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

Vanek (proposal)


Recommended Posts

Vanek to STL for Jordan Schmaltz + 4th

 

This trade is very similar to the deal we landed for Hansen last trade line.  We send a right winger for a unproven, close to NHL ready prospect and a 4th. 

 

Schmaltz was a 2012, 25th overall pick.  He’s a 6’2 190lb right handed shot offensive defensemen.  Despite being 24 he’s had very limited NHL opportunity largely impart due to the stacked D core the blues carry.  He’s proven to be an effect point producer in the AHL (this year he sits with 22 points in 30 games).  He does have to clear waivers for the first time next season, so I can see the blues looking to move him as he’s not likely replacing Parayko or Pietrangelo anytime soon.  Canucks lack RHD, Schmaltz would be put into a similar situation as Pouliot.  A young offensive D with high end potential that has yet to find his NHL game.  We also recoup a 4th, that we moved early this year. 

 

Blues have a need for right handed wingers on their roster.  They don’t have a single right handed winger on their roster that has played over 30 NHL games.  Brodziak is their lone full time right shot but he’s their 3rd line center.  The other right handed shots, Thompson and Sundqvist and Thorburn have all rotated in and out of the lineup in the bottom six.  If the trade happened today Vanek would sit 3rd in points on their roster, and would slide right into their 2nd line with Stastny and Steen.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Vanek to STL for Jordan Schmaltz + 4th

 

This trade is very similar to the deal we landed for Hansen last trade line.  We send a right winger for a unproven, close to NHL ready prospect and a 4th. 

 

Schmaltz was a 2012, 25th overall pick.  He’s a 6’2 190lb right handed shot offensive defensemen.  Despite being 24 he’s had very limited NHL opportunity largely impart due to the stacked D core the blues carry.  He’s proven to be an effect point producer in the AHL (this year he sits with 22 points in 30 games).  He does have to clear waivers for the first time next season, so I can see the blues looking to move him as he’s not likely replacing Parayko or Pietrangelo anytime soon.  Canucks lack RHD, Schmaltz would be put into a similar situation as Pouliot.  A young offensive D with high end potential that has yet to find his NHL game.  We also recoup a 4th, that we moved early this year. 

 

Blues have a need for right handed wingers on their roster.  They don’t have a single right handed winger on their roster that has played over 30 NHL games.  Brodziak is their lone full time right shot but he’s their 3rd line center.  The other right handed shots, Thompson and Sundqvist and Thorburn have all rotated in and out of the lineup in the bottom six.  If the trade happened today Vanek would sit 3rd in points on their roster, and would slide right into their 2nd line with Stastny and Steen.

 

 

This is actually a good proposal that would benefit both teams.   I don't often see good proposals in this section.   Well done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty solid proposal actually. It's a bit of a risk in whether or not Schmaltz will pan out at the NHL level, but with the 4th, I'd say it's a good deal for both sides. Vanek helps the Blues' playoff push and eventual run at the Cup and we get another young defenseman and a 4th round pick for the future. I'd be happy with this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike Yeo is coach of the Blues.  He was not thrilled when Minnesota signed Vanek.  Yeo also had some harsh comments on his play during the playoffs - Vanek was then bought out.

 

Doug Armstrong also said last month that he is not interested in acquiring rental players.

https://www.nhl.com/news/st-louis-blues-general-manager-doug-armstrong-not-interested-in-rentals/c-295056072

 

"I don't see us involved in the rental market. Now that can always change with the proper phone call and a scenario in which the assets we have to give up are something we can live with. But to get a player for six weeks and hope you are going to go on a run, well, the teams that have done that recently really haven't been that successful.

"I would like to make a trade, especially if we're going to get a player like we did a few years ago with [defenseman] Jay Bouwmeester where you get him for one or two additional playoffs more."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Vanek to STL for Jordan Schmaltz + 4th

This kind feels like a Pouliot type deal. 

Schmaltz is kind of the forgotten man there but still has upside, he was the Blues lone representative in the AHL All Star game this year.

 

I like the idea of taking a chance with this guy but he was a 1st round pick and recent AHL All Star so I question how much the Blues value him. Vanek may not cut it.?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vanek has been called out by the last two teams that acquired him as a rental/short-term guy - any GM looking for a scoring rental for the playoffs likely knows Vanek's history resulting in a low value even considering his more than reasonable reg-season output - he simply doesn't show up for the meaningful games in the playoffs apparently; it's well known around the league and giving up assets to acquire a disappearing act in the playoffs wouldn't be sending a positive message to your team I don't think.  OTOH, he could surprise you and actually show up for a round or two since he's quite a streaky scorer - that type of production can win a series occasionally. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good proposal

-good value for both teams

-risk of each player seems equal (shmaltz may never pan out, Vanek may disappoint in post season)

-canucks still recoup a pick

-RHD is by far the biggest hole in canucks system

-better than “trade Vanek for a third” proposals that get thrown around like nothing

 

10/10 hope JB thinks of this as well

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Fanuck said:

Vanek has been called out by the last two teams that acquired him as a rental/short-term guy - any GM looking for a scoring rental for the playoffs likely knows Vanek's history resulting in a low value even considering his more than reasonable reg-season output - he simply doesn't show up for the meaningful games in the playoffs apparently; it's well known around the league and giving up assets to acquire a disappearing act in the playoffs wouldn't be sending a positive message to your team I don't think.  OTOH, he could surprise you and actually show up for a round or two since he's quite a streaky scorer - that type of production can win a series occasionally. 

Yes, but GM's go nuts at the deadline and develop really short term memory loss :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we can get this done despite what Fanuck is saying (I will assume he's right) I'd be willing to do this.

 

I think with Juolevi presumably going to be on our team next season, we will be lacking some depth there - especially if Biega isn't re-signed. Regardless, we are pretty much void of any defensive prospects with skill - unless you want to count outside chances like Chatfield or Brisebois.  Can't be any worse than that guy who has recently become useless named Pouliot, can he?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, mll said:

....

Those are good points. I wasn’t aware of yeo’s dislike. .  

 

The only thing I would say is that it’s at a very manageable cost. Vanek today is the top rw UFA avalable and for them to be able to keep high picks and their top prospects while improving would be a win.  If they are interested in improving a player at vaneks level with term it’s going to cost them a bunch more. There was rumors they were interest in Hoffman but that’s going to cost them a kyrou, kostin or Thomas.  Where vanek might not be at the level or term but they get to keep those guys.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mll said:

Mike Yeo is coach of the Blues.  He was not thrilled when Minnesota signed Vanek.  Yeo also had some harsh comments on his play during the playoffs - Vanek was then bought out.

 

Doug Armstrong also said last month that he is not interested in acquiring rental players.

https://www.nhl.com/news/st-louis-blues-general-manager-doug-armstrong-not-interested-in-rentals/c-295056072

 

"I don't see us involved in the rental market. Now that can always change with the proper phone call and a scenario in which the assets we have to give up are something we can live with. But to get a player for six weeks and hope you are going to go on a run, well, the teams that have done that recently really haven't been that successful.

"I would like to make a trade, especially if we're going to get a player like we did a few years ago with [defenseman] Jay Bouwmeester where you get him for one or two additional playoffs more."

 

An interesting fix could be to make the pick conditional. Make it a 4th if the Blues make the Conference final, but a 5th if they don't. That or tie it more directly to Vanek's play in either the regular season, post-season, or both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would actually compare this trade proposal more with what he was traded for last year than to Hansen's trade though. Hansen was signed for another year, so it wasn't strictly a playoff rental. Vanek having a similar season this year to last got traded for a former first round 24 year old dman (Dylan McIlrath) and a 3rd round pick. Seems like a reasonable deal for both sides if there is interest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

I would actually compare this trade proposal more with what he was traded for last year than to Hansen's trade though. Hansen was signed for another year, so it wasn't strictly a playoff rental. Vanek having a similar season this year to last got traded for a former first round 24 year old dman (Dylan McIlrath) and a 3rd round pick. Seems like a reasonable deal for both sides if there is interest.

The problem with your comparison is that McIlrath was clearly a reclamation project in that trade.  He was pretty much a throw in. He has not lived up to expectations in any way.  Schmaltz is a much better prospect.  He’s 2 points off the lean lead in scoring in San Antonio (despite a playing 11 fewer games than the leader).  I don’t know that they’d value Vanek enough to move Schmaltz. And if they did I can’t see them adding a pick 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, qwijibo said:

The problem with your comparison is that McIlrath was clearly a reclamation project in that trade.  He was pretty much a throw in. He has not lived up to expectations in any way.  Schmaltz is a much better prospect.  He’s 2 points off the lean lead in scoring in San Antonio (despite a playing 11 fewer games than the leader).  I don’t know that they’d value Vanek enough to move Schmaltz. And if they did I can’t see them adding a pick 

But Detroit got a 3rd round pick whereas this proposal is a 4th. McIlrath is suppose to be a tough stay at home dman while Schmaltz is more offensive, but they are both 24 if/when these trades happen(ed), so they are likely to both considered as projects at this point. Clendening had decent stats in the AHL and didn't amount to much. Points aren't everything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think the trade is fair value

but i really think that is not a good fit for the canucks

the canucks have enough younger dmen in the 3 to 6 range

 

we need to upgrade the top end and i think a package needs to be put together

to get a 2nd round pick in the next draft at worst

we have hutton, pouliot, stetcher, as younger d filing the 3 to 6 roles

biega and arguably edler are also in the bottom 4

 

tanev is our only top 2 and is injury prone

doubtful joulevi will be top 2 next year but at least he has reasonable potential to get there

we need more dmen with higher potential and will require higher draft picks to get them

no more marginal nhlers or young players who cannot quite make it with their current team

management has to upgrade the talent level in the back end or our offense will continue to struggle

 

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...