Proposal: Vancouver Canucks-Winnipeg Jets ("A Hockey Trade")

NeutralOrange

Guest
Why would Vancouver give a pick that is most likely going to be top 5? Terrible trade
 

Starat327

Top .01% OnlyHands
Sponsor
May 8, 2011
37,645
74,717
Philadelphia, Pa
Canuck's first will be top 3.

So ya, there's no reason for either team to do this. Horrible, bad, not well thought out proposal.

And Vegas was going to finish dead last.

That's really besides the point though. The jets are trying to win now. a Top 5 pick may step in and help the team right away, and provides cost certainty, sure. But losing Trouba and replacing him with 50 games a year Tanev isn't really beneficial, especially when Tanev only has one additional year on his contract.

So the Jets trade a compete now piece for a Top 5 pick that wont really help them be contenders again until the other piece of the deal is already gone. So yes, thanks for confirming the bolded.
 

Snowman

Registered User
Oct 12, 2007
3,217
3,116
Texas
Honestly, it's not even a downgrade plus you potentially get the 1st overall pick! It is an awful proposal and the Jets would be insane not to take this if it were offered. I might quick being a Canucks fan if it did.
Well you're entitled to your opinion, but the Jets wouldn't touch this trade. A contending team is not going to trade half of their top pairing for a downgrade on defense and a chance at a player who may help them in 3 or 4 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Flyerfan52

north49er

Registered User
Dec 20, 2017
1,465
736
So Jets give up the cheap cost controlled player for a more expensive one? Yeah that makes sense with Winnipeg being in cap hell.
OK, I know it's only preseason but he scored 2 goals last night equalling Tanev's goal production for all of last season. IMO just a hint of what's to come from the kid.
 

THE Green Man

Registered User
Dec 27, 2013
2,965
721
Narnia
I wouldn't do that from Vancouver's side, from Winnipeg's side I think it depends on the signing outlook on Trouba - Winnipeg is ready to contend so there's value in being better now and dealing him to Van might help to keep Van's pick from being as high

probably no from both sides, from the Canuck's perspective - don't cut corners, just rebuild and keep your picks. Benning has been doing very well with his draft picks so I don't know why you'd want to take what could be a really good one away from him

Agree that we have to keep the pick. As for Benning, his drafting is the only sliver of light that his tenure has brought and even then he really missed on the Virtanen and Juolevi picks. JB is the hockey version of the drunken 2-step. 1 step forward at the draft making a pick, millions of steps back when July 1st hits or he makes a trade.
 

Randy Randerson

Registered User
Jul 28, 2016
10,637
3,445
Hamilton
Agree that we have to keep the pick. As for Benning, his drafting is the only sliver of light that his tenure has brought and even then he really missed on the Virtanen and Juolevi picks. JB is the hockey version of the drunken 2-step. 1 step forward at the draft making a pick, millions of steps back when July 1st hits or he makes a trade.
well, one more year of being really bad could give the Canucks what looks like a formidable young core along the lines of what Winnipeg and Toronto have built. I think a Hughes/Cozens/Kakko level prospect in addition to what you already have should be enough for a solid core, plus there should be cap space to bring in UFA talent - this last year's free agency I think was just getting human shields for the kids, he overpaid for them but really think that's of little consequence in the grand scheme

I'd like to see Vancouver be one of the up and coming young franchises, Edmonton should right the ship this year and Winnipeg should be formidable. I'd like to see some all Canadian finals in the next 3-6 years
 
  • Like
Reactions: libertarian

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad