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

[Discussion] Our Weakest Link: Defense. Can We Afford to Lose Forwards for D Via Trades?

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Alflives said:

Bo would return a Seth Jones level of D Mann.  Fabbro is not good enough.  

that sounds ambitious to me at this point, not taking away from Bo I think he's a boss, but Jones, proven player, at his salary is pretty awesome.. but that's why I added a reasonable pick anyways.. maybe 2 good prospects? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, smithers joe said:

these are good future trades, but they need to wait till the new guys are ready to take on prime time. till then we go with what we have.

I agree with you in part Joe...this is how I see it...….for what it is worth!


Baertschi at the TDL...……...no loss, he is replaceable long term and short term.internally and externally

MDZ at the TDL...…………...we already have several young players who can replace him

Sutter is a more difficult one, and should be moved if Beagle proves himself and/or Gaudette suddenly takes off


Of note*


I think it is very important to start moving non-essential veterans, for picks to condense our young talent.....as once having built your team, there is such a small window before contracts start causing your team to start moving players......


And as much as this isn't about trading other players......Edler should be considered as trade bait, for the very same reason. We are not going to be a contender for 3 or 4 years, and by that time our aging veterans will not have the same trade value...….The ones I have suggested are replaceable. when and if we are competitive, then there is ample opportunity to trade a later 1st for a veteran, like other top teams do......but now they are not needed, nor should we be trading any high picks as of now....we should be acquiring them (picks) for the next 2 years.


This is a journey, and we are not there yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i could see edler being resigned, year by year because he can log heavy minutes. at the same time, it would be great if he could be moved to the second pairing until woo is ready. i see them moving del zotto and maybe tanev by season's end. pouliot and hutton will probably remain bubble players. i see brisebois cracking the line up next year. 

Bartsch will dictate his future, by his play. i agree that dahlen will be a lw next year with elias. 


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope people take the time to realize that last year, Canucks had horrid injury luck but when their top 4 all were in the lineup, their record was nearly playoff like (it was three games above .500).    Given that group is largely back, why would you think if it can remain healthy that it cannot have a similar year?   While there certainly are better D's in the NHL, the top six that Green can role out presently is decent if healthy.   


It is two friggin' games into a long season.   Give it a few weeks and if things don't settle in and/or the injury bug bites, start it up again.   This year there are actual options in Utica as well which sure hasn't been the case for a long while on the back end.   


Rebuild folks.   No long term commitments to anyone on the backend.    All seemingly going according to a plan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, TheGuardian_ said:

Rumblings that Pred's 2016 pick, RH dman, Dante Fabbro might be available. They failed to sign him and he becomes a FA at the end of the year, ala Vesey. Like Stecher he is/was a Canuck fan in his youth and like Vesey he has been saying all the right things BUT does Nashville want to take another chance? I am sure his agent/buddy/advisor/friends have pointed out the Preds D is established and set while a spot on the Canucks may/could/will be available almost immediately.



In two years and he's not available for now.  He sees it as a challenge and his sisters study in Nashville.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • -SN- changed the title to [Discussion] Our Weakest Link: Defense. Can We Afford to Lose Forwards for D Via Trades?
2 hours ago, mll said:

In two years and he's not available for now.  He sees it as a challenge and his sisters study in Nashville.

Quite correct the end of next year, his sisters "studied" past tense.

Still the Preds trade position erodes the closer to his FA date, two years though is not much to worry about right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2018-10-08 at 11:53 AM, Rob_Zepp said:

Wow, really?   Do you watch other teams?

I do actually.


To be fair, there might be a couple of other teams around our situation to so maybe bottom 5 in the league? I don't think there's any need to sugar coat what we don't have and you know I'm positive about other things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2018-10-07 at 2:20 PM, coolboarder said:

We have Hughes in the wing, developing his game in NCAA and I can see him make the team as soon as he decide to sign with us, OJ is in Utica developing his game and should be up with the big club sooner than later, and Tryamkin has 2 season left from his KHL contract and just too far away for an immediate help.  We still see a big hole in our D and our forward group is set for years to come with great prospects in Lind, Dalhen, Gaudette, Gadjovich, and Palmu.   Woo is years away and we still don't know what Brisebois, Chatfield can bring to this club as MDZ, Pouliot and Edler are hurting this team with bad D zone coverage and giveaways.  If there's injury to Edler/Tanev, there's suddenly not enough depth as it happened last year.  


There are two options we can do: trade Sutter for a top 4 D or Horvat for a top D. If we were to trade away Horvat, we have Gaudette replacing Horvat if he pans out and I'd like to see a few games from Gaudette first before trading away Horvat.  If Gaudette does pan out, we can afford to lose a C for a top pairing D and bump down Edler in the depth chart.  I don't think Horvat has NTC or NMC so his value is at its highest.   So hence, my question is to you, what could we fetch for a D if we offer Horvat as a part of the deal?    What is he worth for a straight up one on one deal and who might this D be?  Petterson is a 1C for sure with Horvat being 2C if Petterson keeps it up for first two months.  The earlier we discuss this, the better the deal would be if it ever comes up in near future.    For now, the D is obvious the weakest link and we do not want to become an Oilers/Maple Leafs with great offense but bad defence.   I'm more interested in what we can get for Horvat and would it make any difference if we ever decide to make this move?  If Eriksson ever rebounds to his normal level by playing with Petterson, we can then get something from Eriksson next summer and his stock might rise again would also be an option.  


My answer: yes, we can afford to lose Horvat and still have Guadette as our 2C without missing any beat.   If any team is desparate for a 1C, let them think that Horvat is 1C in exchange for #1 D.   I just do not think that Horvat is 1C as proven when playing against a harder match-up.   

With this season looking to be another tough one, I'm fully, expecting another top five pick, with which I'm hoping to get our last top four dman ( I don't dare hope for Hughes ). 

This being said, I don't see a need to deal away core pieces to our future.

Intead, I'd like to see deals that may go, largely, unnoticed but bring big returns down the road.

Two such players I've had my eye on are Andrew Nielsen in Toronto and Erik Cernak in Tampa.

Both are big, physical aggressive players with modest offensive abilities.

While neither may turn into offensive forces at the NHL level, both play the style of hockey that wins playoff rounds.

I would love for JB to get his hands on one of these guys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The OP had some merit but the wording kind of ruins the message.


Yes IF a Gaudette works out and is a solid 2nd line C AND Pettersson bumps Horvat we could trade him for a 1st-second pairing guy with upside.  That’s at least  two years away though, one year Gaudette  comes in and is so good we put him on the 1st unit PP, and he outscores Horvat, second year he does it again and proves it was no fluke, only then will would it make sense to trade Horvat.  


A more likely scenario is Gaudette comes in and pushes Horvat, he’s scores at a clip that is high enough to be a solid second liner if he gets enough minutes, people take notice and he’s the one traded for an up and coming defenseman.   Or Sutter is simply traded to make room for him, and we get what we can for him, hopefully a solid D prospect and a pick or just a high pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

   Big physical centers are a must in the western conference. Beagle and Horvat are keepers and Pettersen for his skill of course.

Any of the other forwards except Boeser are fair game if the right deal is offered. Most teams will low ball the bottom teams like ours.

If they are not resigning Edler and/or MDZ they definitley could trade for a mid tier veteran and a prospect D for 2 of the utility forwards

and a 3rd or later pick.


Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Create New...