86Viking Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 Always liked Ritchie, would be a nice fit in our bottom 6. Saw a Dallas fan mention his name in a swap to getting vanek. Pretty easy yes I from us I would think To Dallas Vanek To Vancouver Brett Ritchie http://www.eliteprospects.com/player.php?player=45554 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drakrami Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 Pretty sure Dallas is fed up with old non performing stars. (Spezza, Sharp, etc...) As for us, a 2nd rounder (hope we get more than this) is probably better than Ritchie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timberz21 Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 Based on Benning's track record, I'd rather have a pick. I'd be satisfied with a 2nd, but if Vanek's production continues, I could see a contender, who struck out elsewhere, throwing a 1st rounder for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
groovy Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 Let`s beef up those numbers on Vanek! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 10 minutes ago, groovy said: Let`s beef up those numbers on Vanek! It's not really going to change the perception teams have on him. He's been around for a while. His last playoffs the comments on his performance were not particularly flattering and could make some teams hesitate in bringing him in. Adding him for depth in case of injuries maybe but as a key player doubtful. If Benning can't get a decent pick/player it wouldn't be on him but more on history/reputation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 1 minute ago, mll said: It's not really going to change the perception teams have on him. He's been around for a while. His last playoffs the comments on his performance were not particularly flattering and could make some teams hesitate in bringing him in. Adding him for depth in case of injuries maybe but as a key player doubtful. If Benning can't get a decent pick/player it wouldn't be on him but more on history/reputation. you're probably correct, but its also really hard to find any scoring so I think Jim will get some calls on him. If Jim can't get at least a 3rd then I'd rather he just leave him with Boeser and let Brock build more points and confidence as a player, thats worth a lot as well for Brock's development. Their chemistry has been great to watch and I do think its given Brock the ability to develop his passing game a bit by having a skilled partner. I wouldn't want to stop that for a 5th or AHLr. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Blight Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 Vanek had 38 points in 48 games for Detroit last year and they only got a 3rd round pick for him. He has 29 points in 42 games for us, is a year older, and some of you think it is reasonable that we will get a 1st or 2nd for him? The Mike Milbury type GM's are gone. If we decide to trade him we are certainly unlikely to get more than Detroit got for him last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RetroCanuck Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 40 minutes ago, Rick Blight said: Vanek had 38 points in 48 games for Detroit last year and they only got a 3rd round pick for him. He has 29 points in 42 games for us, is a year older, and some of you think it is reasonable that we will get a 1st or 2nd for him? The Mike Milbury type GM's are gone. If we decide to trade him we are certainly unlikely to get more than Detroit got for him last year. I think Vaneks shown this year that he has more compete and set up ability. But I agree with you, I think we will get a high third or low second for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 44 minutes ago, Rick Blight said: Vanek had 38 points in 48 games for Detroit last year and they only got a 3rd round pick for him. He has 29 points in 42 games for us, is a year older, and some of you think it is reasonable that we will get a 1st or 2nd for him? The Mike Milbury type GM's are gone. If we decide to trade him we are certainly unlikely to get more than Detroit got for him last year. I know D's have a tendancy to get overvalued at the trade deadline but didn't Polak cost the Laffs two 2nd round picks? He's awful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Blight Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 4 minutes ago, NewbieCanuckFan said: I know D's have a tendancy to get overvalued at the trade deadline but didn't Polak cost the Laffs two 2nd round picks? He's awful. The Leafs signed Polak from his PTO this year. I think you may be referring to when the Leafs traded Spaling and Polak to San Jose for 2 seconds and a cap dump. Toronto Maple Leafs ✔@MapleLeafs . @SportChek Player Alert: Leafs acquire San Jose's 2017 and 2018 2nd Rd. picks and Raffi Torres for Roman Polak and Nick Spaling. #TMLtalk 6:39 AM - Feb 22, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklehead44 Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 Fair trade - Ritchie is a solid physical 15 player. Helps Dallas in the short-term, not a huge loss for them. Still young at 24 and is the type of big physical player who can play decent minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammertime Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 I'm pretty meh on Ritchie. Would rather give a shot to Dahlen Gaudette or even Gadjo when their seasons finish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal.view Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 1 hour ago, Rick Blight said: Vanek had 38 points in 48 games for Detroit last year and they only got a 3rd round pick for him. He has 29 points in 42 games for us, is a year older, and some of you think it is reasonable that we will get a 1st or 2nd for him? The Mike Milbury type GM's are gone. If we decide to trade him we are certainly unlikely to get more than Detroit got for him last year. well i dunno about the milbury comment i have been watching the ottawa gm trade this past year he seems like a bit of an easy mark don;t you think ? too bad they are doing so poorly as they have no current reason to trade for a playoff run Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 Boeser seems to like Vanek, and despite most people's views of Vanek so do I. I'd rather just keep him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ojibwa72 Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 If we get a second its a bonus. I think going in they were betting on a third for Vanek if he did well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkpoet Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 Have you seen Vanek and Boeser this year? You have to question if he has more value staying here, than he would in a trade just based on that. Especially the last few weeks where they have been line mates. The chemistry is undeniable. Those two guys have an almost Sedin-like knack for knowing where the other is going to be. How about Vanek and his play-making ability ?? He is fishing passes to Brock through seems that make the rest of the team want to hide in embarrassment. And not softy, limp wristed half-arse efforts, ... I mean hard, accurate right-on-the-tape passes. If ever there was an off-season signing who should end up being re-signed, it's Vanek. Simply because of the chemistry that him and Boeser are displaying. We have other players who I'd bump first. Edler. Hello. Eriksson. HELLO. Could you get more for Vanek? I'd assume so. But you have to weigh whether what you get, beats what you already have. (and are getting, from those two playing together) Think of it this way: People went ape-%$# when the team gave Sundin $10M for one year..... but if it weren't for him, Kesler would likely have not become the player he did. That kind of veteran mentorship, when it really clicks, can be incredible and invaluable. Not saying don't get rid of him. Just think very long and hard before doing it. Especially for a 3rd round pick? What 3rd round pick out there do you see playing this well with Boeser right now. ? Yes, I agree the team needs to look to the future, but it also has to realize that you can't just throw away that kind of chemistry - especially when it involves by far your best offensive player who's still just a rookie finding his way. my two bits Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 In Minnesota he got criticised for giving up and there were some very harsh comments made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRAZY_4_NAZZY Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 4 minutes ago, mll said: In Minnesota he got criticised for giving up and there were some very harsh comments made. ^^^ Despite Vanek making efforts to redefine his two way game, that skepticism will follow him, thus we won't be able to fully maximize his value in a trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 54 minutes ago, mll said: In Minnesota he got criticised for giving up and there were some very harsh comments made. Looking at a deal that is purely a low conditional pick (4th/5th round) for Vanek. People thinking we are getting Hansen or Burrows value forget that those deals weren't just rentals. Hansen and Burrows had contracts that would keep them with the team trading for them beyond that playoff run. At best Vanek is a one and done kind of player. Not just that but one with a bad rep for disappearing in the playoffs. No one will give you a 2nd or 3rd round pick straight up for that kind of guy. A conditional 4th that gets bumped up if the team makes the finals yes but not Goldy or Dahlen type deals for Vanek. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanuck Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 59 minutes ago, mll said: In Minnesota he got criticised for giving up and there were some very harsh comments made. He had 10 pts in 17 playoff games in Montreal that year - I don't really call that a no-show when you factor in how much more difficult it is to score in the playoffs vs. regular season. If Mtl. didn't get what they expected from Vanek in the playoffs I think the issue lies with their expectations as he pretty much delivered what he did in the past as far as his limited playoff experience goes. Best case scenario at this stage of his career imo is that he's going to chip-in offensively at a high 3rd liner and/or average 2nd liner is going to and he's not going to be your go-to shut down winger, far from it - if you're expecting more out of him as an NHL GM then that's on you, because you didn't do your homework on him as a player. As for overall effort, criticism is probably fair, but one guy shouldn't be holding your playoff fortunes in his hands anyway - especially if it's a guy like Vanek. If Minny didn't like what he brought they should've sat him - which they didn't. We all know scoring is at a premium around the league especially heading into the playoffs. If Vanek keeps up his current pace I'm sure there will be tire-kickers on him and JB has to decide if the value is worth it or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.