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

[Trade] Sabres trade Sam Reinhart to Panthers for Devon Levi, 2022 1st-round pick


Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Squamfan said:

Should have traded the 9th for him

So why?  You could have whinged about how we still had 3 bad contracts?

 

Problem is, the moment it happened it would be an overpayment in your eyes, then the whining about contracts would come up and more.

 

There's no pleasing some of you so I want to help with that.

 

Take my hand son, it appears you wandered away from the site you belong in.

 

https://hfboards.mandatory.com/forums/vancouver-canucks.36/

 

 

  • Cheers 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Good player but some risk there though. 

True.

 

If injuries are behind him though he would fit perfectly in our to 6.

 

Bertuzzi Pettersson Boeser 

Hoglander Horvat Garland 

Pearson Miller Podkolzin 

Motte Dickinson Highmore

 

:bigblush:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Warhippy said:

So why?  You could have whinged about how we still had 3 bad contracts?

 

Problem is, the moment it happened it would be an overpayment in your eyes, then the whining about contracts would come up and more.

 

There's no pleasing some of you so I want to help with that.

 

Take my hand son, it appears you wandered away from the site you belong in.

 

https://hfboards.mandatory.com/forums/vancouver-canucks.36/

 

 

If the 9th OA had to be traded it needed to be used to get rid of some bad cap. It was always going to be that way as I have been saying for awhile.

 

Didnt expect to take back an even worse long term contract but it helps this year. Arizona did well extracting max value for a guy that Benning clearly had blinders on to get for over a year.

 

Garland is a good fit though.

 

The trade is not as bad as it could have been. But there is still significant work to be done to avoid having possibly the worst top 4 on the defensive side of the puck in the entire NHL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

True.

 

If injuries are behind him though he would fit perfectly in our to 6.

 

Bertuzzi Pettersson Boeser 

Hoglander Horvat Garland 

Pearson Miller Podkolzin 

Motte Dickinson Highmore

 

:bigblush:

Ya he would be a good fit.

 

I am more worried about the D though. We dont have one guy who could be described as a shutdown defensive D. A top 4 of OEL, Hughes, Schmidt, and Myers is easily one of the worst defensive side D in the NHL, sorry to say.

 

One of Rathbone or Juolevi will likely be traded as there is no room for one of them long term now. And the need for a partner who can shelter Hughes is going to make a difference in how effective he is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Ya he would be a good fit.

 

I am more worried about the D though. We dont have one guy who could be described as a shutdown defensive D. A top 4 of OEL, Hughes, Schmidt, and Myers is easily one of the worst defensive side D in the NHL, sorry to say.

 

One of Rathbone or Juolevi will likely be traded as there is no room for one of them long term now. And the need for a partner who can shelter Hughes is going to make a difference in how effective he is.

True.

 

But if we can get Hamonic on the cheap and get another big stay at home guy like Hakanpaa I think we can fill the holes without giving too much cap/term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

1.  If the 9th OA had to be traded it needed to be used to get rid of some bad cap. It was always going to be that way as I have been saying for awhile.

 

2.  Didnt expect to take back an even worse long term contract but it helps this year. Arizona did well extracting max value for a guy that Benning clearly had blinders on to get for over a year.

 

3.  Garland is a good fit though.

 

4.  The trade is not as bad as it could have been. But there is still significant work to be done to avoid having possibly the worst top 4 on the defensive side of the puck in the entire NHL.

Point the first.  Marleau was traded with a 1st for literally nothing.  Dastyuk as well etc.  There is now a history of contracts and cap being traded for 1st round picks.  We got rid of 3 count em 3 bad contracts and took back what is an average top 2/top 3 D salary.  It's more than a wash it's about as equal as it gets.  Rather have $7 million on the ice instead of $12 million in the press box

 

Point the second.  An even worse long term contract is entirely subjective and only in the eyes of the opinionated.  To claim Arizona got "max value" is stretching it.  I would have been equally as ok in just holding off and doing nothing allowing the contracts to wash at the end of the season but this is FAR from bad and Arizona somehow getting the most out of it is your opinion only.  Keeping in mind that there is and was LITERALLY potential issues in merely paying OEL the money owed to him based on that contract.  Arizona couldn't stomach the payments so they HAD to get rid of him.  They also had to give us Garland who is an absolute beauty and arguably one of the most productive and versatile RWs over the past 3 seasons in the entire league.  So again, your opinion only.

 

Point the third.  Love Garland, honestly...that's the type of player you win championships with.  If he was 6 foot and 200 pounds people would be throwing a parade for netting a guy like him.  He is the real steal in this trade and I pray to Howe and Gretzky that our luck of seemingly endless injury issues with traded players doesn't pop up.

 

Point the 4th.  Buffalo LITERALLY had multiple top 10 D picks in their lineup including what was touted as the 2nd coming of Lidstrom and was as bad or worse than us.  Consistently.  A large part of the potential issue with our D core is/was coaching and that has been changed.  So worst top 4 is again, subjective and will be entirely opinion based.

 

I am still meh on this trade but it is far FAR better than some negative nancy's want to admit.  Had we traded the 9th OA for simply Reinhart, a 52 point per season average winger (sometimes centre) AND a prospect like Dipietro, there's a large contingent that would be whining that we gave yp to much, got too litlle and couldn't shed cap.  Added that we'd also now be forced to PAY someone to take cap off just to fit Reinhart.

 

We did very well with what we did in our trade and I feel sincerely that we'd be far worse off had we traded for Reinhart at that price

Edited by Warhippy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

no contract yet.... Reinhart expressed the desire to be out west... well florida is pretty far east and is the farthest away from Vancouver lol...

 

I would wonder if florida is banking on a cup run and a desire to sign a decent cap 1 year deal for Reinhart and will allow him to walk afterwards... Otherwise Reinhart has arb rights and has the ability to force a 1 year deal and walk right out to UFA and choose his western destination.

 

With Brock being an RFA next year I am curious if the decision would be to trade him for futures and see if we can scoop up hometown Reinhart at a competitive and comparable rate to what Boeser will make.

 

Love Boeser and all but Reinhart is only 2 years older and if we can recoup high-end picks and end up with a high-end player like Reinhart for free in UFA that'd be a pretty shrewd move IMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Point the first.  Marleau was traded with a 1st for literally nothing.  Dastyuk as well etc.  There is now a history of contracts and cap being traded for 1st round picks.  We got rid of 3 count em 3 bad contracts and took back what is an average top 2/top 3 D salary.  It's more than a wash it's about as equal as it gets.  Rather have $7 million on the ice instead of $12 million in the press box

 

Point the second.  An even worse long term contract is entirely subjective and only in the eyes of the opinionated.  To claim Arizona got "max value" is stretching it.  I would have been equally as ok in just holding off and doing nothing allowing the contracts to wash at the end of the season but this is FAR from bad and Arizona somehow getting the most out of it is your opinion only.  Keeping in mind that there is and was LITERALLY potential issues in merely paying OEL the money owed to him based on that contract.  Arizona couldn't stomach the payments so they HAD to get rid of him.  They also had to give us Garland who is an absolute beauty and arguably one of the most productive and versatile RWs over the past 3 seasons in the entire league.  So again, your opinion only.

 

Point the third.  Love Garland, honestly...that's the type of player you win championships with.  If he was 6 foot and 200 pounds people would be throwing a parade for netting a guy like him.  He is the real steal in this trade and I pray to Howe and Gretzky that our luck of seemingly endless injury issues with traded players doesn't pop up.

 

Point the 4th.  Buffalo LITERALLY had multiple top 10 D picks in their lineup including what was touted as the 2nd coming of Lidstrom and was as bad or worse than us.  Consistently.  A large part of the potential issue with our D core is/was coaching and that has been changed.  So worst top 4 is again, subjective and will be entirely opinion based.

 

I am still meh on this trade but it is far FAR better than some negative nancy's want to admit.  Had we traded the 9th OA for simply Reinhart, a 52 point per season average winger (sometimes centre) AND a prospect like Dipietro, there's a large contingent that would be whining that we gave yp to much, got too litlle and couldn't shed cap.  Added that we'd also now be forced to PAY someone to take cap off just to fit Reinhart.

 

We did very well with what we did in our trade and I feel sincerely that we'd be far worse off had we traded for Reinhart at that price

We did get rid of 3 bad contracts. All of which had 1 year left on them. And took on 6 years at 7 mil per for a guy who - sorry to burst everyones bubble - has been declining for 3 years and is not the defensive stalwart Benning seems to think he is. OEL has one of the worst contracts in the league. He is not a top dman anymore. A top 4 guy for sure. But his defensive game has been a black hole even relative to his teammates. Arizona made out like bandits on this deal. That doesnt mean its terrible. Its just very risky to the Canucks.

 

Arizona not being interested in keeping Garland was pretty well known. Would you have traded a 2022 2nd for him? I would have for sure. His contract is what will determine if he is really a piece that makes OEL worth taking on at that price though.

 

So a 9th OA pick and a 7th to trade 3 short term cap problems for one long term cap problem seems like a risky proposition. 

 

I dont disagree that trading the 9th OAplus for Reinhart would have been a worse move. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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