RetroCanuck Posted June 11, 2017 Share Posted June 11, 2017 Basically a huge cam dump for chicago. To Chicago Sutter (20% retained) Baertschi Biega To Van Kruger Seabrook 2017 1st DeBrincat Chad Krys Why Chicago does it? They dump the huge seabrook contract on us and Kruger contract. Sutter is a reliable 3C that can contribute to their cup runs. Because we are taking over 10Million in cap from them we get 2 good prospects and a first. DeBrincat value is interesting as he's such a high risk/reward guy and its hard to say if he'll make the NHL, just due to his size 5'7". If he makes it though he'll be a star. Krys is also a high reward but high risk prospect. We might have to add another prospect or something. McEneny? But overall considering the cap I think its fair value. If we do trade for Seabrook then we should trade Tanev for a first. Sbisa to Vegas Tanev to Dallas for 3rd overall + Lehtonen and then trade up with our 5th overall to first. To NJ- 3rd overall+55th for first Overall Picks. 1st, 5th, 26th, 33rd, 64th etc 2017 line up Goldy-Bo-Boeser Sedins-Granlund Boucher-Hirshier-Loui Crammer-Kruger-Dorsett Edler-Stetcher Juolevi-Seabrook Hutton-Guddy Marky Lehtonen Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted June 11, 2017 Share Posted June 11, 2017 Chicago is all but confirmed to be trading Kruger to Vegas with the byproduct of Vegas taking the player (TVR) that Chicago wants vs someone else left unprotected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBatch Posted June 11, 2017 Share Posted June 11, 2017 12 minutes ago, elvis15 said: Chicago is all but confirmed to be trading Kruger to Vegas with the byproduct of Vegas taking the player (TVR) that Chicago wants vs someone else left unprotected. Yep.. Why should we be Stan Bowmans next culprit to keep his team on top by allieviating their core contracts? Let them sink into could have been a dynasty oblivion. They have to own up to their core guys taking up 60 percent of their cap space and I hope Benning doesn't do them any favors. I've always liked Seabrook, think his is generally underrated and without a doubt they don't win three cups without him. But his contract is too big. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeydownUnder Posted June 11, 2017 Share Posted June 11, 2017 Seabrook's contract is terrible. By the time we're competative we'd be spending money on him that we should be putting elsewhere. Only cap dumps we should be taking are 3 years or less. Don't forget Luongo's recapture penalty is coming up as well... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ken kaniff Posted June 11, 2017 Share Posted June 11, 2017 Am I the only one seeing Van-SanJose? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeydownUnder Posted June 11, 2017 Share Posted June 11, 2017 5 minutes ago, ken kaniff said: Am I the only one seeing Van-SanJose? Just noticed that myself. I opened the thread again just now and was confused as to why I was back at the Chicago proposal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckmen84 Posted June 12, 2017 Share Posted June 12, 2017 4 hours ago, RetroCanuck said: Basically a huge cam dump for chicago. To Chicago Sutter (20% retained) Baertschi Biega To Van Kruger Seabrook 2017 1st DeBrincat Chad Krys Why Chicago does it? They dump the huge seabrook contract on us and Kruger contract. Sutter is a reliable 3C that can contribute to their cup runs. Because we are taking over 10Million in cap from them we get 2 good prospects and a first. DeBrincat value is interesting as he's such a high risk/reward guy and its hard to say if he'll make the NHL, just due to his size 5'7". If he makes it though he'll be a star. Krys is also a high reward but high risk prospect. We might have to add another prospect or something. McEneny? But overall considering the cap I think its fair value. If we do trade for Seabrook then we should trade Tanev for a first. Sbisa to Vegas Tanev to Dallas for 3rd overall + Lehtonen and then trade up with our 5th overall to first. To NJ- 3rd overall+55th for first Overall Picks. 1st, 5th, 26th, 33rd, 64th etc 2017 line up Goldy-Bo-Boeser Sedins-Granlund Boucher-Hirshier-Loui Crammer-Kruger-Dorsett Edler-Stetcher Juolevi-Seabrook Hutton-Guddy Marky Lehtonen Thoughts? Wow . First off Seabrook does not have negative value just because of his contract...any contending team would kill to have him. Secondly why would Chicago want to give up Debrincat??? He just had an amazing season and is arguably their best prospect. Just Seabrook and Debrincat and Chad Krys is worth more than Sutter and Bearcheese, Seabrook is a top pair D man. But hey might aswell throw in their first and Kruger cause Biegas value is massive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanuck Posted June 12, 2017 Share Posted June 12, 2017 Someone remind me please, when was the last time a multiple cup winning veteran who's still on a very competitive team waive his NMC to go from essentially first to worst? People actually think Seabrook would want to play out his career on a bottomfeeding team? Oh, but I forgot....his hometown.......seriously people, seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeydownUnder Posted June 12, 2017 Share Posted June 12, 2017 3 hours ago, canuckmen84 said: Wow . First off Seabrook does not have negative value just because of his contract...any contending team would kill to have him. Secondly why would Chicago want to give up Debrincat??? He just had an amazing season and is arguably their best prospect. Just Seabrook and Debrincat and Chad Krys is worth more than Sutter and Bearcheese, Seabrook is a top pair D man. But hey might aswell throw in their first and Kruger cause Biegas value is massive Seabrook is no longer a top pairing d man. A great top 4 yes but he isn't aging well and his contract is absolutely terrible. Go to the chicago boards and see what they have to say on the matter if you don't believe me. It's a mute point anyway. As Fanuck pointed out Seabrook isn't going to waive to come to a bottom feeder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calvin's Dog Posted June 12, 2017 Share Posted June 12, 2017 6 hours ago, HockeydownUnder said: Seabrook's contract is terrible. By the time we're competative we'd be spending money on him that we should be putting elsewhere. Only cap dumps we should be taking are 3 years or less. Don't forget Luongo's recapture penalty is coming up as well... Yeah, JB CANNOT take on Seabrook's contract, he is declining and the end of that contract could sink the Canucks when they are hopefully contending again. The only type of team I could see taking in Seabrook would be a non cap team and Chicago would have to keep some salary,. He also has a NMC which I think is a full NTC also? Tough signing for Chicago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckmen84 Posted June 12, 2017 Share Posted June 12, 2017 16 minutes ago, HockeydownUnder said: Seabrook is no longer a top pairing d man. A great top 4 yes but he isn't aging well and his contract is absolutely terrible. Go to the chicago boards and see what they have to say on the matter if you don't believe me. It's a mute point anyway. As Fanuck pointed out Seabrook isn't going to waive to come to a bottom feeder Top 2 top 4...either way it's a huge under payment in the proposal, would you not agree? And yes it's pretty ovious Seabrook would not waive to come here nor did i mention he would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DinoTambo Posted June 12, 2017 Share Posted June 12, 2017 IMO Sutter Baertschi and Biega isn't enough, even for the Seabrook cap dump. The Blackhawks will probably wanna make a splash at their hometown draft so I don't know how they'd trade their 1st rounder. And bad contract or not, they're giving up a rock on Defense, and he's s fan favourite, and so trading him, their only 1st Rd pk , a great prospect in DeBrincat, for Baertschi and Meh, is not the splash they'd wanna make. I could see Tanev having to be a part of that deal. In fact, for their. 1st AND DeBrincat, the type of cheap ELC player they need to get into the lineup with all those albatrosses of contracts, to get them along with the rest of that package (Kruger, Krys) would probably take Tanev, Baertschi and Virtanen. And What Chicago MIGHT do is, even though next year's draft is a lot better, they might offer NEXT year's 1st Rd pick instead of this year's. As I said, CHI probably wants to keep this year's and either use it or move up at their home town Draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Neilsons Towel Posted June 12, 2017 Share Posted June 12, 2017 8 hours ago, RetroCanuck said: To NJ- 3rd overall+55th for first Overall Nowhere near good enough value to get you first overall imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adarsh Sant Posted June 12, 2017 Share Posted June 12, 2017 46 minutes ago, Roger Neilson's Towel said: Nowhere near good enough value to get you first overall imo. What about 3rd plus 33rd for 1st? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Neilsons Towel Posted June 12, 2017 Share Posted June 12, 2017 3 minutes ago, Adarsh Sant said: What about 3rd plus 33rd for 1st? I still don't think that would do it to be honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adarsh Sant Posted June 12, 2017 Share Posted June 12, 2017 2 hours ago, Roger Neilson's Towel said: I still don't think that would do it to be honest. 3rd plus 55th plus Gaudette? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeydownUnder Posted June 12, 2017 Share Posted June 12, 2017 36 minutes ago, Adarsh Sant said: 3rd plus 55th plus Gaudette? I think the values fair but New Jersey likely still won't go for it. They lack top end prospects and won't give up 1OA for anything short of an overpayment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted June 12, 2017 Share Posted June 12, 2017 9 hours ago, Roger Neilson's Towel said: Nowhere near good enough value to get you first overall imo. 9 hours ago, Adarsh Sant said: What about 3rd plus 33rd for 1st? 9 hours ago, Roger Neilson's Towel said: I still don't think that would do it to be honest. I'm with Roger. AS, would you make that trade if the shoe was on the other foot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Neilsons Towel Posted June 12, 2017 Share Posted June 12, 2017 8 hours ago, Adarsh Sant said: 3rd plus 55th plus Gaudette? Much closer to fair value, but still a no from New Jersey in my opinion. It would take an overpayment on our part to get it done. 7 hours ago, HockeydownUnder said: I think the values fair but New Jersey likely still won't go for it. They lack top end prospects and won't give up 1OA for anything short of an overpayment This, exactly. 1 hour ago, Ryan Strome said: I'm with Roger. AS, would you make that trade if the shoe was on the other foot? Good point. If the Canucks had 1st overall, how many people here would trade it to move down in the draft, get an additional 2nd or a 3rd and/or grab a B level prospect. Not many I would suspect. We would be calling for JB's head for anything less than drafting Patrick or Hischier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.