Master Mind Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 8 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said: Boeser was a late first round pick. Edler is on an expiring deal. Motte was a long shot prospect. Not saying it is probable but if you got Motte and Boeser for the loss of two months of Edler's service you wouldn't make that trade? We need Edler next year for when Hughes and OJ come in. Most late 1sts don't fetch a Boeser, and players like Motte are easy to find. So no, I wouldn't trade a key piece to our D for a chance at another Boeser. We already have a 1st, don't need another lottery ticket at the expense of a known important asset. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 1 hour ago, Westcoasting said: Your namesake would be very disappointed to hear your anti leaf talk! Wow that would be hilarious if that draft pick turned out to be someone amazing!! You would be surprised how many Ontario born people become anti-Leaf. You get to a point of hearing so much about every possible aspect of everything they do from who drives to a game and who takes a taxi to what their summer vacation choices are - it drives you nuts. It was especially excruciating when they were really bad and yet the amount of coverage on things even the most diehard fan could not give a turd about were debated for days on end - and no matter where you went on the dial, it was more of the same. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hectic Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 54 minutes ago, Crabcakes said: As I said above, I think that the bulk of the core of the future Canucks has already been drafted. So I don't think that it is as important at this stage of the rebuild to be acquiring top picks. It is more important to develop the players that they have. I think that this dovetails with what Benning has been saying dovetails. beauty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DADDYROCK Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 Wow, do or die all in for Toronto.Shortly they will have to blow up all the superstars because of cap space so now or never. I am not a leafs fan by any means, and when they lose it feels wonderful,looking foward to seeing them lose even thou they have tried to buy a championship.. BOOO TORONTO! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 47 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said: What does that have to do with anything? I heard those guys like Benn and Datsyuk turned out pretty good.. Nothing, was more of a props for Muzzin pushing through more than anything. Just saying, LA got a pretty great return in years of service, two known prospects and a potential nice additional one in a deep draft all for a fifth round pick who will be turning 30 in a few weeks. Nice asset management. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westcoasting Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 5 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said: You would be surprised how many Ontario born people become anti-Leaf. You get to a point of hearing so much about every possible aspect of everything they do from who drives to a game and who takes a taxi to what their summer vacation choices are - it drives you nuts. It was especially excruciating when they were really bad and yet the amount of coverage on things even the most diehard fan could not give a turd about were debated for days on end - and no matter where you went on the dial, it was more of the same. It's not much different here! I know so many people who have just given up on the Nucks over the years for any number of reasons! Just people i see on a weekly basis are Flyers, Sabres, Leafs, Habs, Nashville, Coilers, and Sharks of all teams All of them were cheering for the Canucks at one time lmao. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 8 minutes ago, Toews said: You keep repeating this as if this is of any significance. Tanev was undrafted but it has zero relevance to his value today. Once you have enough of a sample size on a player their draft position is about as relevant as how they take their coffee. We already know how good Muzzin is. Keep repeating? (says the guy who posts the same thing in the Trump thread every day.....grin) Uh, ok. Answering questions about it is repeating it I guess. It is significant - if an organization can take a later round pick, use the best years of that player and then trade them in on more assets including a high (in this case a late-ish first round) pick, it IS significant. Very good asset management. Using an undrafted player in that same manner is even better. Now, in this case it was Penguins pick but it points out good use of asset leverage in my books. Further to align with your example, Jake is more like Tanev as he signed with LA as an overage OHL FA. He did his years of AHL then NHL service and so for no cost of any pick on LA's part, they lose a guy who is 30 in a few weeks for three assets inclusive of a first round pick in a deep draft. If you don't think that is good asset management, that is fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 16 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: Shinkaruk was also a late first round draft pick, so was Gaunce, Jensen and Schroeder. Just because we landed a top end talent in the first round one time, doesn't mean you can bank on it as the premise of the return. Yup, and Patrick White was in there somewhere too. Vancouver was one of the worst drafting franchise in the entire NHL for a long time. No question, you cannot bank on ANY player. It is about odds, luck and some hard work in seeing something others don't in a kid. I still contend if I were the vancouver GM and Alex Edler consented to it, I would trade two months of his service for two prospects (one of which intrigues me) and a draft pick that could be in the low 20 to mid 20s in a very deep draft....I would make that trade in a heartbeat if not quicker. If I had Jake Muzzin I would do that same trade almost as quickly though would think about it a bit as he has a decent contract but I do like the RHD concept better if I am Canuck GM. For Tanev I would think long and hard and likely would still do it.....but may be talked out of it too if my assistant was worth their salary. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 18 minutes ago, Master Mind said: We need Edler next year for when Hughes and OJ come in. Most late 1sts don't fetch a Boeser, and players like Motte are easy to find. So no, I wouldn't trade a key piece to our D for a chance at another Boeser. We already have a 1st, don't need another lottery ticket at the expense of a known important asset. Fair enough. I can see that logic. In my world, I can still make that happen by re-signing Alex in the summer after letting him have 2 months of fun somewhere....assuming he consented to such a move (which is purely speculative on all our parts). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
189lb enforcers? Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 Is Toronto in better shape on D for the next few years from this deal? Yes. LA is in a better position as far as their Rebuild is concerned. Glad to have news like this and wish there’d be some Canucks news too. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Mind Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 7 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said: Fair enough. I can see that logic. In my world, I can still make that happen by re-signing Alex in the summer after letting him have 2 months of fun somewhere....assuming he consented to such a move (which is purely speculative on all our parts). That's the least likely scenario though. It rarely happens that players re-sign in the summer after being traded as a rental. If I'm Edler, I'd rather just stay than move away for a couple months. Especially when the Canucks are in the race, and Edler could start his mentoring this year should Hughes join the team late March. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40Dangles Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 (edited) 31 minutes ago, DADDYROCK said: Wow, do or die all in for Toronto.Shortly they will have to blow up all the superstars because of cap space so now or never. I am not a leafs fan by any means, and when they lose it feels wonderful,looking foward to seeing them lose even thou they have tried to buy a championship.. BOOO TORONTO! Yes exactly but they knew it and Dumbass has been playing the game of we’re fine we’re fine to try and keep some leverage for trades after the season / at the draft. All the eastern media had said it; that he has to go for it this year because next year they are going to be in cap hell, and that was before Muzzin who’s due 4 mil for one more year. Goes to a point that Burke made a few weeks back. The second contract for young players used to be a bridge, and so you had a longer window as young stars stayed affordable for longer giving you a bigger window. Now the second contract is for young players (if they are stars) is the equivalent of UFA money and term, so your window (if you have a few) is very short. For all the tankers be thankful. Our team is being built as a team that can work under a cap world and be challenging for a long time. I’d hate to be a leaf fan for many reasons but mostly, their window is going to last 1-2 years Edited January 29, 2019 by 40Dangles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westcoasting Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 14 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said: Is Toronto in better shape on D for the next few years from this deal? Yes. LA is in a better position as far as their Rebuild is concerned. Glad to have news like this and wish there’d be some Canucks news too. Yes that would be good 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Toews Posted January 29, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted January 29, 2019 (edited) 39 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said: Keep repeating? (says the guy who posts the same thing in the Trump thread every day.....grin) Uh, ok. Answering questions about it is repeating it I guess. It is significant - if an organization can take a later round pick, use the best years of that player and then trade them in on more assets including a high (in this case a late-ish first round) pick, it IS significant. Very good asset management. Using an undrafted player in that same manner is even better. Now, in this case it was Penguins pick but it points out good use of asset leverage in my books. Further to align with your example, Jake is more like Tanev as he signed with LA as an overage OHL FA. He did his years of AHL then NHL service and so for no cost of any pick on LA's part, they lose a guy who is 30 in a few weeks for three assets inclusive of a first round pick in a deep draft. If you don't think that is good asset management, that is fine. Its clear I have hurt your feelings. I keep having to remind myself how fragile people can be when their opinions are challenged. I will try to be more considerate and let you down more easier next time. The truth is though you have no concept of what "asset management" actually means. Muzzin's value may have initially been a 5th round pick but it is exponentially higher today as he is a top 4 LHD signed to a reasonable contract. Asset management is looking at maximizing what value Muzzin possesses today not what he possessed 10 years ago. Similarly just because we signed Tanev for free doesn't mean it would be good asset management if we were to trade him for a 3rd. My parents house is now worth more than 4 times what they paid for it 15 years ago. I wouldn't tell them that it is good asset management to sell for half the market value just because they are getting a 100% return on their investment. Edited January 29, 2019 by Toews 2 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westcoasting Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 8 minutes ago, Toews said: Its clear I have hurt your feelings. There is just so much angst in your post. I keep having to remind myself how fragile people can be when their opinions are challenged. I will try to be more considerate and let you down more easier next time. The truth is though you have no concept of what "asset management" actually means. Muzzin's value may have initially been a 5th round pick but it is exponentially higher today as he is a top 4 LHD signed to a reasonable contract. Asset management is looking at maximizing what value Muzzin possesses today not what he possessed 10 years ago. Similarly just because we signed Tanev for free doesn't mean it would be good asset management if we were to trade him for a 3rd. My parents house is now worth more than 4 times what they paid for it 15 years ago. I wouldn't tell them that it is good asset management to sell for half the market value just because they are getting a 100% return on their investment. Very nice point on asset management! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drdeath Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 That's a pretty hefty price for a year and a half of Muzzin's services but Toronto needs to win a playoff series so I guess it makes sense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Rocket Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 Good trade by the laffs in that they strengthen their core this year and effectively replace Gardiner next year. Would imagine they look for another value D in the offseason to fill the remaining holes. Jensen maybe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 1 hour ago, Rob_Zepp said: Keep repeating? (says the guy who posts the same thing in the Trump thread every day.....grin) Uh, ok. Answering questions about it is repeating it I guess. It is significant - if an organization can take a later round pick, use the best years of that player and then trade them in on more assets including a high (in this case a late-ish first round) pick, it IS significant. Very good asset management. Using an undrafted player in that same manner is even better. Now, in this case it was Penguins pick but it points out good use of asset leverage in my books. Further to align with your example, Jake is more like Tanev as he signed with LA as an overage OHL FA. He did his years of AHL then NHL service and so for no cost of any pick on LA's part, they lose a guy who is 30 in a few weeks for three assets inclusive of a first round pick in a deep draft. If you don't think that is good asset management, that is fine. So kinda like Calgary trading Ferland acquiring a ppg centre and a young very good dman? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrinceGeorgeGoon Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 Dubas < Gillis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 I thought they would get a RHD from Carolina. Not a left handed D. And a primary puck carrier, distributor. But Muzzin is a v good all round D. They could have done worse... Who comes out of the line up, I guess Oshiginov? And for the moment Gardiner is injured. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now