Trade Rumors and Free Agent TalkTrade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.
I think the common thought of a PMD paired with a shutdown D is the way to go. It's not, IMO. pairings are developed with chemistry. With these thoughts an explosive D > solid shutdown D. The explosiveness draws attention, which is a system that relies on constant attack. A shutdown D has no place in this type of system.
Edler > Garrison
Gardiner > Schenn/Gunnarson etc
Correct me if i'm wrong, but you're expanding on my post? I think you agree with me, but not my assessment of Gardiner. Whether or not Gardiner could find his way onto the "top 4", doesn't matter. My point is, a player as potentially explosive as Gardiner is available, he needs to find his way onto your team, team needs aside. If you think the canucks are worse with Gardiner over garrison, you may be right. But I'd rather have Gardiner.
Lu and garrison for Gardiner and Connolly.
you're wrong, I'm not expanding on your post, I'm disagreeing entirely with it.
You don't trade a guy like Garrison right after signing him. That's just a terrible way to run an organization and is what leads to future UFAs wanting more money and not wanting to sign with such organizations.
Garrison is a local boy. He took less than offered elsewhere to sign with Vancouver (given that Gillis insists now that all dmen sign within the framework of their current team, hence Hamhuis signs for $4.5mill/yr - less than offered by Pittsburgh or Philly, Bieksa signs for $4.6mill to forego FA, Edler signs for $5mill/yr to forego FA, etc).
Garrison signed with Vancouver with a NTC because he wanted to be a Canuck. Do you then turn around and flip him in a trade? This is the video game mentality that people don't think about enough here. You do this to any FA, what are the chances that the next UFA you want here is going to take less money than offered elsewhere to sign here?
Trading Garrison is just not an option for this franchise right now.
And therefore acquiring Gardiner would not force Garrison out. It would force Ballard out.
And the other area where I disagreed with your post is our team make up should such a move happen. We are not a better team with Gardiner next to Edler *right now* than we are with Garrison, who's better defensively, and that's exactly what Edler needed.
Not to mention that Garrison gives us another strong PK presence and another option for a shutdown defender that we can match against top lines. This team - a top end PP team, and a top-end offensive team, needs those options much more than another PMD right now, regardless of how good he could be one day. This team's window is now, not one day when Gardiner may improve enough to be a valuable top-4 guy on a top contending team.
Gagner and Hemmer straight takes our whole second line away. I'd think Gagner+Pjaarvi+2nd round pick or some other mix of prospects would be more reasonable. The goal is to still win games this season, and I don't think getting Luongo would mitigate losing all of our depth scoring.
We could always include Raymond in the equation. Not that he is a high commodity by any stretch but that would help elevate the loss on Edmonton's side. MayRay has simply lost his place here and is in desperate need of a scenery change. Edmonton's young and fast core may just suit his style.
There is no way Edmonton does a Gags + Hemmer for Luongo, or, for that matter, a Gags + MPS + 2nd.
Even though Gagner is not that big bodied 2nd line center that we need, he is still the only other option organizational speaking that fits that role right now. The purpose of getting Lou would be to win games this season.
Give em Horcoff + our 1rst and 2nd 2013, well take Lou and their 1rst 2013. They get the center they want until Kesler gets back, we get our goalie, Van moves up draft positionally (or should) and adds a 2nd. Edmonton signs Arnott for the remainder of the year, everyone is happy.
Any theories as to how Gillis plans to get under the cap in the summer?
That's not a concern. And it's especially not a concern when your team's window is still open.
The Canucks have 3 big contracts that can be replaced by cheaper players. Luongo is one of them. If he's not moved, then there's still Booth and Ballard - a combined $8.5mill/yr. Just replacing those two with cheaper players (ie. Jensen/Connauton), takes the team under the cap with flexibility to spare.
And with that, all their top players are signed as well. Malhotra's $2.5mill contract also comes off the books as well. Only Tanev is the potential RFA who could double his salary (or more, depending on how he does this season). Higgins and Lapierre are due for a raise as well, but are bottom-6 players.
The Canucks cap situation is in good shape and there's lots of options that can create flexibility for them.
I think the common thought of a PMD paired with a shutdown D is the way to go. It's not, IMO. pairings are developed with chemistry. With these thoughts an explosive D > solid shutdown D. The explosiveness draws attention, which is a system that relies on constant attack. A shutdown D has no place in this type of system.
Edler > Garrison
Gardiner > Schenn/Gunnarson etc
Correct me if i'm wrong, but you're expanding on my post? I think you agree with me, but not my assessment of Gardiner. Whether or not Gardiner could find his way onto the "top 4", doesn't matter. My point is, a player as potentially explosive as Gardiner is available, he needs to find his way onto your team, team needs aside. If you think the canucks are worse with Gardiner over garrison, you may be right. But I'd rather have Gardiner.
Lu and garrison for Gardiner and Connolly.
Assuming such a scenario were available, Gardiner would only be acquired to be subsequently traded elsewhere. He would not dislodge any of our core for reasons NFITO articulated. The only reason we might have any interest is a young defenseman with Gardiner's potential is an easier trade due to supply and demand.
There is no way Edmonton does a Gags + Hemmer for Luongo, or, for that matter, a Gags + MPS + 2nd.
Even though Gagner is not that big bodied 2nd line center that we need, he is still the only other option organizational speaking that fits that role right now. The purpose of getting Lou would be to win games this season.
Give em Horcoff + our 1rst and 2nd 2013, well take Lou and their 1rst 2013. They get the center they want until Kesler gets back, we get our goalie, Van moves up draft positionally (or should) and adds a 2nd. Edmonton signs Arnott for the remainder of the year, everyone is happy.
Lots of interest on my end; highly touted and in the very likely event Raymond is a bust; either sign (raymond) for 3rd line duties or ship him off for picks/prospects and let Paaj take his spot.
Paaj is only 21 so he's playing pretty decently for his age.
Gardiner is way more important to us than he would be to the Canucks. If I had it my way, we completely suck this year, draft Nate or Barkov than deal Grabo plus something for Luongo. I think both sides would be happy.
Nate - Kadri - Bozak and suddenly our C crop doesn't look weak and add Lu in nets? Yes please. Grabo is someone who could pot 25 for Canucks with 55-60 points. He'd definitely help them.
There is no way Edmonton does a Gags + Hemmer for Luongo, or, for that matter, a Gags + MPS + 2nd.
Even though Gagner is not that big bodied 2nd line center that we need, he is still the only other option organizational speaking that fits that role right now. The purpose of getting Lou would be to win games this season.
Give em Horcoff + our 1rst and 2nd 2013, well take Lou and their 1rst 2013. They get the center they want until Kesler gets back, we get our goalie, Van moves up draft positionally (or should) and adds a 2nd. Edmonton signs Arnott for the remainder of the year, everyone is happy.
So we swap firsts, take on Horcoff and his higher cap hit for multiple years, and Edmontons second? I'm not sure how you get to the conclusion that's fair value, and with Lu and given our injuries, Edmonton likely isn't much worse then we are. so a slight bump in our first round pick plus horcoff and a second....no thank you.
Gardiner is way more important to us than he would be to the Canucks. If I had it my way, we completely suck this year, draft Nate or Barkov than deal Grabo plus something for Luongo. I think both sides would be happy.
Nate - Kadri - Bozak and suddenly our C crop doesn't look weak and add Lu in nets? Yes please. Grabo is someone who could pot 25 for Canucks with 55-60 points. He'd definitely help them.
I would do Grabovski + 2nd.
Or, even better, have a 3-way involving Anaheim and Corey Perry(or any other team that needs a 2C)
you're wrong, I'm not expanding on your post, I'm disagreeing entirely with it.
You don't trade a guy like Garrison right after signing him. That's just a terrible way to run an organization and is what leads to future UFAs wanting more money and not wanting to sign with such organizations.
Garrison is a local boy. He took less than offered elsewhere to sign with Vancouver (given that Gillis insists now that all dmen sign within the framework of their current team, hence Hamhuis signs for $4.5mill/yr - less than offered by Pittsburgh or Philly, Bieksa signs for $4.6mill to forego FA, Edler signs for $5mill/yr to forego FA, etc).
Garrison signed with Vancouver with a NTC because he wanted to be a Canuck. Do you then turn around and flip him in a trade? This is the video game mentality that people don't think about enough here. You do this to any FA, what are the chances that the next UFA you want here is going to take less money than offered elsewhere to sign here?
Trading Garrison is just not an option for this franchise right now.
And therefore acquiring Gardiner would not force Garrison out. It would force Ballard out.
And the other area where I disagreed with your post is our team make up should such a move happen. We are not a better team with Gardiner next to Edler *right now* than we are with Garrison, who's better defensively, and that's exactly what Edler needed.
Not to mention that Garrison gives us another strong PK presence and another option for a shutdown defender that we can match against top lines. This team - a top end PP team, and a top-end offensive team, needs those options much more than another PMD right now, regardless of how good he could be one day. This team's window is now, not one day when Gardiner may improve enough to be a valuable top-4 guy on a top contending team.
If you read my post, you'll see you actually agree with me on some points, but who cares. I didn't know garrison had a NTC, which would complicate things i'm sure. My opinion of what gillis should do matters just as much as yours does, so arguing why Vancouver signed players is redundant, if you're in on the inner workings of the canucks, then good on you. I rarely trust what I hear from the media, even words spoken from the lips of players and GMs.
what I do know is, Vancouver is in cap trouble, and I don't know how well it would go over if lu and Ballard were both bought out, that's a lot of money to spend on players not playing for you, i'm sure they would rather try to trade away their issues.
Unfortunately for Vancouver, unlike Chicago, they didn't win the cup, so their moves are predicated on winning now more so than just alleviating roster issues, and asset management. So I see where you are coming from. My proposal alleviates cap issues in Van, whilst adding a future stud, and allows Toronto to still make moves this year, which i'm sure they want to do.
I guess our main difference is how we view Gardiner.
I don't play video games. I'm also not a GM of an NHL team. So what do I know?:-P
Gardiner is way more important to us than he would be to the Canucks. If I had it my way, we completely suck this year, draft Nate or Barkov than deal Grabo plus something for Luongo. I think both sides would be happy.
Nate - Kadri - Bozak and suddenly our C crop doesn't look weak and add Lu in nets? Yes please. Grabo is someone who could pot 25 for Canucks with 55-60 points. He'd definitely help them.
Grabovski cap hit is too high for Vancouver. I don't get it though, Grabovski is one of your most valuable forwards, only behind Kessel and Lupul. Why not trade wingers, an organizational strength, like Kulemin or JVR? It's not like they have produced this year yet and both had bad years previous to this.
Grabovski cap hit is too high for Vancouver. I don't get it though, Grabovski is one of your most valuable forwards, only behind Kessel and Lupul. Why not trade wingers, an organizational strength, like Kulemin or JVR? It's not like they have produced this year yet and both had bad years previous to this.
"So basically, we have a deal in principle, we're just waiting on your team's player[to be bought out]."
Or, if Philly did somehow manage to get rid of Bryz, they'd be downright crazy to put themselves back in the exact same position with Luongo. In the words of GWB:
Quote:
"There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again."
Or, if Philly did somehow manage to get rid of Bryz, they'd be downright crazy to put themselves back in the exact same position with Luongo. In the words of GWB:
Works in theory. Fortunately, Luongo is a significantly better goalie than Bryzgalov, thus making his contract easier to swallow.
Or, if Philly did somehow manage to get rid of Bryz, they'd be downright crazy to put themselves back in the exact same position with Luongo. In the words of GWB:
Except you know, Lu has consistently played at a much higher level than Bryz
Or, even better, have a 3-way involving Anaheim and Corey Perry(or any other team that needs a 2C)
I would, the price (salary/cap) is high for our core, but worse things have happened. It'd be tough to get him and force someone like Higgins or Booth out is all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by live playoff hockey
but but but you guys cant have a stable cap and not be forced to move players for nothing
Advantages of having our core players sign cheap deals Seriously, Edler...wow. Kesler, Sedin, Sedin, Bieksa, Hamhuis, Garrison and either or both goalies...Gillis as our lawyer-GM rules.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liferleafer
You want Kuli...talk to me, what else?
Kuli isn't undesirable, but I personally believe he isn't valuable enough to carry the weight of the trade by himself. Aside from the usual non-offerables (Kessel, Phaneuf, Gardiner, Rielly, Lupul now), who's free? Kadri+Kuli+pick would be something for us, but that's awfully lofty for a proposal given the past trade proposals that have been hatched here.
but but but you guys cant have a stable cap and not be forced to move players for nothing
It really does look bad for the Canucks for next season, Hopefully the Sedin resign for 5.5M-5.75M.
If they ask for a raise, they're no way the Canucks can keep them, even with the Cap rumors to go up the year they expire, unless they deal Burrows OR Even Edler, who are the only two high paid players without NTCs or NMCs.
Seriously, Edler...wow. Kesler, Sedin, Sedin, Bieksa, Hamhuis, Garrison and either or both goalies...Gillis as our lawyer-GM rules.
