Proposal: San Jose-Vancouver (Couture/Edler)

[Hi-wayman]

Originally Posted by Chaotic8

Granted VAN's C position is pretty much solidified and hence is the most recurring counter-argument. But few are taking into consideration that Couture can play the wing if necessary.

Obviously you didn't bother to check Vancouver's depth on the wing either. You just stated that Vancouver's centre position is pretty much solidified, and I agree, but depth at centre is also Vancouver's weakest position.

In other words, not only do the Canucks have enough centres (though they could improve their 4th line centre), they have an overabundance of wingers and defencemen too.

[LickTheEnvelope]

Originally Posted by Chaotic8

Granted VAN's C position is pretty much solidified and hence is the most recurring counter-argument. But few are taking into consideration that Couture can play the wing if necessary.

But we don't really need a winger... unless he's a 3rd line grinding winger that hits like crazy and can put up 20 goals/year.

Even then not worth moving Edler who may be our top d-man, he's still young.

[medhatcanuck]

vancouver rarely raises successful defensmen from draft. theyre not gonna let go of their first maybe even since ohlund

[mstad101]

Originally Posted by medhatcanuck

vancouver rarely raises successful defensmen from draft. theyre not gonna let go of their first maybe even since ohlund

Allen was developing nicely, I'm sure that's why Fla asked for him. He is n was developing into a quality top 4 shutdown dman.
But ya Edler is primed to be a Great Dman, not just quality top 4. He has all the tools, n time n contract length are on his side. He improves he'll get his chance at big money in 2 summers I believe? Might be 3 I need to check or be told? (Anyone?) N if he stays at the level he is at, we still have a quality top 4 Dman.

N for the Couture to wing thing, unless he was a RH RW I doubt Vancouver has much interest. We have two holes on RW, 2 n 3 spots; our abundance of LW LH players also limits our choices.
Now considering our Top 6 is Sedin Sedin Samuelsson Kesler Raymond Burrows(most likely) n (least likely) Hodgson.
Couture would at the very minimum beat out a Hodgson, Hansen, Glass, Rypien, and/or Oreskovic realistictly for any Bottom 6 spot.
This doesn't even include the idea of Schroeder making the team, which is highly speculated, along with Shirokov, less speculation but still some. N than there's Desbiens who had a good year in the A, or Rodin; long shot, but still skilled.

What the Nucks lack is a Blue Chip D prospect, an AHL Starting Goaltender, n a tough cheap responsible 4th line Centre. Each can be addressed rather Draft or Free Agency.

[denkiteki]

Originally Posted by Tealblood

young future 2nd line center>>>fringe 2nd pair dman w/injury issues.

counter:
white+7th rounder for bieksa

^there's his value. Surely he's not better than ehrhoff? Plus you guys are in a similar cap situation as we were-with the added advantage of actually having D depth, you'd love to just dump him.

As for this thread in general, the whole edler for couture thing just isn't happening if you hadn't noticed. Canucks aren't exactly in need of another young center, although raymond does suck. Certainly they aren't desperate enough to trade away their young talented future #1 dman.

You forget that the Ehrhoff trade was really a closer to 5mil dump, not just Ehrhoff. We pretty much paid Luko the entire year in the minors and that kinda lower the actual value. Also White was 1 year younger! And we are not in nearly as much cap problem as the Sharks were in last year with no big additions pending that require us to get rid of cap space. We have a full roster that we can ice right now without being over the cap (Salo on LTIR) so we have until at least Nov/Dec to make a move if we need to or if we think Salo won't ever be 100%, we might be dumping him and keeping Bieksa instead (could always be a possibility since the 2 makes the same amount of money and only have a difference of 250k in cap space).. Of course if we want to trade Bieksa, it makes sense to do it before the end of training camp but if we don't, you can't rule out Salo being the odd man out anymore.

[Chaotic8]

Originally Posted by Hi-wayman

Obviously you didn't bother to check Vancouver's depth on the wing either. You just stated that Vancouver's centre position is pretty much solidified, and I agree, but depth at centre is also Vancouver's weakest position.

In other words, not only do the Canucks have enough centres (though they could improve their 4th line centre), they have an overabundance of wingers and defencemen too.

Originally Posted by LickTheEnvelope

But we don't really need a winger... unless he's a 3rd line grinding winger that hits like crazy and can put up 20 goals/year.

Even then not worth moving Edler who may be our top d-man, he's still young.

Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO

it doesn't matter at all when considering a trade for Edler... there are a lot more reasons than just Couture being a center why this makes no sense for the Canucks.

Whoa whoa whoa, slow down gents. Of course, I'm not refuting the fact(s). I'm merely pointing out the fact that Couture is not constricted to Center/Centre.

[Canuckee]

Originally Posted by JPavs8Cluthcy

Thornton+1st+2nd+Couture+Setoguchi+Vlasic+Pavelski +Boyle wouldn't do the trick?

not enough cap

[ttam103]

Couture is probably more NHL ready than our center prospects, but hes got his own injury history to consider - hes had multiple concussions in the OHL already.

[Legion]

LOL to this proposal. As a Sharks fan, Vancouver would be losing out in this big time.