Adarsh Sant Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 So wait Canucks would be willing to eat a bad contract and or trade to get the pick, or possibly trade/take a bad contract to move up I was just told none of those scenarios are possible. Who am I to believe? CDC or Pierre LeBrun! I am so confused right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 Same thing gets said every year, but nothing happens in the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairy Kneel Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 OK trade up with the 2nd rounders, but still keep the #5 pick too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRAZY_4_NAZZY Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 Not sure we are in a position to take on a "bad contract". We already have a few on our plate, few too many. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahyoung Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 We take Lehtonen, and swap the 3rd overall for a 5th. That's probably what Dallas would do. We take Lehtonen, and swap the 3rd overall for 2 2nd rounders. That's probably what the Canucks would do. Maybe move some minor pieces thrown in on both sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horvats_Big_Head Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 God yes, please be true. Must mean we either want one of Patrick/Hirchier or we are not sold on Mittelstadt. possibly going for a D at 3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinny in Vancouver Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 5 minutes ago, -Vintage Canuck- said: Same thing gets said every year, but nothing happens in the end. Teams always have conversations and consider every possibility so I'm sure replacing Dallas and Vancouver with 2 other hockey cities' names won't make one a liar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 2 minutes ago, jmahyoung said: We take Lehtonen, and swap the 3rd overall for a 5th. That's probably what Dallas would do. We take Lehtonen, and swap the 3rd overall for 2 2nd rounders. That's probably what the Canucks would do. Maybe move some minor pieces thrown in on both sides. or give them tanev and a 2nd for the 3rd and Lehtonen. I'm not so sure the #3 pick is worth that though. if it were #2, maybe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanuck Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 Really, there should be a new sub-forum called - CONJECTURE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HerrDrFunk Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 Just now, CRAZY_4_NAZZY said: Not sure we are in a position to take on a "bad contract". We already have a few on our plate, few too many. Niemi or Lehtonen for a year would be doable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUCKER67 Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 3 minutes ago, Horvats_Big_Head said: God yes, please be true. Must mean we either want one of Patrick/Hirchier or we are not sold on Mittelstadt. possibly going for a D at 3. Oh, I hope JB isn't intending on drafting up just to get Heiskanen. I will no longer support him as GM if that happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRAZY_4_NAZZY Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 Just now, HerrDrFunk said: Niemi or Lehtonen for a year would be doable. I think so too, but Benning's love affair with Miller, it would be hard to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucksnihilist Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 not with Dallas.... if you move up it has to be to #1 or #2 this draft.... or... you move up to #3 but it has to be cheap, as the player you get at #3 will almost have the same shot at making an impact as the player at #5.... total crap shoot. Only #1 or #2 offer a substantial upgrade... that said, if we aquire #3 and keep #5, that would be worth it... but "moving up" suggests parting with #5 on the way IMHO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucksnihilist Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 1 minute ago, Fanuck said: Really, there should be a new sub-forum called - CONJECTURE! I'ts called armchair GM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adarsh Sant Posted June 1, 2017 Author Share Posted June 1, 2017 12 minutes ago, -Vintage Canuck- said: Same thing gets said every year, but nothing happens in the end. Just for once I'd wish we'd be debating who to pick first overall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 2 minutes ago, canucksnihilist said: not with Dallas.... if you move up it has to be to #1 or #2 this draft.... or... you move up to #3 but it has to be cheap, as the player you get at #3 will almost have the same shot at making an impact as the player at #5.... total crap shoot. Only #1 or #2 offer a substantial upgrade... that said, if we aquire #3 and keep #5, that would be worth it... but "moving up" suggests parting with #5 on the way IMHO! totally agree.......the only way it's worth it to move to #3 is if they keep #5 as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook007 Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 Lets hope they sort something out, but please keep the no.5 pick...although it may not be possible. Could be Benning want Vilardi, if he can't get top two.... Would be a perfect scenario to take a goalie contract + third pick, for a second + a player Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 Benning said last year he wasn't into taking on cap dumps, but maybe he's changed his tune... but no evidence Taking such a contract could be worth two spots if Dallas doesn't care so much where they draft, unless they really want a Heiskanen and figure Colorado might take him. And Benning would have to be convinced he can't get his guy at 5, too. All in all, no evidence just speculation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted June 1, 2017 Share Posted June 1, 2017 1 minute ago, Hutton Wink said: Benning said last year he wasn't into taking on cap dumps, but maybe he's changed his tune... but no evidence Taking such a contract could be worth two spots if Dallas doesn't care so much where they draft, unless they really want a Heiskanen and figure Colorado might take him. And Benning would have to be convinced he can't get his guy at 5, too. All in all, no evidence just speculation. No to 'cap dumps', but we sign Errikson to 6x6? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.f351d0829e1fa642c2ffece938019cb3.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.