New Jersey - Vancouver (Proposal)

[Convincing John]

We have been waiting +50 years for a D man like Quinn Hughes. If I had to pick 1 untouchable, it’s him. 

[IBatch]

On 2/21/2021 at 6:45 PM, janisahockeynut said:

You see N7, this is why I have a problem with some of CDC

They can not see past their nose

Remember the saying...."All that glitters is not Gold"?

 

Here is the reality of Hughes

Hughes is an elite Offensive Defenseman, but a sub-par defensive defenseman

 

Hughes over all contribution to the Canucks, which includes PP and even strength

Hughes is a -3 defenseman overall, or as close to that as I can make out

Basically his -13 at even strength minus his plus 10 PP =, his -3

 

Taking the same formula, let's look at Ty Smith

Smith is a +7 at even strength plus his 2 PP = his + 9 overall ratng

 

a difference of +12 between Hughes and Ty Smith

Now when you look at Ty Smith's numbers in junior he was +49 even before PP points are added in his last year

 

Now, all I am saying is temper your opinion on Quinn Hughes

as I would not argue that my calculations are incomplete, but using the same theory for both and you can see the results

 

Yes Hughes is better and more dynamic, but a high 1st line player (Nolan Foote + a high 1st better?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Janis, as of right now when i read your proposal, my first thought was that's actually pretty fair.   Foote is a good prospect, and Ty Smith is the current front runner for this years calder.   He's getting points and is a plus player on a not so good team.   QHs game for sure has holes, offensively he's one of the best in the game already,  as a forward one has to wonder what he could achieve.   But he will never be a number one complete D - with a bomb from the point, that can clear the net, crush guys along the boards, and win battles with pure strength, and uncertain if he will ever see PK time.   Chara is 250lbs and can do 60plus pull-ups...even if QHs can do 60 pull-ups and adds 20lbs the best we could hope for is average at some of those things.    

 

To me at least, he's elite no doubt - but has warts in his game that will likely follow him throughout his career - basically if we aren't out scoring with him in the lineup he's a liability.   Teams settled down a lot the past 7 games - QHs 5 x 5 is a lot better then our start, which was brutal.   Unless there is a lot of PPs,  QHs minutes have gone down a little - which to me at least is a good thing.    It remains to be seen if QHs will ever defend as well as decent top four Ds.   So far on a deep team, third pairing minutes and all the PP time he could get seems likely.   

 

As for the deal - as of now it's a pass.   QHs should get better at defending as he packs on muscle.   Reinhart and Barrie are both close in size to him (if he's really 5'10, which i doubt he is), and play at 200lbs which is stocky enough to  bull-dog a little.  

Edited February 23, 2021 by IBatch

[J.I.A.H.N]

3 hours ago, IBatch said:

Janis, as of right now when i read your proposal, my first thought was that's actually pretty fair.   Foote is a good prospect, and Ty Smith is the current front runner for this years calder.   He's getting points and is a plus player on a not so good team.   QHs game for sure has holes, offensively he's one of the best in the game already,  as a forward one has to wonder what he could achieve.   But he will never be a number one complete D - with a bomb from the point, that can clear the net, crush guys along the boards, and win battles with pure strength, and uncertain if he will ever see PK time.   Chara is 250lbs and can do 60plus pull-ups...even if QHs can do 60 pull-ups and adds 20lbs the best we could hope for is average at some of those things.    

 

To me at least, he's elite no doubt - but has warts in his game that will likely follow him throughout his career - basically if we aren't out scoring with him in the lineup he's a liability.   Teams settled down a lot the past 7 games - QHs 5 x 5 is a lot better then our start, which was brutal.   Unless there is a lot of PPs,  QHs minutes have gone down a little - which to me at least is a good thing.    It remains to be seen if QHs will ever defend as well as decent top four Ds.   So far on a deep team, third pairing minutes and all the PP time he could get seems likely.   

 

As for the deal - as of now it's a pass.   QHs should get better at defending as he packs on muscle.   Reinhart and Barrie are both close in size to him (if he's really 5'10, which i doubt he is), and play at 200lbs which is stocky enough to  bull-dog a little.  

Hi IBatch

 

What I would really like is to get Robb Zepps opinion on this....it would be interesting to consider his take on it

 

I think people are getting me wrong here. What I am all about is making the team better, if not trading Hughes makes us better, than I am all for keeping him, or any other player for that matter. I am simply not married to any one player. In my life time, I have seen the best 2 players ever to lace up, play for multiple teams, and in Orrs case, it made me switch teams, when he moved from Boston. ( Meaning I went 100% away from Boston, and went 100% Vancouver, which was not always the case). So, I do relate with the posters that could just not see a player being traded.

 

Upon reflection, I do see warts in my proposal, and things could go terribly wrong with it, if none of the players develop on the Vancouver side. Hughes vs Smith alone, I take Hughes 10 out of 10 times, but I guess it really depends where the pick ends up, how Foote develops and if Smith can continue to develop. If all 3 parts turn out to be 2nd pairing and 2nd line players and better, then it is a big win for Vancouver, if not, well I guess I am wrong and moving.

 

Again, if making a trade like this strengthens the team over all, and we end up winning a cup, then again, I would trade my mother. But I would need my crystal ball, before pulling the trigger. I would just like CDC to be open to moves like this. Especially on this forum, where we should debate decent proposals. I would think if you asked a New Jersey Devils fan, they would consider it an over payment by the Devils.  But it would take at least that much to make me happy. And I do recognize that it could backfire quickly. Which is why, I made the proposal in the first place, as I welcomed people to digest the proposal and give me their opinion on it.

[IBatch]

1 hour ago, janisahockeynut said:

Hi IBatch

 

What I would really like is to get Robb Zepps opinion on this....it would be interesting to consider his take on it

 

I think people are getting me wrong here. What I am all about is making the team better, if not trading Hughes makes us better, than I am all for keeping him, or any other player for that matter. I am simply not married to any one player. In my life time, I have seen the best 2 players ever to lace up, play for multiple teams, and in Orrs case, it made me switch teams, when he moved from Boston. ( Meaning I went 100% away from Boston, and went 100% Vancouver, which was not always the case). So, I do relate with the posters that could just not see a player being traded.

 

Upon reflection, I do see warts in my proposal, and things could go terribly wrong with it, if none of the players develop on the Vancouver side. Hughes vs Smith alone, I take Hughes 10 out of 10 times, but I guess it really depends where the pick ends up, how Foote develops and if Smith can continue to develop. If all 3 parts turn out to be 2nd pairing and 2nd line players and better, then it is a big win for Vancouver, if not, well I guess I am wrong and moving.

 

Again, if making a trade like this strengthens the team over all, and we end up winning a cup, then again, I would trade my mother. But I would need my crystal ball, before pulling the trigger. I would just like CDC to be open to moves like this. Especially on this forum, where we should debate decent proposals. I would think if you asked a New Jersey Devils fan, they would consider it an over payment by the Devils.  But it would take at least that much to make me happy. And I do recognize that it could backfire quickly. Which is why, I made the proposal in the first place, as I welcomed people to digest the proposal and give me their opinion on it.

Hey Janis,

I grew up getting my hockey fix in a very limited way, so glommed on to Wayne Gretzky and the Oiler because the hype around them was impossible to ignore.  Wasn't really a Canucks fan until the late 80's...kind of embarrassing but get it - before expansion you had to pick a team and Orr's was so good - only Wayne Gretzky can compare (with apologies to Mario).    My elders weren't Canuck fans because they didn't even exist yet.  

 

Don't know where Zepp went but know he's in the same demographic as me from past posting together.    

 

As far as Orr goes i was too young to appreciate anything he did - but heard about it enough growing up from my Uncles and older friends.   At the time i liked Bobby Clarke because of his smile and hair.   Both kick - ass.   

 

QHs isn't Bure.    Bure is the only guy i've seen on this team that is at a completely different level then 95% of the players out there.   QHs - Average in his own zone would be a little bit of a homer view.   I've seen Housley.   To me that's his peak.   Only if he adds a deadly shot to his arsenal though.   The best D's on the Canucks  i've seen over the years can control the entire outcome of the game from start to finish  - QHs hasn't done that once yet.  Jovo did though a couple times.  Reinhart too.   Even Ohlund did it a couple of times too.  Same as Babych and Lidster and Lumme.   Salo maybe too. 

 

In recent history the only guy i've seen do that on a regular basis, was EK.   Both pre and post Cooke ruining his ankle.   Leetch could do it, so could Pronger and Neidermayer.   Coffey of course as well.   And Larry Murphy.   And Scott Stevens ... well let's just say it's a very very long list. 

 

QHs wouldn't survive in other eras.   Doubt he'd be a defenseman at all.   That said he's a special player - how special is anyone's guess at this point.   He's no Borque - no Potvin, no Lidstrom that's a given.   And he's no Housley either.   He's kind of making his own special catagory - games changed so much.

 

Still he's ours, for sure he's special - and the potential is tantalizing enough for me at least to want to see where it goes.   That said - id trade him straight across for Heiskanen right now.  

 

Edit: And in all fairness to QHs, he's barely got his feet wet - and you can't ignore his offensive instincts and skating  - both are sublime. 

Edited February 23, 2021 by IBatch

[J.I.A.H.N]

4 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Hey Janis,

I grew up getting my hockey fix in a very limited way, so glommed on to Wayne Gretzky and the Oiler because the hype around them was impossible to ignore.  Wasn't really a Canucks fan until the late 80's...kind of embarrassing but get it - before expansion you had to pick a team and Orr's was so good - only Wayne Gretzky can compare (with apologies to Mario).    My elders weren't Canuck fans because they didn't even exist yet.  

 

Don't know where Zepp went but know he's in the same demographic as me from past posting together.    

 

As far as Orr goes i was too young to appreciate anything he did - but heard about it enough growing up from my Uncles and older friends.   At the time i liked Bobby Clarke because of his smile and hair.   Both kick - ass.   

 

QHs isn't Bure.    Bure is the only guy i've seen on this team that is at a completely different level then 95% of the players out there.   QHs - Average in his own zone would be a little bit of a homer view.   I've seen Housley.   To me that's his peak.   Only if he adds a deadly shot to his arsenal though.   The best D's on the Canucks  i've seen over the years can control the entire outcome of the game from start to finish  - QHs hasn't done that once yet.  Jovo did though a couple times.  Reinhart too.   Even Ohlund did it a couple of times too.  Same as Babych and Lidster and Lumme.   Salo maybe too. 

 

In recent history the only guy i've seen do that on a regular basis, was EK.   Both pre and post Cooke ruining his ankle.   Leetch could do it, so could Pronger and Neidermayer.   Coffey of course as well.   And Larry Murphy.   And Scott Stevens ... well let's just say it's a very very long list. 

 

QHs wouldn't survive in other eras.   Doubt he'd be a defenseman at all.   That said he's a special player - how special is anyone's guess at this point.   He's no Borque - no Potvin, no Lidstrom that's a given.   And he's no Housley either.   He's kind of making his own special catagory - games changed so much.

 

Still he's ours, for sure he's special - and the potential is tantalizing enough for me at least to want to see where it goes.   That said - id trade him straight across for Heiskanen right now.  

For sure!

 

I agree Quinn Hughes is special and IMO, what I suggested as a return, is indicative of how special he is.

In saying that, someone suggested getting a good stay at home defenseman for him........which I agree, may work

But at what cost? And who gives away, big strong, stay at home dmen?

To me, it's kind of robbing Peter to pay Paul, as what ever asset we use, will leave a void behind i his spot

And I am 150% not in favor of using our 2021 - 1st to get that player

 

I am, maybe to a fault, believe that our young guys will fill most voids

and feel that a left side of Hughes, Juolevi, and Rathbone will work for us for years

I also feel that Tryamkin needs to be brought in, and tried, as he brings many of the attributes we need to help Hughes

 

But I am also of the belief we are 2 years away from being that real dominant team

and I do not see the players needed on the RH side yet........hopefully Woo

But if things playout this year, we will be in position to draft a good RHD, which we never have had before

 

IMO, though , we have things to move around, I would not be adverse to moving some of them, to fill the hole

It is a game of chess for sure, and I think a wrong move could set us back........

It is a big picture problem for sure........If our forwards take a step forward, and dominate in the offensive zone more

It will help us defensively, so getting Podkolzin in will help for sure.......Hopefully!

I am also one of the few, from what I can tell, in having Pearson resigned........IMO, he is part of our solution

and bringing in Podkolzin and letting Pearson walk is not a net gain, immediately

So, I would like to keep him...short term

IMO, having a strong 3rd line, will help out our forwards and our defense

 

It is such a domino type situation, and one move depends on another, for the most part,

which IMO, shows us we are not finished our rebuild, which Benning and others seem to think we are.

 

This is one of the reason's I felt the urge to through out this option.......as it fills the holes much quicker

It is a 3 for 1................special deal for Tuesday

But, when you look at the teams needs, and the, long term success, I believe you need a young, big, and strong talented team

To mature together, with veterans to fill in holes, not the other way around.

[ImConfused]

13 hours ago, Convincing John said:

We have been waiting +50 years for a D man like Quinn Hughes. If I had to pick 1 untouchable, it’s him. 

Preach it brother

 

/thread lol

[IBatch]

18 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

For sure!

 

I agree Quinn Hughes is special and IMO, what I suggested as a return, is indicative of how special he is.

In saying that, someone suggested getting a good stay at home defenseman for him........which I agree, may work

But at what cost? And who gives away, big strong, stay at home dmen?

To me, it's kind of robbing Peter to pay Paul, as what ever asset we use, will leave a void behind i his spot

And I am 150% not in favor of using our 2021 - 1st to get that player

 

I am, maybe to a fault, believe that our young guys will fill most voids

and feel that a left side of Hughes, Juolevi, and Rathbone will work for us for years

I also feel that Tryamkin needs to be brought in, and tried, as he brings many of the attributes we need to help Hughes

 

But I am also of the belief we are 2 years away from being that real dominant team

and I do not see the players needed on the RH side yet........hopefully Woo

But if things playout this year, we will be in position to draft a good RHD, which we never have had before

 

IMO, though , we have things to move around, I would not be adverse to moving some of them, to fill the hole

It is a game of chess for sure, and I think a wrong move could set us back........

It is a big picture problem for sure........If our forwards take a step forward, and dominate in the offensive zone more

It will help us defensively, so getting Podkolzin in will help for sure.......Hopefully!

I am also one of the few, from what I can tell, in having Pearson resigned........IMO, he is part of our solution

and bringing in Podkolzin and letting Pearson walk is not a net gain, immediately

So, I would like to keep him...short term

IMO, having a strong 3rd line, will help out our forwards and our defense

 

It is such a domino type situation, and one move depends on another, for the most part,

which IMO, shows us we are not finished our rebuild, which Benning and others seem to think we are.

 

This is one of the reason's I felt the urge to through out this option.......as it fills the holes much quicker

It is a 3 for 1................special deal for Tuesday

But, when you look at the teams needs, and the, long term success, I believe you need a young, big, and strong talented team

To mature together, with veterans to fill in holes, not the other way around.

The last sentence - unfortunately these days that's how rebuilds happen.   Both Detroit and OTT are adding "placeholders" right now while waiting (and i'm sure hoping) their ELC high level prospects click.   CAL is one of the best examples of modern day rebuilding.   A little bit of everything, and still failing.   Too many teams, too much talent dilution.  Very hard to do what Holland managed with Detroit - and what Wilson committed to as well... Vancouver/Detroit and SJ won more games then anyone over a 14 year period, all have had to, or are about to, pay the piper.   At least Detroit won one more cup and made it to a final after so fans have to be more patient there right? 

 

All i think we have as of right now - is a CHANCE to be something special and for sure QHs is part of that either as a trade to plug holes, or as a member.   I haven't been attached to any one player since the Linden era.  And i think perspective, maturity and insight come with the territory.   For me Bieksa was the my favourite player from the last core.   The previous one either Jovo or Ohlund.    

 

Before that?  Pretty much anyone who wore our jersey.    I don't get too attached to players like i used too.   Right now if the trade was right absolutely make it.   Myers has endeared me a little.  Same with BB and EP...QHs...i'm on the fence still but of course happy he's here too.  

 

Watched the same thing happen to folks ten years younger then me fall in love with the WCE era team hard.  Sopel..Allen...Aucion.   Cooke?  lol sorry Diduck-Babych, Lumme-Murzyn hit the heart strings so much more.  

 

Have to say hockey is so toned down, slowly over time - that it's a little heartbreaking too.   Not a lot different then women's hockey or an old all-star game minus all the ridiculous calls made.   Burke touched on this a few weeks ago.  Refs are so whistle happy these days hockey is barely a contact sport anymore.   Concussion awareness and enforcers a footnote now on the history of the sport  .... fans delusional enough to think the players today are so much better yet finishing a check is now counted as a hit, no red-line - no extra pass .... what would Orr do today?   I'm thinking he'd score 160 points on a team like TB.   Bure would score 70-80 per year without a redline and no Darian Hatcher/Ludwig types legally allowed to hook and hold and grab etc...

 

Wayne Gretzky?   Well in his 30's he outscored a pile of guys winning his last Art Ross didn't he?    And then just became somewhat regular all-star until his last year in the dead puck era. 

 

Sorry for the rant. I like our team.   That said - i'm thoroughly unimpressed with the product.   It could - and has been - so so so much better then it is today. 

 

Id also trade anyone on our team right now for a chance at cup.  

[J.I.A.H.N]

@IBatch

 

Yes, My guy was Bure, but before that Linden and before that Smyl.....................common theme.............no days off..............absolutely never!

I do not see that yet on the Canucks, or at least not at a high level. Hoglander may be that guy, with his never ending energizer bunny efforts

but it is too soon!

 

But getting back to my original proposal.......and remember, my date for when they will be top 10 is 3 years from this year.................so let me illustrate

 

Foote.............Pettersson..............Boeser                                  Smith..................2021 1st                                     Demko

Hoglander.........Horvat.......... Podkolzin                                     Juolevi................Woo                                           DiPietro

Motte................2021 1st...............Lind                                     Rathbone.............xxxxxxxx

xxxxxx..............McEwen..........Lockwood

 

Now that  would be 2 top 10 -2021 1sts (3 years from today)

 

That does not include Pearson, Miller, Schmidt, Myers, Holtby, Virtanen, Gaudette or Tryamkin. who would or could still be there.

It also does not include any other picks from 2021, 2022 or 2023

Or any UFA's that might be available.

 

Now I put it down on paper only to illustrate, and not to say in absolute terms. I know that you understand that, but there will be people that take this at face value.

 

Up until that date, I think you try to move pieces around while not weakening the team anymore. Personally, I would be focusing on a proper 3rd line center who age might fit in with the group 3 years from now.......some one who is 23/24 today, and who strength is in faceoffs and defensive play, but still has some offensive up side.......names that come to mind are Eriksson Ek (24) and Scott Laughton (26), both would be out standing 3rd line centers. Ek would cost more, but that is the type of player.

 

This year is now a write for me, and I see it more as a year of building, which means moving players at the TDL......

 

In the end, I want as big, as fast, and as aggressive as we can manage.