Popular Post Convincing John Posted March 10, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted March 10, 2021 Motte in 2 years vs a 2nd or late first rounder in 2 years? This isn’t even a conversation, Motte is a better player than whoever that will be 99/100. The only way Motte should be traded is if we receive a prospect further back in development or a RHD prospect. 1 1 3 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 9 minutes ago, BarnBurner said: Why would you even consider trading him? A second is a completely unknown commodity. Not a sharp move. Personally, I don't want to. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsurrey Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 Only players unmoveable are Demko , Pettersson, Horvat ,Boeser, Miller, Hoglander and Hughes. You take offers on anyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-AJ- Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 I'll be blunt, I'm not sure Motte's even worth as little as any old 2nd rounder. Those are the kinds of guys who are glue for contender teams. Maybe I take a top 40 pick for him, but I'm not sure about lower than that. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarnBurner Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 1 minute ago, Convincing John said: Motte in 2 years vs a 2nd or late first rounder in 2 years? This isn’t even a conversation, Motte is a better player than whoever that will be 99/100. The only way Motte should be traded is if we receive a prospect further back in development or a RHD prospect. I agree. Why would you trade Motte, the way he's developing and the player he's becoming for a 2nd? That is absolutely hilarious!!! Wow! Some people are on serious drugs. Give me their dealer's number! Haha! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post oldnews Posted March 10, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted March 10, 2021 (edited) Of course they're calling for Motte. But they can go have sex with themselves.... He's a steal - a player you win with - who drives the game as much as anyone on the roster. He's also not done improving - and has that critical 'foundation' to his game that key secondary 'core' players like Hansen, Burrows, Higgins did....guys like that tend to be undervalued, particularly in the earlier stages of their career. 42 minutes ago, King Heffy said: I wouldn't trade Motte for anything less than a 2nd. A 2nd round pick has approximately 17.5 to 25% of becoming an average NHL player (depending on where that pick falls in the round. Lower those odds if you're wanting a better than average player - which I consider a talented, hard working, two way Tyler Motte to be - but that's my personal take - I don't devalue players who play primarily a defensive role. For me - I would not deal Motte for those odds. Perspectives on draft picks are interesting - people tend to assume that every draft pick - being a lottery ticket - will have outlier value. When we think of a 2nd round pick - we tend to think of Demko, or Hoglander - as opposed to Alexandre Mallet to Taylor Ellington. Part of the 'problem' is that the Benning era Canucks' drafting has produced more outliers than can be 'expected' - and so the value of draft picks tends to be inflated in the mindset of most fans. This team has a steady stream of prospects incoming - and imo - is likely to continue to - at least enough to produce a reasonable push of youth for what will likely be less roster spots up for grabs. Imo that is the key to a 'rething' - not a tankdown where you bottleneck and have a few years of stockpiled picks - but the long game - where you look to produce a sustaining continuity of incoming youth. So I don't see the point in selling Tyler Motte - and certainly not for a longshot pick. But it does revisit the market value that Benning et al got out of that Vanek rental - arguably a solid uptick on the mid round pick that people were furious the team did not get. If someone seriously wanted Motte - be prepared to part with a far closer to NHL-ready, even more primary need - ie a RHD that has solid draft plus years to assess - and has greater upside to compensate for being less proven/higher risk. A 2nd round pick doesn't cut it. Edited March 10, 2021 by oldnews 1 4 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarnBurner Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 1 minute ago, -AJ- said: I'll be blunt, I'm not sure Motte's even worth as little as any old 2nd rounder. Those are the kinds of guys who are glue for contender teams. Maybe I take a top 40 pick for him, but I'm not sure about lower than that. For someone like you who is writing articles about the midway point of the season... you would actually give away Motte for perhaps a 2nd? Geez, thank God you're not in charge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-AJ- Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 Just now, BarnBurner said: For someone like you who is writing articles about the midway point of the season... you would actually give away Motte for perhaps a 2nd? Geez, thank God you're not in charge. Does me writing about the midway point have anything to do with anything? I'm not sure I see the connection. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 Love Motter, but our 4th line has looked good without him, and he's not really a 3rd line guy. If we can get a 2nd rounder for him, I'd consider it. If not just keep him. Schmidt I see as a replacement for Edler, we should let Edler walk and use that cap to retain Hughes and Petey or try add a top 4 RD somehow. Keep Schmidt though. Unless someone massively overpays with a 1st rounder and a B prospect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AV. Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 Just now, Coconuts said: Even if we are, that puts Motte at 28 which should be a prime age for him, it's not as if he won't still be useful during now and then Nothing wrong with capitalizing on assets, but there are decisions to be made regarding who's worth keeping and I feel the players I mentioned are The problem with drafting is also the development time required for prospects to transition into players who even remotely resemble the guys we've traded away Stocking the cupboards while trying to compete is about balance, not shipping everyone out the moment the playoffs appear to be in doubt For what it's worth, I'm happy to keep Motte and Schmidt. But if offers come along that make sense or are beyond their value, it's crucial we pull the trigger. A lot of players can come in and do what Motte does. Less so for Schmidt but he's also replaceable. Development time is key but with our competitive timeline being pushed back by 2 years, we don't necessarily have a need for picks to develop straight away. According to the experts on this board, Lind/Gadjovich/Woo are all studs in the making so we should be fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post fanfor42 Posted March 10, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted March 10, 2021 49 minutes ago, CRAZY_4_NAZZY said: https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/31-thoughts-eichel-injury-latest-bad-news-sabres-cursed-year/ Elliotte Friedman's 31 thoughts has some Canucks in the article. I'd be interested to see what the market sees in value of Motte, Schmidt, and Hamonic. First inclination is nah I wouldn't dare trade the 3 right now, but its not hurt to explore what teams would be willing to shell out for these guys. Tampa Bay last year traded 1st round picks to acquire Barclay Goodrow and Blake Coleman who are considered bottom six players and with friendly deals. Not saying Motte gets that but what is a team willing to offer? Certainly worth exploring. What a world where reporting is just made up nonsense. Elliotte says it sounds like there's interest in Tyler Motte. No quote. Doesn't say by who. Nothing to back it up. Then he says he thinks Canucks were asked about Nate Schmidt. Here he doesn't even say that it happened, just that he thinks it happened. Then finally he just says he wonders if there is interest in Hamonic. No quote. No source just his own mind thinking out loud. THIS IS SUCH CRAP. Nothing here is substantiated in any way. Don't waste your time on this nonsense. 1 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 Can’t trade Motte. Schmidt? He’s finally turned his game around recently, just need to see more offense. Hamonic? Sure. Next year probably includes: Edler (cheaper, short-term deal), Hughes, Schmidt, Myers, Juolevi, Tryamkin(?), Rathbone(?), Rafferty (?). Probably have room for one-depth guy - is it Benn? Hamonic? Other? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AV. Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 For the sake of context, Tyler Toffoli - a superior player to Tyler Motte - fetched a mid-round 2nd and a B+ prospect. As much as we all love Tyler Motte, you'd be so foolish to turn down a 2nd. I get that he means a lot to us but value is value. If that 2nd turns out to be a Nils Hoglander - a player that the experts on this board have already proclaimed as a legitimate NHL talent, you're laughing all the way to the bank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Convincing John Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 To Columbus: Tyler Motte To Van: Andrew Peeke Torts would need lose fitting trousers if he had Motte on his bench. Andrew Peeke is a underachieving RHD with a monster shot. Perfect partner for QH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck73_3 Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 I'd entertain offers on Hamonic but hands down keeper in Schmidt and Motte 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khay Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 58 minutes ago, CRAZY_4_NAZZY said: https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/31-thoughts-eichel-injury-latest-bad-news-sabres-cursed-year/ Elliotte Friedman's 31 thoughts has some Canucks in the article. I'd be interested to see what the market sees in value of Motte, Schmidt, and Hamonic. First inclination is nah I wouldn't dare trade the 3 right now, but its not hurt to explore what teams would be willing to shell out for these guys. Tampa Bay last year traded 1st round picks to acquire Barclay Goodrow and Blake Coleman who are considered bottom six players and with friendly deals. Not saying Motte gets that but what is a team willing to offer? Certainly worth exploring. Nah is the first reaction for me too. But if it's 1st for Motte? That's gotta be considered. Nah to any trade involving Schmidt. And I would trade Hamonic only if he isn't interested in returning next season. I like his game and I think he has done a good job with Hughes. Our defence strung together some tightly played games. Now is not the time to break it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 1 minute ago, Alain Vigneault said: For what it's worth, I'm happy to keep Motte and Schmidt. But if offers come along that make sense or are beyond their value, it's crucial we pull the trigger. A lot of players can come in and do what Motte does. Less so for Schmidt but he's also replaceable. Development time is key but with our competitive timeline being pushed back by 2 years, we don't necessarily have a need for picks to develop straight away. According to the experts on this board, Lind/Gadjovich/Woo are all studs in the making so we should be fine. You always listen to offers as a GM, if you ain't doing that you ain't doing your job. Fans can afford to be sentimental, hockey executives don't get so much of that luxury. It's one thing to appear cynical regarding the views of other board members, but our drafting has been much improved. You make a fair argument regarding how a timeline would shift, but who's to say we don't have success before 2023 or 2024? It'd take a high second for me to part with Motte, because he provides tangible benefit to the club as opposed to unknown potential. I don't see Schmidt going anywhere, even if Edler comes back next season he's only got so much time left as a player. I could see Schmidt thriving under a more competent coaching staff too. Schmidt's young enough that he should be an effective D for the remainder of his contract. As for Hamonic, I think the value he'd add by giving Quinn a stable D partner outweighs the benefit of moving him for an asset or two. At his age he's not a long-term solution, but him costing us nothing but money allows us to continue hunting for/developing a player who may be able to play with Hughes on a more long-term basis. Putting Hughes on the ice in a position to succeed could go a long way to altering any purported timeline. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khay Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 5 minutes ago, Alain Vigneault said: For the sake of context, Tyler Toffoli - a superior player to Tyler Motte - fetched a mid-round 2nd and a B+ prospect. As much as we all love Tyler Motte, you'd be so foolish to turn down a 2nd. I get that he means a lot to us but value is value. If that 2nd turns out to be a Nils Hoglander - a player that the experts on this board have already proclaimed as a legitimate NHL talent, you're laughing all the way to the bank. True. With JB at the helm, that 2nd rounder can be next Hoglander or Demko. If Hawryluk plays well, Motte may be tradeable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 Just now, khay said: True. With JB at the helm, that 2nd rounder can be next Hoglander or Demko. If Hawryluk plays well, Motte may be tradeable. 32-40 range is where we have hit money. Not as keen when we start talking 50+ 2nd round picks. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drakrami Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 55 minutes ago, Alain Vigneault said: If a team offers a 2nd (or more) for Motte, you take it. By management's own admission that the team is 2 years away, you also take any offer that involves good youth/picks for Schmidt, since he'll be in his early 30s by then. Any round of pick for Hamonic the team should probably take as well. The Canucks are being handed lifelines so they better make use of them. Then again, this team isn't ran by the smartest guys. lol, you buy into that? They "say" we are 2 years away because they don't know wtf went wrong this season and "figured" it will take 2 years to correct and our young stars "should" be in their prime. So instead of a grand 2 year plan, it is more like a lot of hoping at Canucks management. 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