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

[Rumour] Rangers shopping Nils Lundkvist


Recommended Posts

Just now, Kobayashi Maru said:

Amazing that if that said 6'0 instead of 5'11 we would be offering the moon for him.  He's obviously not a perfect fit for a variety of reasons, but could we move our Vet winger depth to give him a try?  What about Pearson and DiPietro for him?

Why would we be giving up anything for a defenceman who can't play defence, regardless of size?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Kobayashi Maru said:

Amazing that if that said 6'0 instead of 5'11 we would be offering the moon for him.  He's obviously not a perfect fit for a variety of reasons, but could we move our Vet winger depth to give him a try?  What about Pearson and DiPietro for him?

I don't like 187lbs.....

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Amazingly....one of the suggested centrepieces of a Miller deal but now available just because.

 

Fancy that

 

He IS an RHD though and will net a decent return from someone, just happy management didn't make a trade involving him just for the sake of making a trade

he was never going to be the centrepiece of a Miller deal

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

Why would we be giving up anything for a defenceman who can't play defence, regardless of size?

Sounds like that part of this game has improved and showing a +4 in a very very small sample set makes me think he is not a complete liability at all.  DiPietro is essentially nothing, and Pearson on the 4th line is also not what we need.  Nothing of significance is lost for a potential lotto ticket prospect.  If he doesn't pan out, it's of no loss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

Dermott>>>Lundqvist 

 

Only way this would make sense is if we traded a redundant player like DiPietro.

 

Even then we’d need to slip him through waivers and I doubt he would pass through.

You are probably right. I never noticed him in a bad way when he played 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Kobayashi Maru said:

Sounds like that part of this game has improved and showing a +4 in a very very small sample set makes me think he is not a complete liability at all.  DiPietro is essentially nothing, and Pearson on the 4th line is also not what we need.  Nothing of significance is lost for a potential lotto ticket prospect.  If he doesn't pan out, it's of no loss.

Pearson can still get you something of value instead of this pylon.  After seeing him play, he has little to no chance of ever learning how to actually play defence.  He's another Pouliot/Hunt/Del Zotto/Larsen.  We don't want any more of those guys, especially not at the expense of NHL quality players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DeNiro said:

Juulsen could actually surprise and get some games this season.

 

From the looks of it a fresh start at home has done him well.

Would love Juulsen cracking the big team.  Seems he could be the exact piece the defense group needs to round it out.   His first offseason being healthy in what I think is 3 years iirc.  

 

Don't know much about Lundqvist.  Good on PA for holding firm with the Rags though.  I bet he knew Lundqvist was already asking out and the Rags tried to play PA a fool.   

 

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

30 minutes ago, BabychStache said:

From an organizational standpoint it makes sense to make a pitch for him, but need to send cap back the other way. 

 

Dickinson + 5th for Lundkvist? Need the pick to compensate for the cap dump. 

I like this deal!!!

 

:towel:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

Pearson can still get you something of value instead of this pylon.  After seeing him play, he has little to no chance of ever learning how to actually play defence.  He's another Pouliot/Hunt/Del Zotto/Larsen.  We don't want any more of those guys, especially not at the expense of NHL quality players.

Ultimately this comes down to Pearson as DiPietro won't get us anything in return.  I think it's a safe bet that Pearson would be worth around a 3rd rounder, so the question becomes would you rather a 3rd rounder or Lundkvist?  Both are longshots, but I would go with the talent of Lundkvist, being an RD, and having a slightly higher potential of turning out vs a 3rd. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Kobayashi Maru said:

Ultimately this comes down to Pearson as DiPietro won't get us anything in return.  I think it's a safe bet that Pearson would be worth around a 3rd rounder, so the question becomes would you rather a 3rd rounder or Lundkvist?  Both are longshots, but I would go with the talent of Lundkvist, being an RD, and having a slightly higher potential of turning out vs a 3rd. 

I'd rather keep Pearson for anything less than a second, and I wouldn't put in a waiver claim for Lundvist.  Bottom line is that I don't want more defensive liabilities on our blueline.

Edited by King Heffy
Autocorrect sucks
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

Dermott>>>Lundqvist 

 

Only way this would make sense is if we traded a redundant player like DiPietro.

 

Even then we’d need to slip him through waivers and I doubt he would pass through.

Lundqvist is still waivers exempt

 

https://www.capfriendly.com/players/nils-lundkvist

 

He was a former first round pick, might do okay with the right coaching.

 

Ideally, we trade Miller to Rangers for Schneider and a 1st round pick and Lundqvist slides up in the Rangers lineup to take Schneider's spot.

 

Who's in favor of the Rangers sending us Schneider instead???

 

 

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

4 minutes ago, Angry Goose said:

 

BCD427CC-EAEE-435D-92C1-475E14D5862D.gif

Poolman has tons of negative value, Hoglander will probably have even less trade value by the end of this year since there's barely a spot for him on the team. I say kill 2 birds with one stone (find young RHD, get rid of Poolman's contract)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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