Will the Canucks trade Alexander Edler for 1st rounders?

[Gaunce4gm]

So you keep Edler, a dwindling talent in my opinion, over a 12-18 area pick? You can get a Fabbro, Mcavoy or maybe luck out and get Bean... You do realize the goal is to compete for a Cup, right? For the Canucks to had a shot during the 2009-12 period, we had to suck and draft well in 1998-2004. It's not going to happen any other way - and with Jim Beam as our GM, may be implausible...

Yes I'd value Edler making 5M (Very reasonable) for a couple more years and who is still young, more than I'd value a mid 1st in this years draft. He would be worth a lot more to someone at the TDL who needs him for a cup run (when he's also more willing to waive)

If we retained 50% so a team like CHI or WSH or PIT could make another legitimate run for the cup that is worth more than a 12-16 pick now.

 

[MS]

With the announcement today regarding expansion that confirms that Hutton will be eligible, one of Gudbranson, Tanev, Hutton, or Edler will either be traded or exposed in the expansion draft. I'd imagine Edler is the odd man out in that group...just a question of how and when.

That time on a PTO is an 'AHL season' isn't exactly confirmed at this point.

And frankly I think these guys would trade Tanev before Edler, in any case.

_________

If Hutton IS expansion draft eligible, how much of a screw-up does the Gudbranson trade look like then? Yikes.

 

[Trelane]

It absolutely, positively won't happen and it's a waste of time even talking about it.

1) This is a team that is trying to compete now, and Edler is one of their top players. His contract isn't expiring. This is the exact opposite of a player they'll try and move.

2) Moreover, Linden and management absolutely love Edler, and he's viewed as a core building block here.

3) He has an NTC, lives in Vancouver and has a Vancouverite girlfriend, and simply isn't going to waive his NTC even if we wanted to move him.

He's going nowhere. As I've said before, the only thing more surprising would be a trade of the Sedins.

Pretty much. The NTC and stated goal of competing for playoffs every year even while rebuilding/retooling are key.

Hansen is about the only roster player with value I can conceive of being traded but he's also too important for the playoff drive. Hard to find better bang for the buck.

My hopes for some non 1st round picks this year rest with dealing rights to Hammer, Subban and maybe Sbisa or Pedan. Frankly even 2nd is pushing it.

 

[Tryforthekingdom]

That time on a PTO is an 'AHL season' isn't exactly confirmed at this point.

"Players with two years of professional experience or less will be exempt from the process. Determining who that covers is based on the definition included in the collective bargaining agreement – meaning that 10 games played in the NHL at age 18 or 19 counts as a season, as does any American Hockey League or NHL season for players older than that."

from http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/nhl-teams-receiving-information-potential-expansion-draft/

Seems so, based on this brief description.

 

[Blueangel1891]

Should they? Probably

Will they? Not in a million years

 

[FroshaugFan2]

"Players with two years of professional experience or less will be exempt from the process. Determining who that covers is based on the definition included in the collective bargaining agreement – meaning that 10 games played in the NHL at age 18 or 19 counts as a season, as does any American Hockey League or NHL season for players older than that."

from http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/nhl-teams-receiving-information-potential-expansion-draft/

Seems so, based on this brief description.

Not sure how you interpret four games on a tryout as a "season".

 

[MS]

With the announcement today regarding expansion that confirms that Hutton will be eligible, one of Gudbranson, Tanev, Hutton, or Edler will either be traded or exposed in the expansion draft. I'd imagine Edler is the odd man out in that group...just a question of how and when.

"Players with two years of professional experience or less will be exempt from the process. Determining who that covers is based on the definition included in the collective bargaining agreement – meaning that 10 games played in the NHL at age 18 or 19 counts as a season, as does any American Hockey League or NHL season for players older than that."

from http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/nhl-teams-receiving-information-potential-expansion-draft/

Seems so, based on this brief description.

It is not considered a 'season' in any other type of CBA/contract situation, so I don't necessarily assume that it will be here.

 

[dc]

Not if their goal is to make the playoffs (which it is.) The defense was a mess when he went down.

 

[JanBulisPiggyBack]

If Gudbranson cost a former 1st with upside, a very high 2nd and that super weird 4th for 5th trade we always seem to be on the losing end watch Edler go for a comparable if not worse deal.

Edler for a player we don't need, ( think Perrault ) and a 3rd

3rd Vancouver Canuck Riot

 

[Johnsie19]

I think Edler will eventually get traded but I don't see it happening this off season. There is no way Benning can sell that we traded our top dman for a draft pick.

As much as many of the fans want to just blow it up lets just accept it isn't gonna happen like that. Benning has to balance the future and the owners expectations.

I could however see Edler being moved maybe closer to deadline if we are out of the playoffs or at next yrs draft.

 

[terhmlee]

As I said before, having two high picks in the first round this year help set the future first line in one time this year. With the same ago group, the future players of this first line can grow together pretty much the same time. Just like the Canucks did with the Sedin Twins.

In fact, even trading Edler away, signing the left hand defenceman through free agency is also an alternative solution to recover the loss of Edler.

If the Canucks trade Edler now, of course they need him to waive the NTC, but once it is waived, the asset return should be very valuable now.

Also, I don't understand why other people say like the Oilers do not need Edler. The Oilers already expressed they need a first line defenceman and would like to make trade for it by trading the picks, plus player(s) in a package....

 

[F A N]

There is no way Benning can sell that we traded our top dman for a draft pick.

Sure he can. The script can write itself. Edler is 30. The stated goal has always been to get younger and faster. The prospect selected with the draft pick is a guy "we" really like and whom "we" feel will develop into a top 6 forward / top 4 defenseman. "We" feel that with the acquisition of Gudbranson and Hutton and Tramkin's development, we have the flexibility to make this trade. "We" are still talking to Hamhuis and possibly add a free agent defenseman.

In practical terms, if Benning can trade Edler for a high first round pick and use it to draft a guy that has high upside and then a week or so later replaces Edler via UFA (perhaps one of the more offensive productive LD) and it's a pretty easy sell at this point.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Sure he can. The script can write itself. Edler is 30. The stated goal has always been to get younger and faster. The prospect selected with the draft pick is a guy "we" really like and whom "we" feel will develop into a top 6 forward / top 4 defenseman. "We" feel that with the acquisition of Gudbranson and Hutton and Tramkin's development, we have the flexibility to make this trade. "We" are still talking to Hamhuis and possibly add a free agent defenseman.

In practical terms, if Benning can trade Edler for a high first round pick and use it to draft a guy that has high upside and then a week or so later replaces Edler via UFA (perhaps one of the more offensive productive LD) and it's a pretty easy sell at this point.

ironically we got older in virtually every trade, save for kesler trade, and the picks we got for bieksa and garrison. and of course the pick we got for garrison was later traded for an older asset while the bieksa puck was thrown away for some magic beans.

 

[dwarf]

This regime's mandate is making the playoffs. There is no way they trade anyone who can help them win now for draft picks.

As a fan who wants to see a solid rebuild and a cup contending core, I would love to see Edler moved for a high draft pick. I believe he has a full NMC though, so even speculation of such a move is a waste of thought.

Edit, ok he has a NTC, so he has a list of teams he can give. Still tough to move, especially when his bread and butter has been the Sedin's.

 

[Tobi Wan Kenobi]

lol.. considering they didn't trade Hamhuis and Vrbata because they were that desperate to make the playoffs makes me think there's zero chance they trade their top pairing defenseman. I think they should but I think they should've done a lot of things.

 

[Johnsie19]

Sure he can. The script can write itself. Edler is 30. The stated goal has always been to get younger and faster. The prospect selected with the draft pick is a guy "we" really like and whom "we" feel will develop into a top 6 forward / top 4 defenseman. "We" feel that with the acquisition of Gudbranson and Hutton and Tramkin's development, we have the flexibility to make this trade. "We" are still talking to Hamhuis and possibly add a free agent defenseman.

In practical terms, if Benning can trade Edler for a high first round pick and use it to draft a guy that has high upside and then a week or so later replaces Edler via UFA (perhaps one of the more offensive productive LD) and it's a pretty easy sell at this point.

And you are gonna buy that? When that draft pick takes 3 or more yrs to develop are you gonna make sure you tune into every Canucks game? Probably not when they are hovering around the bottom of the league.

The mandate for Benning has always been to be competetive. Why would he trade our top Dman for a pick. Don't get me wrong I get why you suggest it. Its a rebuild. I'd be all for that too in some ways. But Benning doesn't have that luxury. As with almost any GM you are gone before your picks start to perform.

Signing a FA dman is a big big if. First there really isn't a lot available and then you have to convince them to come and pay them a very high salary. You wouldn't trade Edler before know you had one of them signed.

An Edler trade now is basically impossible unless it brings in younger roster players.

 

[VanJack]

Edler has the Canucks over the barrel with a full NTC....if he's willing to waive, I'd be surprised he'd even consider going to a team bad enough to trade a high first-rounder to the Canucks for his services.....besides this team has already signaled that it isn't even contemplating a full rebuild....so swapping a proven d-man for picks just isn't going to happen.

 

[M2Beezy]

Put it to a poll. SHOULD the Canucks trade Edler for future ie picks prospects?

Key word --->>> SHOULD

We know Benning the clown wont but what SHOULD be done

 

[Johnsie19]

Put it to a poll. SHOULD the Canucks trade Edler for future ie picks prospects?

Key word --->>> SHOULD

We know Benning the clown wont but what SHOULD be done

Ya because a poll on HF is going to be a good indication of what SHOULD be done.

 

[snipes]

Tanev + (small plus -- actual NHL player, not draft picks) probably gets you in range for #4 OA.

Assuming the draft happens as expected (i.e. Pulju taken at #3), Tanev + definitely would be taken seriously. We would prefer Tanev over Edler. Tanev is younger and he's a RHD, doesn't hurt that 97 thinks the world of him either.

 

[WTG]

Tanev + (small plus -- actual NHL player, not draft picks) probably gets you in range for #4 OA.

Assuming the draft happens as expected (i.e. Pulju taken at #3), Tanev + definitely would be taken seriously. We would prefer Tanev over Edler. Tanev is younger and he's a RHD, doesn't hurt that 97 thinks the world of him either.

I wouldn't trade a top pairing RHD for a potential 1st liner.

 

[snipes]

I wouldn't trade a top pairing RHD for a potential 1st liner.

Fair enough. Tanev is a great player, I'm a fan. I've always thought he looked steady and good for the Canucks. His play really stood out to me this year at the World Hockey Championship.

Dubois & Tkachuk would change the complexion of your team up front and be the future faces of the franchise. But, the Sedin's are still in VAN and you guys are doing a retool and not a full rebuild. Makes sense to keep a valuable asset like Tanev in your situation.

 

[CanucksSayEh]

Edler isn't helping us get to the playoffs, nor would he help if we got there. Our best Dman plays better with rookies and AHLers than him. Edlers a dud, has been for years, squeeze what value we can while we can if possible. Don't see anyone sticking around if a team seriously asks a player to waive, who would want that. Edlers already out of his depth in our top 4, not too worried about the LH assuming we use the space/trade to bring in a reasonable replacement. A lot of guys look to be trending up, we wouldn't be worse thats for sure.

 

[F A N]

ironically we got older in virtually every trade, save for kesler trade, and the picks we got for bieksa and garrison. and of course the pick we got for garrison was later traded for an older asset while the bieksa puck was thrown away for some magic beans.

Well there's the Lack trade too. Regardless, it's pretty much negligible. It's not the norm to consider the Canucks getting younger by trading Bonino for Sutter. It's not the norm to consider the Canucks acquiring a 22-24 year old for a draft pick as "getting older."

And you are gonna buy that? When that draft pick takes 3 or more yrs to develop are you gonna make sure you tune into every Canucks game? Probably not when they are hovering around the bottom of the league.

The mandate for Benning has always been to be competetive. Why would he trade our top Dman for a pick. Don't get me wrong I get why you suggest it. Its a rebuild. I'd be all for that too in some ways. But Benning doesn't have that luxury. As with almost any GM you are gone before your picks start to perform.

Signing a FA dman is a big big if. First there really isn't a lot available and then you have to convince them to come and pay them a very high salary. You wouldn't trade Edler before know you had one of them signed.

An Edler trade now is basically impossible unless it brings in younger roster players.

Sure. I'll buy that. Let's face it, while Edler is signed to a decent deal given the price of UFA Dmen nowadays, Edler isn't going to be the #1 Dman we hoped for. He isn't even as offensively productive as before. At this point, would Yandle and Goligoski be a downgrade? I don't think so. But if the Canucks fail to sign those two, Hamhuis should be an easy sign. While I would consider him a downgrade in the offensive department, overall it shouldn't be that much of a downgrade for the next 2 years or so.

I don't know what the mandate is my guess is similar to your guess. I'm not saying it's something Benning will do, but it's something I want Benning to do and my point is that it would be an easy sell to the fan base. To ownership? Who knows.

 

[FOurteenS inCisOr]

Edler isn't helping us get to the playoffs, nor would he help if we got there. Our best Dman plays better with rookies and AHLers than him. Edlers a dud, has been for years, squeeze what value we can while we can if possible. Don't see anyone sticking around if a team seriously asks a player to waive, who would want that. Edlers already out of his depth in our top 4, not too worried about the LH assuming we use the space/trade to bring in a reasonable replacement. A lot of guys look to be trending up, we wouldn't be worse thats for sure.

There is so much rubbish in this post. I can't find a single true statement.