Jeremy Hronek

Here's what I'm thinking:      

-IF the Canucks are willing to trade for Guentzel, and

-IF the Canucks fully intend to have BOTH Guentzel and Boeser here for the long term (i.e. signing Guentzel right away + signing Boeser when his deal expires)

-Then using Lekkerimaki as a trading chip would make sense.     

-Personally speaking?  I think trading for Guentzel has too much risk associated with it since he's a UFA at season's end, and we've already given up a number of assets.  

-All we (the media) are doing with these constant trade rumours is making our current players feel nervous and unwelcome.   

-Lindholm is excellent at Face-offs and is one of the best defensive players in the league and we want to move on from this guy?  Really?   How about actually using him in the correct manner?  I still say it even now - Mikheyev-Lindholm-Suter as a line would be one of the best shut down lines in all of hockey.  Get this line to take on tough defensive assignments and free up more offensive deployment for the Lotto Line and Bluegar/Garland line (when Joshua comes back).  Hoglander continues to dominate on the 4th line.  If someone from the Lotto line gets injured, Lindholm moves to the top line + Hoglander moves up to the Bluegar/Garland line.   

2 hours ago, wai_lai416 said:

I look at it more like kuzmenko was cap dumped by adding hunter. Kuzmenko have negative trade value as a Canuck. He’s cost 5.5mil sitting in the press box with another year left. Only Canucks fan would think kuzmenko was positive trade asset especially to a team like Calgary. 

 

lindholm was traded for a 1st and jurmo and a 4th

 

guentzel costing a 1st podz jurmo and a 4th is not that ridiculous. Podz value outside of Vancouver is prolly not all that high regardless of what Vancouver fan thinks. Hoglander prolly have much higher value than podz atm

I see your point but Kuzmenko also has 5 goals in 10 games for the Flames.  

3 hours ago, DownUndaCanuck said:

Lots of reports saying we're in hard on Guentzel. I don't agree with this all-in mentality, especially after we've shown we can fumble big games of late and other teams are really catching up to us, but I've got a worrying feeling that PA is going to go hard after another top-6 forward, especially after Lindholm hasn't panned out for us. There are rumours that we may well move Podz as well so are calling him up to beef his stock up.

 

I do not condone this behaviour in any way possible but I've got a feeling PA is going to do something silly like this, and in all fairness it makes sense to both teams:

 

TO PIT: 1st (2025) + Podkolzin + Mikheyev

TO VAN: Guentzel

 

Two firsts sounds like a lot but part of that value is to take Mikheyev's dead contract so I think it pans out. Pittsburgh get two very nice pieces for essentially a rental for Vancouver. Like I said, I don't think it's the right direction we're going in but boy I could sure see it happen. On paper we're obviously loaded for next year but losing so many expensive rentals in one off-season will really sting unless freeing up some cap (Mikheyev, Myers, Cole) means we can keep one of them at the least?

 

 

I’m starting to think the same thing

@CaptainQuin - you got something you wanna say Sonny boy?   

On 2/26/2024 at 1:45 AM, BabychStache said:

Yes. 
 

need to rest him down the stretch. CDS can cover. 

The problem with DeSmith is that he’s been playing like Corky Thatcher from Life Goes On in his last few starts.  Buddy needs to step up.

Pettersson-Lindholm-Boeser

Miller-Bluegar-Garland

Mikheyev-Suter-Hoglander

Podkolzin-Lafferty-PDG

-You emulate the Lotto line by having 3 of your 4 best forwards on one line.

-You reward the Bluegar/Garland line by giving them a winger that would probably be the closest thing to an effective Joshua replacement.

-Realistically, JT Miller is probably the only forward on our team that doesn’t need to play alongside a fellow superstar in order to be effective offensively (I think a line of

Mikheyev-Lindholm-Suter would be an outstanding shut down line).

29 minutes ago, RWJC said:

Interesting that you thought of it while eating dinner. 

The 1993 Super Bowl half time show popped up on my YouTube suggestions and so I gave it a gander.   

I then googled MJ and so him grinning ear to ear as he stood beside Macaulay Calkin with his arm wrapped around him.  

19 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Pettersson is going to need to be a player that carries a line now. He has no choice. 

Pettersson has definitely shown an ability to do so (i.e. first 10 games of this season + second half of 21/22 season as examples), but he needs to be more consistent in doing so. He tends to lose confidence too quickly and then disappears for large stretches. Hopefully, this changes over time. The talent is clearly there but the grapefruits are not from what I see. Just keeping it real.  

1 minute ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Thing about Hronek is, when he's not with Hughes, he's not a superstar defenseman, so giving him $7M+ is a mistake.

Thing about Pettersson is, when he's not with Miller, he's not a superstar forward, so giving him $11.6M+ is a mistake.  

5 minutes ago, higgyfan said:

 

I am really onboard with the Nucks acquiring Roy.  I believe he's the 2nd RD after Pouty. 

Kings have their young guys, Brandt and Spence (both RDs) joining the team now.

 

Roy plays the kind of game that would match well with Quinn (who really doesn't need an

all-star dman partner to be effective).  Roy is also affordable for the Canucks to sign.

 

I have my doubts that the team will be able to sign Hronek to a new contract.  Quinn

has made him a super-star dman, so will probably want $7m or more.

 

I'd pay Hronek.   We kind of do need to commit to him now since we gave up so much to get him.  

All of these years of looking for a good RHD and we finally got one.  

I'd sign all of Hronek, Bluegar, Joshua, and Zadorov.  

Walk from Myers, Cole, and Lindholm.   

23 minutes ago, Blitz-Pix said:

 

He's a .5 ppg player in the playoffs over his career. 

 

23 points in his last 43 games played during the playoffs with Vancouver, Montreal and Calgary.    

I actually wouldn't mind Toffoli since he had previous chemistry with Pettersson and Miller and is familiar with our core players (i.e. Pettersson, Miller, Hughes, Myers, Boeser, and Demko).  Rumour has it that him and Boeser even crossed swords a few times so to speak.  

You could play the Lotto line together and then have Lindholm and Toffoli, or switch TT and BB.    

Some nincompoops have reported that "the deal" would be Mikheyev for Toffoli but it would probably cost significantly more than that.

Why would Jersey agree to that deal?  (i.e. taking on a bad contract for multiple years for a guy that could help significantly in the playoffs).

20 minutes ago, Blitz-Pix said:

 

He's a .5 ppg player in the playoffs over his career. 

 

23 points in his last 43 games played during the playoffs with Vancouver, Montreal and Calgary.    

Fair enough, I just wanted to get in my Michael Jackson line because I thought of it while eating dinner.

Is Toffoli a playoff performer?

He didn't do much in the bubble before he got injured.  

He went down faster than Michael Jackson at a Chuck-E-Cheese when the going got tough.  

8 hours ago, Steamer4GM said:

Went to the game vs Pittsburgh last week and had a very strange experience in the stands

 

Had a solo ticket and had a young couple on my left who were clearly Penguins fans

 

On my right were two big loud guys both wearing Canucks jerseys who seemed as excited as I was when the Canucks opened the scoring but their comments sort of had me laughing as I felt like maybe I was sitting next to two of our more negative forum members. They were constantly yelling out complaints about Canucks play, screaming SHOOT every time a Canuck had the puck, especially on the PP even when they were just trying to get set up, and just generally yelling and commenting things about our players, their play and the team in general that you might expect if we were at the bottom of the standings or behind by 5 goals in the game. Even when we were up 2-0, they were acting like the score was reversed.

 

Then, in the 2nd period, as more alcohol was consumed and  the game started to shift in Pittsburgh's favour, they were clearly pleased and began cheering for Pittsburgh while continuing to complain about the Canucks. Not to mention the couple next to me were also getting excited and drinking more so they were becoming loud and vocal in favour of the Penguins.

 

Needless to say, all 4 of them were quite thrilled by the end result. I managed to keep up my cheering for our boys and still had a blast despite the outcome but seriously felt like I'd been dropped into an episode of The Twilight Zone for a while there in the 3rd.

 

Strange experience

 

(As an aside, the 2 to my right were also racist A-holes as they were mocking Bains and fans wearing his jersey by imitating a Punjabi accent and were mocking one of the ice girls who was heavier set than most of her coworkers. Each intermission brought more booze and more BS behaviour which had me wondering if the Canucks have a family friendly section in Rogers where I might buy my tickets next season)

During the 2011-2012 season in the November that season, two fans behind me kept badmouthing Luongo…..the point where some of the comments became personal.  Finally, I had enough.  I turned around to the two teens and told them that if they badmouthed Luongo on a personal level like that ever again, I would beat the shit out of both of them and gladly go to jail for it.  Needless to say, they didn’t say anything after that.

If this idea where to come to fruition, I’m wondering if it would be better if we saw

Hughes-Roy

Zadorov-Hronek

But, it depends on Roy’s calibre.  Is Roy a #4 guy or is a #3 calibre dman?  Would he look out of place on a top pairing?

1 hour ago, Elias Pettersson said:

He’s a UFA in the summer. So LA doesn’t have to give us anything. 

Oh ok, fair enough.  I thought you were talking about this season and the trade deadline.

Yes for Matt Roy, no for Tanev (too old).

7 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

We need to get a perfect partner for Zadorov for next season.  Hughes   Hronek is set and Soucy can play with Juulsen or another bottom pairing guy.  We need a true defensive dman to play with Zadorov so he can maximize his strength which is moving the puck up the ice.  Never seen a 6'6" 248 pound guy skate like Zadorov.  Well maybe Tryamkin, but that's another story.

 

Chris Tanev is the obvious choice.  But his contract demands might be too high and he's 34 years old.  Don't want to give him a long term deal.  Heck, we refused to give him a long term deal 4 years ago, so why would we do it now.  We need someone who can fit with the core and give us 4-5 years of solid defensive play.

 

That man is Matt Roy.  He is a UFA in the summer.  He might want a change of scenery and go to a cup contender like Vancouver.  LA isn't going anywhere with PLD.  Roy is basically a clone of Tanev, only 5 years younger.  I'd easily pony up for him.  5x5 no problem.  We need a top 4 RHD badly and Willander is still a couple of years away.  With Hronek, Roy and Willander, our right side would be set for the next 5-6 years.

  

Hughes          Hronek

Zadorov         Roy

Soucy            Juulsen

D-Petey         Willander

 

With D-Petey and Willander on the way, this defence is set up to win a cup next season plus the next several seasons as well...

Tanev already went to Dallas. 
 

Why would the rival Kings give us Matt Roy?  

30 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

I'm mean sure, anyone is tradable. 

 

So who wants to give up their top 5 pick, cost controlled, superstar kid for our two middle 1st round kids?

 

I'll check back later. 

Maybe not a superstar kid (McTavish was an unrealistic ask on my part), but perhaps someone that is just..........solid?  (i.e. someone in that 20-23 range that is NHL calibre, but likely won't become a 1st line forward or top pairing defenseman).   What I'm asking is probably too unrealistic...........ehh....was worth a shot?   

39 minutes ago, Moeknows said:

I read this whole post..5 minutes of my life I'm never getting back...why,just why ???? It is not tempting or worthwhile to think about

But how do you *really* feel?

Lawson Crowse?  Rasmus Andersson?  

(I wouldn't give up Willander and Lekkerimaki for either of those guys just for the record, since I think the combined value of Willander and Lekkerimaki is greater than those players).     

Maybe Columbus would make sense? (they have some players in that 20-23 range, who while solid NHL'ers, likely won't be 1st line players or 1st pairing d-men).  

1 minute ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

You know it's a bad idea, yet propose it anyways.....

It's definitely an unrealistic idea but in theory, I think it would be worth exploring.  We give up two very good prospects but get a young guy, aged 20-23, that is on an ELC and is proven, but doesn't have the upside that both Lekker and Willander have.  We give up two prospects with a higher ceiling (but higher volatility obviously since there are no guarantees), but we get a 'sure thing' asset right now that could help us both short term and long term even if said player has little to no chance of being a 1st line player or a top pairing defenseman.......with the trade off being that he would help us in the playoffs this year (which could possibly be this core's best chance at a cup?).       

Who would be fair and equivalent value for a combined package of Willander and Lekker?   (obviously, not Guentzel because JG is a UFA at season's end).   

36 minutes ago, wai_lai416 said:

lol so who's dumb enough to give you a proven 20-23 year old that is bordering star for 2 unproven question mark that you hope will turn into a star? it's like you won the 1st place prize instead of the jackpot but you rather trade it for 2 more lottery ticket  to see if you can win 2 more times.. lekkerimaki might be doing well in the SHL but doesn't mean anything.. karlsson was dominating the shl 2 years ago.. he still yet to crack the nhl lineup as a regular 2 years later. you don't trade proven commodity for unproven commodity unless you are a seller and it's a pending ufa.. or a player is demanding to be traded

Agreed.

McTavish would very likely be an unrealistic ask but getting back to my idea, would there be a hypothetical scenario in which a team accepts both Willander and Lekkerimaki?  (of whatever equates to equivalent value........and someone that could help us now, but wouldn't just be a rental obviously).   

Just wondering which player out there would be the equivalent value of my proposed package (if it's not McTavish), and if it could possibly be worth it from our end (I absolutely loathe the idea of blowing up our prospect pool but would it make sense if an asset came back our way that could help us both short term and long term?)

1 minute ago, King Heffy said:

I'd do it.

Right?  So I’m not *completely* insane for thinking along these lines right?  Yes - we lose two amazing prospects (who will likely turn out to be great players…..but no guarantees) but we get one long term asset back that would help us both short term and long term.  
 

Especially in the case of our short term, this core’s peak just may very well be this year.  We need to find a way to be aggressive this year without technically blowing up our prospect pool and so in an indirect way, my proposal from above would cater to this.

20 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Can’t sleep? 

Living on the other side of the planet my man.

In creating this idea, I'm cognizant of the fact that this will never happen, and am also cognizant of the fact that this is likely a bad idea.  

BUT - playing Devil's advocate here for a second, let us pretend that we gave up our two best prospects for one really good young player (aged 20-23) that

1. Was still on an ELC

2. Could help us win now

3. Could be a long term asset for us.  

So just as an example, lets say you moved Willander + Lekkerimaki to Anaheim for Mason McTavish (if not McTavish, a player, aged 20-23 that would be equal value to Willander + Lekkerimaki).

Maybe Anaheim does this because they get an extra premium asset to build for the long term.  So now, in their collection of young talent, they'd have Carlsson (C), Gauthier (LW), Lekkerimaki (RW), and Willander (D).  No guarantees, but there's a chance that one or BOTH of Lekkerimaki and Willander will be better than McTavish one day.

And maybe the Canucks do this because they get an asset that could help us both now and in the future. We get a long term core player.

Miller-Pettersson-Boeser

Mikheyev-McTavish-Lindholm

Joshua-Bluegar-Garland

Hoglander-Suter-Lafferty

Now, is this a realistic idea?  Probably not.............BUT, I will have to admit that it's tempting to think about.