Speculation: Predict the Next Canucks Trade

[krutovsdonut]

So you think they'll make a faux attempt at locking Gudbranson down? No legit intention to re-sign him. If so, them sure. My comment was about a clear intention to bring him back. They don't have it. They already tried to move him. He's on the block.

no, i think they try to sign him and if they can't they try and trade him armed with the information of his asking price and with the trading partner able to re-sign him.

They are very unlikely to start Juolevi off as a #7 Dman. He's not Virtanen and he's not a reclamation project (Pouliot). He's a top5 pick that if graduated will be given a top6 spot.

on this team #7 is a guaranteed 50 games if you stay healthy. i think they go with that plan and if he shows he is worth a spot they move someone.

Del Zotto likely gets them very little in trade. Hutton is a holdover from the Gillis era. Not a Benning guy. He's also not as good as Tanev, nor is he tenured like Edler. To me, he's the #1 trade piece they move to get help up front (in concert with making room for Juolevi). Nobody else on the defence comes close.

i don't think they are trading to gain value, but out of necessity to clear the roster, so the return on del zotto does not matter.

"not a benning guy" is just your bias showing. he never played a game for gillis. horvat is "not a benning guy". save those arguments for the management thread.

"not as good as tanev" is irrelevant. nobody is suggesting tanev moves.

"not tenured like edler" is irrelevant. nobody is suggesting he moves. i am resigned that he stays at least until the summer and the sedins' intentions are known.

"get help up front" is not something they particularly need right now, so i see no imperative to make a trade for that. we can check back in a couple of weeks but they don't even have a slot for a guy like that right now unless they move a veteran forward and they don't particularly need a guy like that as they are getting adequate distributed scoring.

if they do move hutton i would assume they have doubts about his game, or we are getting a piece back benning really craves.

 

[Bleach Clean]

no, i think they try to sign him and if they can't they try and trade him armed with the information of his asking price and with the trading partner able to re-sign him.

Why would they attempt to sign him if they had already decided to move him? That's a dangerous strategy, what if he accepts when they have no intention of keeping him? If you want to contend that their intention is to keep him, please explain the Demers trade attempt?

on this team #7 is a guaranteed 50 games if you stay healthy. i think they go with that plan and if he shows he is worth a spot they move someone.

The optics of graduating him to be the 7th Dman would be quite humorous. We, of course, disagree about this.

i don't think they are trading to gain value, but out of necessity to clear the roster, so the return on del zotto does not matter.

"not a benning guy" is just your bias showing. he never played a game for gillis. horvat is "not a benning guy". save those arguments for the management thread.

"not as good as tanev" is irrelevant. nobody is suggesting tanev moves.

"not tenured like edler" is irrelevant. nobody is suggesting he moves. i am resigned that he stays at least until the summer and the sedins' intentions are known.

"get help up front" is not something they particularly need right now, so i see no imperative to make a trade for that. we can check back in a couple of weeks but they don't even have a slot for a guy like that right now unless they move a veteran forward and they don't particularly need a guy like that as they are getting adequate distributed scoring.

if they do move hutton i would assume they have doubts about his game, or we are getting a piece back benning really craves.

They are trading capable Dmen to clear the roster for whom exactly?

There's no bias in recognizing that Hutton was not acquired by Benning. If Hutton was viewed to be as important to the team as Horvat or Tanev, he would not be dealt. I don't think Benning values him as such. My comments about Edler and Tanev are made to highlight Hutton's relative importance.

My Hutton trade guess is not about now, it's about the offseason. At that time, Vanek and Burmistrov will likely be off the team. Then they can go after a forward.

It would not matter to me that Benning has doubts about Hutton. We have our own evaluations of Hutton. If Hutton moves and a good piece does not return, fun times are ahead.

 

[krutovsdonut]

Why would they attempt to sign him if they had already decided to move him? That's a dangerous strategy, what if he accepts when they have no intention of keeping him? If you want to contend that their intention is to keep him, please explain the Demers trade attempt?

i don't think they have decided to move him. i think they will keep him for the right price. i am just skeptical they will get a deal done and i am sure they are too, so looking ahead seems prudent.

 

[Bleach Clean]

i don't think they have decided to move him. i think they will keep him for the right price. i am just skeptical they will get a deal done and i am sure they are too, so looking ahead seems prudent.

You don't think they have decided to move him when they have already tried to move him? Hmmm...

He's at 3.5m already. By accepting Demers in trade, who himself had 4 years/4m per on his deal, they have effectively conveyed that Demers at his price was more desirable than Gudbranson at whatever price he would have commanded. The deal was done. It was the player that nixed the trade. And so, I don't think they have any intention of re-signing him. They have made their decision -- all that remains now is to get the best value they can and move him along.

 

[krutovsdonut]

You don't think they have decided to move him when they have already tried to move him? Hmmm...

He's at 3.5m already. By accepting Demers in trade, who himself had 4 years/4m per on his deal, they have effectively conveyed that Demers at his price was more desirable than Gudbranson at whatever price he would have commanded. The deal was done. It was the player that nixed the trade. And so, I don't think they have any intention of re-signing him. They have made their decision -- all that remains now is to get the best value they can and move him along.

the fact they were willing to move him in the summer is not the same as in the middle of the season coming up on the extension option. they were willing to move him then because they couldn't make a deal to extend him at a price they thought was fair and were ready to cut their losses rather than wait until january to see how he looked. now january is close and they have seen how he looked. he looks affordable.

i will concede i don't doubt they would move him now if someone offered them enough. but i don't think with the timing and the recent injury that will happen.

so i think they will try and sign him and then if that fails trade him in january.

 

[Bleach Clean]

the fact they were willing to move him in the summer is not the same as in the middle of the season coming up on the extension option. they were willing to move him then because they couldn't make a deal to extend him at a price they thought was fair and were ready to cut their losses rather than wait until january to see how he looked. now january is close and they have seen how he looked. he looks affordable.

i will concede i don't doubt they would move him now if someone offered them enough. but i don't think with the timing and the recent injury that will happen.

so i think they will try and sign him and then if that fails trade him in january.

Again, it makes no sense why they would attempt to re-sign him if they have already made the call to trade him.

Your supposition hinges on the premise that Gudbranson 1) Understands that his play has been poor 2) Has considered severely adjusting his asking price based on that poor play and 3) Is willing to re-sign here for that lowered price instead of testing the open market for bigger dollars. All three aspects are leaps.

They all but moved him in the summer and they took less (in value) than they paid to get him. They want him off the team and they want something for him. A clear sign of this is what they targeted: They wanted a replacement RHD with the opposite skill set. That should tell you how they value his skill set. Something has changed in the thinking of the front office, and it's making players like Gudbranson undesirable assets. He will be moved and there will be no serious attempt to re-sign him. NOTE: By "serious" I mean and offer at or above his current AAV.

 

[Paulinvancouver]

Next trade will be Hutton/Stetcher or Baertschi/Granlund to go.

Maybe a combination of both.
It's time to try and move quantity for a bit more quality because we have too many tweeners.

I've been saying that for a year though, and the DP trade proved me wrong.

That's what I'd do at least... hopefully something happens before we deal Vanek.

At this point we may as well keep Gagner for another year.

We're not showcasing Burmistrov either. May as well keep him on as well until we can demonstrate value.

MDZ?.... perhaps, but I wouldn't move him now. He needs to turn it around. Maybe he found a woman? #distractions

 

[krutovsdonut]

Again, it makes no sense why they would attempt to re-sign him if they have already made the call to trade him.

Your supposition hinges on the premise that Gudbranson 1) Understands that his play has been poor 2) Has considered severely adjusting his asking price based on that poor play and 3) Is willing to re-sign here for that lowered price instead of testing the open market for bigger dollars. All three aspects are leaps.

my supposition is that the canucks will try to sign him but will likely fail. for the reasons you note.

 

[Bleach Clean]

my supposition is that the canucks will try to sign him but will likely fail. for the reasons you note.

Illogical. The reasons I note are to describe why an attempt to re-sign Gudbranson will not even be made. They have no intention of re-signing him. The botched trade in the summer and looming free agency are major reasons why it's not even considered. Your rationale as to why they will try to re-sign him is that EG will lower his price due to poor play. That doesn't seem off to you at all? How many pending FA's have such and epiphany and are this accommodating? I can't think of any examples.

Edit: EG took a 1 year qualifier at his base 3.5m salary. Reports out of FLA suggested that he was dealt because he wanted upwards of 5m+ AAV (one of the reasons for trading him). Cut to present when they try to deal him for a Dman on a multi-year 4m AAV salary in the summer. After just 30 games played here... In other words, even with a low-end projection of a 3.5m to 4m AAV for EG's long-term contract, they decide to instead move him for a similarly salaried, older Dman. Think about this. They don't wait until January to see if he'll accept the same/similar. They move him. You think they're going to wait now and see if he accepts lower? Not even the same, but lower. Not a chance.

 

[VanJack]

The next Canuck trade?.....has to be Gudbranson....if they don't sign him between now and the trade deadline, then he walks for nothing as UFA on July 1st.....hopefully the Canucks can pump up his tires with some decent minutes between now and then.....also agree with other posters that Hutton is another likely candidate....unfortunately he's been playing so badly recently, not sure what they could get for him.....but the arrival of Pouliot and eventually Juolevi on the left side, renders him redundant.

 

[elitepete]

The next Canuck trade?.....has to be Gudbranson....if they don't sign him between now and the trade deadline, then he walks for nothing as UFA on July 1st.....hopefully the Canucks can pump up his tires with some decent minutes between now and then.....also agree with other posters that Hutton is another likely candidate....unfortunately he's been playing so badly recently, not sure what they could get for him.....but the arrival of Pouliot and eventually Juolevi on the left side, renders him redundant.

To Toronto for 2nd+Nielsen+Polak

 

[LeftCoast]

With the Canucks now above the wildcard line, I bet DimJim will revert to looking for a "hockey trade" at the deadline. The chips too deal are Gudbransson, MDZ, or Hutton for ... basically a better or perhaps younger version of Gudbransson, Hutton or MDZ. Not an easy task. Colour me skeptical.

 

[krutovsdonut]

With the Canucks now above the wildcard line, I bet DimJim will revert to looking for a "hockey trade" at the deadline. The chips too deal are Gudbransson, MDZ, or Hutton for ... basically a better or perhaps younger version of Gudbransson, Hutton or MDZ. Not an easy task. Colour me skeptical.

i am worried we will morph into buyers. quite apart from benning the track record of the owner suggests he will tell management to go for the playoffs if he sees even a hint of daylight.

 

[sting101]

If Codi Ceci has fallen out of favor in Ottawa a Gudbranson to Ottawa deal would be ideal

 

[Bleach Clean]

If Codi Ceci has fallen out of favor in Ottawa a Gudbranson to Ottawa deal would be ideal

Thought about this, even proposed this, but if there are picks/prospects on the table, I would do that over taking back Ceci. He's not the style of Dman they seem to want (Demers skill set, puck rusher).

 

[WTG]

If Codi Ceci has fallen out of favor in Ottawa a Gudbranson to Ottawa deal would be ideal

Analytically, Ceci is about as useless as Gudbranson.

Personally, if we were to get a defenseman we need more Huttons/Pouliots and less Gudbransons. The more transitional defenseman the better in my opinion, opens us up to play a high tempo/high event game which will attract fans.

 

[Jack Burton]

Analytically, Ceci is about as useless as Gudbranson.

Personally, if we were to get a defenseman we need more Huttons/Pouliots and less Gudbransons. The more transitional defenseman the better in my opinion, opens us up to play a high tempo/high event game which will attract fans.

We need more defencemen that can do it at both ends of the rink. We're desperate for a couple of Dmen that can handle the opposition below the hash marks, transition the puck up to the forwards and then become an offensive threat in the other teams zone. We simply do not have these players and I personally don't see Hutton, Stecher or Pooh ever becoming this type of defencemen.

If there are any of these Dmen available on the market then Benning should listen and seriously consider the asking price...you only get these types of Dmen through the draft or trade.

 

[StreetHawk]

i don't think they have decided to move him. i think they will keep him for the right price. i am just skeptical they will get a deal done and i am sure they are too, so looking ahead seems prudent.

The right price? He's taken back to back 1 year $3.5 mill deals in the hopes of getting a long term deal for between tanev to Edler money at least.

So, ask is he worth that price to the Canucks? Guy plays under 18 minutes a game. Tanev and Edler play 23 and against the best lines. You simply can't pay gudbranson that kind of money.

Decision to move him is clear imo.

 

[WTG]

We need more defencemen that can do it at both ends of the rink. We're desperate for a couple of Dmen that can handle the opposition below the hash marks, transition the puck up to the forwards and then become an offensive threat in the other teams zone. We simply do not have these players and I personally don't see Hutton, Stecher or Pooh ever becoming this type of defencemen.

If there are any of these Dmen available on the market then Benning should listen and seriously consider the asking price...you only get these types of Dmen through the draft or trade.

I just wonder what the asking price is. I'd rather tank it out for the next Hanafin then just trade away half our prospect pool just to get our hands on a #1 D-man.

 

[krutovsdonut]

The right price? He's taken back to back 1 year $3.5 mill deals in the hopes of getting a long term deal for between tanev to Edler money at least.

So, ask is he worth that price to the Canucks? Guy plays under 18 minutes a game. Tanev and Edler play 23 and against the best lines. You simply can't pay gudbranson that kind of money.

Decision to move him is clear imo.

i'd give him $3.5m x 2 years. i might even hold my nose and give $4m x 3 though.

i don't think he's shown he can be a top 4 dman. i think he can play minutes like one when needed though. and i think a guy who play 20 minutes in a war against big forwards and even push back is valuable, particularly when i look at the rest of our d corps and forwards.

 

[StreetHawk]

i'd give him $3.5m x 2 years. i might even hold my nose and give $4m x 3 though.

i don't think he's shown he can be a top 4 dman. i think he can play minutes like one when needed though. and i think a guy who play 20 minutes in a war against big forwards and even push back is valuable, particularly when i look at the rest of our d corps and forwards.

Do u expect him to sign that offer? I don't. You don't do a pair of 1 year deals to sign for $500k more per season.

 

[VanJack]

With Luongo now gone for an extended period, is there anything in the works with our favorite historical trading partner, Florida?....They wanted Gudbranson back, and now they're likely going to have to rely on James Reimer in goal for most of the rest of the season. Yikes! Tallon has to be in the market for help in goal. Nilsson and Gudbranson to Florida for___?

 

[Jack Burton]

I just wonder what the asking price is. I'd rather tank it out for the next Hanafin then just trade away half our prospect pool just to get our hands on a #1 D-man.

Well Hanafin is definitely out of the question as it would cost us half our prospect pool and agree that we should just tank for one but I'm not really talking about acquiring a #1 Dman.

I think we need that guy or guys who are decent in all 3 zones because I'm just not seeing it in this group. All of our Dmen have flaws. None of them can play consistently in all 3 zones and I think it's really hurting this group from taking the next step.

I think they all need to be upgraded to a more well rounded type of player and I wouldn't be apposed to packaging up any of them with someone else (no picks) to get that Dman or Dmen.

 

[krutovsdonut]

Do u expect him to sign that offer? I don't. You don't do a pair of 1 year deals to sign for $500k more per season.

a show me deals requires that the player show me. he's on his second show me deal in a row. based on what he's shown me, i think his weaknesses keep his value down. if i am low on his market value, i think i'd tend to pass. i think he's injury prone, and he's going to lose a lot of his bite when he can no longer fight, which seems to be coming soon.

there are moments when he looks great out there, and i have no doubt he adds a significant element to this team and allows us to confront certain other teams. if we ever make the playoffs we need someone like him. but if it comes down to it, i'd rather offer tryamkin stupid money to come back than guddy.

 

[StreetHawk]

a show me deals requires that the player show me. he's on his second show me deal in a row. based on what he's shown me, i think his weaknesses keep his value down. if i am low on his market value, i think i'd tend to pass. i think he's injury prone, and he's going to lose a lot of his bite when he can no longer fight, which seems to be coming soon.

there are moments when he looks great out there, and i have no doubt he adds a significant element to this team and allows us to confront certain other teams. if we ever make the playoffs we need someone like him. but if it comes down to it, i'd rather offer tryamkin stupid money to come back than guddy.

I agree. But, I bet he goes for the money, which means Benning has to trade him.

Maybe gudbranson needs to go to market and get the fransson and Russell wakeup to realize that they aren't as valuable as they think they are.

But, he's going to go to market if he doesn't get a deal that he likes from Vancouver. And I doubt Benning meets his demands.