HFBoards

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

Van/ChiHawks trade proposal.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-01-2004, 08:29 PM
  #26
Peter
Registered User
 
Peter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Alberta
Posts: 3,674
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO

I don't think you can use one move that an organization makes and use it as a barometer for something else they may do... like saying that it was a surprise move to not bring Burke back so they could surprise us by dealing Bertuzzi.

Now if you're suggesting it's ownership that will make this deal, then we can pretty much write off the canucks completely... McCaw isn't a GM, and any move that McCammon makes can only hurt the team... but if they move a superstar player in the first year of Nonis' reign as GM, it will create a black cloud over the organization in general... if Nonis fails, what GM is going to want to come here to work under that ownership group.
I can use one move as an example to validate a point if that one move is based upon the same suposition. Burke was not re-hired because he was an embarrassment PR wise for Orca Bay (or so we are led to believe). In the same way, Bertuzzi could possibly be viewed in the same light. IF (and I do say if) Orca Bay is willing to get rid of arguably the most successfuly GM in franchise history because of negative PR then it is likely that Orca Bay might get rid of one of the best Canuck players for the same reason.

One thing that many people aren't aware of is John McCaw's love for privacy and the desire to be percieved as not having anything or anyone suspect in his organization - morally suspect or verbally suspect. One rumor that often makes the rounds in Seattle is that McCaw, in one of his business, would fire any employee who admitted committing adultery.

Anyways, yes, I am suggesting that a Bertuzzi trade would be made at the owner's behest...and heh, maybe that is one reason that Burke was not resigned - he might have refused to trade Bertuzzi. Who knows. It's not like owners haven't forced GM's to move players before...and who better to do it through than a young, first time, wet behind the ears GM. You think Nonis, who has always wanted a GM job, is going to say no to his employer. Especially after he saw what happened to Burke?

Anyways, yes, much of this is my speculation and what I believe to be true. I just don't think it is as far out of the realm of possibility that you might think it is.

Peter is offline  
Old
06-03-2004, 03:23 PM
  #27
Habsaku
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 5,554
vCash: 500
CHI would do this in a heartbeat, a real steal. Bertuzzi alone is worth more then Daze and 3rd overral.

Habsaku is offline  
Old
06-03-2004, 08:01 PM
  #28
Teemu
Moderator
 
Teemu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Palatine
Country: United States
Posts: 21,851
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habsaku
CHI would do this in a heartbeat, a real steal. Bertuzzi alone is worth more then Daze and 3rd overral.
If we were even a .500 team, I would agree. But we are several years away from serious contention. By that time, Bertuzzi will leave from free agency (god knows he wouldnt sign)

Teemu is offline  
Old
06-04-2004, 01:11 PM
  #29
I in the Eye
Registered User
 
I in the Eye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country:
Posts: 4,556
vCash: 500
Well, since this is a Vancouver / Chicago trade proposal thread... I guess this is a good place to post this draft day trade proposal I've been thinking a bit about:


To Chicago:

Jarkko Ruutu + 5th round draft pick ('04)

To Vancouver:

Jason Strudwick + 2nd round draft pick ('04)

I think that the Canucks still have their 5th round pick, but if not, I'd do a 4th round draft pick in '04 instead...

Chicago's 2nd would be the 2nd or 3rd of the 4 that you have...

I'll post my reasoning when and if I get some feedback - and if this deal is deemed feasible, and worth discussing further

I in the Eye is offline  
Old
06-04-2004, 02:22 PM
  #30
Teemu
Moderator
 
Teemu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Palatine
Country: United States
Posts: 21,851
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by A Mind at a Time
Well, since this is a Vancouver / Chicago trade proposal thread... I guess this is a good place to post this draft day trade proposal I've been thinking a bit about:


To Chicago:

Jarkko Ruutu + 5th round draft pick ('04)

To Vancouver:

Jason Strudwick + 2nd round draft pick ('04)

I think that the Canucks still have their 5th round pick, but if not, I'd do a 4th round draft pick in '04 instead...

Chicago's 2nd would be the 2nd or 3rd of the 4 that you have...

I'll post my reasoning when and if I get some feedback - and if this deal is deemed feasible, and worth discussing further

well, Strudwick < Ruutu , but not anywhere close to enough to the difference between a 5th rounder and a 2nd rounder

Teemu is offline  
Old
06-04-2004, 03:57 PM
  #31
Wally112pac
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,826
vCash: 500
I'd do the deal if our 2nd turned into a 3rd.

Wally112pac is offline  
Old
06-04-2004, 04:52 PM
  #32
I in the Eye
Registered User
 
I in the Eye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country:
Posts: 4,556
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wally112pac
I'd do the deal if our 2nd turned into a 3rd.
I'm interested in one of Chicago's 2nds... I'd only be interested in moving Ruutu if it involved getting a 2nd rounder from Chicago as part of the deal...

How about to Chicago:

J. Ruutu and 4th round draft pick ('04)

To Vancouver:

Strudwick and 2nd round draft pick ('04) - the 4th one of the 4 that you have in the 2nd round...

Deal?

I in the Eye is offline  
Old
06-04-2004, 05:59 PM
  #33
Wally112pac
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,826
vCash: 500
Jarkko Ruutu isn't more than a 4th line pest. Strudwick isn't more than a number 6 and he can play forward. They're both 28. And we would have to give you a 2nd and only get a 4th back?

No thanks.

Wally112pac is offline  
Old
06-04-2004, 06:23 PM
  #34
I in the Eye
Registered User
 
I in the Eye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country:
Posts: 4,556
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wally112pac
Jarkko Ruutu isn't more than a 4th line pest. Strudwick isn't more than a number 6 and he can play forward. They're both 28. And we would have to give you a 2nd and only get a 4th back?

No thanks.
IMO, more than a 4th line pest, Ruutu is also a character guy who plays physical and will help protect your younger Russian players... not to mention he plays sound defensively, and would provide intangible support to his emerging star brother (the two are apparently very close, with Jarkko giving advice on the NHL and North American life, and Teomo giving advice on improving his offensive skills )... To have them both on the same team is an intangible benefit IMO... Ruutu can play on your 3rd line, and kills penalties also...

But I'm not going to try and hard sell him to you... I think that Ruutu would be a very good fit for Chicago, but I'd gladly keep him...

I in the Eye is offline  
Old
06-04-2004, 07:54 PM
  #35
monster_bertuzzi
registered user
 
monster_bertuzzi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 30,798
vCash: 500
Regarding the Daze trade...no dice. Makes no sense for either team IMO. Bertuzzi for a soon-to-be retired Daze and Slava Olesz? On the flipside, Why would Chicago, in a re-building stage, trade the #3 and one of their franchise players for someone in trouble with the law?

monster_bertuzzi is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 12:00 PM
  #36
Hawkhead
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 466
vCash: 500
Absolutely monster_bertuzzi

how bout this?

Jarkko Ruutu + 4th rounder
Eric Nickulaus + (4th) 2nd rounder

Hawkhead is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 12:26 PM
  #37
SedinFan*
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Lethbridge, Alberta
Posts: 10,543
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to SedinFan*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
Canuck fan here. Looking to float this thought by you Hawk fans before I post it over on the Canuck board: would love your input.

Some say that the Canucks would like to draft Cam Barker. So would your Hawks make this deal:

To Vancouver: Daze and 1st pick 2004 (#3)
To Chicago: Bertuzzi and 1st pick 2004

Thanks
Riiiiiiiiiiight...trade Bertuzzi who's an All Star for Eric Daze who can hardly walk.

SedinFan* is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 12:37 PM
  #38
Wally112pac
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,826
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SedinFan
Riiiiiiiiiiight...trade Bertuzzi who's an All Star for Eric Daze who can hardly walk.

You didn't see the 3rd overall in there?

Wally112pac is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 03:25 PM
  #39
I in the Eye
Registered User
 
I in the Eye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country:
Posts: 4,556
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkhead
how bout this?

Jarkko Ruutu + 4th rounder
Eric Nickulaus + (4th) 2nd rounder
Hmmm...

I'd personally consider it... but I personally wouldn't end up making the deal...

I don't know Eric Nickulaus very well, but we don't need a 3rd or 4th line forward... We need a physical, defensive 7th d-man...

Deal reasoning from my perspective...

The Canucks scouting staff, IMO, have done a pretty good job with the 2nd and 3rd round picks in recent years (off the top of my head - Koltsov, Chubarov, Ruutu, Grot, Bernier, Fedorov) and I think that the Canucks should be trying to get more 2nd rounders for our scouts to work with... This year, Burke traded our 2nd rounder away (for Hedberg) and I think the Canucks should try to re-stock it if possible - considering the pretty good recent 2nd and 3rd round drafting record, and considering that the draft is 'wide open' after the first 10 or so picks... The Canucks scouting staff should be able to get a player they are very high on in the 2nd round...

But having a 2nd rounder is a 'nice-to-have' not 'need-to-have' asset... I really like Ruutu, and there is really no big need for us to trade him (he provides spark, grit, good defensive awareness, and he makes other teams take inopportune penalties with his 'in-your-face' style - not to mention he doesn't cost a lot)... I'm not looking to ship him (I'm happy with the job he's done, he's great value, and he does seem to get better with the more responsibility he is given - but I would deal him to bring us a 2nd rounder...

We've got a guy in the minors that I like - Tyler Bouck... I think he's ready to make the jump to the Canucks as a 4th line winger (he's my sleeper prospect to make the team next season)... Like Ruutu, he is gritty, hits hard, works very hard, and is defensively responsible... He plays 'in-your-face' but not the 'cheeky in-your-face' game that Ruutu plays... I think that Bouck has it in him to turn into a Matt Cooke (without the offensive potential)... The Canucks have brought him up here and there (slowly bringing him along), but IMO, he's ready to make the jump full time... Thus, IMO either Ruutu or May proposals should be considered...

And Ruutu would be a great fit for Chicago... I think that Chicago would welcome him for his good defensive play, his 'in-your-face' style, his physical presence, and his relation to their emerging young star... IMHO, Ruutu would quickly become a fan favourite and would significantly help the development of his brother... The 'big brother' influence should help young Teomo fullfill his potential (the two are apparently very close - at worse, Jarkko would provide a close support group and having them both on the same team is great for dressing room chemistry - and also the PR department)... IMO, there is an intangible benefit for Chicago to pay a little more than 'market value' to acquire Ruutu... However, there is also an intangible benefit for Vancouver to pay a little more than 'market value' to acquire Strudwick...

The Canucks need a physical defensive d-man, and for our 7th d-man, Strudwick would be a great fit... He knows the Canucks, he knows the system, he's physical, he fits like a glove in the dressing room - with many friends already on the team), he's versatile (d-man and winger), and he's a great 'team guy'... IMO, Strudwick would be the perfect 7th d-man for the Canucks... We know Strudwick well, and I would personally welcome him back with open arms... If we're not getting Strudwick back, I'm not really interested in getting another player (unless perhaps it is another physical 7th d-man - or physical defensive d-man prospect)...

So the assets that I would ask for from Chicago are a 2nd rounder and Strudwick...

One of the assets I am willing to give up is Ruutu... What else would Chicago consider a fair asset to even out the deal?

Proposal #1


To Chicago:


Jarkko Ruutu + (unknown)

To Vancouver:


2nd rounder (4th of 4)


Proposal #2


To Chicago:


Jarkko Ruutu + (unknown)

To Vancouver:


Jason Strudwick + 2nd rounder (4th of 4)


What unknown asset from the Canucks would make this deal fair from a Chicago perspective? I really think that this could be a win-win minor deal for both teams...


Last edited by I in the Eye: 06-06-2004 at 03:28 PM.
I in the Eye is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 03:43 PM
  #40
SedinFan*
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Lethbridge, Alberta
Posts: 10,543
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to SedinFan*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wally112pac
You didn't see the 3rd overall in there?
How would that help the Canucks as most of their core players are entering their primes....

Not happening.

Canucks wouldn't trade Ruutu for a soft player in Eric Nicklas. Trade Ruutu for Nichol if anything.

SedinFan* is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 05:17 PM
  #41
Wally112pac
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,826
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SedinFan
How would that help the Canucks as most of their core players are entering their primes....

Not happening.

Canucks wouldn't trade Ruutu for a soft player in Eric Nicklas. Trade Ruutu for Nichol if anything.

I wouldn't do the orignal deal either.

It just seemed like you thought the canucks were getting ripped off. Like 3rd overall has little value.

Wally112pac is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 05:32 PM
  #42
Behn Wilson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago, Il
Posts: 3,945
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by A Mind at a Time
I'm interested in one of Chicago's 2nds... I'd only be interested in moving Ruutu if it involved getting a 2nd rounder from Chicago as part of the deal...

How about to Chicago:

J. Ruutu and 4th round draft pick ('04)

To Vancouver:

Strudwick and 2nd round draft pick ('04) - the 4th one of the 4 that you have in the 2nd round...

Deal?
DONE!!! The second rounder may be overpaying slightly but it would be worth it to get Jarko on the Hawks. The guy hits like a truck. He is strictly a depth player but it would be good for his brother to have another Finn as a teammate to replace Niemenen who was showing him the town. The fact that he is his older brother is an even biggeer plus.

Behn Wilson is offline  
Old
06-06-2004, 07:29 PM
  #43
I in the Eye
Registered User
 
I in the Eye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country:
Posts: 4,556
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Behn Wilson
DONE!!! The second rounder may be overpaying slightly but it would be worth it to get Jarko on the Hawks. The guy hits like a truck. He is strictly a depth player but it would be good for his brother to have another Finn as a teammate to replace Niemenen who was showing him the town. The fact that he is his older brother is an even biggeer plus.
Agreed... done.

I think this is a good deal for both teams... I also think that some fans of either team will think they're giving up too much - which IMO is a pretty good indicator that it is fair for both sides - both sides feel they are giving a little more than market value...

I know that some Canuck fans would hate the idea of trading Ruutu... But IMO, receiving a 2nd rounder (which gives us the opportunity to draft a good prospect - where our prospect depth is lacking), and the good and steady development of Bouck (who IMO is ready to play for the Canucks in a gritty, hardworking, defensive-responsible role), makes this a reasonable deal for Vancouver... Not to mention, we already have a hated 'pest' in Cooke... Not to mention that we would reduce salary a bit having Bouck instead of Ruutu - which the Canucks may be looking to do if they hope to acquire a high quality, physical, defensive d-man to play in our top 4 (which I hope Nonis will be looking to do!... those guys are expensive, so the Canucks should start looking to save money when and where it makes sense to do so)...

And from a Canucks perspective, a 4th rounder may seem like overpaying slightly for Strudwick - but IMO, it would be worth it to get Struds back on the Canucks... He is exactly what we need our 7th d-man to be... Physical, defensive-oriented, team-oriented, hard working, and cheap... We need someone who is not going to complain if he sits out for a number of games... We need someone who fits with the personalities in the dressing room, and will put the team needs before his own... Struds is also versatile and can play forward (giving Crawford more options)... The fact that he is good friends with a number of our players, and already knows the Canucks system are even bigger pluses... IMO, Strudwick fits and belongs in Vancouver...

In essence, Chicago overpays a bit for Ruutu... The Canucks overpay a bit for Strudwick... Who overpays more could be debated - but why... IMO, consider it a wash... both teams end up getting what they want, and it's hard to measure who would benefit more with the intangibles of this deal... From a Chicago perspective, I would imagine that getting a stud prospect (#3 pick), Jarkko Ruutu (a player who could help your young star develop - at the worse, make your young star very comfortable in Chicago), and three good prospects from your other 2nd round picks would be considered a very good draft day...

Glad to have done business with you *shakes hand


Last edited by I in the Eye: 06-06-2004 at 07:39 PM.
I in the Eye is offline  
Old
06-07-2004, 12:05 AM
  #44
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 22,181
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by A Mind at a Time
Agreed... done.

Glad to have done business with you *shakes hand
Gets a nod from me. He's a great pest but Jarko might surprise a few people if given an offensive role. He might just be able pot 20G in a good year on a line with a bit offense. At worst he's a great pest. The Nucks can afford to move him, we've moved past the point of needing a few pests in the lineup to make things interesting. We have bigger fish to fry.

me2 is offline  
Old
06-07-2004, 04:38 PM
  #45
GaryU
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Schaumburg,Il
Posts: 3,173
vCash: 500
How bout Cooke instead of Ruutu? The Hawks have enough 'pests'. Hawks need offense, Cooke's got a nice future.

GaryU is offline  
Old
06-07-2004, 08:33 PM
  #46
cyrisweb
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Calgary ab
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,149
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryU
How bout Cooke instead of Ruutu? The Hawks have enough 'pests'. Hawks need offense, Cooke's got a nice future.
Cooke has twice the value of a Ruutu or a Strudwick

cyrisweb is offline  
Old
06-08-2004, 04:59 PM
  #47
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,920
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyrisweb
Cooke has twice the value of a Ruutu or a Strudwick
I disagree... Cooke has more than twice the value of both Ruutu and Strudwick combined!!

I don't see him getting dealt at all, without getting a serious overpayment which addresses our needs - which isn't going to happen.... I see Cooke as a Canuck for a long long time.

NFITO is offline  
Old
06-09-2004, 01:39 AM
  #48
CuSa_1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 1,557
vCash: 500
Nicklas= undersized 3rd-4th line finesse player. An ok depth guy to have as your 13-15 forward. Shouldn't be playing every night.

CuSa_1 is offline  
Old
06-09-2004, 07:15 PM
  #49
Behn Wilson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago, Il
Posts: 3,945
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CuSa_1
Nicklas= undersized 3rd-4th line finesse player. An ok depth guy to have as your 13-15 forward. Shouldn't be playing every night.
Maybe 13-15th on your AHL team. Talk about a guy that added NOTHING to the lineup.

Behn Wilson is offline  
Old
06-10-2004, 04:27 AM
  #50
cyrisweb
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Calgary ab
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,149
vCash: 500
Curious how much a package of Thibault and Strudwick would cost?

cyrisweb 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 05:45 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.