[Discussion] Hutton, is he AND Tanev the chip to play?

[goblix]

First my preface here is that I do love Hutton and the first argument against the below is that he is still on the upward swing and could become more valuable than he is currently. So while I recognize that I will outlay a couple of reasons to trade Hutton.

 

The initial and correct reaction to any Hutton trade is "Why don't we just trade Edler" and while this would generally be a good idea the NTC is a big complication and if you think Edler is a whipping boy for his mistakes whilst being thrust into a #1 pairing role then Hutton will likely easily become the villain in that regard as well. In short I'd argue that if we intend to keep Hutton we need to keep Edler so the youth below him don't have to be dumped on with that kind of pressure in this market while they are developing.

 

Looking at our LHD depth charts it is quite promising.

Juolevi, Brisebois are the two big names

McEneny, who is quite a nice prospect, reminds me a lot like Tanev in terms of his two-way ability and how quickly he transitions the puck.

Pedan and Stewart, long shots but both have some decent wheels and nice size. Could surprise given enough development time. On Pedan, more of a show me now.

**Tryamkin is LHD but he prefers to play the right side and while I'm hopeful he'll be back at some point I'm not intending to include him on the depth charts until he does.

 

Hutton does have nice tools, great skater, decent hands and decent vision but they aren't elite and this team really needs elite talent right now. Some players can cut through the ice like butter, ala Karlson, P. Kane and Drouin. Hutton can do that at times but not to the same extent. 

Hutton is a former 5th round draft pick. Draft position means little to me, yet it does seem good business to move a stock you purchased as a 5th rounder and trade him in for a stock that may have a higher value. 

 

Overview:

• Hutton is a good player but not elite
• LHD has some nice prospects in the pipeline. Robbing the LHD Peter to pay the RHD Paul may be the correct move.
• Young roster player would be a great chip to play in a trade scenario, have to trade something good to get something good back

 

 

There are 5 big time trade targets that will need defense:

Buffalo, Toronto, Dallas. Tampa, Philly

 

For Hutton I think Dallas or Tampa makes the most sense. Dallas fans on hfboards seem to think that their LHD is priority 1 which does make sense. Their current depth chart on defense:

Lindell - Klingberg

Hamhuis - Johns

Nameth - Honka

Olesiak  - Pateryn

My guess is that Johns is the most likely target for Vegas, big mobile RHD defenseman. But overall their RHD depth doesn't look too bad. LHD I don't think Nameth/Olesiask is very good and Hamhuis is on the decline. Lindell seems to be on the upswing though. 

 

The trade proposal:

Van Hutton + CBJ 2nd for Dallas 3rd overall + Lehtonen

 

Dallas would essentially trading down 52 spots for a big time cap dump and Hutton. First impression is that this fits the need for Dallas in three regards. They get a 2nd pick to pick a long term project for the future, move cap tied up into goaltending so they can move that in the UFA market and they get a youthful roster player that will grow with their young team. On Canucks side it does seem to be a hefty price for the 3rd overall but that depends on how highly you think of the 3rd overall or Hutton.

 

 

On Tanev:

Guy is good, if I'm Benning I'm creating a bidding war and a hot market for him. We can wait out the expansion draft to avoid the team needing to use their protection slot which adds to the value.

Philly, Toronto, Buffalo are the main markets that should be looking into this player.

 

Philly fans on hfboards remarked their desperate need to find a top 6 center and this draft picking second overall definitely has that talent there, yet will Hischier / Patrick be producing at the level they want them to or will it take 2-3 years to get that going. Their team just missed the playoffs and they have a youthful contributing defense that are hefty in the LHD side.

Provorov - MacDonald (LHD)

Manning - Gostisbehere (LHD)

Brennen - Gudas

Gostisbehere is LHD but played on the right due to a need but think he prefers the left side and is better there. MacDonald is a cap dump 5m x 3years and Gudas is decent but not really a top 4 type.

 

The Trade proposal:

Van Tanev + Granlund for Philly 2nd overall + MacDonald

Philly doesn't get their big time center prospect but they get a roster player center/winger who is young, a great 2-way player who put in 20 goals last year. Tanev bumps Gostisbehere and those 2 become a very good top pair in the league and Philly gets rid of a bad contract. It's quite debatable if Philly is or isn't in a "win now" mode but I think the  world of Giroux and would put my money on Provorov and Gostisbehere pushing the team into greatness in the near future.

Canuck-wise it's clear we get an elite talent that we can put in the bank. Canucks probably have to sweeten

 

Buffalo has similar problems to Philly. Good young talent but need to insulate them a bit more. Eichel, O'Reilly, Reinhart and Ristolainen are youthful pieces that want to win now.

Gorges - Ristolainen

McCabe - Bogosian

Falk - Nelson

 

The Trade proposal:

Van Tanev for Buffalo 8th overall

Buffalo is not trading Reinhart, going to start with that here. Tanev brings a defensive posture to a young team that Buffalo requires. Their RHD depth does seem pretty deep though so maybe they are looking for a LHD dman more? Either way Tanev could still help on that team. Canucks would likely have to add to sweeten

 

Now the likelihood of any of these trades on occurring is close to none but the general idea here is trying to trade nice players for a chance of elite talent and hopefully 1 or 2 of those elite talents turn out to be successful players.

Canucks would then draft either:

2/3/5 or 3/5/8

Hischier/Patrick (2) + any two of Hesikenen / Makar / Liljegren for the 3/5 pick

or

Choose your center at 3 + Makar / Liljegren (5) + Choose your dark horse center pick at 8

 

Too much debate to decide on the center pool outside of top 2 in this draft.

 

Lastly our defense does get pretty ravaged in trading Tanev and Hutton which looks like: 

Edler - Stecher

Sbisa - Gudbranson

Juolevi - MacDonald / Subban / Biega

Pedan 

 

I apologize for the giant blog here but interested in hearing your constructive thoughts.

[JM_]

5 minutes ago, goblix said:

 

Canucks would then draft either:

2/3/5 or 3/5/8

Hischier/Patrick (2) + any two of Hesikenen / Makar / Liljegren for the 3/5 pick

or

Choose your center at 3 + Makar / Liljegren (5) + Choose your dark horse center pick at 8

 

Too much debate to decide on the center pool outside of top 2 in this draft.

 

Lastly our defense does get pretty ravaged in trading Tanev and Hutton which looks like: 

Edler - Stecher

Sbisa - Gudbranson

Juolevi - MacDonald / Subban / Biega

Pedan 

 

I apologize for the giant blog here but interested in hearing your constructive thoughts.

If we could pick up Alzner to shore up the D I'm all for it. Ending up with all 3 of Hischier, Makar and Liljegren pretty much completes the core rebuild. 

 

 

[Rob_Zepp]

2 minutes ago, S'all Good Man said:

If we could pick up Alzner to shore up the D I'm all for it. Ending up with all 3 of Hischier, Makar and Liljegren pretty much completes the core rebuild. 

 

 

What?!   All three could be complete busts or HOFs.    You cannot say a "rebuild is complete" after some unproven draft picks.   Not even close.   IF the Canucks get a few good prospects from this weaker than average draft this year that will be great.  To expect more is to court massive disappointment.

[JM_]

6 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

What?!   All three could be complete busts or HOFs.    You cannot say a "rebuild is complete" after some unproven draft picks.   Not even close.   IF the Canucks get a few good prospects from this weaker than average draft this year that will be great.  To expect more is to court massive disappointment.

it fills the positions. Of course it has to work out, but all you can do is pick for potential. Right now we have no one in the system thats 1C or 1D potential, we'd have that at least. 

 

[Gaudette Celly]

27 minutes ago, goblix said:

Lastly our defense does get pretty ravaged in trading Tanev and Hutton which looks like: 

Edler - Stecher

Sbisa - Gudbranson

Juolevi - MacDonald / Subban / Biega

Pedan

Well thought-out, but what about the expansion draft, especially if we lose Sbisa?  Then we'd be not ravaged but decimated.

[aGENT]

I actually could see us moving Hutton at some point. Ahead of the ED he'd have a ton of value. If you can swing a VERY big return then, do it IMO.

 

If not, hang on to him for another year or two until we've got more of our youth ready to make the jump.

 

Also, don't forget McEneny

[MrCanuck94]

26 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

What?!   All three could be complete busts or HOFs.    You cannot say a "rebuild is complete" after some unproven draft picks.   Not even close.   IF the Canucks get a few good prospects from this weaker than average draft this year that will be great.  To expect more is to court massive disappointment.

It's not a weaker than average draft, it doesn't have the one or two franchise players the last few drafts have spoiled the NHL with. Lot of great players available in the first round here.

[goblix]

6 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said:

Well thought-out, but what about the expansion draft, especially if we lose Sbisa?  Then we'd be not ravaged but decimated.

Sbisa is unlikely to be claimed, 1 year left at UFA. Isn't there some stipulation that Vegas can't trade claimed players for a year or something also?

My guess is that Gaunce is the easy pick or Sutter if we expose him to protect Gaunce.

 

I don't know, else if Sbisa does get claimed we can find a low cost UFA rental to fill in as a stop gap. Sbisa isn't great anyways lol not overly worried at finding a replacement for him

[PlanB]

Neither Philadelphia nor Buffalo take us up on those offers imo. 

My gut feeling is Tanev will not bring anywhere near what many here think he will.

 

Understand that I don't undervalue him,  it's that I really doubt that despite his numbers, anyone else out there sees his true value other than those who watch him day in day out. 

And I don't mean the occasional scout or GM who sees him the odd time. 

[goblix]

1 minute ago, PlanB said:

Neither Philadelphia nor Buffalo take us up on those offers imo. 

My gut feeling is Tanev will not bring anywhere near what many here think he will.

 

Understand that I don't undervalue him,  it's that I really doubt that despite his numbers, anyone else out there sees his true value other than those who watch him day in day out. 

And I don't mean the occasional scout or GM who sees him the odd time. 

I did stipulate the canucks may need to add on those trades so we agree that we likely need to add on both of them. Either way Tanev is an analytic beast in shot suppresion so that does benefit the canucks in terms of trade value.

[Where'd Luongo?]

1 hour ago, goblix said:

The Trade proposal:

Van Tanev + Granlund for Philly 2nd overall + MacDonald

Philly doesn't get their big time center prospect but they get a roster player center/winger who is young, a great 2-way player who put in 20 goals last year. Tanev bumps Gostisbehere and those 2 become a very good top pair in the league and Philly gets rid of a bad contract. It's quite debatable if Philly is or isn't in a "win now" mode but I think the  world of Giroux and would put my money on Provorov and Gostisbehere pushing the team into greatness in the near future.

Canuck-wise it's clear we get an elite talent that we can put in the bank. Canucks probably have to sweeten

I'm not sure I'd do this one, although I would love to see the Canucks trade up to 1-2, I just don't see the need for MacDonald other than a placeholder. Giving up Tanev for the 2nd overall wouldn't be enough, I agree, but adding Granlund seems like an overpayment in my opinion. I get that you are trying to even it out with MacDonald but I think it would have to be something/someone else. 

[jono2009]

I am okay with moving Hutton. I think he is a bit overrated actually. He could fetch a mediocre return. I didn't like his new contract. I thought it was a bit rich for him. I think he just benefited from one good rookie season. 

[bp79]

1 hour ago, goblix said:

Sbisa is unlikely to be claimed, 1 year left at UFA. Isn't there some stipulation that Vegas can't trade claimed players for a year or something also?

My guess is that Gaunce is the easy pick or Sutter if we expose him to protect Gaunce.

 

I don't know, else if Sbisa does get claimed we can find a low cost UFA rental to fill in as a stop gap. Sbisa isn't great anyways lol not overly worried at finding a replacement for him

 

+1 on a terrible team ya he is terrible people need to quit with the Sbisa hate. Besides tanev he was our best defensive d Sbisa hate was so last season.

[bp79]

34 minutes ago, PlanB said:

Neither Philadelphia nor Buffalo take us up on those offers imo. 

My gut feeling is Tanev will not bring anywhere near what many here think he will.

 

Understand that I don't undervalue him,  it's that I really doubt that despite his numbers, anyone else out there sees his true value other than those who watch him day in day out. 

And I don't mean the occasional scout or GM who sees him the odd time. 

 

I think his value is worth a lot more this year due to the lack of good D on the market this year. We get spoiled watching him but you can be sure scouts of other teams notice how good he is. T.O the oilers would have probably gone farther if they had a guy like Tanev There is a pretty good chance more than one team will be in the hunt for him and that will drive up his value. I still hope we trade him to the oilers along with sutter for Jesse P and their 1st  maybe we add maybe we don;t depending on how much the Oilers realise that those too will put them over the top. I'm ok with taking back A camp dump if needed.

As for Hutton, I think he needs to show a little more consistency before his value is worth more than a second-round pick. Edler and Tanev are the guys to move. As far as his NTC he has stated on more than one occasion he would move it if the Canucks no longer wanted him. He was asked after Garrison was moved.

[cbdoubleu]

I know unloading one of those goalie contracts is going to cost Dallas, but Hutton for a 3rd overall pick and a bad cap hit would be 10x the robbing that Hall for Larsson was.

 

I'd be happy to move a dman and take a cap hit from Dallas in exchange for a package of someone like Faksa, and Ritchie/Elie. Maybe you ask for next year's 1st rounder from Dallas instead. If they want to keep their 3nd overall pick, let them. I know Benning has talked about landing a top 6 for a dman, but think we can add some real depth and skill to round out our young top.  I don't know if Gurianov would be in play (or if Benning has pause about Russians right now), but there is definitely some good options to look at for Benning outside of holding out for the top 3 pick in the draft.

 

 

[goblix]

2 minutes ago, cbdoubleu said:

I know unloading one of those goalie contracts is going to cost Dallas, but Hutton for a 3rd overall pick and a bad cap hit would be 10x the robbing that Hall for Larsson was.

 

I'd be happy to move a dman and take a cap hit from Dallas in exchange for a package of someone like Faksa, and Ritchie/Elie. Maybe you ask for next year's 1st rounder from Dallas instead. If they want to keep their 3nd overall pick, let them. I know Benning has talked about landing a top 6 for a dman, but think we can add some real depth and skill to round out our young top.  I don't know if Gurianov would be in play (or if Benning has pause about Russians right now), but there is definitely some good options to look at for Benning outside of holding out for the top 3 pick in the draft.

Different deals but you the 55th pick is also in that trade and isn't small potatoes and shouldn't be ignored in the deal.

I'd prefer the pick rather than older all be it promising prospects.

[cbdoubleu]

3 hours ago, goblix said:

Different deals but you the 55th pick is also in that trade and isn't small potatoes and shouldn't be ignored in the deal.

I'd prefer the pick rather than older all be it promising prospects.

I'd even take the late 1st they got off Anaheim