HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Alex Edler

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-17-2013, 04:26 PM
  #276
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanaFan View Post
If you are referring to me...
Nope, not referring to you or to any other specific poster. I'm just having a flashback to the chatter early last summer, only now it's about what Edler "will" bring instead of being about what Luongo "will" bring.

 
Old
05-17-2013, 04:48 PM
  #277
CanaFan
Registered User
 
CanaFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,833
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by goodluckchuck View Post
Obviously the canucks would jump at the opportunity. But it takes two teams to make a trade. Would Anaheim do it? That should be the question we should be asking.

No argument, and I always *try* to look fairly at any trade from the other team's side as well. But as an outsider looking in, I think the prospects are good for a deal to be made:

1. Disappointing playoff exit creates an environment where Anaheim, much like Vancouver, is going to look closely at the make-up of their team and where they may have deficiencies to address.

2. Loads of forwards makes Bobby Ryan potentially expendable, much in the way Vancouver's D depth makes Edler expendable. Doesn't mean they will give him away, but at least they can entertain the move. Perry, Etem, and Palmieri are all skilled, offensive wingers who can step up to replace Ryan's lost offence. This even assumes Selanne retires, which he *may* not.

3. Paucity of puck moving defensemen. Outside of Cam Fowler, who is still young and inconsistent, they have no reliable, big minute defenseman who can run the power play and spark the transition. That Francois Beauchemin led their D in scoring tells you how dire the situation is ...

Ultimately there is no guarantee Anaheim makes this trade any more than Vancouver does. But there is a lot to it that makes sense, and that is all a fan can look at when speculating about such things. The only thing going against it is the changing divisions and having Anaheim in our division next year. Generally that works against teams trading with each other, though it isn't a hard and fast rule ...

CanaFan is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 04:52 PM
  #278
CanaFan
Registered User
 
CanaFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,833
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
Nope, not referring to you or to any other specific poster. I'm just having a flashback to the chatter early last summer, only now it's about what Edler "will" bring instead of being about what Luongo "will" bring.

Fair point. If there's anything I've learned about this board is there are as many opinions as there are posters. Some think Edler is too valuable to trade, others think he has negligible value. But ignoring that, would you not agree that Edler is appealing to a far broader group of teams than Luongo? Goalies, by nature, are hard to trade seeing as how you only need 2 per team. If you have an established #1 or an up-and-coming #1 you will have no interest in Luongo, period. Factor in the contract and his age and it is no great surprise that the market is near-zero. Clearly different situation for a 27 year old defenseman on a good contract ...

CanaFan is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 05:06 PM
  #279
Skead
Registered User
 
Skead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,122
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanaFan View Post
To people who argue Gillis won't move Edler before his NTC kicks in, solve me this logic puzzle:

1. Gillis has promised to "reset the organization" and "re-invent ourselves". This suggests more significant changes than have been made in the past 5 years. While this could refer exclusively to a coaching change, that would be a fairly weak interpretation of "resetting" and "re-inventing". A more moderate interpretation is that there will be some change to the core, specifically the top 6 forwards and/or top 4 defense.

2. Players with NTCs include Sedins, Kesler, Bieksa, Hamhuis, and Garrison. This leaves Kassian and Booth as top 6 forwards (?) and Edler as a top 4 defenseman without an active NTC.

3. Weak UFA crop and declining cap suggest a limited ability to re-invent or reset the team through that avenue. There are few legitimate top 6 forwards or top 4 D available that route, nor do we have much in the way of cap room - even after dumping Booth/Ballard/Luongo - to be adding one of the few top end guys (i.e. Horton).

So given the stated intent to make meaningful changes to the team, and given the limited options to trade most of our core due to NTCs or add significant pieces via UFA, how likely is it that Edler is considered completely off the table by Gillis due to the points raised above (recent signing, left money on table, NTC to kick in)?

While it may be uncomfortable, I don't see how Gillis has any other option to do what he stated his intentions should he not explore moving players like Edler or perhaps players who have active NTCs (Bieksa?). There simply aren't any other moves available - that I can see anyway - that can meet the goals of a reset/reinvention. Does that mean dumping him off to Florida or Columbus? No, I believe he could have a discussion with Edler and understand what teams he would be amenable to go to without destroying the goodwill of Edler and future players. Players by and large understand hockey is a business, and as long as you treat them respectfully and honestly, I don't think are necessarily "offended" by attempts to move them in the best interests of the team.

1. Reset / Reinvent ourselves doesn't typically mean trading a 6'3 215lb defenseman which is exactly what we need. Edler, when coached or at his prime, is exactly what this team needs.

2. Alex Burrows' NTC doesn't kick in until July 1st either, does that mean he will be traded? Unlikely, we're already having a bit of a rough time attracting free agents, trading a player that took a discount isn't exactly the best message to send.

3. Under your argument if we traded Luongo/Booth/Balard (I dont agree Booth will be traded cause again we need more players like him) we'd have 50M committed in cap for a 64.5M cap hit. With Tanev, Weise, Pinizzotto(?), Raymond(?) as the potential re-signings.

The likely option is changing drastically the bottom 6 to become bigger, better defensively that can take other teams 1st lines (Like LA's 4th line) while adding on a core piece (David Clarkson, etc)

Skead is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 05:25 PM
  #280
CanaFan
Registered User
 
CanaFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,833
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skead View Post
1. Reset / Reinvent ourselves doesn't typically mean trading a 6'3 215lb defenseman which is exactly what we need. Edler, when coached or at his prime, is exactly what this team needs.

2. Alex Burrows' NTC doesn't kick in until July 1st either, does that mean he will be traded? Unlikely, we're already having a bit of a rough time attracting free agents, trading a player that took a discount isn't exactly the best message to send.

3. Under your argument if we traded Luongo/Booth/Balard (I dont agree Booth will be traded cause again we need more players like him) we'd have 50M committed in cap for a 64.5M cap hit. With Tanev, Weise, Pinizzotto(?), Raymond(?) as the potential re-signings.

The likely option is changing drastically the bottom 6 to become bigger, better defensively that can take other teams 1st lines (Like LA's 4th line) while adding on a core piece (David Clarkson, etc)

Sure, its a solid opinion and maybe it ends up being right. But I don't think anyone can say what reinvent/reset "typically" means. I mean, its not like teams do it every day and what is best for one team isn't going to be best for another. I don't think your view on what constitutes a reset is any more valid than mine. We are all speculating.

Is Edler what this team needs? Maybe. I'd argue a greater need is a big, skilled forward who can contribute on both the powerplay and at regular strength. I don't see how addressing the bottom 6 fixes a team that has scored barely a goal a game for the last 3 playoff series. Shutting down the other team is only half of the equation, scoring goals ourselves is the other half and I think the more pressing issue. I like David Clarkson but I don't think he is the solution nor is he a mutually exclusive option here. But you are taking a great risk if you bank on being able to get him or Horton or Iginla in free agency, as Vancouver is far from the only team that will be interested and AFAIK none of those players has any particular connection to Vancouver, unlike our recent signees like Hamhuis, Garrison, Demitra, and Malhotra.

CanaFan is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 06:01 PM
  #281
Nine to Five
Now Eight to Four!
 
Nine to Five's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,603
vCash: 500
Edler has a tremendous amount of value, but cmon fellow fans..3rd overall pick or Bobby Ryan?

After the disaster year(s) Edler's had with his boneheaded plays, do you really think Edler's going to return that?

Nine to Five is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 06:11 PM
  #282
DJOpus
Registered User
 
DJOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,776
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nine to Five View Post
Edler has a tremendous amount of value, but cmon fellow fans..3rd overall pick or Bobby Ryan?

After the disaster year(s) Edler's had with his boneheaded plays, do you really think Edler's going to return that?
You know Ryan played at a 20 goal, 53 point pace right - 57 points two years ago ...his best is 71PTS? It's not like he lit the league on fire lately. If you believe he will comeback to 70 point form, you trade Edler for him, otherwise, you don't.

Also, I wouldn't trade Edler for the 3rd overall...how many 3rd overall picks are better than Edler? Something like 1 in 3? How many are hyped to be better than Edler at the time of draft? 3 in 3.

DJOpus is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 07:19 PM
  #283
ItsAllPartOfThePlan
Registered User
 
ItsAllPartOfThePlan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,167
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by goodluckchuck View Post
Please name me half the teams and who would they be willing to give up for the great Edler?
Colorado
Calgary
Carolina
Columbus
Detroit
Edmonton
New Jersey
Philly
Buffalo
Anaheim
Tampa
Winnipeg

Would all give significant assets for Edler

ItsAllPartOfThePlan is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 07:36 PM
  #284
BlueRoyal14
Registered User
 
BlueRoyal14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Edmonton AB
Posts: 156
vCash: 500
Edler may be overrated by some but he's also severely underrated by many people as well. I believe this season was NOT a good indication of his true worth and abilities. He's a better defenseman than what he showed this year.

BlueRoyal14 is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 07:37 PM
  #285
CanaFan
Registered User
 
CanaFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,833
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJOpus View Post
You know Ryan played at a 20 goal, 53 point pace right - 57 points two years ago ...his best is 71PTS? It's not like he lit the league on fire lately. If you believe he will comeback to 70 point form, you trade Edler for him, otherwise, you don't.

Also, I wouldn't trade Edler for the 3rd overall...how many 3rd overall picks are better than Edler? Something like 1 in 3? How many are hyped to be better than Edler at the time of draft? 3 in 3.
Not every draft is equal. 2007 was considered weak from the outset. 2008 could have yielded Pietrangelo except Atlanta made a bad call on Bogo. Duchene in 09 and Hubs is 11 look good and if Gudbranson were available this year - knowing what we did at the time - I wouldn't have traded Edler. Hard to pull out the hindsight but I think most top 5 picks have panned out as expected in the last 5-6 drafts. Given what scouts say about MacKinnon, Drouin, and Barkov, I'd say they are worth the *risk* ...

CanaFan is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 07:47 PM
  #286
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,789
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsAllPartOfThePlan View Post
Colorado
Calgary
Carolina
Columbus
Detroit
Edmonton
New Jersey
Philly
Buffalo
Anaheim
Tampa
Winnipeg

Would all give significant assets for Edler
Then we should go out and get those significant assets.

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 08:03 PM
  #287
leftwinglockdown
Dude Guy
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wheatley View Post
Watching Ottawa play this year, and Karlsson in particular, you can really see how far Edler still has to go before ever being this "perennial Norris Trophy candidate" so many here hope that he'll be.

No matter how hard you look watch Karlsson, looking for mistakes, you'll be hard pressed to find any. With Edler, sometimes it seems like he's making some boneheaded play every other shift.
No mistakes? I've watched Karlsson, the kid is flat out amazing with his outlet passes and ability to control the puck in the offensive zone but he does make mistakes in his own zone when pressured hard enough, every d-man does.

We were talking about Ryan Suter winning the Norris this year and he might just pull it off but the guy dropped of at the end of the year and made noticeable mistakes that he was not making when all the Norris talk started.

Every d-man in the league is susceptible to making mistakes. Don't kid yourself.

leftwinglockdown is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 08:06 PM
  #288
ItsAllPartOfThePlan
Registered User
 
ItsAllPartOfThePlan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,167
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Then we should go out and get those significant assets.
I agree. However, I think those teams would give similar assets for Bieksa (or maybe better ones due to his lower cap hit). I would rather trade bieksa than Edler.

ItsAllPartOfThePlan is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 08:07 PM
  #289
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,476
vCash: 500
I really think you could get Philly to do their 1st + Couturier for Edler + Van 1st with maybe another semi-valuable piece in there somewhere.

Proto is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 08:42 PM
  #290
CanaFan
Registered User
 
CanaFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,833
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proto View Post
I really think you could get Philly to do their 1st + Couturier for Edler + Van 1st with maybe another semi-valuable piece in there somewhere.

I seem to be in the minority but I don't like Couturier *that*much. Hes a few years away from showing any real offensive game IMO and isnt surefire to ever develop into one. I'd do Edler for him and the 11th but not send our 1st back. If we are sending our first back with Edler, I'd be looking at B Schenn and the 11th. More offensive upside, could be a #1 eventually or at least a good #2. Couts looks more like an elite #3 or an adequate #2. Just my 2 cents mind you ...

CanaFan is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 09:06 PM
  #291
leftwinglockdown
Dude Guy
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsAllPartOfThePlan View Post
Colorado
Calgary
Carolina
Columbus
Detroit
Edmonton
New Jersey
Philly
Buffalo
Anaheim
Tampa
Winnipeg

Would all give significant assets for Edler
The young impact forwards that we would want from that list:

Colorado: O'Reilly would fit pretty well. Problem is, he's only under contract for next year and he has a history of holding out to get what he wants. Wouldn't fit with the culture of taking less that MG has started here.
Calgary: Baertschi is their only real dynamic young forward on the verge of breaking out. Doubt they'd give him up for Edler. There's also Max Reinhart who looked pretty good at the end of the season. Could also try and start the BC version of the Staals with acquiring Max first. Flames would have to add though.
Carolina: Skinner if they're willing to part with him which I doubt. Is smallish and already has concussion issues. Questionable fit in the West.
Columbus: Johansen could be on the verge of a breakout soon. There's also Anisimov but he's RFA this offseason.
Detroit: Small talented forwards like Nyquist and Jarnkrok but they need more seasoning and as I said earlier in this thread, I think Holland isn't as desperate for a guy like Edler as many seem to think.
Edmonton: Yakupov. Don't see Edmonton giving up Yakupov to a conference rival, they'd probably try to lowball us with Paajarvi.
New Jersey: Only Henrique but there's no way they're giving him up with their center situation.
Philly: Couturier is a good fit but we're likely taking salary back and his offensive game is a question mark.
Buffalo: Foligno is no-go after they gave up Kassian. Girgensons and Armia look real intriguing but are untested.
Anaheim: Like others have mentioned, Bobby Ryan. We're conference rivals though and they have Lindholm waiting in the wings for next year.
Tampa: Connolly is their most highly regarded. There's also Panik who has a good mix of size and skill. Both are unproven though.
Winnipeg: Definitely Kane but he's hands down their best player.

leftwinglockdown is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 09:14 PM
  #292
Huntershin Karuk
Horvat is Horfat
 
Huntershin Karuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,648
vCash: 500
We need proven young talent, not draft picks.

Players that have shown the ability to play at the NHL level.

Huntershin Karuk is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 09:21 PM
  #293
CanaFan
Registered User
 
CanaFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,833
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by leftwinglockdown View Post
The young impact forwards that we would want from that list:

Colorado: O'Reilly would fit pretty well. Problem is, he's only under contract for next year and he has a history of holding out to get what he wants. Wouldn't fit with the culture of taking less that MG has started here.
Calgary: Baertschi is their only real dynamic young forward on the verge of breaking out. Doubt they'd give him up for Edler. There's also Max Reinhart who looked pretty good at the end of the season. Could also try and start the BC version of the Staals with acquiring Max first. Flames would have to add though.
Carolina: Skinner if they're willing to part with him which I doubt. Is smallish and already has concussion issues. Questionable fit in the West.
Columbus: Johansen could be on the verge of a breakout soon. There's also Anisimov but he's RFA this offseason.
Detroit: Small talented forwards like Nyquist and Jarnkrok but they need more seasoning and as I said earlier in this thread, I think Holland isn't as desperate for a guy like Edler as many seem to think.
Edmonton: Yakupov. Don't see Edmonton giving up Yakupov to a conference rival, they'd probably try to lowball us with Paajarvi.
New Jersey: Only Henrique but there's no way they're giving him up with their center situation.
Philly: Couturier is a good fit but we're likely taking salary back and his offensive game is a question mark.
Buffalo: Foligno is no-go after they gave up Kassian. Girgensons and Armia look real intriguing but are untested.
Anaheim: Like others have mentioned, Bobby Ryan. We're conference rivals though and they have Lindholm waiting in the wings for next year.
Tampa: Connolly is their most highly regarded. There's also Panik who has a good mix of size and skill. Both are unproven though.
Winnipeg: Definitely Kane but he's hands down their best player.

Fair assessment, though you might want to consider draft picks to balance out some of the value, including Carolina (#5), Calgary (6), Edmonton (7), Buffalo (8 & 16), NJ (9), Phi (11), Wpg (13), and CBJ (14). Id consider Skinner + 5 (take Monahan) for Edler + 24, or B Schenn + 11 (take Lazar or Nichkushin) for Edler + 24 or Johansen + 14 (Lazar) for Edler straight.

Just examples, honestly have no idea if the value is right for those teams but seems close to me. And gillis doesn't need 10 teams to create demand, he merely needs 2 which he should easily have ...

CanaFan is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 09:25 PM
  #294
leftwinglockdown
Dude Guy
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanaFan View Post
Fair assessment, though you might want to consider draft picks to balance out some of the value, including Carolina (#5), Calgary (6), Edmonton (7), Buffalo (8 & 16), NJ (9), Phi (11), Wpg (13), and CBJ (14). Id consider Skinner + 5 (take Monahan) for Edler + 24, or B Schenn + 11 (take Lazar or Nichkushin) for Edler + 24 or Johansen + 14 (Lazar) for Edler straight.

Just examples, honestly have no idea if the value is right for those teams but seems close to me. And gillis doesn't need 10 teams to create demand, he merely needs 2 which he should easily have ...
It definitely crossed my mind but I was more focused on what forwards we would want from those teams and the consequences of that if we wanted to make a run next year rather than getting the right value.

Most picks won't make an impact immediately.

leftwinglockdown is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 09:42 PM
  #295
CanaFan
Registered User
 
CanaFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,833
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by leftwinglockdown View Post
It definitely crossed my mind but I was more focused on what forwards we would want from those teams and the consequences of that if we wanted to make a run next year rather than getting the right value.

Most picks won't make an impact immediately.
Fair point, wasn't a criticism. I guess I'm less in the "make a run next year" camp and more in the "lets get this team back on the rails" to compete again in the next 3-5 years. A kid like Monahan, if he pans out, is the kind of versatile, highly competitive forward that I want to see our next core to be comprised of. If we could get that along WITH a roster player like Skinner then id feel a lot better going into summer where maybe we add a UFA or something. Id also be more than happy with Bobby Ryan instead of course ...

CanaFan is offline  
Old
05-17-2013, 09:47 PM
  #296
leftwinglockdown
Dude Guy
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanaFan View Post
Fair point, wasn't a criticism. I guess I'm less in the "make a run next year" camp and more in the "lets get this team back on the rails" to compete again in the next 3-5 years. A kid like Monahan, if he pans out, is the kind of versatile, highly competitive forward that I want to see our next core to be comprised of. If we could get that along WITH a roster player like Skinner then id feel a lot better going into summer where maybe we add a UFA or something. Id also be more than happy with Bobby Ryan instead of course ...
I'm all for that as well due to the quality of players available in the 1st round. I definitely want us to try and get a top 15 pick at least. A guy like Monahan could be what Couture is to the Sharks if he can come in early and help the team.

But I also think that MG is unwilling to let the window close on this core right now and getting both an impact player and something for the future is much more difficult.

leftwinglockdown is offline  
Old
05-18-2013, 12:41 AM
  #297
goodluckchuck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 449
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsAllPartOfThePlan View Post
I agree. However, I think those teams would give similar assets for Bieksa (or maybe better ones due to his lower cap hit). I would rather trade bieksa than Edler.
I'm sorry but I literally laughed out loud when i read this.

Absolutely brilliant strategy. I'm sure GMMG is already working hard on the phones trading Bieksa and Edler for some great assets.

goodluckchuck is offline  
Old
05-18-2013, 03:14 PM
  #298
biturbo19
Registered User
 
biturbo19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 6,889
vCash: 500
All this talk about moving Edler for Couturier with varying parts to 'balance' it (1st rounders, etc.)...i love Couturier as a player and think he's gonna be a stud in his own right. But i think we're talking about more of a less physically imposing Martin Hanzal, than a dynamic impact scorer. I thought it was nuts how much Couts fell at the draft, and there is obviously some more offensively potential in there to go with his outstanding defensive ability (which is only going to get better as he fills out his frame and continues to work on his skating).

But let's put things in perspective here...

This Canucks team struggles mightily to score in the playoffs. So we fix that by hypothetically trading a 50pt defenceman for a 30pt forward? This math just doesn't jive. Not only are we getting less points from a pure production standpoint, but we're also getting a guy who stands zero chance of getting top PP time where we can get him on the ice with our other top players to score, and more importantly...we're neutering our puck moving/transition game even further.

It's nothing against Couturier as a player at all...but i just don't think it's the right idea, moving our most prolific point producing defenceman for 'shutdown center with upside'. If we were a younger team as a whole and looking at a true 'rebuild'...? Maybe it makes more sense...but if Couturier is ever going to 'break out' offensively, i get the distinct impression it's going to be at a later point...more like Kesler who didn't bloom offensively until later in his career.

I think it's 'shiny and new' syndrome to the extreme tbh.

biturbo19 is offline  
Old
05-18-2013, 08:46 PM
  #299
leftwinglockdown
Dude Guy
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by biturbo19 View Post
All this talk about moving Edler for Couturier with varying parts to 'balance' it (1st rounders, etc.)...i love Couturier as a player and think he's gonna be a stud in his own right. But i think we're talking about more of a less physically imposing Martin Hanzal, than a dynamic impact scorer. I thought it was nuts how much Couts fell at the draft, and there is obviously some more offensively potential in there to go with his outstanding defensive ability (which is only going to get better as he fills out his frame and continues to work on his skating).

But let's put things in perspective here...

This Canucks team struggles mightily to score in the playoffs. So we fix that by hypothetically trading a 50pt defenceman for a 30pt forward? This math just doesn't jive. Not only are we getting less points from a pure production standpoint, but we're also getting a guy who stands zero chance of getting top PP time where we can get him on the ice with our other top players to score, and more importantly...we're neutering our puck moving/transition game even further.

It's nothing against Couturier as a player at all...but i just don't think it's the right idea, moving our most prolific point producing defenceman for 'shutdown center with upside'. If we were a younger team as a whole and looking at a true 'rebuild'...? Maybe it makes more sense...but if Couturier is ever going to 'break out' offensively, i get the distinct impression it's going to be at a later point...more like Kesler who didn't bloom offensively until later in his career.

I think it's 'shiny and new' syndrome to the extreme tbh.
+1.

There definitely will be demand for Edler if he is shopped but those expecting a really great return need to settle down because the likelihood of that happening is low.

We're trading a 50pt d-man in his prime. What we want in return is an impact young player who is proven at the NHL level. Most of those are already being made core pieces of other teams at this point and will not be given up easily if at all.

The return for Edler will then most likely be a player that looks like he has a lot of potential but has question marks and is hoping for a change of scenery. Our scoring could very well get worse before it gets better without Edler here next year.

leftwinglockdown is offline  
Old
05-18-2013, 09:01 PM
  #300
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,476
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanaFan View Post
I seem to be in the minority but I don't like Couturier *that*much. Hes a few years away from showing any real offensive game IMO and isnt surefire to ever develop into one. I'd do Edler for him and the 11th but not send our 1st back. If we are sending our first back with Edler, I'd be looking at B Schenn and the 11th. More offensive upside, could be a #1 eventually or at least a good #2. Couts looks more like an elite #3 or an adequate #2. Just my 2 cents mind you ...
I think Couturier is a good bet to be an elite #3 like you said, with a pretty good shot to be a poor man's Anze Kopitar. He's got a much bigger frame than guys like Schenn --Couturier is 6'3 with room to add 15-20 pounds. I think he's exactly what the Canucks need moving forward. He can be a #3 center, and if he develops into an offensive player he can move Kesler to the wing, or slide up the lineup when the Sedins get older.

If there's any chance that Holmgren is moving Couturier, Gillis better be all over it.

Proto 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 07:04 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.