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

[Proposal] Van - Detroit


Recommended Posts

I like the premise, they do need a goalie and a d-man that they can grab at 10. I think they only do this if Byram is not around at 6. Only reason they didn’t take Hughes last year is cause Zadina dropped as far as he did imo. But I wonder if DiPietro has that kind of value around the league.

 

With that said I’d only trade up to snag Byram. I think the forwards in the 6-10 range are all pretty close. Not worthwhile in my books to trade up for a forward. Then again I don’t have the scouting tools of Benning. He may think moving up to ensure he gets his guy is a good idea and I’d trust him and his crew on that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The upcoming expansion draft complicates a deal like this. There's a pretty solid chance that we end up losing one of Markstrom or Demko to Seattle, so bailing on DiPietro now may end up biting us in the ass. If Demko is able to take the reigns from Markstrom and becomes the clear starter at some point during the season, I'd be for a move like this at next years draft, but for now it's kinda risky. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

The upcoming expansion draft complicates a deal like this. There's a pretty solid chance that we end up losing one of Markstrom or Demko to Seattle, so bailing on DiPietro now may end up biting us in the ass. If Demko is able to take the reigns from Markstrom and becomes the clear starter at some point during the season, I'd be for a move like this at next years draft, but for now it's kinda risky. 

Why would we lose one of them? I thought as long as we had a third goalie who meets the criteria it was fine. I think Seattle goes the vegas route and takes picks to select the player's teams want.. Especially when they have to reach the cap floor.  I think Hutton is the guy we lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, youngguns19 said:

Why would we lose one of them? I thought as long as we had a third goalie who meets the criteria it was fine. I think Seattle goes the vegas route and takes picks to select the player's teams want.. Especially when they have to reach the cap floor.  I think Hutton is the guy we lose.

Can only protect one goalie, and both are eligible. The way around this is to have Markstrom be a pending UFA, where Seattle might  not pick him because he might not sign with them (Vegas tried to pick a UFA and that player didn't sign). With this method, a goalie would have to be acquired that fits the bill, just like we did when we got Bachman for Vegas draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, youngguns19 said:

Why would we lose one of them? I thought as long as we had a third goalie who meets the criteria it was fine. I think Seattle goes the vegas route and takes picks to select the player's teams want.. Especially when they have to reach the cap floor.  I think Hutton is the guy we lose.

Benning said when it comes to the expansion draft it's best to just take the hit instead of giving away added resources for them to take someone. You're losing someone anyway, why give away more assets on top of that? As it stands now, yes lots can change between now and the expansion draft, we'll very likely be losing a goalie. Demko is young and has upside and Marky as of parts of this season has proven to be a very reliable starter. Most of the players we'll likely be exposing aren't worth worrying about anyway, except one of the goalies but we have good organizational depth there that it's not a huge loss. Just take the hit, keep the assets and replace the player we lose as best we can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, vannuck59 said:

Keep the 10th send them Markstrom and our 2020 first and 2021 second

 

They've just re-signed Howard and also have Bernier.  Markstrom is also a free agent in a year.  Sounds like the Canucks might want to extend him this summer.  Also Markstrom was pretty average before Vancouver brought in Ian Clark - he might not do as well under another goalie coach and teams would know that.   

 

Don't know if plans have changed with Yzerman now in charge but Holland wanted to make the playoffs next season.  He feels that their prospects have made sufficient progress that they are ready for the next step.

 

Benning thinks that the top-6 might be ready to play next season while it might take a bit longer for those after.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, N7Nucks said:

I like the premise, they do need a goalie and a d-man that they can grab at 10. I think they only do this if Byram is not around at 6. Only reason they didn’t take Hughes last year is cause Zadina dropped as far as he did imo. But I wonder if DiPietro has that kind of value around the league.

 

With that said I’d only trade up to snag Byram. I think the forwards in the 6-10 range are all pretty close. Not worthwhile in my books to trade up for a forward. Then again I don’t have the scouting tools of Benning. He may think moving up to ensure he gets his guy is a good idea and I’d trust him and his crew on that.

I said a couple of weeks ago that I see him in a Chicago uniform. He makes a lot of sense there too. 

If we want to get him, I think we'd have to snipe the second spot to get the jump on Blackhawk Nation.

Good luck with that.

We need everyone they'd want and JB doesn't trade picks.

The only player that I would consider dealing and one that may interest New York, aside from Petey and Horvat, would be Boeser.

As I do value a quality defenseman over a winger, I would consider Boeser expendable in this case. 

However, If Boeser is in play, our 10th would not be. Boeser is a proven, young NHL forward, and well worth the second. The only reason I consider this is due to our more dire need to build our defense. 

Being a fan favorite as well as a productive player, losing Brock would hurt, no doubt but, wingers are plentiful and quality can be found at an affordable price.

Keeping our 10th also allows us to draft a winger to replace Boeser. Matthew Boldy, imo, would make a great replacement.

This would be a case of taking one step back to gain two steps down the road.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, komodo0921 said:

I said a couple of weeks ago that I see him in a Chicago uniform. He makes a lot of sense there too. 

If we want to get him, I think we'd have to snipe the second spot to get the jump on Blackhawk Nation.

Good luck with that.

We need everyone they'd want and JB doesn't trade picks.

The only player that I would consider dealing and one that may interest New York, aside from Petey and Horvat, would be Boeser.

As I do value a quality defenseman over a winger, I would consider Boeser expendable in this case. 

However, If Boeser is in play, our 10th would not be. Boeser is a proven, young NHL forward, and well worth the second. The only reason I consider this is due to our more dire need to build our defense. 

Being a fan favorite as well as a productive player, losing Brock would hurt, no doubt but, wingers are plentiful and quality can be found at an affordable price.

Keeping our 10th also allows us to draft a winger to replace Boeser. Matthew Boldy, imo, would make a great replacement.

This would be a case of taking one step back to gain two steps down the road.

Chicago is interesting, cause they could really use a bit of everything. Although their defense prospect pool looks very nice, much nicer than ours imo. It was even said they are willing to move one of their big D prospects. So for that reason I could see them taking Turcotte or Podkolzin with their pick instead of Byram.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, HughMungus said:

Well he just said we can only protect 1 goalie so it would make more sense. Its good reasoning.

Reasoning was fine, value was way off. If we traded one of the top goalie prospects in the league as a sweetener to move up several spots in the draft it would be a travesty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, coastal.view said:

cheers

unfortunately dipietro is reported to just be injured

and it looks bad

i think he is untradable now until he is fully recovered and demonstrates he has no long term lingering issues

Why would you trade him Chances are we lose Marky leaving DAemkoas our only decent goalie Dipietro will be ready around the expansion draft to join the big club. You trade him now for what a crappy return? you have a lot of weird thoughts this one takes the cake. Would you have traded Demko in his last year of college? Goalies have no value until they can prove themselves in the NHL. Sure lets trade him for a 4th, watch him turn into the next elite goalie and set our organizational need back 5 years. Makes tons of sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, HughMungus said:

Dipietro was like a 3rd. Its fair value not a travesty.

 

Demko could only become like a late first

 

A travesty is picking Julevi at 6th. Lets get this Byram guy and do it right

I cant wait for you to eat your word on OJ He lit up the AHL before he got injured and until he plays for us next year all you haters can pretend you know what you talking about How did he do in Finland? Why was he rated the best 2 way D in the CHL oh and how did seg do on a stacked TB team? Terrible You OJ haters are like Parrots. I bet you know nothing of his body of work, you just think well he has suited up yet so he must be a bust. News flash he barely made the cutoff for the 2016 draft. He was almost a 2017 pick. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, youngguns19 said:

I cant wait for you to eat your word on OJ He lit up the AHL before he got injured and until he plays for us next year all you haters can pretend you know what you talking about How did he do in Finland? Why was he rated the best 2 way D in the CHL oh and how did seg do on a stacked TB team? Terrible You OJ haters are like Parrots. I bet you know nothing of his body of work, you just think well he has suited up yet so he must be a bust. News flash he barely made the cutoff for the 2016 draft. He was almost a 2017 pick. 

You seem sure. Lets make a friendly forum bet.

 

I think he doesnt make camp again. His draft peers already have. I hope he does. 

 

Lets see what happens come october. Can follow up.

 

But i think we move on. Especially with Hughes and woo etc. 

 

You cant honestly look at that draft rn and say youd still pick Ollie in the first round. Stop being a homer

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...