HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
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.

BUF and VAN

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-15-2013, 06:59 PM
  #26
LPH
[hello] :)
 
LPH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Granduland
Country: United States
Posts: 39,388
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chainshot View Post
So Jensen, a 2nd, and a 3rd -- and a negative value bag of crap like Booth -- for Vanek? I suspect someone else can do better, including an upcoming first for one.
Tell us how you really feel

LPH is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2013, 07:03 PM
  #27
is the answer jesus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJOpus View Post
Okay, obviously dumping Booth (which VAN included a 2nd + 3rd vs. Stafford @50%) to do is a major issue.

As a Canucks fan, I do Vanek @ 50% for Jensen + 1st and figure out the rest later (and it would require some figuring).

Are BUF fans okay with:

To BUF: Jensen + 1st
To VAN: Vanek @ 50%

?
I'd want slightly more personally. I think Jensen is a nice prospect but he's not a blue chipper and that 1st is likely to be a late pick. It really isn't a bad deal value wise, but I think we could do better.

is the answer jesus is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2013, 07:05 PM
  #28
Chainshot
Global Moderator
Give 'em Enough Rope
 
Chainshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Costa Rica
Country: Costa Rica
Posts: 56,483
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by StringerBell View Post
I don't understand what the issue is with Booth. He might not have much value now, but provided he's healthy the Sabres could flip him at the deadline and probably pick up a 2nd/3rd round pick. Classic buy low/sell high scenario.

We also have no use for Stafford. You can keep him and sell him elsewhere for a better deal. However if Buffalo retained salary on Vanek and he was willing to negotiate an extension with us beforehand there would definitely be a solid basis for a deal here.
Stafford at least has a career abomination shooting percentage last year to point to his fall from grace. Not sure if Booth returns to form, but Stafford simply getting back to his norms puts him back into the 20-goal neighborhood... and at his contract, that's not a bad thing at all.

__________________
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. - Aristotle
Chainshot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2013, 07:07 PM
  #29
Boose30
Registered User
 
Boose30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: The Colony
Country: United States
Posts: 281
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJOpus View Post
These never seem to go well but I've got a proposal depending on what direction BUF is going:

To BUF: Jensen + Booth + 1st + 2nd + 3rd

To VAN: Vanek @ 50% + Stafford @ 50%

VAN gets a top line winger at a reasonable price that they can afford for one year...they also get him before the year starts which allows him to mesh with other players on the roster.

BUF gets a natural goal scoring replacement for Vanek in Jensen, a recent 1st rounder, who was #11 in goals the SEL (top goal scorer under 20 years-old), who brings speed, size and a great release to the table along with a 1st round pick to speed up the rebuild. Eating salary for one year has no negative effect on BUF long-term and is necessary for VAN to be able to make this trade.

...Had to add Stafford @ 50% for Booth + 2nd +3rd late to make things work salary wise for the Canucks...and I don't think BUF will miss Stafford or VAN will miss Booth...if that part is really objectionable for either side, something else can likely be arranged.

To a certain extent, this is Buffalo buying draft picks.
Great Deal for Buffalo. Would love to hear any other Sabres fan suggest otherwise.

Boose30 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2013, 07:13 PM
  #30
clownfat
Registered User
 
clownfat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 11
vCash: 500
I thought teams could only retain money on two contracts at a time. Did the Sabres only retain salary on last year for Pominville when they traded him and not this year? I know they retained some, I had assumed it was for both years. If so, then I don't think they can do a reduced salary for both Vanek and Stafford.

clownfat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2013, 08:02 PM
  #31
ZeroPT
Beast
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,154
vCash: 500
I don't dislike the deal but I don't love it. Vanek alongside the Sedin's would be deadly, like REALLY deadly. How about we drop Stafford and we take booth as cap dump, and maybe it looks like
Vanek (50%)
for
Jensen+1st+Booth+Weise
would that work? I posteed on the Nucks board and the price for Weise was quite low, Buffalo could add a third.

ZeroPT is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2013, 08:14 PM
  #32
Ron C.
Registered User
 
Ron C.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Amherst, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 2,235
vCash: 356
No interest in 2 years of Booth at that salary. Vancouver's 1st will likely be 24 or lower. I would rather hold Vanek until the trade deadline where his worth could likely match Iginla's depending on how he does this year. He should certainly match Gaustad's return.

Ron C. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2013, 08:21 PM
  #33
ohnoeszz
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 920
vCash: 500
It makes no sense for Vancouver to be trading young NHL ready talent.

Vanek would be a fantastic hockey addition but adds to a terrible cap situation. Jensen could be the answer to the 2nd line issues as soon as this year for 1/6th of what Vanek will cost on a new contract. The Canucks need talented players on entry level contracts to get the most out of their cap situation.

ohnoeszz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2013, 08:54 PM
  #34
SillyRabbit
Trix Are For Kids
 
SillyRabbit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,593
vCash: 1250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergei Shirokov View Post
Nah I would just hold onto our futures, we need those now more than ever. Gotta stop trading them for stop gap options.
This.

We just got out of the prospect basement, no need to head back there.

This core could be completely blown up after this season, in which case we'll need all of our picks and young prospects.

SillyRabbit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2013, 09:45 PM
  #35
Sergei Shirokov
Registered User
 
Sergei Shirokov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: British Columbia
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,007
vCash: 500
Yeah Vanek would be a wonderful add, but getting/keeping our good young talent is something we need more.

Jensen + 1st is far more valuable to us than what would likely be 1 year of Vanek.

Sergei Shirokov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2013, 10:42 PM
  #36
Djp
Registered User
 
Djp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Seattle,WA
Posts: 5,848
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by clownfat View Post
I thought teams could only retain money on two contracts at a time. Did the Sabres only retain salary on last year for Pominville when they traded him and not this year? I know they retained some, I had assumed it was for both years. If so, then I don't think they can do a reduced salary for both Vanek and Stafford.
the rules on cap retention are:

max 3 contracts at one time

AND

The total retained can not exceed 15% of the cap...($9.6M this year)

It has nothing to do with the number of years...just only 3 contracts at a time. Once one contract falls off another could be retained.

For example say they traded miller and Vanek this year and retained 50% for each. Pominville is still on the books

All 3 fall off the books after this year.

Buffalo could move Stafford at the deadline with the stimulation that the team get him has to pay him in full for the remainder of the season but they take a cap hit of 50% for 2014-2015 season.

Djp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2013, 10:46 PM
  #37
Horvat2Virtanen
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Horvat2Virtanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 33,639
vCash: 50
Please tell me how Booth is viewed as a player with negative value while Drew Stafford isn't.

__________________
Clear Eyes. Full Hearts. Can't Lose!
Horvat2Virtanen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2013, 10:51 PM
  #38
hockeyjack89
R.I.P. Thrashers
 
hockeyjack89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,420
vCash: 500
Bad move for Vancouver

hockeyjack89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2013, 10:51 PM
  #39
Seatoo
Never Stop Poasting
 
Seatoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: The Interior of BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,915
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kesler2Burrows View Post
Please tell me how Booth is viewed as a player with negative value while Drew Stafford isn't.
Because Booth is on the Canucks, duh.

Seatoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2013, 11:01 PM
  #40
Djp
Registered User
 
Djp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Seattle,WA
Posts: 5,848
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron C. View Post
No interest in 2 years of Booth at that salary. Vancouver's 1st will likely be 24 or lower. I would rather hold Vanek until the trade deadline where his worth could likely match Iginla's depending on how he does this year. He should certainly match Gaustad's return.
2 yrs of Booth's cap hit isnt much different than 2 yrs of Staffords cap hit.

Djp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2013, 11:06 PM
  #41
Katani Kalan
Registered User
 
Katani Kalan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Down by the seaside
Country: Canada
Posts: 512
vCash: 500
Sedin Sedin Vanek
Burrows Kesler Stafford
Higgins Horvat Hansen
Wiese Richardson Kassian

Looks solid to me sign me up. Who knows if Jensen even pans out. With cap going up next year we should be able to sign Vanek again if he wants to. Added plus is we get 2 right handed shots which would help our power play not to mention the talent level of Vanek and the fact both are bigger guys.

Sedins and Vanek would be lethal and Burr Kes and Staff would be a great energy line that can score. I think Horvat could be ready and with two vets on his wings could really be a solid 3 line.

Katani Kalan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2013, 11:18 PM
  #42
McTank
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,820
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kesler2Burrows View Post
Please tell me how Booth is viewed as a player with negative value while Drew Stafford isn't.
Who the hell wants either of them

McTank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2013, 11:20 PM
  #43
Hockeygirl95*
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 176
vCash: 500
Jensen is overrated, meh in the OHL, Meh overseas and terrible in the AHL/NHL.

Hockeygirl95* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2013, 11:26 PM
  #44
huntison
Registered User
 
huntison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,592
vCash: 500
I like it. Think canucks could retain vanek the next year?

huntison is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2013, 11:37 PM
  #45
Horvat2Virtanen
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Horvat2Virtanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 33,639
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheyAreGoodScaryGood View Post
Who the hell wants either of them
I know right it's not like players who produce similarly like David Clarkson are getting more money than Booth and Stafford on the open market, oh wait.

Horvat2Virtanen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 12:53 AM
  #46
Virtanen2Horvat
Tweet@CanucksOnARoll
 
Virtanen2Horvat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,029
vCash: 462
Not interested in that trade. Vanek is starting to get older and it just doesn't make sense for us. I rather go for someone else.

Virtanen2Horvat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 02:34 AM
  #47
14s incisor
Registered User
 
14s incisor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 594
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockeygirl95 View Post
Jensen is overrated, meh in the OHL, Meh overseas and terrible in the AHL/NHL.
Terrible in the AHL is a bit of an exaggeration. He was used exclusively in the bottom6 and only played 20 games. In the previous season he scored 6 goals in 8 games.

Also, not sure how one of the highest goal totals for a jr-aged player in the SEL in recent years equates to "Meh overseas".

14s incisor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 04:27 AM
  #48
Spectrefire
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 437
vCash: 500
Jensen + 1st for a 1 year rental?

No thanks.

Spectrefire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 05:24 AM
  #49
DJOpus
Registered User
 
DJOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,750
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectrefire View Post
Jensen + 1st for a 1 year rental?

No thanks.
What stops the Canucks from re-signing Vanek? His age and style of play fits the team perfectly...it's not like he'd be available at all if he wasn't an upcoming UFA.

DJOpus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 05:34 AM
  #50
Chainshot
Global Moderator
Give 'em Enough Rope
 
Chainshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Costa Rica
Country: Costa Rica
Posts: 56,483
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kesler2Burrows View Post
Please tell me how Booth is viewed as a player with negative value while Drew Stafford isn't.
Who said anything about Stafford not having paltry value? The point was Booth, Jensen, a 2nd and a 3rd for Vanek with retained salary. In that scenario, Booth is a drag on the overall deal.

Chainshot is offline   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 07:05 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.