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.

Gillis says Raymond NOT available + likes depth on D and toughness

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-01-2012, 12:36 AM
  #51
dave babych returns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,358
vCash: 500
Another Canucks fan who doesn't think Gillis needs to make a splash at the deadline.

(Although I wouldn't be opposed to him picking up a depth player or two like last year.)

dave babych returns is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 12:58 AM
  #52
Nash
Registered User
 
Nash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: North Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,915
vCash: 500
Gillis already made a big trade this year in jettisoning Sturm and Samuelsson for Booth. Tanev is defensive depth on the farm. Toughness is overrated. The supposedly weak Canucks went to game 7 last year. All I see Gillis doing is adding 4th line and 6/7th defense depth like he did last year. I really don't expect anything major.

Nash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 01:02 AM
  #53
monster_bertuzzi
registered user
 
monster_bertuzzi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nash View Post
Gillis already made a big trade this year in jettisoning Sturm and Samuelsson for Booth. Tanev is defensive depth on the farm. Toughness is overrated. The supposedly weak Canucks went to game 7 last year. All I see Gillis doing is adding 4th line and 6/7th defense depth like he did last year. I really don't expect anything major.
A defenceman better than your standard #6/#7 pylon is imperative.

monster_bertuzzi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 01:11 AM
  #54
David71
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,183
vCash: 500
well gillis needs to fix the d. and HE KNOWS it. salo is 100% sure to get hurt again in the playoffs. and you're expecting tanev/alberts/rome/sulzer to play more mins. also guys like bieska/edler/hamhuis=will be exhausted if they play 25+mins in the playoffs. they won't have any gas left in the tank if the nucks make it all the way. plus injuries will play a factor too

David71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 01:21 AM
  #55
Bubbles
Tank for Tyler2016
 
Bubbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: BC Teams:Nucks,Juve
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,366
vCash: 200
All this Raymond talk is fueling those Nashville rumors I've been hearing.

Bubbles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 01:29 AM
  #56
ayoshi
Registered User
 
ayoshi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 390
vCash: 500
considering the following, I believe Vancouver will be actively looking to make a move at the deadline:

1) The Canucks could use more depth on D.

2) Last season Gillis aquired Higgins and Lapierre at the deadline and both worked out nicely.

3) Raymond has lost his spot on the Canucks' 2nd line and is a pending RFA.

ayoshi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 01:35 AM
  #57
shortshorts
The OG Kesler Hater
 
shortshorts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,611
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ayoshi View Post
considering the following, I believe Vancouver will be actively looking to make a move at the deadline:

1) The Canucks could use more depth on D.

2) Last season Gillis aquired Higgins and Lapierre at the deadline and both worked out nicely.

3) Raymond has lost his spot on the Canucks' 2nd line and is a pending RFA.
the third point is irrelevant. Raymond will sign a deal almost identical to the one signed. He doesnt have any leverage to command much more. A cheap contract for a 40-50pt producer is very valuable to the canucks right now. Not many plausible deals out there outweigh the benefits raymonds cheap contract provides.

shortshorts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 02:23 AM
  #58
flack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,366
vCash: 500
In my opinion, Canucks need to strengthen their D. Today's game against Chicago, especially in the second period prove that point. Even though Canucks won today, the team is not going to win playoff series by goaltending alone. Gillis should reconsider what he said.

flack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 02:31 AM
  #59
Man Bear Pig
Registered User
 
Man Bear Pig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 8,825
vCash: 500
Of course he'll say he's not shopping him. What's he gonna do come out publicly and say he's dangling him as trade bait?

Man Bear Pig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 02:33 AM
  #60
Luwongo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 120
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by flack View Post
In my opinion, Canucks need to strengthen their D. Today's game against Chicago, especially in the second period prove that point. Even though Canucks won today, the team is not going to win playoff series by goaltending alone. Gillis should reconsider what he said.
Though I'd like to see an upgrade on D or just more depth, I don't believe you can pin the ridiculous chances Chicago was getting during the game (especially the second period) solely on Van's D. The team was making dumb decisions like cutting at the blue-line and losing the puck and consequently giving up odd-man rushes. Also their spacing/gap control was terrible. And lastly, they were playing the Hawks...a PRETTY explosive/highly offensive team

Luwongo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 02:40 AM
  #61
Numbers
Registered User
 
Numbers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,037
vCash: 500
Schneider + Raymond for Schenn + Kulemin

would be close in value

Numbers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 02:53 AM
  #62
ProstheticConscience
Seeing is believing
 
ProstheticConscience's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Canuck Nation
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,408
vCash: 883
Quote:
Originally Posted by Numbers View Post
Schneider + Raymond for Schenn + Kulemin

would be close in value
Comes up quite a bit.

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

And damn, we're getting every single player in the NHL!!! And only for Raymond!

Life is good.

ProstheticConscience is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 02:57 AM
  #63
Campoli2Burrows
Registered User
 
Campoli2Burrows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 999
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProstheticConscience View Post
Comes up quite a bit.

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

And damn, we're getting every single player in the NHL!!! And only for Raymond!

Life is good.
What about adding Tampa into the deal and making it

To Van: Kulemin, Schenn

To Tampa: Schneider, Raymond

To Leafs: Malone, Connolly

Campoli2Burrows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 03:21 AM
  #64
flack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,366
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luwongo View Post
Though I'd like to see an upgrade on D or just more depth, I don't believe you can pin the ridiculous chances Chicago was getting during the game (especially the second period) solely on Van's D. The team was making dumb decisions like cutting at the blue-line and losing the puck and consequently giving up odd-man rushes. Also their spacing/gap control was terrible. And lastly, they were playing the Hawks...a PRETTY explosive/highly offensive team
I am not, it is the entire team. They didn't play well defensively.

flack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 03:33 AM
  #65
ProstheticConscience
Seeing is believing
 
ProstheticConscience's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Canuck Nation
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,408
vCash: 883
Quote:
Originally Posted by Campoli2Burrows View Post
What about adding Tampa into the deal and making it

To Van: Kulemin, Schenn

To Tampa: Schneider, Raymond

To Leafs: Malone, Connolly
Add Stamkos and Kessel, then we'll talk.

ProstheticConscience is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 03:40 AM
  #66
drewskiv
Registered User
 
drewskiv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Victoria BC
Posts: 547
vCash: 50
How about Raymond + 2012 5th round pick to the Flames for Jackman + Hannan 2012 3rd round pick

drewskiv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 07:30 AM
  #67
BrainOfJ
Call it a comeback
 
BrainOfJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: State St.
Country: United States
Posts: 14,913
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canuckaholic19 View Post
As far as I'm concerned everyone calling for more "toughness" is basing that off one opponent, the Boston Bruins. You cant build your team just to match the style of one individual team. The Canucks Core have proved they are "tough enough" to beat teams like Chicago, Nashville, San Jose, Los Angeles in a playoff series over the past two seasons.

It just so happened they met up with the team who plays the most bruising style in the finals last year and had an already fairly battered lineup, which made it difficult to respond physically. Too bad that was unlucky, but hey they still went to Game 7... so they very well could have beat them if a few things went different early in the series, but they didn't.

I'm sick and tired of people thinking the Canucks will not be able to compete for the cup without more "toughness" because they just took the toughest team by a county mile to 7 games in the Final. And lets think about this for a second here, if they were "tough enough" to beat the Chicago's and San Jose's of this league. I see no reason why they wouldn't be able to potentially beat the Flyers, Rangers, Captitals, Penguins or yes even the Bruins.

One Player doesn't change your team dynamic, but we have a damn effective team dynamic already. Lets run with it again.
Here's one thought though....because teams should be built to win 4 postseason series's, not 3. You're saying they were tough cause they battled through the first three but then were too worn down and battered for the 4th to respond to physical play....I'd say they definitely need to add some physicality to their line up if they're only tough enough to make it through the a couple series before getting beat up and battered down to look at the other end of the argument.

BrainOfJ is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 07:34 AM
  #68
Bird Law
Daisy's back.
 
Bird Law's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Country Roads
Country: United States
Posts: 72,232
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Bird Law
He's probably not available because he has little value and it'd be silly to trade him.

__________________
"Of course giving Sather cap space is like giving teenagers whiskey and car keys." - SBOB
"Watching Sather build a team is like watching a blind man with no fingers trying to put together an elaborate puzzle." - Shadowtron
"Used to be only Twinkies and cockroaches could survive a nuke. I'd add Habs to that. I'm convinced the CH stands for Club du Hypocrisy." - Gee Wally
Bird Law is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 07:36 AM
  #69
trellaine201
Registered User
 
trellaine201's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Left coast
Posts: 6,265
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by David71 View Post
he is shopping raymond... i dont like dreger.
+1 don't like Dreger

trellaine201 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 09:00 AM
  #70
Luck 6
\\_______
 
Luck 6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 7,245
vCash: 500
I'm sure he's shopping Raymond, maybe even Ballard. It's still unrealistic that he trades either if you ask me. If he ships out Raymond, it changes the dynamic of the 3rd line. Even if he brings a guy like Moen back, it really hurts the offensive ability of that line. Right now it's Hodgson centering two ~20 goal scoring, defensively responsible speedsters. It works, but if you replace Raymond with Moen that line loses it's identity to an extent.

I'm all for trading Raymond if it brings us in a better top 6 forward. At the same time, I'm all for bringing in a guy like Moen or Gaustad to play on the 4th line. But trading Raymond for a defenseman, and then swapping a pick for Moen to replace him is something I'm not on board with. I'd rather overpay in picks to get a dman than do that type of deal.

Luck 6 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 10:41 AM
  #71
biturbo19
Registered User
 
biturbo19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 5,609
vCash: 500
I really doubt he's 'shopping' Raymond at all. Is he likely available as part of the right deal? Yeah, if he can be swapped for a similar aged or younger top-4 d-man, or as part of a package for a legitimate Superstar calibre player, sure...

But it would be moronic to throw Raymond away for spare parts. This team is gearing up for a playoff run that will require tons of depth, including scoring depth that Raymond provides. There's zero reason to unload Raymond unless it's for a real upgrade that can be retained for the future at a reasonable price. And no, UFA guys like Moen and Gill are definitely NOT the sort of 'upgrade' you move a top-6 forward for.

biturbo19 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 11:16 AM
  #72
Cloudedthought
Registered User
 
Cloudedthought's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 188
vCash: 500
Im not in the camp of making a trade just to make a trade and it seems some people really enjoy that. Gillis would be stupid to say he needs this and that,it would only drive the asking price up and saying who is available lowers theirs.

We could use help on D and some grit but its not necessary.

Cloudedthought is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 11:26 AM
  #73
Reign Nateo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,416
vCash: 500
Last night was the first time the Canucks have had their full team healthy for a game all season (apologies to Andrew Ebbett and Aaron Volpatti) I think Gillis would like to evaluate where he's at with this team before he makes any moves.

Reign Nateo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 11:41 AM
  #74
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 16,332
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by heelsox View Post
Here's one thought though....because teams should be built to win 4 postseason series's, not 3. You're saying they were tough cause they battled through the first three but then were too worn down and battered for the 4th to respond to physical play....I'd say they definitely need to add some physicality to their line up if they're only tough enough to make it through the a couple series before getting beat up and battered down to look at the other end of the argument.
Between the whistles the 'physical play' ie. hits were even.

Post whistles scrums, glove punches, cross checks and slashes I would say is not considered 'physical play', but the Bruins definitely won that battle.

The Canucks lost, your Bruins won....

Why dont you worry about your team and we'll worry about ours.

People continually act like the Canucks were swept aside in the finals...it came down to ONE GAME, lets put that in perspective.

They weren't swept, and while they were blown out in the losses, they had 2 chances to win the cup.

Physical play was likely the 4th or 5th reason why the team lost, not the #1 reason...the #1 reason was Tim Thomas.

arsmaster is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 12:04 PM
  #75
Halifaxhab
Registered User
 
Halifaxhab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,012
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luck 6 View Post
I'm sure he's shopping Raymond, maybe even Ballard. It's still unrealistic that he trades either if you ask me. If he ships out Raymond, it changes the dynamic of the 3rd line. Even if he brings a guy like Moen back, it really hurts the offensive ability of that line. Right now it's Hodgson centering two ~20 goal scoring, defensively responsible speedsters. It works, but if you replace Raymond with Moen that line loses it's identity to an extent.

I'm all for trading Raymond if it brings us in a better top 6 forward. At the same time, I'm all for bringing in a guy like Moen or Gaustad to play on the 4th line. But trading Raymond for a defenseman, and then swapping a pick for Moen to replace him is something I'm not on board with. I'd rather overpay in picks to get a dman than do that type of deal.
Gladly send Moen over for your 4th line for 2012 2nd

Halifaxhab is online now   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 09:59 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.