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

[Rumour] Sam Reinhart open to a trade back to West Coast


Recommended Posts

50 minutes ago, garthsbutcher said:

Would you trade Horvat for Reinhart and a swap of first round pics?

Depends on the lottery draw.  If Buffalo gets the first overall pick and we end up 10th, then I would consider it.  Depends on how high Benning is on Power and/or Beniers.  If the deal is Reinhart and Owen Power for Horvat and Kent Johnson, I'd probably do it.  Then I would go hard for a 3C in free agency or via trade.

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

Would you trade Horvat for Reinhart and a swap of first round pics?

Nah. Reinhardt is half the player Horvat is. 

  • Hydration 2
  • Vintage 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Depends on the lottery draw.  If Buffalo gets the first overall pick and we end up 10th, then I would consider it.  Depends on how high Benning is on Power and/or Beniers.  If the deal is Reinhart and Owen Power for Horvat and Kent Johnson, I'd probably do it.  Then I would go hard for a 3C in free agency or via trade.

That is a real tough one.  I like Horvat's game better than Reinhart and I don't really know how Power's play will be in the NHL.  Some of these big dmen can dominate in junior years, but the advantage in physical feature fade once you get into the NHL.

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, higgyfan said:

That is a real tough one.  I like Horvat's game better than Reinhart and I don't really know how Power's play will be in the NHL.  Some of these big dmen can dominate in junior years, but the advantage in physical feature fade once you get into the NHL.

I think Power will be a poor man's Hedman.  He will be a #2 in the NHL.  Reinhart can be a 30 goal scorer easy.  If you can trade Horvat and a #10 pick for Reinhart and a #2 defenceman I think you do it.  

 

Benning could also be high on a guy like Johnson, or any other player available at #10, so like I said it depends on how high Benning is on Power and even Beniers, who could also be the #1 pick, especially if Buffalo trades Eichel.

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would give Buffalo our first in this year's draft for Reinhart, (lottery protected) and our 2nd round pick next year. Would not trade Horvat, he's more valuable of the two.

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

I think Power will be a poor man's Hedman.  He will be a #2 in the NHL.  Reinhart can be a 30 goal scorer easy.  If you can trade Horvat and a #10 pick for Reinhart and a #2 defenceman I think you do it.  

 

Benning could also be high on a guy like Johnson, or any other player available at #10, so like I said it depends on how high Benning is on Power and even Beniers, who could also be the #1 pick, especially if Buffalo trades Eichel.

Bo came close to 30goal in the 2018-2019 season with 27gs.  He will likely reach 30 goals without the pressures of Covid cutting up seasons.  He is definitely a clutch player, who can bulldoze through most dmen in the league, all the while having to weigh in as the premier defensive line and take on some very highly skilled opposition.  His leadership, passion and tremendous drive makes him a very important player on our team.  I just don't see Reinhart measuring up to all that.  I do like Reinhart a lot and I think they could sign him in his UFA year, but it will be for ++$, which he will get anyways if this trade happens.  I think he would be a great fit on our team.

 

Receiving Buff's #1 pick is definitely a game changer.  It seems like a crazy draft this year and difficult to know who really are the top 10 picks as they are constantly changing.  Hopefully the team scouting group will be able to find the right choice.

 

I do like that you are thinking out of the box.  It's time to fill some spots on the team and a top 6 goal scorer, RD and 3C are not strong points in the prospect system.  JB will have to them in trade, top 5 pick in the draft or UFA.  It's a tall order, but if he can ditch some cap space, find a good trading partner or get a higher pick, he might be able to fill a couple of the roles and maybe use the UFA to plug someone into the 3C role short term (maybe Sutter-if he's willing to go cheap will little term).

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Trading Bo to get Reinhart will not improve the team.  We would be losing a top 6 forward to get a top 6 forward.  So it's a lateral move.  The goal is to gain.  So trading futures (picks) and or potential (prospects) is the route to take if we want Reinhart. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

but none of that changes the fact that Nashville received a benefit that we didn't. If the NHL cared about treating teams as equally as possible, they would have allowed us to put Li on LTIR vs just a cap hit. 

 

Its simply unfair that Nashville gets any kind of favourable rule change and we didn't. 

 

What benefit?  They will still have to cover those 20M+.  Unlike Vancouver, they never tried to circumvent the cap or get a benefit out of it.

 

The Canucks recapture penalty is less than the AAV so it doesn’t change.

 

No team finished with more than 20M in cap space this season per CapFriendly.  It’s simply not a realistic amount.  The highest was NJD with 10.5M.  Only 3 teams had more than 8M - NJD, LA and Ottawa. 

 

Capping the annual amount to the contracts AAV seems pragmatic.  If Luongo had retired his last year, instead of having ~8M on their books Vancouver would have had ~5.5M followed by ~2.5M.  It’s still significant but more manageable.

 

Edited by mll
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Patel Bure said:

2021 1st + Rathbone +Virtanen *might* get you Reinhart but I don’t think it would be worth it.

Bone is far more important to our team than Rhino.  We will keep our Bone, and they can keep their Rhino.  

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Devron44 said:

Also Bo isn’t getting traded, why suggest such a thing 

I’d trade Bo, but not for Rhino.  Bo is by far the superior player.  Rhino isn’t a guy we should even be considering.  If we trade Bo, it’s Eichel coming back.  

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Alflives said:

I’d trade Bo, but not for Rhino.  Bo is by far the superior player.  Rhino isn’t a guy we should even be considering.  If we trade Bo, it’s Eichel coming back.  

Trading Bo takes away one of the premier FO% centres in the league. If puck possession is a key ingredient in Cup play then you don’t make that deal. Winnipeg dominated the Oilers in the FO circle yesterday. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Boudrias said:

Trading Bo takes away one of the premier FO% centres in the league. If puck possession is a key ingredient in Cup play then you don’t make that deal. Winnipeg dominated the Oilers in the FO circle yesterday. 

Love Bo.  He’s great, and our Captain.  I would trade Bo for Eichel, but certainly not for Rhino.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Alflives said:

Love Bo.  He’s great, and our Captain.  I would trade Bo for Eichel, but certainly not for Rhino.  

That would be a bold move. I would ask whether the Canucks can get what Eichel offers by committee? FO % could be more critical if Sutter walks and Beagle goes on LTIR. One of the major weaknesses on the Sabres is puck possession. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, mll said:

What benefit?  They will still have to cover those 20M+.  Unlike Vancouver, they never tried to circumvent the cap or get a benefit out of it.

 

The Canucks recapture penalty is less than the AAV so it doesn’t change.

 

No team finished with more than 20M in cap space this season per CapFriendly.  It’s simply not a realistic amount.  The highest was NJD with 10.5M.  Only 3 teams had more than 8M - NJD, LA and Ottawa. 

 

Capping the annual amount to the contracts AAV seems pragmatic.  If Luongo had retired his last year, instead of having ~8M on their books Vancouver would have had ~5.5M followed by ~2.5M.  It’s still significant but more manageable.

 

OK let me try it this way. I know you're pretty set that the treatment was fair, but hear me out.

 

1. Nashville was given a benefit the Canucks were not.

2. The benefit was applied unequally. 

 

The justification for Bettman  changing the rule, was that it was somehow unfair to Nashville. But show me where in the CBA it says that Nashville deserves special protection from offer sheets? The CBA already has a remedy for that in transfer of picks. Nashville also had a choice here, they could take the picks for Weber, match or try harder before the offer sheet period to get a deal done, or trade Weber and let another team match. They have several CBA options here, they were not some kind of passive victim, they chose to match a front loaded deal eyes open, under the CBA rules that no one was breaking. 

 

So if 20m in cap space is unrealistic, that just means the whole conception of the recapture is unfair and not well thought out. Hence the beneficial change that allows Nashville to survive a more reasonable cap hit.

 

Where this is unfair is we were not given equal treatment. If Bettman made the rule that all recapture penalty team can extend the cap hit, then fine thats fair. But we were not given the same opportunity to spread out our cap recapture. If we could spread out Lu's recapture over 6 years instead of 3, that would make a big difference.

 

What you're doing is saying its fair because our recapture is lower than Nashvilles. But thats like saying a bad traffic law is OK if one person gets a lower fine than another, but its still a bad law. 

 

The fact that our recapture penalty doesn't change is at the heart of why its unfair. Nashville gets to spread their penalty out, we don't. That is unequal treatment. 

 

 

___

 

and all of this ^ doesn't take into account the benefits to Florida, and Lu's personal benefit by being put on a management track. 

 

It stinks mll, from more than one angle. 

 

Edited by Jimmy McGill
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Alflives said:

I’d trade Bo, but not for Rhino.  Bo is by far the superior player.  Rhino isn’t a guy we should even be considering.  If we trade Bo, it’s Eichel coming back.  

I think letting markstrom and tanev go had a negative impact on our team.  I'm not saying we should have kept them but they were close with there teammates and I think it affected the dressing room. 

Trading Bo is pretty much the last thing this team needs 

It shouldn't even be discussed. 

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

Love Bo.  He’s great, and our Captain.  I would trade Bo for Eichel, but certainly not for Rhino.  

That would be a sad sight and cruel to be honest. But I get what your saying. Bo’s value is very high 

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...