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

[Proposal] Draft Day Splash


Recommended Posts

I saw this trade somewhere else and I wanted to gather opinions on it. 

 

Trade:

 

To CHI: 10th Overall Pick

To VAN: 3rd  Overall Pick + Seabrook

 

Reasons for Chicago:

 

Chicago get's out of a significant contract. Clearing up almost 7 million in cap space increases their roster flexibility significantly as they continue to re-tool with their current core. Seabrook's play has dropped off considerably since signing the contract, making him more of an anchor than anything else. With their plethora of young defensemen coming up (including Boqvist and Jokiharju on the right side), Seabrook can be effectively replaced fairly quickly. 

 

Moving a contract like this allows Chicago to make many other moves in the short and long term. Short term, they can take a run at reuniting Kane and Panarin without fear of causing cap problems next year when Strome, DeBrincat and Gustaffson have to be re-signed. It also allows them to explore alternative options in net with Crawford's unfortunate unreliability in net due to injuries. These can all have a significant impact on Chicago returning to form as one of the most dangerous teams in the conference. Long term, shedding Seabrook's cap hit puts them in a better position for when Boqvist, Jokiharju and all their other young players need new contracts. That's still a ways down the line, but putting it off to the last minute can lead to significant cap crunches such as what Winnipeg, Toronto and San Jose are experiencing right now. 

 

Losing out on someone like Byram, Turcotte or Dach is never ideal, but they will still be able to land a good player at 10th overall. Given their quantity and quality of young defensemen, this puts them in a good spot to snatch a young forward to compliment their current group. It's easy to see someone like Zegras, Boldy, Krebs, or Newhook flourishing in Chicago. 

 

Reasons for Vancouver:

 

Making a splash of this kind at the hometown draft to draft the hometown kid is exactly the kind of narrative Aqualini, and by extension Benning would want. Vancouver would now have the pieces in place to build an elite defense core with Q. Hughes and Byram being electrifying young players. Elite talent is what pulls you through rebuilds and get's you into contention status and the Canucks would be landing another one here. 

 

As previously stated, the Canucks would have the foundation in place to build a high end defense core. Q. Hughes and Byram are talented players that can drive the play and log big minutes. They would simply need complimentary partners to be effective. Having both of them gives us two pairings with players who are difference makers as opposed to just one, which is much more difficult to defend and match up against. Additionally, we still have Juolevi who is a bit of a wild card right now but could still turn into something valuable as well. While adding a forward would be nice to address our lack of scoring, Benning himself has said that championship teams are built  in goal, on defense and through the middle. This would all but solidify one of those three key areas. 

 

Taking on Seabrook's contract is a gut punch, but it can be managed with some decisive and creative moves. The primary objective after acquiring Seabrook's contract should be to dump Eriksson's contract as it is similar in term in cap hit. Given the recent comments made by Eriksson, it seems as though a move of some sort is something that will at least be discussed before next season, so something should be able to get done if we take charge of the situation. Removing Eriksson's cap hit leaves us with net increase of under a million, which is more than manageable when you consider than Seabrook also addresses an organizational need, RD depth. Coming back to Seabrook now, his play certainly does not warrant his pay, but he is not completely worthless. As said, he fills an organizational need for us and brings a championship pedigree to his hometown team. Furthermore, his play will likely improve as he plays with better players, such as Q. Hughes or Byram. Seabrook also would not have to be protected in the Expansion Draft if he waives his NMC for this trade. Mentoring those two young defenseman could bring Seabrook's game somewhere close to where it was before signing that contract and make it much easier to swallow. Seabrook will still likely have an overall negative effect on our team, but likely not nearly as bad as Eriksson's. That can be stomached for an elite talent like Byram. 

 

Thoughts?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we had lotto luck would we go from 3rd to 10th, or even 6th for that matter, just to dump Loui's deal? nope. 

 

We would have to add a rebuild piece like Boeser to get the 3rd from Chicago and take Seabrook. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's say we do it and then can not get rid of Eriksson ? Seabrook is 34 and it looks like he has 5 years remaining on his deal.

 

Imagine if we take on Seabrook, can't get rid of Eriksson and then just because we're the Canucks and bad luck follows us around, Luongo retires and we get stuck getting penalized for his contract.

 

Then we surely are in cap purgatory. Just in time to be re-signing the kids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doubt that comes anywhere close to moving the needle for Chicago.

I would even add in Virtanen and a 2nd-3rd, (even DiPietro maybe!) to get that done, but I still doubt that does it.

 

Byram is such a stud.

I hope Jim does at least explore the possibilities... but Chicago knows exactly what kind of commodity this pick is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, nergish said:

Doubt that comes anywhere close to moving the needle for Chicago.

I would even add in Virtanen and a 2nd-3rd, (even DiPietro maybe!) to get that done, but I still doubt that does it.

 

Byram is such a stud.

I hope Jim does at least explore the possibilities... but Chicago knows exactly what kind of commodity this pick is.

Byram has been playing against boys.  The other top D prospects in this draft have been playing against men.  I am wondering if Byram is as good as what some think?  Seider, Or Broberg could easily be far better NHL players.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Byram has been playing against boys.  The other top D prospects in this draft have been playing against men.  I am wondering if Byram is as good as what some think?  Seider, Or Broberg could easily be far better NHL players.  

He led the WHL in playoff scoring as a 17 year old defenseman. That never happens. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Pears said:

He led the WHL in playoff scoring as a 17 year old defenseman. That never happens. 

Ssshhhh.  I’m hoping the GMs of the teams picking ahead if us read CDC.  

Byram is not going to do well playing against men.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would be willing to add to get this deal done. Not piece like Boeser, but something. Chicago can choose any one young player from our system to add to the deal excluding Horvat, Pettersson, Boeser, Demko, Hughes, Juolevi, Gaudette, Woo or Madden. That still leaves a solid list of prospects to choose from, including DiPietro, Lind, Gadjovich, etc.

 

Other people will probably have different lists of which prospects they would give up, but that's mine. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

 

Thoughts?

The entire Chicago management team would have to have had copious quantities of your best BC bud for the entire week leading up to the draft to make this one happen.   There is so little here for Chicago to like in terms of justifying this to their fanbase.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

The entire Chicago management team would have to have had copious quantities of your best BC bud for the entire week leading up to the draft to make this one happen.   There is so little here for Chicago to like in terms of justifying this to their fanbase.

Well let’s hope they come early and partake in our liberal weed laws....and if they get the munchies maybe there is a case of Lays lying around from the Messier era.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

If we had lotto luck would we go from 3rd to 10th, or even 6th for that matter, just to dump Loui's deal? nope. 

 

We would have to add a rebuild piece like Boeser to get the 3rd from Chicago and take Seabrook. 

yah boeser or else something they really need like.. -- gulp -- a goalie prospect.. 

 

bit of a scary proposition, methinks.. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chicago has like 20 million in cap space next season with no significant player needing to be re-signed. He's not the player he once was, but still put up a respectable 28 points, plays 19 minutes a night and is one of their top PK defenders, plus he's been relatively healthy his entire career. It doesn't seem like they are desperate to dump Seabrook and especially at the value here.

 

Although he was born in this area, I think it'll be hard to convince to waive his trade clause. He's likely one of those lifer guys on one team and retire with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, coastal.view said:

seabrook has a nmc

but posters on here think that nmc really can almost be ignored

He's a BC boy and some posters on here seem to think NMC means they are forever stuck where they are forever until the end of time and nobody ever would ever waive to go to a young up and coming team like Vancouver. It's not like it's a nice city to live in if you're rich as hell either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Canucklehead73 said:

Chicago must be peeing in their pants at getting a 3rd overall pick and a shot at using a blue chip ELC along side Kane and Toews.

 

Good luck getting them to budge

Yup.  They are re-tooling on the fly to get one more crack at the cup while they still have Kane and Toews around...and the league is right behind this helping all the way.

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...