HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

Flyers - Canucks trade

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-29-2012, 01:48 PM
  #26
Cogburn
Registered User
 
Cogburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,732
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tortorella View Post
I don't see why the Flyers trade their #1 d-man and top prospect for a backup goalie and a garbage d-man.
That...that's a joke, right? I mean value is all kinds of off, but "a back up" and a "garbage d-man"? Yikes, tell me how you assess Philly's players with that kind of mind set. Saying "their" number one D-man, when clearly Philidelphia fans are looking for a better one, is pretty telling.

Anyway, from past proposals, the only players on the Canucks the Flyers faithful would be looking at paying market value for are Edler and Hamhuis. Hamhuis is a permanent fixture on our blueline, and Edler will resign here IMO, so really, we'd just be breaking up the boredom by proposing anything between the two teams.

Cogburn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-29-2012, 02:52 PM
  #27
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 13,129
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cogburn View Post
That...that's a joke, right? I mean value is all kinds of off, but "a back up" and a "garbage d-man"? Yikes, tell me how you assess Philly's players with that kind of mind set. Saying "their" number one D-man, when clearly Philidelphia fans are looking for a better one, is pretty telling.

Anyway, from past proposals, the only players on the Canucks the Flyers faithful would be looking at paying market value for are Edler and Hamhuis. Hamhuis is a permanent fixture on our blueline, and Edler will resign here IMO, so really, we'd just be breaking up the boredom by proposing anything between the two teams.
As a Flyers fan, I pretty much agree with everything you said.

Schneider couldn't be had for anything the Flyers would be willing to give up. Even if he could, and even if the Flyers did buy out Bryz, I'm not sure Schneider would fix the team's issues.

Bryzgalov is not a top-10 goalie, but he's also not a bottom-10 goalie. He's somewhere in between, and that, sadly, is itself an upgrade over what they've had lately.

Jack de la Hoya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-29-2012, 07:21 PM
  #28
Cogburn
Registered User
 
Cogburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,732
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack de la Hoya View Post
As a Flyers fan, I pretty much agree with everything you said.

Schneider couldn't be had for anything the Flyers would be willing to give up. Even if he could, and even if the Flyers did buy out Bryz, I'm not sure Schneider would fix the team's issues.

Bryzgalov is not a top-10 goalie, but he's also not a bottom-10 goalie. He's somewhere in between, and that, sadly, is itself an upgrade over what they've had lately.
Precisely, and barring Bryz staying in Europe (that's what these Schneider to team X threads are using as a basis it seems), both teams wanting to field the best team possible doesn't make us good trade partners. Both want an upgrade on D (not more 2-6 guys, but a number one), both are fairly set in goal for the next decade (if they want to keep their guys anyway) and both have a ton of depth in the forward position, that wouldn't really be a great upgrade on what's there now (not counting Giroux or the Sedins....Kesler, Voracek, Booth, Couturier, Hartnell, Briere, Burrows, Hansen, Simmonds, Higgins, Talbot...Raymond...we have great depth on both sides).

I don't see any big trades between the Flyers and Canucks, and that's no disrespect to either roster.

Cogburn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 04:51 PM
  #29
casualkev
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 132
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
Couturier or Voracek+.

Otherwise no dice.
this

casualkev is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 06:13 AM
  #30
Falconator
Registered User
 
Falconator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,072
vCash: 500
How does this help either team? Canucks have four top four defensemen in Hamhuis, Bieksa, Edler & Garrison. Coburns comes in at $4.5 million. They're trying to get rid of a high priced 5th/6th defenseman, not get another one at the price of the best goaltending prospect in the league.

This makes no sense what so ever! You can address the third line center position by other means, like trading Luongo.

Falconator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 11:06 PM
  #31
Hi-wayman
Registered User
 
Hi-wayman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,509
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Falconator View Post
How does this help either team? Canucks have four top four defensemen in Hamhuis, Bieksa, Edler & Garrison. Coburns comes in at $4.5 million. They're trying to get rid of a high priced 5th/6th defenseman, not get another one at the price of the best goaltending prospect in the league.

This makes no sense what so ever! You can address the third line center position by other means, like trading Luongo.
Simple. Though HF fans have assumed Garrison will play RD, Gillis has indicated that the team expects Garrison to start as a LD. Unless Edler is not in the Canucks future plans due to money demands or lingering injury, the Canucks have Hamhuis, Edler, Garrison and Ballard as LD's and only Bieksa and Tanev as RD's

AV has shown he wants 3 RD's and 3 LD's, to the extent that AV played Rome over Ballard, who is a far better defenseman than Rome, primarily because Rome could play RD better than Ballard.

Either the Canucks play Tanev as RD on the 2nd pairing and find a rookie to play third pairing RD (Savard or Goloubef from Columbus?) or the Canucks trade for an experienced top four RD. Though Coburn is a left hand shot, he is very comfortable playing RD. He plays well enough that he could play RD on either the first or second pairing with either Hamhuis or Edler/Garrison. In order for this trade to work, the Canucks have to trade Ballard and his $4.2 million salary or Edler is not re-signed. Though HF fans knock Ballard, he is still a very good left side defenseman who would be a top four D on half the NHL teams so he is not just a thow in salary dump.

Until Schnieder learns to control his rebounds as well as Luongo, I prefer to have Luongo in net rather than Cory. If we can keep both great, but if not, I say we keep Luongo.

Hi-wayman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 04:54 AM
  #32
mstad101
Registered User
 
mstad101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,061
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hi-wayman View Post
Simple. Though HF fans have assumed Garrison will play RD, Gillis has indicated that the team expects Garrison to start as a LD. Unless Edler is not in the Canucks future plans due to money demands or lingering injury, the Canucks have Hamhuis, Edler, Garrison and Ballard as LD's and only Bieksa and Tanev as RD's

AV has shown he wants 3 RD's and 3 LD's, to the extent that AV played Rome over Ballard, who is a far better defenseman than Rome, primarily because Rome could play RD better than Ballard.

Either the Canucks play Tanev as RD on the 2nd pairing and find a rookie to play third pairing RD (Savard or Goloubef from Columbus?) or the Canucks trade for an experienced top four RD. Though Coburn is a left hand shot, he is very comfortable playing RD. He plays well enough that he could play RD on either the first or second pairing with either Hamhuis or Edler/Garrison. In order for this trade to work, the Canucks have to trade Ballard and his $4.2 million salary or Edler is not re-signed. Though HF fans knock Ballard, he is still a very good left side defenseman who would be a top four D on half the NHL teams so he is not just a thow in salary dump.

Until Schnieder learns to control his rebounds as well as Luongo, I prefer to have Luongo in net rather than Cory. If we can keep both great, but if not, I say we keep Luongo.
Coburn is a good idea, but unfornately he is Philly's #2 behind Timonen. I doubt they will be looking to trade him. They wanna add to what they have.

I wonder if the Caps struggle out the gate and don't look to be a playoff team, we could exchange some deal between Edler and Green. The Caps replace an offensive Dman with another but who most likely will command less than Green and produce similar numbers.

The Nucks go for a solid right side Dman who can move the puck and play the PP. a guy who has #1 potential still, but may be a tad expensive to re-sign. I would add to the deal as the Caps suggest.

I'd even look into a deal around say Schneider Edler Raymond for Green Nuvy and Ward. ?

mstad101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 08:17 AM
  #33
Falconator
Registered User
 
Falconator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,072
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hi-wayman View Post
Simple. Though HF fans have assumed Garrison will play RD, Gillis has indicated that the team expects Garrison to start as a LD. Unless Edler is not in the Canucks future plans due to money demands or lingering injury, the Canucks have Hamhuis, Edler, Garrison and Ballard as LD's and only Bieksa and Tanev as RD's

AV has shown he wants 3 RD's and 3 LD's, to the extent that AV played Rome over Ballard, who is a far better defenseman than Rome, primarily because Rome could play RD better than Ballard.

Either the Canucks play Tanev as RD on the 2nd pairing and find a rookie to play third pairing RD (Savard or Goloubef from Columbus?) or the Canucks trade for an experienced top four RD. Though Coburn is a left hand shot, he is very comfortable playing RD. He plays well enough that he could play RD on either the first or second pairing with either Hamhuis or Edler/Garrison. In order for this trade to work, the Canucks have to trade Ballard and his $4.2 million salary or Edler is not re-signed. Though HF fans knock Ballard, he is still a very good left side defenseman who would be a top four D on half the NHL teams so he is not just a thow in salary dump.

Until Schnieder learns to control his rebounds as well as Luongo, I prefer to have Luongo in net rather than Cory. If we can keep both great, but if not, I say we keep Luongo.
I think that's pure fantasy or speculation on your part, unless you have a direct quote from Mike Gillis saying otherwise??? From everything I've read, they expect Garrison to partner with Edler.

"Garrison is expected to look more than decent in a projected pairing with Alex Edler, who has been medically cleared from rehabbing a building disc in his back."

Those 16 goals were third among NHL blueliners behind Shea Weber and Erik Karlsson, who had 19 apiece, and Garrison’s nine power-play goals were just two behind Weber, who led that category for defencemen.

That’s why Garrison hit the career jackpot here after earning $700,000 last season and why he believes a possible pairing with Edler could pad those stats.

“We’ve paired up as much as we can for drills and I think the chemistry is there for sure and from the limited amount of working together, it’s there 100 per cent,” said Garrison.

“It’s not only on the ice. We’ve hung out a lot and that’s how you want to build things.”



Read more: http://www.theprovince.com/sports/Ga...#ixzz2GpNVnWGc

Falconator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 08:37 AM
  #34
Luck 6
\\_______
 
Luck 6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 7,267
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hi-wayman View Post
The Canucks would like a 1st or 2nd line RW and a bottom six centre, but do not NEED any forward. The Canucks do need an RD which Coburn can play plus the team needs to reduce salary by 2013-14 season.

Current Canuck centres are Henrik, Kesler, Higgins if needed, Schroeder, Malhotra, Lapierre and Ebbett.

Current Canuck players and NHL ready prospects able to play top six are Daniel, Henrik, Burrows, Booth, Kesler, Higgins, Raymond, Hansen, Kassian and Schroeder plus a slight possibilty of Rodin and Jensen. That is 12 players for six roster spots.

I believe Luongo will emerge the stronger goalie over the long run so would rather see a Luongo/Lack combo in goal.

Laughton is a decent 2nd or 3rd line centre prospect and though the Canucks are in a win now mode, our prospect depth also needs addressing.
Despite all of your clarifications, why do we need a right handed defenseman? Things may work themselves out in that regard. If Garrison can play the right, for example, we'll have a surplus of defensemen all of a sudden. Then there's Tanev, who by many indications could be ready for a top 4 roll. I certainly wouldn't be willing to give up Schneider for a piece we don't really need.

Luck 6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 11:35 AM
  #35
ItsAllPartOfThePlan
Registered User
 
ItsAllPartOfThePlan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,086
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thadd View Post
That's a really nifty proposal. Elder is probably going to be lost to free agency anyway.

What's funny about these proposals is that if the whole season is written off Edler is pretty much a free agent so nobody will own his rights... the the Canucks will be in the market for another top 4 d-man.

Yeahh..Edler is not going anywhere. Luongo and ballard will be dealt/bought out before we lose Edler

ItsAllPartOfThePlan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 01:47 PM
  #36
lush
@jasonlush
 
lush's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,314
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Falconator View Post
How does this help either team? Canucks have four top four defensemen in Hamhuis, Bieksa, Edler & Garrison. Coburns comes in at $4.5 million. They're trying to get rid of a high priced 5th/6th defenseman, not get another one at the price of the best goaltending prospect in the league.
What makes you think that the Canucks are trying to dump a defender? I'm not outright trying to oppose what you're suggesting but you seem to present it as a fact. Gillis has gone on the record numerous times to explain that the Canucks need to carry 8 defensemen on their active roster and need 5 or 6 to be able to hold down a top 4 role. Assuming all these guys are paid fairly, that means that by his own model used to manage this roster and salary that there will always be one if not two "high priced 5th/6th defenseman".

There are so many people that seem confident that the Canucks have unwanted assets on defense simply by loading up gapgeek.com

lush is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 03:26 PM
  #37
Cogburn
Registered User
 
Cogburn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,732
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by lush View Post
What makes you think that the Canucks are trying to dump a defender? I'm not outright trying to oppose what you're suggesting but you seem to present it as a fact. Gillis has gone on the record numerous times to explain that the Canucks need to carry 8 defensemen on their active roster and need 5 or 6 to be able to hold down a top 4 role. Assuming all these guys are paid fairly, that means that by his own model used to manage this roster and salary that there will always be one if not two "high priced 5th/6th defenseman".

There are so many people that seem confident that the Canucks have unwanted assets on defense simply by loading up gapgeek.com
I agree here 100%. However, at the same time, if a fair offer comes in for Ballard, I'm not opposed to moving him. This is someone who is probably in the top 5% of Ballard boosters in this city. The only time we would even consider "dumping" a defender who can play in the top six is if the cap drops to 60, but then we're not the only ones getting screwed over there.

Then again, I'm not opposed to moving others too, but Hamhuis and Bieksa are our top pairing, and will cost you more then it would be worth, and Garrison just forewent a loaded paycheque and signed at a small discount to play in his home town, so he's not moving easily either. Edler and Ballard are the only two we have a possible reason to move, but even then, I'd rather be paying them the money they make this season (3.25 and 4.2 respectively) then go looking for replacements at the same cost or cheaper. If a top 4 defender fell into our lap making slightly above minimum cap hit.....eh....you might be able to pry Edler from me for an upgrade offensively, but to say we're interested in dumping ballast (Ballard) is simply inaccurate.

Cogburn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 03:38 PM
  #38
nowhereman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,514
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tortorella View Post
I don't see why the Flyers trade their #1 d-man and top prospect for a backup goalie and a garbage d-man.
Schneider is primed to become a Vezina caliber goaltender.

If Vancouver's going to unload him, the price would start with one of Couturier or B. Schenn.

nowhereman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 03:52 PM
  #39
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,385
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Falconator View Post
How does this help either team? Canucks have four top four defensemen in Hamhuis, Bieksa, Edler & Garrison. Coburns comes in at $4.5 million. They're trying to get rid of a high priced 5th/6th defenseman, not get another one at the price of the best goaltending prospect in the league.

This makes no sense what so ever! You can address the third line center position by other means, like trading Luongo.


You don't trade Luongo for a third line center.

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 09:47 PM
  #40
Falconator
Registered User
 
Falconator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,072
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by lush View Post
What makes you think that the Canucks are trying to dump a defender? I'm not outright trying to oppose what you're suggesting but you seem to present it as a fact. Gillis has gone on the record numerous times to explain that the Canucks need to carry 8 defensemen on their active roster and need 5 or 6 to be able to hold down a top 4 role. Assuming all these guys are paid fairly, that means that by his own model used to manage this roster and salary that there will always be one if not two "high priced 5th/6th defenseman".

There are so many people that seem confident that the Canucks have unwanted assets on defense simply by loading up gapgeek.com
Nothing I say if factual, unless I've quoted something direct from someones mouth, I'm like everyone else. Best guess's is all, due to the reported salary cap reduction. If it does go down for next year I see them making a move with Ballard, but for this year with the cap still at $70 million, they'll most likely keep Ballard.

Falconator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 09:50 PM
  #41
Falconator
Registered User
 
Falconator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,072
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post


You don't trade Luongo for a third line center.
You do if the salary cap goes down next year and you need to get rid of his salary. This is all fun and games, best guess's, we'll see what actually happens. But, I don't think Gillis is getting the offers he'd like for him and he can't afford to keep both goaltenders going forward into the new CBA. Have to wait and see what the actual rules are. I'm reading that you might be able to trade a player and retain some of his salary, therefore making it easier to trade players. But I'll wait and see when the deal is signed.

Falconator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 09:57 PM
  #42
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,385
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Falconator View Post
You do if the salary cap goes down next year and you need to get rid of his salary. This is all fun and games, best guess's, we'll see what actually happens. But, I don't think Gillis is getting the offers he'd like for him and he can't afford to keep both goaltenders going forward into the new CBA. Have to wait and see what the actual rules are. I'm reading that you might be able to trade a player and retain some of his salary, therefore making it easier to trade players. But I'll wait and see when the deal is signed.
No, you don't. Trading an elite top 5 goalie just to get rid of his salary is one of the worst ideas I've ever heard. There are other ways to cut salary from this team.

y2kcanucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 10:25 PM
  #43
Falconator
Registered User
 
Falconator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,072
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
No, you don't. Trading an elite top 5 goalie just to get rid of his salary is one of the worst ideas I've ever heard. There are other ways to cut salary from this team.
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. We'll see what happens and I'll chat with you on it later to see who was right.

Falconator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 10:36 PM
  #44
capitalsrock
Registered User
 
capitalsrock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,872
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
No, you don't. Trading an elite top 5 goalie just to get rid of his salary is one of the worst ideas I've ever heard. There are other ways to cut salary from this team.
Lol. what? elite top 5 goalie? more like top 20

capitalsrock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-02-2013, 10:42 PM
  #45
ginner classic
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Kitsilano
Posts: 6,681
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hi-wayman View Post
To the Flyers: Cory Schnieder, Keith Ballard

To the Canucks: Braydon Coburn, Scott Laughton
Awful all around. Value is way off. Basic premise is wrong....Edler and Garrison can and have played the right side....and like Coburn are LHS.

Flyers are not trading for a goalie unless they buy out Bryz which they cannot do, under the most recent proposal, until next summer.

You don't trade Schneider unless you get a super youngster back. As others have said if it ain't SC or BS, no interest.

ginner classic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 09:31 AM
  #46
jameswrjobe53
Registered User
 
jameswrjobe53's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Williamsburg VA
Country: Wake Island
Posts: 1,723
vCash: 492
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hi-wayman View Post
To the Flyers: Cory Schnieder, Keith Ballard

To the Canucks: Braydon Coburn, Scott Laughton
Bad for Canucks.
Impractical for Flyers (unless they plan on Amnestiying Bryzgalov)

EDIT: What the guy above me said

jameswrjobe53 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 10:46 AM
  #47
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( _)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,928
vCash: 13357
Quote:
Originally Posted by capitalsrock View Post
Lol. what? elite top 5 goalie? more like top 20
Care to back that up with facts or just blind nonsense? Unfortunately, facts would disprove your assertion. Shame really.

Nonetheless, if we are trading Schneider to Philly. I want Voracek involved.

Bourne Endeavor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 12:12 PM
  #48
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,385
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by capitalsrock View Post
Lol. what? elite top 5 goalie? more like top 20
I don't know what you're talking about, but you couldn't realistically name 5 better goalies than Luongo, let alone 10. Anyone who has tried has been embarrassed when their lists have been picked apart.

y2kcanucks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-03-2013, 04:33 PM
  #49
Spectrefire
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 435
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by capitalsrock View Post
Lol. what? elite top 5 goalie? more like top 20
Generally when you post great numbers over 11 years consistently, you're allowed to be known as an elite player.

Spectrefire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 06:54 AM
  #50
Sergei Shirokov
Registered User
 
Sergei Shirokov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: British Columbia
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,997
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hi-wayman View Post
To the Flyers: Cory Schnieder, Keith Ballard

To the Canucks: Braydon Coburn, Scott Laughton
Terrible for us, Coburn is great but that would kiss any hope good bye of re-signing Edler (which I remain confident is possible)

And Laughton is basicly Gaunce, except Gaunce is better IMO.


I would want more for Schneider, to me the deal would have to be just remarkable for us to move Schneider instead of Luongo.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hi-wayman View Post
The Canucks would like a 1st or 2nd line RW and a bottom six centre, but do not NEED any forward. The Canucks do need an RD which Coburn can play plus the team needs to reduce salary by 2013-14 season.

Current Canuck centres are Henrik, Kesler, Higgins if needed, Schroeder, Malhotra, Lapierre and Ebbett.

Current Canuck players and NHL ready prospects able to play top six are Daniel, Henrik, Burrows, Booth, Kesler, Higgins, Raymond, Hansen, Kassian and Schroeder plus a slight possibilty of Rodin and Jensen. That is 12 players for six roster spots.

I believe Luongo will emerge the stronger goalie over the long run so would rather see a Luongo/Lack combo in goal.

Laughton is a decent 2nd or 3rd line centre prospect and though the Canucks are in a win now mode, our prospect depth also needs addressing.
Actually we don't need any defensemen, our core currently:

Hamhuis - Bieksa
Edler - Garrison
Ballard - Tanev

Garrison was brought in to fill that spot.

And contrary to what you think we do need a top 6 forward and a 3rd line center.

Jensen won't take that spot this season (And I doubt next season either he needs time in the AHL)

It will be down to Kassian, Raymond and Schroeder (If he can play wing), Raymond has been given endless chances already and I doubt he will earn it back, so that leaves Schroeder and Kassian. I'm confident Kassian might be able to step into that role since when he was on that line against Buffalo the entire line was great, and if Schroeder can play wing he has the speed and offensive tools to fit on the line fine IMO.

But niether are proven options, and getting a Top 6 forward would be much better for us.

Then for the 3C spot it is down to Manny, Lappy and Schroeder. Ideally it would be nice to add someone else and have Manny and Lappy on the 4th which would have that line a ton better, but who knows if that is possible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PALE PWNR View Post
Flyers keep bryz get rid of our best dman in the process for a goalie controversy?
Schneider would be worth it for Coburn, you would just need to find a way to get rid of Bryz.

I'm not giving up Schneids for that deal though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrindamoursNose View Post
Flyers don't want any part of it either
I'm glad you want to no part of it cause I don't wanna be near it either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tortorella View Post
I don't see why the Flyers trade their #1 d-man and top prospect for a backup goalie and a garbage d-man.
Schneider >>> Bryz

our "Backup" would easily be better than your starter, and we don't have back-up, it's a tandem consisting of 2 starters.

Also Ballard isn't garbage and is unfairly criticized, he may not be worth of his cap hit but last season he improved mightly and in the playoffs was easily our best defensemen on a team that player like crap (Bieksa and Edler especially)

Sergei Shirokov 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 08:37 PM.

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.