[Proposal] Ben Hutton for a forward

[smithers joe]

3 hours ago, Crabcakes said:

I agree, Hutton is an NHL player with value just not a whole lot on his own.

 

I could also see him moved for a right shot D on his own or as part of a package.  I see that as a more likely scenario than the OP's proposal.

i’ld like hutton + for roland mckeown.  

[Rob_Zepp]

4 hours ago, Hindustan Smyl said:

[proposal] Ben Hutton for a forward 

 

This isn’t a proposal on my end, but rather, just a question for curiosity sake.

 

If the Canucks offered Hutton for a forward around the league, who would be equivalent value in a straight one-for-one deal?  (Ie Gudbranson landed Pearson).

 

Again - I’m NOT saying that “this should happen,” or “this will happen,” but I’m simply curious. 

 

Thanks!

I hear Jason Megna is available.   

[J.I.A.H.N]

1 minute ago, Rob_Zepp said:

I hear Jason Megna is available.   

You don't like Hutton...

 

I thought he had a good year after ditching Gudbranson.....I wish I had a way of confirming this?

[Rob_Zepp]

2 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

You don't like Hutton...

 

I thought he had a good year after ditching Gudbranson.....I wish I had a way of confirming this?

I think Hutton is fine - I don't think he is part of the long-term solution for this team but he is an NHL dman....Jan, it was  you that noted him as expendable.   Are you arguing with yourself as I don't recall saying he needed to go.

[J.I.A.H.N]

4 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

I think Hutton is fine - I don't think he is part of the long-term solution for this team but he is an NHL dman....Jan, it was  you that noted him as expendable.   Are you arguing with yourself as I don't recall saying he needed to go.

Ok gotcha……..just did not understand....sorry

 

IMO,he is expendable because of his ceiling and who we have here now......not because of his play

 

IMO...Hughes pushes him down......but then again, what is the hold up on the Edler signing? If he does not sign, that changes everything...…...doesn't it

[DrJockitch]

I would like to see one or two of Edler, Tanev or Hutton return. 

Tanev's value is likely extremely low atm, Edler is a UFA with no value so only move that returns value is Hutton.

Trading a D for a winger should give a bit of an upgrade as D the more premium position.  

Might be a good piece in a bigger deal that includes a salary dump.

[Rob_Zepp]

1 hour ago, janisahockeynut said:

Ok gotcha……..just did not understand....sorry

 

IMO,he is expendable because of his ceiling and who we have here now......not because of his play

 

IMO...Hughes pushes him down......but then again, what is the hold up on the Edler signing? If he does not sign, that changes everything...…...doesn't it

Hold up?   It is still May Jan and if the Vancouver management team is doing their jobs properly they are looking at the biggest picture possible and weighing all nature of outcomes.   The cannot sign any other FAs until July so take that into consideration so they don't jump any guns would be my guess.   Further, why would Edler be in any rush - he wants to see if there is any interest too through his agent and that is largely something that comes in more concentrated waves once SCF over and the draft is in the rearview.   IF he re-signs in Vancouver, I would not be suprised to see it happen July 2nd or so.

[JM_]

6 hours ago, Fanuck said:

Still boggles my mind how ppl think we have anywhere near the required depth on d that we can afford to entertain trades including arguably our 3rd or 4th best defenceman and replacing him with a rookie?   Even worse idea if in fact Edler doesn't re-up.

I just don't see him above a bottom pairing d, and he's got a pretty high qualifying offer too. I think Sautner can do the job and save the cap space we'll need for Brock and other potential free agent signings. 

[BigCountry18]

Pearson now is worth a lot more than Gudbranson. But when we acquired him, he was a struggling forward playing 3rd to 4th line roles on a team that didn't fit his style of game. Just like Gudbranson was a struggling defenseman who couldn't catch our competition due to our new "run and gun" style of play.

 

I'd say you could probably acquire a player of the same calibre as what Pearson is now for Hutton. So at best probably a gritty almost 20-goal scorer in their mid to late 20s. On the low end you're probably looking at a bottom-6 forward of similar age with 3rd line scoring potential.

 

Let's just say we already have a lot of the forwards we would get for Hutton.

 

Hutton for RHD makes the most sense if we're trading him.

[Crabcakes]

7 hours ago, Fanuck said:

Still boggles my mind how ppl think we have anywhere near the required depth on d that we can afford to entertain trades including arguably our 3rd or 4th best defenceman and replacing him with a rookie?   Even worse idea if in fact Edler doesn't re-up.

You're absolutely right.  That's why nothing will likely happen re Hutton until.......

1. Edler re-signs.  But they still likely keep him for depth after that since he has shown that he can play up the line up for short periods.  But more important,
2. Until Juolevi or Sautner or somebody else prove that they can be a better alternative at a better cap hit.

So if Hutton gets moved, it may not be this season.  There is no hurry.  I still think they move on from him, but it may take a while.

 

Fwiw, I would call Hutton the Canucks 5th best D after Edler, Tanev, Hughes and Stecher as the line up sits today

 

 

[J.I.A.H.N]

3 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Hold up?   It is still May Jan and if the Vancouver management team is doing their jobs properly they are looking at the biggest picture possible and weighing all nature of outcomes.   The cannot sign any other FAs until July so take that into consideration so they don't jump any guns would be my guess.   Further, why would Edler be in any rush - he wants to see if there is any interest too through his agent and that is largely something that comes in more concentrated waves once SCF over and the draft is in the rearview.   IF he re-signs in Vancouver, I would not be suprised to see it happen July 2nd or so.

You would know better than I......I guess my confusion is that Edler did not want to be traded at the TDL......but yes, I get your point...….

 

I just took as to be there was a hick up and maybe Edler is asking for 4 years and Canuck want 2, or Edler wants a NTC....Benning is saying no

 

But I see your point

[NewbieCanuckFan]

5 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Are you arguing with yourself

I do that myself all the time.  How else am I supposed to win an argument?

[Rob_Zepp]

1 hour ago, janisahockeynut said:

You would know better than I......I guess my confusion is that Edler did not want to be drafted at the TDL......but yes, I get your point...….

 

I just took as to be there was a hick up and maybe Edler is asking for 4 years and Canuck want 2, or Edler wants a NTC....Benning is saying no

 

But I see your point

No question it comes down to term and I bet you are almost bang on - Edler's agent will push for 4 (even 5) and Canucks will want 2.   Many teams will consider more than 2 for a guy of his calibre so it will be an interesting situation for sure.   My gut (and I have zip knowledge about this case specifically) is it gets done with Vancouver and it is a 2 year term.   I base that on a few things that seem to be clear about Edler's nature of player (loyal), his love of family (doesn't want to move kids) and his faith/confidence in himself (certain he can get another contract at end of those two years).

[J.I.A.H.N]

14 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

No question it comes down to term and I bet you are almost bang on - Edler's agent will push for 4 (even 5) and Canucks will want 2.   Many teams will consider more than 2 for a guy of his calibre so it will be an interesting situation for sure.   My gut (and I have zip knowledge about this case specifically) is it gets done with Vancouver and it is a 2 year term.   I base that on a few things that seem to be clear about Edler's nature of player (loyal), his love of family (doesn't want to move kids) and his faith/confidence in himself (certain he can get another contract at end of those two years).

So what kind of NTC does he get? How much extra $$$?

 

I know I would be really pi$$ed if he had to be protected...…..

 

Edler to Seattle would not be so bad for him...….it could be done

 

He could still live at home in Vancouver...

 

1/2 hour plane ride...……$40,000....probably a lot less than that actually

[Hindustan Smyl]

Why I bring up Hutton.

 

The reason why I brought up Hutton in this thread, because I was thinking about the idea of the Canucks.....

 

1) Signing both Gardiner and Myers

2) Using our newfound depth on D to trade for a forward.

 

The idea behind my thought process was that perhaps the Canucks could land a half decent top 6 RW’er that could play alongside Pearson and Horvat.  

 

OR - trade Hutton for a 3rd line Center that was an upgrade over Sutter.  Gaudette would then be moved to Horvat’s wing.

 

Eriksson-Pettersson-Boeser

Pearson-Horvat-[HuttonReturn]

Baertschi-Gaudette-Virtanen

Roussel-Beagle-Sutter

 

Edler-Stecher

Hughes-Tanev

Gardiner-Myers

 

OR

 

Eriksson-Pettersson-Boeser

Pearson-Horvat-Gaudette

Baertschi-[HuttonReturn]-Virtanen

Roussel-Beagle-Sutter (Sutter could get traded).

 

Edler-Stecher

Hughes-Tanev

Gardiner-Myers

 

 

 

[IBatch]

16 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:

Ok gotcha……..just did not understand....sorry

 

IMO,he is expendable because of his ceiling and who we have here now......not because of his play

 

IMO...Hughes pushes him down......but then again, what is the hold up on the Edler signing? If he does not sign, that changes everything...…...doesn't it

Could be management wants that week before July 1 to see what else might be available to them before committing, and Edlers camp wants to see what teams are interested in him as well, just to get an idea of how much money he can get from us.  It makes sense for both camps to wait and see...

[IBatch]

14 hours ago, BigCountry18 said:

Pearson now is worth a lot more than Gudbranson. But when we acquired him, he was a struggling forward playing 3rd to 4th line roles on a team that didn't fit his style of game. Just like Gudbranson was a struggling defenseman who couldn't catch our competition due to our new "run and gun" style of play.

 

I'd say you could probably acquire a player of the same calibre as what Pearson is now for Hutton. So at best probably a gritty almost 20-goal scorer in their mid to late 20s. On the low end you're probably looking at a bottom-6 forward of similar age with 3rd line scoring potential.

 

Let's just say we already have a lot of the forwards we would get for Hutton.

 

Hutton for RHD makes the most sense if we're trading him.

This exactly.  Harder to do than say to do it, we’d have to add to get an approximate equal player given how many less of them there are overall (approx 40%) unless things work out really well for us...have been suggesting this for a couple months on and off, if OJ is healthy and ready room needs to be made.... that said it’s too early yet, wait until Free agency is winding down first.  Who knows maybe we sign Gardiner instead of Edler or Myers or two of those guys.   At some point if OJ on the team for good Hutton OR Edler needs to go.

[Dannydog]

17 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:

You would know better than I......I guess my confusion is that Edler did not want to be traded at the TDL......but yes, I get your point...….

 

I just took as to be there was a hick up and maybe Edler is asking for 4 years and Canuck want 2, or Edler wants a NTC....Benning is saying no

 

But I see your point

i honestly think that is the preliminary opening point for both sides. Eddy wants 4yr NTC, Benning and the nucks want 2yrs. Anything above 2yrs for Eddy is a mistake.

[CaptainLinden16]

On 5/19/2019 at 7:29 AM, Hindustan Smyl said:

[proposal] Ben Hutton for a forward 

 

This isn’t a proposal on my end, but rather, just a question for curiosity sake.

 

If the Canucks offered Hutton for a forward around the league, who would be equivalent value in a straight one-for-one deal?  (Ie Gudbranson landed Pearson).

 

Again - I’m NOT saying that “this should happen,” or “this will happen,” but I’m simply curious. 

 

Thanks!

Is there any chance it returns Adrian Kempe?  I would add a pick to even it out eh? 

 

Kempe is a force, a truely excellent 3rd line player and only 22.  Lots and lots and lots of grit.

[Kuzy]

13 minutes ago, CaptainLinden16 said:

Is there any chance it returns Adrian Kempe?  I would add a pick to even it out eh? 

 

Kempe is a force, a truely excellent 3rd line player and only 22.  Lots and lots and lots of grit.

Every time I've watched a Canucks vs LA game Kempe seems to score lol. I think it would take more than just Hutton, and looking at LA's depth chart on LD, they have 3 NHL calibre dmen already (okay... Phaneuf is a bit of a reach but his contract says otherwise).

 

My guess, if this trade were to go down would be Hutton, 3rd round pick, and B-prospect for Kempe + depth dman?

 

Love Kempe.