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

The Armchair GM Thread - LII

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-16-2013, 01:21 AM
  #951
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 17,974
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by StringerBell View Post
Skilled playmaker who could come cheap due to.his ufa status. Is familiar with Kesler and Torts from Olympics and would probably have a good probability of re-signing. Great on faceoffs, solid defensively and could anchor the second unit PP.
He won't come cheap. Someone will likely overpay at the deadline. If the Avs keep winning it'd take a huge overpayment.

me2 is offline  
Old
10-16-2013, 01:32 AM
  #952
StringerBell
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by me2 View Post
He won't come cheap. Someone will likely overpay at the deadline. If the Avs keep winning it'd take a huge overpayment.
Cheap in a relative sense. Hard to find consistent 50+ point two way centers in their primes who aren't a part of their teams' future plans. I checked the Avs board and most of their fans seem to be down to move him at the deadline. They also seem to really want Brian Campbell, hence my three way proposal on the last page.

StringerBell is offline  
Old
10-16-2013, 01:39 AM
  #953
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( _)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,191
vCash: 13357
Quote:
Originally Posted by turkulad View Post
Stastny for Bieksa.
Weaver for Jensen.
Terrible. You do not trade a player of Bieksa's caliber for a UFA, and no to pretrade negotiations. Its occurrence in the NHL is akin to unicorns.

That being said, I am almost certain Stastny would cost us either Corrado or Tanev, plus additional pieces. Colorado desperately needs to defense and we are unlikely to entice them without forfeiting one of our young defensemen.

Personally, I have my doubts Colorado moves Stastny at all if they are in the thick of things once the deadline looms. We're not dealing with incompetent management, but new guys who may believe they can convince Stastny to stick around.

Bourne Endeavor is offline  
Old
10-16-2013, 02:16 AM
  #954
Chubros
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,151
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
...

And unless we dump Booth I don't think we can't afford Stastny.
Hmmm... I wonder if there is any way to dump Booth at the trade deadline and get something back... a 2nd or 3rd round pick or something and save a buyout in the process.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
Terrible. You do not trade a player of Bieksa's caliber for a UFA, and no to pretrade negotiations. Its occurrence in the NHL is akin to unicorns.

That being said, I am almost certain Stastny would cost us either Corrado or Tanev, plus additional pieces. Colorado desperately needs to defense and we are unlikely to entice them without forfeiting one of our young defensemen.

Personally, I have my doubts Colorado moves Stastny at all if they are in the thick of things once the deadline looms. We're not dealing with incompetent management, but new guys who may believe they can convince Stastny to stick around.
Stastny's play has really fallen off over the last few years so I don't why anyone would want to trade either Bieksa or Tanev+ or Corrado+ for him, even if Stastny was signed for a few years at market value.

Chubros is offline  
Old
10-16-2013, 02:53 AM
  #955
peen
Registered User
 
peen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 2,723
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chubros View Post
Hmmm... I wonder if there is any way to dump Booth at the trade deadline and get something back... a 2nd or 3rd round pick or something and save a buyout in the process.



Stastny's play has really fallen off over the last few years so I don't why anyone would want to trade either Bieksa or Tanev+ or Corrado+ for him, even if Stastny was signed for a few years at market value.

I'm just saying. If there's no wingers available for this team to acquire, Stastny isn't a bad option.

We'll have some capspace after this season anyways. If we really feel we can win by adding a top six piece to this team, I'd go for it.

peen is offline  
Old
10-16-2013, 10:32 AM
  #956
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,499
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by peen View Post
I'm just saying. If there's no wingers available for this team to acquire, Stastny isn't a bad option.

We'll have some capspace after this season anyways. If we really feel we can win by adding a top six piece to this team, I'd go for it.
If we could get him fairly cheap (maybe a 1st rounder?) and are looking like a playoff team closer to the deadline I wouldn't be against picking up Stastny. Especially if we split up the Sedins:

Sedin-Stastny-Kesler
Higgins-Sedin-Burrows

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
10-16-2013, 10:46 AM
  #957
Just A Bit Outside
Playoffs??!
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,580
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
If we could get him fairly cheap (maybe a 1st rounder?) and are looking like a playoff team closer to the deadline I wouldn't be against picking up Stastny. Especially if we split up the Sedins:

Sedin-Stastny-Kesler
Higgins-Sedin-Burrows
No chance he comes that cheap.

Other teams in need of centre help will give more; especially with the AVs looking for defensive help.

Just A Bit Outside is offline  
Old
10-16-2013, 10:57 AM
  #958
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,499
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reds81 View Post
No chance he comes that cheap.

Other teams in need of centre help will give more; especially with the AVs looking for defensive help.
True, especially since the Avs also look like a good team this year they won't just sell him for picks at the deadline. I wonder what their opinion of Chris Tanev would be...

y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
10-16-2013, 11:08 AM
  #959
dave babych returns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,365
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
If we could get him fairly cheap (maybe a 1st rounder?) and are looking like a playoff team closer to the deadline I wouldn't be against picking up Stastny. Especially if we split up the Sedins:

Sedin-Stastny-Kesler
Higgins-Sedin-Burrows
If you've got your other "high end" playmaking center, why bother splitting up the Sedins?

dave babych returns is offline  
Old
10-16-2013, 11:25 AM
  #960
Catamarca Livin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1,971
vCash: 500
It is a tough choice between Stastny and Tanev plus IMO. Stastny is the better player right now and is getting paid like it. Tanev is a top 4 dman who get paid and played like a 5th dman. Tanev is progressing, Stastny is stagnant. It really depends on how close you think the Canucks are. They need another top 6 forward to compete but Tanev and Corrado are so valuable that i do not think you trade them. Trade draft picks, Jensen, Schoeder,anyforward not name Sedin before you trade young dmen who can play and are not getting paid. Having a player like Corrado who is waiver exempt and can play in the top 4 in case of injury will be very valuable before the season is over. We use to pray for that kind of player. When Bieksa was on the block that is the kind of player i wanted to trade him for. The Canucks d depth is their strength just because we have gone 7 games without injury does not mean you do not need it. We have a lot of young forward prospects and we have many forwards signed for the long term trade one established player draft pick and a prospect before trading a young d man. I imagine Schroeder, Jensen and a first might not get you much right now but by the deadline if Schroeder and Jensen have good years it might get you a lot. At that point we would have another top 6 forward and Gaunce, Hunter, Horvat still coming up. One reason to trade a lot for Stastny would be that you are not 100% sure the Sedins are going to sign. Hopefully that is not the case, but if there is that chance Gillis will need to make trades and sign UFA's to try and replace them.

Catamarca Livin is offline  
Old
10-16-2013, 11:32 AM
  #961
14s incisor
Registered User
 
14s incisor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 598
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scouter View Post
No, not a chance.

Look, we shouldn't be giving them a contract based on what they have done since the last one, we should be giving them a deal based on their current value, which is probably in decline, which means that they are worth less than what they make now.
They're underpaid right now.

14s incisor is offline  
Old
10-16-2013, 11:35 AM
  #962
Betamax*
YOU MAD, BRO?
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 2,380
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by arttk View Post
a) It's Aquaman's money so I don't care that it is expensive.
I'm making the assumption that they would explore every opportunity before going the compliance buy-out route. That to them would be the "nuclear" option.

Quote:
b) Trading our starting goalie to a divisional rival for worse than nothing (Dubnyk).
Well, it all depends on how you project Bobby Lu will play, moving forward. If off to his usual, average start but he typically heats up in November and December. For him to have any trade value, whether it be at the trade deadline or in the off-season, he has to play really well -- top 10 or top 5. Even still, I don't think you could much for him. You're getting relief from the contract and a player who allegedly doesn't want to play here.

Quote:
c) Having that worse than nothing player play tandem with Lack means bye bye playoffs.
You have a point here but to sell "high" and that is a relatively speaking here since Bobby Lu had virtually zero trade value this off-season, the only opportunity is when he playing well -- probably their best chance would be a team that gets irrational during the trade deadline, feels the pressure to make the playoffs and thinks he would be the difference maker. However, this would likely descrease the Canucks chances so if they wait until the off-season and wait for to see how he does in the Playoffs ... and we get another one and done like we've seen in the past couple of seasons, I don't see much of a trade market for him unless the Canucks are willing to retain a big chunk of his AAV.

Quote:
d) Who is going to be our starting goalie next year and beyond?
Who is available via UFA, because whether the Canucks stick with Bobby Lu for the rest of the season or not ... they have to be preparing for the possibility that he won't be here next season.

Betamax* is offline  
Old
10-16-2013, 11:44 AM
  #963
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,499
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave babych returns View Post
If you've got your other "high end" playmaking center, why bother splitting up the Sedins?
Who says Stastny is "high end" anymore?

y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
10-16-2013, 11:47 AM
  #964
dave babych returns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,365
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Who says Stastny is "high end" anymore?
Well you know what I mean. "Prototypical," whatever. If the point of acquiring him is to give Kesler a playmaker, why not leave Henrik and Daniel together and use Stastny with Kesler?

dave babych returns is offline  
Old
10-16-2013, 11:51 AM
  #965
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,455
vCash: 500
The notion that Luongo had "zero trade value" that gets bandied about all the time seems misguided. The truth is, it's impossible to know what his trade value was, as reports seem to indicate he was obstinate about where he would accept a trade to. That destroyed any leverage the club had.

But spending pages re-hashing that seems about as fun as hitting yourself in a head with the hammer, so I'll leave it at that. The notion that they're going to actively shop him for nothing right now is ludicrous, though.

Proto is offline  
Old
10-16-2013, 12:00 PM
  #966
Betamax*
YOU MAD, BRO?
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 2,380
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proto View Post
The notion that Luongo had "zero trade value" that gets bandied about all the time seems misguided. The truth is, it's impossible to know what his trade value was, as reports seem to indicate he was obstinate about where he would accept a trade to. That destroyed any leverage the club had.
Uh, if you had no leverage it's kinda hard to extract "trade value" sort of like trying to extract water from a rock.

Quote:
But spending pages re-hashing that seems about as fun as hitting yourself in a head with the hammer, so I'll leave it at that. The notion that they're going to actively shop him for nothing right now is ludicrous, though.
I doubt they are ... but I think we should keep an eye on teams that are in desperate need of goaltending. The Oilers stand out right now, as the only team that actively wants/needs to improve in this area.

Betamax* is offline  
Old
10-16-2013, 12:03 PM
  #967
arttk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Country: Denmark
Posts: 1,658
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Betamax View Post
I'm making the assumption that they would explore every opportunity before going the compliance buy-out route. That to them would be the "nuclear" option.
They did that last summer, that is why we ended up with Luongo. Aquaman will spend to get value for the team, not spend to get rid of talent(exception being Ballard due to the cap).

Quote:
Well, it all depends on how you project Bobby Lu will play, moving forward. If off to his usual, average start but he typically heats up in November and December. For him to have any trade value, whether it be at the trade deadline or in the off-season, he has to play really well -- top 10 or top 5. Even still, I don't think you could much for him. You're getting relief from the contract and a player who allegedly doesn't want to play here.
If he is playing well for us he won't be traded period. Hell he needs to have a Jim Carrey collapse for us to get rid of him. We don't need relief from his contract, the cap is going back up next season, he is relatively cheap compare to all other star goalies that around around 6+ mil.

Quote:
You have a point here but to sell "high" and that is a relatively speaking here since Bobby Lu had virtually zero trade value this off-season, the only opportunity is when he playing well -- probably their best chance would be a team that gets irrational during the trade deadline, feels the pressure to make the playoffs and thinks he would be the difference maker. However, this would likely descrease the Canucks chances so if they wait until the off-season and wait for to see how he does in the Playoffs ... and we get another one and done like we've seen in the past couple of seasons, I don't see much of a trade market for him unless the Canucks are willing to retain a big chunk of his AAV.
You don't sell high on your only goalie. That's like selling your house when you have nowhere else to stay and everything left in town are cheap ghetto apartments.

Luo playing well doesn't change the fact there is a "**** cap circumvention" rule in the cba that will make his contract unattractive to other GMs.


Quote:
Who is available via UFA, because whether the Canucks stick with Bobby Lu for the rest of the season or not ... they have to be preparing for the possibility that he won't be here next season.
He will be here next season because no team wants to pick up his contract and he won't be bought out. He can demand a trade, oh wait, he did and nobody bit so what is different this time?

arttk is offline  
Old
10-16-2013, 12:06 PM
  #968
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,455
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Betamax View Post
Uh, if you had no leverage it's kinda hard to extract "trade value" sort of like trying to extract water from a rock.
Trade value is different from leverage, in my opinion. Trade value would be more like contract vs performance. I think if Luongo didn't have a NTC, there would have been a market to trade him.


Quote:
I doubt they are ... but I think we should keep an eye on teams that are in desperate need of goaltending. The Oilers stand out right now, as the only team that actively wants/needs to improve in this area.
Why? If he was willing to accept a trade to the Oilers, of all teams/places, then conceivably he'd be at a point where he was willing to be traded absolutely anywhere. I think that's completely unlikely. Short of Lundqvist leaving NY this summer or Markstrom proving he is absolutely not an NHL calibre goaltender, I don't see a trade route developing.

Proto is offline  
Old
10-16-2013, 12:17 PM
  #969
Betamax*
YOU MAD, BRO?
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 2,380
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proto View Post
Trade value is different from leverage, in my opinion. Trade value would be more like contract vs performance. I think if Luongo didn't have a NTC, there would have been a market to trade him.
Do you believe if the Canucks put him on waivers, there would have been at least one claim?

If so, I would have went that route (even if a division rival like Calgary or Edmonton decided to take on his contract last off-season) rather than trade The Cory and essentially ensure goalie stability here for the next 7 years or longer.

Quote:
Why? If he was willing to accept a trade to the Oilers, of all teams/places, then conceivably he'd be at a point where he was willing to be traded absolutely anywhere. I think that's completely unlikely.
Well, if none of the FLA teams (his preferred destination) weren't an option at the time, what other teams' were a market for him.

Quote:
Short of Lundqvist leaving NY this summer or Markstrom proving he is absolutely not an NHL calibre goaltender, I don't see a trade route developing.
Maybe if Lundqvist leaves the NYR, or Miller with the Sabres that opens up a destination spot for Bobby Lu. Although, there might be issues with the Coach of the NYR.

Betamax* is offline  
Old
10-16-2013, 12:20 PM
  #970
Outside99*
Sedins off Kas
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,347
vCash: 796
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catamarca Livin View Post
It is a tough choice between Stastny and Tanev plus IMO. Stastny is the better player right now and is getting paid like it. Tanev is a top 4 dman who get paid and played like a 5th dman. Tanev is progressing, Stastny is stagnant. It really depends on how close you think the Canucks are. They need another top 6 forward to compete but Tanev and Corrado are so valuable that i do not think you trade them. Trade draft picks, Jensen, Schoeder,anyforward not name Sedin before you trade young dmen who can play and are not getting paid. Having a player like Corrado who is waiver exempt and can play in the top 4 in case of injury will be very valuable before the season is over. We use to pray for that kind of player. When Bieksa was on the block that is the kind of player i wanted to trade him for. The Canucks d depth is their strength just because we have gone 7 games without injury does not mean you do not need it. We have a lot of young forward prospects and we have many forwards signed for the long term trade one established player draft pick and a prospect before trading a young d man. I imagine Schroeder, Jensen and a first might not get you much right now but by the deadline if Schroeder and Jensen have good years it might get you a lot. At that point we would have another top 6 forward and Gaunce, Hunter, Horvat still coming up. One reason to trade a lot for Stastny would be that you are not 100% sure the Sedins are going to sign. Hopefully that is not the case, but if there is that chance Gillis will need to make trades and sign UFA's to try and replace them.
To me, the first question that has to be answered is do you want Garrison, your best dman on his natural side or his off side knowing that he's better on the former? After you've answered that, the rest is obvious - knowing that Corrado isn't ready today, and could be 2-3 years away, if anyone is moved it should be Edler or Hamhuis.

Outside99* is offline  
Old
10-16-2013, 12:46 PM
  #971
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,303
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outside99 View Post
To me, the first question that has to be answered is do you want Garrison, your best dman on his natural side or his off side knowing that he's better on the former? After you've answered that, the rest is obvious - knowing that Corrado isn't ready today, and could be 2-3 years away, if anyone is moved it should be Edler or Hamhuis.

Better at what? Defending? If there is a distinct difference, does it make up for the advantage he has offensively on his off-side? It's a trade off. Really, I have no issue with Garrison on the right, I'm even starting to prefer it. As a result, my preference would be to place him on that side and retain Edler and Hamhuis, both playing on the left.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
10-16-2013, 12:57 PM
  #972
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,455
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Betamax View Post
Do you believe if the Canucks put him on waivers, there would have been at least one claim?

If so, I would have went that route (even if a division rival like Calgary or Edmonton decided to take on his contract last off-season) rather than trade The Cory and essentially ensure goalie stability here for the next 7 years or longer.
Yes. I actually think as many as four or five teams would have. I think there's no way Gillis would accept a trade for that little -- hell, he was barely willing to accept what sounded like a couple 2nds and a prospect from the Leafs at the deadline.

I think the Oilers would have definitely claimed him on waivers. I think the Leafs and Flyers would have been good bets to claim him on waivers. The Lightning would have been a maybe; even after their trades, I would suspect the cap space freed up by Lecavalier would have given them pause.

Beyond that, I'd argue there's another handful of teams that should have been interested, but probably wouldn't have been for one reason or another: Devils (financial), Jets (dumb enough to hand Pavelec that contract), Panthers (financial? Love Markstrom too much?)...

There are also other teams with guys on expiring contracts that could be moving like Miller in Buffalo or Halak in St. Louis, and Luongo would be an upgrade on either.

Out of those scenarios, I think you could find at least 2-3 teams that put a claim on him if he's on waivers. But other than the Panthers/Lightning, who may not have, does Luongo want to go to any of those teams? All reports indicate that he only wanted to go to Florida, so it's irrelevant. I don't think Gillis would waive him and force him to go to Siberia for a decade; it's not a Gillis move at all.

He didn't want to give the asset away. I think that's a fair reading of events. What route you would have gone is not relevant to Luongo's value.

Quote:
Well, if none of the FLA teams (his preferred destination) weren't an option at the time, what other teams' were a market for him.
That's the thing. Maybe Tallon thought he was calling the Canucks bluff and waiting for a buyout, or had his hands tied by ownership, or any number of things. But if the two teams Luongo wants to go to don't want him, there's not only zero leverage but zero utility in trying to create leverage. If Gillis can shop Luongo to 30 teams, I think there's a market that develops for him.

I just think people get caught up in what they personally would have done, rather than the calculation that Gillis made.

Proto is offline  
Old
10-16-2013, 01:46 PM
  #973
Just A Bit Outside
Playoffs??!
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,580
vCash: 50
Instead of maybe going after just one big fish (Stastny), I'd rather go after two needed spots on potential rentals.

Depending on how the team is doing near the TD, I'd target Goc (1.7) and Hemsky (5).

Could provide assets from a pool of potential picks in 2014/15, Gaunce, McEneny, possibly Jensen.

Could give you a flexible line-up potentially as follows:

Sedin - Sedin - Burrows
Higgins - Kesler - Hemsky
Santorelli - Goc - Hansen
Booth - Richardson - Weise
Kassian
Schroeder

Just A Bit Outside is offline  
Old
10-16-2013, 01:53 PM
  #974
PRNuck
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,097
vCash: 500
Before we get too carried away with the Stastny love, we have to remember this: http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-pu...190110715.html

PRNuck is offline  
Old
10-16-2013, 01:58 PM
  #975
TLinden16
Horse
 
TLinden16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,965
vCash: 1200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reds81 View Post
Instead of maybe going after just one big fish (Stastny), I'd rather go after two needed spots on potential rentals.

Depending on how the team is doing near the TD, I'd target Goc (1.7) and Hemsky (5).

Could provide assets from a pool of potential picks in 2014/15, Gaunce, McEneny, possibly Jensen.

Could give you a flexible line-up potentially as follows:

Sedin - Sedin - Burrows
Higgins - Kesler - Hemsky
Santorelli - Goc - Hansen
Booth - Richardson - Weise
Kassian
Schroeder
Pass on Hemsky. Post-season play is not made for his glass body (and he hasn't played a playoff game in 8 years), he'd be banged up coming out of Round 1.

TLinden16 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 04:19 AM.

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.