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

[Proposal] Vancouver-Toronto (not Tanev related - If Van lands 2nd/3rd overall pick)


Recommended Posts

Vancouver-Toronto (not Tanev related - If Van lands 2nd/3rd overall pick)

 

To Toronto:  2nd overall or 3rd overall pick (assuming that Hughes gets taken at #1).

 

To Vancouver:  Mitch Marner

 

I’m not sure as to what would exactly constitute a fair deal, but this would be the meat of the deal.  Either side could add to even out the deal if necessary.

 

 

Why Toronto might be inclined to do this:  With Matthews due for a hefty raise, it’s unlikely that Toronto will be able to afford all of Matthews, Marner, Nylander (whom they just re-signed), and Tavares.  Toronto reduces cap space, while getting a rookie on an ELC that would likely be an impactful NHL’er right from Day One.

 

Why Vancouver might be inclined to do this:  Add another impactful long term piece.  Having Boeser and Mariner on that right side would be killer.  You can either keep Virtanen on the right side in a 3rd line capacity (giving that right side even more depth), or, you could consider moving Virtanen to LW.   If Vancouver does need to add in this package, maybe you can include Virtanen (although I would prefer to keep Virtanen).

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Monteeun said:

How strong is the coming draft?

I haven’t done an assessment on it yet (Outside of the top pick, I usually don’t analyze draft picks until May), but from what I’m hearing, there’s another guy in this draft that is pretty much on par with Hughes (or close to).  

 

His name escapes me but I think it’s a European guy.  

 

IF that is the case and IF the Canucks land 2nd overall, then maybe the 2nd OA + ??? For Mariner might be beneficial for both teams.

 

Leafs clear cap while maintaining their contender status (combination of Kaspanen growing into his role + the 2nd OA being an immediate impactful NHL player), while the Canucks should have two legitimate powerhouse scoring lines.  

 

Pettersson and Boeser on one line, while Horvat and Marner anchor another.

 

if the 2ndOA isn’t enough to land Marner, then maybe you include Virtanen in said deal (along with a young dman like Chatfield perhaps).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, milk and honey said:

marner is worth more then a maybe player although likely to turn into a star imo

 

marner goes for middle 6forward, a dman/prospect and a top 10  pick imo

I think this coming draft is fairly deep from what I understand.  The top two picks (Hughes and CantRememberName) are pegged to be immediate impact NHL players........not to the extent of Matthews/McDavid, but superior to that of Nico Hischier.  The 3rd overall is slated to have a 1st year that would be comparable to the Sons of Keith.

 

Anything can happen obviously, but if I understand correctly, the Top 3 picks of this year’s draft are pretty safe bets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, 6string said:

Toronto are in their 3 year window, I mean 53 year window to win the cup.

 

Marner is their cornerstone like Gilmour was...lol.  Speaking words of wisdom Let It Be.

Will Toronto be able to afford both Matthews and Marner?  I’m not so sure.  Between the two of them, you’re looking at a 19 million dollar cap hit.....if you’re being optimistic.    Where is the cap space going to come from?

 

I’m not so sure.   

 

They could still move Nylander I guess, be if they trade Nylander for an impactful defenseman of defensive-equivalent value to Nylander, then the cap hit will likely be around the same.  I also don’t think Nylander will entice a lottery team to move a 2nd-3rd OA pick (perhaps I’m wrong).

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Hindustan Smyl said:

I haven’t done an assessment on it yet (Outside of the top pick, I usually don’t analyze draft picks until May), but from what I’m hearing, there’s another guy in this draft that is pretty much on par with Hughes (or close to).  

 

His name escapes me but I think it’s a European guy.  

 

IF that is the case and IF the Canucks land 2nd overall, then maybe the 2nd OA + ??? For Mariner might be beneficial for both teams.

 

Leafs clear cap while maintaining their contender status (combination of Kaspanen growing into his role + the 2nd OA being an immediate impactful NHL player), while the Canucks should have two legitimate powerhouse scoring lines.  

 

Pettersson and Boeser on one line, while Horvat and Marner anchor another.

 

if the 2ndOA isn’t enough to land Marner, then maybe you include Virtanen in said deal (along with a young dman like Chatfield perhaps).

You're probably thinking of the Finnish kid Kaapo Kakko playing for TPS playing in the Liiga.  Haven't seen him play myself, but he's supposed to be a "can't miss" type of prospect and a lot of scouts have him ranked #2 or #3 behind Hughes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, skolozsy2 said:

You're probably thinking of the Finnish kid Kaapo Kakko playing for TPS playing in the Liiga.  Haven't seen him play myself, but he's supposed to be a "can't miss" type of prospect and a lot of scouts have him ranked #2 or #3 behind Hughes.

Yes, that’s who I was thinking about it.  

 

Kakko would be nice, but so would Marner would he not?

 

If the Canucks were in a position to land Kakko and could move him for Marner, perhaps it would benefit both teams.  Leafs reduce cap space and stay in contender category, while the Canucks add another long term piece that would be signed for a long time.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Hindustan Smyl said:

Perhaps the same could be said for Mitch Marner?  

 

(If you have a chance to trade for a guy who is producing at more than 1.00 PPG, you take it and run?).

Fair enough. I can't much argue with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Hindustan Smyl said:

Perhaps the same could be said for Mitch Marner?  

 

(If you have a chance to trade for a guy who is producing at more than 1.00 PPG, you take it and run?).

The only downside I see is that Mitch Marner is gonna get really expensive, really fast.  Whereas Kaako can be cost controlled for years to come.

 

But you're also getting a guarantee in Marner, where Kaako could still be a miss.

 

Tough call.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, skolozsy2 said:

The only downside I see is that Mitch Marner is gonna get really expensive, really fast.  Whereas Kaako can be cost controlled for years to come.

 

But you're also getting a guarantee in Marner, where Kaako could still be a miss.

 

Tough call.

Definitely.

 

i think that’s why it makes this interesting.

 

The Canucks have the cap space to afford Marner, whereas Toronto likely doesn’t.  However - there’s a good chance that Kaako will be an immediate impact NHLer (no guarantees obviously) and so if that’s the case, then Toronto keeps their ‘contender’ status while solving their long term cap issues.

 

Meanwhile, the Canucks edge closer to being a perennial playoff team in both the short term and the long term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Hindustan Smyl said:

Vancouver-Toronto (not Tanev related - If Van lands 2nd/3rd overall pick)

 

To Toronto:  2nd overall or 3rd overall pick (assuming that Hughes gets taken at #1).

 

To Vancouver:  Mitch Marner

 

I’m not sure as to what would exactly constitute a fair deal, but this would be the meat of the deal.  Either side could add to even out the deal if necessary.

 

 

Why Toronto might be inclined to do this:  With Matthews due for a hefty raise, it’s unlikely that Toronto will be able to afford all of Matthews, Marner, Nylander (whom they just re-signed), and Tavares.  Toronto reduces cap space, while getting a rookie on an ELC that would likely be an impactful NHL’er right from Day One.

 

Why Vancouver might be inclined to do this:  Add another impactful long term piece.  Having Boeser and Mariner on that right side would be killer.  You can either keep Virtanen on the right side in a 3rd line capacity (giving that right side even more depth), or, you could consider moving Virtanen to LW.   If Vancouver does need to add in this package, maybe you can include Virtanen (although I would prefer to keep Virtanen).

 

 

If we get 2knd overall I suggest we keep it. Just for the 3 years of ELC!

 

Which for the same reason, you ask for more than Marner from TO.

 

If they say no?

 

Who cares!  :bigblush:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said:

If we get 2knd overall I suggest we keep it. Just for the 3 years of ELC!

 

Which for the same reason, you ask for more than Marner from TO.

 

If they say no?

 

Who cares!  :bigblush:

Unfortunately, that’s the risk you take in giving away a 2nd/3rdOA.

 

Yes - perhaps said pick could be as good as an Elias Pettersson, Patrik Laine, Jack Eichel, etc, but it’s also possible that said pick ends up being like Jesse Puljiujarvi, Nolan Patrick, or a Nail Yakupov.

 

3 years of ELC is nice but I think for the Canucks, this management group really wants this team to get into the playoffs as fast as possible while still icing a relatively young team.   This management group clearly seems to see a benefit in getting playoff experience for their young kids.

 

Toronto on the other hand, is a cup contender right now.....and in order to keep their contending window open longer, will need to find a way to solve their upcoming cap storm.  

 

Given that Vancouver and Toronto have an extremely good relationship right now (ie  Gagner loan, Leivo trade), I do think that a trade like this could greatly benefit both teams while meeting the needs of both teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Signs Tavares at 11M$ (aka aim for the Stanley Cup) and turns around and trade a young player entering his prime... :blink: ... that makes sense.

 

If Toronto didn't have a salary plan for next year, they would have traded Nylander already.  The only plausible trade scenario for Marner, would be a Johansen/Jones type of deal and I believe they would have done it with Nylander instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, timberz21 said:

Signs Tavares at 11M$ (aka aim for the Stanley Cup) and turns around and trade a young player entering his prime... :blink: ... that makes sense.

 

If Toronto didn't have a salary plan for next year, they would have traded Nylander already.  The only plausible trade scenario for Marner, would be a Johansen/Jones type of deal and I believe they would have done it with Nylander instead.

Fair enough and I see your point.

 

Honestly though - how on earth are Toronto going to be able to afford everyone?  Have you analyzed their cap situation?  If so - how do you see the clearing space?

 

Maybe it’s unlikely, but maybe it’s possible that Toronto signed Tavares with the mindset that THIS was going to be their year......and that “they’d figure things out as they go.”

 

I just don’t get how things will work from a cap standpoint UNLESS they trade Marner for a guy on an ELC that can likely make an immediate impact.

 

Nylander won’t fetch such a player, while Matthews and Tavares are untouchable.  Trading Nylander for a defenseman a la Johansen/Jones doesn’t solve their upcoming cap storm.

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...