HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
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.

Bieksa for a Shutdown Dman

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-26-2010, 05:03 PM
  #26
Reign Nateo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,064
vCash: 500
You know what this place needs?... another Bieksa thread.

Reign Nateo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 05:07 PM
  #27
R0bert0 Lu0ng0
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by denkiteki View Post
Seems like a common theme that you make threads about the 'nucks but more often than not they don't even make any sense.

R0bert0 Lu0ng0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 05:08 PM
  #28
keslehr*
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,045
vCash: 500
Add to topic title "cheap"

keslehr* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 05:11 PM
  #29
BoondockSaint16
 
BoondockSaint16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1
vCash: 500
I'm more interested in keeping Bieksa (now that Mitchell has signed) until Salo is back. With Salo out and Bieksa traded we would have no more right handed D-Men. We have the room to keep & showcase him until Salo is back (his value will increase closer to the deadline after injuries & such have effected teams). He's starting the season healthy and in a contract year, I'm expecting a bounce back season (as his track record would show). With Hamhuis & Ballard in the mix, there will be less pressure on Kevin to be a top pairing guy. Trade Alberts for a 4th-6th rounder.
Hamhuis - Edler
Erhoff - Ballard
O'Brien - Bieksa
Rome

And when/if Salo returns, trade Bieksa for whatever is needed at the time.

Hamhuis - Edler
Erhoff - Ballard
O'Brien - Salo
Rome

Rome is more than capable for filling in for injuries as a #6 and I'm sure some of our prospects (Oberg, Tanev, Sauve, Connauton, Sweatt, Zimmerman) will get a game or two also along with Baumgartner. So I don't see the Canucks trading Bieksa for an NHL caliber defencemen, but rather either a prospect/picks/forward.

I'm also in favour of keeping Shirokov, he's only had 1 season of Pro North American hockey and held his own. Gillis is trying to create an environment that players want to be in (not asking player's with NTC to waive etc.) and I don't think immediately trading away a russian prospect that he personally brought over the pond goes along with that philosphy, especially since most of us thought all of our russian prospects were long gone and would never see a game in a Canucks uni. With Burrows possibly out for game 1, that gives Sergei a huge opportunity to claim his spot (alongside Raymond-Kesler??). Schroeder/Hodgson may have more upside but Shirokov has much more experience playing against pro's/men which gives him an advantage. Plus if he sticks with the team, it will make the Luongo trade oh so much sweeter.

BoondockSaint16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 05:11 PM
  #30
PoolChamp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,747
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by keslehr View Post
Add to topic title "cheap"
inexpensive not cheap. you cut your own hair that's cheap.

PoolChamp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 05:54 PM
  #31
Canuckee
Registered User
 
Canuckee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,259
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by matt trick View Post
I think most Sharks fans are willing to go into the season with Boyle-Murray-Vlasic-Wallin-Huskins-Demers. It is far, far from perfect, but a single acquisition and all the sudden it looks pretty decent. Boyle is a good #1, Vlasic and Murray are solid as the #3 and #4. Huskins and Wallin are capable bottom pairing guys (I actually think Huskins is perfect, albeit overpaid, in that role), and Demers has exceptional potential as puck-mover, but for now, he is not someone you don't want much higher up than five or six with loads of PP time. Wilson has already shown his hand that for a young top 4 d-man, he has no problem giving up his 1st and 3rd.

There are a host of players that can slide into that top 4 spot, even if it is as a player that plays behind Vlasic and Murray. There will be a top 4 d-man available at the deadline and I bet Wilson acquires one than, probably earlier. All of Francois Beauchmein, Trevor Daley, Ian White, James Wiznewski, Eric Brewer, John Michael Liles, Barret Jackman, Sheldon Souray, Matt Carle, Jan Hejda, Fedor Tyutin, Johny Oduya, Butler/Sekera and probably 15 others meet our needs. Maybe only one or two of those players are available, maybe none are, but I expect Doug will bring one in. Come trade deadline with no other acquisitions to the current roster it is feasible that we have 7 million in cap space, and could acquire two of the above if Doug feels it is necessary, but we only need one.
bieksas only 29 and first and joslin is all it will take

Canuckee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 05:57 PM
  #32
matt trick
Registered User
 
matt trick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 7,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canuckee View Post
bieksas only 29 and first and joslin is all it will take
Not a chance they get a 1st+prospect.

matt trick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 09:23 PM
  #33
Steamer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: In the nosebleeds
Posts: 241
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IrMitchell View Post
Bieksa + 4th for Finger?
What I am wondering is are other users of this bard as tired of your infantile posts as I am? If your going to post at least try and post something useful, instead of the usual Maple Jokes stuff, I am surprised you didn't say Kaberle.

Steamer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 09:28 PM
  #34
denkiteki
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,097
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by carlweezer View Post
Salo is out for a LONG time....so if we dont trade Bieksa for a Dman we would have 2 of Alberts-Rome-Obrien in the line up...i dont feeel comfortable with that...

Lee Sweatt? this guy can be a bigger version of Patrick Columbe for all we know...cant bank on the unknowns...
What?!? If we don't trade Bieksa, then wouldn't he be playing? If he's playing, how do we have 2 of them in the line-up unless someone else got hurt? I.e. wouldn't that be exactly the same as say... getting someone else? You are exchanging Bieksa for another dman, that doesn't change Alberts/Rome/SOB's role on the team one bit. So i don't even get what you are talking about. Sweatt is also much better than Columbe in the sense that he's both a lot stronger and better defensively. Doesn't mean i think he'll make the team but he's not a good comparable to Columbe. As it stands right now, defense is without a doubt looking like a strength not a weakness.

Quote:
Originally Posted by carlweezer View Post
Free Asset? I know what you are trying to say but you have to realize that he would have taken up somebody's spot on the roster and on the cap space..so there is no such thing as a FREE ASSEt....if Mitchell was signed then we could kiss Bieksa anbd Obrien Goodbye...


Never make the NHL??? i didnt know you knew more than the Canuck scouting staff who drafted these players....and if a guy like Alex Burrows who was never drafted and was on the ECHL to do what he does in the NHL, pesimistic guys like you are a waste of time...

Canucks dont need a Shut-Down Crease Clearing Dman? really? Sure Byfuglien is gone but you remember how he tore us up right? and what happens if we meet Detroit in the playoffs? who is going to handle Holmstrom or Franzen?..wait we have puck moving Dmen so we can just play keep away and not let them touch the puck!

Thornton
Bickell
Brouwer
Backes
Handzus
Brown
Getlaf

just to name a few players who will stand in front of the net and crash the next at any expense to rattle and score on Luongo....no team can have too many Shut Down dmen...
Free asset in the sense we get someone without giving up anything (beside cash). Yes you lose a roster spot but in exchange, SOB/Bieksa would fetch us assets that we wouldn't otherwise have given (although maybe lower their value but at the same time we don't need to fill the hole that trading them create). In business terms, this teams we obtained additional assets (via trading those players) thus increasing our total assets.

As for the scouting staff, they take chances on players. At the same time these are long shots to make the NHL and so far (after being drafted) don't really look like NHLers. Do you seem them being high on our depth chart? Also you do make moves for your minor league team to help your top prospect develops. Teams do minor trades for their minor league teams all the time and its not abnormal. Do i know more than the 'nucks scouting staff? Of course not and i doubt anyone else does. But i do think i know more about our prospect then you do if you really think 2 players that might not be on the moose are consider 2nd tier prospect. They are at best long shots and have value equal to a late pick, no where near being a 2nd tier prospect. 2nd tier prospects are prospects like Rodin who have a lot of upside but aren't currently our top prospect. Same with Shirokov if you still consider him a prospect.

As for shutdown dman... you do know we signed Hamhuis right? He was bought over NOT for his offensive skill but to be Mitchell's replacement (when Mitchell's health was unknown). Hamhuis was one of the best shutdown dmans on the market and likely better than any shutdown dman currently on the trade market. You are underrating Hamhuis quite a bit if you think Murray (or others) are better at the shutdown role. There's a reason teams offered reportedly offered 5mil/yr for him and his draft rights being dealt twice.

As for crashing the net, that might be the reason SOB is still on the team. Bieksa also could prevent players from crashing the net. I guess you forgot how good of a fighter Bieksa is and how tough he is. Given our defensive situation (i.e. he doesn't need to stay out of the box as badly), AV might turn him loose and let him fight more/find his edge.

denkiteki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 10:14 PM
  #35
JuniorNelson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: E.Vancouver
Country: Australia-Aboriginal
Posts: 4,388
vCash: 50
I think the top four will eat up minutes to an unprecedented degree and Bieksa and O'Brien will be getting low minutes. Maybe really low.

Vignault is known to favour certain pairings or guys, no matter what. If Hamhuis becomes his favorite, he will get the minutes. Bieksa'a spot in the hierarchy will be determined by his play.

The team can currently clear the cap, but will need to use rookies to fill out the roster. Since the plan seems to have been to work rookies into the line-up anyway, the defence hasn't really affected that. Bieksa isn't thwarting anything.

Bieksa is a guy that might put up a career year if he comes in with a healthy attitude. He might perfectly compliment Hamhuis. Or Ballard, or Ehrhoff, it isn't known yet, how things will shake out. The scheme will be different and the chemistry will change. The team's look is different up the middle with the addition of Malhotra. All these factors will affect Bieksa's usage. Vignault is good at different line-ups, switching lines up and stuff. It's practically his speciality. He'll determine the team's strengths and how to conceal its weaknesses.

No worries.

JuniorNelson is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 10:23 PM
  #36
LickTheEnvelope
Decertified Poster
 
LickTheEnvelope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 26,059
vCash: 500
I'm actually for trading Bieksa now rather than trading him later anyways due to cap constraints, but not for this. Sure if we're getting a D prospect that can slot in as a 7th... that's fine... but moving Bieksa and O'brien for just a different 4th/5th d-man ... makes no sense.

LickTheEnvelope is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-27-2010, 12:04 AM
  #37
tonestar
Registered User
 
tonestar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Van City
Country: Canada
Posts: 14
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazyforhockey View Post
The only reason they looked at Mitchell was his potential(over Bieksa) and his "low cap hit" if he took a 1yr bonus laden contract.....meaning they could trade Bieksa and get a better defensive dman for a lot less cap hit.

Didnt happen unfortunally,so do we keep him...and eventually trade Obrien and Alberts or trade Bieksa and keep SOB and Alberts.

And no I dont think we trade him for another dman unless he is a very talented defensive prospect that could play this year or next.....and I doubt that player gets traded.

I think if Bieksa goes he will only go for a pkg of picks/prospects
what do you think of a deal that starts with Bieksa and Fistric from Dallas, and add parts that makes sense for both?

tonestar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-27-2010, 12:13 AM
  #38
lush
@jasonlush
 
lush's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,279
vCash: 500
Swapping Bieksa for another defender with a different skillset makes no sense.

The Canucks training camp will have:

Edler
Ehrhoff
Hamhuis
Ballard
Bieksa
O'Brien
Alberts
Rome
Sweatt

Then we should get Salo back and essentially in game-shap by the trade deadline.

I'm pretty sure we can find 6 guys who can play and compliment each others skillsets out of all these names. We'll even have a handful of guys on two way contracts ready to play if 3 or 4 D are injured at the same time (god forbid).

Doesn't it make sense just to at least go to camp and let things get sorted out before we ship guys out of town?

lush is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-27-2010, 02:21 AM
  #39
TyBOZAK*
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Brampton, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,091
vCash: 500
Kevin Bieksa
for Finger
hehe

TyBOZAK* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-27-2010, 09:57 AM
  #40
MauDevils
Registered User
 
MauDevils's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 4,111
vCash: 500
Bryce Salvador? Saves you over a million.

He's a fiesty Defensive D-man. Fights, blocks shots, sticks up for his teammates. The warrior type.

MauDevils is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-27-2010, 09:59 AM
  #41
99 steps
to the top
 
99 steps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: RV, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 2,718
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by matt trick View Post
I think most Sharks fans are willing to go into the season with Boyle-Murray-Vlasic-Wallin-Huskins-Demers. It is far, far from perfect, but a single acquisition and all the sudden it looks pretty decent.
Hjalmarsson would have made it pretty good.


99 steps is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-27-2010, 10:24 AM
  #42
Luck 6
\\_______
 
Luck 6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 7,040
vCash: 500
We don't need a shutdown defender.. We have Salo and Hamhuis for that role. When Salo is out, we have Ballard and I think Gillis is hoping Edler aswell, if he steps it up this season.

Luck 6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-27-2010, 10:31 AM
  #43
wholesickcrew
Registered User
 
wholesickcrew's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,886
vCash: 500
Add me to the list of Canucks fans who don't want a defensive defenseman coming back for Bieksa. Our top four is solid, and Salo should at the very least be back for the playoffs. In the meantime, I'm fine with O'Brien, Alberts, Rome, Sweatt, and Oberg fighting it out for the bottom pairing.

wholesickcrew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-27-2010, 10:36 AM
  #44
Peter Griffin
Registered User
 
Peter Griffin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,390
vCash: 500
Bieksa isn't going anywhere at this point IMO. Maybe later on in the season, but with Salo's future anyone's guess and Mitchell moving on, it really doesn't make a whole lot of sense to move him. Half-way through the season if the Canucks have to move him, I expect there will be a number of teams that would be interested given the fact that potential top 4 d-man aren't traded too often during the season and by that point over half his salary will be paid out, making it much easier for teams to take on the remainder of his contract.

Peter Griffin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-27-2010, 10:43 AM
  #45
IrMitchell*
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,049
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steamer View Post
What I am wondering is are other users of this bard as tired of your infantile posts as I am? If your going to post at least try and post something useful, instead of the usual Maple Jokes stuff, I am surprised you didn't say Kaberle.
He has a NTC.

Okay, in all honesty.. I'm sorry, I'm just having a hard time understanding why Vancouver fans want so much from Kevin Bieksa.. Seems like they want him out more than anything.

IrMitchell* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-27-2010, 10:59 AM
  #46
ReggieDunlop7
Registered User
 
ReggieDunlop7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 248
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by lush View Post
Swapping Bieksa for another defender with a different skillset makes no sense.

The Canucks training camp will have:

Edler
Ehrhoff
Hamhuis
Ballard
Bieksa
O'Brien
Alberts
Rome
Sweatt

Then we should get Salo back and essentially in game-shap by the trade deadline.

I'm pretty sure we can find 6 guys who can play and compliment each others skillsets out of all these names. We'll even have a handful of guys on two way contracts ready to play if 3 or 4 D are injured at the same time (god forbid).

Doesn't it make sense just to at least go to camp and let things get sorted out before we ship guys out of town?
'Nucks don't need to do anything right now. Let's wait to see them play some games before more changes are made.

ReggieDunlop7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-27-2010, 10:59 AM
  #47
WJG
Running and Rioting
 
WJG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Country: Ireland
Posts: 12,571
vCash: 500
Bieksa for Doug Murray would be a good deal

WJG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-27-2010, 03:01 PM
  #48
mstad101
Registered User
 
mstad101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,865
vCash: 500
Bieksa just became the most important RH shot dman we got.
The price for a Western conference team who has been a consistent playoff threat, well your gonna have to pay mor than say Washington.

Personally I wouldn't balk at a YOUNG low salary RH dman coming back, as long as he can actually play Defense. But I'd expect some type of additional incentive would be put forth as well

mstad101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-27-2010, 03:43 PM
  #49
Canuckee
Registered User
 
Canuckee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,259
vCash: 500
bieksa for demers !!!

Canuckee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-27-2010, 03:53 PM
  #50
matt trick
Registered User
 
matt trick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 7,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 99 steps View Post
Hjalmarsson would have made it pretty good.

Or Ehrhoff....

Not to mention we pursued Hambuis, Martin, Gonchar, and Michalek in the offseason.

matt trick 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 04:22 PM.

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.