250Integra Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 To be honest, the Canucks would strongly benefit from an offensive-RH defenceman. I'd give him a shot if he's on a very short-leash. Plus, he probably doesn't have much value so it would maybe cost us a third round pick to get him. He would be a huge upgrade on Chatfield or Juolevi, and our vets will keep him in his place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me_ Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 On 1/31/2021 at 12:17 PM, GoCanucks16 said: do your thing, jim Yes. Do not trade for this guy in any circumstances. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me_ Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 (edited) On 1/31/2021 at 3:39 PM, rekker said: I wouldn't even trade LE for that chump. His value is in the negatives, just like LE. Oh I would. I really would. Any deal ridding the Canucks of that six million dollar dead weight is a great deal. Deangelo wouldn’t be the reason why. Edited February 2, 2021 by Me_ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theo5789 Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 22 minutes ago, 250Integra said: To be honest, the Canucks would strongly benefit from an offensive-RH defenceman. I'd give him a shot if he's on a very short-leash. Plus, he probably doesn't have much value so it would maybe cost us a third round pick to get him. He would be a huge upgrade on Chatfield or Juolevi, and our vets will keep him in his place. We paid a 3rd round pick in 2022 for Nate Schmidt. Why would we pay the same price for a locker room cancer? If we wanted an offensive player that is suspect on defense, we have Rafferty already. Nevermind the fact that he's gone through waivers and no one wanted him for free. If anything they would likely have to add a pick with retention to move him out at this point and that's to a team willing to take the chance of dealing with his off ice issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris12345 Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 10 minutes ago, Me_ said: Oh I would. I really would. Any deal ridding the Canucks of that six million dollar dead weight is a great deal. Deangelo wouldn’t be the reason why. I wouldn't. Culture trumps all. I couldn't imagine telling Demko I just traded for Deangelo. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
250Integra Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 9 minutes ago, theo5789 said: We paid a 3rd round pick in 2022 for Nate Schmidt. Why would we pay the same price for a locker room cancer? If we wanted an offensive player that is suspect on defense, we have Rafferty already. Nevermind the fact that he's gone through waivers and no one wanted him for free. If anything they would likely have to add a pick with retention to move him out at this point and that's to a team willing to take the chance of dealing with his off ice issues. So you're telling me you would rather have Rafferty over DeAngelo in an NHL lineup? No one wants to pick him up on waivers because his cap hit is a risk. As you mentioned though, a team trading for him will either swap a player with a similar cap / term or NYR will have to retain some of his cap. A third-round pick for him + 50% retained (or something along those lines) is not far fetched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 As per Elliotte Friedman in his 31 Thoughts: Quote 3. The Rangers have made it clear they will eat salary to facilitate a Tony DeAngelo trade. GM Jeff Gorton provided clarity on why DeAngelo was cut: The organization felt DeAngelo “wasn’t able to move on” from his early-season benching and warned him one more incident would be the end of his tenure. That came Saturday night, after the 5–4 overtime loss to Pittsburgh. DeAngelo delivered a sarcastic, cutting comment to Alexandar Georgiev in the aftermath of that defeat. The goalie clocked DeAngelo before the two were separated, and the decision to put him on waivers was made that night. New York will try to trade him, but it’s not going to be easy. Any acquiring team knows there will be heat. Gorton indicated the Rangers currently are not pursuing a termination of DeAngelo’s contract, and it appears unlikely they’d be able to do it unless the player agreed, for whatever reason. Since he does not turn 26 until October, he can be bought out for one-third of the $5.3-million salary on his contract for 2021–22. https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/31-thoughts-sabres-islanders-postponement-cause-concern/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
250Integra Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 3 minutes ago, Chris12345 said: I wouldn't. Culture trumps all. I couldn't imagine telling Demko I just traded for Deangelo. If it is was Lundqvist in net, I doubt he would've said anything. This NYR team is a young squad and unfortunately, they lack a strong veteran presence. Both their goalies are under the age of 25. The majority of their team is in their 20's. He wouldn't get away with any of that garbage here with Horvat, Holtby, Miller, Beagle, Sutter, Edler, Schmidt, Myers, and Roussel watching over him. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me_ Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 (edited) 16 minutes ago, Chris12345 said: I wouldn't. Culture trumps all. I couldn't imagine telling Demko I just traded for Deangelo. No but I could imagine telling him Eriksson was traded away... Eriksson would look really good in NYR. The change isn’t that different... Edited February 2, 2021 by Me_ 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 (edited) 37 minutes ago, 250Integra said: So you're telling me you would rather have Rafferty over DeAngelo in an NHL lineup? I would. DeAngelo has already proven he is incapable of playing acceptable defense. We have already experienced Pouliot, Larsen, Weber, Del Zotto, and Bartkowski; I am unwilling to go down that road again and ice another blueliner unwilling or unable to play like an NHLer in his own end. We have guys in Utica who are better players than this pitiful excuse for a man. Edited February 2, 2021 by King Heffy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theo5789 Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 33 minutes ago, 250Integra said: So you're telling me you would rather have Rafferty over DeAngelo in an NHL lineup? No one wants to pick him up on waivers because his cap hit is a risk. As you mentioned though, a team trading for him will either swap a player with a similar cap / term or NYR will have to retain some of his cap. A third-round pick for him + 50% retained (or something along those lines) is not far fetched. You're ignoring the locker room cancer aspect. The Ranger's defense isn't exactly the best in the league and they've been losing and are willing to lose him for nothing. Now even saying they're willing to eat cap to get rid of him. This most recent incident was "the last straw", it's not the first time he's been a problem for them. The way he plays actual defense, yes I might as well have Rafferty (who by the way isn't even a regular for us). Sure DeAngelo has offensive potential, but that isn't what we are lacking. I believe there was a stat not long ago that we have had the most offensive production from our defense in the NHL. He isn't stealing top PP time from Hughes, so whatever offense he has is going to squandered while not being effective in his own end. The cons far outweigh the pros on this one especially if we have to move a draft pick on top. Only way I'd even consider it is if they take Eriksson at full cap hit and even then that's only for cap purposes as I would still bury him in the minors for his character and consider buying him out for further cap savings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 4 hours ago, NHL'er said: You don't become anywhere like McDavid with his attitude. Yes, exactly. Not a big McDavid fan - not going to bother naming why - but I am warming a bit. I saw him the other night - postgame after a loss - he was asked what's about their penalty kill. To paraphrase - he said it's not really his place to comment because he doesn't kill penalties, but went on to say what a difficult job it is, how hard the players work at it, his respect for them, and that he believes in those guys/they aren't the cause of their losses. Probably the most impressed I've been with McDavid - sounded like a maturing captain. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
250Integra Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 16 minutes ago, King Heffy said: I would. DeAngelo has already proven he is incapable of playing acceptable defense. We have already experienced Pouliot, Larsen, Weber, Del Zotto, and Bartkowski; I am unwilling to go down that road again and ice another blueliner unwilling or unable to play like an NHLer in his own end. We have guys in Utica who are better players than this pitiful excuse for a man. Where is it proven that he is "incapable of playing acceptable defense"? Also, none of those guys you listed have put up 50 points in an NHL season. Not sure how they are comparable. This guy isn't exactly a fringe NHL player. Maybe he acts like one, but his skillset is far above any of those players listed. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24K PureCool Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 3 minutes ago, 250Integra said: Where is it proven that he is "incapable of playing acceptable defense"? Also, none of those guys you listed have put up 50 points in an NHL season. Not sure how they are comparable. This guy isn't exactly a fringe NHL player. Maybe he acts like one, but his skillset is far above any of those players listed. Need to stop with the obsession with scoring from the backend. We have way bigger issue with our D men can't play defense. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 (edited) 5 minutes ago, 250Integra said: Where is it proven that he is "incapable of playing acceptable defense"? Also, none of those guys you listed have put up 50 points in an NHL season. Not sure how they are comparable. This guy isn't exactly a fringe NHL player. Maybe he acts like one, but his skillset is far above any of those players listed. He is absolute trash in his own zone; if you've ever seen him play, it will be quite clear he's a total liability out there. Zero room on this team for a defenseman who can't play defense, regardless of points. He will not be a legit NHLer until he stops playing like trash in his own zone and cuts out the off-ice garbage. Edited February 2, 2021 by King Heffy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokes Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 Chance to get rid of the Eriksson contract? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me_ Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 (edited) VAN DeAngelo 2nd ‘21 NYR Virtanen Unfortunately Eriksson’s contract is way too rich for the Rangers. Be ready for Virtanen to take off though... Mic more than he could in Vancouver. Or not. Edited February 2, 2021 by Me_ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 2 minutes ago, Me_ said: VAN DeAngelo NYR Virtanen Eriksson Ew. Rangers would be the ones adding. Neither Eriksson nor DeAngelo can play at the NHL level, but at least Eriksson can keep his mouth shut. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theo5789 Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 1 minute ago, King Heffy said: Ew. Rangers would be the ones adding. Neither Eriksson nor DeAngelo can play at the NHL level, but at least Eriksson can keep his mouth shut. I think you're forgetting his "not seeing eye to eye" with Green. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 37 minutes ago, theo5789 said: I think you're forgetting his "not seeing eye to eye" with Green. I'm not a fan, but hopefully he's learned that misconduct of that nature won't help him in his quest to continue to waste ice time. 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