Toggle sidebar

Speculation: Predict the TDL outcome for Gudbranson and Vanek

What happens to Gudbranson and Vanek before the deadline?

  • Total voters
    123
  • Poll closed .
I in the Eye

I in the Eye

Drop a ball it falls
Dec 14, 2002
6,371
2,327
vancityluongo said:
This group is not smart enough for that.

"What if Vanek goes on to lead his new team to a Cup? That could have been OUR Cup!!!!! Why would we risk that just to get a fourth?"
Click to expand...

That's just it... It was most obvious to do that with Hamhuis (albeit, for whatever reason Hamhuis wasn't in the plans). If Vanek is in the plans, I think they'll rationalize that the asset return (say a 4th) didn't justify potentially losing him (and losing non-1st picks isn't a concern of Benning). Benning is known to leave value on the table for players he wants. Also, chances are, Benning won't even be here next year... I think he'd want Vanek here down the stretch, if not to help pad the wins, to help pad the stats of Boeser or other players.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vancityluongo
Brock Boeser Laser Show

Brock Boeser Laser Show

Registered User
Sep 27, 2017
5,629
4,858
My TDL predictions

We make some weird deal involving NYI involving Brock Nelson(former 1st round pick from 2010 draft so you know Jimbo will be salivating at the thought) for Gudbranson/Hutton and a 2nd/3rd round draft pick
We don't deal Vanek because Jimbo refuses to take a mid round pick for him thinking he's somehow worth a 1st.

We exit the TDL with fewer picks somehow and only 2 picks in the top 4 rounds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: timw33

VanJack

Registered User
Jul 11, 2014
21,206
14,354
Wow!....voted 'both get moved", but that's a dramatically minority opinion....most voters seem to see a repeat of 2016 when the Canuck UFA's survived the TDL and then walked for nothing in the off-season.....the only way that happens this year is if Benning really is a 'lame duck' and Linden is just waiting for the next guy to be hired....and that's if the case they definitely wouldn't sign both guys in mid-season.

I mean even third to fifth round draft-picks for both would be better than nothing.
 

M2Beezy

Objective and Neutral Hockey Commentator
May 25, 2014
45,477
30,443
y2kcanucks said:
Vanek was better last year in Detroit and got less than that.

And do you really think Benning is going to target draft picks?


My guess: Neither gets moved. But if they do get moved it'll be for some mediocre older prospects. Perhaps Slater Koekkoek from Tampa (for Gudbranson). Not sure what team would be in for Vanek (if anyone).
Click to expand...
Just predicting. Vanek having a good season and a lotta teams need offensive help this year in the playoffs. Could see him fetching it
 
tantalum

tantalum

Hope for the best. Expect the worst
Sponsor
Apr 2, 2002
25,111
13,926
Missouri
They are already floating the idea to their media shills about re-signing both. I don’t believe they are trying to be clever to build up a market for the players by saying they might keep them.

So I voted neither gets moved.
 
Intangibos

Intangibos

High-End Intangibos
Apr 5, 2010
7,806
3,370
Burnaby
Either they stay or we get fleeced. A bag of pucks is fair value for Gudbranson but market value is significantly higher than that for some reason.
 
Luck 6

Luck 6

\\_______
Oct 17, 2008
10,199
1,793
Vancouver
y2kcanucks said:
Vanek was better last year in Detroit and got less than that.

And do you really think Benning is going to target draft picks?


My guess: Neither gets moved. But if they do get moved it'll be for some mediocre older prospects. Perhaps Slater Koekkoek from Tampa (for Gudbranson). Not sure what team would be in for Vanek (if anyone).
Click to expand...

y2kcanucks said:
Except he had a better year last year and didn't fetch that...
Click to expand...

While I don't disagree, we have no idea how McIlrath was valued as part of the Vanek trade. GMs often will look at first time reclamation projects of previous top 10 picks as at least being worth a 3rd round pick, hence you could make an argument that Vanek was traded for the equivalent of two 3rds.

Also, keep in mind some GMs may have considered Vanek's success in Detroit as a bit of a one off, there was no guarantee he would recreate that after being traded. While his numbers after the trade did take a dip in Florida they were still low end top 6 numbers which wasn't bad considering how he was being used. Then, for him to put together another season projecting in that 60 point range?

There could be a bit more interest this go around, who knows. A 2nd isn't impossible, and a 3rd and a prospect is definitely probable.
 

orcatown

Registered User
Feb 13, 2003
10,263
7,471
Visit site
You'd like to think organization has laid out an overall plan but doubt they have. Benning seems to be saying we will have meetings to discuss it. (probably a few hours before the deadline) If so, they'll probably find other teams have made their deals and they will have little in the way of offers for either player with the result that Aquilini vetoes everything and nothing gets done. Then they will say they are going to make a concerted effort to re-sign both players (putting themselves over the barrel in any subsequent negotiations).
 
  • Like
Reactions: timw33, MS, dwarf and 2 others
y2kcanucks

y2kcanucks

Le Sex God
Aug 3, 2006
71,229
10,319
Surrey, BC
Luck 6 said:
While I don't disagree, we have no idea how McIlrath was valued as part of the Vanek trade. GMs often will look at first time reclamation projects of previous top 10 picks as at least being worth a 3rd round pick, hence you could make an argument that Vanek was traded for the equivalent of two 3rds.

Also, keep in mind some GMs may have considered Vanek's success in Detroit as a bit of a one off, there was no guarantee he would recreate that after being traded. While his numbers after the trade did take a dip in Florida they were still low end top 6 numbers which wasn't bad considering how he was being used. Then, for him to put together another season projecting in that 60 point range?

There could be a bit more interest this go around, who knows. A 2nd isn't impossible, and a 3rd and a prospect is definitely probable.
Click to expand...

We have no idea how McIlrath was valued? Really? He was on waivers a month prior to the trade deadline. I get there's some value in trading for a player who's already cleared waivers, but one would't expect that value to be as high as a 3rd round pick.
 
  • Like
Reactions: timw33
Wo Yorfat

Wo Yorfat

dumb person
Nov 7, 2016
2,961
3,924
giphy.gif
 

tyhee

Registered User
Feb 5, 2015
2,553
2,635
As it wasn't a poll that asked what should be done, I answered what I expect will happen (neither moved) rather than what I'd like to see happen (both moved.)
 

VanJack

Registered User
Jul 11, 2014
21,206
14,354
The fact that the Canucks are making noises about re-signing both obviously means the offers in the marketplace aren't what they were hoping for, at least for now......Vanek is basically a free asset, so whatever they can get is a bonus.....but the one that's really going to hurt is Gudbranson.....either they sign him to a ludicrous contract with term; trade him for a proverbial bag of pucks; or let him play out the season and walk....and all they'll have to show for it is two mediocre, injury-plagued seasons.......just a wanton waste of assets for a supposedly rebuilding team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jyrki21 and dwarf
Bleach Clean

Bleach Clean

Registered User
Aug 9, 2006
27,017
6,581
alternate said:
Real Gud gets moved for whatever. If Vanek doesn't bring back a reasonable return, there is some sense in keeping him around to play with Horvat and Boeser. I voted, just Gudbranson gets dealt.
Click to expand...


There is no sense in keeping Vanek around. 2 months of missed playing time with Horvat and Boeser is a blink of an eye. If they think there is value in signing Vanek long-term, trade him at the deadline and then re-sign him in the offseason.

This team cannot afford to be this liberal with its assets. It's not so rich in assets that it can arbitrarily decide to get nothing for expiring contracts at the deadline. No team is.


drax0s said:
It kind of is a buyers market.
Click to expand...


Why do you think this?
 
Grub

Grub

First Line Troll
Jun 30, 2008
9,717
7,488
B.C
Anyone else feeling de ja vu? This is the same crap that's happening like Hamhuis and Vbrata walking away for nothing because this idiot management team is clueless.

How do you go from wanting to move Gudbradson to re-signing him 3 weeks away from the trade deadline?? There's just no consistency and in the end these idiots will say that they didn't have the time to move these players. Bunch of idiots, comical really.

The idea of keeping Vanek is also lunacy.
 
Kryten

Kryten

slightly regarded
Sponsor
Sep 29, 2011
15,130
12,406
Kootenays
MAGICMAN1963 said:
Was just adding some others that could be moved
Ganger,Hutton,Vanek,Gudbranson,Dowd,,Stecher, Tanev,Gaunce,Virtanin,Grandlund,none of these guys should be left off the table imo...
Click to expand...
True. Id listen to offers on Tanev but wouldnt trade him unless it was really really worth it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom