(Rumour) Maple Leafs Have Interest In Erik Gudbranson

[86Viking]

2 minutes ago, BCNate said:

There is a rumor out there from TSN that the Leafs have offered Andrew Neilsen and a 3rd.

I don't have the link, so don't put any stock in it happening, but do you feel about that value?

I think it is a pretty good value, but would rather JB hold out for a 2nd to replace the 3rd..

Ya he is another LHD though I believe which seems to not make sense to what we need. I know Pouliot can play the right side maybe Nielsen does too?

 

Seems like an interesting player but would be nice to get a better pick back, or try for Nielsen and Kapanen or something else

[Tomato Pajamas]

11 hours ago, theo5789 said:

As for Tanev, I suggest Liljegren and a 1st as a starter. Not sure what to expect for him, but 2 1sts+ is probably not a bad return for a player who is looking to be very injury prone and is probably around his prime age now, so may not be too beneficial when the Canucks start to make their serious push for the playoffs in a couple more years. There may be other more intriguing proposals with other teams, but this is what I would suggest if we are dealing with the Leafs.

 

Honestly, who do you expect to make that deal? Turn the tables, are you willing to give your 2017 first round pick and a 2018 first round pick for an injury prone top 4? I love Tanev, but his value isn't as high as we'd all like it to be. 

[oldnews]

10 hours ago, coryberg said:

All this speculation is based on demers flapping his mouth, pretty sure he had no idea who (or what) he was being traded for.  Tallon doesn't strike me as a guy who divulges precious information to a player who he is desperately trying to dump.

 

As we saw from the Phoenix trade Demers had negative value. Even the Gudbranson haters can admit that Gudbranson has some value. If by chance there was a serious negotiation there would have been a ++ beside demers without a doubt, anybody who thinks otherwise should put down the pipe. 

Exactly. 

What I suspect is that Benning was willing to listen / entertain the option of taking a cap dump as a placeholder to replace Sbisa, who they were about to lose in the ED.

Instead it became an MDZ signing.

Gudbranson though - for a cap dump - is the kind of thing I'd expect to hear from failed analyticz wannabees (which is not a reference to theo5789).

 

[Nice guy eddy]

Canucks need to figure out some scoring & trading Guddbranson for any thing less would be a waste , so no D for D trade , or for some prospect that isn't working out , we got enough of those . Canucks could have the best D core in the league & hold the other teams to 15-20 shots a game but they'll still score 5-6 goals on us because we don't have any NHL goaltending , the two no shows this team has are the most pathetic goalie tandem ever. So unless we get a forward group that can net 5-6 or even 4 nightly this team is destined to lose for a long time. 

[oldnews]

58 minutes ago, Tomato Pajamas said:

Honestly, who do you expect to make that deal? Turn the tables, are you willing to give your 2017 first round pick and a 2018 first round pick for an injury prone top 4? I love Tanev, but his value isn't as high as we'd all like it to be. 

there is a very huge variance in first round picks.

Teams looking to add to contending rosters - typically offer picks destined in the 20-30 range.

 

Those picks come with considerably lower odds of turning out than top 10 picks do.

If you combine the odds of a pair of late 1st round picks (roughly 30% each off the top of my head) - that is not necessarily a good risk relative to a top 4 D in hand.

So, yes - I think if you 'turn the tables' a pair of firsts coming from a contender is not only a reasonable ask for Tanev, but approaching bare minimum of what should even be considered.  He's the rare RH shutdown D, he's still young / in his prime - and he's a steal of a cap hit / contract.

Tanev either commands a serious return, or he stays here - (I think it will be the latter - as he will provide a great stabilizing presence for this team.)

I think it's Edler or Hutton likely to be moved - the team has considerably more depth and talent emerging on the left side.

If teams want to take from the team's area of least depth, be prepared to pony up - this team is in no desperation to add marginal assets - it has already built a pretty solid stable of youth and prospects.   It will have to be quality, not quantity imo.

 

 

[oldnews]

53 minutes ago, BCNate said:

There is a rumor out there from TSN that the Leafs have offered Andrew Neilsen and a 3rd.

I don't have the link, so don't put any stock in it happening, but do you feel about that value?

I think it is a pretty good value, but would rather JB hold out for a 2nd to replace the 3rd..

I remember the Komisarek and a 2nd rumours around Luongo. 

And then Luongo having been dealt to Toronto.....for comparable nonsense.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if Torontrolls offered Nielsen and a 3rd.....if they have no intention whatsoever of acquiring Gudbranson.

 

Their second rate AHL assets - I'm going out on a limb and suggest they are not going to get something done.

[Gaudette Celly]

On 1/4/2018 at 7:58 PM, canucklehead44 said:

His agent did say that Toronto offered Bozak and a pick in the summer but Benning didn’t accept the offer. So there is obvious interest from the Toronto side.

 

1 hour ago, BCNate said:

There is a rumor out there from TSN that the Leafs have offered Andrew Neilsen and a 3rd.

 

Typical Leaf trollage, pimping their imaginary and over-inflated value of their assets and denigrating those of other teams.  Sorry no -- the NHL is not a charity to benefit the Leafs.

[Gaudette Celly]

14 hours ago, oldnews said:

Liljegren is over-rated here - overvalued - and just a prospect - one that certainly did not live up to the hype the national media heaped on him at the WJC.   The NHL.com had him at #4 among drafted players to watch at the WJC.....That was laughable.   TSN pumped his tires endlessly at the beginning of the tournament, and after a game and a nice stretch pass or two, it was a disappearing act...

Par for the course when it comes to Toronto fans and media.  Liljegren is like Mo Peterson -- anyone a Toronto sports team drafts that isn't a top pick automatically becomes "the steal of the draft".

[oldnews]

Toronto shouldn't have rented Boyle at that ludicrous price of the 48th overall pick in the draft last year.

 

They could have drafted Gadjovich and had something we'd actually want in return....

 

Or they could have added another D to their prospect pool...  Ian Mitchell, Josh Brook, Luke Martin = a few RHD they could have had in their system vs a Brian Boyle 0 goals, 5 assists in a 27 game cup of coffee in Toronto.

[Rush17]

https://thecanuckway.com/2018/01/06/vancouver-canucks-3-possible-trade-destinations-erik-gudbranson/

 

seriously?

 

What do the Leafs have to offer? Well, they have two picks in the second round and a single pick in rounds three, four and five. Since the second round picks belong to the Leafs and San Jose Sharks, getting either pick would mean making a selection in the latter half of that round.

There are certainly options. Gudbranson could be moved for one of those picks alone or have a pick and a prospect come back. If the Canucks want a defenceman coming back, they could see if Gudbranson brings back Andrew Nielsen and a third round pick. Nielsen is a project defenceman with offensive upside and a powerful shot.

 

Another option could be trading for Andreas Johnsson and a fifth. He is a skilled offensive winger whose weakness lies in his skating. Ryan Biech describes him as someone who is not fast, but has a “powerful stride” to his skating.

 

I hear people mention Kasperi Kapanen, but I don’t think Gudbranson alone could acquire him, even in a one-for-one trade.

 

 

[Rush17]

Lets flip him to Colorado for Connor Timmins and a 3rd. :D  

[oldnews]

10 minutes ago, Rush17 said:

https://thecanuckway.com/2018/01/06/vancouver-canucks-3-possible-trade-destinations-erik-gudbranson/

 

seriously?

 

What do the Leafs have to offer? Well, they have two picks in the second round and a single pick in rounds three, four and five. Since the second round picks belong to the Leafs and San Jose Sharks, getting either pick would mean making a selection in the latter half of that round.

There are certainly options. Gudbranson could be moved for one of those picks alone or have a pick and a prospect come back. If the Canucks want a defenceman coming back, they could see if Gudbranson brings back Andrew Nielsen and a third round pick. Nielsen is a project defenceman with offensive upside and a powerful shot.

 

Another option could be trading for Andreas Johnsson and a fifth. He is a skilled offensive winger whose weakness lies in his skating. Ryan Biech describes him as someone who is not fast, but has a “powerful stride” to his skating.

 

I hear people mention Kasperi Kapanen, but I don’t think Gudbranson alone could acquire him, even in a one-for-one trade.

 

 

the boyscouts are at it again?

[theo5789]

1 hour ago, oldnews said:

cool story but you've mangled it and added a couple layers of assumption that weren't / aren't based in fact.

you don't see much that is quality that would be available out of Florida?  I see lots of quality in Florida - I also don't pretend to know what Tallon would make available to acquire Gudbranson.

nowhere did Demers say he declined a deal for Gudbranson - he simply declined to waive.

you and I have no idea what assets were discussed, but what we do know is that Demers was dumped for Jamie McGinn.  You're welcome to equate McGinn to Gudbranson's market value if you think that makes sense - I don't, and in fact I consider it complete nonsense that might sell down at CA, but I aint buying a whiff of it.

Upon researching further, I have tried to find something in reference to Demers mentioning Gudbranson and I cannot find much other than The Score suggesting that he told media about it, so I'll take back the factual part of that. We do know a deal was in place and was denied because of Demers and we know what Tallon eventually got in return for Demers. 

 

I did not equate McGinn to Gudbranson. I suggested that Tallon was looking for toughness and someone hard to play against (see Gudbranson) and in the end they grabbed McGinn because the supposed deal for Gudbranson could not be made (perhaps a pick and/or prospect could've been involved if Demers agreed to waive). I am also suggesting that it wasn't a cap dump (or negative value piece as some are suggesting) because no picks were involved in the deal and the cap retained negated any sort of cap dump for the player they got in return. Perhaps Tallon did not want Demers and did want to get rid of him in that sense of dumping him, but he didn't just give him away and gave up picks to ensure he could get rid of him. I believe Tallon was looking for something and knew that Demers had value, which he must've had considering at least Vancouver and Arizona, if not more, were interested.

 

I'm not suggesting that you know what Tallon is thinking, but I am wondering what it would take for you to trade Gudbranson to Florida. Since Liljegren isn't enough to get you excited about a deal with Toronto and you rather deal with Tallon, I would like to know your expectations as this is how this whole conversation began.

[86Viking]

I dont see Guddy even being a good fit with the leafs, let them have Polak remain instead as most of their fans seem to think he is an upgrade over Guddy anyway....Okay then that is so laughable when i read those commments.

 

0 trades involving toronto and Vancouver is A okay with me!

[mll]

3 hours ago, aGENT said:

As far as I recall Gudbranson's involvement was all media driven speculation. I've seen no direct quotes that actually name him.

Kuzma asked Benning about that rumour and wrote this:

http://theprovince.com/sports/hockey/nhl/vancouver-canucks/kuzma-canucks-see-value-in-erik-gudbranson-others-see-trade-bait

 

If you listen to Canucks general manager Jim Benning, there’s a different take on all this and the Demers rumour.

“It was nowhere near what was out there in the media,” he stressed. “I didn’t comment on it because I don’t know how these things get out there. I get calls from the GMs about our players and we talk, but that’s all that was. It was just talk.

“Erik is hard to play against and gives us some push back. When you talk about intangibles, he’s a leader in our group with young players and will stick up for his teammates. There is an important role for him with our team.

“There’s a mutual thing with his agent. Let’s just see where this goes. From their perspective, they want to feel comfortable in a new city and find his niche. We agreed to let it play out and when the time is right, we’ll talk about it.”

[theo5789]

2 hours ago, Tomato Pajamas said:

Honestly, who do you expect to make that deal? Turn the tables, are you willing to give your 2017 first round pick and a 2018 first round pick for an injury prone top 4? I love Tanev, but his value isn't as high as we'd all like it to be. 

Valuation is different based on situations. Toronto is basically in a win now mode while their best offensive players are cheap and producing. They need to make a sacrifice if they think they can get a player to put them into contention. This is why I had brought up before about how I believe Anahiem should've ponied up for Miller last year, which could've at least put them in the finals. I don't know what the Canucks were possibly looking for from Anaheim but let's say it was for a 2nd (possibly 1st since it would be a late pick), would it not be worth it to get that chance for the Cup?

 

Tanev is definitely becoming injury prone, but when he's in our lineup, our defense is much improved compared to when he's not. I agree that he's probably a "top 4" dman overall, but he could be the best defensive dman as he is for us and play high minutes against the top opposition. His cap hit is very reasonable for what he provides when healthy as well for a couple more years as well, so he's not just some rental. If the tables were turned in this scenario, I would probably offer Liljegren, a 2nd and maybe a project player like Carrick/Shoshnikov for Tanev, but if it is insisted that it be a 1st and the difference between a 2nd and 1st is my chance to get the team into contention, I would just go for it and hope for the best.

[rekker]

Would be lucky to get a first for Guds. 

[hammertime]

Heard TO offered Andrew Nielsen and a 3rd for Gud. 

 

No thanks.

 

[oldnews]

4 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

Upon researching further, I have tried to find something in reference to Demers mentioning Gudbranson and I cannot find much other than The Score suggesting that he told media about it, so I'll take back the factual part of that. We do know a deal was in place and was denied because of Demers and we know what Tallon eventually got in return for Demers. 

 

I did not equate McGinn to Gudbranson. I suggested that Tallon was looking for toughness and someone hard to play against (see Gudbranson) and in the end they grabbed McGinn because the supposed deal for Gudbranson could not be made (perhaps a pick and/or prospect could've been involved if Demers agreed to waive). I am also suggesting that it wasn't a cap dump (or negative value piece as some are suggesting) because no picks were involved in the deal and the cap retained negated any sort of cap dump for the player they got in return. Perhaps Tallon did not want Demers and did want to get rid of him in that sense of dumping him, but he didn't just give him away and gave up picks to ensure he could get rid of him. I believe Tallon was looking for something and knew that Demers had value, which he must've had considering at least Vancouver and Arizona, if not more, were interested.

 

I'm not suggesting that you know what Tallon is thinking, but I am wondering what it would take for you to trade Gudbranson to Florida. Since Liljegren isn't enough to get you excited about a deal with Toronto and you rather deal with Tallon, I would like to know your expectations as this is how this whole conversation began.

Tallon was in a tough spot for sure.  The team he'd built had been instant-rice 'rebuilt' with the promise of an analytical upgrade which....wasn't and upgrade.

But what he adopted was a small market team that had now failed to make the playoffs - an owner that was likely stung by the sales-kick he bought - and Tallon was left to dump cap/contracts.   Demers isn't that bad - but not surprisingly he didn't replicate his 'analytics' in Florida.   Reilly Smith - more cap that needed to be dumped - but not a bad player, and certainly a very good gamble for LV to take at a low cost. 

 

In any event I didn't begin a conversation of  'expectations' of a Gudbranson return - I indicated that I think people are over-rating the value of a player like Liljegren - as people tend to - the sky is always the limit with recent draftees.....particularly Leaf prospects, who are inevitably core pieces in multiple future Stanley Cupz.

 

My 'expectation' - rather my preference - is that they re-sign Gudbranson.  For me, that's the best 'return.'

 

If they were to deal him to a team like Toronto or Florida, I would want an NHL asset involved -and ideally, a RHD.   So, in the case of Florida, I'd want Petrovic as a secondary piece in a deal.  Petrovic is struggling this year - his value has dipped - he may or may not remain an NHL asset or potential top 4 - but he brings some of what we'd be losing in Gudbranson.  He's a big, physical RHD - young - with a mean streak, relatively mobile and can fill some of the void that we'd lose in Gudbranson.    The advantage of taking a chance on Petrovic - he also would not represent the bulk of value in a deal imo, while more proven than a prospect.  He'd be a serviceable RHD on our roster, one that Green might be able to get a whole lot out of, but there would also need to be an accompanying principle piece necessary.

 

Toronto doesn't really have a comparable to offer.  They have some B prospect LHD and a Swedish Pouliot that they overhype to no end.   Connor Carrick is probably not an option I'd entertain - there's a reason they need to upgrade on their right side - and Carrick may have some grit, but he's another undersized D that we don't really need.  

 

Florida has Ekblad, Matheson, Yandle....McCoshen....Pysyk....Petrovic.  I think they are more able to offer a suitable roster piece (could even be more of a hockey trade for one of their other young D) - and I think their prospect pool is also better and deeper than Toronto's.    Tippett, Heponiemi, Borgstrom, Mascherin - the Leafs simply don't have that quality of prospects outside their NHL roster.   I'm not going to go into specific proposals - I think that a 1st equivalent would be a necessary add to Petrovic, so depending on which combination of pick or pick and prospect imo the value would have to be in the range of their 2018 1st.  In a case like this we recover a serviceable RHD, one that brings some of what our roster lacks - and we could take our chances on the futures.  Does Toronto have a Petrovic to add to a deal?   No, not really.

Would Gudbranson even want to go back to Florida?   I have no idea.  It's a different team really, with a different coaching staff, and a bunch of water under the bridge....

Would he want to stay here?   I hope so.  Would he want to go to Toronto?  If he were dealt there, I'd hope it would just be until July 1st - I'd love to see them waste futures again as they did with Boyle with Erik moving on to wherever he wants to be in free agency.  

 

 

[rekker]

14 minutes ago, hammertime said:

Heard TO offered Andrew Nielsen and a 3rd for Gud. 

 

No thanks.

 

Just Hockey DB Nielsen. Good prospect actually. Got some grit and size that we need. Him and a second and I'm inclined to go for that. Those thinking Lijigren are dreaming. Even a first alone is a dream.