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

[Rumor] Nate Schmidt being dealt very soon any minute now


Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Kragar said:

I can't say, but I'm not in any rush to lose Schmidt.  Just hope that JB does the right thing, however it goes.

I don’t think he’s in a rush either. Basically said there was lots of interest but he hasn’t moved him. If there’s an offer on the table that makes sense make a deal. Otherwise see ya at training camp Nate 

Edited by Devron44
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Devron44 said:

I don’t think he’s in a rush either. Basically said there was lots of interest but he hasn’t moved him. If there’s an offer on the table that makes sense make a deal. Otherwise see ya at training camp Nate 

Works for me.  I know there's been mention of rumors about him wanting out, and I hoped they were just that... rumors.  Don't want to be selling from a position of weakness.

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You’d really need a few dominoes lined up to move Schmidt at this point… with Edler possibly gone and Hamonic yet unsigned, Schmidt could be a top 4 D man on either side that we desperately need.  
 

Seattle hogging Larsson and Oleksiak doesn’t help our chances of landing FA’s that fit the bill, either.  The D might very well be an issue that doesn’t get solved until next offseason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Kragar said:

Works for me.  I know there's been mention of rumors about him wanting out, and I hoped they were just that... rumors.  Don't want to be selling from a position of weakness.

According to Benning, other teams were inquiring about Schmidt and that got out. It was then twisted into him wanting out. Refuted by Benning twice.

 

That means that other teams are interested in him. If we get decent value back then maybe we take the deal otherwise we are better off keeping him.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RWMc1 said:

According to Benning, other teams were inquiring about Schmidt and that got out. It was then twisted into him wanting out. Refuted by Benning twice.

 

That means that other teams are interested in him. If we get decent value back then maybe we take the deal otherwise we are better off keeping him.

It would be crazy for Benning to say “yes the rumours are right Schmidt wants out” he’d lose trade leverage so it’s better to deny it and try to move him. Or everything could be made up and he hasn’t. Believing either way is fine just take what the gm says with a grain of salt. I just wouldn’t take a gm’s word for it because he’s not going to tell you the truth just because you asked and tell all the other gms I have to move this guy. I think you’d get lesser offers coming your way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, flickyoursedin said:

It would be crazy for Benning to say “yes the rumours are right Schmidt wants out” he’d lose trade leverage so it’s better to deny it and try to move him. Or everything could be made up and he hasn’t. Believing either way is fine just take what the gm says with a grain of salt. I just wouldn’t take a gm’s word for it because he’s not going to tell you the truth just because you asked and tell all the other gms I have to move this guy. I think you’d get lesser offers coming your way.

Not this again.

 

I'll take Bennings word over media members with a history of twisting things to push a narrative.

  • Cheers 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RWMc1 said:

Not this again.

 

I'll take Bennings word over media members with a history of twisting things to push a narrative.

Well I could see it both ways. He might like it here or maybe he sees it like he was on two pretty good teams before coming to Vancouver. We look to be a little while away from being real contenders while Schmidt is 30 years old now. He might want to spend his prime years on a team with a better shot at a cup while he’s still in his prime. I wouldn’t be surprised either way. If he did give Benning the curtesy of going to him directly instead of making it public I don’t think that’s a crazy narrative. Benning wanting bargaining power so he could say one thing while actively shopping any player shouldn’t shock people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Me_ said:

Hey why don’t you go play in the middle of the second narrows bridge see what happens. 
 

Let me know how it goes for ya ok thanks.

It Went well a few close calls but over all more successful  than a JB ufa signing. 
 

thanks.

 

oh darn it, I fed the TROLL. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, flickyoursedin said:

Well I could see it both ways. He might like it here or maybe he sees it like he was on two pretty good teams before coming to Vancouver. We look to be a little while away from being real contenders while Schmidt is 30 years old now. He might want to spend his prime years on a team with a better shot at a cup while he’s still in his prime. I wouldn’t be surprised either way. If he did give Benning the curtesy of going to him directly instead of making it public I don’t think that’s a crazy narrative. Benning wanting bargaining power so he could say one thing while actively shopping any player shouldn’t shock people.

To me the question was, who is more likely to be lying. Jim Benning or the media guy who told a blatant lie while reporting the story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, combover said:

It Went well a few close calls but over all more successful  than a JB ufa signing. 
 

thanks.

 

oh darn it, I fed the TROLL. 

I just hate dumb debbiedowners. They piss me off greatly.

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Me_ said:

I just hate dumb debbiedowners. They piss me off greatly.

must be tough when others control your mood. 
 

 

12 minutes ago, RWMc1 said:

So, what did you eat?

I had a ham and cheese with a side of  Jb fanboys. 
 

 

Edited by combover
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, RWMc1 said:

To me the question was, who is more likely to be lying. Jim Benning or the media guy who told a blatant lie while reporting the story.

More times than not it’s definitely the media spewing lies trying to create content for their websites. All I’m saying is just because Benning says one thing I wouldn’t say 100% that the other scenario won’t happen. It’s a business and he wants leverage so he’s not going to show his hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, flickyoursedin said:

More times than not it’s definitely the media spewing lies trying to create content for their websites. All I’m saying is just because Benning says one thing I wouldn’t say 100% that the other scenario won’t happen. It’s a business and he wants leverage so he’s not going to show his hand.

Which scenario? Getting traded wouldn't prove that he requested a trade. If he did request a trade, then that scenario has already happened.

 

I get your point and we are now going in circles. Square dance style. haha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...