurt Duchene's confidence.  I think a change of scenery would help.   

Bo will be that center. We need another young center that will grow with this team and not be 30 years old by the time we're ready to compete.

[Borvat]

12 minutes ago, VIC_CITY said:

Bo will be that center. We need another young center that will grow with this team and not be 30 years old by the time we're ready to compete.

Well so far we don't have that center and picking 5th and higher doesn't guarantee we will.  30 is not that old and there always needs to be some veterans.  If we can get a better and younger center as an option as you suggest for a price that doesn't cripple the team then sure.  If not I would not be opposed to Duchene for that price.

[VIC_CITY]

1 minute ago, Borvat said:

Well so far we don't have that center and picking 5th and higher doesn't guarantee we will.  30 is not that old and there always needs to be some veterans.  If we can get a better and younger center as an option as you suggest for a price that doesn't cripple the team then sure.  If not I would not be opposed to Duchene for that price.

Well I would argue that Duchene and someone like Sam Reinhart have similar value. I would much rather go for Reinhart, although there's no guarantee that he's available. Personally, I'd rather have the 3rd or 4th OA pick than Duchene. You're right there's no guarantee that they'll be as good as Duchene but we'd be wasting Duchene's prime years, so I'd rather not go that route. Plus, when we are ready to compete, it's important that we have players contributing on ELCs.

[Borvat]

24 minutes ago, VIC_CITY said:

Well I would argue that Duchene and someone like Sam Reinhart have similar value. I would much rather go for Reinhart, although there's no guarantee that he's available. Personally, I'd rather have the 3rd or 4th OA pick than Duchene. You're right there's no guarantee that they'll be as good as Duchene but we'd be wasting Duchene's prime years, so I'd rather not go that route. Plus, when we are ready to compete, it's important that we have players contributing on ELCs.

Well I would argue that Reinhart and Duchene do not  have similar value.  I am pretty certain that Reinhart has superior value especially when using your reasoning, as well as he still has more upside as a player.  Also, using your logic in 3 - 4 years when you feel the Canucks will be ready to compete (I agree by the way) Reinhart won't be on an ELC and likely the pick you suggest obtaining will just be coming off their ELC if they are the player you would expect.  

 

In my opinion Reinhart would cost much more than Duchene.  I think he's worth it but at what cost, certainly more than Tanev. 

[VIC_CITY]

3 hours ago, Borvat said:

Well I would argue that Reinhart and Duchene do not  have similar value.  I am pretty certain that Reinhart has superior value especially when using your reasoning, as well as he still has more upside as a player.  Also, using your logic in 3 - 4 years when you feel the Canucks will be ready to compete (I agree by the way) Reinhart won't be on an ELC and likely the pick you suggest obtaining will just be coming off their ELC if they are the player you would expect.  

 

In my opinion Reinhart would cost much more than Duchene.  I think he's worth it but at what cost, certainly more than Tanev. 

I see your point, but it really comes down to the team acquiring. If you're building for the future, you want Reinhart. If you're trying to win the Stanley Cup next year, you want Duchene. So that's why I see them as having similar value.

 

And yes, Reinhart will no longer be on his ELC, But I was referring to trading for the 3rd or 4th OA pick instead of Duchene (for that very reason).

[Alflives]

2 minutes ago, VIC_CITY said:

I see your point, but it really comes down to the team acquiring. If you're building for the future, you want Reinhart. If you're trying to win the Stanley Cup next year, you want Duchene. So that's why I see them as having similar value.

 

And yes, Reinhart will no longer be on his ELC, But I was referring to trading for the 3rd or 4th OA pick instead of Duchene (for that very reason).

I'm wondering if there could be a three way deal, where Tanev ends up in TO (God I hate that though, friggin' Leafs stink); Reinhart ends up with us; and who would Buffalo want from the Leafs: Kappanen and the Leafs 2017 first?

[VIC_CITY]

2 hours ago, Alflives said:

I'm wondering if there could be a three way deal, where Tanev ends up in TO (God I hate that though, friggin' Leafs stink); Reinhart ends up with us; and who would Buffalo want from the Leafs: Kappanen and the Leafs 2017 first?

3 way trades rarely happen anymore. It's a lot harder to make trades these days. Throw in a 3rd team and it's almost impossible. But for arguments sake, I'd say we'd probably need to throw in an additional piece. I'd offer the CBJ 2nd but Buffalo needs players that can help them now. Maybe offer them Baertschi and Buffalo can add in a 3rd rounder. 

 

To Van:

Reinhart

Buffalo's 3rd round pick in 2017

 

To Toronto: 

Tanev

 

To Buffalo:

Leafs 1st round pick in 2017

Kapanen

Baertschi

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, VIC_CITY said:

3 way trades rarely happen anymore. It's a lot harder to make trades these days. Throw in a 3rd team and it's almost impossible. But for arguments sake, I'd say we'd probably need to throw in an additional piece. I'd offer the CBJ 2nd but Buffalo needs players that can help them now. Maybe offer them Baertschi and Buffalo can add in a 3rd rounder. 

 

To Van:

Reinhart

Buffalo's 3rd round pick in 2017

 

To Toronto: 

Tanev

 

To Buffalo:

Leafs 1st round pick in 2017

Kapanen

Baertschi

Well thought out.  I'm happy with that.  Seems fair all around.  

[Borvat]

3 hours ago, VIC_CITY said:

I see your point, but it really comes down to the team acquiring. If you're building for the future, you want Reinhart. If you're trying to win the Stanley Cup next year, you want Duchene. So that's why I see them as having similar value.

 

And yes, Reinhart will no longer be on his ELC, But I was referring to trading for the 3rd or 4th OA pick instead of Duchene (for that very reason).

But even if the Canucks trade for the pick that player won't be on an ELC in 3 - 4 years (again following your initial reasoning) unless they don't play in the NHL for at least a year or two.  If that's the case, how good is that pick/player and will they actually be top six?

 

Also, it will take much more than Tanev to even hope to pry Reinhart away.  I just don't see the similar value rationale. Tanev may get you Duchene with little added based on Duchene's current value. And Duchene isn't 30 he's only 26. I agree I would rather have Reinhart (I think) based on the current Canucks situation.  But I think Reinhart is out of the price range.

 

 

 

[VIC_CITY]

28 minutes ago, Borvat said:

But even if the Canucks trade for the pick that player won't be on an ELC in 3 - 4 years (again following your initial reasoning) unless they don't play in the NHL for at least a year or two.  If that's the case, how good is that pick/player and will they actually be top six?

 

Also, it will take much more than Tanev to even hope to pry Reinhart away.  I just don't see the similar value rationale. Tanev may get you Duchene with little added based on Duchene's current value. And Duchene isn't 30 he's only 26. I agree I would rather have Reinhart (I think) based on the current Canucks situation.  But I think Reinhart is out of the price range.

Mittelstatd will be in college for at least 2 years. But even if we were to draft someone that went back to junior for 1 year, his ELC would end 4 years from now and he would only be 22 years old at that point. So once again, that's why I'd rather go after 3rd or 4th OA than Duchene.

[Borvat]

49 minutes ago, VIC_CITY said:

Mittelstatd will be in college for at least 2 years. But even if we were to draft someone that went back to junior for 1 year, his ELC would end 4 years from now and he would only be 22 years old at that point. So once again, that's why I'd rather go after 3rd or 4th OA than Duchene.

So who plays top six center for the next 3 - 4 years? Assuming Mittelstadt is ready and is capable of stepping in and playing and leaves college early?  And the player you draft still requires a year of junior and you assume they are top six caliber?  I'm sorry but that's too many if's for too long.

 

Duchene can play now and is in his prime.  Mr. Sedin is not with all due respect. And we are not getting Reinhart unless it's for a lot more than the Canuck's can afford to pay.  I wish it were so.

[VIC_CITY]

Just now, Borvat said:

So who plays top six center for the next 4 years? 

4 years? Well I'm not a fortune teller but I think there's probably a good chance that we re-sign the Sedins for 1 more year. We just don't have any centers ready to step into that role for the next 2 years. I guess Gaudette has a shot. I expect him to get a look 2 seasons from now and that should answer a lot of questions for year 3. It also depends on who we draft. If we get a guy like Vilardi, I imagine he'll play 1 more year in junior and then hopefully make the jump. So hypothetically speaking, we could potentially have a new 2nd line center 3 seasons from now. That may be too much too soon to ask of Vilardi though. So hopefully Gaudette pans out. But the reality is, with or without a player like Duchene, we're probably not a playoff team for at least 2 more years. So we'd be better off planning for our future  (3-4 years from now) IMO. Rather than wasting Duchene's prime years on a non-playoff team. 4 years from now Bo will be the same age as Duchene is now. 

[Borvat]

8 minutes ago, VIC_CITY said:

4 years? Well I'm not a fortune teller but I think there's probably a good chance that we re-sign the Sedins for 1 more year. We just don't have any centers ready to step into that role for the next 2 years. I guess Gaudette has a shot. I expect him to get a look 2 seasons from now and that should answer a lot of questions for year 3. It also depends on who we draft. If we get a guy like Vilardi, I imagine he'll play 1 more year in junior and then hopefully make the jump. So hypothetically speaking, we could potentially have a new 2nd line center 3 seasons from now. That may be too much too soon to ask of Vilardi though. So hopefully Gaudette pans out. But the reality is, with or without a player like Duchene, we're probably not a playoff team for at least 2 more years. So we'd be better off planning for our future  (3-4 years from now) IMO. Rather than wasting Duchene's prime years on a non-playoff team. 4 years from now Bo will be the same age as Duchene is now. 

Losing leaves a mark.  Bo can't carry the team on his own he needs help, now.  Potentially in  2 - 3 years is not good enough for a draft pick who may or may not pan out. How is obtaining a player who is 26 (30 when your 4 year hypothetical scenario may or may not play itself out) who helps you win now, is a proven NHL top six and doesn't cost you more than you can afford a waste.  

 

The Canucks' have no one proven to replace Sedin at center now or for the foreseeable future.  Read your rationale above, there is no one who is proven and who can help for the next few years.  How does that work? 

[VIC_CITY]

7 minutes ago, Borvat said:

Losing leaves a mark.  Bo can't carry the team on his own he needs help, now.  Potentially in  2 - 3 years is not good enough for a draft pick who may or may not pan out. How is obtaining a player who is 26 (30 when your 4 year hypothetical scenario may or may not play itself out) who helps you win now, is a proven NHL top six and doesn't cost you more than you can afford a waste.  

 

The Canucks' have no one proven to replace Sedin at center now or for the foreseeable future.  Read your rationale above, there is no one who is proven and who can help for the next few years.  How does that work? 

But what is your goal when you say we need someone to help? Help doing what? I'd rather be lousy for the next 2 years, hoard prospects/picks and build a sustainable winner. It's the same line of thinking that goes into whether or not we re-sign Miller. Sure Miller and Duchene will help us win more games but for what? So we can finish in 10th instead of 15th? You can't tell me trading Tanev for Duchene makes us a playoff team. So why bother? If we're gonna be a bad team, let's trade the vets for prospects/picks and draft as high as possible. I'm not exactly inventing this formula...