Edler will be easier to trade and bring back a better return than Ballard. With the cap shrinking next year we'll likely need to move a $4m+ dman. Obviously we should ditch Edler.
wouldn't it be funny if gillis turned around and said, "now that i have my core locked up on longterm deals, the loyalty i've shown to my players who have taken less money on hometown deals is no longer necessary. so long schneids and edler."
wouldn't it be funny if gillis turned around and said, "now that i have my core locked up on longterm deals, the loyalty i've shown to my players who have taken less money on hometown deals is no longer necessary. so long schneids and edler."
arguably. though i wonder how this would be going down if lou hadn't publicly or privately gone along with the possibility of being moved. like, i doubt MG would have "wade reddened" him, to cite an extreme example.
Kipper is going nowhere. He has a NMC and loves Calgary. He'll play out his contract.
His NMC ended last year on his contract he is able to be move this deadline or off season.. he was just one potential goalies to be on the market think of all the UFA's coming up (Howard, Backstrom, Smith) to name a few. Point is waiting till deadline could hurt Luongos value with more potential goalies that could be on the market by then.
Edler will be easier to trade and bring back a better return than Ballard. With the cap shrinking next year we'll likely need to move a $4m+ dman. Obviously we should ditch Edler.
Your logic makes no sense. Of course, Edler brings back a better return because he is the better defenseman, but trading him rather than Ballard makes the team worse off in the short-term and in the long-term. His relative value to the team compared to Ballard way surpasses the differences in return he and Ballard bring in.
Your logic makes no sense. Of course, Edler brings back a better return because he is the better defenseman, but trading him rather than Ballard makes the team worse off in the short-term and in the long-term. His relative value to the team compared to Ballard way surpasses the differences in return he and Ballard bring in.
Two questions:
What is Edler worth in a trade?
What is Ballard worth in a trade?
If the return for Edler is two contributing young players on cap friendly contracts and a 1st round pick (lets say Simmonds, Couturier and a 1st) and the return for Ballard is a 2nd round pick....I know for me, I'd think incredibly long and hard about moving Edler.
If the return for Edler is two contributing young players on cap friendly contracts and a 1st round pick (lets say Simmonds, Couturier and a 1st) and the return for Ballard is a 2nd round pick....I know for me, I'd think incredibly long and hard about moving Edler.
Problem for me is, you fix one hole by creating another (forwards/defense). And that other hole created could become a far more significantly bigger hole should either Hamhuis, Bieksa, or Garrison get hurt. Ballard (and obviously Tanev) has looked very solid so far - in their current role as a 3rd pairing. Who knows how they'll look when getting top four icetime.
If the return for Edler is two contributing young players on cap friendly contracts and a 1st round pick (lets say Simmonds, Couturier and a 1st) and the return for Ballard is a 2nd round pick....I know for me, I'd think incredibly long and hard about moving Edler.
Man, you don't even want to know what Detroit would do for Edler.
If the return for Edler is two contributing young players on cap friendly contracts and a 1st round pick (lets say Simmonds, Couturier and a 1st) and the return for Ballard is a 2nd round pick....I know for me, I'd think incredibly long and hard about moving Edler.
If you deal Edler you are pretty much immediately faced with having to search for a replacement.
You know how much it costs to replace Edler? Look no further than the kind of bonkers return you are suggesting Philadelphia would offer (although I'm skeptical they'd offer that - if that was plausible then I'm sure they would have met Nashville's asking price for Weber last year).
On the flip side of the coin, the contribution the Canucks need from Keith Ballard could be replaced for probably $2-3m on the free agent market this summer.
Why in the world are we discussing moving Edler. You move one of the goalies for assets, because that's the only position where you can afford a downgrade.
You don't move your #1 defensemen who is irreplaceable
What could detriot give us we really want/need in return tho ?
Detroit has a ton of prospects.
They had never stopped drafting well.
Tomas Jurco, Petr Mrázek, Teemu Pulkkinen, Gustav Nyquist, etc.
These are just some examples.
Detroit has a ton of prospects.
They had never stopped drafting well.
Tomas Jurco, Petr Mrázek, Teemu Pulkkinen, Gustav Nyquist, etc.
These are just some examples.
No need for a goaltender. Pulkkinen is a bust. Jurco is a meh prospect from what I've seen of him in the AHL. Nyquist is pretty much their only interesting prospect. (And Jarnkrok, but it would be a gamble.)
They don't have anywhere near the resources to acquire Edler.
I'm increasingly of the mind that the return for Luongo should be centered around picks and prospects. With Kesler looking close to returning, Booth is probably another 4 weeks or so away, and the say Jordan Schroeder is playing (not outstanding, but capable) we have plenty of depth up front.
Likewise on our blueline, out top 6 is pretty much set and starting to play like it. Alberts, a guy with 425 NHL games is not even getting a sniff, and Cam Barker gets great seats for every game.
With Kesler back in the line up, I'd be hard pressed to say what position the Canucks need to strengthen for the playoffs.
So - why not get the best possible futures oriented deal?
Edited: You can't predict injuries - they can happen at any position. If we traded Luongo and then had a core position player get injured, like any team, we would be in trouble.
I'm increasingly of the mind that the return for Luongo should be centered around picks and prospects. With Kesler looking close to returning, Booth is probably another 4 weeks or so away, and the say Jordan Schroeder is playing (not outstanding, but capable) we have plenty of depth up front.
Likewise on our blueline, out top 6 is pretty much set and starting to play like it. Alberts, a guy with 425 NHL games is not even getting a sniff, and Cam Barker gets great seats for every game.
With Kesler back in the line up, I'd be hard pressed to say what position the Canucks need to strengthen for the playoffs.
So - why not get the best possible futures oriented deal?
Edited: You can't predict injuries - they can happen at any position. If we traded Luongo and then had a core position player get injured, like any team, we would be in trouble.
The one thing I'd disagree with is we do have a huge need for a true PP QB. Preferably a RHS. It doesn't necessarily have to come from the Luongo trade, but getting at least one current NHLer back gives us additional options. Doesn't have to be the primary piece of the deal, but I'd like to see at least a legit top 9 forward or top 6 dman come back.
The return for Luongo should (and I believe always has been) focused around finding a long-term centre to replace Henrik on the top line.
I think even getting a #2C prospect would be great if they're on the bigger side and can play defense. If you can get them top wingers then you can still be a solid team. Acquiring a #1C prospect to replace Henrik and jump ahead of Kesler will be tough.
arguably. though i wonder how this would be going down if lou hadn't publicly or privately gone along with the possibility of being moved. like, i doubt MG would have "wade reddened" him, to cite an extreme example.
He couldn't, he wouldn't have cleared waivers. Worst case he just "5 game backups" him, or let's CbJ grab him off waivers.
I'm increasingly of the mind that the return for Luongo should be centered around picks and prospects. With Kesler looking close to returning, Booth is probably another 4 weeks or so away, and the say Jordan Schroeder is playing (not outstanding, but capable) we have plenty of depth up front.
Likewise on our blueline, out top 6 is pretty much set and starting to play like it. Alberts, a guy with 425 NHL games is not even getting a sniff, and Cam Barker gets great seats for every game.
With Kesler back in the line up, I'd be hard pressed to say what position the Canucks need to strengthen for the playoffs.
So - why not get the best possible futures oriented deal?
Edited: You can't predict injuries - they can happen at any position. If we traded Luongo and then had a core position player get injured, like any team, we would be in trouble.
I agree with the type of return Gillis should be targeting. The question becomes: When is it best to deal Luongo to get said return? At the deadline, buyer teams generally devalue futures. So that seems like the best time. At the draft, they overvalue them IMO. MG is also faced with the cap crunch in the offseason. So for Gillis to utilize Luongo in the here and now, he will have to expect weaker futures later, both due to GMs overvaluing futures and a reduced bargaining position.
However, the landscape may change in the offseason somewhat with re-alignment, and perhaps relocation for some teams. That has to be a factor as well.
I think the best way to go about it is for Gillis to get to an agreement right now, in principle, with a team that's on the fence about their goaltending. Then, as the season progresses and said suitor finds their goaltending unsatisfactory, perhaps resulting in missing the playoffs or being bounced early, a deal can be quickly consummated after the season ends. Right now, there doesn't seem to be a team with an apparent need willing to step up and pay the price. We'll only see that type of team after they've lost the season due to shoddy goaltending.
