Canuck Surfer Posted January 2, 2019 Share Posted January 2, 2019 Winnipeg re-signed Teemu Selanne to a team friendly deal coming off his ELC. After he scored 70 goals plus as a rookie. The next year Keith Tkachuk refused to do the same. Made it known he was the real prima donna. So Selanne was traded, in part so they could afford Tkachuk. Because, you know, Tkachuk was a hard as nails, Don Cherry style player. That's better than a rookie who scores 76 goals. Right? Problem was! The provincial govt. was also underwriting any losses the team handled to keep it in town. The next year the $3 mill (by memory) paid to Tkachuk became a dead loss. And the govt pulled the plug. @Hockey God, that trade killed a legitimate Canadian hockey team. That deal sulked! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Beagle had landed Posted January 2, 2019 Share Posted January 2, 2019 Cam Neely. That bust of a trade allowed us to stay bad enought to draft Trevor Linden a couple of years later. Eventually he got traded away for Bertuzzi and McCabe, which lead us to acquiring Luongo and the Sedins who were part of the most successful teams in franchise history. Linden was also responsible for hiring Jim Benning who has quickly and efficiently engineered this team into what we are witnessing today. Sure, the Neely trade worked out great for Boston with them acquiring a dominant power forward who eventually won a Cup as team President in 2011, but would Neely have blossomed into what he's become today if he stayed a Canuck? Most definitely not. But that trade 33 years ago is starting to come around full circle, and the Canucks will reap the rewards in due time. The Linden factor is real. His character, leadership, work ethic and legacy is still alive in every facet of this current team, and I hope he gets to lift the Cup one day like Neely did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SingleThorn Posted January 2, 2019 Share Posted January 2, 2019 20 hours ago, canucklehead44 said: The purpose behind a trade is for both teams to get better - not necessarily for one to come out a winner and the other a loser. Better can mean short-term or long-term. Just a note from the original post. A 'good trade' is a win-win situation, not a mammoth winner/ loser situation. Agree 100%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckNORRIS4Cup Posted January 2, 2019 Share Posted January 2, 2019 21 hours ago, goalie13 said: Don't forget the other side of that deal. Linden to the Islanders for Bertuzzi, McCabe and a 3rd (Jarkko Ruutu). And then McCabe was part of the deal to get the extra pick to land both Sedins. My other favourite Canucks trades... Stojanov for Naslund. Quinn and Butcher for Courtnall, Dirk, Momesso, Ronning and future considerations. I'm well aware of what took place before, but that wasn't one of my best/favorite trades he should of never been traded in the first place. It would be like finding out tomorrow Horvat has been traded I don't think many people would be happy lol. That Naslund one was a good one too! And someone else posted it, the 94 trade that brought Jeff Brown and Bret Hedican here, that was huge for the 94 run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Biestra Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 These were all interesting ones back in the day... Hawerchuk for Housley Denis Savard for Chelios Gartner for Ciccarelli LaFontaine for Pierre Turgeon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lmm Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 On 1/1/2019 at 2:04 PM, Hockey God said: A different era to be sure, but I agree, Pollock was as crafty a GM as they come. The Seals, if they could have had a superstar like Lafleur, may have been able to make a go of it in SoCal, especially if they had a suitable place to play. I'm going to have to read Kurtzberg's book at some point, as I've seen it referenced a few times when talking about the Seals and hockey in the early 70s. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't one of the reasons that the Seals moved to Cleveland because the NHL saw their arena situation as unsuitable, but it was the same arena, the Cow Palace, that the Sharks ended up using? NHL hypocrites, looking for the expansion money above all else. And, we can only imagine if Labbat's had been behind a Vancouver team, what might have happened. For one thing, that Greek tragedy of a wheel spin might not have happened, and we might have had a GM with corporate support who could have a Vancouver team much better, sooner. Good story in Ice Warriors, by Jon Stott, about Labatt's and Canuck's being denied permission by the NHL to relocate the Seals. do you really think Lafleur would have helped the Seals? They had Reg Leach, Carol Vadnais, Rick Smith, Gilles Meloche, Ivan Bolderev, Dick Redmond, Craig Patrick... I think the real winner in all that was Guy Lafleur the 71 Seals had 27 players 25 or under, 17 were 22 or under the Habs probably would have traded for Lafleur by 1973 for 2 3rd round picks and Claude LaRose Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lmm Posted January 8, 2019 Share Posted January 8, 2019 Esp + Hodge for Ratelle, Park + Zanuzzi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.