Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Report] Bruins willing to move #18 pick


Recommended Posts

I'm not sure where the delusion of the Canucks trading elder and Tanev come from.   Elder can't and won't be traded period.

 

 Tanev is possible but unlikely imo.  There no one remotely close to taking his minutes.  Moving him is likely to damage the development of other youngsters.   People don't seem to take this into account when looking at the grand scheme of the rebuild.  You simply cannot just throw young players into primary roles and think that it'll payoff.   Exceptional talent is the exception, not the rule. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, 70seven said:

I'm not sure where the delusion of the Canucks trading elder and Tanev come from.   Elder can't and won't be traded period.

 

 Tanev is possible but unlikely imo.  There no one remotely close to taking his minutes.  Moving him is likely to damage the development of other youngsters.   People don't seem to take this into account when looking at the grand scheme of the rebuild.  You simply cannot just throw young players into primary roles and think that it'll payoff.   Exceptional talent is the exception, not the rule. 

 

 

 

Canucks have (finally) got cap space to bring in a decent shut down UFA for a couple of years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, VanGnome said:

Beleskey, Spooner, 18th Overall for Sbisa + CLB 2nd

I'd do that. That's actually pretty fair for both teams. 

 

Then say flip Spooner along with Tanev for Drouin and the 14th?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

The problem is that would take up two roster spots that canucks don't really have.  I'd rather have one of the 4 youth compete for that spot rather than give it to players with limited upside.

 

Yes they'd like want Edler,...there's really not a lot of LHD on the market. 

 

 

The 18th this year aint worth it 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, S'all Good Man said:

is he that bad? tbh i've paid no attention at all to Boston this year. 

We basically have a guy like Spooner in Boucher (if the Canucks decide to keep him). Smaller guy that's not quite skilled enough to stick in the top 6 but not quite good enough defensively to be effective in the bottom 6. Hard pass on Spooner. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, 70seven said:

I'm not sure where the delusion of the Canucks trading elder and Tanev come from.   Elder can't and won't be traded period.

 

 Tanev is possible but unlikely imo.  There no one remotely close to taking his minutes.  Moving him is likely to damage the development of other youngsters.   People don't seem to take this into account when looking at the grand scheme of the rebuild.  You simply cannot just throw young players into primary roles and think that it'll payoff.   Exceptional talent is the exception, not the rule. 

 

 

 

You don't just have to throw young players to the wolves.

 

Removing Tanev and we have lots of veterans still.... Edler, Sedin, Sedin, Eriksson, Sutter, Dorsett, and Gudbranson as of right now.  Then you also do something like what Toronto did and pick up some cheaper veteran players who are left out in the cold after free agent frenzy.  There will be a couple of dozen solid veterans to play in the bottom half of your roster at $1 million and 1 year deals, it has been that way in the past couple years and will only be more prevalent as the league turns to younger guys.

 

We can then flip a couple of those guys for picks at the deadline as rentals to playoff teams.

 

That way we get peak value for older assets like Tanev, and we also get some additional mid/later round assets for the cheap veterans... and we create some mentorship and competition for the younger guys not to just get gifted roster spots because there is no alternative.  Not every young guy we have is going to be ready for next season, so it doesn't hurt their development for a couple of them to be in Utica to start the year and get injury call up time instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Provost said:

You don't just have to throw young players to the wolves.

 

Removing Tanev and we have lots of veterans still.... Edler, Sedin, Sedin, Eriksson, Sutter, Dorsett, and Gudbranson as of right now.  Then you also do something like what Toronto did and pick up some cheaper veteran players who are left out in the cold after free agent frenzy.  There will be a couple of dozen solid veterans to play in the bottom half of your roster at $1 million and 1 year deals, it has been that way in the past couple years and will only be more prevalent as the league turns to younger guys.

 

We can then flip a couple of those guys for picks at the deadline as rentals to playoff teams.

 

That way we get peak value for older assets like Tanev, and we also get some additional mid/later round assets for the cheap veterans... and we create some mentorship and competition for the younger guys not to just get gifted roster spots because there is no alternative.  Not every young guy we have is going to be ready for next season, so it doesn't hurt their development for a couple of them to be in Utica to start the year and get injury call up time instead.

Careful! When you start talking to much sense around here you get ganged up on. Stay out of the shadows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, smokes said:

Subban for the 18th pick if the Canucks aren't planning on using him this year?

Where's the little sarcasm emoji?  I like Subban too, but I doubt we could trade him for even a seventh rounder:(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Provost said:

You don't just have to throw young players to the wolves.

 

Removing Tanev and we have lots of veterans still.... Edler, Sedin, Sedin, Eriksson, Sutter, Dorsett, and Gudbranson as of right now.  Then you also do something like what Toronto did and pick up some cheaper veteran players who are left out in the cold after free agent frenzy.  There will be a couple of dozen solid veterans to play in the bottom half of your roster at $1 million and 1 year deals, it has been that way in the past couple years and will only be more prevalent as the league turns to younger guys.

 

We can then flip a couple of those guys for picks at the deadline as rentals to playoff teams.

 

That way we get peak value for older assets like Tanev, and we also get some additional mid/later round assets for the cheap veterans... and we create some mentorship and competition for the younger guys not to just get gifted roster spots because there is no alternative.  Not every young guy we have is going to be ready for next season, so it doesn't hurt their development for a couple of them to be in Utica to start the year and get injury call up time instead.

I'd agree if there was more depth at the discussed position, but there's not.  After Tanman, you have gudbranson and stecher.  That's about it.  

 

You think were we're going to find a rhd via free agency?   

 

34 year old Dennis Wideman

29 year old Cody Franson

 

Thats pretty much the list lol

 

 

I'm not against moving Tanev if there's a succession plan to fill the void, but the only spot that'll be coming from is via trade.   

 

You simply cannot trade trade him without any sort of replacement.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, 70seven said:

I'd agree if there was more depth at the discussed position, but there's not.  After Tanman, you have gudbranson and stecher.  That's about it.  

 

You think were we're going to find a rhd via free agency?   

 

34 year old Dennis Wideman

29 year old Cody Franson

 

Thats pretty much the list lol

 

 

I'm not against moving Tanev if there's a succession plan to fill the void, but the only spot that'll be coming from is via trade.   

 

You simply cannot trade trade him without any sort of replacement.  

 

Biega

Chatfield

Subban

 

That is reasonable depth for a team that will be bad next year.  It is likely we use one of that top picks for a D who will be ready in 1-3 years, so a piece for the future.

 

There are other ways to add depth in that position.  Free agency, waiver wire, trades.

 

Vegas will have an option to pick way more D than they need.  We could have a deal in place where we trade a later pick this draft or next for someone we ask them to select.

 

There is no question our team will be worse this year without Tanev, but with him we are still one of the worst teams in the league so there isn't a long way to drop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trade Sbisa for the 18th to avoid losing him for nothing in the expansion draft making our lost player a Gaunce or Biega, which isn't much in the grand scheme of things. Maybe even add a 3rd or higher pick to get the deal done if necessary. That will leave Edler and Tanev to continue mentoring the young guys on the team. This then allows either or both to be traded come trade deadline when prices skyrocket for players (especially defenseman) so we can sell at the highest price with an upcoming deep draft in 2018.

 

This would make perfect sense, which is why it's unlikely to happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎2017‎-‎06‎-‎02 at 2:49 PM, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Edler or Sbisa would make sense, but the only player I think that would be considered a cap dump would be Beleskey.  Everyone else is an important piece or RFA.

Biega meets our D requirement for the expansion draft.  Sbisa + a 3rd sounds really appetizing to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...