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

[Rumour] Arizona looking to still move Chychrun, Kessel and Crouse?


Recommended Posts

Arizona, seems to be going all in: doing a quick rebuild by acquiring as many picks, in these next two [loaded] drafts.  I wonder, how this gamble will work out, for one of the ever rebuilding clubs.

 

Arizona, going fishing for another JB ?

Edited by ShawnAntoski
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Jester13 said:

I agree with everything you've said, except that I don't believe Petey is a top 6 C. I don't see him as a centerman at all anymore. He's not strong enough and is terrible at faceoffs, which is why we saw him play wing tonight. Miller and Bo are out top 6 Cs.

 

Petey could eventually be replaced by Klimovich or someone else via trade. For me, at this point when we'll have to make important decisions such as Miller, Bo, Boeser, or Petey, I choose the three former and trade the latter; with JR loving to trade struggling player for struggling player, Petey for Chychrun might make sense. But, I agree that I don't think Arizona says yes.

Yeah, there is a discussion to be had on that point by team management. This being said, whether Pettersson is a top-6 C or not, there still ain't anyone in the system who looks like they could replace Pettersson's point output (at least from what we've seen from his first two seasons).

 

Klimmovich will (very likely) play at the NHL level, but I don't see him as being a replacement for Pettersson as far as point production on the from the wing. It would be nice if I was wrong. :)

 

                                                   regards,  G.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gollumpus said:

Yeah, there is a discussion to be had on that point by team management. This being said, whether Pettersson is a top-6 C or not, there still ain't anyone in the system who looks like they could replace Pettersson's point output (at least from what we've seen from his first two seasons).

 

Klimmovich will (very likely) play at the NHL level, but I don't see him as being a replacement for Pettersson as far as point production on the from the wing. It would be nice if I was wrong. :)

 

                                                   regards,  G.

Gawd, I hate even thinking about this, but I'm starting to wonder more and more if we might need to do a much larger retool than originally thought? Trading any of our top guys means that we can get some very nice returns, but - as you mention - any one of them will leave a gaping hole in their position, so if we trade one for a really nice return, it might be something to think about trading more than one of them and just biting the bullet for the next few years+. The only other option, really, is to stick with our current core and try to bolster the guys around them, but even that isn't going to be easy. And, I feel as though all of Bo, Petey, and Boeser are underperforming a lot with what we truly need out of them to be a contender, so it's a pretty big risk to hold onto them all and hope they regain their form and outperform their contracts rather than under, and then we're eventually forced to sell low and start a rebuild in a few years without any sniffs at the playoffs/cup. JR & Co. have a very tough job ahead of them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, shiznak said:

I think ideally, you’ll have to move OEL if we acquire Chychrun. He doesn’t fit with this team’s window to compete and his play doesn’t really account for his caphit. He’s been fine defensively, but offensively he has been nonexistent. We could’ve just re-signed Edler, and he’ll probably be doing the same thing OEL been doing for us, but without the huge caphit.
 

Having said that, Chychrun has played on the right side before in juniors and most recently last year, where he had his best offensive year. So, maybe he’s more comfortable playing on the right side?
 

Now, the question is who does he play with? I don’t think he will mesh well with Hughes, as both players like to carry the puck and go on the attack. Phoenix/Arizona tried playing OEL with Chychrun before, but it was a failed experiment. Although this was when OEL was more of a puck carrier and Chychrun was just breaking into the league. I could see them working well in the present day.

As mentioned above, trading Ekman-Larsson is a great idea (for those who want to do that), however, his NMC complicates things, so I don't see it happening. And even if the Canucks could convince him that playing in a different city is a good idea, there's going to be a cost to the team:

 

* The Canucks will lose Ekman-Larsson (which is the point of the exercise), but does their play improve by a substantial amount by having Chychrun over Ekman-Larsson? In some ways, yes it likely/probably will, assuming Ekman-Larsson doesn't ramp up the offensive side of his game.

 

* The Canucks would potentially (likely) lose another high pick in moving Ekman-Larsson, as well as some prospects (maybe).

 

* Salary retention. I'm thinking the Canucks would have to retain at least $1 million, and possibly even $2 million to unload Ekman-Larsson. For another five years. 

 

I'm going to go with "the jury is still out" as far as Chychrun playing on the right side. It would be great if he could do it, and do it well. This being said, if he was acquired at the cost of moving out Ekman-Larsson, then Chychrun could just as easily be played on the left side, so problem solved.

 

Who does Chychrun play along if he is on the left side? Dunno. There really isn't a lot there. If he is on the right side, then I would agree that trying him along side of Ekman-Larsson would be the best shot.

 

                                                             regards,  G.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/12/2022 at 4:54 PM, BabychStache said:

I think you’re onto something here, but I think that’s a little too lopsided to work for the Canucks. 
 

Pete + 3rd

for 

Crouse + Chychrun

 

lets us keep the real offensive engine; JT Miller.

Maybe then flip Chychrun for another strong left D and a1st or 2nd. Save some dough and start to restock the cupboards.

 

What the hell- lets make it a 3 way! :towel:

 

BTW I agree with you get AZ to throw in 1 of their many pics as well.

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

On 1/11/2022 at 7:39 AM, Goal:thecup said:

Not much being said about JB being able to dump old guys with fat contracts onto the desert dogs, which I think is a huge part of that deal.

Dead guys cap hit gone; OEL, and Garly?

Incredible.

Totally.

 

E r i k s s o n, Beagle and Roussel we’re not assets; they were liabilities.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, ShawnAntoski said:

Arizona, seems to be going all in: doing a quick rebuild by acquiring as many picks, in these next two [loaded] drafts.  I wonder, how this gamble will work out, for one of the ever rebuilding clubs.

 

Arizona, going fishing for another JB ?

Even if they have good players, learning to win is entirely different. They can’t just accumulate draft picks and get all young players to play together. We’ve seen that with Edmonton, and look how that’s turned out for them over the years. 

 

There needs to be a good mix of veteran players (good ones), and young talent. 

 

It’s really hard to do. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd argue we still miss Beagle, we never actually replaced him. He just took up more cap than some would have liked, but I had no issue with his play. Not having him or Sutter really hurt our PK earlier in the season.

 

Rouss was full value before his knee injury and his stats bear that out. Not the first player to have his career derailed by a knee injury.

 

Player Name was a disaster that few, if any, saw coming.

  • Like 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, N4ZZY said:

Even if they have good players, learning to win is entirely different. They can’t just accumulate draft picks and get all young players to play together. We’ve seen that with Edmonton, and look how that’s turned out for them over the years. 

 

There needs to be a good mix of veteran players (good ones), and young talent. 

 

It’s really hard to do. 

 

You can add, Buffalo, NJ and Ottawa as a few of the teams, that are ever rebuilding.  Player acquisition, is just one part of the equation cause we had already seen, how a roster will have different results, with a different coach.   Can't wait, what JR will be able to do with this roster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/14/2022 at 7:54 AM, Jester13 said:

Gawd, I hate even thinking about this, but I'm starting to wonder more and more if we might need to do a much larger retool than originally thought? Trading any of our top guys means that we can get some very nice returns, but - as you mention - any one of them will leave a gaping hole in their position, so if we trade one for a really nice return, it might be something to think about trading more than one of them and just biting the bullet for the next few years+. The only other option, really, is to stick with our current core and try to bolster the guys around them, but even that isn't going to be easy. And, I feel as though all of Bo, Petey, and Boeser are underperforming a lot with what we truly need out of them to be a contender, so it's a pretty big risk to hold onto them all and hope they regain their form and outperform their contracts rather than under, and then we're eventually forced to sell low and start a rebuild in a few years without any sniffs at the playoffs/cup. JR & Co. have a very tough job ahead of them. 

Apologies for the late response, I was being nibbled to death by guppies... or I was kidnapped by gypsies. One of the two.

 

Short answer: yes, they do.

 

                                    regards,  G.

 

Longer answer:

 

The team is (again) in a state of flux, which as you have observed, trading one guy to fill a hole in the roster would only lead to another hole/weakness elsewhere. I suppose the question would come down to which moves (assuming there are moves) will provide the most value/return for the assets moved and the overall team needs.

 

I see there being three guys who could be moved, for varying reasons, Boeser, Huighes and Pettersson. Ekman-Larsson has a NMC, so unless you have inside knowledge of why he would consider waiving there's no sense in any further mention of his name. Myers has a NTC, which allows some wiggle room, but his camp probably has most/all of the teams with lots of cap space who might be willing to take him on, for a price. How much does anyone think the Canucks should pay out to another to take on Myers, and what becomes of the very large hole he leaves on the right side?

 

Horvat isn't a worthy candidate for trading (this year), unless someone comes up with a really huge overpayment. He's also my favorite player on this team, so if he were traded it might well use up the last of the goodwill I feel for the Canucks organization.

 

In some cases current cap concerns could be part of the decision to move them, or not. Boeser is the guy who is at the top of the list, in part because of his pending RFA status. If Boeser wants more than what would be deemed a reasonable amount (maybe $2 million raise?/term), then trading him makes a lot of sense, depending on what comes back (of course). Of the three players mentioned, Hughes is probably the easiest guy to move. He's young, playing as advertised (he scores a lot of points), and he has a fairly reasonable contract with term. (For those who keep bandying his name around, Miller is currently the team's best player, so moving him anytime before the last year of his current contract doesn't make sense, unless there was also a huge overpayment.)

 

* By "huge overpayment" I'm thinking a 1st, a blue chip prospect, and a fairly good quality roster player - the quality of the latter two would depend on the potential level of the 1st round pick. If the level is bottom third (assuming no significant progress in the playoffs) then the prospect and player's value goes up.

 

* If Boeser were moved (atm I'd prefer that he wasn't), the team loses a lot of production from the RW. The team also gains a lot of flexibility as far as cap issues go. Who does the team have to fill that void left by trading Boeser? Podkolzin (eventually)? The cast of thousands - Garland, Motte, Hoglander etc. Lockwood? There doesn't look to be a lot of promise here, but I would be very pleased to be shown to be wrong in my assessment.

 

A RW might be an ask for the prospect/player in a return for Boeser.

 

* Moving Hughes should bring back a significant return. Depending on who is coming back the other way. Moving him clears some cap, and frees up the left side D, depending on who comes back in such a deal.

 

* Pettersson could be difficult to move, partly due to his contract, and that he isn't playing as advertised (at least not currently). He isn't performing as a top-6 C, and he isn't performing as a top-6 LW. Why? I dunno, but he isn't. He is making himself expendable. Maybe it's COVID related, maybe there's some other health concern. Maybe he's just lost his desire to play (it happens). Maybe he'll find his touch later this season, but if he doesn't, and a really good deal comes along then I suspect he will be gone. Either way, I wish him well.

 

*Cut to the chase, I got stuff to do*

 

Assuming Arizona were the trading partner (as is the topic of this thread), I'd be very happy were the Canucks to acquire Chychrun and Crouse. I'd start the dangle by offering Hughes for both of those guys+. I'd let them laugh themselves out before letting them put forward a counter offer, or to make an addition to the initial offer. I'd then offer Pettersson, and see how that goes, and so on. I'd be looking for Chychrun, Crouse and a 1st (at a minimum).

 

My belief is that while the Canucks would lose points scored by a couple of individual players (Hughes/Pettersson), overall team goals scored would go up with Chychrun and Crouse.

 

                                                        regards,  G.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/14/2022 at 7:54 AM, Jester13 said:

Gawd, I hate even thinking about this, but I'm starting to wonder more and more if we might need to do a much larger retool than originally thought? Trading any of our top guys means that we can get some very nice returns, but - as you mention - any one of them will leave a gaping hole in their position, so if we trade one for a really nice return, it might be something to think about trading more than one of them and just biting the bullet for the next few years+. The only other option, really, is to stick with our current core and try to bolster the guys around them, but even that isn't going to be easy. And, I feel as though all of Bo, Petey, and Boeser are underperforming a lot with what we truly need out of them to be a contender, so it's a pretty big risk to hold onto them all and hope they regain their form and outperform their contracts rather than under, and then we're eventually forced to sell low and start a rebuild in a few years without any sniffs at the playoffs/cup. JR & Co. have a very tough job ahead of them. 

Yep, bigger retool should be considered.

 

I'd start off by trading JT Miller at the TDL. And give EP, Boeser, and Horvat one more season to prove that they can lead the team.

 

If we falter yet again next season, then next TDL should see at least one of EP, Boeser, and Horvat as trade baits.

 

Hughes and Demko should be the only safe players at that point.

 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Gollumpus said:

Apologies for the late response, I was being nibbled to death by guppies... or I was kidnapped by gypsies. One of the two.

 

Short answer: yes, they do.

 

                                    regards,  G.

 

Longer answer:

 

The team is (again) in a state of flux, which as you have observed, trading one guy to fill a hole in the roster would only lead to another hole/weakness elsewhere. I suppose the question would come down to which moves (assuming there are moves) will provide the most value/return for the assets moved and the overall team needs.

 

I see there being three guys who could be moved, for varying reasons, Boeser, Huighes and Pettersson. Ekman-Larsson has a NMC, so unless you have inside knowledge of why he would consider waiving there's no sense in any further mention of his name. Myers has a NTC, which allows some wiggle room, but his camp probably has most/all of the teams with lots of cap space who might be willing to take him on, for a price. How much does anyone think the Canucks should pay out to another to take on Myers, and what becomes of the very large hole he leaves on the right side?

 

Horvat isn't a worthy candidate for trading (this year), unless someone comes up with a really huge overpayment. He's also my favorite player on this team, so if he were traded it might well use up the last of the goodwill I feel for the Canucks organization.

 

In some cases current cap concerns could be part of the decision to move them, or not. Boeser is the guy who is at the top of the list, in part because of his pending RFA status. If Boeser wants more than what would be deemed a reasonable amount (maybe $2 million raise?/term), then trading him makes a lot of sense, depending on what comes back (of course). Of the three players mentioned, Hughes is probably the easiest guy to move. He's young, playing as advertised (he scores a lot of points), and he has a fairly reasonable contract with term. (For those who keep bandying his name around, Miller is currently the team's best player, so moving him anytime before the last year of his current contract doesn't make sense, unless there was also a huge overpayment.)

 

* By "huge overpayment" I'm thinking a 1st, a blue chip prospect, and a fairly good quality roster player - the quality of the latter two would depend on the potential level of the 1st round pick. If the level is bottom third (assuming no significant progress in the playoffs) then the prospect and player's value goes up.

 

* If Boeser were moved (atm I'd prefer that he wasn't), the team loses a lot of production from the RW. The team also gains a lot of flexibility as far as cap issues go. Who does the team have to fill that void left by trading Boeser? Podkolzin (eventually)? The cast of thousands - Garland, Motte, Hoglander etc. Lockwood? There doesn't look to be a lot of promise here, but I would be very pleased to be shown to be wrong in my assessment.

 

A RW might be an ask for the prospect/player in a return for Boeser.

 

* Moving Hughes should bring back a significant return. Depending on who is coming back the other way. Moving him clears some cap, and frees up the left side D, depending on who comes back in such a deal.

 

* Pettersson could be difficult to move, partly due to his contract, and that he isn't playing as advertised (at least not currently). He isn't performing as a top-6 C, and he isn't performing as a top-6 LW. Why? I dunno, but he isn't. He is making himself expendable. Maybe it's COVID related, maybe there's some other health concern. Maybe he's just lost his desire to play (it happens). Maybe he'll find his touch later this season, but if he doesn't, and a really good deal comes along then I suspect he will be gone. Either way, I wish him well.

 

*Cut to the chase, I got stuff to do*

 

Assuming Arizona were the trading partner (as is the topic of this thread), I'd be very happy were the Canucks to acquire Chychrun and Crouse. I'd start the dangle by offering Hughes for both of those guys+. I'd let them laugh themselves out before letting them put forward a counter offer, or to make an addition to the initial offer. I'd then offer Pettersson, and see how that goes, and so on. I'd be looking for Chychrun, Crouse and a 1st (at a minimum).

 

My belief is that while the Canucks would lose points scored by a couple of individual players (Hughes/Pettersson), overall team goals scored would go up with Chychrun and Crouse.

 

                                                        regards,  G.

Hughes is untouchable, imo. I like Chychrun, but with his injury history I definitely don't want to replace Hughes for him. 

 

Our team can be pretty frustrating because they have so much darn potential as a core group, but there are many games where they just don't show up. But when they do show up they look like contenders. I just wish they had the fire game in and game out.

 

The more I think about the whole situation, the more I want this core to stick together and continue to grow together. I'd really like to see our defence restructured to be more balanced. This means we have to get rid of Hamonic and Poolman, as that's $5.5 million we could spend on a #4 dman and then try to have Rathbone on the bottom left with a cheap stay-at-home, serviceable rhdamn for the #6 slot. I'm also glad we got Garland, and OEL is a good player, but we're simply spending too much on him to play an offensive role for us.  Alas, he's untradeable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Jester13 said:

Hughes is untouchable, imo. I like Chychrun, but with his injury history I definitely don't want to replace Hughes for him. 

 

Our team can be pretty frustrating because they have so much darn potential as a core group, but there are many games where they just don't show up. But when they do show up they look like contenders. I just wish they had the fire game in and game out.

 

The more I think about the whole situation, the more I want this core to stick together and continue to grow together. I'd really like to see our defence restructured to be more balanced. This means we have to get rid of Hamonic and Poolman, as that's $5.5 million we could spend on a #4 dman and then try to have Rathbone on the bottom left with a cheap stay-at-home, serviceable rhdamn for the #6 slot. I'm also glad we got Garland, and OEL is a good player, but we're simply spending too much on him to play an offensive role for us.  Alas, he's untradeable. 

You want to get "rid" of Hamonic and replace him with rathbone?  Did you just start watching hockey?

This isnt a fantasy hockey pool.  

Little Rathbone is going to end up the likes of rafferty and chatfield.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/15/2022 at 6:25 PM, khay said:

Yep, bigger retool should be considered.

 

I'd start off by trading JT Miller at the TDL. And give EP, Boeser, and Horvat one more season to prove that they can lead the team.

 

If we falter yet again next season, then next TDL should see at least one of EP, Boeser, and Horvat as trade baits.

 

Hughes and Demko should be the only safe players at that point.

 

Horvat has been leading the team.  As has Miller.  Petey is growing.   Boesers already a goner. No way on earth does jr sign him to 7.5.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, EddieVedder said:

You want to get "rid" of Hamonic and replace him with rathbone?  Did you just start watching hockey?

This isnt a fantasy hockey pool.  

Little Rathbone is going to end up the likes of rafferty and chatfield.  

Nice try, but I'm not biting on your hook.

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...