Roster and Fantasy GM Thread

[Askel]

i dont think he will remain a 1D for more than two years tops. i dont want a #4 for the next five years later

Byfuglien brings Offense, Size and plays the right side. He is everything our defensive core is missing in one package. Id offer 7 over 7. Even as a no 4 he would be useful with his size and shot.

 

[Bleach Clean]

i dont think he will remain a 1D for more than two years tops. i dont want a #4 for the next five years later

Do you foresee a rapid decline because of his conditioning? If not, then by the numbers?

He will remain a PP factor later into his career. As long as he can rely upon this to buoy his point totals, and not completely crash at ES, he would be quite passable as a top pairing defender, IMO.

 

[DFAC]

Byfuglien brings Offense, Size and plays the right side. He is everything our defensive core is missing in one package. Id offer 7 over 7. Even as a no 4 he would be useful with his size and shot.

7x7 for a #4 dman?

You can't be serious lol

 

[MikeK]

The only way Buff comes to Van is if we are a top bidder in what is surely going to be a massive over bidding war. No thank you. By the time this team is relevant again he will be useless.

 

[Horvat1C]

Hmm.....

Actually, reading through it again you are right.


I'd gladly do a Hamilton type deal with Colorado for Barrie.

All we would have to give up for Barrie at arbitration is a 1st round pick?

If that's true we should definitely do this.

 

[biturbo19]

Apparently, Colorado is having troubles signing Barrie.

http://nhl.nbcsports.com/2015/11/15/report-tyson-barrie-could-find-himself-on-trading-block/

Yeah so wouldn't our offer sheet give them that opportunity on a platter ?

Yeah. This is the reality of offersheets.

It effectively just hands the other team a contract to sign and get the guy locked up. Teams just match, and if the player has signed the sheet...that's that, contract done for the "home team".

The exception being players who are 1 year away from UFA, to where matching a 1-year offersheet can have them cut loose the next summer. Which isn't exactly Barrie's situation.

Really, offsheets are kind of more a "scare tactic" at best, rather than a practical acquisition tool. If teams are truly afraid of the cap situation an offer sheet might put them in, they've had no trouble at all finding a taker for a trade that offloads that liability on someone who can handle it comfortably.



I do really like the idea of going after Barrie though. Just not sure we have the pieces to do it, and really doubt the efficacy of offersheets. Our blueline prospect pool is worse than Colorado's, and we don't exactly have a surplus of real "value vets" to offer as chips. Just not great trading partners. Which is a bummer, because Barrie would be perfect here.

Maybe we'll have to wait a few years for him to hit the UFA market and come "home", a la Hamhuis and Garrison. I could go for that. Who knows where our team will be at when that time rolls around though, with the Sedins presumably moving on - may not be the most attractive/competitive UFA destination.

 

[Bleach Clean]

7x7 for a #4 dman?

You can't be serious lol

I believe he was referring to the years of decline covered by that long-term contract. Byfuglien would start as a #1 Dman here for few years, then decline to become a #4 eventually.

The only way Buff comes to Van is if we are a top bidder in what is surely going to be a massive over bidding war. No thank you. By the time this team is relevant again he will be useless.

Not unless VAN moves Hamhuis the other way during the season. This gives VAN a chance to negotiate exclusively until July 1st. Also, WPG gets a good LHD - which they need. Granted, he has little reason to sign here, but you never know. His wife is from BC after all... Could work.

Teams seldom have the luxury of trading for #1 Dmen when they are 'ready to compete'. Or, at some other arbitrary point in time. These opportunities are few and far between.

 

[VanillaCoke]

I believe he was referring to the years of decline covered by that long-term contract. Byfuglien would start as a #1 Dman here for few years, then decline to become a #4 eventually.
.

I don't think he'll decline until ~35 he's so big he doesn't take much punishment.

 

[Askel]

7x7 for a #4 dman?

You can't be serious lol

No I'm counting on him being a first pairing for 3-4 years than a no 3 for 2 and maybe to overpaid in his last year.

To get great UFA players you overpay in term its the only way.

 

[PM]

I could see Byfuglien letting himself go about half way through that contract and no longer caring about his fitness. You know what we need. A new Big Country.

 

[Verviticus]

Do you foresee a rapid decline because of his conditioning? If not, then by the numbers?

He will remain a PP factor later into his career. As long as he can rely upon this to buoy his point totals, and not completely crash at ES, he would be quite passable as a top pairing defender, IMO.

yeah, by the numbers. i dont think its really fair for me to speculate whether or not his conditioning will make it worse but i feel people just dont expect decline in defencemen as rapidly as it actually happens

generally when you sign a guy like bufflin or weber or suter to these huge #1 contracts, you're buying 2-3 years of excellent play at a bit of a discount in exchange for a bad one for a couple years and a kick in the balls for the last few. i dont think 2-3 years of excellent play suits us right now

your thinking is otherwise sound, but i feel this team should be bargain binning and converting to long-term assets. if there happened to be a 25 y/o bufflin hanging around i'd be all for it though

 

[Nuckles]

In terms of Byfuglien, the Canucks would be hard pressed to find a #1D another way. They just aren't available.

I would sign him, even long-term (7 years).

[insert joke about Luca Sbisa being a #1 d-man]





[insert laughter from people reading this post]

 

[Horvat1C]

With Klingberg taking over in Dallas, could Honka be somewhat available? We would still have to give up a lot, but he is a future #1 D-man, and Klingberg has taken his spot.



To DAL:

Hamhuis (50% retained)

Higgins

Briesbois

Jensen

Vey

2nd Round Pick 2016

3rd Round Pick 2016

2nd Round Pick (from Columbus)



To VAN:

Honka

Moen



Hamhuis will steady out their D-core, but hopefully he can pick up his level of play soon. Higgins will fill out their bottom-6. Briesbois is a good defense prospect that could somewhat replace Honka. Jensen and Vey are spare parts, but still hold some value, especially if injuries occur. Jensen would also benefit from going to a run-and-gun team like Dallas I think. The picks are thrown in for value. This is about how much we would need to give up to get him.



We get Moen back so Dallas can fit Hamhuis under the cap. He's on an expiring contract so we should be fine there.



Honka would be the future of our D-core along with Hutton.



Lineup after the trade:



Sedin - Sedin - Hansen

Baertschi - Sutter - Vrbata

Moen - Horvat - Virtanen

Prust - McCann - Burrows



Edler - Tanev

Bartkowksi - Weber

Hutton - Sbisa



Just like any trade involving Hamhuis, a hole is left in our top-4, making our defense weaker than it already is. However, Hutton will most likely step into top-4 minutes next year. If we could also sign someone like Demers we would be completely set:



Edler - Tanev

Hutton - Demers

Sbisa - Honka



If Dallas really thinks they can make a run this year, I could almost see this happening

 

[Askel]

Did Canucks just give up Hamhuis (retained)2 2:nds and a third for Honka? Thats a horrible deal

 

[VanillaCoke]

Horriawful

 

[kanucks25]

Honka

1. Why would a team trade away a good young D-man just because they already have one? It's even better to have 2.

2. You literally just packaged a UFA, a bunch of players with no value and a few non-1st rounders for a good asset. This trade only works in a video game where quantity can = quality.

 

[Addison Rae]

Hamhuis to the Stars for their 1st or Brett Richie would be a deal I'd seek. Dallas really looks like a threat to go out o the West this year, especially with a bolstered dcore.

 

[Nuckles]

Hamhuis to the Stars for their 1st or Brett Richie would be a deal I'd seek. Dallas really looks like a threat to go out o the West this year, especially with a bolstered dcore.

Dallas, Ottawa, NY Islanders, maybe Detroit or Montreal, potentially another playoff team if one of their d-men gets injured closer to the deadline. Plenty of possible returns.

But yeah, I'd want the main piece coming back to be a 2016 1st or an equal value prospect (though I'd probably prefer a 1st over a forward prospect), as well as another decent piece like a conditional 2nd/3rd round pick (conditional on Hamhuis re-signing/team reaching conference finals) or a solid prospect.

 

[Bleach Clean]

yeah, by the numbers. i dont think its really fair for me to speculate whether or not his conditioning will make it worse but i feel people just dont expect decline in defencemen as rapidly as it actually happens

generally when you sign a guy like bufflin or weber or suter to these huge #1 contracts, you're buying 2-3 years of excellent play at a bit of a discount in exchange for a bad one for a couple years and a kick in the balls for the last few. i dont think 2-3 years of excellent play suits us right now

your thinking is otherwise sound, but i feel this team should be bargain binning and converting to long-term assets. if there happened to be a 25 y/o bufflin hanging around i'd be all for it though

"Bargain binning" is something I hope they do as well, but only after this necessary piece has been acquired. After that happens, they'll have the three major pieces needed to compete: 1C, 1D and a 1G. Without that Dman, I'm not sure what they can achieve.

By the numbers, you are expecting Buff's play to decline in year 3, while I give him until year 5. Right around 35-36 years of age. That's the key difference in our opinions. 2 good years vs 4 good years. The latter would make that contract worth the stretch, IMO. I think he has that ability, but I can understand why others don't think so.

 

[Peen]

Philly is overflowing in LD's long term.

Maybe try and get one of those prospects in a separate deal if Hamhuis isn't being re-signed?

 

[JuniorNelson]

Canucks do not have tradeable vets. To move a vet we'd have to add value.

 

[coldsteel79]

"Bargain binning" is something I hope they do as well, but only after this necessary piece has been acquired. After that happens, they'll have the three major pieces needed to compete: 1C, 1D and a 1G. Without that Dman, I'm not sure what they can achieve.

By the numbers, you are expecting Buff's play to decline in year 3, while I give him until year 5. Right around 35-36 years of age. That's the key difference in our opinions. 2 good years vs 4 good years. The latter would make that contract worth the stretch, IMO. I think he has that ability, but I can understand why others don't think so.

Buffs decline will depend solely on his willingness to work, he's so big that his body can hold out fine but he needs to keep his conditioning top notch and I don't know if he's that committed to it like say the sedins are.

 

[Jimson Hogarth*]

Thank god the era of bargain binning in this city is over.

Hopefully Benning continues to target specific character players to fill roles.

 

[biturbo19]

With Klingberg taking over in Dallas, could Honka be somewhat available? We would still have to give up a lot, but he is a future #1 D-man, and Klingberg has taken his spot.



To DAL:

Hamhuis (50% retained)

Higgins

Briesbois

Jensen

Vey

2nd Round Pick 2016

3rd Round Pick 2016

2nd Round Pick (from Columbus)



To VAN:

Honka

Moen


If Dallas really thinks they can make a run this year, I could almost see this happening

I don't think there's much chance Honka is the guy the Stars would look to move. He's going to be a big part of their future d-corps.


The guys that i think could be real trade bait and possibly moved with Klingberg flourishing and Honka in the pipeline...are the two young-ish guys they have sitting in the press box intermittently.

Jamie Oleksiak and Patrik Nemeth.

Which kind of interests me. Worries me a bit that they can't establish themselves in the lineup, but it is an awkward situation where there's kind of a glut of young defenceman on the cusp there, and not really room for all of them at the same time.

At the right price, i'd definitely be interested in those two. The real issue i see, is that we don't necessarily have room to experiment with another fringey/inexperienced LD right now.

If we're out of it at the deadline and Hamhuis ends up dealt, it might make some sense then. Maybe even as a swap, Hamhuis for Nemeth/Oleksiak+ type thing. But to me, Hamhuis is still a guy i'd want to get signed to an extension and keep around for a few more years for some continuity, stability, and veteran leadership here on the back end.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Thank god the era of bargain binning in this city is over.

Hopefully Benning continues to target specific character players to fill roles.

Absolutely agree with you. It really sucks to get quality players at low cap hits. Much prefer this era where we overpay for crappy players like Miller, Sbisa, and Dorsett.