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

(Rumour) Canucks listening to offers for Hutton


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Lancaster said:

Normally having a more offensive prone defenseman is weak defensively isn't an issue if there's only 1 or 2 on the team.  Except the Canucks have quite a few defenders who aren't defensive stalwarts.  

 

Edler is erratic, Del Zotto is more known for offensive, Stecher is a battle but size may be an issue at times.  That's already 3 players that are sketchy at time.  Throw in Hutton and now you have 4/6 defenseman who can have defensive blunders at anytime.... and that's not a recipe for long-term success.  

 

If Hutton stays, someone else needs to go.  Stecher is young and has the cockiness/confidence you want for an offensive guy... plus he is decent defensively, just could be out-muscled against bigger guys.  Del Zotto is an UFA, with a relatively inexpensive cap hit and consistent with offense.  

So that leaves Edler.... he isn't gonna worth more in the trade market and his cap hit is high for what he brings to the Canucks currently.  You still see flashes of 2010/11 Edler once in a while... but then he follows up with gaffs here and there too.  

 

I'm more inclined to keep Hutton as he is still young.  Not saying he will ever improve dramatically, but more experience and strength can certainly make him in a regular top-4.  Plus his contract is and will be cheap going forward.  

so you are saying our dmen can't play d ?

and we know they are unable to generate offense...

damn why are they on the team

i have said it before

this is the worst d grouping on any canuck team in a really long time

 

they are the primary reason why our goalies are falling apart

did you see all the breakdowns early in the game against montreal?

we basically have an ahl level d grouping without tanev

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, hammertime said:

You didn't read the context stated earlier. I think Barrie would have an Eirhoff effect on Edler allowing him to play a supporting role to an offensive D where he excelled previously. 

 

Edler Salo (was amazing)

Edler Ehrfoff (even better)

Edler Stetcher (Stetch has never looked better)

 

Its when Edler is expected to create offence instead of support it he runs into trouble. 

 

Yes his -40 and -20 seasons speak volumes of his defensive prowess.,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, rekker said:

At this point his value is so low it may be better to just keep him. See if he can turn it around. 

 

Agreed though none of us thought we'd get anywhere near the return on Hansen and Burrows so who really knows. If it's too low an offer let's hope he rebounds and either becomes a steady D or at least increases his value come trade deadline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Standing_Tall#37 said:

Yes his -40 and -20 seasons speak volumes of his defensive prowess.,

to be fair. edler would probably compliment him pretty well.  colorado hasn't really had very good left pairing D. you can hate edler all you want but he was 1 half of a top pairing that went to game 7 of the finals. im curious if they would work or be a total disaster.

 

might not be worth the risk but maybe he'd be a good long fit for juolevi.  i lije the idea of Juolevi Tanev tho 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i was in favor of keeping vanek but if this slide continues offering him a spot on a playoff contender wouldn't be so bad.  maybe he would consider coming back on a 2 year deal in the off season.  if his new team doesnt work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could Vegas be a possible destination for Hutton?

 

They only have 3 guys on their blueline signed past this year and have more than enough cap space to absorb his 2.8 million dollar salary. They also have a bunch of picks in upcoming drafts and given their unexpected success this season, could Hutton fit their plans being that he is still young enough to fit both present and future plans?

 

 It won't be a big return by any means but it might be a gamble they'd be willing to take at minimal cost. We have guys like Holm waiting in the wings in the short term (and maybe longer given his play in Utica this year) and guys like Juolevi coming up in the long term so we don't really need him. Plus it gives us even more cap space this offseason to play with

 

I'd even be willing to take on Garrison's expiring deal (he's currently buried in the minors) in exchange if it means getting a slightly better return. One would assume that we are also moving Vanek and possibly Guddy at the deadline so we will have more than enough space to absorb the slight difference in pay between Hutton and Garrison (2.8 vs 3.6)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Alflives said:

Hutton for Barrie would be a great deal for us, right?

Barrie has 27 points - 12th in the league among defensemen. That's despite missing games to injury. His points-per-game is 4th in the league, behind only Klingberg, Karlsson, and Ghostbear. He's a legitimate #1 offensive RHD. So what do you think?

 

What I think is anyone who thinks Colorado is going to even consider trading Barrie for Hutton has no idea what they're talking about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

why trade him when his value is so low? As we just saw on Sat as well, this team needs Dmen as they get hurt a bunch. Why ship Hutton out, who is a viable Dman not having a great season, for what? a 3rd round pick? Some other teams junk project? Unless it's bringing something solid back (good draft pick or solid prospect) I don't think he's a piece that gets a lot and is worth more as a player knowing the system and able to play. Let OJ play in Finland still, there's no one really in Utica that's going to be better than Hutton and this team has suffered massive injuries this season so he's more valuable that way. I get its a rumour that JB is listening to calls but this would have to be a big win for Van in the trade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, aGENT said:

That's what I'd prefer as well if he gets moved as well.  

 

Packaged with Vanek or maybe even one of our young W'ers for an upgrade would be best imo. 

yup. picks aren't in the cards either - lets say Jim set the market price with the Pouliot deal on project/depth D (which Hutton would be viewed as imo) at an AHLr and a 4th, then Hutton is worth something maybe like a 3rd and a guy like Dowd in that scenario, so why bother with that? might as well keep him and see if he can get back to form if thats all the return is.

 

If anything on a 1 for 1 deal I could see Jim finding some sort of 'hockey trade' for a project forward, but I don't know who fits that bill. 

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...