HFBoards

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

The Armchair GM Thread - XL

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-22-2013, 03:51 AM
  #926
DJOpus
Registered User
 
DJOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,740
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
Only if you think Burrows commands that much value. I would say a first alone is enough. Much as I love Burrows, he means far more to us than any other team in the league. Consider for a moment what your reasons are for trading him: may be overpaid; thirty. Every other team is going to be thinking the same and most certainly are not about to hand over a top prospect and their first. Look at huge aggressive Pittsburgh and Boston were in their refusal to do just that.

Value aside, Burrows was essentially paid chump change for all his success here and perception would be highly negative on our reputation to trade him now. I also believe it would spend the wrong message to the dressing room, especially to Kesler and Bieksa.

For those reasons, I cite Burrows untouchable, if only due to circumstance; his value isn't there on the market and his departure would set in a slew of negatives.
The thing is, I think we need to trade Burrows because he is a large part of why we don't get calls when games start to matter. I honestly think the referee fraternity currently hates us and it all stems from the Auger/Burrows incident.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From the main boards (kind of quoting myself but want feedback):

Three way trade:
To VAN: Vermette + Gromley (minors) + 1st (PHI)
To PHX: Couturier + Schroeder
To PHI: Edler + 1st (VAN) + 3rd (PHX)

Philly picks 11th, we pick mid-20s...or instead of an exchange of 1sts with Philly, just take their 2015 1st

DJOpus is offline  
Old
05-22-2013, 04:01 AM
  #927
jammyrft
Registered User
 
jammyrft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Up North eh
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,831
vCash: 500
Weise is just terrible...seriously folks its Weise. He doesn't play a scrappy game nor score. He might pop in a couple goals throughout a 82 game schedule, and he might get in some scraps but that's about it. For our money Sestito does almost the EXACT same thing. Except Sestito brings a lot more size, willingness to fight.


Both won't really score, both aren't all that talented but you can make an argument with Sestito's size, physical play.

jammyrft is online now  
Old
05-22-2013, 04:37 AM
  #928
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,182
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
Paul Stastny is a tank. He's not a physical player but he doesn't get knocked off the puck either. He's shorter than Kesler but stronger on his skates.

Never heard Stastny being referred to as a "tank". Interesting.

I look at Stastny as an average sized C that doesn't utilize his size as well as he could. For comparison, O'Reilly is far more apt in using a similar frame far more effectively. So in that respect, I don't see a size disparity, in comparison to a guy like Roy, being all that favourable for Stastny. Both are skill-based players, and what Stastny gives up in foot speed, and he gives up a lot, he makes up for by being more defensively capable - especially in the circle.

To me, very comparable players for overall effectiveness.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
05-22-2013, 05:36 AM
  #929
King of the ES*
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,728
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
Absolutely no interest in Richards. To quote a rangers' fan, "he has been craptacularly terriawful." Even were he bought out, why pay him $4.5M after a dreafully poor season, yet people shy away from Roy, who actually played well? If you think Roy no showed during the playoffs, well Richards is so bad, he is anchoring the fourth line and getting outplayed. Granted, Torts had a habit of crushing confidence but the risks far outweigh any possible gain.

In a trade? Good lord no. That is Gomez bad.
Not sure how much credibility you should place in this Ranger fan. Like I said, the guy's got 100 points over 128 "craptacularly terriawful" games in NYC.

And you're saying that Derek Roy played well? Huh?

King of the ES* is offline  
Old
05-22-2013, 05:39 AM
  #930
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( _)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,546
vCash: 13357
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJOpus View Post
The thing is, I think we need to trade Burrows because he is a large part of why we don't get calls when games start to matter. I honestly think the referee fraternity currently hates us and it all stems from the Auger/Burrows incident.
No offense, but I find the bias officiating theory unfounded nonsense. I just tossed on Detroit/Chicago game two and the refs missed numerous calls and oddly seemed to favor Detroit. Somewhat amusing considering our issues with refs against Chicago. Simply put, if you fancy the blatant conspiracy angle, the league pushes for favorable matches or lengthily playoff series. Barring that, the refs are merely incompetent.

To give up a talented player like Burrows because of an assumption is terrible. Even had the refs called a perfect series, we were not beating San Jose. Perhaps it goes five but they were clearly the superior team. On the flip side, were we playing as we have in the past. San Jose would have been terrified of putting us on the powerplay just once.

Bourne Endeavor is offline  
Old
05-22-2013, 05:43 AM
  #931
King of the ES*
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,728
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
Kyle Wellwood.

Takes no penalties and if you bookend him with a couple big, physical wingers that can put the puck in the net you might have something. You would at least win a lot of faceoffs and outchance opponents 4th lines.
I'm a big fan of Wellwood, but if he's not being used correctly, he'll just get bored and fade away.

Anyone else notice that about him? He always had the ability to step up for us in big games, when the coach confided in him and gave him an important role. If he was getting 10 - 12 minutes per game on the bottom-six, forget it, he'd be invisible.

I wouldn't be opposed to acquiring him in a Higgins-esque 2nd/3rd line swingman role.

King of the ES* is offline  
Old
05-22-2013, 05:50 AM
  #932
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( _)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,546
vCash: 13357
Quote:
Originally Posted by King of the ES View Post
Not sure how much credibility you should place in this Ranger fan. Like I said, the guy's got 100 points over 128 "craptacularly terriawful" games in NYC.

And you're saying that Derek Roy played well? Huh?
And Scott Gomez put up 80+ points, followed by numerous 50-60+ seasons. Would you have taken him at full price from the Habs? While the change of scenery narrative has merit in some cases, Richards play deteriorated to the point of being slotted on the fourth line. To acquire him via trade is ridiculous. What if that was not indicative of Torts' coaching, but Richards on a steep decline? We have effectively decimated our cap with a single trade.

The only way we chance Richards is if he is bought out and accepts a low (<$2.5M) deal as a reclamation project.

Until the playoffs Roy was quite well. He was less a scoring force but made Higgins look akin to a thirty goal scorer. Had we consistently used Higgins/Kesler/Roy and actually bothered to play offensively, I have little doubt it would pay dividends. AV chose to rein Roy into his conservative abomination and never utilized his creativity.

Bourne Endeavor is offline  
Old
05-22-2013, 07:10 AM
  #933
DJOpus
Registered User
 
DJOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,740
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
No offense, but I find the bias officiating theory unfounded nonsense. I just tossed on Detroit/Chicago game two and the refs missed numerous calls and oddly seemed to favor Detroit. Somewhat amusing considering our issues with refs against Chicago. Simply put, if you fancy the blatant conspiracy angle, the league pushes for favorable matches or lengthily playoff series. Barring that, the refs are merely incompetent.

To give up a talented player like Burrows because of an assumption is terrible. Even had the refs called a perfect series, we were not beating San Jose. Perhaps it goes five but they were clearly the superior team. On the flip side, were we playing as we have in the past. San Jose would have been terrified of putting us on the powerplay just once.
1 - On the Burrows thing, the first thing I do is employ a recently retired veteran referee to discuss how to fix our referee situation plus help us deal with referee situations in the future. He'd also help with referee tendencies and things of that nature. If he says Burrows isn't a problem, then trading Burrows only becomes a questions of what we can get for Burrows vs Booth, if he says Burrows is a problem that will haunt us with the refs going forward, I'd trade Burrows immediately...the same applies to other players.

2 - Disagree about your point on the SJ series. The calls discrepancy was enough to change the series completely...I have the penalties as +15 for SJ which is crazy.

3 - Agree, our powerplay and penalty kill need to be better.

4 - We can agree to disagree on the referee thing. I have a guy that gives me betting tips that does a lot of research on referees as one of his main betting metrics which he uses to great success. There are biases in the referees and they are there to be taken advantage of and the anti-Canucks bias of some referees is so unlikely that it is almost impossible that it's coincidence.

5 - Look at the whole Auger incident (and this is not a discussion about fair or not, just a point of view). Taking calls out on a player for prior incidents (make up calls) is pretty common in the NHL. Auger hammered Burrows for a dive he made in a prior game. Burrows complained in the media which eventually resulted in Auger losing his job. If one of your buddies got fired because someone ratted on him for say, taking a nap at the office, how would you treat the person that ratted them out in the future...probably not too well. It only makes sense that Auger's buddies would treat Burrows and the Canucks poorly after the incident.


Last edited by DJOpus: 05-22-2013 at 07:16 AM.
DJOpus is offline  
Old
05-22-2013, 09:17 AM
  #934
PRNuck
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,951
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJOpus View Post
The thing is, I think we need to trade Burrows because he is a large part of why we don't get calls when games start to matter. I honestly think the referee fraternity currently hates us and it all stems from the Auger/Burrows incident.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From the main boards (kind of quoting myself but want feedback):

Three way trade:
To VAN: Vermette + Gormley (minors) + 1st (PHI)
To PHX: Couturier + Schroeder
To PHI: Edler + 1st (VAN) + 3rd (PHX)

Philly picks 11th, we pick mid-20s...or instead of an exchange of 1sts with Philly, just take their 2015 1st
Yikes bad value for us. Maybe if we keep our first.

PRNuck is online now  
Old
05-22-2013, 09:30 AM
  #935
Alflives
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,374
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadianPirate View Post
Dale Weise is still signed right? Having a skilled guy on the fourth line might bring out some more of Weise's talent.
Bring out Weise's talent? What? Since when does Weise have talent?

Alflives is offline  
Old
05-22-2013, 09:42 AM
  #936
LolClarkson*
Canucks 4 the cup
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Embrace the hate
Posts: 6,695
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shortshorts View Post
After playing with capgeek the last hour... Burrows is way too expensive if he's not on the Sedin line.
What about a guy like Lucic at 6 million ?

LolClarkson* is offline  
Old
05-22-2013, 09:45 AM
  #937
LolClarkson*
Canucks 4 the cup
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Embrace the hate
Posts: 6,695
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WestleySnipez View Post
BRILLIANT! WE'D NEVER LOSE A GAME 7 AGAIN!

But his cap is too much, he'd be getting paid more than the Sedins and would be a second liner for us. If he was bought out, and we signed him for 9 mil for 2 years I'd be okay with that. I think he would fit in well with Kesler/Higgins and be able to score 20 goals/50 points, he really just needs a change of scenery.
RE Richards. He is criminally over rated and I don't want to be on the wrong end of another one of Sathers bad contracts.

I would rather keep Booth.

LolClarkson* is offline  
Old
05-22-2013, 09:52 AM
  #938
Alflives
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,374
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldrunner View Post
What about a guy like Lucic at 6 million ?
Are you saying Lucic is not worth the contract?

Alflives is offline  
Old
05-22-2013, 09:54 AM
  #939
Alflives
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,374
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldrunner View Post
RE Richards. He is criminally over rated and I don't want to be on the wrong end of another one of Sathers bad contracts.

I would rather keep Booth.
The Canucks are keeping Booth.

Alflives is offline  
Old
05-22-2013, 09:54 AM
  #940
ddawg1950
Registered User
 
ddawg1950's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,520
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by King of the ES View Post
I'm a big fan of Wellwood, but if he's not being used correctly, he'll just get bored and fade away.

Anyone else notice that about him? He always had the ability to step up for us in big games, when the coach confided in him and gave him an important role. If he was getting 10 - 12 minutes per game on the bottom-six, forget it, he'd be invisible.

I wouldn't be opposed to acquiring him in a Higgins-esque 2nd/3rd line swingman role.
Wellwood?

This is such an unrealistic idea. So instead of getting younger bigger faster you want us to get older smaller and slower?

This makes zero sense.

What is it with you? Do you own an Uncle Willie's buffet?

ddawg1950 is online now  
Old
05-22-2013, 09:58 AM
  #941
Alflives
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,374
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ddawg1950 View Post
Wellwood?

This is such an unrealistic idea. So instead of getting younger bigger faster you want us to get older smaller and slower?

This makes zero sense.

What is it with you? Do you own an Uncle Willie's buffet?
Schroeder would be better. I wonder about Schroeder in the 4th line center role?

Alflives is offline  
Old
05-22-2013, 09:59 AM
  #942
Eddy Punch Clock
Gold Jerry!!!
 
Eddy Punch Clock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chillbillyville
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldrunner View Post
RE Richards. He is criminally over rated and I don't want to be on the wrong end of another one of Sathers bad contracts.
One of the best trades we never made.

The vast majority of the Rangers board want him bought out... and I'd almost be surprised if they didn't get their wish.

Next stop... Leafs. Nonis likes his reclamation projects.

Eddy Punch Clock is online now  
Old
05-22-2013, 10:50 AM
  #943
Dreamskull
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Sudbury, ON
Posts: 177
vCash: 500
would anybody consider a trade based on Edler for Nielsen + Nino?

Dreamskull is offline  
Old
05-22-2013, 10:58 AM
  #944
Vankiller Whale
Maybe HE can score
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,841
vCash: 5555
If we trade Edler it should either be for a top line forward or if we decide to go full rebuild.

Vankiller Whale is offline  
Old
05-22-2013, 11:02 AM
  #945
PRNuck
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,951
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamskull View Post
would anybody consider a trade based on Edler for Nielsen + Nino?
Personally I'd want something shinier than Nielsen included.

PRNuck is online now  
Old
05-22-2013, 11:12 AM
  #946
Tiranis
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 20,955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreamskull View Post
would anybody consider a trade based on Edler for Nielsen + Nino?
Strome++ would have to be coming back in any deal for Edler with the Islanders.

Tiranis is offline  
Old
05-22-2013, 11:13 AM
  #947
ItsAllPartOfThePlan
Registered User
 
ItsAllPartOfThePlan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,045
vCash: 500
TSN reports that Burmisterov or however you spell it wants out of Winnipeg. Any interest? He reportedly won't sign with the KHL.

ItsAllPartOfThePlan is offline  
Old
05-22-2013, 11:15 AM
  #948
PRNuck
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,951
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsAllPartOfThePlan View Post
TSN reports that Burmisterov or however you spell it wants out of Winnipeg. Any interest? He reportedly won't sign with the KHL.
Very interested!

PRNuck is online now  
Old
05-22-2013, 11:16 AM
  #949
Eddy Punch Clock
Gold Jerry!!!
 
Eddy Punch Clock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chillbillyville
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiranis View Post
Strome++ would have to be coming back in any deal for Edler with the Islanders.
While were at it, throw Luongo in with Edler and see if we can't make us a blockbuster deal.

Give them the negotiating rights to Raymond too.

...oh wait, they already have Grabner... Mason would just be "redundant".

Eddy Punch Clock is online now  
Old
05-22-2013, 11:17 AM
  #950
Tiranis
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 20,955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsAllPartOfThePlan View Post
TSN reports that Burmisterov or however you spell it wants out of Winnipeg. Any interest? He reportedly won't sign with the KHL.
Probably but I'm sure the asking price is substantial.

Tiranis is offline  
Closed Thread

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 10:45 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.