[Proposal] Miller and Hamonic for Tarasenko, and Barbashev

[VancouverHabitant]

Tarasenko has asked for a trade a long time ago and had maintained that request, but has been a professional about it. 

 

Ivan Barbashev is a very good young forward and someone that Podkolzin could learn a lot from (mainstay on the PK to boot). 

 

St Louis loads up for the cup run, improves their D and makes a spot for one of their promising young forwards. 

We get a shakeup and also receive the youngest player in this deal. 

[Neutral]

Not a chance from me. We need a young RHD back if we trade JT or a top 6 C who is younger move EP to wing where he belongs until he can address his dreadful FO% and try to get stronger during the season physically somehow...Put big focus on that in the off season, you got the big payday now show the commitment next off season EP

[Pears]

With how well Tarasenko is doing now there’s zero chance they move him unless he does still want out. 

[VancouverHabitant]

2 minutes ago, Pears said:

With how well Tarasenko is doing now there’s zero chance they move him unless he does still want out. 

His agent has confirmed that they are still hopeful to go somewhere else. That was at the beginning of this season, so maybe things did change recently but he has maintained that request for more then a season now. 

[Coconuts]

Our defense is already questionable with Hamonic, I can't imagine a trade involving him when we've got nobody to fill that void

 

Not unless management miraculously embraces a tank and ships players out to start a soft rebuild 

 

In which case Tarasenko likely wouldn't be a target 

[Patel Bure]

It’s a nice idea but I’d decline that for now.  Miller should be moved at the trade deadline for a 1st and/or elite prospect if the Canucks are not within striking distance of the playoffs.

[DrJockitch]

Agree with Patel.  Playoffs a pipe dream at this point.

Novel idea, sell expiring contracts when on rebuilding team.

Build with youth not UFAs.

[kloubek]

I'm trying to understand the reasoning behind this for us. Is it to better our team so we might make the playoffs this season? If so, Miller has been our most consistent forward. Bringing in another player might actually make things worse, depending on how he does right off the bat. Regardless of that, the optics are bad: The one guy who is giving his heart out there every night is the one to get moved. Doesn't make much sense. And they are both UFA in the same amount of time, so it seems a lateral move at best.

 

Barbashev might be of some use as a center for us, with Dickenson not really doing a lot out there, but that's the only benefit of this trade for us as I see it.

 

In addition to all this, we need BETTER defensemen and not less decent defensemen. Losing Hamonic would also do us no favours - and keep in mind he is signed for another year after this one, so it would have a detrimental effect for us next year too.

 

In short: No thanks.

[khay]

2 hours ago, kloubek said:

I'm trying to understand the reasoning behind this for us. Is it to better our team so we might make the playoffs this season? If so, Miller has been our most consistent forward. Bringing in another player might actually make things worse, depending on how he does right off the bat. Regardless of that, the optics are bad: The one guy who is giving his heart out there every night is the one to get moved. Doesn't make much sense. And they are both UFA in the same amount of time, so it seems a lateral move at best.

 

Barbashev might be of some use as a center for us, with Dickenson not really doing a lot out there, but that's the only benefit of this trade for us as I see it.

 

In addition to all this, we need BETTER defensemen and not less decent defensemen. Losing Hamonic would also do us no favours - and keep in mind he is signed for another year after this one, so it would have a detrimental effect for us next year too.

 

In short: No thanks.

I agree with this.

 

Although Barbashev is intriguing, losing Hamonic is not the way to go. 

 

It's a little too soon to give up on tje season and solving PK issues could just turn things around.

 

If you look at +/- stats, the guys that are deep in the negative are 4th liners and 6/7D, well and EP and Boeser are -3.

 

Burroughs: -6

Hunt: -5

Lammikko: -5

Rathbone: -5

Bailey: -4

EP: -3

Boeser: -3

Dowling: -3

Bowey: -3

 

Essentially, 5-on-5 play has been fine except when the bottom pairing and/or 4th line is on the ice. Add some tough to play against guys on the 4th line and an LD to kill penalties can turn things around.

 

I have my doubts as to whether this staff can fix the PK and whether JB can get help on D without overpaying. If I'm JB, I'd prioritize acquiring an LD and try to find a solution within for the 4th line and PKers. Maybe promote Lockwood?

 

And at this point, I'd demote EP to the 4th line. Let him focus on defensive aspect of the game with wingers that move their feet. And since Pearson doesn't bring much in the way of scoring, I'd just to form a match up line out of Horvat line.

 

Hoglander-Miller-Boeser

Podkolzin-Dickinson-Garland

Pearson-Horvat-Dowling (can't believe they couldn't find someone better than Dowling for a checking role)

Motte-EP-Chiasson

 

The top 2 lines are still loaded and have been scoring bulk of the goals for us anyways.

 

I think Motte will be able to create a lot of space for EP. So maybe EP will re-discover his scoring.

[nergish]

8 hours ago, Patel Bure said:

It’s a nice idea but I’d decline that for now.  Miller should be moved at the trade deadline for a 1st and/or elite prospect if the Canucks are not within striking distance of the playoffs.

I'd say this is the move.
 

No blockbuster trade at this point, maybe fire Green for a little kick in the behind, just keep playing and developing the young players...

Then at deadline, offload Miller and whoever else for picks. This would be a great year to have multiple firsts and try moving up in the draft.

 

Shane Wright is probably not a "generational" player, but he is a future 1C and ready to play next year.

Otherwise, we take a couple swings in the first round.

 

 

I guess the fear is that EP40 is actually a complementary piece, and not a franchise cornerstone. 

[Phil_314]

I don't think we really make good trading partners.  Mikkola does draw some interest as a 6'4", safe and mobile defensive D-man but I question how much upside there would be, while Barbashev might also just be a bottom-6 center?  Someone who's more informed of this, correct me if I'm wrong.  Nonetheless, I don't think that they have any pieces that we would want that they'd be willing to move.

[Patel Bure]

34 minutes ago, nergish said:

I'd say this is the move.
 

No blockbuster trade at this point, maybe fire Green for a little kick in the behind, just keep playing and developing the young players...

Then at deadline, offload Miller and whoever else for picks. This would be a great year to have multiple firsts and try moving up in the draft.

 

Shane Wright is probably not a "generational" player, but he is a future 1C and ready to play next year.

Otherwise, we take a couple swings in the first round.

 

 

I guess the fear is that EP40 is actually a complementary piece, and not a franchise cornerstone. 

Earlier, I mentioned that the Canucks should trade all three of Miller, Horvat, and Boeser at the deadline if we are out of it, but I’d actually hang onto Boeser since he’ll be an RFA when his contract expires.

 

Miller and Horvat however, will be UFA’s, and both guys should be able to fetch us 1st rounders and/or elite prospects.  
 

My other line of thinking is this:  We hang onto BOTH Benning and Green for this season, regardless of outcome, and then fire them when the regular season ends (assuming that we don’t make the playoffs, etc.).

 

Let’s face it:  No elite head coach is going to come here if they believe that the GM’s job security is at stake.  In other words, guys like Claude Julien and Bruce Budreau likely won’t come here if they believe that Benning is closed to being axed.