HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=3)
-   -   Dreger: Gillis targeting Schneider (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=546879)

fogducker 08-28-2008 01:10 AM

Gillis targeting Schneider
 
tsn.ca

Gillis also looking for a centre (duh..)

Randall Graves* 08-28-2008 01:12 AM

What are considered the canucks expendable assets? If they got Schneider then they could flip another dman into a center?

pitseleh 08-28-2008 01:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randall Graves (Post 15278482)
What are considered the canucks expendable assets? If they got Schneider then they could flip another dman into a center?

Yeah, I think that'd be the plan. Acquire a short-term fix like Schneider then try to flip a long-term asset like Bieksa in a package for a center.

Hi-wayman 08-28-2008 01:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randall Graves (Post 15278482)
What are considered the canucks expendable assets? If they got Schneider then they could flip another dman into a center?

Not likely. Three of our older, top defensemen have NTC's. Schnieder would be condisered a short term fix for this season only, a quality defenseman whom Gillis would expect to get cheap (Burke has to dump some salary and Schnieder is the best source). Of our younger defensemen, only Bieksa, Edler and to some extent Krajicek have any meaningful trade value, but they are being groomed for the eventual replacement for Ohlund, Mitchell & Salo over the next 2 to 3 years. In the mean time, they fill the roles of #4, 5 & 6 defensemen on a team that suddenly lacks much in defensive depth until Sauve & Ellington are ready.

Gillis will continue to be patient and wait for teams to want to dispose of players at less then market value and he likely will use draft picks as trading chips.

Bobby Lou 08-28-2008 01:27 AM

I don't mind Schneider at all, and the Canucks don't really have a high calibre puck-mover on the back-end, but I'd be very tentative in giving up anything substantial for a 40 year old offensive d-man.

pitseleh 08-28-2008 01:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hi-wayman (Post 15278535)
Of our younger defensemen, only Bieksa, Edler and to some extent Krajicek have any meaningful trade value, but they are being groomed for the eventual replacement for Ohlund, Mitchell & Salo over the next 2 to 3 years. In the mean time, they fill the roles of #4, 5 & 6 defensemen on a team that suddenly lacks much in defensive depth until Sauve & Ellington are ready.

I think that's being conservative in terms of long-term planning. I think it's realistic to expect that Salo will be able to finish out his contract (3 more years) and that Ohlund and Mitchell will play until they are 36 or 37 (so ~5 more years each).

With that in mind it isn't a terrible idea to move one of the young defensemen ready now under the premise that by the time two or three of those players have retired you should have developed a defenseman or two more through the draft (in addition to at least one of the prospects currently on the team). In a worst case scenario where you don't get the expected years out of your defensemen, there is always the option of looking for a replacement through the trade/free agent market.

Obviously I don't want him to mortgage the future completely, but being too conservative with the defense assets in place today would be detrimental to the on-ice product now.

Hi-wayman 08-28-2008 01:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pitseleh (Post 15278507)
Yeah, I think that'd be the plan. Acquire a short-term fix like Schneider then try to flip a long-term asset like Bieksa in a package for a center.

I have to disagree with you. Though the team would not be a strong cup contender, the team as it stands now has enough players to start the season and almost assuredly make the playoffs barring a similar horrendous injury filled season like the last. Any defenseman or centre that Gillis acquires now will be just to add more depth to the list of players already signed. Why would Gillis trade Bieksa or Edler just to get an extra centre to compete against Wellwood, Krog, Kesler, Shannon, Hodgson or Demitea for the 2nd or 3rd line centre spot for the season opener. Would it not be best to wait and see if those already on the team can fill the position prior to trading away a key defensive player?

pitseleh 08-28-2008 01:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hi-wayman (Post 15278613)
I have to disagree with you. Though the team would not be a strong cup contender, the team as it stands now has enough players to start the season and almost assuredly make the playoffs barring a similar horrendous injury filled season like the last. Any defenseman or centre that Gillis acquires now will be just to add more depth to the list of players already signed. Why would Gillis trade Bieksa or Edler just to get an extra centre to compete against Wellwood, Krog, Kesler, Shannon, Hodgson or Demitea for the 2nd or 3rd line centre spot for the season opener. Would it not be best to wait and see if those already on the team can fill the position prior to trading away a key defensive player?

The way I see it, while the Canucks have a bunch of depth they are lacking in higher end talent on the forward lines, and with only one position left to fill (assuming one of the second line wing positions is open to competition at camp) it stands as the best opportunity to make a significant impact on the team. Obviously I don't want to do it if Bieksa is being moved for a marginal upgrade. But as part of a package for a strong(er), preferably long-term top-6 option I think it makes sense.

Schneider upgrades the offense from the defense substantially, and with a quality forward inserted into the top-6 I think the Canucks would be in good shape going into the season.

Spawn 08-28-2008 01:45 AM

He's a decent hockey player, and on a 1 year deal with plenty of cap space on the Canucks he'd be a good pickup. I didn't like the signing for the ducks in relation to the d-core they had and the cap space they had but for the Canucks I think he'd be a good fit. Would help the PP.

My only concern if I was a Canucks fan would be adding yet another injury prone defenseman to a defense core that already has issues with a few guys not being able to stay healthy for an entire season.

If all healthy though, a defense of Ohlund, Mitchell, Salo, Edler, Bieksa and Schneider would be one of the best in the league though for sure.

myrocketsgotcracked 08-28-2008 01:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hi-wayman (Post 15278613)
I have to disagree with you. Though the team would not be a strong cup contender, the team as it stands now has enough players to start the season and almost assuredly make the playoffs barring a similar horrendous injury filled season like the last. Any defenseman or centre that Gillis acquires now will be just to add more depth to the list of players already signed. Why would Gillis trade Bieksa or Edler just to get an extra centre to compete against Wellwood, Krog, Kesler, Shannon, Hodgson or Demitea for the 2nd or 3rd line centre spot for the season opener. Would it not be best to wait and see if those already on the team can fill the position prior to trading away a key defensive player?

because, as it stand right now, those guys aren't ideal 2nd line center material. eventually hoghson will be, but if we want to compete now we can't count on the like of krogs or shannon to anchor the 2nd line. demitra is better suited on the wing IMO. i wouldn't want to wait till the season start and find out none of them can handle the responsibility, once you fall behind in the west it is really hard to catch up.
plus with ohlund, salo, mitchell, and if we make the trade, schneider, we have an excellent group of top 4. we can afford to deal either bieksa or edler for offensive help, especially with krajicek still in the system and need playing time. of course we aren't going to sell of bieksa or edler for a declining player, but somebody young and offensive (if we can acquire those kind of player) is acceptable return right now.

TOML 08-28-2008 01:57 AM

I suppose Krajicek and Cowan are available. Pettinger, maybe.

Vatican Roulette 08-28-2008 02:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hi-wayman (Post 15278535)
Not likely. Three of our older, top defensemen have NTC's. Schnieder would be condisered a short term fix for this season only, a quality defenseman whom Gillis would expect to get cheap (Burke has to dump some salary and Schnieder is the best source). Of our younger defensemen, only Bieksa, Edler and to some extent Krajicek have any meaningful trade value, but they are being groomed for the eventual replacement for Ohlund, Mitchell & Salo over the next 2 to 3 years. In the mean time, they fill the roles of #4, 5 & 6 defensemen on a team that suddenly lacks much in defensive depth until Sauve & Ellington are ready.

Gillis will continue to be patient and wait for teams to want to dispose of players at less then market value and he likely will use draft picks as trading chips.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pitseleh (Post 15278598)
I think that's being conservative in terms of long-term planning. I think it's realistic to expect that Salo will be able to finish out his contract (3 more years) and that Ohlund and Mitchell will play until they are 36 or 37 (so ~5 more years each).

With that in mind it isn't a terrible idea to move one of the young defensemen ready now under the premise that by the time two or three of those players have retired you should have developed a defenseman or two more through the draft (in addition to at least one of the prospects currently on the team). In a worst case scenario where you don't get the expected years out of your defensemen, there is always the option of looking for a replacement through the trade/free agent market.

Obviously I don't want him to mortgage the future completely, but being too conservative with the defense assets in place today would be detrimental to the on-ice product now.


Thank you both, for having a hockey conversation without calling each other morons, and I mean this in the highest respect. It's been a long time since I've seen a conversation that isn't immature.

Now. I think if the Canucks could spare a d-man, likely a prospect like Ellington and a pick for Schneider, that would help in the forward position as well. On the PP the Canucks lack a guy to be the go-to man, and they have decent talent on the forward position. Givin a PP QB, I think this area would take off, rather than siging/trading for a 2nd line center. The problem in my eyes is the Canucks don't have a player that controls their PP, a dominant force, Schenider would be that guy. Another forward would be gravy, but IMO they don't need to spend the money or assets obtaining that forward, unless the PP goes to hell during the season.

A freshly drafted defensive prospect and a pick would be a great return for a salary strapped team, givin the value I think Schneider holds.


Disagree with me and thats quite fine (I don't follow the Canucks more than 12 times a year) but if you do give me a reason, I'd love to debate it in a objective manner.

Hi-wayman 08-28-2008 02:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pitseleh (Post 15278598)
I think that's being conservative in terms of long-term planning. I think it's realistic to expect that Salo will be able to finish out his contract (3 more years) and that Ohlund and Mitchell will play until they are 36 or 37 (so ~5 more years each).

With that in mind it isn't a terrible idea to move one of the young defensemen ready now under the premise that by the time two or three of those players have retired you should have developed a defenseman or two more through the draft (in addition to at least one of the prospects currently on the team). In a worst case scenario where you don't get the expected years out of your defensemen, there is always the option of looking for a replacement through the trade/free agent market.

Obviously I don't want him to mortgage the future completely, but being too conservative with the defense assets in place today would be detrimental to the on-ice product now.

For the last three season's, the Canucks have lacked enough quality forwards to fill the roster spots for the team's top six. We drafted a number of good prospects, but they were years away from playing in the NHL. Fortunately we acquired a allstar goalie and were lucky to have Bieksa and Edler develop years ahead of when they were expected to so we had a strong backend.

Time has passed and our prospects who were years away from playing in the NHL are no longer years away. Some, Hansen and Raymond are ready to play this season. Brown, Rypien & Grabner, if they aren't ready this season will be ready for the following season. Grabner may even turn into a superstar. Hodgson is likely at the most just 2 seasons away.

As a team with Demitra, Daniel & Henrik, our top six really only has three vacant roster spots, two of which likely are filled by Bernier and Raymond. That leaves just one roster spot for an unknown. Sundin was supposed to fill that spot for this season and possibly next, but if he doesn't come, do you honestly feel that not one of Grabner, Wellwood, Krog, Hansen, Shannon, Pyatt or Pettinger will not be good enough to fill that sixth spot? Definately Kesler and Edler make our defense better than it would be without one of them.

Quagmier 08-28-2008 02:11 AM

Am I crazy, or does Gillis seem to be copying off of Gainey's exam sheet?

fogducker 08-28-2008 02:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quagmier (Post 15278745)
Am I crazy, or does Gillis seem to be copying off of Gainey's exam sheet?

or Gainey is copying Gillis

deanosaur 08-28-2008 02:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spawn (Post 15278651)
He's a decent hockey player, and on a 1 year deal with plenty of cap space on the Canucks he'd be a good pickup. I didn't like the signing for the ducks in relation to the d-core they had and the cap space they had but for the Canucks I think he'd be a good fit. Would help the PP.

My only concern if I was a Canucks fan would be adding yet another injury prone defenseman to a defense core that already has issues with a few guys not being able to stay healthy for an entire season.

If all healthy though, a defense of Ohlund, Mitchell, Salo, Edler, Bieksa and Schneider would be one of the best in the league though for sure.

He plays atleast 65+ games a season... That's better than all of the Canucks dmen.. I wouldn't necessarily call that injury prone, but he's no ironman either.

Hi-wayman 08-28-2008 02:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vatican Roulette (Post 15278737)
Thank you both, for having a hockey conversation without calling each other morons, and I mean this in the highest respect. It's been a long time since I've seen a conversation that isn't immature.

Now. I think if the Canucks could spare a d-man, likely a prospect like Ellington and a pick for Schneider, that would help in the forward position as well. On the PP the Canucks lack a guy to be the go-to man, and they have decent talent on the forward position. Givin a PP QB, I think this area would take off, rather than siging/trading for a 2nd line center. The problem in my eyes is the Canucks don't have a player that controls their PP, a dominant force, Schenider would be that guy. Another forward would be gravy, but IMO they don't need to spend the money or assets obtaining that forward, unless the PP goes to hell during the season.

A freshly drafted defensive prospect and a pick would be a great return for a salary strapped team, givin the value I think Schneider holds.

Disagree with me and thats quite fine (I don't follow the Canucks more than 12 times a year) but if you do give me a reason, I'd love to debate it in a objective manner.

I agree. Actually the ducks may be even more interested in a forward like Pyatt or Pettinger plus a draft pick than Ellington & a pick. The Ducks really don't have much bargaining power.

deanosaur 08-28-2008 02:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hi-wayman (Post 15278789)
I agree. Actually the ducks may be even more interested in a forward like Pyatt or Pettinger plus a draft pick than Ellington & a pick. The Ducks really don't have much bargaining power.

I don't know about that.
Would Pyatt or Pettinger be good enough? I mean as in would that possibly help at all in improving scoring issues they have.

Hi-wayman 08-28-2008 02:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by myrocketsgotcracked (Post 15278677)
because, as it stand right now, those guys aren't ideal 2nd line center material. eventually hoghson will be, but if we want to compete now we can't count on the like of krogs or shannon to anchor the 2nd line. demitra is better suited on the wing IMO. i wouldn't want to wait till the season start and find out none of them can handle the responsibility, once you fall behind in the west it is really hard to catch up.
plus with ohlund, salo, mitchell, and if we make the trade, schneider, we have an excellent group of top 4. we can afford to deal either bieksa or edler for offensive help, especially with krajicek still in the system and need playing time. of course we aren't going to sell of bieksa or edler for a declining player, but somebody young and offensive (if we can acquire those kind of player) is acceptable return right now.

No matter how good a young & offensive player the Canucks got, we could not compete against teams like Pittsbourgh, Washington, LA, Ottawa, Edmonton as an offensive style of play team. We don't have the depth of those types of forwards those teams have. Nor are we going to get a Malkin, a Crosby or the like for Bieksa or Edler in trade.

Vancouver's strength is the quality and depth of defensive role players on our team. It starts in goal with Luongo and spreads out with a strong top six on defense and a strong bottom six on our forward lines. To weaken any part of that just to improve our top six doesn't give our team a better chance at the Cup. Reducing our team's strengths just leads us into that medioratim of average teams that have quality players at each level, but lack any special advantage over the rest of the league.

Yes we need to score more goals, but that can be achieved in many ways. Bernier and Demitra should be better than Naslund and Morrison (though I'd love to get Morrison back). Our strong defensive style should prevent a few more goals this season while also being able to add to the offense. The bottom six has improved immensely and should help the PK. While the top six is only slightly improved, the type of players Gillis is sighning are the type that usually are very good on special teams.

To try an make this a Cup team in one season is not realistic. Trading away players who should be there to help you two & three seasons away is a step backwards in my opinion and in two or three seasons Hodgson and Grabner will both be there ready to play.

Hi-wayman 08-28-2008 02:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deangamblin (Post 15278805)
I don't know about that.
Would Pyatt or Pettinger be good enough? I mean as in would that possibly help at all in improving scoring issues they have.

Pyatt is actually a pretty under-rated player. He is a solid third line winger who has little problem filling in on the second line when needed.

The Ducks know they will not get value for Schnieder. Moving him will be a salary dump. I just think the Ducks would be more interested in a player who can fill a roster spot than acquiring a prospect who is still a couple of years away.

Kesler Kills Kommies 08-28-2008 03:28 AM

he is 39 years old, no thanks

Sean Garrity 08-28-2008 03:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hi-wayman (Post 15278885)
Pyatt is actually a pretty under-rated player. He is a solid third line winger who has little problem filling in on the second line when needed.

The Ducks know they will not get value for Schnieder. Moving him will be a salary dump. I just think the Ducks would be more interested in a player who can fill a roster spot than acquiring a prospect who is still a couple of years away.

I could almost guarantee you, unless the player is a 2nd/1st line scoring winger and selanne doesn't resign(both are very unlikely) the ducks simply want to dump his salary. Assuming Selanne comes back our lines look like this.

Ryan - Getzlaf - Perry
Kunitz - Morisson - Selanne
Moen - Pahlsson - Niedermayer
3 of Carter, Suts, Parros, Marchant, May

Pronger-OD
Nieds-Beauch
Huskins-Montador

No need for anyone really.

Would Vancouver possibly want Marchant to look at as a possible 2nd line center? Or even 3rd line center and promote Kesler. (I honestly have no idea, so please don't rip this idea too bad)

Trends Analyst 08-28-2008 03:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by karacter (Post 15278967)

Would Vancouver possibly want Marchant to look at as a possible 2nd line center? Or even 3rd line center and promote Kesler. (I honestly have no idea, so please don't rip this idea too bad)


Nah, not at all, Kesler is an ideal 3rd line center, he thrives there.

VelvetJones 08-28-2008 03:44 AM

I could see it if they have a trade for a forward in the works. Lots of cap space and they could sacrifice one d-man.

Randall Graves* 08-28-2008 04:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spawn (Post 15278651)
He's a decent hockey player, and on a 1 year deal with plenty of cap space on the Canucks he'd be a good pickup. I didn't like the signing for the ducks in relation to the d-core they had and the cap space they had but for the Canucks I think he'd be a good fit. Would help the PP.

My only concern if I was a Canucks fan would be adding yet another injury prone defenseman to a defense core that already has issues with a few guys not being able to stay healthy for an entire season.

If all healthy though, a defense of Ohlund, Mitchell, Salo, Edler, Bieksa and Schneider would be one of the best in the league though for sure.

He's a top 3 defensemen that's more than just a decent hockey player.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:15 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.