The Picks that were Traded/Acquired

[MS]

Oops right I missed Vrbata, but the point still stands that at the time of the signing he was set to be our 5th highest paid forwards ahead of 2nd and 3rd liners Bonino, Higgins, and Hansen.

This is horrible optics when it comes time to resign the other guys, and shows a completely clueless approach by Benning. Okay overpay Dorsett if he's all that important, but at least draw the line that you're not going to pay him over the $2.5M that Higgins & Hansen are making.

Yeah, I remember saying this at the time.

It's a small thing, but it should have just been obvious to cap out Dorsett at $2.4 million so he's paid less than Hansen/Higgins and has a salary position more in line with his role on the team.

Given Dorsett's agent's comments after signing the deal, it wouldn't have been difficult to do, either.

Scrivens wasn't even in the NHL when he was traded for Kassian and is now in Europe so based on the number of games actually played for us by Prust and Marchand getting it in the junk, I'd actually call this whole scenario a win for the canucks.

What?

Prust scoring 1 goal for $2.5 million doesn't make this trade better.

That's like saying it would be better yet to have traded Kassian for Clarkson, because Clarkson would have played even more games!

Benning somehow INCLUDED a draft pick to take back a negative-value cap dump from Montreal. It is one of the most hilariously bad deals in recent NHL history.

Trading Kassian for nothing is *exponentially* better that trading Kassian with a draft pick for a bad player on a bad contract who is much worse than nothing.

 

[CanaFan]

Montreal took all the risk and unloaded a journeyman who was also a fan favourite. Rehab+5th seems perfectly reasonable.

No they didn't. Prust was older, declining rapidly, had a bigger cap hit, and at that point was a marginal 4th liner with foot speed issues in an NHL moving away from marginal 4th liners with foot speed issues.

Kassian was only "risky" in the sense that his off-ice behaviour was not at the desired level. His on-ice play was miles ahead of Prust, his cap hit better, and his age better. And even if he proved to be a headache for Montreal (as subsequent events showed) he could always be waived and/or demoted or simply not re-signed the following season.

There was far more *risk* being taken on by Vancouver in terms of cap hit and on-ice play and yet we still paid the kicker in the deal.

Maybe out of all those 33 teams that wanted Kassian, maybe Montreal actually had the best offer? Everyone else wanted Kassian but either had no room on their roster, cap space, couldn't offer the same value as Montreal. Like who would have been offered that was better? Out of all those teams who definitely wanted Kassian. They still want Kassian. Vancouver still wants Kassian.

Maybe they did, maybe they didn't. Maybe Benning simply loved the idea of a physical, "character", vet who could "mentor" and "provide leadership". Wouldn't be the first time he has sought out that type of player and overpaid for those "skills".

My objection is to the "presented-as-fact" argument that no other team wanted Kassian and therefore Benning *had* to overpay Montreal to "do us a favour". This is a completely made up narrative by people who seek to (for whatever reason) justify a trade that looked bad when it was made and looks even worse 12 months later. The evidence of that is the fact that a mere 6 months after the deal and despite Kassian's off-ice behaviour actually getting worse, Montreal was able to move him to another NHL without paying a "draft pick tax".

So if you simply acknowledge that Benning wanted Prust and that was the impetus for the deal, then cool we can at least proceed on those grounds. But I have little patience for this constant deflecting of responsibility that Benning should be taking for his transactions.

 

[Jimson Hogarth*]

Boston, San Jose, Pittsburgh, Winnipeg, and Dallas. Also Nashville aaaaand (just for kicks) the Islanders, Buffalo, and Toronto.

Happy now?

Source?

 

[CanaFan]

Source?

Same source as the poster who said no one wanted Kassian.

 

[ProstheticConscience]

Who wanted Kassian when the Canucks traded him?

Well, who wanted Kassian when the Habs traded him? You can't have it both ways here. Somehow, another GM managed to find someone to take him for a warm body without having to throw in a draft pick, didn't he?

 

[Ozone]

It's particularly funny when a team like Calgary got three 2nds, a 3rd, a 4th, Jokkipakka, and Pollack for three guys (Glencross, Hudler, and Russell) are currently without NHL contracts.

This deserves a repost. Now, every situation is different, but this shows the creativity and mental prowess of what is possible.

In a nutshell, this shows the range and spectrum of what GM's can do.

I have an idea where we fall on this spectrum..

 

[Ozone]

I really don't like beating up on our management group, over trades and picks, but how is it possible to objectively see things otherwise?

At some point, you would think the Aquamen would realize that this market would support a full - and proper - rebuild, with competent people at the helm.

I want to be positive about our team again. I want to be hopeful again.

We can only bleed so long.

 

[Jimson Hogarth*]

Well, who wanted Kassian when the Habs traded him? You can't have it both ways here. Somehow, another GM managed to find someone to take him for a warm body without having to throw in a draft pick, didn't he?

That isn't my argument tho. He's the one arguing more than Montreal were bidding on Kassian at the time. I'm wondering what evidence there is to suggest that?

 

[ProstheticConscience]

That isn't my argument tho. He's the one arguing more than Montreal were bidding on Kassian at the time. I'm wondering what evidence there is to suggest that?

It's not as if any of us know who if anyone wanted Kassian either time he was traded.

We do however have a direct comparison: the return on the same player in the same year. Prust + loss of token draft pick < Scrivens. That's all we're saying here.

 

[F A N]

This is horrible optics when it comes time to resign the other guys, and shows a completely clueless approach by Benning. Okay overpay Dorsett if he's all that important, but at least draw the line that you're not going to pay him over the $2.5M that Higgins & Hansen are making.

Yeah, I remember saying this at the time.

It's a small thing, but it should have just been obvious to cap out Dorsett at $2.4 million so he's paid less than Hansen/Higgins and has a salary position more in line with his role on the team.

I don't think Higgins and Hansen could be used as "caps." Higgins' contract began two years ago and includes a restrictive modified NTC. Hansen has a full NTC not to mention signing bonuses. I think most (legitimate NHL players) would take Hansen's contract over Dorsett if given a choice.

 

[Ozone]

That isn't my argument tho. He's the one arguing more than Montreal were bidding on Kassian at the time. I'm wondering what evidence there is to suggest that?

There is a famous line: can't see the forest for the trees. It's often misquoted as 'can't see the forest through the trees'...

 

[F A N]

Well, who wanted Kassian when the Habs traded him? You can't have it both ways here. Somehow, another GM managed to find someone to take him for a warm body without having to throw in a draft pick, didn't he?

Using that argument, Kassian was worth nothing. The Canucks essentially traded a 5th round pick for Prust. Did you prefer the Canucks waive Kassian at the time?

When you say warm body, you meant AHL player with a significant NHL salary? Scrivens had negative value.

 

[DanCloutiersFiveHole]

That isn't my argument tho. He's the one arguing more than Montreal were bidding on Kassian at the time. I'm wondering what evidence there is to suggest that?

That is exactly your argument

 

[DanCloutiersFiveHole]

No team wanted Kassian, the Canucks had to add a pick just to mItigate the risk for Montreal.

Scrivens lol. Great argument.

In case you forgot

 

[DanCloutiersFiveHole]

I really don't like beating up on our management group, over trades and picks, but how is it possible to objectively see things otherwise?

At some point, you would think the Aquamen would realize that this market would support a full - and proper - rebuild, with competent people at the helm.

I want to be positive about our team again. I want to be hopeful again.

We can only bleed so long.

The critically aware fanbase is apathetic. The fair weather fans left ages ago. The hear no evil see no evil speak no evil fans will continue to support them regardless. The only one who isn't in for a rebuild is Aquaman (and his management team)

 

[racerjoe]

The critically aware fanbase is apathetic. The fair weather fans left ages ago. The hear no evil see no evil speak no evil fans will continue to support them regardless. The only one who isn't in for a rebuild is Aquaman (and his management team)

I am not even sure that is true anymore from the sounds of things. Not that I want these guys in charge of anything to do with the Nucks.

 

[Jimson Hogarth*]

It's not as if any of us know who if anyone wanted Kassian either time he was traded.

We do however have a direct comparison: the return on the same player in the same year. Prust + loss of token draft pick < Scrivens. That's all we're saying here.

No, it isn't. The poster clearly stated the Canucks had other options than Montreal to work out a trade. I'm asking what those trading options were?

 

[CanaFan]

No, it isn't. The poster clearly stated the Canucks had other options than Montreal to work out a trade. I'm asking what those trading options were?

How would we as fans know specific option?

All we - as fans - can do is look at a facts and events that occur and draw reasonable conclusions from them.

1. Very few players are "untradeable". A player who was quietly in stage 1 substance abuse but is a) young b) on a cheap contract c) skilled is rarely ever "untradeable".

2. The very same player who was supposedly "untradeable" in July was somehow "tradeable" in December despite a) a highly public and negatively portrayed MVA b) attending stage 2 (i.e. more advanced) substance abuse c) not having played in 6 months.

3. The player Vancouver acquired from Montreal fits many of the qualities that Benning purports to value. "Veteran", "Character", "Gritty", "Leader". Despite the results being deplorable it is entirely likely that Benning saw this trade as an "asset for asset" deal.


Critically assessing this trade, the circumstances, subsequent events, and the GM's past track record is how I have come to the conclusion that it is unlikely that "no team except Montreal wanted Kassian". Certainly the price teams were willing to pay would have been low - no one was gonna give us a top player or pick for him - but almost anything would have been better than a slug like Prust AND paying a pick on top for that slug.

Asking for specific teams is just a cop out argument made to avoid thinking critically about the situation. Besides the teams I named might have been interested in Kassian. There is equal evidence that they were as that they weren't. Beyond that it is up to you to use your thinking skills or choose to blindly accept Canuck spin time and time again.

 

[RandV]

3. The player Vancouver acquired from Montreal fits many of the qualities that Benning purports to value. "Veteran", "Character", "Gritty", "Leader". Despite the results being deplorable it is entirely likely that Benning saw this trade as an "asset for asset" deal.


Critically assessing this trade, the circumstances, subsequent events, and the GM's past track record is how I have come to the conclusion that it is unlikely that "no team except Montreal wanted Kassian". Certainly the price teams were willing to pay would have been low - no one was gonna give us a top player or pick for him - but almost anything would have been better than a slug like Prust AND paying a pick on top for that slug.

Yeah this really can't be emphasized enough. During the season, specifically while he was out with injury in December, there was a whole lot of grumbling from management and coaching staff about how they were unhappy with Kassian. That seemed to clear up by the end of the season and both sides, or at least content... then out of nowhere in the offseason the Kassian/Prust trade happens.

We had all the rumours from earlier in the season, but when the trade actually happened management didn't really give any reasons as to why. Did they just really want to dump Kassian and that was the price they have to pay? Or did they really want Prust and that was Montreal's asking price? Benning never clarified that, so all the reasons that came after were likely fan speculation.

Another comparable that you can draw to this is the Shinkaruk trade. We know they were shopping Shinkaruk for a comparable prospect dman. We know that when they couldn't find one, they said **** it and just traded him in a brutal trade for a lesser valued Weisbrod guy. Wouldn't be surprised if something similar happened with Kassian.