SilentSam Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 5 hours ago, Wolfgang Durst said: Not surprised that this has been brought up by Sekeras. Key question is: Is Dahlen the kind of forward Travis wants to have on his team going forward? The answer for me is no. When I read Travis statements about Goldobin's weaknesses this key question instantly came to my mind. My read on Dahlen is, that he is a skill player like Goldobin is. Travis obviously wants forwards on his team playing a responsible two way game, playing with a high compete level in all three zones, agressive on the forecheck taking time and space away from opponents, having enough speed for his up-tempo game. I really doubt that Dahlen checks most of these boxes. I would be O.K. with trading him away. Youv’e watched a lot of Utica Games? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Sestito Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 Sorry, am I the only one who thinks this wouldn't be a bad move? If you think you can get good value back for a prospect you've lost faith in, why not take it? The dahlen for burrows trade was a good one, and anyone would have taken that deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 [Speculation] Sekeres talking out of his ***? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mo Grit Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 Quote .. prospect W Jonathan Dahlen .... My understanding is Canucks have shopped him, soured on him a bit .... Name to keep an eye on ... 'Fake News' Sekeras. If even remotely true, he'd be the last guy to know. Ban his waddlin' arse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ButterBean Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 Obviously trading him doesn’t make the most sense but if you’re getting a legit top 6 forward or top 4 dman in return it needs to be explored... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 57 minutes ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said: [Speculation] Sekeres talking out of his ***? That's not speculation, that's exactly what he is doing and all he does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jester13 Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 59 minutes ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said: [Speculation] Sekeres talking out of his ***? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 3 hours ago, Davathor said: Who cares? Every other source is blocked or banned on here... they should really take the tag 'rumors' off. Just verified trades, no debating and speculating allowed. I didnt hear the context, but it should probably have been more accurately tagged "Speculation." Then again, the mods have said that the media get a free pass so whatever they spew out is given defacto credibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoneypuckOverlord Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 Click bait. He’s trying to fish for subscribers. Benning already said he’s not interested in moving prospects at this point. Fail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoneypuckOverlord Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 I speculate 31 gms are looking to make a trade. im an insider boys . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theo5789 Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 2 hours ago, Tom Sestito said: Sorry, am I the only one who thinks this wouldn't be a bad move? If you think you can get good value back for a prospect you've lost faith in, why not take it? The dahlen for burrows trade was a good one, and anyone would have taken that deal. I don't think what's in question is whether it would be a good move or not. I think the problem is Sekeras is suggesting that we are "soured" on Dahlen and I just can't see that we are in that position already. Perhaps we are exploring a trade to improve the team and of course Dahlen could be moved in this case. I highly doubt the Canucks lost faith in him. If they're willing to put in the time that they have for Goldobin, surely they're still patient with Dahlen after (and still currently) his first pro year in NA adjusting to a new rink size and playing style. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Listening Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 I don't get why the Canucks would be shopping him when we haven't even seen him skate with Petey yet. At least try him out with his junior linemate before considering to trade him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 1 minute ago, The Listening said: I don't get why the Canucks would be shopping him when we haven't even seen him skate with Petey yet. At least try him out with his junior linemate before considering to trade him. The so called source of this stupidity is a moron. The Canucks aren’t shopping Dahlen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Vanderhoek Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 3 hours ago, Tom Sestito said: Sorry, am I the only one who thinks this wouldn't be a bad move? If you think you can get good value back for a prospect you've lost faith in, why not take it? The dahlen for burrows trade was a good one, and anyone would have taken that deal. The thing is the Canucks have NOT lost faith in Dahlen, this is a story drummed up by someone trying to stay relevant since the Canucks left 1040. Dahlen is someone who has developed nicely in Utica, a bonus for the franchise and with some history with the Canucks rookie sensation it would be insane to explore options moving Dahlen UNLESS another team feels they see more in him and can offer much more value. Which won't happen, the team needs scorers and Dahlen is projecting nicely. Not someone the Canucks would consider trading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Sestito Posted February 24, 2019 Share Posted February 24, 2019 44 minutes ago, theo5789 said: I don't think what's in question is whether it would be a good move or not. I think the problem is Sekeras is suggesting that we are "soured" on Dahlen and I just can't see that we are in that position already. Perhaps we are exploring a trade to improve the team and of course Dahlen could be moved in this case. I highly doubt the Canucks lost faith in him. If they're willing to put in the time that they have for Goldobin, surely they're still patient with Dahlen after (and still currently) his first pro year in NA adjusting to a new rink size and playing style. For the most part, I find Van media to be trustworthy when it comes to inside information. They all seem to be well connected. Now, obviously they all have opinions that are biased and this is where people base their opinions on the media from - (i.e. pro canuck management loves imac, anti canuck management loves botch). But strictly speaking, I find the speculation to be merited for the most part regardless of allegiance or bias. And by all accounts, it doesn't seem like they have patience for Goldobin. He was sitting at around 0.5 PPG after 40 games, and then the trade rumors from multiple outlets on both sides cane up that they were looking to dump him. 3 minutes ago, Mike Vanderhoek said: The thing is the Canucks have NOT lost faith in Dahlen, this is a story drummed up by someone trying to stay relevant since the Canucks left 1040. Dahlen is someone who has developed nicely in Utica, a bonus for the franchise and with some history with the Canucks rookie sensation it would be insane to explore options moving Dahlen UNLESS another team feels they see more in him and can offer much more value. Which won't happen, the team needs scorers and Dahlen is projecting nicely. Not someone the Canucks would consider trading. See my reply above. Also, SN650 is honestly awful. I don't mind one of their afternoon shows, but outside of that it's pretty dire. Also, Dahlen has really not been good at ES in the AHL. I don't think he's shown improvement. It was a good trade by Benning, but he's really not shown much at the AHL level. That's okay, prospects bust. Some don't live up to their pedigree, and some surprise more than others. If you can get something now, by all means take it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theo5789 Posted February 24, 2019 Share Posted February 24, 2019 2 hours ago, Tom Sestito said: For the most part, I find Van media to be trustworthy when it comes to inside information. They all seem to be well connected. Now, obviously they all have opinions that are biased and this is where people base their opinions on the media from - (i.e. pro canuck management loves imac, anti canuck management loves botch). But strictly speaking, I find the speculation to be merited for the most part regardless of allegiance or bias. And by all accounts, it doesn't seem like they have patience for Goldobin. He was sitting at around 0.5 PPG after 40 games, and then the trade rumors from multiple outlets on both sides cane up that they were looking to dump him. The problem is they throw out speculation rather than "inside information". They mostly just try to create media buzz and very often they are wrong. However they do flip flop on their ideas often until something sticks and claim they were right all along. I guess we will find out soon enough if our relationship with Dahlen has "soured". IMO, Sekeres is probably thinking why Dahlen hasn't been called up instead of these trades that have made to fill the openings and decided to spin that we are not favouring him. The reality is we are developing him and he's had a slow start but has picked it up quite a bit lately. It would be foolish to be "shopping" him considering he's progressing (keep in mind he started the year with a knock and got a concussion in December). Quote See my reply above. Also, SN650 is honestly awful. I don't mind one of their afternoon shows, but outside of that it's pretty dire. Also, Dahlen has really not been good at ES in the AHL. I don't think he's shown improvement. It was a good trade by Benning, but he's really not shown much at the AHL level. That's okay, prospects bust. Some don't live up to their pedigree, and some surprise more than others. If you can get something now, by all means take it. Don't think he's shown improvement compared to what? It's his rookie season in NA. Not every player can be like EP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanukfanatic Posted February 24, 2019 Share Posted February 24, 2019 6 hours ago, Tom Sestito said: Sorry, am I the only one who thinks this wouldn't be a bad move? If you think you can get good value back for a prospect you've lost faith in, why not take it? The dahlen for burrows trade was a good one, and anyone would have taken that deal. Who has lost faith? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steviewonder20 Posted February 24, 2019 Share Posted February 24, 2019 TSN trade bait has Granlund and Goldobin listed for Vancouver, for whatever that's worth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Sestito Posted February 25, 2019 Share Posted February 25, 2019 On 2/22/2019 at 3:21 PM, Squamfan said: Irrelevant source mods can block On 2/22/2019 at 3:29 PM, coryberg said: And that him and petey are good friends, why would you trade him without trying him on EP's wing? Just a troll job I'm sure. On 2/22/2019 at 3:29 PM, Salacious Crumb said: Sekeres is absolute garbage source. On 2/22/2019 at 3:29 PM, Dazzle said: This guy is out to lunch. Dahlen is slowly getting the jist of AHL play. He actually looks dangerous out there. He's also fifth on the Comets list for points. 5 * Jonathan Dahlen LW UTI 50 14 15 29 -13 10 8 0 0.58 0.20 103 2 3 1 66.7 Furthermore, it is WELL KNOWN that Pettersson and Dahlen are buddies. Surely the Canucks aren't so deep that Dahlen is going to be given up after one year? For these reasons, Matthew Sekeres should be considered an invalid source. On 2/22/2019 at 3:34 PM, BlastPast said: Lol at Sekeres having sources. On 2/22/2019 at 3:43 PM, Ronaldoescobar said: Sekeres is garbage On 2/22/2019 at 3:43 PM, ohmy said: Sekeres doesnt have a face for TV or a voice for radio. Pretty much as credible as my 2 year old lying about eating chocolate when its canvassed all over his face. Leave Dahlen alone. Just from the first page. Again, VAN media - regardless of station or views on management - is relatively reliable. I rarely hear completely baseless things. And I think people forget, general managers themselves in every sport have stated that a STRONG majority of stuff discussed never turns to anything. So, obviously rumors will never be reported with 100% accuracy lol. Except Andrew Walker, that guy is a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westcoasting Posted February 25, 2019 Share Posted February 25, 2019 On 2/22/2019 at 3:29 PM, Salacious Crumb said: Sekeres is absolute garbage source. Apparently not lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.