Pip
Registered User
I would be interested in Domi depending on the price. He's a player who has shown good NHL production and is struggling on an absolutely brutal team.
Its funny cause those people can't use this argument anymore. Look at the Top 8 teams in the West right now. Vegas, Winnipeg, Nashville, St. Louis, Dallas, Colorado, Calgary, San Jose. Which of those teams are "tough"? Maybe San Jose?Yeah but the west.
Its funny cause those people can't use this argument anymore. Look at the Top 8 teams in the West right now. Vegas, Winnipeg, Nashville, St. Louis, Dallas, Colorado, Calgary, San Jose. Which of those teams are "tough"? Maybe San Jose?
I'm 95% sure he's making a joke.Was Botch being facetious with that Tanev for Liljegren + 1st rumour tweet, it seemed like it but then he continued on about hearing about it at the beginning of the month.
To be frank I'd pull the trigger. I like Timme
I'm 95% sure he's making a joke.
Was Botch being facetious with that Tanev for Liljegren + 1st rumour tweet, it seemed like it but then he continued on about hearing about it at the beginning of the month.
To be frank I'd pull the trigger. I like Timme
Pretty sure your second point is illegal in the CBA there Bovinder
Kesler, Garrison, Sutter, Forsling, Pedan, Vey, Gudbranson, Dorsett and Etem.
A deal is only considered “bad” when one’s own team suffers while the other team benefits immensely.
what???????????????????????????????
I think the issue is that you're proposing a pre-arranged agreement for the following year. kant do datWhich part? Trading a player to another team and then having said player return to his original team in the summer?
Didn’t Antoine Vermette do that recently?
UFA’s can sign wherever they want can’t they?
I think the issue is that you're proposing a pre-arranged agreement for the following year. kant do dat
How bout don’t trade the Sedins
I think its been pretty clear that the Sedins don't want to move, theres no point of bringing it up.Yeah you're right man.
I mean - who needs things like "draft picks" and "prospects" right?
It's not like the twins would want to come back to Vancouver in a few months and finish out there careers here or anything.
I think its been pretty clear that the Sedins don't want to move, theres no point of bringing it up.
Fair enough.
A trade can also be considered 'bad' if two teams make a trade and BOTH teams suffer big time. It's extremely rare, but it can happen I guess. I can't think of an example where this has happened to Vancouver under Benning's tenure however.
#GoWhatYourself
I think its been pretty clear that the Sedins don't want to move, theres no point of bringing it up.
How about we dont sign them.Why would we want to bring them back to the same gong show next season.Is it really going to make any difference?If its for there farewell tour for 1 year im fine with that.But for another 3 or more,forget it,id rather play the kids.How bout don’t trade the Sedins
Dat 500k on honey badger's 2.5m salary.When two lifetime Canucks have NMCs (that they 100% deserve), it's totally their call and they don't owe us anything.
The other hitch in the plan is that we're using up one of our retention spots on Hansen and can't retain on both, essentially scuttling any deal possible for both of them.
The other hitch in the plan is that we're using up one of our retention spots on Hansen and can't retain on both, essentially scuttling any deal possible for both of them.
Theres no way they're going to be ok with being traded to different teams. They both have NMC. They want to play together. Furthermore, they want to play here. Its not even worth discussing.Hence - my suggestion that we trade ONE of them at 50% retention (preferably Henrik) so that it nets us a 1st rounder AND a damned good prospect. If we trade for Hansen to come back to us, it makes BOTH Hank and Dan available in terms of us retaining salary. We then trade BOTH guys in SEPARATE deals so that the accommodating teams can absorb their salary, while also giving the Canucks a chance to avoid the Law of diminishing returns (i.e. Canucks could likely get more out of a trade for Hank and Dan in SEPARATE deals).