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

[Trade] Golden Knights trade Nate Schmidt to Canucks for 2022 3rd-round pick


Recommended Posts

Just now, Teemu Selänne said:

last playoffs:

2nd in points among Vegas D with 9 in 20

2nd on Vegas in shots on net

1st in TOI/GP

2nd on the team in takeaways (behind Stone)

53% CF despite playing against top lines

 

 

Stoked for this big game player 

 

loosen up ice hockey GIF by NHL

  • Cheers 2
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, iinatcc said:

Maybe but Schmidt plays on the different side. So I can't see how he replaces Tanev

That wasn't the question, it was that our defense is worse with the loss of Tanev and Stetcher and I beleive that both Schmidt and OJ our better reguardless of which side they play. And I believe I heard that Schmidt can play both sides

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, buddyguy said:

Schmidt is an upgrade, despite the big contract.

I completely agree he is an upgrade as he has a two way game, but we need defense. Nate Schmidt isn't good enough defensively to cover the defense we need to have. We literally have no true stay at home defensemen now that we can fully trust. I believe you need two on your team. 

 

For 6 mill and for what he brings I think he's making fair value for open market but the contract could end up being a killer. He's also somewhat injury prone. 

 

Don't get me wrong, I like his game but 6 mill when we just lost 3 important players due to cap is a tough pill to swallow. We got him on the cheap, but he's a big contract to be putting up less than 40 points. Not to mention that's playing with Vegas who is a team that generates off the rush way more effectively than the Canucks. He's got a great outlet pass but when our boys seemingly can't generate a shot on net 50% of the time on a 3 on 1, I just can't see him being nearly as effective. And now we even have less scoring depth. 

 

If I were Benning I'd honestly use Schmidt to offload one of our bad contracts so we can gain some wiggle room. I can't see us coming close to the playoffs this season. Hopefully I'm wrong, but I anticipate a high draft pick next year. 

  • Cheers 1
  • Haha 1
  • Wat 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, billabong said:

Canucks literally need to shed salary to put a 23 man roster together 

 

They may need one more dman and re-sign their RFA’s

 

And they have obviously written ferland off cause they need his money on LTIR to do anything 

We can maybe squeak under as it stands, but hopefully money gets moved out so it isn’t that tight.

 

Bury Eriksson and Baertschi and that is $2.15 free plus the $2 million we have now and 19 guys on the roster.  Sign Virtanen around $2.75 and that is two minimum salary guys to fill out a 22 man roster.

 

That isn’t enough for Leivo and Gaudette... so one would hope that someone goes out.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

And...? I stand by my original statement lol.

 

:rolleyes:

You're as stubborn as Squamfan.

 

I was also around when you made that fake Corey Perry thread back then. You were rather smug about being a "brilliant troll" today. But posting fake trades should've landed you a permanent ban, so you really shouldn't even be here.

Edited by Dazzle
  • Cheers 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

Some of you guys are missing the bigger picture here.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

who gives up 88 Schmidt or Gaudette?

Nikita Tryamkin shows up and they fight for the right to wear #88. LOL 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Brock Botanen said:

From a division rival who we took 7 games a few weeks ago LOL

Interesting, the team that beat us get better and heavier while we help them do it by taking the crumbs of their table. 

Pietrangelo is much bigger than Schmidt and produce up to 20 points more.

 

This is more of a desperate move by Benning in my view. He had to do something... I had waited til we could get one of the best. 

I hope Schmidt prove me wrong though. 

  • Wat 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

No way anyone can say OJ over Stecher at this point.

 

OJ was considered a bust by many until his one game and now he’s a regular?  I’m hopeful for him but let’s ease expectations. He probably still needs some developing.

If he's not better than Stetcher right off the bat this season, he will be by the end of his first season

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, MikeyD said:

I completely agree he is an upgrade as he has a two way game, but we need defense. Nate Schmidt isn't good enough defensively to cover the defense we need to have. We literally have no true stay at home defensemen now that we can fully trust. I believe you need two on your team. 

 

For 6 mill and for what he brings I think he's making fair value for open market but the contract could end up being a killer. He's also somewhat injury prone. 

 

Don't get me wrong, I like his game but 6 mill when we just lost 3 important players due to cap is a tough pill to swallow. We got him on the cheap, but he's a big contract to be putting up less than 40 points. Not to mention that's playing with Vegas who is a team that generates off the rush way more effectively than the Canucks. He's got a great outlet pass but when our boys seemingly can't generate a shot on net 50% of the time on a 3 on 1, I just can't see him being nearly as effective. And now we even have less scoring depth. 

 

If I were Benning I'd honestly use Schmidt to offload one of our bad contracts so we can gain some wiggle room. I can't see us coming close to the playoffs this season. Hopefully I'm wrong, but I anticipate a high draft pick next year. 

Aint nobody got that much cap space

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Master Mind said:

So many doubted Benning, yet he just acquired a top pairing D for a 3rd.

Hes not top pairing.

Hes 30 yrs old and hes going to eat up 6 mill of our cap until ges 36.  

Im a big believer in Benning, but this was a brutal.

How do you justify not signing Tanev now?

  • Like 1
  • Wat 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MikeyD said:

I completely agree he is an upgrade as he has a two way game, but we need defense. Nate Schmidt isn't good enough defensively to cover the defense we need to have. We literally have no true stay at home defensemen now that we can fully trust. I believe you need two on your team. 

 

For 6 mill and for what he brings I think he's making fair value for open market but the contract could end up being a killer. He's also somewhat injury prone. 

 

Don't get me wrong, I like his game but 6 mill when we just lost 3 important players due to cap is a tough pill to swallow. We got him on the cheap, but he's a big contract to be putting up less than 40 points. Not to mention that's playing with Vegas who is a team that generates off the rush way more effectively than the Canucks. He's got a great outlet pass but when our boys seemingly can't generate a shot on net 50% of the time on a 3 on 1, I just can't see him being nearly as effective. And now we even have less scoring depth. 

 

If I were Benning I'd honestly use Schmidt to offload one of our bad contracts so we can gain some wiggle room. I can't see us coming close to the playoffs this season. Hopefully I'm wrong, but I anticipate a high draft pick next year. 

 

0CFCA361-75BD-4E7B-A6B6-993DD6DA9DB1.gif

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

You're as stubborn as Squamfan.

 

I was also around when you made that fake Corey Perry thread back then. You were rather smug about being a "brilliant troll". Back then, posting fake trades was a permanent ban. You shouldn't even be here.

What am I being stubborn about?

 

And I never posted a thread. :bigblush:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, kanucks25 said:

What am I being stubborn about?

 

And I never posted a thread. :bigblush:

Come to think of it, that was a status post. Maybe you posted in a thread too, but I'm not sure. All those histories are all gone now. Either way, you should've been banned. Meanwhile Ukrainian Canuck is banned for eternity. And for what?!

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...