It's Eklund though. However, it's worth noting. Usually, his posts say not imminent, or "it's close", however this one said "nearly complete".
We would be getting a defenseman and a forward. The source he received this information from said its win-win for both teams.
We'd be getting 2 players, they would be getting 1.
Bieska comes to mind as a defenseman and I don't know who it would be for a forward.
I'm pretty sure Bieksa just got hurt.
I dont believe in eklund though I do read his twitter updates when I'm bored. I guess we can ponder this one. But I really dont know what we would be getting that would be valuable from a team that is 1st in the conference, if not the league? I'm not sure on that but they are definitely up there.
Don't think it makes a difference, he's wrong a majority of the time. Hope this isn't true, I like the team the way it is now; we just need to get healthy again.
Bieksa got beat up in a fight but thats about it. I just dont see Vancouver dealing him
I also dont see sather making a deal on the day of a game.
I'd rather be patient and go for Weiss or Olesz. Maybe even Hemsky if he is available. Then grab a cheap vet defenseman or a solid one with an expiring contract.
Am I wrong in thinking that I'd rather have it be us getting one and giving up two players? Seems like I'd rather give quantity and gain quality not the other way around.
He has us recieving two "solid" players yet we are dealing a "bigger forward" in return. LOL what "bigger" forwards do we have to offer? Gaborik? W2? Theres no way in hell sather would deal the kids. We're not dealing Gaborik. And W2 has been solid for us. Stupid rumor.
He has us recieving two "solid" players yet we are dealing a "bigger forward" in return. LOL what "bigger" forwards do we have to offer? Gaborik? W2? Theres no way in hell sather would deal the kids. We're not dealing Gaborik. And W2 has been solid for us. Stupid rumor.
The only person who I can think that the Canucks might have interest in, who would fit salary wise is Fedotenko. Obviously we'd have interest in Dubinsky or Callahan but I seriously doubt they'd be going anywhere for anyone we'd be willing to offer.
The only person who I can think that the Canucks might have interest in, who would fit salary wise is Fedotenko. Obviously we'd have interest in Dubinsky or Callahan but I seriously doubt they'd be going anywhere for anyone we'd be willing to offer.
Fedotenko is hurt (just like the rest of the team ).
I always wondered why people post Eklund rumors, then always say "it's Eklund". If you don't believe this guy (and I don't), why post it to begin with?
At first, I thought a 2 for 1 seemed ridiculous given our depth but then I remembered that we have a bajillion injuries. Well this rumor sounds more credible than his ridiculous Calgary-NJ / Tor-Dal post.
Outside of Drury, I can't think of any uninjured players I would want to 2-for-1 for. Would Vancouver take any of our injured players? I think Fedotenko is the player highest on the depth chart I'd be willing to deal. Prospal shouldn't even be an option. I doubt they'll want EC.
OT: EC, MZA, Wolski will be a sweet shoot out trio.
I always wondered why people post Eklund rumors, then always say "it's Eklund". If you don't believe this guy (and I don't), why post it to begin with?
Eklund serves a purpose: after reading his rumors, we know for a fact who we will NOT be trading with.
I always wondered why people post Eklund rumors, then always say "it's Eklund". If you don't believe this guy (and I don't), why post it to begin with?
Because this is a discussion board and this starts discussions. If you didn't believe it why'd you even bother?
With all the Rangers' injuries and scoring problems I don't know what forward they'd trade that would bring back a forward and a defenseman, especially a name like Bieksa.
One thing I noticed looking over Vancouver's stats the other day is that Keith Ballard's average time on ice is down almost 7 minutes from his usual career average. I don't know if he's had injury problems or an off year or he's just lower on the depth chart because he's on a much better team than Phoenix or Florida, but he's playing about 15 minutes a game as opposed to 22. But this is not enough to make me think he's available. I always thought Gillis made those moves this offseason to significantly upgrade his depth on defense, so I don't think he'll undo it now by moving one of them. That Vancouver defense corps is much improved. The one thing I could think of is maybe his salary is prohibiting them from doing something else so they're entertaining the thought of moving it?
Without following Vancouver much this year I'd say Ballard probably just ended up being the one very solid defenseman they're forced to put on the third pair. Someone has to play there. And Bieksa from what I've heard has been very good this year so I doubt they're moving him. At least not for what the Rangers could offer.
If I had to guess I'd wager that the defensemen in this rumor could be names like Alberts or Rome. Is Ryan Parent's back healthy?
I don't know who the forward could be. Maybe Raymond.
).
