Speculation: Fantasy GM and Rumor Roundup Thread | "Trader Jim" gearing up for TDL

[AppleHoneySauce]

We should shop Schenn. If we get some a good offer (B-Level prospect or 2nd rounder) for him we should trade him. If not then what ever, but just not bothering to see what you could get for him is Dim Benning tier.

This goes for like literally every player as well. Who knows you might get some McDavid for Demko tier trade for a player.

 

[TruGr1t]

There's not much reason to keep the majority of this roster together, because it's a bad team. I think you look at each asset on a value-in, value-out basis because you have a laundry list of needs: draft picks, futures, cap space, depth, size, speed, etc. Of course, you don't want to ice even more of a tire-fire team than we have currently, but at the same time you need to be looking at nearly over-hauling the roster outside of 3-4 pieces. I think it was Drance that made that point the other day, they should just be looking to maximize value at this point.

By maximizing asset value it should give you more options to optimize the line-up on the ice. Doesn't all have to be one transaction.

I'd argue the hallmark of the Benning regime was the opposite, sacrificing value in transactions to fulfill perceived, specific roster needs.

 

[elitepete]

So people don't want to trade Schenn. And they don't want to trade Burroughs.

How are we going to improve the defense then?

 

[Fatass]

What's taking so long? We stink and a rebuild is clearly needed. Is our owner holding up the works?

 

[VanJack]

I really don't think Rutherford will rush into any trades.....I'm sure teams are calling on various Canuck players, headed by J.T. Miller. But typically they're trying to trade a row boat for a battleship. If the deals aren't there, there isn't much point in making them.

The rest of this season matters little to the current Canuck braintrust. In fact if in the end they made some shrewd deadline day trades; enhanced their draft position as a lottery team; and get a head-start on who might be available to them in the off-season, then as far as I'm concerned it would be a success.

 

[DFAC]

So people don't want to trade Schenn. And they don't want to trade Burroughs.

How are we going to improve the defense then?

Its not the guys on the bottom pairing that we need to fix, it's our top end guys. Schenn and Burroughs are great if given a limited role.

 

[MS]

I cant believe that this is a discussion, again especially with you and melvin...

I disagree with your bad boeser takes but atleast i can understand them, same with horvat. I'd keep him for 10 years but i can see why others are ready to trade him.

We're talking about 32 yr old Luke schenn.

Who you've already said had no value 6 months ago, so if he's now an "irreplaceable $3 million + asset" why the hell wouldn't we sell high in case his value drops 6 months from now.
Get some even better asset(s) that could actually help contribute for 5+ years once we're competitive annually.

I fail to see how toughness and hughes pal are even close to reasonable enough reasons to hold on to him until he's worthless. Like so many others we've already let walk for zero cough Calgary cough...

And to top it off we have Burroughs who is seemingly a younger ready made toughness replacement IF one wanted to argue that aspect.

It makes no sense

First off, obviously if you get a good enough offer you move anybody.

But again, we aren't playing video games here.

Management has a task here to build a new/improved identity for this team. We were just embarrassingly pushed around by a rival in our own building last night in a must-win game. We're slow and soft, and need to get more competitive and harder to play against. That culture shift needs to start *now* and will be a long process to get it changed.

You can't be a management team saying 'We need to develop an identity here' and simultaneously be saying 'We need to trade everyone who embodies that identity and is over age 25 for any mid-round picks we can get!' It's ridiculous. It's not how it works in real life. It's not how you build success. It's not how you turn around a franchise that has been a rudderless trainwreck for 8 years.

And when you have a guy like Schenn who is a veteran leader and *by far* your most physical player and the guy in there standing up for teammmates and embodies the culture you want to build moving forward AND is working well in a defensive pairing with your most important position player, who already went sideways once when the team traded his partner/mentor out from under him ... no, it isn't an 'automatic' that you move him.

Same goes for Motte, although that one is more pressing because of his UFA status. They need to suss out his contract demands and move from there. If it's under $2 million, you probably don't trade him either unless you get an insane offer.

 

[ziploc]

Its not the guys on the bottom pairing that we need to fix, it's our top end guys. Schenn and Burroughs are great if given a limited role.

And are cheap, especially relative to their effectiveness, in contradistinction to Poolman, Myers and Hamonic. If an offer blows you away you take it of course. Otherwise they are helpful pieces of the puzzle for next year.

 

[Burke's Evil Spirit]

Teams like Colorado and Florida are hugely stacked toward one side on their bluelines and do just fine.

Also Tampa Bay and Toronto. m9 is correct when he says a lot of teams obsess about handedness on D...but the good ones don't, and that's not a coincidence.

 

[Fatass]

I really don't think Rutherford will rush into any trades.....I'm sure teams are calling on various Canuck players, headed by J.T. Miller. But typically they're trying to trade a row boat for a battleship. If the deals aren't there, there isn't much point in making them.

The rest of this season matters little to the current Canuck braintrust. In fact if in the end they made some shrewd deadline day trades; enhanced their draft position as a lottery team; and get a head-start on who might be available to them in the off-season, then as far as I'm concerned it would be a success.

sounds like an excellent, and much needed plan. Will our owner allow it though? He's been nothing but impatient from the moment he bought the club.

 

[racerjoe]

Anyone who is insisting the team needs to hold on Schenn has lost the plot. If you can extract value out of a depth player who will be aged out by this team does anything, you do it. They have 3 other guys (Hamonic, Burroughs, Poolman) who can provide 85% of what Schenn does anyway.

The argument is he is under contract at a bargain price for next year. Without an over payment why not sell him next trade deadline?

 

[m9]

The argument is he is under contract at a bargain price for next year. Without an over payment why not sell him next trade deadline?

No guarantee that he'll be playing this well and worth anything a year from now. Plus his extra year for cheap should add value, like it does for Miller.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

So people don't want to trade Schenn. And they don't want to trade Burroughs.

How are we going to improve the defense then?

Trade one of the forwards for a young blue chip D man.

 

[VanillaCoke]

The whole point is we'd be getting an overpayment since he's apparently the most valuable he's ever been right now

 

[elitepete]

Trade one of the forwards for a young blue chip D man.

If we keep both Burroughs and Schenn that means one of them would be in our top 4. A defense with Schenn or burroughs in the top 4 just isn't good enough.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

If we keep both Burroughs and Schenn that means one of them would be in our top 4. A defense with Schenn or burroughs in the top 4 just isn't good enough.

They need a succession plan on D...Hughes plays well with Schenn, and Schenn is of more value on the team, than a middling pick in return ..Schenn isn't a top 4 man, but has elevated his play with Hughes and is workable in the top 4 (especially when you're getting quality goaltending) ...This..until they work in one or two young quality RHD (via trade) .

Schenn leaves in a year, Myers the year after.(a succession plan)....I honestly don't believe that Rutherford has the 'lets blast everybody into the sun if your over 25' vibe , that some of the angry mob, are clamouring for.

 

[racerjoe]

No guarantee that he'll be playing this well and worth anything a year from now. Plus his extra year for cheap should add value, like it does for Miller.

If we are getting that value sure, but what is that value?

I would absolutely trade anyone on this team for the right deal, I just can’t see us getting this extra value you speak of.

 

[elitepete]

They need a succession plan on D...Hughes plays well with Schenn, and Schenn is of more value on the team, than a middling pick in return ..Schenn isn't a top 4 man, but has elevated his play with Hughes and is workable in the top 4 (especially when you're getting quality goaltending) ...This..until they work in one or two young quality RHD (via trade) .

Schenn leaves in a year, Myers the year after.(a succession plan)....I honestly don't believe that Rutherford has the 'lets blast everybody into the sun if your over 25' vibe , that some of the angry mob, are clamouring for.

Disagree that Schenn is good enough in the top 4. If Hughes had a better parter, he would be that much better. It would also take pressure off of OEL-Myers (which is used a little more often against other teams top lines).

Hughes-top 4 d
OEL-Myers
Defensive minded LHD-puck moving rhd

 

[elitepete]

Its not the guys on the bottom pairing that we need to fix, it's our top end guys. Schenn and Burroughs are great if given a limited role.

They are both rhd. So if they are in the lineup, one of them is going to be in the top 4, logically. Unless you have both of them paired on the bottom pairing, which is not ideal imo.

 

[m9]

If we are getting that value sure, but what is that value?

I would absolutely trade anyone on this team for the right deal, I just can’t see us getting this extra value you speak of.

It's hard to to say what his value is, but I think if you could get a 2nd or a solid prospect then you pull the trigger. I see lots of "I don't want to dump Schenn for a mid-round pick!".. but nobody is suggesting that. If you get appropriate value for a piece that will be a better fit long-term then you should do it. I would rather take the bet that this is an outlier stretch vs a 32 year old player suddenly developing into a long-term answer.

 

[rypper]

I don't want to see Schenn moved (of course with the caveat if someone is willing to overpay) because I want to see some bigger moves made that could shake the foundation of the team. Ie. if you move Miller, which they should, that greatly effects the identity of the team.

If the team hacks away at the foundation, making big moves for pieces that could take a year or two to begin helping the team, you need players like Schenn around to support the team. If you're bringing in young and experienced players you need guys like Schenn to prevent teams from running over them and having their way with them.

Teams come into Rogers Arena and have an easy night, often times it's Schenn and Burroughs who prevent it from being a complete bending over.

 

[Reverend Mayhem]

I wasn’t sold on Boston or Carolina, they got extremely lucky ie Roloson injury in the finals and we all know how fluky dim and chirelli was.

But you are right, other than those two, every other one was legit since I started watching.

Unfortunately JR had to be attached to one of the flukes. Sigh…..just our luck if he actually believes that just get in crap……..

The StLouis thing is funny because the made the WCF recently and just traded the farm for O’Reilly and the dim fans used that as an example. And LA was just stacked lol

The 2012 Kings had no business being an 8th seed on paper, yet they were. I said before the season if St. Louis got good goaltending, they'd make some noise.

Boston was an extremely deep team that got great goaltending and no injuries, before the season I had them marked. Carolina was a wave after wave of scoring team. They had 8 players score 15 or more points that run...Williams, Brind'Amour, Staal, Recchi, Weight, Whitney, it was like a who's who of underrated scorers for that era. Their defense was subpar, but Hedican was a sneaky good player and Ward was stellar. That was kind of a funny year anyways, post-lockout. They were easily the biggest fluke team I've seen, but they were also a really good team.

 

[iFan]

We should shop Schenn. If we get some a good offer (B-Level prospect or 2nd rounder) for him we should trade him. If not then what ever, but just not bothering to see what you could get for him is Dim Benning tier.

This goes for like literally every player as well. Who knows you might get some McDavid for Demko tier trade for a player.

is moving Schenn really going to move the needle? I mean is this what we should be spending time looking at, for what a 3rd or 4th rounder for him? our focus should be on moving guys like Horvat, Miller and Boeser, figuring out how we reshape this team and how we want to move forward. If a team calls us and says hey we'll give you a 2nd rounder for Schenn sure but I'm not so sure how likely that will be.