Grandmaster Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 2 hours ago, Bardown said: Would people be open to moving Hoglander for Guentzel assuming an extension is in place. hear me out before you spaz Hogs is playing great and I love him, that being said, he’s still getting limited minutes, particularly given his performance. This would suggest he hasn’t fully got Tocchet’s “trust” defensively. They said this on Halford and Brough today. as good as he’s been, Guentzel is clearly a much better top 6 winger. He’s proven, in the playoffs as well. this allows us to sell high, keep podz and upgrade top 6. Podz is a much more well rounded player, and will probably be more valuable down the road. i thought about this today, and I think Hogz being the core piece would address Pens high value ask and probably not hurt us for our run. I would miss Hogz, but I think I’d be more worried giving up podz long term. and “asset management” we’d be selling high. Guentzel has the potential to level us up for a Cup win far more than Hogs so yeah I would do it 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain insano Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 1 minute ago, Pears said: Still amazes me we never took Bettman to court over that crap while LA and New Jersey begged and pleaded with him to get of their penalties for Richards and Kovalchuk. That penalty cost us keeping at least one of Toffoli or Tanev. I’m not giving benning that out lol, but I hear you, the nhl is not black and white when it comes to fine print and seems they bend rules often and example coyotes forfeited a first for having private workouts and Chicago got nothing for literal rape inside their organization and covering it up for years… anyone can say whatever they want I’m convinced the league has bias movements Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 1 minute ago, Captain insano said: I’m not giving benning that out lol, but I hear you, the nhl is not black and white when it comes to fine print and seems they bend rules often and example coyotes forfeited a first for having private workouts and Chicago got nothing for literal rape inside their organization and covering it up for years… anyone can say whatever they want I’m convinced the league has bias movements On that topic, as I was looking up what those penalties were, I realized that the Devils got slapped with a bigger penalty for a contract that was legal when it was signed than Chicago did for covering up sexual assault Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain insano Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 5 minutes ago, Pears said: On that topic, as I was looking up what those penalties were, I realized that the Devils got slapped with a bigger penalty for a contract that was legal when it was signed than Chicago did for covering up sexual assault Yeah nhl is shady AF under bettman exactly why that smug lil midget needs to go Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucks curse Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 Didn’t Fhaliwal just say we are out on Guentzel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook007 Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 I can't see Canucks letting go of Hugs... He is one of the few, who really goes into the dirty areas, and comes out with puck similar to Garland... On top of that he has soft hands in front of goal and is build like a brick... Just don't see us letting go of a Tocchet player, who costs next to nothing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 3 minutes ago, canucks curse said: Didn’t Fhaliwal just say we are out on Guentzel Holy shit, so that means the Canucks are getting Guentzel by Friday! 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Jester13 Posted March 5 Popular Post Share Posted March 5 29 minutes ago, Bardown said: I agree with all your logic, my suggestion was assuming (and not explicitly) that the Canucks are going to take a hard run at Guentzel regardless. In that situation, if we assume they are just too enamoured with him .....would you make that deal... Hogs, Lekk, Willander, are all on my do-not-trade list. 1 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bardown Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 Just now, Jester13 said: Hogs, Lekk, Willander, are all on my do-not-trade list. Podz, Lekk, Willander, EP2 all on my do-not-trade list. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 6 minutes ago, canucks curse said: Didn’t Fhaliwal just say we are out on Guentzel I think he’s speculating that other teams have more assets to trade that’s all. Same thing could have been said about the Lindholm trade but they got it done. He underestimates this management. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N4ZZY Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 3 hours ago, Bardown said: Would people be open to moving Hoglander for Guentzel assuming an extension is in place. hear me out before you spaz Hogs is playing great and I love him, that being said, he’s still getting limited minutes, particularly given his performance. This would suggest he hasn’t fully got Tocchet’s “trust” defensively. They said this on Halford and Brough today. as good as he’s been, Guentzel is clearly a much better top 6 winger. He’s proven, in the playoffs as well. this allows us to sell high, keep podz and upgrade top 6. Podz is a much more well rounded player, and will probably be more valuable down the road. i thought about this today, and I think Hogz being the core piece would address Pens high value ask and probably not hurt us for our run. I would miss Hogz, but I think I’d be more worried giving up podz long term. and “asset management” we’d be selling high. Giving up Nils Höglander would be painful considering he's making 1.1M. He's the kind of player that we need moving forward. Cheap forwards on their ELC's still and that are producing and contributing to the offense of the team. I don't know if Podkolzin will produce offensively - I don't see him being a 20 goal scorer, and Höglander is close to that, if he scores one more goal. But at the end of the day, Petey needs a winger to produce. Mik isn't going to do it, and I don't know if Höglander is the long term answer to Petey's wing. So with that being said, I would be open to trading Höglander if it only meant that Guentzel is signed on long term. It wouldn't be a one for one swap, though, so who else is Allvin giving up to Pitts? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N4ZZY Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 7 minutes ago, DeNiro said: I think he’s speculating that other teams have more assets to trade that’s all. Same thing could have been said about the Lindholm trade but they got it done. He underestimates this management. To be fair, I wouldn't be surprised if Canucks management is out. Rumours are that Nashville is in on Guentzel. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N4ZZY Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 15 minutes ago, spook007 said: I can't see Canucks letting go of Hugs... He is one of the few, who really goes into the dirty areas, and comes out with puck similar to Garland... On top of that he has soft hands in front of goal and is build like a brick... Just don't see us letting go of a Tocchet player, who costs next to nothing... If we don't get Guentzel through a trade, I think management will pursue hard to sign him in the off-season if the price and term are reasonable. The team needs a good start next season just as much as they did this season. Can't get out of the gate slow like in previous years under Green and during the Benning era. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N4ZZY Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 34 minutes ago, Grandmaster said: Guentzel has the potential to level us up for a Cup win far more than Hogs so yeah I would do it But it wouldn't just be Höglander. It would be Höglander + Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bardown Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 2 minutes ago, N4ZZY said: To be fair, I wouldn't be surprised if Canucks management is out. Rumours are that Nashville is in on Guentzel. That would make alot of sense. They have some good prospects and lack scoring... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N4ZZY Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 2 hours ago, Coconuts said: They certainly have the picks to do it, less sure about the prospects but Matthew Wood and Felix Nilsson are their first and second round picks from this past draft Maybe Joakim Kemmel, their top pick from 2022 or Tanner Molendyk, the 24th OA from 2023 Speaking of strictly picks, they have their 1st over the next three seasons as well as Tampa's 1st next season, three 2nd's this draft, a couple 3rd's this draft, and most of their other picks over the next three drafts If Nashville actually wants to pay it's doubtful either Vancouver or Vegas could outbid them, they could use firepower up front, but it comes down to whether Guentzel would extend there If he's traded to Nashville, then signs are probably that he would agree to sign long term there. Or else it doesn't make sense to lose so much only to lose the player. Oh wait, that's what we did for Lindholm lol. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jester13 Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 3 minutes ago, N4ZZY said: Giving up Nils Höglander would be painful considering he's making 1.1M. He's the kind of player that we need moving forward. Cheap forwards on their ELC's still and that are producing and contributing to the offense of the team. I don't know if Podkolzin will produce offensively - I don't see him being a 20 goal scorer, and Höglander is close to that, if he scores one more goal. But at the end of the day, Petey needs a winger to produce. Mik isn't going to do it, and I don't know if Höglander is the long term answer to Petey's wing. So with that being said, I would be open to trading Höglander if it only meant that Guentzel is signed on long term. It wouldn't be a one for one swap, though, so who else is Allvin giving up to Pitts? Let's not forget that Hogs is only 23 years old, and already he's about to score 20+ goals this year with very limited ice time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 (edited) You wanna pay this? I don't Edited March 5 by Coconuts 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 2 minutes ago, N4ZZY said: To be fair, I wouldn't be surprised if Canucks management is out. Rumours are that Nashville is in on Guentzel. Nashville has always been pretty stingy about trading futures. Would they be willing to part with Kemmel or L’Heureux? Then he likely goes there. I doubt it though. They’re an older team that’s gonna need those young pieces. If that’s the case then I see Van being able to match. It’s all about what pieces Dubas likes more though. Is a young former top 10 pick a good sell to fans as a return? Guess we’ll find out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N4ZZY Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 11 hours ago, VintageActualCanuckfan said: exactly, these three have better potential to be top 6 than anyone we could trade them for. Be patient people. Raty Podz Lek Not sure if Räty has potential to be top six. Might be more middle six player (third line centre, isn't that the role the organization is grooming him for?) Podkolzin could be a top six, but he doesn't strike me as a guy who has the hands to contribute offensively. Middle six, if he hits. Lekkerimäki is the one guy who would be top six player in the NHL There's a really fine balance of giving up the future for immediate help for the postseason right now. Petey is here for 8 years. There needs to be a consistent building towards becoming a perennial contender, and not just a contender for 1-2 years, and then the next 6 years are bottom years. Giving up Lekkerimäki without having a ton of picks in the next little while is concerning for me. Where are the prospects coming from? Where will they have the money to add quality players since the OEL cap hit will be worse in a couple of seasons. They need cheap ELC players to fill out their roster. Can't build a contending team through free agency. Benning tried that - look where that got us for close to a decade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N4ZZY Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 Just now, DeNiro said: Nashville has always been pretty stingy about trading futures. Would they be willing to part with Kemmel or L’Heureux? Then he likely goes there. I doubt it though. They’re an older team that’s gonna need those young pieces. If that’s the case then I see Van being able to match. It’s all about what pieces Dubas likes more though. Is a young former top 10 pick a good sell to fans as a return? Guess we’ll find out. I have no idea who Kemmel or L'Heureux is. But who would be the equivalent in our organization? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook007 Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 4 minutes ago, N4ZZY said: If we don't get Guentzel through a trade, I think management will pursue hard to sign him in the off-season if the price and term are reasonable. The team needs a good start next season just as much as they did this season. Can't get out of the gate slow like in previous years under Green and during the Benning era. True but we did get out of the traps quickly this season, with the players we've got... most of them will likely be a little better. If they can make the numbers fit, they may try and sign him, but we have to think about the future cap as well... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N4ZZY Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 2 minutes ago, Coconuts said: You wanna pay this? I don't I guess we'll find out just how big Rutherford's balls really are. 1st for the Canucks has to be 2025; young player has to be Podkolzin, and prospects - Räty, and who else DPetey? Would that get it done? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sell.the.team Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 44 minutes ago, Pears said: Still amazes me we never took Bettman to court over that crap while LA and New Jersey begged and pleaded with him to get out of their penalties for Richards and Kovalchuk. That penalty cost us keeping at least one of Toffoli or Tanev. The recapture formula was the formula. Makes no sense to me but it was what it was. We could have bought out Luongo's contract cap free and management / ownership refused. Instead, we chose to trade away and took on the risk of retirement. Furthermore, reports arose that Florida called Vancouver to see if they wanted to trade for the contract and Benning didn't answer the call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N4ZZY Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 1 minute ago, spook007 said: True but we did get out of the traps quickly this season, with the players we've got... most of them will likely be a little better. If they can make the numbers fit, they may try and sign him, but we have to think about the future cap as well... exactly, future cap. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts