Proposal: Rumours and Proposals Thread: Waiting For a Trade For Lu(cic)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Aceboogie

Registered User
Aug 25, 2012
32,649
3,896
If you can get an actual NHL player for him that can play now and is young enough to integrate into the core ... I think you'd be dumb not to do that.

You have to make some moves to win now.

If you are referencing to the next 1 or 2 years, there is no shot. This roster has way too many holes in a ton of key areas. We shouldnt be making win now/immediate moves if it means mortgaging the future

We dont need a rebuild but we need to be looking at years 3-5 to compete. That is when the bad contracts are off the books + some of the young D prospects have hopefully turned out into top 4/top pairing D and Yamamoto + some forwards prospects have turned into solid NHLers

I am not opposed to dealing JP if we are dealing him for a young player. But to trade him for a 3rd liner is of no use. That 3rd liner wont move the needle right now. JP still does have potential and Id rather keep him and hope for a turn around, even if it means risking him busting and getting nothing
 

Bankerguy

Registered User
Apr 28, 2013
3,789
1,925
There is now way Canucks move Tanev for a downgrade unless they get something in value coming back.
Any Tanev move would require a nice piece going the other way obviously. Moving from 10th to 8th has little value in this draft as there isnt a clear consenus on draft order from pick 6 to 14
 

Aceboogie

Registered User
Aug 25, 2012
32,649
3,896
I wonder how Draisaitls agent knew of the upcoming contract enviroment. Immediately before him, Tarasenkos/Gaudreaus were getting 7-7.5 mil deals. LDs contract was seen as an outlier at the time. Now a year later, friggin Hayes gets 7 mil. And players of LDs ability are looking at 9.5-11 mil deals. I get the difference of RFA vs UFA. But seems like over the course of a year, the contracts went way up
 
  • Like
Reactions: Oilhawks

ChaoticOrange

Registered User
Jun 29, 2008
50,532
29,152
Edmonton
My god I hate absolutely everything in that Rishaug tweet.

2 of the 4 I don’t hate. Benning out makes sense - our young D are bursting at the seams and teams are always looking for RHD. I think he’d bring a decent return.

Connolly makes a lot of sense as a UFA target.

Rishaug doesn’t have much time for Puljujarvi. If a third liner is all he’d bring then absolutely stand pat.

Broberg at 8 doesn’t make a lot of sense *unless* we’re considering something like Jones for Roslovic.
 

The Safe Play

Registered User
Jul 8, 2011
4,351
4,911
Connolly I would be ok with, flipped my opinion recently when looking at his goal scoring rates and the centers he played with. Legit scorer.

Depends on return for Puljujärvi.

Hard pass on Broberg unless they trade down.

Hope they get a solid return on Benning.
 

Aceboogie

Registered User
Aug 25, 2012
32,649
3,896
There is now way Canucks move Tanev for a downgrade unless they get something in value coming back.
Any Tanev move would require a nice piece going the other way obviously. Moving from 10th to 8th has little value in this draft as there isnt a clear consenus on draft order from pick 6 to 14

Eh- its Benning. Such a wild card that its hard to discuss rational proposals (similar to Chiarelli). He loves his gritty D and could legitimately think Russell is a better D and getting him for more years under contract + more games (since Tanev is injury prone) is an upgrade

Id add some smaller parts for that deal though. Whether its prospects, picks or moving back in the draft
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->