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

The Real reason for picking up Madison Bowey, not what you think. And a Clarification

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Gollumpus said:

Assuming Seattle did take Myers, what asset(s) would you be willing to use as trade bait for a replacement? Motte? Lind? A high pick? RD aren't inexpensive in trade, nad usually seem to be more so if the other GM recognizes your team's need.

 

And signing free agent RD (probably) won't be inexpensive, however, the Canucks can probably get someone who is of average ability. Any thoughts on who the team should target?

 

                                       regards,  G.

I understand what your saying but I’m pretty sure another schmidt deal could be out there. A mid round pick or a b level prospect to a team to get something rather than nothing possibly. I’m not going to list every player possible but looking at teams that could be looking to move a dman due to too many to protect. 
anaheim. Buffalo. Carolina. Colorado. Columbus. Florida. La. Montreal. Minnesota. Philly. St. Louis. Tampa. Washington. 
 

for example nik Jensen from caps rd 2.5 x 2 years after this one 30 years old. Defensive dman.  Caps have Carlson, orlov, schultz, Jensen, van riemsdyk, Dillon to protect. 
 

and if myers did get taken and hamonic resigned (as he’s looked good with Hughes) for probably around 2.5 mil. U would have 2 right shot dmen for 1 mil less than myers both are better than myers (in my mind) defensively not as good offensively.

And Jensen pks I’d argue better than myers. 
Jensen probably acquired for 2021 3rd

Edited by Bure1010
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, wallstreetamigo said:

I think realistically a competent GM should be able to get some value trading Virtanen.

Keep in mind the team trading for him will likely expose him, and we now lose something else.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, King Heffy said:

Keep in mind the team trading for him will likely expose him, and we now lose something else.

Maybe, maybe not. Another team might genuinely have a forward protection spot available. 

 

Its probably realistic to think Elias, Boeser, Miller, Horvat, Pearson, Lind, and Motte will be protected for forwards. Outside of them and Virtanen who else could we lose at forward that would be even a reasonably big deal?

 

Myers, Schmidt, and Juolevi for D unless Benning re-signs Edler or Hamonic before the ed. I doubt either re-signs without an agreement to not be exposed. In that event they will probably leave Juolevi exposed and Seattle would absolutely take him if they did.

 

I would expose Myers tbh. Because its unlikely Seattle would take him and if they did at least it frees up cap so the worst case is not so bad.

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

Maybe, maybe not. Another team might genuinely have a forward protection spot available. 

 

Its probably realistic to think Elias, Boeser, Miller, Horvat, Pearson, Lind, and Motte will be protected for forwards. Outside of them and Virtanen who else could we lose at forward that would be even a reasonably big deal?

 

Myers, Schmidt, and Juolevi for D unless Benning re-signs Edler or Hamonic before the ed. I doubt either re-signs without an agreement to not be exposed. In that event they will probably leave Juolevi exposed and Seattle would absolutely take him if they did.

 

I would expose Myers tbh. Because its unlikely Seattle would take him and if they did at least it frees up cap so the worst case is not so bad.

I'd prefer to keep Gadjovich instead of Virtanen.

  • Vintage 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, King Heffy said:

I'd prefer to keep Gadjovich instead of Virtanen.

Then trade Virtanen and use one of those spots to protect him instead. In my example Virtanen isnt protected. To me Pearson should not be protected. Lind, Gadjovich, and possibly Motte should.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see the Canucks wanting Virtanen selected and dont necessarily disagree. I am not sure Seattle selects him even if exposed though. His contract structure makes him pretty risky on the re-sign.

 

The real problem is protecting Pearson and Myers (if another of our D get re-signed and needs protection which I expect to happen).

 

There is literally no reason the Canucks should have to lose an asset like Gadjovich, Lind, Juolevi, or even the hated Virtanen for nothing. 

 

At worst they could let the expansion draft shed some cap even if they lose a player like Myers. 

 

The Canucks need a new management group with a much different plan and a lot more skill in many areas to get to the next stage.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Then trade Virtanen and use one of those spots to protect him instead. In my example Virtanen isnt protected. To me Pearson should not be protected. Lind, Gadjovich, and possibly Motte should.

Not a lot of teams are lining up to trade for a winger who doesn't score, doesn't backcheck, doesn't use his linemates offensively, doesn't hit enough, doesn't stick up for teammates, doesn't stay in shape, and doesn't seem to care that his coach has an issue with these deficiencies.  He's especially unattractive as a trade target due to being overpaid and eligible to be taken in the expansion draft.  I'd rather lose Jake for free than get a 6th rounder back and lose Gadjovich in the expansion draft.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, King Heffy said:

Not a lot of teams are lining up to trade for a winger who doesn't score, doesn't backcheck, doesn't use his linemates offensively, doesn't hit enough, doesn't stick up for teammates, doesn't stay in shape, and doesn't seem to care that his coach has an issue with these deficiencies.  He's especially unattractive as a trade target due to being overpaid and eligible to be taken in the expansion draft.  I'd rather lose Jake for free than get a 6th rounder back and lose Gadjovich in the expansion draft.

This is pretty over the top. Benning re-signed him last year. If he was as bad as you suggest why did he? His contract is the only part of him other teams would hesitate over and thats solely on Benning.

 

He is still young enough to rebound, is big, fast, has shown some offensive ability, and lots of GM's would take that kind of potential especially for next to nothing. Benning's contracts tend to make players hard to trade though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Phil_314 said:

Okay, ignoring this season, what about last season's play-in's?

I thought he had a good bubble playoffs, was effective most nights and was able to move up and down the lineup as needed.

 

How about his steady progression until this ridiculous season?  His production has gone up steadily, despite getting low mins in the bottom 6.  His underlying numbers were also quite good.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, wallstreetamigo said:

This is pretty over the top. Benning re-signed him last year. If he was as bad as you suggest why did he? His contract is the only part of him other teams would hesitate over and thats solely on Benning.

 

He is still young enough to rebound, is big, fast, has shown some offensive ability, and lots of GM's would take that kind of potential especially for next to nothing. Benning's contracts tend to make players hard to trade though.

Personally I wouldn't have re-signed him.  The only reason Benning did was to avoid uncertainty in salary arbitration.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, King Heffy said:

Not a lot of teams are lining up to trade for a winger who doesn't score, doesn't backcheck, doesn't use his linemates offensively, doesn't hit enough, doesn't stick up for teammates, doesn't stay in shape, and doesn't seem to care that his coach has an issue with these deficiencies.  He's especially unattractive as a trade target due to being overpaid and eligible to be taken in the expansion draft.  I'd rather lose Jake for free than get a 6th rounder back and lose Gadjovich in the expansion draft.

What are you smoking 

 

benedict cumberbatch wtf GIF

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think there's any intention of playing Bowey, he might get a couple of games in (not sure if he has to this season to qualify for ED) but he's here just to expose so we can protect our main defencemen. Smart move by JB but just about every trade JB has made in the last 2 years has been revolving around the expansion draft, and signings included. We can only hope Seattle pick him or Holtby, otherwise they might be able to snag a nice 3rd/4th line forward. 

 

Hopefully we will protect all our main forwards (Motte included) and expose someone like Beagle or Roussel who they can snap away and save us some cap space too.

 

If they don't pick Bowey I guess he's going to end up in Utica to be honest, but a righty might slot in nicely alongside our stacked left, depending on who JB re-signs this off-season.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DownUndaCanuck said:

I don't think there's any intention of playing Bowey, he might get a couple of games in (not sure if he has to this season to qualify for ED) but he's here just to expose so we can protect our main defencemen. Smart move by JB but just about every trade JB has made in the last 2 years has been revolving around the expansion draft, and signings included. We can only hope Seattle pick him or Holtby, otherwise they might be able to snag a nice 3rd/4th line forward. 

 

Hopefully we will protect all our main forwards (Motte included) and expose someone like Beagle or Roussel who they can snap away and save us some cap space too.

 

If they don't pick Bowey I guess he's going to end up in Utica to be honest, but a righty might slot in nicely alongside our stacked left, depending on who JB re-signs this off-season.

 

The Seattle expansion draft is the very least the Canucks have to worry about.  That's not a compliment. I'm surprised there is so much hand wringing here about it.  Add Bowey to the list of under-performing  eligible contracts in every position, goaltending, defence, and forward,  to expose to them.  One time when JB's underwhelming legacy of acquisitions will work in our favour.  So thanks Jim, I guess?

 

Its teams like the Wild, the Avalanche, and the Lightening, who's GM's brilliant work will be punished that have to worry more.  The teams that have put together a deep base of talent.  Those teams and their fans have to steel themselves up for the real possibility of losing a very good player.  (or a 1st round pick if they make another type of deal). 

 

Put it this way, by the time of the Seattle draft, the Canucks will not be one of the teams whose pick Seattle will be salivating over.

  • Hydration 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...