Guest Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 1 hour ago, Warhippy said: To be honest, looking at the Burns trade. I'd say that's actually quite comparable. Burns + 2nd for Charlie Coyle Devin Setoguchi 1st round pick Coyle was an unknown late 1st picked prospect, Setoguchi had just banked his 3rd 20+ goal season and the additional 1st was quite late. So in essence, if it was Boeser, 1st.....Karlsson? That'd be quite comparable without offering in a top tier prospect and additional pick. I'd quite ok with that. But the idea of Hoglander, Podz 1st 2nd plus plus is a shade nuts. Coyle = Hoglander But yeah, Burns would be a good comparable to Ekblad's value right now. Getting a legit top pairing d-man is so tough in the NHL. If you look at all the deals involving Burns, Seth Jones, etc.... it's really rare that the team giving up the legit top d-man loses in the long run (let's not call Adam Larsson a top pairing d-man please). Podkolzin has higher value at the moment then the 1st or Charlie Coyle since he's a very fresh 10th overall pick that has kept trending in the right direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sbriggs Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 46 minutes ago, Sweathog said: Exactly, which is why I don't think a deal is happening, Florida will want more than what we're willing to give. Your not sure about that or is anyone here on CDC. Brock with a pick and a prospect can get it done Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 (edited) 3 hours ago, iinatcc said: Ekblad elite RHD. Brock Boesser a very good top 6 forward. Sorry it's going to take 1 or 2 more pieces for Florida to trade Ekblad for Boesser assets Vancouver might not have Keep in mind that up until this past season, Ekblad was considered to be a disappointment. It isn’t like he has had a long history of elite play. He would be worth it, but let’s not pretend he is a perennial Norris trophy winner here. Boeser, a pick and a prospect are the kind of package he would command if available. If it is Boeser as part of the package, the prospect wouldn’t be Podkolzin, and the pick maybe not even a 1st rounder depending on the prospect involved. Florida also has the ability to take on of our low dollar, high cap hit contracts to even out some value. Eriksson at $2.5 per year may help their goals against. Baertschi at $2.4 could be some secondary scoring (they will have none after UFA guys walk this offseason). Edited September 21, 2020 by Provost 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peaches5 Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 People who think that Seth Jones had proven more than Ekblad when he was traded.. What are you on? Jone's had not proven anything in his NHL career when he was traded. He was expected to become a number 1 but was nowhere near that when he was traded, he was not even a number 2 Dman. He was literally a struggling 3/4 guy. Ekblad has proven way more and has shown he is a clear number 2 guy and quite possibly a solid number 1 in a few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 (edited) 5 hours ago, Warhippy said: Some of these proposals are ludicrous Nylander Liljegren 1st 2nd For Ekblad That's an equivalent to much of what's posted here. Give your heads a shake guys. The thing is - if I'm Florida - I tell you to go back to the drawing board. The problem with that proposal above - is that it's a volume offer - without a real, worthwhile principal involved. You can sprinkle cake decorations around Nylander all you want - but I'd be making the Leafs part with a better principal, period. You may see it as ridiculous value being offered - I see it as value structured in an unacceptable form. Nylander doesn't get the conversation started. I'm not sure you're keeping in mind the fact that Nylander comes with a 7 million cap hit - 500k less than Ekblad - the reality imo is that his terms seriously mitigate his trade value. Edited September 21, 2020 by oldnews Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 7 minutes ago, oldnews said: The thing is - if I'm Florida - I tell you to go back to the drawing board. The problem with that proposal above - is that it's a volume offer - without a real, worthwhile principal involved. You can sprinkle cake decorations around Nylander all you want - but I'd be making the Leafs part with a better principal, period. You may see it as ridiculous value being offered - I see it as value structured in an unacceptable form. Nylander doesn't get the conversation started. This is only a value comparison nothing more. As stated I think this would be more like the Burns trade. Not the Karlsson trade for return as people are suggesting Boeser 1st (late) Karlsson/Lind Ekblad. I'd say that's far mroe reasonable than giving up a potential blue chip a 30 goal scoring winger +++ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, rekker said: Exactly, not wanting to get into who is worth more or less but possible offers from teams needing a stud right side dman start with Nylander, Ehlers, Laine, Johnny Hockey. Just off the top of my head. Are you suggesting Boeser isn't at/near the same tier as double flamingo and the gnome? I'd take him on my team over either one of those one dimensional, non playoff guys, any day. Laine/Ehlers you certainly have an argument for and I'll give you both as a slight premium but they aren't without warts. Laine seems mostly to score (albeit a lot) when it doesn't matter ( and seems a bit of a weirdo tbh) and Ehlers has that speed and is certainly a decent scorer but he's been fairly mia come playoffs where his lack of size becomes more of an issue. Not to say Boeser is perfect (he has warts as well) but it seemed like you were claiming those guys were clearly worth more. Or perhaps I misread your intent? Edited September 21, 2020 by aGENT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toews Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 42 minutes ago, peaches5 said: People who think that Seth Jones had proven more than Ekblad when he was traded.. What are you on? Jone's had not proven anything in his NHL career when he was traded. He was expected to become a number 1 but was nowhere near that when he was traded, he was not even a number 2 Dman. He was literally a struggling 3/4 guy. Ekblad has proven way more and has shown he is a clear number 2 guy and quite possibly a solid number 1 in a few years. Jones was playing behind Weber and Ellis. RHD is a tough position to fill, so its often the position that you can climb the depth chart quickly as a young player especially if there is a lack of competition which happens frequently on bad teams. My point is that you cannot look at the situation that each player came up in and see it as equivalent. Nashville had 2 very good RHD ahead of Jones. Ekblad had Gudbranson, and a broken down Willie Mitchell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kobayashi Maru Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 (edited) 9 hours ago, peaches5 said: Actually no. The GM said they would listen to offers on Ekblad but likely say no to them all. He has also been quoted saying the owners haven't told him to cut costs but to act like this is a new franchise and do what he thinks is best to make them grow. Barkov is the only untouchable. There is no indication at all that Ekblad is available for economical reasons. The indication is clearly if someone offers up something really good that he can't say no to he will be traded. Some pretty mediocre draft picks is not going to get it done. I don't even think Boeser, Juolevi and 1st will get it done but I see that as a fair trade. I think it would likely cost another pick/prospect. I definitely agree that if I was Florida’s GM there is no need to move Ekblad. To me the two pillars are #1 D and # 1C. They have both and couldn’t see a scenario where they move those two. Only thing I could see is a move for economic reasons which they would never state publicly, otherwise all their top players would request a trade. It’s the only reason the GM would even listen rather than stating that they are building around Barkov and Ekblad. It’s definitely odd that they are even listening on him. Edited September 21, 2020 by Kobayashi Maru Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peaches5 Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 43 minutes ago, Warhippy said: This is only a value comparison nothing more. As stated I think this would be more like the Burns trade. Not the Karlsson trade for return as people are suggesting Boeser 1st (late) Karlsson/Lind Ekblad. I'd say that's far mroe reasonable than giving up a potential blue chip a 30 goal scoring winger +++ The Burns trade is the majority of what the trade offers for Ekblad are.. Boeser + Juolevi + 1st is pretty damn close to Burns trade. You're trying to offload a pretty worthless prospect which San Jose did not do. With Joulevi's injuries and age you can't compare him to a top 5 pick anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peaches5 Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 7 minutes ago, Toews said: Jones was playing behind Weber and Ellis. RHD is a tough position to fill, so its often the position that you can climb the depth chart quickly as a young player especially if there is a lack of competition which happens frequently on bad teams. My point is that you cannot look at the situation that each player came up in and see it as equivalent. Nashville had 2 very good RHD ahead of Jones. Ekblad had Gudbranson, and a broken down Willie Mitchell. Jone's wasn't playing anywhere near Ekblad's level. If you use hindsight yea Jones is the much better dman but at the time Jones was just a struggling young top 4 dman. Nashville was deep at D and needed a top line centre and I think when all they had offer for Johansen was Jones they jumped at it. It was an incredibly risky trade for Columbus. Not only that but Johansen was a centre and a proven number 1 centre and it works against anyone trying to say Boeser for Ekblad is a good comparable... Actually says the opposite for a more proven top 2 dman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuck1991 Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 To all my Gm friends I would love to see ekblad in nucks jersey but he is not a #1 dman, He is a top 4 for sure We need to find Tanev's replacement. As good as Myers is he s top 6. Canucks have 2 top 4 Rhd to fill holes in blue line Cernak is a the one i think we ll target, he fills tanves spot very good. Rasmus Ristolainen can fill that hole as well. He is an elite skater who can partner will edler very well. His stats are horrible but he a damn good player. Cernak will command around 4 m/ year Risto carries cap hit of 5.4m tanev benn and stecher needs to be moved thou 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 1 hour ago, Warhippy said: This is only a value comparison nothing more. As stated I think this would be more like the Burns trade. Not the Karlsson trade for return as people are suggesting Boeser 1st (late) Karlsson/Lind Ekblad. I'd say that's far mroe reasonable than giving up a potential blue chip a 30 goal scoring winger +++ In a flat cap world, once you've given the double flamingo 7 million....his value is mitigated imo - so you can split assets or remove the 2nd, but I don't see that great deal a difference tbh. The one thing I would qualify though - if I'm dealing with Toronto, I want their 1st. In fact, if I'm any team, I'm looking to take Toronto's 1sts from them. They appear on the cusp of dumping Kerfoot, Johnsson - so they can get even more top heavy. They don't want to break up their 4 shiny forwards, so the solution as they see it appears to be getting rid of any other cap they can. Barrie is walking, Ceci is walking, Clifford is walking.... So it looks like the Spamaplan is to have a build of Tavares, Matthews, Marner, Nylander, Reilly and Muzzin - and add a 'big fish' RHD like AP. 60+ million on 7 players....65 on 8 if you include Andersen, who has 1 year of term remaining. And then surround those 8 players with a dozen players close to league minimum. It'll be an interesting experiment to witness - certainly it's been interesting to this point, and it might even get moreso.. I don't think they have the option to shop for an Ekblad - could you imagine their futures if they spend Liljegren, a 1st and 2nd in the process? If I'm Alex Pietrangelo - unless he's a Tavares blanket type Leafs homer - I'm probably not the least interested in stepping into that $&!#uation. I'm talking to Winnipeg, and other suitors and steering well clear of what appears to be emerging as one of the league's shallowest teams. The point - I'd want their 1sts, absolutely. One or two key injuries, and what does that lineup look like? To me, anything approaching the kind of injuries the Canucks face.....and it's lottery material. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweathog Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 1 hour ago, Sbriggs said: Your not sure about that or is anyone here on CDC. Brock with a pick and a prospect can get it done The thing is I don't think it can. Imo the issue here is not what Ekblad's perceived value is, but what Florida is willing to move him for. Why would Florida move their best defenseman, a player they would rather keep, for such a low package? If I'm Florida, having Brock and Podkolzin as a minimum in the deal, would be entirely reasonable from my perspective. But then again, from the Canuck's point of view, that would be too high a price imo. That's why I think that this deal will never happen. We'll have to agree to disagree. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-Dizzle Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 2 hours ago, Provost said: Keep in mind that up until this past season, Ekblad was considered to be a disappointment. Sure wish we had a few perennial 40 point disappointments on the back end Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 (edited) 32 minutes ago, Nuck1991 said: To all my Gm friends I would love to see ekblad in nucks jersey but he is not a #1 dman, He is a top 4 for sure We need to find Tanev's replacement. As good as Myers is he s top 6. Canucks have 2 top 4 Rhd to fill holes in blue line Cernak is a the one i think we ll target, he fills tanves spot very good. Rasmus Ristolainen can fill that hole as well. He is an elite skater who can partner will edler very well. His stats are horrible but he a damn good player. Cernak will command around 4 m/ year Risto carries cap hit of 5.4m tanev benn and stecher needs to be moved thou Who is? 23 minutes/game 41 pts in 67 games = 16th in NHL D scoring 48.7% ozone starts, 14th on the Panthers 52.7 corsi - 3rd on the Panthers. 2 minutes/g pk - a principal penalty killer with Stralman. Yandle got 3:42/g of pp ice time, Ekblad 1:26. Yandle played considerably easier 5 on 5 minutes - Ekblad outscored him 5 on 5, by 10 pts. Yandle 58% ozone starts, an even 0, Ekblad 48.7%, was a team best +12. I've never been a big 'fan' of Ekblad, but being realistic here - if you don't believe he's a 1D, who is? And keep in mind that he's 23 years old, so if you're going to try to split hairs here (and essentially claim that there are only ? a handful of real "1D" in the NHL - what is his trajectory? I don't think 'we' need to find Tanev's replacement - and adding a player like Cernak would not preclude bringing Tanev back, who is probably going to represent the best D available in his cap range, and the one that fits best here. You're talking about foregoing Tanev and Stecher and spending the assets it would take to acquire both Cernak and Ristolainen - I think you might be dipping a bit too heavily into the futures pool if you believe you're going to do both, but I'm all ears if you have the realistic costs figured out. Edited September 21, 2020 by oldnews Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuck1991 Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 has tanev ever played a full season, u dont &^@#ing win a cup with a top D men injured! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rekker Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, aGENT said: Are you suggesting Boeser isn't at/near the same tier as double flamingo and the gnome? I'd take him on my team over either one of those one dimensional, non playoff guys, any day. Laine/Ehlers you certainly have an argument for and I'll give you both as a slight premium but they aren't without warts. Laine seems mostly to score (albeit a lot) when it doesn't matter ( and seems a bit of a weirdo tbh) and Ehlers has that speed and is certainly a decent scorer but he's been fairly mia come playoffs where his lack of size becomes more of an issue. Not to say Boeser is perfect (he has warts as well) but it seemed like you were claiming those guys were clearly worth more. Or perhaps I misread your intent? Not at all. Not a fan of no-contact Nylander either, or any of those players really. Just wanted to make a point on what other teams may be offering up if Ekblad is traded. Edited September 21, 2020 by rekker 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silky mitts Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 44 minutes ago, Nuck1991 said: To all my Gm friends I would love to see ekblad in nucks jersey but he is not a #1 dman, He is a top 4 for sure We need to find Tanev's replacement. As good as Myers is he s top 6. Canucks have 2 top 4 Rhd to fill holes in blue line Cernak is a the one i think we ll target, he fills tanves spot very good. Rasmus Ristolainen can fill that hole as well. He is an elite skater who can partner will edler very well. His stats are horrible but he a damn good player. Cernak will command around 4 m/ year Risto carries cap hit of 5.4m tanev benn and stecher needs to be moved thou Risto is a terrible defenseman. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rekker Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 2 minutes ago, Silky mitts said: Risto is a terrible defenseman. He is. People just see his size and drool. He's aggressive enough but when I watch him play he isn't a great thinker. 1 1 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