Trade Rumors and Free Agent TalkTrade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.
Why this works: From a Cane's perspective, they get a good checking center who will help on the PK seeing as Brind'amour looks to be gone, Umberger fits in with the young core of Cole, Williams, Vrbata, Staal, Vasicek.... build for the future, plus a 3rd rounder. And they dump a huge salary. Even with Rod and Ron going, there is still too much payroll. To get down to 28 million, I think this is a very good deal for the Cane's.
^Nonis said last night that they were basically going to try and make a deal without tampering with the current team. If they have to they will, but that's not their intention. A deal for picks and prospects is more likely...and we certainly won't see guys like Allen, Sopel or Cooke moving.
seeing how well Cooke has always played for us in the playoffs I would be hesitant to move him...
from what Nonis had mentioned as well it seems unlikely guys like Cooke, Sopel or Allen are going anywhere...
probably why the canucks haven't been mentioned as having interest in O'Neill - they're likely targetting strictly rental players right now.
Well I am obviously a fan of Matt Cooke, I think if there is anything we can spare on this team it's grinders. With guys like Bouck waiting in the minors, Kesler emerging as a legitimate checking centre and Ruutu seeming to perpetually improve his game, there is no question in my mind I would move Cooke for a player like O'Neill. Now I admit these guys aren't Cooke and his departure will hurt us, but I think we can survive and adding a player like O'Neill is worth it. Personally I think if we let Cooke go we resign Arvedson for another season so as not to loose the defensive presence and maybe go out in the off-season and sign or trade for a player of Cooke's type. I figure O'Neill will more then make up for the loss of Cooke's offensive production, while the defensive side of Cooke's game can be covered by a variety of players and even if that doesn't work, high-end 3rd line players are available a heck of a lot more then players like O'Neill, who will help Vancouver for a long time to come. And when it comes down to it, I would rather move Cooke then Allen ---- and Koltsov ain't getting it done.
It works out to basically Cooke + 1st for O'Neill and Reid for Boughner. That might be overpayment for Boughner, but I'd do it simply to help convince Carolina to choose our package over the tons of others their probably receiving. This is what I think the Canes might realistically ask for, and I'd give them this package.
Well I am obviously a fan of Matt Cooke, I think if there is anything we can spare on this team it's grinders. With guys like Bouck waiting in the minors, Kesler emerging as a legitimate checking centre and Ruutu seeming to perpetually improve his game, there is no question in my mind I would move Cooke for a player like O'Neill. Now I admit these guys aren't Cooke and his departure will hurt us, but I think we can survive and adding a player like O'Neill is worth it. Personally I think if we let Cooke go we resign Arvedson for another season so as not to loose the defensive presence and maybe go out in the off-season and sign or trade for a player of Cooke's type. I figure O'Neill will more then make up for the loss of Cooke's offensive production, while the defensive side of Cooke's game can be covered by a variety of players and even if that doesn't work, high-end 3rd line players are available a heck of a lot more then players like O'Neill, who will help Vancouver for a long time to come. And when it comes down to it, I would rather move Cooke then Allen ---- and Koltsov ain't getting it done.
It works out to basically Cooke + 1st for O'Neill and Reid for Boughner. That might be overpayment for Boughner, but I'd do it simply to help convince Carolina to choose our package over the tons of others their probably receiving. This is what I think the Canes might realistically ask for, and I'd give them this package.
I'm kinda torn on moving Cooke... I agree with you that when you get a chance to get a player of O'Neill's calibre you should be willing to deal anyone that doesn't have that kind of offensive ceiling... but I'm glad that the team doesn't want to move him - IMO Cooke is a bigger part of this team's success than he's ever given credit for.
with Cooke you know you have a playoff performer - he has every time raised his game a level in the playoffs and his game is perfectly suited for it... he's also playing a leadership role with this team on and off the ice now... he just brings a whack load of intangibles - especially in the playoffs - that the players you mentioned just don't bring to that level.
If adding O'Neill right now would cost us Cooke, I would rather go after a rental - or two - and add to our team's current group... personally I'd be willing to give up anyone who's not a regular (even Kesler)... probably be cheaper to add Zhamnov and Bondra, then O'Neill.
I'm kinda torn on moving Cooke... I agree with you that when you get a chance to get a player of O'Neill's calibre you should be willing to deal anyone that doesn't have that kind of offensive ceiling... but I'm glad that the team doesn't want to move him - IMO Cooke is a bigger part of this team's success than he's ever given credit for.
with Cooke you know you have a playoff performer - he has every time raised his game a level in the playoffs and his game is perfectly suited for it... he's also playing a leadership role with this team on and off the ice now... he just brings a whack load of intangibles - especially in the playoffs - that the players you mentioned just don't bring to that level.
If adding O'Neill right now would cost us Cooke, I would rather go after a rental - or two - and add to our team's current group... personally I'd be willing to give up anyone who's not a regular (even Kesler)... probably be cheaper to add Zhamnov and Bondra, then O'Neill.
I'm banking on the fact O'Neill himself might be able to replace or even boost some of those intangibles. I'm not sure how he is in the locker room, but he has been (virtually) the Canes franchise player for quite sometime. I realize Cooke's off-ice popularity among players and fans might make it a chemistry-threatening trade, but in the case of O'Neill I think I'd take my chances.
in most cases I wouldn't either... but if there is a big trade in the works and it's between Kesler or Cooke, I'd move Kesler.
Kesler has much more upside, and he may one day even be twice the player that Cooke is... but this team is on the cusp right now of having all the right pieces in place now - and Cooke IMO is just one of those pieces that needs to be here.
basically I'd be willing to sacrifice more of the future (and end up overpaying) than sacrifice any key parts of the group right now.
One team I can think of that could give us what we need in one trade is Chicago... I'd move Kesler in a deal there, if the overall deal addressed all our needs - Zhamnov, Sullivan and a depth dman - like Quint or even Strudwick.
I don't think that it'd cost all that much more - it'd probably cost the same to get all 3 of these guys as it would O'Neill - maybe slightly more, but Chicago may be a team that would move these guys for a pkg around prospects and picks.
Zhamnov, Sullivan and a depth dman - like Quint or even Strudwick.
I don't think that it'd cost all that much more - it'd probably cost the same to get all 3 of these guys as it would O'Neill - maybe slightly more, but Chicago may be a team that would move these guys for a pkg around prospects and picks.
If you can get Zhamnov, Sullivan and a depth d-man for the same price as O'Neill, I'd be all over that. I know Chicago seems to be in possibly the worst shape, but that seems like a bit of a stretch even then.
That being said, if Chicago was willing to part for those three with a package based around Kesler, I'd definitely refine and probably do that deal.
I like that. Though with the Sedins actually playing like 2nd line players recently (heck, they both have roughly equivalent numbers to Sullivan almost), I think we'd be hard-pressed to find icetime for everyone.
I'm tellin' ya, you can get O'Neill for even less.
Koltsov and a 1st - I'm betting dollars to doughnuts they bite.
It's not so much the overall value that he'd go for - but the specific pieces that the canucks have to offer.
The canucks IMO will have to overpay, moreso than other a lot of other teams, if they wish to get O'Neill.
We don't have a top 15 1st round pick (likely)... our top prospects - even Koltsov - isn't in the same class as many other team's top prospects either... maybe O'Neill does go for a good prospect and a 1st round pick - but chances are that Koltsov and our 1st isn't likely to be enough to match the "same" from another team, and we end up having to give up more.
We can't really move guys like Cooke, Sopel or Allen... and when you pay up in futures, you usually end up having to overpay.
we offer a guy like Koltsov, SJ for example, can counter with Fahey and/or Davidson and more than likely will have a higher pick than us... they also have prospects like Michalek, while we have Kesler... or Goc, where we have Reid... overall they could easily come up with a more attractive pkg than us - and for us to convince Carolina otherwise, we will likely have to give up more.
even the Leafs, considered to have a low pool of prospects, still have guys like Carlo C., Steen or Stajan...
the same can be said for most other teams... if our top guy is Koltsov, there are probably more than 75% of the teams in the league that can beat that offer with a more NHL ready prospect or young player, and likely someone that suits their needs better.
I like Koltsov, and he is a good prospect - but prospects get so overrated on this board... fact is that he was still a 2nd round pick in the draft, and although he's put his question marks about his attitude to rest, he hasn't exactly stood out in the AHL yet as a 20 yr old rookie dman - while guys like Fahey and Michalek have shown better things at the NHL level already... Koltsov also has his question marks still too... he lacks size at the NHL level, and hasn't yet adjusted well to playing NA style hockey... I think that Carolina might be interested in him cause of his potential, but I don't see them wanting him as the center piece of an O'Neill deal.
If you can get Zhamnov, Sullivan and a depth d-man for the same price as O'Neill, I'd be all over that. I know Chicago seems to be in possibly the worst shape, but that seems like a bit of a stretch even then.
That being said, if Chicago was willing to part for those three with a package based around Kesler, I'd definitely refine and probably do that deal.
I like that. Though with the Sedins actually playing like 2nd line players recently (heck, they both have roughly equivalent numbers to Sullivan almost), I think we'd be hard-pressed to find icetime for everyone.
if we can get Zhamnov and Sullivan, I think we've addressed all our holes up front really (outside the ever popular need for true enforcer, which I don't really see a huge need for anyways).
I think a Cooke-Mo-Sully 2nd line would be excellent - Mo has played well with Cooke before, and it gives him a chance to play more offensively now, and should be a good fit with Sully.... Linden has played well with the Sedins, and it could be a solid #3 scoring line - making our 4th line the "shutdown" unit - and Arvedson and Chubs play that role well.
If the Canucks make a deal for secondary scoring, picks/prospects and maybe a guy like Artem Chubarov or Jason King will be the trading chips. The Canucks, like all contenders, are looking to add to their current team. Trading Allen as part of package for O'Neill improves their secondary scoring, but it also hurts their PK'ing and defense, the Canucks' problem in last years' playoffs. If it takes Allen to get O'Neill, I see Burke passing on that option. I think Kirill Koltsov will be the main asset Burke shops around as the centerpiece for any package.
I think a Cooke-Mo-Sully 2nd line would be excellent - Mo has played well with Cooke before, and it gives him a chance to play more offensively now, and should be a good fit with Sully.... Linden has played well with the Sedins, and it could be a solid #3 scoring line - making our 4th line the "shutdown" unit - and Arvedson and Chubs play that role well.
The only problem I see with that line is that it is very small and pretty much non-physical. They aren't pushovers, but that line would be dominated by other team's big, physical d-men. I would be more inclined to do this:
Naslund-Zhamnov-Bertuzzi(don't like the idea of breaking the top line up...)
D.Sedin-H.Sedin-Sullivan
Arvedson-Morrison-Linden
Cooke-Chubarov-May/Keane/Ruutu
The only problem I see with that line is that it is very small and pretty much non-physical. They aren't pushovers, but that line would be dominated by other team's big, physical d-men. I would be more inclined to do this:
Naslund-Zhamnov-Bertuzzi(don't like the idea of breaking the top line up...)
D.Sedin-H.Sedin-Sullivan
Arvedson-Morrison-Linden
Cooke-Chubarov-May/Keane/Ruutu
Now that is pretty solid depth!
either way it's pretty solid depth...
I wouldn't worry so much about the line being dominated physically... first of all Cooke is on that line, and Morrison has done well with dealing with phyiscal play as well... and secondly, if the opposition's biggest dmen are matched up against this line, all the better for Bertuzzi (and Naslund)... but chances are the most phyiscal dmen will still be out there against Bertuzzi and Naslund.
either way though, there are a lot of options available:
although I agree with you what we need more is a gritty hardnosed defensive center... Ricci would be a great fit for our 3rd line... personally I'd rather add a higher calibre rw - like O'Neill - and a lower rated center, than the other way around.
if we can get Zhamnov and Sullivan, I think we've addressed all our holes up front really (outside the ever popular need for true enforcer, which I don't really see a huge need for anyways).
I think a Cooke-Mo-Sully 2nd line would be excellent - Mo has played well with Cooke before, and it gives him a chance to play more offensively now, and should be a good fit with Sully.... Linden has played well with the Sedins, and it could be a solid #3 scoring line - making our 4th line the "shutdown" unit - and Arvedson and Chubs play that role well.
Two other teams that would have players the Canucks may be interested in are the Ducks & LA. Any of Prospal, Rucchin or Sykora from the Ducks or Stumpel, Norstrom or Modry from LA. LA's still in the playoff hunt so they may hold off trading until the deadline, but the Ducks have a lot of salary they would like to dump. O'Niell or Zhamnov aren't our only options.
Two other teams that would have players the Canucks may be interested in are the Ducks & LA. Any of Prospal, Rucchin or Sykora from the Ducks or Stumpel, Norstrom or Modry from LA. LA's still in the playoff hunt so they may hold off trading until the deadline, but the Ducks have a lot of salary they would like to dump. O'Niell or Zhamnov aren't our only options.
O'Neill and Zhamnov (along with Sullivan, Bondra) are more realistic choices though.
Sykora is probably as untouchable as any forward in Anaheim... I would love to add him to our team, but it would probably cost us a lot, and even then I doubt that Anahiem has any thoughts of moving him.
The same I think can be said for Norstrom - IMO he'd be a perfect addition to our team, but his value is so high to LA... he's their Ohlund in almost every way, and very highly respected in LA... I don't see them dealing him at all.
although I agree with you what we need more is a gritty hardnosed defensive center... Ricci would be a great fit for our 3rd line... personally I'd rather add a higher calibre rw - like O'Neill - and a lower rated center, than the other way around.
Agreed on the points above and here as well. I would love to see Ricci in the Canucks colours, perfect center for a shutdown line with Arvedson/Cooke on the left and Linden on the right. Everyone knows how much I like O'Neill as well.
I'm actually kind of warming up to the idea of getting Zhamnov, even though I hated it before. It does give the Canucks some awesome depth and maneuverability. The best part IMO is it allows Linden to move to the right side, but then again, getting a guy like Mike Ricci would as well and I'd be happier with him as the shutdown center then any of Morrison, Henrik, or Archie.
Two other teams that would have players the Canucks may be interested in are the Ducks & LA. Any of Prospal, Rucchin or Sykora from the Ducks or Stumpel, Norstrom or Modry from LA. LA's still in the playoff hunt so they may hold off trading until the deadline, but the Ducks have a lot of salary they would like to dump. O'Niell or Zhamnov aren't our only options.
Prospal has a rediculous contract, no interest in him. I'd like to see Rucchin as the Canucks' 3rd line center, but he's signed for another season is Anaheim's captain, don't see them trading him. As for Sykora, agreed on what NFITO said. The Canucks would have to seriously overpay. Norstrom would be an awesome addition, but then again, the asking price would be high and Norstrom isn't cheap salary wise. Don't see a fit there. Stumpel is soft and a floater, not a good fit. And finally Modry, what does he bring to the table that other Canucks' defense don't already bring? He's average defensively and pretty soft. I'd pass on him personally and try to acquire a tougher, stay-at-home defender.
Mizral, don't forget that Carolina is actually dealing from strength considering the fact that O'Neill is NOT an unrestricted free agent at the end of the season and even if he were, would likely resign with Carolina. Despite the overblown problems Jeff O'Neill had with Paul Maurice, he loves the state of North Carolina and really has a strong desire to stay here. I've heard from several people that are fairly close to Jeff that he doesn't want to uproot and leave unless he's forced to or unless he's no longer needed on the Hurricanes. Neither of those situations are true and with his recent goal scoring production back up to where it's supposed to be (6 goals in the past 9 games), he's probably not even on the trading block anymore. This team needs offense in the worst way and you don't deal offense for defense when you're in that position. This team is like 16th in total defense and like 30th in total offense. What would you do next? Trade your only legitimate 30 goal scorer on your roster for peanuts and prospects? I think not.
If O'Neill was to be traded, it certainly wouldn't be for a Cooke type of player. We were stuffed to the gills with those type of guys a few years back with Gelinas, Cole, and Battaglia and the team has tried to move away from that mold and establish itself as a team that has more of a european feel and more of a scoring dynamic than those players provide. While players like Cooke aren't exactly a dime a dozen, players like O'Neill are even more rare. I've often made the cleaned up analogy of "you can't stack crap high enough to reach the moon" and that is what I feel like Vancouver would be doing in a package centering around Cooke for O'Neill. Don't get me wrong, i'm by no means calling Cooke crap, I just feel that these two players are in differant worlds as far as talent level is concerned and you don't trade players like that for players like Cooke.
The only trade i'd be happy with from a Carolina perspective would be dealing O'Neill for Umberger, Allen, and another small piece. We could argue all day about the logistics of that deal, but it's the only one i'd be satisfied with that is actually pretty realistic.
