Value of: Alex Edler for a Young Center (22-24)

[Djp]

Elder does not get you a potential 1/2 line center. You could have gotten that with the pick at 5 but it was used on defense.

You have a better shot trading Elder for a prospect Dman who was not a high 1st and doest project as a top Dman but someone who projects as a mid pair Dman.

 

[Breakers]

They're only 7M with 50% retained, and the Canucks could take cap back.

Sedins are easily moveable if the team ever wanted to do it.

Sorry but not Everyone has unlimited budgets like the Leafs.

You expect them to eat $7 million in DEAD cap space a year or roughly 10%


The entire TSN panel stated the same thing, they are unmoveable

 

[2020 Cup Champions]

..

 

[Horse McHindu]

This trade wouldn't work.

Nobody is going to trade a 1C for Edler and it's not worth it for us to trade him for a middle-6 C when we have Horvat and Sutter.

I'm a Kadri fan but he's not a 1C. We're hoping Horvat can produce like him this upcoming year.



You think we'd trade a #2 D-man for a 3rd line center?

Sedin-Sutter-Horvat-Granlund

We don't need a center.

Keep him.

I was thinking more long term. If the Canucks made the trade now, you'd have to place Kadri (or *insert center here*) on the wing until the twins left in two years.

That's when you'd do Kadri-Horvat-Sutter.

Kadri obviously isn't a #1 center, but I can't see the Canucks getting a true franchise #1 center anytime soon...........be it attempting to RFA MacKinnon, going after Stamkos, tanking for Patrick, etc.

That's why I'm contemplating this idea. Use Edler to get a young 2nd line C (so lets say, Kadri, or the Kadri equivalent).

Then, over the next 3-4 years, hyper-target wingers and defensemen in the draft, and use the 14 million Sedin money in two years to round out other areas of the line-up as well.

So basically - you'd accept the pitfall of having 3 "#2 centers" (as opposed to having a true franchise guy), but due to hypertargeting wingers, defensemen, etc. via drafting and UFA, you'd have an extremely formiddable line-up with your next core.

I'm not sure how much correlation/comparison there would be between such a team, and the 1995 New Jersey Devils team, but that's kind of what I had in mind.

Accept the fact that landing a franchise center will be a near impossible task, trade Edler for another #2 center, and spend the next 'X' number of years hyper-targetting other positions via draft and UFA (when twins come off the books).

 

[ziploc]

Zero chance the Oilers give up RNH for Edler. Zero. I actually hope they keep their "top pairing defenseman" because it's more beneficial for the Oilers to keep playing the Canucks aging superstars.

Edler is 30. He still has a lot of years of solid play ahead of him, and is currently our oldest defenseman. And he is unlikely to waive for Edmonton in any event. I don't think he is moveable, frankly, until the last year of his contract, because he does not want to waive (at least up till now that has been the issue).

I think Tanev for RNH would be a workable deal, as painful as it would be to deal Tanev.

 

[Horse McHindu]

Zero chance the Oilers give up RNH for Edler. Zero. I actually hope they keep their "top pairing defenseman" because it's more beneficial for the Oilers to keep playing the Canucks aging superstars.

Fair enough. Valuation of my players is clearly not my strong suit and I can accept that.

The biased Canuck in me wants to believe that Edler could land a Brayden Schenn or a Sean Couturier, but I know it wouldn't happen either. (along with RNH, those are the other two guys I had in mind btw).

 

[Horse McHindu]

Edler is 30. He still has a lot of years of solid play ahead of him, and is currently our oldest defenseman. And he is unlikely to waive for Edmonton in any event. I don't think he is moveable, frankly, until the last year of his contract, because he does not want to waive (at least up till now that has been the issue).

I think Tanev for RNH would be a workable deal, as painful as it would be to deal Tanev.

I'd never part ways with Tanev personally. Tanev will still be an asset to our NEXT core (which is the biggest reason why I created this thread - it was with our next core in mind).

 

[Breakers]

Elder does not get you a potential 1/2 line center. You could have gotten that with the pick at 5 but it was used on defense.

You have a better shot trading Elder for a prospect Dman who was not a high 1st and doest project as a top Dman but someone who projects as a mid pair Dman.

Dubois to me was the only guy Vancouver could have gotten to be a #1 and they couldn't get him.

Logan brown = No
Jost = No
Keller = Maybe

 

[Scygen]

This entire thread is pointless, first Edler is not willing to waive NTC. Second Benning specifically went out to acquire another dman to solidify that position. He's not going to trade a dman now. He already traded a young centre away to fix the D. Original poster needs to use his brain and figure these things out.

 

[blankall]

You won't get a true #1 centre in the 22-24 age range for Edler. Those are extremely hard to come by and teams don't give those up.

You might get a #2 centre with potential to be a #1. If you're expecting more than a 50 point centre in the 22-24 age range, I would come up with a new plan. Even then 50+ point centres in the 22-24 range are very rare. There are maybe a dozen of them in the league.

Kadri would be solid value for Edler at this point.

 

[Fire Sweeney]

Spooner+Hayes

 

[Seatoo]

Spooner+Hayes

For Sbisa? Sure! For Edler? Give your head a shake

 

[Horse McHindu]

You won't get a true #1 centre in the 22-24 age range for Edler. Those are extremely hard to come by and teams don't give those up.

You might get a #2 centre with potential to be a #1. If you're expecting more than a 50 point centre in the 22-24 age range, I would come up with a new plan. Even then 50+ point centres in the 22-24 range are very rare. There are maybe a dozen of them in the league.

Kadri would be solid value for Edler at this point.

I agree with your post.

I just want to focus on your last statement however (i.e. "Kadri would be solid value for Edler at this point.").

Lets just say, hypothetically, the Canucks went ahead and did that, and then somehow unloaded the twins for a defenseman, picks, prospects, etc. (not saying that this can or will happen, but go with me on this).

Do you think a center depth of Kadri-Horvat-Sutter-Granlund (later becomes Cole Cassels) would be decent?

I guess I'm just wondering if the Canucks went ahead with an Edler/Kadri trade, and then unloaded the twins, if a middle depth of Kadri-Horvat-Sutter could be considered 'respectable?'

FutureCanucks

###-Kadri-Boeser
Baertschi-Horvat-###
###-Sutter-Virtanen
###-Cassels-###

Juolevi-Tanev
Hutton-Gudbranson
###-###

Demko
###

If the Canucks pull of a Sedin trade correctly, a number of those "###'s" should be from a Sedin deal.

Depending on what the Canucks got on a hypothetical Sedin return, and what they could get if they spent the next 'x' number of years hyper-targeting wingers, defenseman, and goalies, I'm just wondering if sometime in the future, they could build a championship level team *without* a true franchise center (and instead, opting for three 2nd line centers for depth down the middle).

Only Kadri, Horvat, Sutter, and Cassels down the middle (which may not even be all that bad given that all three guys are #2's), but great-to-tremendous in other areas in the FUTURE due to hyper-targeting via draft, trades, UFA signings, etc.) #2020 #NewJersey1995Model?

 

[Horse McHindu]

This entire thread is pointless, first Edler is not willing to waive NTC. Second Benning specifically went out to acquire another dman to solidify that position. He's not going to trade a dman now. He already traded a young centre away to fix the D. Original poster needs to use his brain and figure these things out.

Sure. I need to use my brain. Lets go with that.

Benning's plan all along has been to get younger. Period. However, he wants to bring in young guys that are 'sure things' in the NHL, and therefore, is willing to trade prospects for young 'ready' guys. Hence - his Shinkaruk for Granlund deal, and his McCann for Gudbranson deal.

And as I mentioned, if you're moving Edler, then you can re-sign Hamhuis as a contingency plan (i.e. Hamhuis doesn't seem to be in Benning's plans right now). Therefore, the "addition" of Gudbranson would still stand, in terms of solidifying that position.

Yes - Benning traded a 'young center', but said young center was basically a prospect that still has some questions as far as NHL readiness is concerned. What I suggested, is that the Canucks move Edler for a 22-24 year Top 6 center that was *already* Top 6 calibre.

I'm not sure why you insulted me, but whatever. If I resided in Calgary and had to milk bulls on the farm for entertainment, I'd be angry as well. p.s.______mods, I'm only kidding around. Not meant to be a personal attack, just some good natured ribbing.

 

[King In The North]

Imo that Canucks team would be at best similar to what the Jets have been. Good depth, no superstar anywhere and always just missing the playoffs.

 

[King In The North]

Sure. I need to use my brain. Lets go with that.

Benning's plan all along has been to get younger. Period. However, he wants to bring in young guys that are 'sure things' in the NHL, and therefore, is willing to trade prospects for young 'ready' guys. Hence - his Shinkaruk for Granlund deal, and his McCann for Gudbranson deal.

And as I mentioned, if you're moving Edler, the you can re-sign Hamhuis as a contingency (i.e. Hamhuis doesn't seem to be in Benning's plans right now). Therefore, the "addition" of Gudbranson would still stand, in terms of solidifying that position.

Yes - Benning traded a 'young center', but said young center was basically a prospect that still has some questions as far as NHL readiness is concerned. What I suggested, is that the Canucks move Edler for a 22-24 year Top 6 center was *already* Top 6 calibre.

I'm not sure why you insulted me, but whatever. If I resided in Calgary and had to milk bulls on the farm for entertainment, I'd be angry as well. p.s.______mods, I'm only kidding around. Not meant to be a personal attack, just some good natured ribbing.

Granlund isn't a sure thing.

 

[serp]

So you want Cody Eakin for Edler ? Deal where to i sign ?

 

[Horse McHindu]

Imo that Canucks team would be at best similar to what the Jets have been. Good depth, no superstar anywhere and always just missing the playoffs.

Fair enough. Interesting observation, and I definitely see where you're coming from.

 

[Horse McHindu]

Granlund isn't a sure thing.

True. Sorry, poor choice of words on my part.

Granlund isn't a sure thing, but is further along the path than Shinkaruk, and at this stage, looks more likely to stick in the NHL than Shinkaruk (although my info. might be outdated now as I never saw Shinkaruk play post-trade).

 

[FOurteenS inCisOr]

Hutton can replace Edler easily.

He absolutely can't at this point.

We saw that first hand last season.

 

[FOurteenS inCisOr]

Elder does not get you a potential 1/2 line center. You could have gotten that with the pick at 5 but it was used on defense.

You have a better shot trading Elder for a prospect Dman who was not a high 1st and doest project as a top Dman but someone who projects as a mid pair Dman.

So trade a top pairing D in his prime and signed to an excellent contract for a prospect who projects as a "mid pair D"...?

That's fantastic asset management right there.

 

[CherryToke]

He absolutely can't at this point.

We saw that first hand last season.

I know what I saw and he can replace current Edler easily.

 

[thorman]

Would love to see Edler moved for a young centre and would love to see RNH a part of our team. Don't think Edler alone would even be close and would Edmonton even be interested in someone like Hansen? Probably not...But I think Edler, a prospect and a roster player would get it done..

 

[Scygen]

I'm not sure why you insulted me, but whatever.

I'm not insulting you, I'm simply stating more reasonable thought should be put into ideas like this. Benning just paid a massive price to solidify the d, Trade Edler and the Canucks have another gaping hole on the D. No Hutton is not anywhere near ready to replace Edler, Nor is Hamhuis good enough to replace Edler on the top pairing and there really are not any suitable UFA's out there.

Never mind the fact that you didn't address the fact that Edler has a NTC that he has already refused to waive in the past. Right here right now.. Edler is not tradeable. End of story. Maybe at the trade deadline if Hutton takes another huge step in his career.. but that's a pretty big if.

 

[Jumptheshark]

As many have stated. Edler can not stay healthy and that is bringing his value down