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

(Rumour) Virtanen on the trade block


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Me_ said:

VAN

Ekholm ($3.750 x 2)

 

NSH

Virtanen (2.550MIL x 2)

Gaudette (0.950MIL x 1)

2nd

 

The ask is a 1st round pick, an elite prospect and another asset per LeBrun.  

  • Hydration 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, mll said:

The ask is a 1st round pick, an elite prospect and another asset per LeBrun.  

so for us its something in the 11-14th oa, Juolevi or Podkolzin, and AG. I think I'd pass and just re-up Edler for 2.5 mil. 

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

so for us its something in the 11-14th oa, Juolevi or Podkolzin, and AG. I think I'd pass and just re-up Edler for 2.5 mil. 

Juolevi is probably not seen as an elite prospect.  He’s waiver eligible next season and can’t get in the lineup. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

so for us its something in the 11-14th oa, Juolevi or Podkolzin, and AG. I think I'd pass and just re-up Edler for 2.5 mil. 

I wouldn't do pod straight up

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, mll said:

The ask is a 1st round pick, an elite prospect and another asset per LeBrun.  

Is he that good?

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

well, I think that says more about Baumgartner than OJ imo. 

Benning agrees with the decision and demoted him to the taxi squad.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mll said:

Benning agrees with the decision and demoted him to the taxi squad.

to me that seems very much like a Green decision that Jim wouldn't argue with, it is the coaches team to field after all. 

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

to me that seems very much like a Green decision that Jim wouldn't argue with, it is the coaches team to field after all. 

We are suffering a lot with forward injuries as well so I figure that plays a part. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, higgyfan said:

Panthers are desperate to unload some of their D as they lose one in the ED. 

Huh? This doesn't make sense. You saying they want to get rid of D because they are losing one to expansion? Make themselves weaker in a position that they are going to get weaker in...

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Me_ said:

Is he that good?

Nope. 
 

Maybe if he were 25 still is he worth that. I’d love to see a team dumb enough to pay that price.

  • Hydration 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BigTramFan said:

Huh? This doesn't make sense. You saying they want to get rid of D because they are losing one to expansion? Make themselves weaker in a position that they are going to get weaker in...

Getting Virtanen for a dman is better than getting nothing in return when Seattle takes him.  Or maybe the want to give up a draft pick or a decent prospect for Seattle not to pick him up.

  • Hydration 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Zhukini said:

I'd be happy with almost anything coming back

That's right!!! It's called salary dump for players that no longer have a long term future here!!! Sadly, we can only use Virtanen as no teams would be interested in taking cap hits for Roussel, Sutter....  thanks to JB!! The new NHL now operates on finding gems and reclamation projects for $800k to $1.5M!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, higgyfan said:

Getting Virtanen for a dman is better than getting nothing in return when Seattle takes him.  Or maybe the want to give up a draft pick or a decent prospect for Seattle not to pick him up.

Seattle would take Gudas, not Nuutivara. So that means FLA lose two Dmen...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are we assuming it’s Nutivaraa and not Weegar? Haven’t we been linked to Weegar for a while now?

 

Honestly I’d prefer Juulsen over Nutivaraa...

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

I'm pretty skeptical of that one tbh, I suspect that was driven by ANA in the media and not JB, at least I hope so.

 

I like the idea of trading Jake for defence vs. another problematic winger, even if its bottom pairing d. 

 

If we were judging this from the outside, a top 9 winger makes sense for a decent bottom pair d that could occasionally play up the line with injuries. 

Trade him for Stecher? :frantic::rolleyes:

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...