Odd. Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 To Montreal: Sven Baertschi 2019 3rd round pick, 2018 3rd round pick To Vancouver: Micheal McCarron, Charles Hudon, 2018 2nd round pick. We get 2 gritty yet skilled forwards in McCarron and Hudon. McCarron 6'6 230lbs + not only is he very skilled at his size but he's huge and physical. We also get Hudon who's 5'10 195lbs. Plays more of a heavier game than Baertschi. Very fast, and tenacious. Montreal gets next year's 3rd round pick and our 3rd rounder this year. They also get a skilled a real good 2nd line winger in Baertschi to further help their top 6. Next trade: To Philadelphia: Ben Hutton and Brendan Gaunce To Vancouver: Brandon Manning, 2018 6th round pick, conditional 2018 4th round pick that turns into a 3rd round pick if Philadelphia make it into the playoffs, 2nd round pick if they make it to the 2nd round, or if they make it to the Conference finals it becomes a 1st round pick. Philadelphia gets a younger Ben Hutton that would look good with that rather inexperienced d-core that they have. I think Hutton's is best suited in the east where his game is more make plays don't get hit rather than take a hit to make a play style. We get a poorer man's Chris Tanev with 1 year left on a $950,000 contract. Plays with an edge, gritty, solid defensively with an offensive upside, only 27 years old, and he's from BC as well. His father is a firefighter in Northern B.C. Line-up: McCarron - Horvat - Boeser Sedin - Sedin - Eriksson Hudon - Gagner - Vanek Granlund- Sutter - Virtanen Goldobin gets sent down to Utica when Sutter returns. Burmistrov would be our 13th forward. Or if we decide to roll with 8 defenseman rather than the 13th forward when Gudbranson comes back, we waive Burmistrov. Edler - Tanev Del Zotto - Pouliot Manning - Stecher Gudbranson? Again if we decide to roll with 8 defenseman I think Gudbranson is the odd-man who becomes our 7th defenseman. Biega being our 8th. Addressing that situation deserves a different proposal thread (whether it's my proposal or Hutton in Manning's place). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Rocket Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 McCardon as a top line winger?? I’ve never even heard of this guy before this proposal so I guess I’m not one to judge, but looking at his stats it’s looks like he can barely put it together at the AHL level. Seems more like a 4th liner. I think canucks are overpaying in both deals Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainKool Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 ... As a Canucks fan living in Montreal, I would say this is a terrible deal for the Canucks. I like Baertschi and I do believe Canucks consider him as our future core unless something REAL good gets on the table. And McCarron...I mean, at least right now, I dont see any value of him while Baertschi is one of our top scorers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeydownUnder Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 The Canucks have a glut of forward depth atm. I'd consider trading Baertschi for Hudon a downgrade. I'd also rather keep the third round over McCarron. McCarron's size is nice but he hasn't shown much skill at the nhl level. Trading Baertschi when he's looked good on the top line is an odd call. Replacing him with an offensive black hole in McCarron is a definite no go. As for the Hutton deal, Philly wants experience, so they trade the older more experienced defensemen for Hutton? Also Manning has one year left on his deal. We shouldn't be giving up young assets for an older player on an expiring contract. I see your trying to add size and grit to the lineup but your proposals are overpaying for it. Free agency is the best time to look for these things. You can acquire them without giving up picks or players Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sygvard Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 Interestingly, I think the focus here is on the wrong Montreal player. McCarron hasn't been able to translate it to the NHL and looks like more of a 4th liner with skill. Not a terrible option if we want size in the bottom line I guess, but not the main focus. BUT. Hudon is probably Montreals most fun prospect that is just hitting the show. I suspect they see him as a younger version of Baertschi, and would hesitate to make that part of the trade straight across. He has 12 points to Baers 17, with worse ice-time and line mates. Importantly he also has 77 shots (5% shooting percentage) to Baers 37 shots (21% shooting percentage). If they both regress to sustainable league average shooting (or Hudon gets as many minutes as Baer), Hudon should pass his scoring pretty quickly. If there was an option to shake him loose for an asset that Montreal wanted, I think that would be value worth pursuing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kloubek Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 I actually like this trade proposal. At least the one with Montreal. We give up quite a bit here, with a legit 2nd liner and the extra draft pick (presumably to get us into the 2nd round of what should be a deep 2018 draft). As mentioned, McCarron may be nothing more than a 4th liner and while Hudon does appear promising he's hardly a sure thing. On the flip side, we definitely improve our size and Hudon's ceiling is unknown whereas many of us believe Baertschi has basically hit his. This trade absolutely hurts us right now, but we have quality prospects in the system who could step up if Hudon doesn't work out. I agree with Sygvard whereby McCarron may not have enough translatable talent to be in the top six. I wouldn't count him out quite yet, but it doesn't look great. Still, as a Dorsett replacement.... Not going to comment on the Philly portion since I don't know enough about their team. That conditional pick is a while swing though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odd. Posted December 5, 2017 Author Share Posted December 5, 2017 10 hours ago, Canadian Clay said: McCardon as a top line winger?? I’ve never even heard of this guy before this proposal so I guess I’m not one to judge, but looking at his stats it’s looks like he can barely put it together at the AHL level. Seems more like a 4th liner. I think canucks are overpaying in both deals McCarron isn't a top line winger however that whole line-up is interchangeable. I just have McCarron slotted with them because I think they'd have good chemistry together. A big PWF with Horvat and Boeser. McCarron has respectable AHL numbers. Montreal has a rather veteran heavy AHL team and so he's gotten modest minutes. But he plays on all situations. He started the season with Montreal however he didn't put up any points in his 8 games. But to his defense, Gallagher, Pacioretty, Plekanec's and Shaw, combined, had a total of 4 points through 8 games. Combined. We send our 3rd round pick of this year as part of the package while getting Montreal's 2nd round pick in this years draft which gives us 3 picks in the first 40-50 picks. I agree that I think we might be slighty over paying and I'd change that 2019 2nd round pick to a 3rd or 4th rounder, but the whole idea of that Montreal trade is to trade Baertschi for a similar player in Hudon who's 2 years younger and is on pace for similar point totals Baertschi had last year while addressing the grit side. We might have to throw in a 3rd round pick to entice Montreal because of the current situation they're in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odd. Posted December 5, 2017 Author Share Posted December 5, 2017 10 hours ago, Sygvard said: Interestingly, I think the focus here is on the wrong Montreal player. McCarron hasn't been able to translate it to the NHL and looks like more of a 4th liner with skill. Not a terrible option if we want size in the bottom line I guess, but not the main focus. BUT. Hudon is probably Montreals most fun prospect that is just hitting the show. I suspect they see him as a younger version of Baertschi, and would hesitate to make that part of the trade straight across. He has 12 points to Baers 17, with worse ice-time and line mates. Importantly he also has 77 shots (5% shooting percentage) to Baers 37 shots (21% shooting percentage). If they both regress to sustainable league average shooting (or Hudon gets as many minutes as Baer), Hudon should pass his scoring pretty quickly. If there was an option to shake him loose for an asset that Montreal wanted, I think that would be value worth pursuing. The whole idea of the montreal trade was to gain some grittier players with skill and potential while obtaining 3 top picks in the first 2 rounds in this years stacked draft. We might suffer for a short time being with the departure of Baertschi, but I feel as though Hudon could turn out to be a better player than Baertschi. McCarron would be quite useful for our line-up due to a number of reasons. And that's why I included the 2019 2nd or 3rd round pick because we would need to entice them a little bit if they do view Hudon as a Baertschi. But if I'm Montreal, and I want to make the playoffs, I would probably accept this trade because Baertschi would definitely bolster their top 6 and give them a bit of offense and a huge improvement over Hudon. It's a trade that would benefit both teams. I wouldn't mind giving up a 2nd or 3rd rounder of next years draft as long as we don't trade our first round pick. Preferably 3rd rounder, but if it means giving up a 2nd rounder in a slightly weaker draft, it's not the end of the world. By next year, I would say we are close to finishing our 'rebuild on the fly'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odd. Posted December 5, 2017 Author Share Posted December 5, 2017 10 hours ago, HockeydownUnder said: The Canucks have a glut of forward depth atm. I'd consider trading Baertschi for Hudon a downgrade. I'd also rather keep the third round over McCarron. McCarron's size is nice but he hasn't shown much skill at the nhl level. Trading Baertschi when he's looked good on the top line is an odd call. Replacing him with an offensive black hole in McCarron is a definite no go. As for the Hutton deal, Philly wants experience, so they trade the older more experienced defensemen for Hutton? Also Manning has one year left on his deal. We shouldn't be giving up young assets for an older player on an expiring contract. I see your trying to add size and grit to the lineup but your proposals are overpaying for it. Free agency is the best time to look for these things. You can acquire them without giving up picks or players Hutton brings a lot of the things Manning brings, only a few years younger. I do realize now after reading back a couple of times that I did kind of contradict myself so let's just say Philly does this because they want to upgrade over Manning. They take a chance on Hutton who could become a reliable 4th or 5th defenseman and trade Manning who they know most likely isn't going to re-sign with them (he has expressed interest in Vancouver) and they give up their 2 later round picks. Gaunce is a throw in to balance out the line-up. But yes, I do think that the Philly trade does need some work. If we would to do these trades today, we would then have 3 picks in the top 50, 1 4th rounder, 1 5th rounder, 2 6th rounders and 1 7th rounder (we can also use these later round picks to get a higher round draft pick if necessary) for total of 8 picks in this years draft and we would lose just 1 2nd or 3rd rounder in next years draft. We lose Baertschi but get a similar player in Hudon who we take a chance on, and McCarron being the other prospect who they would have to give up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sygvard Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 2 hours ago, Odd. said: But if I'm Montreal, and I want to make the playoffs, I would probably accept this trade because Baertschi would definitely bolster their top 6 and give them a bit of offense and a huge improvement over Hudon. It's a trade that would benefit both teams. I wouldn't mind giving up a 2nd or 3rd rounder of next years draft as long as we don't trade our first round pick. Preferably 3rd rounder, but if it means giving up a 2nd rounder in a slightly weaker draft, it's not the end of the world. By next year, I would say we are close to finishing our 'rebuild on the fly'. My point was largely that I don't actually think Baer is a huge improvement or Hudon. Debateably an improvement at all. He has a few more points, largely driven by an unsustainable high shooting percentage and pulling assists from Horvat and Boeser. Hudon has been doubling his shots in less minutes while getting quite unlucky. Drop Hudon on a line with two of the hottest young players in the league and I think he immediately outscores Baer. Drop Baer into third line minutes in the clunky Montreal system and I think his production drops soundly. I mean this largely to say that I would accept the offer if we could pull it off. I think Bergevin would have an issue with it, but who knows with him. He has been crazy in the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurt Nirvanagut Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 I like your name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeydownUnder Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 3 hours ago, Odd. said: If we would to do these trades today, we would then have 3 picks in the top 50, 1 4th rounder, 1 5th rounder, 2 6th rounders and 1 7th rounder (we can also use these later round picks to get a higher round draft pick if necessary) for total of 8 picks in this years draft and we would lose just 1 2nd or 3rd rounder in next years draft. We lose Baertschi but get a similar player in Hudon who we take a chance on, and McCarron being the other prospect who they would have to give up. I like picks and Hudon is a decent piece. I don't have high hopes on McCarron but his ahl #'s are better than I thought. Still don't want to mess with our top lines chemistry but I think the values there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwijibo Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 5 minutes ago, HockeydownUnder said: I like picks and Hudon is a decent piece. I don't have high hopes on McCarron but his ahl #'s are better than I thought. Still don't want to mess with our top lines chemistry but I think the values there Doesn't seem like a fit for either team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
higgyfan Posted December 6, 2017 Share Posted December 6, 2017 Imo, the team looks worse off with these trades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.