[proposal] Holtby and Schmidt to Seattle, assuming that.....

[Patel Bure]

[proposal] Holtby and Schmidt to Seattle, assuming that.....

 

There is legitimacy to the Schmidt wants out rumors.  Yes - Benning has refuted this multiple times but this could also be a strategic ploy so who knows.  
 

I’m not entirely sure how Expansion drafts work but this is what I’d like to see:

 

To Seattle:  Holtby and Schmidt

To Vancouver:  A cheaper backup goalie that is a clear cut back up goalie (ie NOT a 1B like Holtby) + a young cheap RHD defenseman with top 4 potential.  
 

Overall, the Kraken would be taking on about 10.2 million in cap (Holtby and Schmidt) while we take on about 4-5 million (new back up goalie + young cheap RHD “defensive defenseman”).   Overall increase in cap space = about 5-6 million = Canucks getting more involved in the UFA market.

[Patel Bure]

I’m assuming of course that Seattle will have picked these items/assets before our trade with them.......or, we work out something with Seattle in which we say, “if you take x and y from [TEAM] and [TEAM], we will throw in Schmidt to you guys once you select Holtby from us.

[YEGCanuck]

Whoa, those assumptions will get you everytime.

[Johnny Torts]

 

 

 

[eeeeergh]

2 hours ago, Patel Bure said:

[proposal] Holtby and Schmidt to Seattle, assuming that.....

 

There is legitimacy to the Schmidt wants out rumors.  Yes - Benning has refuted this multiple times but this could also be a strategic ploy so who knows.  
 

I’m not entirely sure how Expansion drafts work but this is what I’d like to see:

 

To Seattle:  Holtby and Schmidt

To Vancouver:  A cheaper backup goalie that is a clear cut back up goalie (ie NOT a 1B like Holtby) + a young cheap RHD defenseman with top 4 potential.  
 

Overall, the Kraken would be taking on about 10.2 million in cap (Holtby and Schmidt) while we take on about 4-5 million (new back up goalie + young cheap RHD “defensive defenseman”).   Overall increase in cap space = about 5-6 million = Canucks getting more involved in the UFA market.

I like it, get er done

[Patel Bure]

2 hours ago, Johnny Torts said:

 

 

 

I’ll try and clarify:

 

Lets say Seattle wants Holtby and intends to take him during the expansion.  We then say to Seattle, “ok - you’re obviously more than welcome to take Holtby from us but how about we do this:   You also take ‘x’ back up goalie from [TEAM A] and ‘y’ young defenseman from [TEAM B].  If you select these two players from those teams, trade then to us and we will give you Nate Schmidt.

 

Why Seattle does this?

-They get Holtby AND a very good defenseman in Nate Schmidt (who has prior experience playing for an expansion team).

 

Why Vancouver does this:

-We get a decent back up goalie at a reasonable cap hit.

-We get a good young defenseman with promise.

-We move on from Nate Schmidt if he truly wants out 

-I’m assuming that we increase our cap space by about 4-5 million by replacing Holtby and Schmidt with a cheap back up + young defenseman (if we went this route)

Maybe Seattle trades us someone that they selected from Carolina, Colorado, NYI, Tampa, etc., and we get an actual upgrade on Schmidt in a classic “hockey deal” (although this likely wouldn’t help us cap wise).

[Johnny Torts]

4 minutes ago, Patel Bure said:

I’ll try and clarify:

 

Lets say Seattle wants Holtby and intends to take him during the expansion.  We then say to Seattle, “ok - you’re obviously more than welcome to take Holtby from us but how about we do this:   You also take ‘x’ back up goalie from [TEAM A] and ‘y’ young defenseman from [TEAM B].  If you select these two players from those teams, trade then to us and we will give you Nate Schmidt.

 

Why Seattle does this?

-They get Holtby AND a very good defenseman in Nate Schmidt (who has prior experience playing for an expansion team).

 

Why Vancouver does this:

-We get a decent back up goalie at a reasonable cap hit.

-We get a good young defenseman with promise.

-We move on from Nate Schmidt if he truly wants out 

-I’m assuming that we increase our cap space by about 4-5 million by replacing Holtby and Schmidt with a cheap back up + young defenseman (if we went this route)

Maybe Seattle trades us someone that they selected from Carolina, Colorado, NYI, Tampa, etc., and we get an actual upgrade on Schmidt in a classic “hockey deal” (although this likely wouldn’t help us cap wise).

I hear you Patel. 
 

I think that Schmidt has value around the league and if he was being actively shopped then he would garner interest from at least a few teams. 
 

But if the rumours are true that he indeed does not want out, then he is very useful to us. 
 

The cap space has to come from 

 

1. Holtby traded (teams are interested) or picked up by Seattle.

 

2. JV picked up, traded, or bought out.

 

3. Antoine Roussel buried.

 

4. Beagle dumped with a pick, or dumped with retained salary for pennies.

 

These moves give us over 11M in cap space. 
 

Maybe Schmidt could be moved for a similar, proven but disgruntled player on a similar-ish contract. 
 

But I agree with you that we need cap space and cap space is achievable. 
 

I think we don’t have to panic. There are options. Educated fans and management know this. The only concerning things are Luongo’s recapture and Erikssons 4.8 buried hit. 
 

Even then, the buried hit is tradable. 
 

I personally want us to add a top 6 forward, another top 4 D and an ex - star vet on a cheap contract like a Getzlaf. 
 

Nice chatting with you!

[Phil_314]

So is Schmidt and his near-$6 million Benning's sweetener for Seattle to take Holtby?  Or they take Holtby and then we trade Schmidt to them for a 1B and a young RHD?
Either way, in option 1) his cap hit doesn't work as a sweetener and in 2) if Seattle drafts a goalie I doubt they'd flip him esp. for a $6 million D when they can also sign their own guys e.g. a Hamilton/ Savard/ Larsson [Drieger isn't going anywhere, nor will Price(?); maybe we flip Schmidt for someone like Raanta's rights if he's picked and Justin Holl [which I would do] but I don't see the benefit of it for Seattle, unless they know of another team wanting to acquire him, in which case we might as well flip him to them ourselves).

[wildcam]

4 hours ago, Patel Bure said:

[proposal] Holtby and Schmidt to Seattle, assuming that.....

 

There is legitimacy to the Schmidt wants out rumors.  Yes - Benning has refuted this multiple times but this could also be a strategic ploy so who knows.  
 

I’m not entirely sure how Expansion drafts work but this is what I’d like to see:

 

To Seattle:  Holtby and Schmidt

To Vancouver:  A cheaper backup goalie that is a clear cut back up goalie (ie NOT a 1B like Holtby) + a young cheap RHD defenseman with top 4 potential.  
 

Overall, the Kraken would be taking on about 10.2 million in cap (Holtby and Schmidt) while we take on about 4-5 million (new back up goalie + young cheap RHD “defensive defenseman”).   Overall increase in cap space = about 5-6 million = Canucks getting more involved in the UFA market.

 Kraken will want Vancouver to take some salary back-- Holtby 4.3 --  Scmidt 6 million = 10.3 million

Maybe we could take McCann back if Kraken taken him .. 3 million  and another player .....

[Patel Bure]

47 minutes ago, wildcam said:

 Kraken will want Vancouver to take some salary back-- Holtby 4.3 --  Scmidt 6 million = 10.3 million

Maybe we could take McCann back if Kraken taken him .. 3 million  and another player .....

Exactly.   My hope under this scenario is one of two scenarios:

 

1) We make an actual ‘hockey’ deal and get an upgrade on Schmidt (with the trade off being that we get a back up goalie that is inferior to Holtby).  
 

2) We focus on cap clearance in which we get a back-up goalie + youngish asset with potential with the total combined cap hits coming to about 5-6 million (giving is a 4-5.3 million dollar cap savings).