[Proposal] Defining Trade

[Dr.BRR]

3 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Yup, that would be a defining trade for sure.   Trading a reasonably priced veteran C who can play in all situations and one of the best goalie prospects in hockey for two forward prospects who would arguably only be decent depth prospects (Lind comparable) in compare to existing Canuck elite forward prospects/young NHL forward talent would indeed be defining.   It would define the Canucks as idiots.   

Good-great prospects that Florida is fortunate to have and we would love to have. But I agree with Zepp, if its demo moving it would define us as idiots if we dont give him his shot that he's earned. Plus Sutter isn't the throw away everyone seems to think. Extremely versatile vet.

[The Lock]

So basically we trade away a position we desperately need to for a position we are finally starting to look pretty solid in?

 

[vannuck59]

Here's why, Florida is in the win now window, Sutter gives them that shut down capability that they need. Demko  gives them a replacement for Lou and keeps them in the hunt in the Cup race for the next 4 years. Borgstrom gives us a good center 1b or 2a . The Tippett part gives a potential high end with speed 30 goal scorer that can play either side .  Why we give up Demko is because we have DePietro in the wings. Now maybe we trade Depietro instead of Demko we can try . I would hardly call Tippett a redundant winger. and if he is the same as Lind which I doubt trade him for a D-man.

[Glug Datt]

if we're giving up demko, it better be for a bonafide 1c or 1d.. and yah maybe we'd need to add more, but those are the only 2 things we need as much as a genuine starting goalie

[Pears]

50 minutes ago, vannuck59 said:

Here's why, Florida is in the win now window, Sutter gives them that shut down capability that they need. Demko  gives them a replacement for Lou and keeps them in the hunt in the Cup race for the next 4 years. Borgstrom gives us a good center 1b or 2a . The Tippett part gives a potential high end with speed 30 goal scorer that can play either side .  Why we give up Demko is because we have DePietro in the wings. Now maybe we trade Depietro instead of Demko we can try . I would hardly call Tippett a redundant winger. and if he is the same as Lind which I doubt trade him for a D-man.

We have Boeser and if we’re lucky enough to get Hughes, Pettersson on the RW as well. There’s absolutely zero need for Tippett. Not saying he isn’t good, but Florida needs him more than we do. Not to mention, they have Barkov-Trochek-Bjugstad as their top 3 centres so again, they don’t need Sutter. 

[48MPHSlapShot]

1 hour ago, Pears said:

We have Boeser and if we’re lucky enough to get Hughes, Pettersson on the RW as well. There’s absolutely zero need for Tippett. Not saying he isn’t good, but Florida needs him more than we do. Not to mention, they have Barkov-Trochek-Bjugstad as their top 3 centres so again, they don’t need Sutter. 

Hell, even if we don't land a center and go with a LW or Dman in next years draft, and Pettersson is able to transition to center, we're still pretty damn solid on RW, with Boeser locked in as top line center and a glut of young guys (Virtanen, Lind, Jasek, Goldobin) all likely duking it out for that 2nd line spot within the next year or two.

 

Creating a massive hole in our pool for a redundant piece makes no sense.

[JeremyCuddles]

2 hours ago, Pears said:

We have Boeser and if we’re lucky enough to get Hughes, Pettersson on the RW as well. There’s absolutely zero need for Tippett. Not saying he isn’t good, but Florida needs him more than we do. Not to mention, they have Barkov-Trochek-Bjugstad as their top 3 centres so again, they don’t need Sutter. 

Bjugstad has been used primarily on the wing. Took fewer than 300 faceoffs last year.

[Toews]

Henrik Borgstrom is a consensus top 10-20 prospect. Those don't get moved unless it's in a package for an elite player, neither Sutter nor Demko qualify. 

 

Also as highly as we value Demko unproven goalies don't end up fetching much on the trade market. It's a fickle position and no one wants to pay the value we would want for Demko. 

[Pears]

1 hour ago, N7Nucks said:

Bjugstad has been used primarily on the wing. Took fewer than 300 faceoffs last year.

Still. With Tippett coming in next year I see Bjugstad becoming Florida’s full time 3C. But even then, they have McCann as well who’s more than capable of playing centre. 

[mll]

 

4 hours ago, vannuck59 said:

Here's why, Florida is in the win now window, Sutter gives them that shut down capability that they need. Demko  gives them a replacement for Lou and keeps them in the hunt in the Cup race for the next 4 years. Borgstrom gives us a good center 1b or 2a . The Tippett part gives a potential high end with speed 30 goal scorer that can play either side .  Why we give up Demko is because we have DePietro in the wings. Now maybe we trade Depietro instead of Demko we can try . I would hardly call Tippett a redundant winger. and if he is the same as Lind which I doubt trade him for a D-man.

This was Tallon at the TDL: "Everybody's high on him, and we're higher on him," Tallon said of Borgstrom. "He's the real deal and we're excited to have him in our system. We'll be a better team with him in the lineup long-term. There were a lot of requests about him and we were reluctant to do anything."

 

Re goalie draft success and development.  Mitch Korn is considered one of the best goalie coaches in the league.  He worked for Nashville since their inception in 1998 to 2014 where he followed Trotz to Washington.  Nashville has drafted 20 goalies in 16 drafts from 1998 to 2013 including 2 in the 1st round with even one at 6th overall.  Only Pekka Rinne became a starter and Saros looks to be on his way.

 

Canucks are not going to trade Demko on the hope that DiPietro can be a starter.  This was Kevin Woodley on DiPietro:

 

[Hairy Kneel]

Borgstrom looks great on his highlight reels. It'll take a lot to get him more than in this trade offer. But if they are truly in the win now mode (they finished 16th overall) 

They could possibly use some of our veteran D help or a scoring winger as insurance for a playoff push. Our goalie is good but too young for where they're at.

[JeremyCuddles]

5 hours ago, Pears said:

Still. With Tippett coming in next year I see Bjugstad becoming Florida’s full time 3C. But even then, they have McCann as well who’s more than capable of playing centre. 

McCann is piss poor in the faceoff dot, he McCann’t win a draw very often. So he’s a winger pretty much. Bjugstad is versatile which is good. Play him on Borgstrom’s wing. Tippett with Trocheck or on the 4th line with MacKenzie. Double down on kids on the 3rd line? Maybe. Either way I’m thinking they’ll give Borgstrom every opportunity to man the 3rd line center spot. Keep Bjugstad on the wing. Center core will look nice no matter how they slice it. 

[IBatch]

20 hours ago, hammertime said:

For the record Markstrom was also considered one of if not the best  NHL goalie prospect in hockey for some time in Florida. Demko is far from a sure thing to be a starter let alone an Elite one. Here's to hoping. But let's not laud too many expectations on the kid.

You are correct, actually he was at the top for several years (Markstrom) before his stock started to slide.  Huge goalies were also at a premium then too.   Demko isn't far off that now though, he's getting lots of props after last years play in the AHL, and is definitely the goalie of the future for the Canucks at this point....unless Markstrom stops letting the early and often easy save goal in and turns into a monster (doubtful but not completely out of the picture, he played great for us the final six games and he's surely knows his days are numbered at this point).

[vannuck59]

On ‎8‎/‎25‎/‎2018 at 10:37 AM, Rob_Zepp said:

Yup, that would be a defining trade for sure.   Trading a reasonably priced veteran C who can play in all situations and one of the best goalie prospects in hockey for two forward prospects who would arguably only be decent depth prospects (Lind comparable) in compare to existing Canuck elite forward prospects/young NHL forward talent would indeed be defining.   It would define the Canucks as idiots.   

Lets track this in two years and see I predict 50 to 60 points for each player. wanna bet

[The Lock]

11 hours ago, vannuck59 said:

Lets track this in two years and see I predict 50 to 60 points for each player. wanna bet

The problem is, 50 or 60 points per player is not enough for us to want to trade what is most likely our future star goalie.

 

Talk about an 80+ point player and then maybe, but if you are just talking 50 or 60 points? Ouch!

[Rob_Zepp]

On 8/27/2018 at 6:28 AM, vannuck59 said:

Lets track this in two years and see I predict 50 to 60 points for each player. wanna bet

Over what young Canuck prospects they replace who do same?   Over future No. 1 goalie?

[kloubek]

On 8/25/2018 at 11:22 AM, Fanuck said:

Typical CDC...we got one of the best goalies on the planet not currently in the NHL 

We do?  I thought we had a goalie prospect hasn't really proven anything yet.  Even at the AHL level he has has flashes of brilliance but ultimately was 6th best in save % and 13th in GAA across qualified AHL goalies last season.

CDC loves to consider him the goalie of the future and he well might be, but at this point he remains nothing but a prospect.

 

With that said, he's a prospect we are relying on for our team moving forward.  I don't think it is worth it for us to put him up as trade bait as I don't think anyone would overpay us so much as to make it worthwhile to lose one of our only prospects in a position which so obviously needs attention on our particular club.

[JeremyCuddles]

6 hours ago, kloubek said:

We do?  I thought we had a goalie prospect hasn't really proven anything yet.  Even at the AHL level he has has flashes of brilliance but ultimately was 6th best in save % and 13th in GAA across qualified AHL goalies last season.

CDC loves to consider him the goalie of the future and he well might be, but at this point he remains nothing but a prospect.

 

With that said, he's a prospect we are relying on for our team moving forward.  I don't think it is worth it for us to put him up as trade bait as I don't think anyone would overpay us so much as to make it worthwhile to lose one of our only prospects in a position which so obviously needs attention on our particular club.

To be fair, was Utica a good team last season? I recall us taking a lot of their better players. And they had poor center depth.

[kloubek]

3 hours ago, N7Nucks said:

To be fair, was Utica a good team last season? I recall us taking a lot of their better players. And they had poor center depth.

...which is why I feel save percentage is a more appropriate stat than gaa.

[JeremyCuddles]

1 minute ago, kloubek said:

...which is why I feel save percentage is a more appropriate stat than gaa.

I feel like goalie stats in general aren't a very good for measuring how good a goalie is. But I guess if you HAD to pick one 6th best GAA isn't too shabby on an average team.