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

[Trade] Canucks trade Nate Schmidt to Jets for 2022 3rd-round pick


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

 

Schmidt was plan B for Benning. Unless you think that trade came together only after Benning moved on from OEL.

 

Which is possible, I guess, although that would say a lot about the lack of planning on Benning's part.

 

I have no problem with the Schmidt trade, it was Benning's best and it'll never be topped. Just hilarious how the narrative has changed on it one year later.

That really doesn't make sense since there was an offer in place for Tanev ($4M x 2yr).  Tanev didn't like it and signed with Calgary ($4.5M x 4yr).

 

I think Schmidt was just a chance as Vegas was close to signing AP and quickly needed to dump his contract. 

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DeNiro said:

Don’t need to.

 

I knew it didn’t work as soon as I saw Hamilton at 9.5.

So either Benning re-signs Hamonic, signs Hakanpaa, signs Kevan Miller or just re-signs Edler yet again...

 

Don't see how Benning is going to find quality on the free market.

 

Time to dial up those GMs because he may need to pull another trade to fill the Canucks need for a top 4 d.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, AV. said:

Thing is, it's only hindsight with bad planning and bad judgment.

 

Anybody who watched the Canucks saw Virtanen play for multiple seasons and knew he was inconsistent and had flaws in his game.  Even though Toffoli only played about 10 GP in the regular season and a handful of playoff games, it was clear as day to see he meshed well with either Horvat or Pettersson and took significant scoring pressure off of Miller and Boeser.

The Canucks opted for Virtanen only because he was their 6th OVR pick and they didn't want to walk away from that outright.  A very bad decision from the on-set.

Except that the team was still plummeting downward after the Toffoli trade, indicating that he wasn't taking the pressure off of Miller and Boeser at all. Toffoli himself played well during that stretch, yes, but his production had very little impact on the team as a whole. 

 

And the point still stands that Virtanen nearly equaled Toffoli's production during their contract years. Taking that production into consideration, it made more sense to invest in the younger player at a reduced rate than the older player at nearly double the cap hit.

 

For the record, I was very vocally against the Toffoli trade in the first place. Considering the negligible effect he had on the Canucks as a whole, we would have been much better off holding onto Madden and our 2nd. And I do have the receipts to back that up, in case you wanted to accuse me of blind homerism.

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

3 minutes ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

Except that the team was still plummeting downward after the Toffoli trade, indicating that he wasn't taking the pressure off of Miller and Boeser at all. Toffoli himself played well during that stretch, yes, but his production had very little impact on the team as a whole. 

 

And the point still stands that Virtanen nearly equaled Toffoli's production during their contract years. Taking that production into consideration, it made more sense to invest in the younger player at a reduced rate than the older player at nearly double the cap hit.

 

For the record, I was very vocally against the Toffoli trade in the first place. Considering the negligible effect he had on the Canucks as a whole, we would have been much better off holding onto Madden and our 2nd. And I do have the receipts to back that up, in case you wanted to accuse me of blind homerism.

I personally had faith in Virtanen until he allegedly sexually assaulted a chick. 
It was a mistake to "choose him" over Toffoli, even though I think that's an oversimplification of what happened.
I don't regret the trade for Toffoli because we had a good run in the bubble, and that was great experience for our young group.
Honestly though, I think Garland fits our team better than Toffoli, and Ekman-Larsson fits our team better than Schmidt. 
We'll see what happens. But I'm happy with how things played out.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, CaptKirk888 said:

Loved Sundstrom, he was a Canuck at the wrong time. We sure did get value from his trade to NJ tho.

He had great chemistry with Tanti, though.  They were the Petey and Brock of their time

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

Except that the team was still plummeting downward after the Toffoli trade, indicating that he wasn't taking the pressure off of Miller and Boeser at all. Toffoli himself played well during that stretch, yes, but his production had very little impact on the team as a whole. 

 

And the point still stands that Virtanen nearly equaled Toffoli's production during their contract years. Taking that production into consideration, it made more sense to invest in the younger player at a reduced rate than the older player at nearly double the cap hit.

 

For the record, I was very vocally against the Toffoli trade in the first place. Considering the negligible effect he had on the Canucks as a whole, we would have been much better off holding onto Madden and our 2nd. And I do have the receipts to back that up, in case you wanted to accuse me of blind homerism.

No need for the receipts.  It was a very desperate move to add him and any sensible fan *should* have been against the deal, given where we were at.  With that said, it was one of rare times where a gamble liked that rendered some visible results.

 

I get the argument but I'm just saying based on how well Toffoli fit in the top six in a limited, but important sample size (i.e playoffs) and how much evidence that Virtanen didn't fit in the top six (nearly three full seasons), it was always a bad decision to choose the latter.  As I said, it really only came down to the fact that Virtanen was homegrown and Toffoli was a pending UFA acquired via trade.  Easier to play Toffoli as a pure rental than letting Virtanen go and admitting they screwed up their 1st round pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Googlie said:

He had great chemistry with Tanti, though.  They were the Petey and Brock of their time

For sure, but what a different era. Would Tanti be putting up multiple 40 goal seasons now?

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, stawns said:

I thought that after OEL, but with NS gone I think there's a decent chance he could be back.  It's his team, his home...........I can'timagine if a number comes in the nbeighborhood of what he's asking, he'd do it.

 

The question is where does he fit with Rathbone in the mix? I recall Edler being tried on the right side years ago & don't think it went well. Unless Rathbone could play the right side maybe.

 

I like the idea of Edler in a bottom 3 role, just seems like a logjam on the left side. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Chip Kelly said:

The Canucks are not getting Dougie Hamilton or David Savard so Benning has to get creative to land a d man who can play top 4 minutes.

 

The pickings are very slim right now.

 

Who are the other options in free agency Kevan Miller and Jani Hakanpaa?

 

I think Benning should stick to his guns and make another big move like he has been doing this week. Try to avoid free agency unless it's for a backup goalie or 4C to fill out the fourth line.

 

OEL-Myers

Hughes-Subban

Rathbone-Schenn

Juolevi

 

Upgrade from last year and just as good if not better than when they had Tanev and Stecher in the fold 2 years ago.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subban with Hughes?  Whos going to play defense?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Smashian Kassian said:

 

The question is where does he fit with Rathbone in the mix? I recall Edler being tried on the right side years ago & don't think it went well. Unless Rathbone could play the right side maybe.

 

I like the idea of Edler in a bottom 3 role, just seems like a logjam on the left side. 

How do we know Rathbones even in the starting 6?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, appleboy said:

Jim should have no problem attracting UFA's.

They can expect to get paid more than their worth. The Canucks will throw in at least one extra year and at the end of your contract you will get to spend the winter in Arizona.  

Do you follow hockey news? It appears JB has cleared 26 mil of cap and added 2 valuable pieces to this team.

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...