The Armchair GM Thread - Part LXXXVIII | March "status quo" deadline looming

[y2kcanucks]

That days when you used to suggest outlandish returns for Roberto Luongo? No, I don't miss those days.

I do. The team was good those days. Then we started selling off assets for mediocre returns, letting players walk for free, and let the current core get old and stale without replacing what we have with solid youth.

 

[y2kcanucks]

Simmonds+B.Schenn for Tanev+McCann+1st

I would do this too.

This would be 2/3rds of a 2nd line. Then all we need is a 2C.

 

[Addison Rae]

Well you can compete for the corsi cup, or you can accept that this team has far too many players like that and actually go out and get a guy who can put up points.

Did you even read what I posted? Schenn puts up points because he plays with Giroux and Voracek, he isn't going to produce at the same rate without them. Zuccarello is better at producing yet you aren't intereted in him, the double standard in your posts are mind boggling.

 

[Virtanen2Horvat]

Wouldn't want Zuccarello, he would get killed here.

 

[Addison Rae]

Zuccarello is a much better even strength player than Brayden Schenn.

 

[Addison Rae]

Wouldn't want Zuccarello, he would get killed here.

No, he wouldn't. This "all small players in the west would get killed" notion is utterly ridiuclous.

 

[PG Canuck]

How are/were Zuccarello's production against the West? Just curious.

 

[Scurr]

How are/were Zuccarello's production against the West? Just curious.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/player.htm?id=8475692&view=splits

20 in 38/GP against the East

15 in 20/GP against the West

Last year it was

43 in 50/GP East
16 in 27/GP West

 

[604]

Simmonds+B.Schenn for Tanev+McCann+1st

I wouldn't do this...

Don't like Schenn all that much and that would decimate our team going forward.

 

[kanucks25]

Why are we even discussing Zuccarello? He would be the worst kind of acquisition for us (expensive UFA). I like him as a player but we need to stay away.

Simmonds+B.Schenn for Tanev+McCann+1st

lol... no thanks.

 

[PG Canuck]

http://www.nhl.com/ice/player.htm?id=8475692&view=splits

20 in 38/GP against the East

15 in 20/GP against the West

Last year it was

43 in 50/GP East
16 in 27/GP West

Pretty good numbers for those saying he'd get killed out here.

Thanks for this.

 

[Scurr]

Why are we even discussing Zuccarello? He would be the worst kind of acquisition for us (expensive UFA). I like him as a player but we need to stay away.



lol... no thanks.

1.He's available

2.He's available for veteran pieces

3.He's in the 27< age group that this team is lacking in up front

4.He's a really good player

5.He's available

 

[Addison Rae]

Simmonds+B.Schenn for Tanev+McCann+1st

Thats absoloutely awful for us, yuck.

 

[Addison Rae]

http://www.nhl.com/ice/player.htm?id=8475692&view=splits

20 in 38/GP against the East

15 in 20/GP against the West

Last year it was

43 in 50/GP East
16 in 27/GP West

Could you post Schenn's numbers, too?

 

[kanucks25]

1.He's available

2.He's available for veteran pieces

3.He's in the 27< age group that this team is lacking in up front

4.He's a really good player

5.He's available

What veteran pieces do we have that the Rangers will actually want? If I were them, I'd rather let Zucc walk in the summer than exchange him for Higgins. Even if we add picks, there's no guarantee they can flip those picks for other players (we aren't in a position to be trading high picks, anyway).

Once again, an expensive UFA both when it comes to the trade price and contract price is something we need to stay far away from.

 

[Verviticus]

*sigh*

I miss the days when we were talking about the Canucks adding good players. Discussing the likes of Fleischmann, Tlusty, Semin, Schlemko, Erixon, Zuccarello is very depressing.

lol what? zuccarello is a very good player

 

[Peter Griffin]

Because he's 27 and Radim is 33.

So why not just wait until the off-season and make a run at him then? Becuase if the Rangers deal him it's most likely because he wants to test the market.

 

[BamBam91]

The days when you used to suggest outlandish returns for Roberto Luongo? No, I don't miss those days.

thank you

 

[Rotting Corpse*]

1.He's available

2.He's available for veteran pieces

3.He's in the 27< age group that this team is lacking in up front

4.He's a really good player

5.He's available

I think 1, 2 and 5 are wrong.

 

[BamBam91]

And speculating on trades based on what fans will accept on the trade and rumours board is meaningless too.

He may be available, he may not be available. Time will tell. But if he is available then I would certainly hope that the Canucks are in on him and push hard to get him.

what about Crosby?

"He may be available, he may not be available. Time will tell. But if he is available then I would certainly hope that the Canucks are in on him and push hard to get him."

 

[Scurr]

What veteran pieces do we have that the Rangers will actually want? If I were them, I'd rather let Zucc walk in the summer than exchange him for Higgins. Even if we add picks, there's no guarantee they can flip those picks for other players (we aren't in a position to be trading high picks, anyway).

Once again, an expensive UFA both when it comes to the trade price and contract price is something we need to stay far away from.

Higgins isn't going to get it done by himself. I think we are in a rare position to give up now pieces for a pending UFA. A depth defenseman or bottom 6 forward also carries some pretty good value at the deadline. They'd also be getting one more year of Higgins @ 2.5m. That's pretty important for a cash strapped team.

People are down on Higgins but he has 21ESP (Zucc 28) while shooting 5%. He's still a good player.

So why not just wait until the off-season and make a run at him then? Becuase if the Rangers deal him it's most likely because he wants to test the market.

That's not true. The Rangers have cap implications going forward that are restricting the kind of money they can offer Zucc. I think we could get him signed. We're probably looking at 5m with some term, though, so there's that.

 

[Scurr]

I think 1, 2 and 5 are wrong.

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1844397

I'm going by what Katie Strang and Rangers fans have to say.

 

[Peter Griffin]

That's not true. The Rangers have cap implications going forward that are restricting the kind of money they can offer Zucc. I think we could get him signed. We're probably looking at 5m with some term, though, so there's that.

So the Rangers can't afford Zuccarello at $5M but can afford Vrbata at $5M?

 

[Scurr]

Vrbata for Zuccarello?

Seems kinda harsh to dump Radim now but I'd do it to get Zucc signed at the same money to a longer term. Probably doesn't work for their cap anyway.

So the Rangers can't afford Zuccarello at $5M but can afford Vrbata at $5M?

Probably not. Part of the problem for them, though, is how many RFA's they have that need contracts. So they might be able to bridge one or two of them to allow them one more year but not have the money to commit long-term to Zucc.

 

[PG Canuck]

At 1000 posts.

Continue here: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?p=98185679#post98185679

Closed.