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

[Trade] Canucks trade Tyler Motte to Rangers for 2023 4th-round pick


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, DontMessMe said:

Like i said, something better than nothing. What will Motte do for the remaining games anyways. We not signing him... No point in discussing this anymore. I understand that you wouldve kept him while I wouldve just taken the 4th and called it. 

you see it as "something" is better than "nothing", I see it as "nothing" is worse than "20 games of motte".

 

a 4th rounder IS nothing as far as I'm concerned, since there's a 90%+ chance it'll never help the team in any way. 

 

not to mention the deflating effect of losing a popular teammate. 

  • Like 1
  • Cheers 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Vinny in Vancouver said:

That's the billion dollar question. But imho, it can't start with comparing ourselves to bad franchises. Listen, I'm not trying to pick on you - I'm just tried of the never-ending X-year retool plan that we've been sold on for over 7 years now. Rutherford just said last month that the Canucks won't be competitive until 2024 because they have some good pieces. But then he said that the Canucks players are slow and not skilled enough and are only competitive because of great goaltending. If that's what the players really are, then we should expect to get low value during trades - for example, see the Motte return. He also said we need to clear cap space. With all those constraints, is 2024 realistic?

I get it and what has added to the frustration - imo, is that both the Kings & Ducks are almost done with there respective rebuilds, whilst, the Canucks are headed in there second re tool. Canucks have no cap and no prospect depth to draw from vs what both Cali teams had accomplished, in the same period.  Aquaman and JR has to agree, that the previous models of re tooling, when the core is neither ready/set or declining will only perpetuate the cycle of mediocrity.  With JRs' resume I am expecting a lot but the team doesn't possess a Crosby or Malkin, he can build around - although, having Demko is a win.

 

Imo, the best model had been what most of the cap era champs had done: building up depth & acquiring core foundational pieces through drafting & development - with the support of coaches that fits with roster.  

 

Anyways, hoping for more context/data on the new crew in the draft and offseason.   

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JayDangles said:

Yeah but now our options with Miller are likely 

Take way less value in a future trade or handicap the team for 8 years by signing him to a ridiculous contract 

Kay? So what are you suggesting? Again, was Allvin supposed to blackmail someone into buying high on Miller? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, rekker said:

You take the fourth. Punch the lottery ticket, we haven't punch enough of them the last decade and a half. 

Then shouldn't we have kept the 3rd we got for Hamonic?  The philosophy of our owner is just the same as with Benning.  Try to speed up any retool using draft picks as the capital to do so.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Baggins said:

You don't think that's true? They moved the one pending UFA with "some" value. They rest weren't essential trade deadline moves. So if the offer wasn't great, why do it? It's not like Miller, Boeser, Garland, Myers, or Pearson are in position to just walk away after the season. There will be deals to be had before the draft and then again before free agency, and then again during the summer for those guys. You don't makes trades for the sake of making trades, or to simply appease fans wanting something to happen.

Then make some upgrades!!!!  Not like Dermott and Richardson in,  Hamonic and Motte out...  That is basically waving a white flag pretty much 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, PetterssonOrPeterson said:

we also copped out a 27 year old motte for a 37 year old richardson. Is that a building move? 

Yeah we got the 4th but why not then keep the 3rd as well instead of trading for dermott then? we don't even have enough money to qualify boeser at this point.

 

My point was that I don't get a clear indication that this management group at this point still has a set plan for where to go with this team which is a little disappointing. However you're right, this isn't the deadline for bigger deals where larger pieces might move around and this team could free up more cap space so I'll reserve my judgement for later.

 

A temporary no cost replacement to move Motte. Richardson is a low contract pending UFA that plays C or wing. A free Motte replacement to finish the season. 

 

Not doing what YOU want doesn't mean they don't have a plan. Even then plans should always be fluid based on what comes your way.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Alflives said:

IMHAO our owner has stepped in on any Miller trade in hopes of re-signing the player.  

That's your opinion, you're entitled to it. To me it seems much more likely he priced himself out of the market, like it has been reported on for weeks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Shayster007 said:

Kay? So what are you suggesting? Again, was Allvin supposed to blackmail someone into buying high on Miller? 

Honestly I don't know... But if we are going to end up trading him for less, might as well have done it now and moved on. The sooner we get some pics and prospects developing the better.

Paying him 9+mill is not an option. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s obviously a disappointing return for Motte, but at the same time, it’s right in line with returns on many of the player comparables this trade deadline, so it’s better than nothing.

 

Word is that management tried to get an extension done, at an AAV they could live with, but Motte’s demands were higher than this team could pay. That’s nothing against Motte. He deserves to get paid on his next deal. We just couldn’t afford the luxury.

 

So, under those circumstances, you take what you can get. 
 

One of the greatest sins a management team can commit, especially under the circumstances this team is facing, and at our stage of competitiveness, is to let expiring assets walk for nothing, if they don’t fit our future plans, and will not be retained.

 

You take the pick (and the cap space) and move on.

 

It hurts, because we all loved Motter and what he brought to this team, but the facts are he wasn’t coming back and we couldn’t afford him, so (like I said at the top) getting something is better than nothing.

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

10 minutes ago, combover said:

He wanted more than he was worth,

wouldn’t extend 

So trade pending ufas for assets

a 4th beats nothing. One of the biggest issues with JB was letting ufas walk for nothing. 


if you worried that motte was the difference between playoffs and not,

just stop and think about that

maybe say it out loud a 4th line winger was our best hope at making the post season…. Right. 

 



 

Literally who is saying that? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, kilgore said:

The one way I can be okay with today is if I do a little mental gymnastics, and switch what we got for Hamonic and Motte.

 

We got a third and a fourth,

For Motte and Hamonic.  

 

Plus added Richardson for nothing.

 

go Canucks go :unsure:

 

 

I think we traded that Hamonic 3rd for Dermott. So we got a 4th rounder and Dermott for Hamonic and Motter. Which looks less sexy than getting picks. But it is what it is. Maybe Schenn can help Dermott out. Dermott is more of an offensive guy, Schenn can babysit him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, tas said:

you see it as "something" is better than "nothing", I see it as "nothing" is worse than "20 games of motte".

 

a 4th rounder IS nothing as far as I'm concerned, since there's a 90%+ chance it'll never help the team in any way. 

 

not to mention the deflating effect of losing a popular teammate. 

Funny because we currently have a 10.1% chance of making the playoffs too. So essentially your swapping a 90% chance of a nothing prospect for a 90% chance we onyhl get 20 regular season games?>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, JayDangles said:

Honestly I don't know... But if we are going to end up trading him for less, might as well have done it now and moved on. The sooner we get some pics and prospects developing the better.

Paying him 9+mill is not an option. 

I agree signing him isn't a good call, but I don't know what you want me to say here Jay. Clearly Allvin didn't get an offer that sounded fair, I wouldn't have wanted him to panic and dump Miller for under market value. Could you imagine the fallout if that had gone down?

  • Cheers 2
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...