HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Notices

All Purpose Proposals Mashup Pt. II

View Poll Results: would you sign morrison
yes 13 19.70%
no 53 80.30%
Voters: 66. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-31-2011, 03:10 PM
  #301
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,225
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsAllPartOfThePlan View Post
I guess I don't see Oshie as a pass-first winger otherwise I would be inclined to agree with you and get the more established player.
"Pass-first" may be the wrong descriptor, but he usually ends with more assists than goals. Like 40%/60% split.


Canucker: Fair enough.

Bleach Clean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2011, 04:27 PM
  #302
Winroba
Keep Calm, Kassi On
 
Winroba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,318
vCash: 500
Was thinking that Byfuglien would be a great net presence for the Sedins and then I came up with this:

to VAN
Byfuglien, Ladd, Pavelec

to WPG
Luongo, Raymond, Ballard, Schroeder, 1st

Ballard & Byfuglien are a swap of not great contracts and Ballard may need a change of scenery and Byfuglien would be great playing with the Sedins in front of the net

Luongo for Pavelec, Pavs hasn't been great and WPG may consider making a move for a big name goalie

Everything else is to even up value

Lineup ends up being:

Sedin - Sedin - Byfuglien
Booth - Kesler - Burrows
Ladd - Hodgson - Higgins
Lapierre - Malhotra - Hansen
Weise - Volpatti

Edler - Salo
Hamhuis - Bieksa
Sulzer - Alberts
Rome

Schneider
Pavelec

Winroba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2011, 04:39 PM
  #303
jimmythescot
Registered User
 
jimmythescot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,237
vCash: 500
To be honest, I was really annoyed that Byfuglien signed that contract because I was really hoping he would come here. I know there may be some friction, but it's not like he's Messier. He's like a massive Burrows (antagonistic net presence) when he plays as a forward.

Well, maybe not as good defensively, or anywhere near as quick on the fore or backcheck, but you get what I mean.

jimmythescot is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2011, 04:46 PM
  #304
Winroba
Keep Calm, Kassi On
 
Winroba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,318
vCash: 500
Apparently Buff said in an interview that he'd never play FWD again because he likes D a lot better

Winroba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2011, 04:55 PM
  #305
jimmythescot
Registered User
 
jimmythescot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,237
vCash: 500
I saw that too. If he's talking about the regular season, I guess I could live with that. Rome, Sulzer and Alberts for the bottom 6-8 for the playoffs. Then there's Tanev on the farm.

If he could be had for Ballard (though I like him and don't think he's had a fair shake) + picks/prospects/unimportant forwards, I would say go for it.

jimmythescot is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2011, 04:59 PM
  #306
Winroba
Keep Calm, Kassi On
 
Winroba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,318
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmythescot View Post
I saw that too. If he's talking about the regular season, I guess I could live with that. Rome, Sulzer and Alberts for the bottom 6-8 for the playoffs. Then there's Tanev on the farm.

If he could be had for Ballard (though I like him and don't think he's had a fair shake) + picks/prospects/unimportant forwards, I would say go for it.
I agree generally. IMO, the best way to build a team is to get as many players as possible who can play multiple roles.

Having a guy like Byfuglien who could move to D if we get an injury, or who could also play in both a top 6 & bottom 6 role would greatly benefit the Canucks. It's the same thing as having as many natural C's on the roster, which I am a firm believer in.

Winroba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2011, 05:02 PM
  #307
whoshouse
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 964
vCash: 500
Not sold on Byfuglien. He may be good for a couple of years but hes a lazy guy. Wellwoodx10

whoshouse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2011, 05:46 PM
  #308
Tiranis
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 20,955
vCash: 500
Why would Luongo waive his NMC for Winnipeg? At least make your proposals somewhat realistic...

Tiranis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2011, 05:47 PM
  #309
rye&ginger
Registered User
 
rye&ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,156
vCash: 500
We have ocean near by, so there are even more boat issues to deal with if Buff plays here. No thanks.

rye&ginger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2011, 06:51 PM
  #310
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,267
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Why would we trade Luongo for a 300lb defenseman?

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2011, 07:46 PM
  #311
Winroba
Keep Calm, Kassi On
 
Winroba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,318
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Why would we trade Luongo for a 300lb defenseman?
It was Ballard for Byfuglien, Luongo was for Ladd

Winroba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2011, 08:56 AM
  #312
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,225
vCash: 500
Ballard for Campoli and a 1st from MTL. Doubt MTL does it, but the deal makes sense. Ballard is a long-term fit there, while Campoli is a 1 yr fit here as a number 5 dman. The 1st evens out the deal because there's no real reason for the nucks to downgrade for a draft pick, but the 1st is high enough to entice them to do it.


The other target might be Ballard for Kostitsyn + 2nd. The 2nd is there for some compensation for the extended years MTL gets. While Kostitsyn is likely to leave at the end of this year if not signed, leaving the nucks no asset. The 2nd is to account for that.

Bleach Clean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2011, 10:00 AM
  #313
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,361
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
Ballard for Campoli and a 1st from MTL. Doubt MTL does it, but the deal makes sense. Ballard is a long-term fit there, while Campoli is a 1 yr fit here as a number 5 dman. The 1st evens out the deal because there's no real reason for the nucks to downgrade for a draft pick, but the 1st is high enough to entice them to do it.


The other target might be Ballard for Kostitsyn + 2nd. The 2nd is there for some compensation for the extended years MTL gets. While Kostitsyn is likely to leave at the end of this year if not signed, leaving the nucks no asset. The 2nd is to account for that.
Campoli: why would Montreal trade for a guy that's 3x more expensive, locked into a long-term deal, arguably worse this season, and give the Canucks a 1st to help them get out from under that contract? Maybe if we gave them a 2nd and Ballard they might take the contract off our hands and give us Campoli.

Kostitsyn: Why would they trade a 20g50p 26 year old forward for an albatross contract? We would be paying them for the extra years, not the other way. Not only that, but the Habs need more scoring, not less.

If the Canucks trade Ballard it's either as part of a salary in a moving parts deal (ie: the Canucks are taking 6 million back in a trade and need to stay compliant) or as part of a salary dump so they can take on salary somewhere else. I don't see them getting a ton of value now that he's started this season as poorly as last.

Proto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2011, 11:04 AM
  #314
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,225
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proto View Post
Campoli: why would Montreal trade for a guy that's 3x more expensive, locked into a long-term deal, arguably worse this season, and give the Canucks a 1st to help them get out from under that contract? Maybe if we gave them a 2nd and Ballard they might take the contract off our hands and give us Campoli.

Perhaps because Ballard is a better player? I still think he is. He's not a fit here, but he brings more offensively to the table than Campoli does _and_ he plays a more abrasive style.


Quote:
Kostitsyn: Why would they trade a 20g50p 26 year old forward for an albatross contract? We would be paying them for the extra years, not the other way. Not only that, but the Habs need more scoring, not less.

If the Canucks trade Ballard it's either as part of a salary in a moving parts deal (ie: the Canucks are taking 6 million back in a trade and need to stay compliant) or as part of a salary dump so they can take on salary somewhere else. I don't see them getting a ton of value now that he's started this season as poorly as last.

Kostitsyn is in Martin's doghouse. Taken off the PP, and there are rumblings of hate between him and coach. And they are searching for D help now and into the future.


I think one important point needs to be made here: The NHL right now is money rich, not asset rich. There isn't enough talent to go around. A rising cap and good cap management by the richer teams has lead to a dearth of talent making it to UFA every year. So despite all of Ballard's struggles here, I have full confidence he still has value. He will not be a salary dump.


Take St.Louis for example. They have Kent Huskins as a top pairing Dman with Pietrangelo... Think about that for a moment. Montreal, they have Markov and Weber as the only dmen signed next year. They have to sign everyone else, including Subban. To be sure, they reason they even signed Campoli was their uncertainty on defense this year, and he's been out of the line-up with an injury. Assuming they sign Subban and Gorges to healthy raises, who are the other top 4s? Markov certainly cannot be relied upon.


I know Ballard has not been doing well here, but he has a history before coming to Vancouver. Teams have seen him play before he's come into this situation, and GMs have longer memories than fans might. He won't be a salary dump IMO.

Bleach Clean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2011, 11:09 AM
  #315
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,225
vCash: 500
Alberts + Volpatti = Van's 3rd rnd pick back from Anaheim. Please?

Bleach Clean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2011, 11:09 AM
  #316
Lyndon Slewidge
Registered User
 
Lyndon Slewidge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 272
vCash: 500
This Year's Burrows

How is Alex Burrows looking so far this year? Considering swapping him with Cammalleri what do you think?

Lyndon Slewidge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2011, 11:17 AM
  #317
PRNuck
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,994
vCash: 500
Never. Cammalleri is the better player on a pure skill basis, but Burrows brings so much to our team. Chemistry with the twins, PKing chemistry with Kesler, personality, dragon slaying, awesome contract. And besides, I love the kid but I don't know if he'd even be a 15 goal scorer on another team tbh.

PRNuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2011, 05:34 PM
  #318
CaNuCKSForEVER WOOT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 3
vCash: 500
i put some thought into this and i ask why do we go after parise or big guns like that? when there is some talent in our faces. I am thinking Troy Brouwer. Why would we want him?? He can score he has played with kane and toews so why not kesler and booth??
and he can protect his teammates physical,scoring is something that would go great for us.
i suggest a trade of.....

Canucks Aquire: Troy Brouwer

Capitals Aquire: Mason Raymond & 2nd Roundpick

our forwards lineup would look something like this....

Daniel Sedin Henrik Sedin Alex Burrows
David Booth Ryan Kesler Troy Brouwer
Manny Malhotra Cody Hodgson Jannik Hansen
Chris Higgins Maxim Lapierre Dale Weise
extra: Aaron Volpattie
Or we could let the DB,RK,CH line develop and give our 3rd and 4th line a look like this....

Troy Brouwer Manny Malhotra Jannik hansen
or...
Manny Malhotra Cody Hodgson Troy Brouwer

then the 4th line .....

Chris higgins Maxim Lapierre Jannik Hansen

Even in tough games like against chicago or edmonton with darcy H we could put brouwer with the sedins

I like TB because you can put this guy anywhere on our roster plus a 4th line of higgins, lapierre and hansen would give us a extra 3rd line (no issues with our current line though)


Last edited by CaNuCKSForEVER WOOT: 11-04-2011 at 05:48 PM.
CaNuCKSForEVER WOOT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2011, 05:51 PM
  #319
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,267
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winroba View Post
It was Ballard for Byfuglien, Luongo was for Ladd
That's even worse

y2kcanucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2011, 11:41 AM
  #320
Crede777
Deputized
 
Crede777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 7,140
vCash: 500
Just a thought from a CBJ fan. Would the following be a plausible trade:

Van:
Nash
Brassard/Vermette
Mason
Pick/Prospect (value depends on what you guys think of trade)

CBJ:
Kesler
Ballard
Luongo

Ballard and Luongo are considered dumps from a Vancouver point of view, allowing Schnieder to play as the #1 and freeing up space. Nash would be on top line with Sedins. Brassard/Vermette brought in to center 2nd line.

I know Kesler is untouchable and what not, but from a hypothetical view would it fit any needs for Vancouver? The reason why I ask is because I see in Kesler attributes that could IMO turn the Columbus franchise around. He's a Buckeye, is a leader, is a top forward in the league, etc. As for moving Nash, I feel that he could free up a ton of ice for the Sedins. Also, I think Luongo's contract is going to hurt Vancouver in the long run but he's an immediate replacement for Mason in Columbus.

The salaries balance out to CBJ taking on ~$600,000 this year. As for the pick/prospect, could add Moore, Savard, Atkinson, Calvert, etc. Wouldn't want to add Johansen unless value is WAY off in your eyes. A guaranteed 1st overall pick is a non-starter because the franchise would just hang onto it.


Last edited by Crede777: 11-07-2011 at 11:48 AM.
Crede777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2011, 11:59 AM
  #321
xtr3m
Registered User
 
xtr3m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,218
vCash: 500
I don't think Gillis will ever pay a forward $7.8M (Nash).

xtr3m is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2011, 11:59 AM
  #322
jimmythescot
Registered User
 
jimmythescot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,237
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crede777 View Post
Just a thought from a CBJ fan. Would the following be a plausible trade:

Van:
Nash
Brassard/Vermette
Mason
Pick/Prospect (value depends on what you guys think of trade)

CBJ:
Kesler
Ballard
Luongo

Ballard and Luongo are considered dumps from a Vancouver point of view, allowing Schnieder to play as the #1 and freeing up space. Nash would be on top line with Sedins. Brassard/Vermette brought in to center 2nd line.

I know Kesler is untouchable and what not, but from a hypothetical view would it fit any needs for Vancouver? The reason why I ask is because I see in Kesler attributes that could IMO turn the Columbus franchise around. He's a Buckeye, is a leader, is a top forward in the league, etc. As for moving Nash, I feel that he could free up a ton of ice for the Sedins. Also, I think Luongo's contract is going to hurt Vancouver in the long run but he's an immediate replacement for Mason in Columbus.

The salaries balance out to CBJ taking on ~$600,000 this year. As for the pick/prospect, could add Moore, Savard, Atkinson, Calvert, etc. Wouldn't want to add Johansen unless value is WAY off in your eyes. A guaranteed 1st overall pick is a non-starter because the franchise would just hang onto it.
We'd like to thank you for considering us for your #1 Centerman and reliable goaltending provider. We regret to inform you that at this time we are currently attempting to win a Stanley Cup so your request has been denied. We apologise for any inconvenience caused.

jimmythescot is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2011, 12:01 PM
  #323
Crede777
Deputized
 
Crede777's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 7,140
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmythescot View Post
We'd like to thank you for considering us for your #1 Centerman and reliable goaltending provider. We regret to inform you that at this time we are currently attempting to win a Stanley Cup so your request has been denied. We apologise for any inconvenience caused.


Thanks, it was just a thought. That's why I didn't post it on the main boards.

Crede777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2011, 12:50 PM
  #324
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,267
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crede777 View Post


Thanks, it was just a thought. That's why I didn't post it on the main boards.
We would love to get Nash though, but quite honestly outside of Schneider I'm not too sure what we can offer that Columbus would be interested in.

y2kcanucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2011, 01:05 PM
  #325
Canucker
Registered User
 
Canucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Prince Rupert, BC
Posts: 18,209
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
We would love to get Nash though, but quite honestly outside of Schneider I'm not too sure what we can offer that Columbus would be interested in.
I like Nash but at $7.8m per year until eternity he's probably one of the most overpaid players in the league. I'd be more interested in their first rounder this year.

Canucker is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:52 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.