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
07-16-2013, 06:40 AM
  #51
maroon 6
Live and let live
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: British Columbia
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,933
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockeygirl95 View Post
Jensen is overrated, meh in the OHL, Meh overseas and terrible in the AHL/NHL.
Lol whatever makes you happy

maroon 6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 06:44 AM
  #52
LPH
[hello] :)
 
LPH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Granduland
Country: United States
Posts: 45,677
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockeygirl95 View Post
Jensen is overrated, meh in the OHL, Meh overseas and terrible in the AHL/NHL.
What? Point a game player in the OHL, scored 6 goals in 8 games in his first stint in Chicago, then scored 17 goals in 50 games (28 goal pace in 82 games) over in the SEL on a pretty terrible AIK team. Just because he struggled in the cluster**** that was the Wolves in the last 20 or so games does not mean much in the grand scheme of things.

I am glad you threw in the NHL stuff as well when he only played 2 games, and didn't even really look out of place. He was sent down because we want him to be an impact player, not someone who just keeps up with the play and is responsible in his own end.

He will likely have the year in Utica with spot callups and I expect him to make great progress. Jensen has some question marks about his game, but your comment screams of ignorance, especially the part about his play overseas.

LPH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 06:51 AM
  #53
maroon 6
Live and let live
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: British Columbia
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,933
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by live playoff hockey View Post
What? Point a game player in the OHL, scored 6 goals in 8 games in his first stint in Chicago, then scored 17 goals in 50 games (28 goal pace in 82 games) over in the SEL on a pretty terrible AIK team. Just because he struggled in the cluster**** that was the Wolves in the last 20 or so games does not mean much in the grand scheme of things.

I am glad you threw in the NHL stuff as well when he only played 2 games, and didn't even really look out of place. He was sent down because we want him to be an impact player, not someone who just keeps up with the play and is responsible in his own end.

He will likely have the year in Utica with spot callups and I expect him to make great progress. Jensen has some question marks about his game, but your comment screams of ignorance, especially the part about his play overseas.
I think that post is a perfect example of a stats watcher.

maroon 6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 06:55 AM
  #54
tsujimoto74
Moderator
 
tsujimoto74's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Virginia
Country: United States
Posts: 9,995
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.
1) Stafford has only had 1 bad year, where his shooting % was incredibly and abnormally low.
2) He's not injured all the time.
3) At 50%, Stafford is a bargain. While you're asking the Sabres to take Booth at his full cap hit, which is awful.

tsujimoto74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 07:11 AM
  #55
Vankiller Whale
Propaganda Minister
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,446
vCash: 1300
I'd do Jensen + 1st for Vanek.

I don't think Stafford would be a good fit for us. Booth could be included if the Sabres want, I'm sure we could recoup a pick for him from someone.

Would also be willing go swap Jensen for Gaunce if any Buffalo fans prefer that.


Last edited by Vankiller Whale: 07-16-2013 at 07:16 AM.
Vankiller Whale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 07:26 AM
  #56
DJOpus
Registered User
 
DJOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,837
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chainshot View Post
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.
Booth is a drag on the overall deal, especially since we are asking you to keep some of Stafford's salary...

But there's a significant amount of value going the other way including a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, plus top prospect which is significantly more than any one rental has garnered for quite a while IIRC.

DJOpus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 11:13 AM
  #57
HiddenInLight
Registered User
 
HiddenInLight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,023
vCash: 500
One thing I noticed most people forgetting is that Vanek plays on either wing. He would be playing on the RW with the sedins. Vanek with the Sedins would be a scary sight to see for an opposing team. He is everything that they could want in a winger. Hes almost as good a playmaker as he is a goal scorer, and LOVES to sit in front of the net and deflect shots in. With the sedins their point totals would probably increase by at least 10 each, and it wouldn't be too out there to say vanek could score 50 goals. This move might even put the nucks over the hump and get them a cup.

HiddenInLight is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 11:30 AM
  #58
NYVanfan
Registered User
 
NYVanfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 6,126
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiddenInLight View Post
One thing I noticed most people forgetting is that Vanek plays on either wing. He would be playing on the RW with the sedins. Vanek with the Sedins would be a scary sight to see for an opposing team. He is everything that they could want in a winger. Hes almost as good a playmaker as he is a goal scorer, and LOVES to sit in front of the net and deflect shots in. With the sedins their point totals would probably increase by at least 10 each, and it wouldn't be too out there to say vanek could score 50 goals. This move might even put the nucks over the hump and get them a cup.
is it me, or is he the most hot & cold player in the league?
goes on tears like the best scorer in the league, then gets some injury and comes back and takes forever to get going again ...
that's my impression as a Vanek owner in my fantasy league anyway
he's an enigma for sure

NYVanfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 12:32 PM
  #59
14s incisor
Registered User
 
14s incisor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 670
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiddenInLight View Post
One thing I noticed most people forgetting is that Vanek plays on either wing. He would be playing on the RW with the sedins. Vanek with the Sedins would be a scary sight to see for an opposing team. He is everything that they could want in a winger. Hes almost as good a playmaker as he is a goal scorer, and LOVES to sit in front of the net and deflect shots in. With the sedins their point totals would probably increase by at least 10 each, and it wouldn't be too out there to say vanek could score 50 goals. This move might even put the nucks over the hump and get them a cup.
I'd be more interested in what he could do on Kesler's wing.

The Canucks need secondary scoring.

Bumping Burrows down to the second line in favour of Vanek might increase the both lines' outputs a bit, but I'd be much more interested in the Canucks targeting a player that would be a better fit with Kesler to turn that line into a threat again.

14s incisor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 01:45 PM
  #60
Djp
Registered User
 
Djp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Seattle,WA
Posts: 6,505
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYVanfan View Post
is it me, or is he the most hot & cold player in the league?
goes on tears like the best scorer in the league, then gets some injury and comes back and takes forever to get going again ...
that's my impression as a Vanek owner in my fantasy league anyway
he's an enigma for sure
If you have ever actually watched him you would know he usually gets 2 or 3 soliid goal scoring chances a game and his presence pond up area for other players.

Djp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 02:43 PM
  #61
iFan
McDavid to Virtanen
 
iFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 4,403
vCash: 500
Jensen and a 1st seems on the high side given what other players have been traded for and still had term left on their contract. If Vanek comes signed on a good deal then I could part with all that but for a rental Vanek I'm not parting with Jensen, Schroeder and a 1st is the most I'd give up for him as a pending ufa

iFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 02:45 PM
  #62
Stop Winnin
TANK ON BOYS
 
Stop Winnin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Buffalo
Posts: 8,842
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
I'd do Jensen + 1st for Vanek.

I don't think Stafford would be a good fit for us. Booth could be included if the Sabres want, I'm sure we could recoup a pick for him from someone.

Would also be willing go swap Jensen for Gaunce if any Buffalo fans prefer that.
We're loaded with center prospects but pretty thin on the wing. Jensen would be much more preferable.

Stop Winnin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 03:09 PM
  #63
StringerBell
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stop Winnin View Post
We're loaded with center prospects but pretty thin on the wing. Jensen would be much more preferable.
Gaunce played LW the last half of the season. He's adept at both positions.

StringerBell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 04:57 PM
  #64
LPH
[hello] :)
 
LPH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Granduland
Country: United States
Posts: 45,677
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
I'd do Jensen + 1st for Vanek.

I don't think Stafford would be a good fit for us. Booth could be included if the Sabres want, I'm sure we could recoup a pick for him from someone.

Would also be willing go swap Jensen for Gaunce if any Buffalo fans prefer that.
I don't touch that deal, because there is no need to trade two first rounders for Vanek

LPH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 05:26 PM
  #65
Vankiller Whale
Propaganda Minister
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,446
vCash: 1300
Quote:
Originally Posted by live playoff hockey View Post
I don't touch that deal, because there is no need to trade two first rounders for Vanek
We need more scoring. Vanek brings scoring. Is there someone else available for cheap that can help us score?

Vankiller Whale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 05:27 PM
  #66
PG Canuck
Moderator
 
PG Canuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Prince George, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,229
vCash: 50
Not interested in trading a top prospect of ours for a rental, assuming Vanek doesn't re-sign. At this point in time of the Canucks roster, I'd rather just inject some youth into the lineup.

PG Canuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 05:31 PM
  #67
14s incisor
Registered User
 
14s incisor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 670
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
We need more scoring. Vanek brings scoring. Is there someone else available for cheap that can help us score?
They need more than a one-dimensional scoring winger to be a contender. They also need another playmaker for the 2nd line, and you could also argue a 3C and more D depth.

If Vanek would be enough to put the Canucks "over the top", then it might be worth trading prospects and picks to acquire him.

As it stands right now, he isn't enough, and with the risk of him leaving when his contract is up, it's simply not worth sacrificing the future that much for one year of Vanek.

14s incisor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 05:46 PM
  #68
Vankiller Whale
Propaganda Minister
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,446
vCash: 1300
Quote:
Originally Posted by 14s incisor View Post
They need more than a one-dimensional scoring winger to be a contender. They also need another playmaker for the 2nd line, and you could also argue a 3C and more D depth.

If Vanek would be enough to put the Canucks "over the top", then it might be worth trading prospects and picks to acquire him.

As it stands right now, he isn't enough, and with the risk of him leaving when his contract is up, it's simply not worth sacrificing the future that much for one year of Vanek.
I think Vanek would put us over the top. I think our centre and defense depth are both top-5 in the league. Our biggest need is at wing.

Realistically speaking Vanek would be scoring a goal every other game or two, and his playmaking ability is still miles ahead of Higgins/Booth.

I agree we'd have to be fairly certain we could re-sign him though, or else it wouldn't be worth it.

Vankiller Whale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 06:28 PM
  #69
14s incisor
Registered User
 
14s incisor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 670
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
I think Vanek would put us over the top. I think our centre and defense depth are both top-5 in the league. Our biggest need is at wing.

Realistically speaking Vanek would be scoring a goal every other game or two, and his playmaking ability is still miles ahead of Higgins/Booth.

I agree we'd have to be fairly certain we could re-sign him though, or else it wouldn't be worth it.
Really don't agree with this. And I'm fairly shocked anybody would claim this with the current roster.

Maybe a few years ago before Malhotra's eye injury, and before Kesler broke a bone and tore a ligament every other week.

As it stands right now the Canucks are very weak at C. I like Schroeder, but the guy still has a lot to prove before he can be considered a full time NHL C.

And until Schroeder proves he is a full time NHLer, and Kesler can prove he can go a full season without getting injured, the Canucks are short two legit top9 centres.

The D is in great shape when healthy, but how often is that? They need additional depth if they want to contend this season, as injuries are likely.

14s incisor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 06:46 PM
  #70
VegasSabreFan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Las Vegas
Country: United States
Posts: 99
vCash: 500
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.
The problem is this isn't a buy low scenario as we wouldn't just be taking on his full salary but also covering $5+ million in salary between Vanek and Stafford. It's one top prospect, plus one late first, 2 mid round picks, and Booth for Vanek and Stafford both at half salary.

If we are trading Vanek alone at half salary another team would be willing to give a prospect of equal value to Jensen, a late first, and a prospect worth more than either of Booth or the other picks individually.

Stafford alone is worth a 2nd. If Buffalo is giving Stafford at half salary ($2 million) with 2 years left then some GM is going to be willing to give a late first for a guy who scored 30 goals in 60 games a few years back.

all the Vancouver fans can say what they want about not being willing to give up that much, but that's what it will take to get either player. And every trade Buffalo has made in the last 3 years Darcy has held firm with what he asked for and gotten it. With Vanek being better than every other player Buffalo has traded away I don't anticipate he'll be the exception to the rule. Darcy got a first for a third line center in Gaustad and a 2nd for Leopold who was the by far the worst defenseman we iced all last year. He'll have no problem getting full value for Vanek.

VegasSabreFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 06:56 PM
  #71
14s incisor
Registered User
 
14s incisor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 670
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VegasSabreFan View Post
The problem is this isn't a buy low scenario as we wouldn't just be taking on his full salary but also covering $5+ million in salary between Vanek and Stafford. It's one top prospect, plus one late first, 2 mid round picks, and Booth for Vanek and Stafford both at half salary.

If we are trading Vanek alone at half salary another team would be willing to give a prospect of equal value to Jensen, a late first, and a prospect worth more than either of Booth or the other picks individually.

Stafford alone is worth a 2nd. If Buffalo is giving Stafford at half salary ($2 million) with 2 years left then some GM is going to be willing to give a late first for a guy who scored 30 goals in 60 games a few years back.

all the Vancouver fans can say what they want about not being willing to give up that much, but that's what it will take to get either player. And every trade Buffalo has made in the last 3 years Darcy has held firm with what he asked for and gotten it. With Vanek being better than every other player Buffalo has traded away I don't anticipate he'll be the exception to the rule. Darcy got a first for a third line center in Gaustad and a 2nd for Leopold who was the by far the worst defenseman we iced all last year. He'll have no problem getting full value for Vanek.
Yeah...

Stafford and Booth have similar value. Stafford may be worth a bit more due to the fact that his injury issues are slightly better than Booth's, and he has a 0.60 point per game average compared to Booth's 0.53.

If Stafford has value, so does Booth.

14s incisor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 07:02 PM
  #72
VegasSabreFan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Las Vegas
Country: United States
Posts: 99
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by iFan View Post
Jensen and a 1st seems on the high side given what other players have been traded for and still had term left on their contract. If Vanek comes signed on a good deal then I could part with all that but for a rental Vanek I'm not parting with Jensen, Schroeder and a 1st is the most I'd give up for him as a pending ufa
Which trade would you be referring to for a first line winger with term left?

Because the most recent ones that could be compared are the Bobby Ryan deal, which was a 1st (which would presumably be 5-10 picks better than Vancouver's), Silverberg (who has a lot more value then Jensen) and Noesen (who has similar value to Jensen).

Or there is the Pominville trade, where Buffalo got the #16 pick in a much better draft class, plus Hackett and Larsson, two prospects close to the value of Jensen.

And Vanek is a lot better than Pominville. He's the one player on Buffalo over the last few years that has consistently made his teammates around him better. I can tell you now Darcy will make sure he gets a better package back if he makes a trade. Also neither of these players had salary retained, which would add to the package required to get Vanek.

If you want Vanek at half salary, it will take a 1st, Jensen, and another prospect/young player like Gaunce. If you don't want to pay it that's fine, someone else will.

VegasSabreFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 07:32 PM
  #73
is the answer jesus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,333
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 14s incisor View Post
Yeah...

Stafford and Booth have similar value. Stafford may be worth a bit more due to the fact that his injury issues are slightly better than Booth's, and he has a 0.60 point per game average compared to Booth's 0.53

If Stafford has value, so does Booth.
Look at the last 3 years. Stafford has shown he's a 50 point player in 2 of the last 3 years. He had a bad year last year. I'd rather keep the younger healthier stafford who has shown more recently than Booth. I wouldn't be opposed to taking Booth back in a trade and I wouldn't say he's worthless, but his value isn't even in the same ball park as Staffords.

is the answer jesus is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 08:00 PM
  #74
Lord Flacko*
Down to let it go
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,399
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
We need more scoring. Vanek brings scoring. Is there someone else available for cheap that can help us score?
Grab a shut down 3rd line center so Kesler can focus more on offense.
Its not that complex.

Lord Flacko* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2013, 08:09 PM
  #75
LPH
[hello] :)
 
LPH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Granduland
Country: United States
Posts: 45,677
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
We need more scoring. Vanek brings scoring. Is there someone else available for cheap that can help us score?
We need to develop players from within, this moves is basically a band-aid imo

LPH 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 09:15 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.