(Rumour) Maple Leafs Have Interest In Erik Gudbranson

[peaches5]

1 minute ago, PhillipBlunt said:

So....no source.

Good find it yourself. The last time I went back and sourced an article, that Boyle was told by the Tampa ownership to list some teams or be waived when he had a NTC, y'all were just like... well that will never happen again... blah blah blah. Not wasting my time again. You're implying I am talking about wanting more soft players and that has nothing to do with what I am saying. You want to keep a pending UFA when there could potentially but great prospect(s) to be acquired. That is just pure stupidity. Yea let's pass on potentially Liljegren so we have a shot a signing a tough dman.. yea that is a great idea.

[combover]

6 minutes ago, peaches5 said:

Yea and then watch him walk on FA for nothing so we should pass up on great prospects or picks to have a chance at signing an injury prone "tough" dman.  Great asset management. 

Sorry, I thought it was very obvious that if he doesn’t want to sign here or isn’t signed long before the trade deadline then he should be shopped and traded. Theres more than one team that would be interested in him and even as a playoff team rental he would have very good value. I don’t think jumping the gun now is good ”asset managment”.

 

[peaches5]

2 minutes ago, combover said:

Sorry, I thought it was very obvious that if he doesn’t want to sign here or isn’t signed long before the trade deadline then he should be shopped and traded. Theres more than one team that would be interested in him and even as a playoff team rental he would have very good value. I don’t think jumping the gun now is good ”asset managment”.

 

You're not going to get Liljegren at the deadline.

[peaches5]

4 minutes ago, combover said:

Sorry, I thought it was very obvious that if he doesn’t want to sign here or isn’t signed long before the trade deadline then he should be shopped and traded. Theres more than one team that would be interested in him and even as a playoff team rental he would have very good value. I don’t think jumping the gun now is good ”asset managment”.

 

and what happens if he gets injured again? If Liljegren or similar was offered for him right now you take it and run. You can hope he goes to FA and try to sign him there if not who cares.

[VIC_CITY]

1 hour ago, peaches5 said:

He has never played a full 82 game season in 6 years in the NHL and is looking for a huge payday. Odds are he is gone in FA. We have no chance in the playoffs we are rebuilding and if we can get a grade A prospect for a pending UFA we need to make that trade. Who knows maybe we overpay him and sign him in FA we will have the cap space. It could be a win win instead of a loss. 

This is what is causing the divide on CDC. Like @PhillipBluntsaid, none of us know for sure what kind of payday Gudbranson is looking for. However, I think we have reason to believe that Gudbranson will be looking for a long term deal at the minimum of $4.5M annually. That's pretty big cake for a guy that will likely be our #4-5 going forward. Yes, he brings an element that this team is sorely lacking. But the argument is whether or not you believe his toughness more than makes up for his deficiencies to the tune of $4.5-$5M annually on a long term deal. Personally, I just don't see him accepting anything less than $4.5M. It's free agency, someone will pay him. 

 

I don't think anyone is questioning what Gudbranson brings to the table. I think we would all like to have him in the lineup. It just come down to how much of our cap you're willing to allocate to a guy with as many limitations as Gudbranson. If his game was more well rounded, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

[combover]

14 minutes ago, peaches5 said:

You're not going to get Liljegren at the deadline.

But he’s as you point out injury prone dman you think you’ll get lilly now. Funny you think the guy has no value but then think your going to get a top pick in return it’s one of the other. 

you don’t know what TO is offering or if the theres any truth to it. 

How do you know what he be worth at the deadline ,maybe a team has an injury and really needs a  injury  dman.

12 minutes ago, peaches5 said:

and what happens if he gets injured again? If Liljegren or similar was offered for him right now you take it and run. You can hope he goes to FA and try to sign him there if not who cares.

What  if he doesn’t get injured and scores 15 goals and becomes way more valuable ,What if ,what if what if. What if your aunt were your uncle what would you be. 

Hes a big good dman that actually uses his size if he’s willing to sign here for a reasonable rate and the deal can be done at some point in January then I wouldn’t trade him. 

We don’t have to agree it’s okay, you rather trade him for a good prospect that may or may not pan out, I like what he does and the type of player he is. 

[PhillipBlunt]

6 minutes ago, peaches5 said:

Good find it yourself. 

So you're full of it. Cool. Don't present something as fact if you can't back it up, Holmes. 

6 minutes ago, peaches5 said:

Thelast time I went back and sourced an article, that Boyle was told by the Tampa ownership to list some teams or be waived when he had a NTC, y'all were just like... well that will never happen again... blah blah blah. Not wasting my time again.

 

What, do you want a cookie for your troubles? 

6 minutes ago, peaches5 said:

You're implying I am talking about wanting more soft players and that has nothing to do with what I am saying.

 

By saying "source"? You may need to up your Ritalin dosage and calm down. It's hilarious how much you determined and read into one word. 

6 minutes ago, peaches5 said:

You want to keep a pending UFA when there could potentially but great prospect(s) to be acquired. That is just pure stupidity. Yea let's pass on potentially Liljegren so we have a shot a signing a tough dman.. yea that is a great idea.

Who said that? This is all a rumour with no actual information to back it up outside of conjecture. Yet you've already lost your marbles because some people would want to sign Gudbranson (only if he's willing) versus trading him to Toronto for a player that there is no telling the Canucks would get back in return. 

[peaches5]

9 minutes ago, combover said:

But he’s as you point out injury prone dman you think you’ll get lilly now. Funny you think the guy has no value but then think your going to get a top pick in return it’s one of the other. 

you don’t know what TO is offering or if the theres any truth to it. 

How do you know what he be worth at the deadline ,maybe a team has an injury and really needs a  injury  dman.

What  if he doesn’t get injured and scores 15 goals and becomes way more valuable ,What if ,what if what if. What if your aunt were your uncle what would you be. 

Hes a big good dman that actually uses his size if he’s willing to sign here for a reasonable rate and the deal can be done at some point in January then I wouldn’t trade him. 

We don’t have to agree it’s okay, you rather trade him for a good prospect that may or may not pan out, I like what he does and the type of player he is. 

I did not say you're going to get Liljegran ever. Don't twist around what I am saying because you know damn well IF Liljegran or a similar prospect was on the table you take him right now. But people here were saying Liljregan right now would be less value than what we paid for him and they can't understand how his value could fall so low. I pointed out that Liljregan is great value for Gudbranson and we should be trading him right now if that were the offer by Toronto not trying to get more.

[peaches5]

13 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

So you're full of it. Cool. Don't present something as fact if you can't back it up, Holmes. 

What, do you want a cookie for your troubles? 

By saying "source"? You may need to up your Ritalin dosage and calm down. It's hilarious how much you determined and read into one word. 

Who said that? This is all a rumour with no actual information to back it up outside of conjecture. Yet you've already lost your marbles because some people would want to sign Gudbranson (only if he's willing) versus trading him to Toronto for a player that there is no telling the Canucks would get back in return. 

18,000+ posts, how's life? You clearly don't have one so you should have no issues spending some time googling. I really couldn't care less.

[PhillipBlunt]

11 minutes ago, peaches5 said:

18,000+ posts, how's life? You clearly don't have one so you should have no issues spending some time googling. I really couldn't care less.

I really could care less, says the guy that just responded. I get that you're a little ball of rage, but please stop trying so hard, Junior. 

[DrJockitch]

This one is getting testy. 

If they were offering Liljegren you take it and laugh all the way to the bank. 

They aren't offering Liljegren.  He is everything JB wants in the next draft.  This year he just wanted Pettersen more and good on him for that.  I think if Liljegren was offered Gudbranson would already be in TO.

[combover]

1 hour ago, peaches5 said:

I did not say you're going to get Liljegran ever. Don't twist around what I am saying because you know damn well IF Liljegran or a similar prospect was on the table you take him right now. But people here were saying Liljregan right now would be less value than what we paid for him and they can't understand how his value could fall so low. I pointed out that Liljregan is great value for Gudbranson and we should be trading him right now if that were the offer by Toronto not trying to get more.

Ummm your the one who brought Liljegren into the conversation ,hypothecialy or not you can go back and check, you won’t even have to sift through six months of articles either.

I think it goes with out saying that if there a deal that improves the team now or in the near future it would be made but that could be said about almost every player  on the team. It  would have to be socks blown off type deal that would change my mind.

I like grit and hard nosed players mixed with skill, a balance so that when someone decides to run you skill there’s a response something this team has missed for a long time.

Gud is 25 soon to be 26(fixed thanks to @qwijibo )was a top draft pick Is as advertised not sure what more people want from him he’s still developing. He is vaulable to this team now and in the future we don’t have any one in the system that bring what he does. There’s a reason other teams want him.

like I said before many times if he isn’t sign or doesn’t want to by sometime in January he should be shopped there will still be plenty of interest because of what he brings. 

 

 

[qwijibo]

5 minutes ago, combover said:

Ummm your the one who brought Liljegren into the conversation ,hypothecialy or not you can go back and check, you won’t even have to sift through six months of articles either.

I think it goes with out saying that if there a deal that improves the team now or in the near future it would be made but that could be said about almost every player  on the team. It  would have to be socks blown off type deal that would change my mind.

I like grit and hard nosed players mixed with skill, a balance so that when someone decides to run you skill there’s a response something this team has missed for a long time.

Gud is 24 was a top draft pick Is as advertised not sure what more people want from him he’s still developing. He is vaulable to this team now and in the future we don’t have any one in the system that bring what he does. There’s a reason other teams want him.

like I said before many times if he isn’t sign or doesn’t want to by sometime in January he should be shopped there will still be plenty of interest because of what he brings. 

 

 

Not to nitpick. But he's actually 25. Soon to be 26. (Jan 7) That's actually a fairly big distinction

[peaches5]

 

On 11/18/2017 at 1:38 PM, Bo53Horvat said:

Timothy Liljegren

 

On 11/18/2017 at 1:45 PM, LegionOfDoom said:

And? We gave up McCann and a ....33?? I just don't see how his value has dropped since coming here. I thought he has been a rock for us on the back end and would be disappointed in us losing our only tough dman, sbisa going in the draft was okay with me cuz we still had guddy for physical play. I want another young proven guy in return if guddy goes 

 

6 minutes ago, combover said:

Ummm your the one who brought Liljegren into the conversation ,hypothecialy or not you can go back and check, you won’t even have to sift through six months of articles either.

I think it goes with out saying that if there a deal that improves the team now or in the near future it would be made but that could be said about almost every player  on the team. It  would have to be socks blown off type deal that would change my mind.

I like grit and hard nosed players mixed with skill, a balance so that when someone decides to run you skill there’s a response something this team has missed for a long time.

Gud is 24 was a top draft pick Is as advertised not sure what more people want from him he’s still developing. He is vaulable to this team now and in the future we don’t have any one in the system that bring what he does. There’s a reason other teams want him.

like I said before many times if he isn’t sign or doesn’t want to by sometime in January he should be shopped there will still be plenty of interest because of what he brings. 

 

 

No, I did not. As you can see from the first page. None of what you say matters when he's a UFA. We could have signed him long term last year and we didn't. We can't afford to keep losing UFA's for nothing especially when Gudbranson has value. 

[combover]

9 minutes ago, qwijibo said:

Not to nitpick. But he's actually 25. Soon to be 26. (Jan 7) That's actually a fairly big distinction

It’s good , thanks. My mistake.

[combover]

15 minutes ago, peaches5 said:

 

 

 

No, I did not. As you can see from the first page. None of what you say matters when he's a UFA. We could have signed him long term last year and we didn't. We can't afford to keep losing UFA's for nothing especially when Gudbranson has value. 

As far as our conversation you did.

 

1 hour ago, peaches5 said:

You're not going to get Liljegren at the deadline.

 

I’m with you man, I’ve been saying we can’t lose pending ufas for nothing for years but he’s not an old declining player and if there’s a chance to resign him then we should he can’t sign prior  to jan1st . If he isn’t signed or doesn’t want to sign for a reasonable hit then by all means shop the sh.t out of him his cap hit size and position will hold value. 

Or if he makes it clear now he won’t resign then yeah by all means start the process nobody’s arguing that.

 

not sure by what you mean when you say nothing I say matters when hes a ufa.i guess my response would be nothing you say matters when he signs.

 

[peaches5]

19 minutes ago, combover said:

As far as our conversation you did.

 

 

I’m with you man, I’ve been saying we can’t lose pending ufas for nothing for years but he’s not an old declining player and if there’s a chance to resign him then we should he can’t sign prior  to jan1st . If he isn’t signed or doesn’t want to sign for a reasonable hit then by all means shop the sh.t out of him his cap hit size and position will hold value. 

Or if he makes it clear now he won’t resign then yeah by all means start the process nobody’s arguing that.

 

not sure by what you mean when you say nothing I say matters when hes a ufa.i guess my response would be nothing you say matters when he signs.

 

He's not a top tier player like Stamkos where you are trying to sign this guy no matter what. He is a UFA you can afford to lose and can get assets for him instead of just flat out losing him.

[LegionOfDoom]

16 minutes ago, peaches5 said:

He's not a top tier player like Stamkos where you are trying to sign this guy no matter what. He is a UFA you can afford to lose and can get assets for him instead of just flat out losing him.

my tune changes if we enter February and he is not resigned but for right now best thing that could happen for the canucks is us getting guddy locked up for 4/5 mill a year  5-6 years 

[combover]

24 minutes ago, peaches5 said:

He's not a top tier player like Stamkos where you are trying to sign this guy no matter what. He is a UFA you can afford to lose and can get assets for him instead of just flat out losing him.

I don’t think anyone is arguing that we can’t afford to lose him for nothing and unless theres a major gaff we won’t. We have until the TDL .

and again I don’t think anyone is arguing we need to sign him no matter what or at all costs 

if his demands arent reasonable or he doesn’t want to be here then he gets traded but if he wants to be here and has a reasonable contract that makes sense there’s no reason to panic and trade him right this second to the first offer we get, if it’s a great offfer the by all means out the door and down the road.

all the pending ufas should be move by the TDL if they aren’t in the plans or resigned. Some of the vets that aren’t ufas should be moved too.

i like Gud I like what he has to offer what he brings to the table.

 

[combover]

3 minutes ago, LegionOfDoom said:

my tune changes if we enter February and he is not resigned but for right now best thing that could happen for the canucks is us getting guddy locked up for 4/5 mill a year  5-6 years 

Exactly.