Canucks Trade Deadline Predictions

[PrinceOfPucks]

I have a suspicious feeling we trade McCann for Drouin. We may add a bit.

How would people feel about this ?

I think we also move Bartkowski for a 6th

 

[Alan Jackson]

If there's interest in Higgins, he'll be dealt.

Prust will be traded or waived.

My gut feeling is that Hamhuis will be re-signed and Vrbata will be dealt.

I don't know how much interest they'll be in Weber, but I could see him being flipped for a late pick.

 

[Jyrki21]

I don't think any team will pony up for Hamhuis because of his injury and questions about how much he'll actually be able to add to a contender after this layoff. There may be lowball offers, but I don't think he gets traded.

Even with the Canucks teetering on the brink of the playoffs, I could see Vrbata maybe getting moved (because I think management is unduly style-focused and doesn't like his style), but it will be for a 2nd at best unless there is a true bidding war with multiple parties.

Prust may be moved out as a courtesy, but it would just be for futures or something. It depends if he's actually stirring things up behind the scenes or not. Because otherwise Benning will believe that he's "the type of guy you win in the playoffs with" despite there being essentially no evidence of this, and the fact that the Canucks will be hard-pressed to make said playoffs.

Nobody else moves. In fact, I envision the team pointlessly adding a depth defenseman or something.

 

[MS]

1) If Vrbata and Hamhuis are moved, we get a #1 pick for neither, and instead get a 2nd rounder and a crap prospect for each.

2) Higgins won't be moved.

3) If Prust is moved, we get nothing back except a crap AHL contract to balance things out a bit for someone taking him off our hands.

4) Benning manages to give away an extra pick or two somehow in his moves for no apparent reason.

 

[GailWilliams]

I don't think any team will pony up for Hamhuis because of his injury and questions about how much he'll actually be able to add to a contender after this layoff. There may be lowball offers, but I don't think he gets traded.

Even with the Canucks teetering on the brink of the playoffs, I could see Vrbata maybe getting moved (because I think management is unduly style-focused and doesn't like his style), but it will be for a 2nd at best unless there is a true bidding war with multiple parties.

Prust may be moved out as a courtesy, but it would just be for futures or something. It depends if he's actually stirring things up behind the scenes or not. Because otherwise Benning will believe that he's "the type of guy you win in the playoffs with" despite there being essentially no evidence of this, and the fact that the Canucks will be hard-pressed to make said playoffs.

Nobody else moves. In fact, I envision the team pointlessly adding a depth defenseman or something.

I think the best comparable to Hamhuis is Timonen, and most people would argue that Hamhuis has more value. 2 2nds should be the bare minimum return if they decide to deal him.

 

[stuffradio]

I doubt Vrbata is interested in playing here if he's not always with the Sedins, so we should trade Vrbata and for sure Prust. I'd be okay with re-signing Hamhuis at a discount. We should try and trade Weber/Bartkowski and have Subban instead to replace one of them. We can trade Miller at the deadline next year, unless he's willing to re-sign at a discount... somewhere around 3-4.5 mill/year instead of his current salary. We should also see if we can get anything for Burrows and Higgins.

 

[Intoewsables]

I think the best comparable to Hamhuis is Timonen, and most people would argue that Hamhuis has more value. 2 2nds should be the bare minimum return if they decide to deal him.

This is true, although that was a pretty disgusting overpayment and I'm not sure Benning has the chops to pull that off.

He should return a 2nd and an okay prospect at the absolute bare minimum, though.

 

[iceburg]

On with the youth movement....

Of the roster players, they might be willing to trade only Hamhuis, Vrbata, and Prust have some value. Vrbata and Prust are easy decisions - trade them for picks/prospects. Hamhuis would be more difficult to let go but his value will not be higher than it is now. Like Bieksa he will be looking for one final 3 or 4 year deal at $4M+. That's too expensive for what he now brings but other teams will pay it when he's a UFA. So, it's best to trade him now.

All the other assets that get talked about (e.g. Weber, Bartkowski etc) have very little trade value and have a negative impact on the team in that they`re holding a roster spot that a younger player (like Pedan) could be developing in. So, if at all possible, they should be a throw in to any other deal just to open up the spot.

Finally, the big need as I see it right now is to build prospect depth on D. Since there are a lot of middle 6 prospects in the organization right now, I would be in favour of trading one fo the Utica forwards (e.g. Shinkaruk, Gaunce) to help access a solid D prospect who`s very close to stepping into the NHL and has top 4 upside.

So, overall I think the following would be an excellent outcome:

Hamhhuis + Utica prospect (Shinkaruk or Gaunce) for a 20-23 year old D-prospect with top 4 potential.

Vrbata for picks (try to get a 1st rounder but likely would have to throw something else in)

Prust for picks (anything higher than a 6th rounder)

 

[Alan Jackson]

1) If Vrbata and Hamhuis are moved, we get a #1 pick for neither, and instead get a 2nd rounder and a crap prospect for each.

2) Higgins won't be moved.

3) If Prust is moved, we get nothing back except a crap AHL contract to balance things out a bit for someone taking him off our hands.

4) Benning manages to give away an extra pick or two somehow in his moves for no apparent reason.

Do you see any team giving up a 1st rounder for Vrbata? I don't.

If Hamhuis can come back and play at a reasonably high level prior to the deadline, I could see a team perhaps giving up a 1st for him, but I'm not holding my breath.

 

[GailWilliams]

This is true, although that was a pretty disgusting overpayment and I'm not sure Benning has the chops to pull that off.

He should return a 2nd and an okay prospect at the absolute bare minimum, though.

What does the TDL market for UFAs look like this year? Other than Polak, Medvedev, Russell and maybe Byfuglien, I can't think of anyone else off the top of my head. Hamhuis will be in high demand.

 

[unknown]

To Van:

Brandon Sutter
Henrik Sedin
Dan Hamhuis

Management is probably thinking of the return of these three players as TDL acquisitions, they are looking at the 16 games we had all three of these guys in the line up and saw a team that went 9-4-3 (if we were winning at this pace we would still be in contention for 1st in our division).

Wouldn't get our hopes up about any big trades around the deadline unless Henrik is out longer than expected and even than...we might keep clawing away as a playoff hopeful, which means Benning likely won't move anyone unless he's trying to improve the current roster.

 

[Horse McHindu]

Do you see any team giving up a 1st rounder for Vrbata? I don't.

I don't either to be honest.

I'm wondering if the Canucks might be better off packaging Vrbata and Hamhuis in the manner that Philly did with Lecavlier and Schenn? The Flyers got Jordan Weal out of it. What could the Canucks get?

My hope is that if we decide to move Hamhuis, we get a defenseman in return. The Canucks defense is thin as is and I don't like the idea of moving Hamhuis for no defenseman in return.

 

[tyhee]

...
Hamhuis would be more difficult to let go but his value will not be higher than it is now.
...

I'm having trouble understanding why Hamhuis' value will not be higher than it is now.

He's finishing up two very mediocre seasons, in both of which he was injury plagued. He's presently injured and might or might not make it back much before the trade deadline. If he makes it back by then he might or might not be up to speed and so his effectiveness is in issue. He's on an expiring contract.

So the team looking at him is looking at a 33 year old rental whose play has fallen off and who is coming off an injury, whose level of play during the rental period (i.e. trade deadline to end of season) is far from certain.

I find it hard to imagine Hammer's value getting any lower than it is now. Am I missing something?

Maybe somebody that Hamhuis would waive for will be willing to overlook all of that on the basis that he might return to something approaching past form. Otoh, his trade value may be small and the cost of extending him might not be prohibitive. Certainly the Canucks' ranks are not overflowing with top 4 defencemen.

Also, the elephant nobody is mentioning is his full ntc. If he is asked to move for a three month period, why would he waive to uproot or move away from his wife and school-aged children? I could see it happening if he knew the acquiring team would give him an extension, but otherwise can't see why he would consider it.

I'm not pretending to know what will happen. It just seems to me that Hamhuis' trade value right now is lower than it would normally be expected to be and might, just might, be less than the chance that he is healthy and effective for a couple of years starting next season. Between that and his ntc imo there is a reasonable chance of him not being traded.

 

[Ho Borvat]

I have a suspicious feeling we trade McCann for Drouin. We may add a bit.

How would people feel about this ?

You would be an idiot not to do that.

 

[Ho Borvat]

1) If Vrbata and Hamhuis are moved, we get a #1 pick for neither, and instead get a 2nd rounder and a crap prospect for each.

2) Higgins won't be moved.

3) If Prust is moved, we get nothing back except a crap AHL contract to balance things out a bit for someone taking him off our hands.

4) Benning manages to give away an extra pick or two somehow in his moves for no apparent reason.

1) Honestly, if we could get 2 2nds for Hamhuis/Vrbata each (So 4 total... and assuming they were higher 2nds, and not picks 56/57/58/59) I wouldn't be too disappointed. If we had 4 2nd round picks in last years drafts there were a lot of quality prospects to be had. If you could land 3-4 d-men in the 2nd round it would really bolster our d-prospects.

Just using generic examples, but if we had 4 picks in the 2nd round last year we could have gone something like:
- Dermott, Carlo, Kylington, Bracco and really bolstered our pool.

I haven't done a ton of research into this year, but I like the idea of stocking up on d-men.

2-4) Agree

 

[BloatedGuppy]

In descending order of likelihood...

1. Nothing happens. Ultimate reason given will be that trades were explored but the returns were too low/Canucks were too close to contention to trade for pennies on the dollar. Canuck fans will call for the immediate resignation of everyone involved.

2. Vrbata will be moved for an underwhelming return. Canuck fans, their heads firmly stuck in the best deals from three deadlines ago, will view whatever is received as a horrendous under payment and call for the immediate resignation of everyone involved.

3. Dan Hamhuis will be moved for an underwhelming return. Canuck fans, their heads firmly stuck in the best deals from three deadlines ago, will view whatever is received as a horrendous under payment and call for the immediate resignation of everyone involved.

4. Some player not named above will be traded away/and or acquired. Canuck fans, their heads firmly stuck in the best deals from three deadlines ago, will view whatever is received or acquired as a horrendous under or over payment and call for the immediate resignation of everyone involved.

 

[VanillaCoke]

I have a suspicious feeling we trade McCann for Drouin. We may add a bit.

How would people feel about this ?

I think we also move Bartkowski for a 6th

McCann is going to be legit. Hes the creative skilled center needed to play with drouin.

Virt is a better trade chip and a winger for winger move makes more sense.

 

[CRDragon]

McCann is going to be legit. Hes the creative skilled center needed to play with drouin.

Virt is a better trade chip and a winger for winger move makes more sense.

The Canucks should try and keep both McCann and Virtanen. But if push comes to shove, Virtanen would be the better trade chip.

 

[Ho Borvat]

McCann is going to be legit. Hes the creative skilled center needed to play with drouin.

Virt is a better trade chip and a winger for winger move makes more sense.

The Canucks should try and keep both McCann and Virtanen. But if push comes to shove, Virtanen would be the better trade chip.

I've been singing McCanns praise well before he made the team this year, but I would move both pieces for Drouin. Quite easily tbh.

You don't pass on the chance to trade 2 good prospects for 1 great prospect. Drouins ceiling/potential is way higher than either of those players (and again, I am a big McCann fan).

 

[VanillaCoke]

I think thats stupid as ****. Id much rather have a good center in McCann AND Virt over a small (very skilled) winger.

It would take a better prospect to get both.

 

[biturbo19]

Really depends on where we're at as the deadline actually arrives. We're still a full month out right now...hard to say much of anything for the time being.

Will really depend on if we're in the playoff hunt at that point, or if we've managed to fall out of the picture over the next month.

If we're still in it, which seems possible with some players hopefully coming back and being only a couple points out right now...

Prust- dealt for a pick or prospect, probably nothing great.
Higgins- extremely slim outside chance that some GM gets stupid/desperate at the deadline and takes a flier on him, maybe flipping us a minor leaguer contract swap or something.

The rest probably stays.

Though if we have fallen out of the race...

Vrbata- gone for a pick. Late 1st or a 2nd+ type value.
Hamhuis- gone for a pick and young roster fill-in. Late 1st +reasonably young fringe NHLer with some upside to play a few minutes the rest of the year.
Cracknell- gone for a late pick if someone wants to scoop him up as extra depth, but may not have a real market.
Weber- if Benning can find a sucker to take him off our hands for...anything.

Maybe some minor league tinkering for Utica.

Anyone else being moved would surprise me, even if we're well out of it at the deadline.

A fairly quiet "standing pat" with a bit of minor tinkering seems most likely to me.

 

[VanillaCoke]

The Canucks should try and keep both McCann and Virtanen. But if push comes to shove, Virtanen would be the better trade chip.

For sure. But keeping both pretty much guarantees rhis yeara 1st is involved. Which id rather keep.

 

[FroshaugFan2]

Weber and Prust are the only players dealt off the roster. Getting a pick back for either is being optimistic. More likely they return a minor leaguer and possibly a swap of draft picks hopefully in the Canucks favour.

I'm going to say the Prust trade is going to be something like Prust + a 6th for Bartley + a 7th.

 

[Ho Borvat]

I think thats stupid as ****. Id much rather have a good center in McCann AND Virt over a small (very skilled) winger.

It would take a better prospect to get both.

Objectively Drouin is a far significant prospect to either of those pieces, and the only player mentioned who projects as a potential franchise/elite piece.

I would rather have 1 great prospect than 2 good ones.

He would be our best prospect. Unless we're going to offer pieces like Horvat or our 1st this year, I don't see how we can field competitive offers if we aren't giving up multiple assets of decent quality.

 

[Hedberg]

Benning, seeing the team is less than 10 points away from the playoffs, goes all in:

2nd Rd + Hunter Shinkaruk + Jordan Subban for Loui Eriksson
3rd Rd pick for Roman Polak
3rd Rd pick in 2017 for Jamie McGinn