Tomatoes11 Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 Would have been worth it. It’s basically 5 years of Dowd and gaunce instead or Beagle and Schaller. For byram? In a heart beat. If if you can lowball gaudette enough you can swap gaunce for him. Too bad benning likes overpaying his bottom 6 which probably nixed this deal unfortunately. 1 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainLinden16 Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 11 hours ago, Boone Jenner said: https://twitter.com/JamesCybulski/status/1143163471913074694 Heard over the weekend that #Canucks & #Blackhawks had discussed swapping the 3rd and 10th overall picks so Vancouver could jump up to get Bowen Byram, but Chicago wanted Van to take D Brent Seabrook and the remaining 5 years/$6.875M AAV on his contract. Thus the deal died. I would've done this one for two 2nd (2019+2020) and Ben Hutton for 3 and Seabrook. Heck throw in a third. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenhodgejr Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 I think Bryam and Podkolzin are both incredible prospects who have a good chance of reaching their ceiling potential. Bryam = Drew Doughty/ Mark Girodano Podkolzin = Rick Nash I don't think the cost to get Bryam would be worth it. We needed at least two top 6 wingers to add to our core and I think we got a really good power forward with Podkolzin. I count this draft as a win. Hoglander looks like another top 6 forward. Keppan looks like a bottom 6 power forward winger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skolozsy2 Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 8 hours ago, Canuckster86 said: To take on that contract I would want the 3rd almost with us adding something but not 10th overall!!! Brent is a bit of a snob in person, past his prime also so glad we didnt get him at that price! Just curious as to how you have the opinion that Seabs is a snob? Not saying your wrong as I do not personally know the man, but I met him at the Hawks Convention and he seemed normal, cordial even. And Seabs for years now has been the "chaperone" for the rookies and new players...showing them around the city, where the good restaurants are at, where the rest of the guys homes are, etc... So hearing he's a snob is kind of a head scratcher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Ghost Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 8 minutes ago, skolozsy2 said: Just curious as to how you have the opinion that Seabs is a snob? Not saying your wrong as I do not personally know the man, but I met him at the Hawks Convention and he seemed normal, cordial even. And Seabs for years now has been the "chaperone" for the rookies and new players...showing them around the city, where the good restaurants are at, where the rest of the guys homes are, etc... So hearing he's a snob is kind of a head scratcher. I know him casually and have never seen any sign he is a snob. Pretty much the opposite in my experience. Still wouldnt have wanted the canucks to take on that contract though. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teepain Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 15 hours ago, Toyotasfan said: The next rumour will be Corey Perry and Dion Phaneuf in town for UFA discussions. Corey Perry in our top 9 Would be fun to see the comeback story Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mpt Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 19 hours ago, qwijibo said: So by that thinking what should it cost Vancouver to dump Eriksson? Without taking anything back? Near impossible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBatch Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 19 hours ago, Stamkos said: If Pod played in the CHL, there’d be a large number of people saying he should be drafted at 3 ahead of Bowen. I’m glad this didn’t happen. He’d have ate them all alive no doubt...when he’s out there “getting you” all the time to full sized men, those kids wouldn’t have like playing against him at all.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 If there's any truth to it I'm glad it fell through We'd need to be getting more than jumping from 10 to 3 to take on that albatross Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted June 26, 2019 Share Posted June 26, 2019 How much worse than Tyler Myers is Seabrook? I would have liked Byram. Prob not true? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timberz21 Posted June 26, 2019 Share Posted June 26, 2019 On 6/25/2019 at 2:04 AM, CaptainLinden16 said: I would've done this one for two 2nd (2019+2020) and Ben Hutton for 3 and Seabrook. Heck throw in a third. So would have all the other low cap teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCoastDave Posted June 26, 2019 Share Posted June 26, 2019 Maybe, if Chicago had offered Connor Murphy, 26 yr. old with 3 yrs at 3.8 million left, instead of Seabrook as a cap dump might have been more appealing for the Canucks. The Hawks wanted to trade him anyways so will get some cap relief and the Nucks will get a cost controlled RD for the next 3 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wai_lai416 Posted June 26, 2019 Share Posted June 26, 2019 23 minutes ago, WestCoastDave said: Maybe, if Chicago had offered Connor Murphy, 26 yr. old with 3 yrs at 3.8 million left, instead of Seabrook as a cap dump might have been more appealing for the Canucks. The Hawks wanted to trade him anyways so will get some cap relief and the Nucks will get a cost controlled RD for the next 3 years. Why would they give away a cost controlled rd plus a 3rd overall to trade down? Of coz it would be Seabrook. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AK_19 Posted June 26, 2019 Share Posted June 26, 2019 (edited) On 6/24/2019 at 11:59 PM, Tomatoes11 said: Would have been worth it. It’s basically 5 years of Dowd and gaunce instead or Beagle and Schaller. For byram? In a heart beat. If if you can lowball gaudette enough you can swap gaunce for him. Too bad benning likes overpaying his bottom 6 which probably nixed this deal unfortunately. How does 5 years of Gaunce+Dowd instead of Beagle+Schaller =Seabrook's cap hit? I do think your general point is a good one though in that if we had cheaper depth pieces the Seabrook cap hit wouldn't be a big deal. Not signing Beagle/Schaller/Gudbranson and replaced with Seabrook+Gaunce+Dowd w/ the bonus of Byram would've been great. Edited June 26, 2019 by AK_19 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollumpus Posted June 26, 2019 Share Posted June 26, 2019 On 6/24/2019 at 11:04 PM, CaptainLinden16 said: I would've done this one for two 2nd (2019+2020) and Ben Hutton for 3 and Seabrook. Heck throw in a third. Giving away picks like they were candy.... regards, G. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gollumpus Posted June 26, 2019 Share Posted June 26, 2019 (edited) I think the Canucks could handle the first year of Seabrook's contract, based on UFAs and others who (probably) won't be back for next year. Boeser is the most significant contract to be signed. Hutton, Motte, Leivo, Goldobin, Granlund, Teves, Rafferty and Schenn would hopefully agree to a team comfortable deal or be moved. That's a lot of guys being left out to dry. The second year is where it starts to get sticky, and by year three it will really become a problem. This being said, with the Luongo retirement happening when it did, not making this deal averted a significant cap issue. regards, G. EDIT: and Seabrook's NMC would also be a problem if he had to be protected in the Seattle draft. Edited June 27, 2019 by Gollumpus 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted June 26, 2019 Share Posted June 26, 2019 (edited) I think this is probably BS. But if it wasn't I would've done it. Edited June 26, 2019 by Smashian Kassian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestCoastDave Posted June 27, 2019 Share Posted June 27, 2019 9 hours ago, wai_lai416 said: Why would they give away a cost controlled rd plus a 3rd overall to trade down? Of coz it would be Seabrook. There are numerous reasons. First, they need cap space. Second, they like their other defencemen better. Third, they just acquire Maatta & De Haan and are overloaded. And fourth, they have a bunch of promising you Ds like Boqvist, Jokhiharu, Mitchell, and Beaudin waiting in the wings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wai_lai416 Posted June 27, 2019 Share Posted June 27, 2019 7 minutes ago, WestCoastDave said: There are numerous reasons. First, they need cap space. Second, they like their other defencemen better. Third, they just acquire Maatta & De Haan and are overloaded. And fourth, they have a bunch of promising you Ds like Boqvist, Jokhiharu, Mitchell, and Beaudin waiting in the wings. ya they need cap space hence the only guy logical would be seabrook if they have to trade away a lottery pick even if it's trading down. you make it sound like connor murphy is a negative asset. he's a + 12 on a really really bad hawks team last year. with the way contracts are given. 3.85 for a defenseman that can play is very reasonable... if they have to give away the 3rd overall? the starting point would be you have to take seabrook. they can easily get a draft pick for murphy. all team needs cap space.. and they still have 12mil cap space before moving anyone out atm. strome and debrincat is still on their ELC so they have no immediate need to trade away a guy with a reasonable cap and a short deal vs a guy that have a terrible cap at a long deal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skolozsy2 Posted June 27, 2019 Share Posted June 27, 2019 The Hawks don't need cap space. They already have $12 million in space and once they move a few defensemen down, they'll have over $13. With Perlini, Sikura, and Quenneville the only RFA's to sign, they have plenty of maneuverability. Sure the Hawks have a lot of defensemen that could be moved, but I can't see Murphy being the one. On a team that gave up the 2nd highest amount of goals, I can't see them trading their most consistent defensive defenseman who also is on a really good contract. 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