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

[wallstreetamigo]

20 minutes ago, Alienhuggyflow said:

Gotta say we see things very differently. I think as bad as things were last season without an insanely crap schedule, Covid and Petey getting hurt we make the playoffs. The team like most of us predicted would be better after that dumb 19 games in 27 days with no practise and no pre-season to start the year and they were much better 12-5 even without Petey until covid gutted the team and had them play an unprecedented final 20 games. I guess we find out in a couple of months.   

So, if the best case scenario happened in every way for the Canucks they might have made the playoffs? Seems like that would be true for any team.

 

Making the playoffs or not isnt a win to anyone but the owners pocketbook. Lets be clear on that. Because without significant, fundamental changes, the Canucks are not an actual contender. They wont luck their way to a cup just by making the playoffs as no team ever has and this team inspires no confidence they could be the ones to buck that trend.

 

The reality is they played in easily the worst division in hockey and were terrible. In a better division, which they likely will be in next year, they have a lot of work to do to improve at all.

 

I think its entirely possible the Canucks end up close to the bottom of the league again. It wil take a lot of improvement to move up.

[N4ZZY]

1 minute ago, wallstreetamigo said:

So, if the best case scenario happened in every way for the Canucks they might have made the playoffs? Seems like that would be true for any team.

 

Making the playoffs or not isnt a win to anyone but the owners pocketbook. Lets be clear on that. Because without significant, fundamental changes, the Canucks are not an actual contender. They wont luck their way to a cup just by making the playoffs as no team ever has and this team inspires no confidence they could be the ones to buck that trend.

 

The reality is they played in easily the worst division in hockey and were terrible. In a better division, which they likely will be in next year, they have a lot of work to do to improve at all.

 

I think its entirely possible the Canucks end up close to the bottom of the league again. It wil take a lot of improvement to move up.

Wouldn’t be surprising if the Canucks were near the bottom again. Probably won’t be as bad as we need to be to get a top pick, but bad enough where we’re out of the top three. 

[wallstreetamigo]

Just now, N4ZZY said:

Wouldn’t be surprising if the Canucks were near the bottom again. Probably won’t be as bad as we need to be to get a top pick, but bad enough where we’re out of the top three. 

And I know people think I am a hater but to me that would be just fine. This is not the year to go for it. Thats next summer.

 

Sign 1 year placeholder guys, get another good prospect in the draft this year, trade expiribg vets at the deadline to stock up on tradable assets, then use all the cap soace snd assets to go get the half dozen guys you will need to complement the core.

 

I will be happy if the Canucks do this. And would even jump on the dont fire Benning train for not making the playoffs this year and instead setting up for next summer. To me, this would equal Benning learning from his previous mistakes actually.

[N4ZZY]

12 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

And I know people think I am a hater but to me that would be just fine. This is not the year to go for it. Thats next summer.

 

Sign 1 year placeholder guys, get another good prospect in the draft this year, trade expiribg vets at the deadline to stock up on tradable assets, then use all the cap soace snd assets to go get the half dozen guys you will need to complement the core.

 

I will be happy if the Canucks do this. And would even jump on the dont fire Benning train for not making the playoffs this year and instead setting up for next summer. To me, this would equal Benning learning from his previous mistakes actually.

I guess we’ll see what Benning and management does. I wouldn’t count him out on being aggressive this off-season, so that the team can make a strong run at the playoffs. Sign bad contracts and then not be able to sign any of the bigger free agents next summer. 

 

[86Viking]

On 5/30/2021 at 10:23 AM, mll said:

He got that contract in Vegas thinking he’ll be there long term.   

I will go play anywhere in the world if I get paid 5.9m, 1-2 seasons and then it is retirement time back in Beautiful British Columbia for me!

[86Viking]

10 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Have to think about it from Buffalo's perspe tive too, not just what makes sense for the Canucks.

 

They are going to want a young, core player back for Reinhart most likely. They cant go back into a rebuild taking picks and prospects. Or even worse, taking on garbage contracts for overpaid, underwhelming players. Doesnt help them sell big change to their fan base.

 

9th OA plus two guys like Eriksson, Beahle, Roussel, etc aint happening. They have enough garbage contracts they will get offers where they dont have to take any back. 

Wish we still had Gaudette to give them in a deal to go with a cap dump type player to make salary easier to work out

[Alflives]

How about getting Rhino and Risto in one big trade?  

[86Viking]

What kind of contract would Canuck fans be willing to give RFA Reinhart if we acquired him?

 

Would we take back Cody Eakin as well? 30 years old with a 2.25m cap hit for 1 more year, had a down year offensively, was a -9 which seems decent considering the team he was on. eakin had a good season in 19/20 with Vegas then finished year with Jets after the trade but I think an injury occured and that is part of the reason for a dip, plus playing for Buffalo doesn't help anyone's stats.

[86Viking]

4 minutes ago, Alflives said:

How about getting Rhino and Risto in one big trade?  

I would be up for that, but those are 2 guys both needing new contracts. Both players are or can be UFA next off season so we would be doing a sign a trade almost or we risk a lot if they don't want to sign a new deal with us. Plus, we would have to be able to take on around 10m in cap so this deal would for sure include a player like Schmidt @5.9m and 1 of Bo or JT Miller. Are we willing to trade those guys? It sure would be a bold off season in JB did that, and it is a risk for him as if it backfires he is fired but if it works he may get a statue...

[Alflives]

2 minutes ago, Canuckster86 said:

I would be up for that, but those are 2 guys both needing new contracts. Both players are or can be UFA next off season so we would be doing a sign a trade almost or we risk a lot if they don't want to sign a new deal with us. Plus, we would have to be able to take on around 10m in cap so this deal would for sure include a player like Schmidt @5.9m and 1 of Bo or JT Miller. Are we willing to trade those guys? It sure would be a bold off season in JB did that, and it is a risk for him as if it backfires he is fired but if it works he may get a statue...

I think we are clearing enough cap to take on both Rhino and Risto (this season) for futures.  So we keep our current core, and add these two players.  Give up 9 + 40 in this draft and our first in 2022.  That’s aggressive.

 

 

 

[86Viking]

5 minutes ago, Alflives said:

I think we are clearing enough cap to take on both Rhino and Risto (this season) for futures.  So we keep our current core, and add these two players.  Give up 9 + 40 in this draft and our first in 2022.  That’s aggressive.

 

 

 

Think we need to clear cap with term to fit this in, so don't think we can afford to give 9th overall for Risto and Reinhart if we say send them Schmidt and Miller in the deal. Canucks get the younger players but also those 2 need contracts whereas Schmidt and Miller are controlled for at least 2 more years.

 

If we can move LE in a deal then yes 9th will be involved for sure. 9th overall, JT Miller and LE for Reinhart and Risto? 

 

I would rather get Seattle to take 6m Myers in expansion, allowing us to keep and not buyout LE or give up a prime asset to move his contract or try to move him in a deal this summer or at TDL with retention

[Provost]

30 minutes ago, Canuckster86 said:

Think we need to clear cap with term to fit this in, so don't think we can afford to give 9th overall for Risto and Reinhart if we say send them Schmidt and Miller in the deal. Canucks get the younger players but also those 2 need contracts whereas Schmidt and Miller are controlled for at least 2 more years.

 

If we can move LE in a deal then yes 9th will be involved for sure. 9th overall, JT Miller and LE for Reinhart and Risto? 

 

I would rather get Seattle to take 6m Myers in expansion, allowing us to keep and not buyout LE or give up a prime asset to move his contract or try to move him in a deal this summer or at TDL with retention

I wouldn’t trade Schmidt AND Miller for those two… that doesn’t put us ahead at all.  Even with extensions in place with the new guys so we know they are club controlled.

 

I would trade Schmidt and our 1st for Reinhart and Risto IF we were able to negotiate reasonable extensions with them as part of the trade.  

[86Viking]

1 hour ago, Provost said:

I wouldn’t trade Schmidt AND Miller for those two… that doesn’t put us ahead at all.  Even with extensions in place with the new guys so we know they are club controlled.

 

I would trade Schmidt and our 1st for Reinhart and Risto IF we were able to negotiate reasonable extensions with them as part of the trade.  

I know what your saying but we can't take on over 10m in cap space and send out less than 6m when we still need a #3C etc and the EP/QH contracts. I mentioned both those players and the 9th pick because Buffalo was also taking on 6m LE. Reinhart is 3 years younger than Miller, Ristolainen is almost 3 years younger than Schmidt. If, not Risto and Sam sign deals with term for the same or less cap hit as Miller and Schmidt I think that is a win for us as we get younger while getting a natural RHD and a winger for Horvat. There is risk, but with Hoglander and Podkolzin on the horizon and us keeping Pearson around as a swiss army knife veteran who can slide into a top 6 role or for me is best suited to help build a solid 3rd line with maybe not to start next season but the following year if Pod adjusts well to the NHL and Hog doesn't have a sophomore slump type of season.

 

I agree with your  trade idea, but we would have to at least add Roussel in that deal or LE after signing bonus with some retention even.

[Bertuzzipunch]

2 hours ago, Alflives said:

I think we are clearing enough cap to take on both Rhino and Risto (this season) for futures.  So we keep our current core, and add these two players.  Give up 9 + 40 in this draft and our first in 2022.  That’s aggressive.

 

 

 

Would definitely save JIms job and make the city and fans very excited for next season.

[FaninMex]

2 hours ago, Alflives said:

I think we are clearing enough cap to take on both Rhino and Risto (this season) for futures.  So we keep our current core, and add these two players.  Give up 9 + 40 in this draft and our first in 2022.  That’s aggressive.

 

 

 

If we are giving up all that they can take Rous or LE too

[theo5789]

6 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

And I know people think I am a hater but to me that would be just fine. This is not the year to go for it. Thats next summer.

 

Sign 1 year placeholder guys, get another good prospect in the draft this year, trade expiribg vets at the deadline to stock up on tradable assets, then use all the cap soace snd assets to go get the half dozen guys you will need to complement the core.

 

I will be happy if the Canucks do this. And would even jump on the dont fire Benning train for not making the playoffs this year and instead setting up for next summer. To me, this would equal Benning learning from his previous mistakes actually.

There is no sudden on switch whenever we decide we are ready to go for it. Just ask Buffalo and Edmonton. Look at even Toronto and many others.

 

I understand not needing to go "all in" this coming season, but the playoffs is always the goal. The players and management want it. The players and management need it for experience.

[theo5789]

Since we are doing trade proposals, I'd consider the following.

 

#40 pick this year, unprotected 2022 1st, Juolevi, Lind and Eriksson for Reinhart and Ristolainen. Or #9, 2022 2nd, Juolevi, Lind and Eriksson for Reinhart and Ristolainen.

 

Or personally I would do, #9, Juolevi, Lind, and Eriksson for Ristolainen and Buf 2021 2nd (#32?).

 

I think Juolevi and Lind are "expendable" given their expansion eligibility. Rathbone could "replace" Juolevi in the depth chart and we would protect Schmidt, Myers and Risto while Hughes is exempt which sets our top 4 dmen. Re-sign Edler and Hamonic to fill out the defense. Lind can be replaced with Podkolzin and would further be expendable if we acquire Reinhart. Personally I could do without the extra cap on wing with Reinhart and rather focus on the defense which is why I wouldn't even target him. We would lose the #9, but still gain a solid pick at #32.

[Salacious Crumb]

8 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

So, if the best case scenario happened in every way for the Canucks they might have made the playoffs? Seems like that would be true for any team.

 

Making the playoffs or not isnt a win to anyone but the owners pocketbook. Lets be clear on that. Because without significant, fundamental changes, the Canucks are not an actual contender. They wont luck their way to a cup just by making the playoffs as no team ever has and this team inspires no confidence they could be the ones to buck that trend.

 

The reality is they played in easily the worst division in hockey and were terrible. In a better division, which they likely will be in next year, they have a lot of work to do to improve at all.

 

I think its entirely possible the Canucks end up close to the bottom of the league again. It wil take a lot of improvement to move up.

Looking at our division Vegas is a lock for the playoffs next season. Canucks likely scrap it out with the Oilers, Flames and Kraken for playoff seeding don’t you think? With 2 or 3 astute moves this offseason it is entirely possible we could be 2nd.

[DeNiro]

3 minutes ago, Salacious Crumb said:

Looking at our division Vegas is a lock for the playoffs next season. Canucks likely scrap it out with the Oilers, Flames and Kraken for playoff seeding don’t you think? With 2 or 3 astute moves this offseason it is entirely possible we could be 2nd.

I’m gonna predict the Kraken are actually bad next season.

 

Teams learned from the last expansion draft. I don’t see Seattle being given a bunch of gifts for taking certain players.

 

And even then the way Vegas came together so quick I don’t think that is likely to happen again.

[wallstreetamigo]

20 minutes ago, Salacious Crumb said:

Looking at our division Vegas is a lock for the playoffs next season. Canucks likely scrap it out with the Oilers, Flames and Kraken for playoff seeding don’t you think? With 2 or 3 astute moves this offseason it is entirely possible we could be 2nd.

Its possible. But thats also going on the assumption that the Oilers, Flames, Ducks, etc cant also improve. And that the Kraken will be bad too. The Canucks have a lot of work to do to be competitive.