Jump to content

[Trade] Canucks Acquire Elias Lindholm from Calgary for Andrei Kuzmenko, Hunter Brzustewicz, Joni Jurmo, 2024 1st and Conditional 2024 4th


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

Not nervous whatsoever. I had complete faith and confidence in the Hronek trade despite the alarmist "concern" hysteria. Look how that turned out.

 

None of this comes for free. There's a price to pay in order to be a contender. This is a bold move. We didn't give up any blue chip prospects and Kuz was found money/free asset to begin with.

 

We're good in the here and now and need moves like this now to be even better instead of waiting 3-4 years from now.

 

 

 


Remember when Benning promised “bold moves” and what they turned out to be?

 

I have faith that this management group can make bold moves without being reckless. That’s a big difference.

  • Thanks 1
  • Cheers 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, NHL97OneTimer said:

I look at this and can't help but thinking that they'll pick up one more top 6.  Mikheyev just doesn't fit the top 6 IMO.  I can see Hoglander with Miller and Boeser but your top line here is worth trying.  With the current roster though, I'm expecting

 

Lotto line

Hogs - Lindholm - Mikheyev

Joshua - Blueger - Garland

PDG / Aman - Suter - Lafferty

 

One big reason for this - if they want to keep EP after this season, they'll need to stop messing around with his line and give him some productive consistency.  Also, it's more seamless when they're in and out of the PP if they stick together.

I'd move out Mikheyev++ for a winger rental and let the winger walk in the offseason to make room to re-sign Lindholm.

 

Guentzel anybody?!  Can we be that greedy? lol

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, testycal said:

Andrei leaving town

 

sorry to see him go..just a timing issue..if Canucks were not showing cup promise, he likely has more slack cut to him.  he will succeed.

 

Personally not sorry to see him go. Maybe take the job seriously next year if you give a crap about NHL hockey.

 

@stawns obviously Tocchet didn't destroy his value

Edited by Gawdzukes
  • Cheers 1
  • ThereItIs 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Gurn said:

hoping they can acquire an aging, but still effective vet with lots, and lots, of play off experience.

looks like this team is a one run, then massive change model; and if so, they will need a lot of experience to help them through the increased pressure and level of play in the post season.

 

Tanev sticks out as a target, as he still plays 20 minutes a game and is a Stanley Cup finalist.

But I'm sure there are others like him, be they forward, or d, which I would prefer.

 

 

It gets pretty interesting from here in terms of any more moves. They've managed to keep all our ripe/best prospects. But with no 1st we'd be looking at losing some we really need to slot in next year and the one after. Not sure thats in the cards.

 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the move is good also in the sense that if Petey tries to strong arm this team and only signs 1 year to reach UFA status then the Canucks already have a capable 2nd line center in Lindholm that can be signed long term. 
Lindholm won’t be a rental they’ll find a way to re-sign him even if that means trading Mikheyev.

  • Like 1
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, CanuckMan said:

I think the move is good also in the sense that if Petey tries to strong arm this team and only signs 1 year to reach UFA status then the Canucks already have a capable 2nd line center in Lindholm that can be signed long term. 
Lindholm won’t be a rental they’ll find a way to re-sign him even if that means trading Mikheyev.

I don't think it'll come to this, but I can't agree more that it's a fantastic fallback plan. We could get an absolute haul for Petey, so this gives us great leverage in re-signing him. He either wants to stay with the #1 team in the NHL or chase the money. It's going to be veeeeery interesting to learn what Petey truly values the most. I think it'll be the former.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, CanuckMan said:

I think the move is good also in the sense that if Petey tries to strong arm this team and only signs 1 year to reach UFA status then the Canucks already have a capable 2nd line center in Lindholm that can be signed long term. 
Lindholm won’t be a rental they’ll find a way to re-sign him even if that means trading Mikheyev.

Yup, that's really all it will take to re-sign Lindholm.  Trading Mikheyev won't hurt very much at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, PureQuickness said:

 

This wouldn't have happened without Benning then. And Gillis wouldn't have had the success without Burke/Nonis regimes with their horses in the barn.

 

It's pretty clear that we are seeing the best parts of Gillis on display here with Allvin. Hopefully we don't see the bad sides of Gillis. The drafting, however, is apparently so much better than the two regimes (so far). Hunter is already one of the best picks the Canucks had - a third rounder - and Gillis couldn't draft a damn one of these players in FIVE YEARS on the job.

 

FyxD9GjacAAlp9z?format=jpg&name=4096x409

  • Haha 2
  • ThereItIs 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Dizzle said:

So does this mean we're out on Guentzle? 😮 

Honestly?  Not necessarily.  It would definitely mean Guentzel is a rental though.  Moving out Mikheyev and bringing in Guentzel is +$1.25M on the cap which we can afford.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, NHL97OneTimer said:

I get trading Mikheyev.....but why Sissons? (honest question)

he's big... fairly mobile hits and scores goals for cheap... bang for buck he is a really good buy, oh and he can take a faceoff too...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, NHL97OneTimer said:

I don't like Garland's price tag, but I think you underestimate how much he drives the play and how much he gets us on the powerplay.  His offensive numbers haven't been as good as I'd hoped for, but he keeps the puck out of our own net.  His +/- isn't much different than EP's.  Podz has to come up eventually but I'm not sure that he replaces Garland right now.  I'm also not sure you find much better for his money than Blueger.  Joshua deserves a good raise.  Hoping this third line can stay together next year personally.

 

Also, you have DeSmith taking a pay cut from $1.8M/yr.  That isn't happening.  He's played really well as a back-up this year.  I see him getting a small pay bump.  Zadorov may not deserve it, but he'll get more money as well as a UFA.  Cole taking a $1.5M/yr pay cut won't happen either.

 

PA has some work cut out for himself.  He deserved all votes of confidence at this point but he'll also need some help from the players.  Lindholm at $6M/yr and EP at $10M/yr, or trading Mikheyev (not unreasonable) would go a long way to keeping this group largely intact.  This is why it's so difficult to create a cup contender with a $12M/yr player on your roster.

 

Garland, as much as I like him, and as much as he DOES drive play, is a $4.95m luxury we can't afford on our 3rd line next year if we hope to retain/add better players in our top 6 / top 4. Hoglander can replace 95% of what he does at almost 1/4 the cap hit and we can use that cap space to  maintain/improve other parts of the roster.

 

12 minutes ago, HKSR said:

I'd move out Mikheyev++ for a winger rental and let the winger walk in the offseason to make room to re-sign Lindholm.

 

Guentzel anybody?!  Can we be that greedy? lol

 

7 minutes ago, CanuckMan said:

I think the move is good also in the sense that if Petey tries to strong arm this team and only signs 1 year to reach UFA status then the Canucks already have a capable 2nd line center in Lindholm that can be signed long term. 
Lindholm won’t be a rental they’ll find a way to re-sign him even if that means trading Mikheyev.

 

You guys spell Garland weird.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

And trade Zadorov, but sign the inferior player in Myers? 

Uh Oh Sam GIF by GLOW Netflix

I would just keep both for the playoffs, unless someone makes a stupid offer. I like the D as is

 Maybe add a depth, cheaper Dman. Maybe a physical, speedy winger if one is available for not too much. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, NHL97OneTimer said:

I don't like Garland's price tag, but I think you underestimate how much he drives the play and how much he gets us on the powerplay.  His offensive numbers haven't been as good as I'd hoped for, but he keeps the puck out of our own net.  His +/- isn't much different than EP's.  Podz has to come up eventually but I'm not sure that he replaces Garland right now.  I'm also not sure you find much better for his money than Blueger.  Joshua deserves a good raise.  Hoping this third line can stay together next year personally.

 

Also, you have DeSmith taking a pay cut from $1.8M/yr.  That isn't happening.  He's played really well as a back-up this year.  I see him getting a small pay bump.  Zadorov may not deserve it, but he'll get more money as well as a UFA.  Cole taking a $1.5M/yr pay cut won't happen either.

 

PA has some work cut out for himself.  He deserved all votes of confidence at this point but he'll also need some help from the players.  Lindholm at $6M/yr and EP at $10M/yr, or trading Mikheyev (not unreasonable) would go a long way to keeping this group largely intact.  This is why it's so difficult to create a cup contender with a $12M/yr player on your roster.

I know Lindholm has been off this year offensively but if you look at his scoring over the last few years it is essentially the same as EP's and JTM's and he was second in Selke voting last year.

This isn't going to be a $6M player.  If we could get him for JT's contract that would be a steal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, aGENT said:

 

Garland, as much as I like him, and as much as he DOES drive play, is a $4.95m luxury we can't afford on our 3rd line next year if we hope to retain/add better players in our top 6 / top 4. Hoglander can replace 95% of what he does at almost 1/4 the cap hit and we can use that cap space to  maintain/improve other parts of the roster.

 

 

 

You guys spell Garland weird.

you are likely right... Garland is the player to go... Mikheyev can score 20 on any line...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, HKSR said:

Honestly?  Not necessarily.  It would definitely mean Guentzel is a rental though.  Moving out Mikheyev and bringing in Guentzel is +$1.25M on the cap which we can afford.

 

TBH, I can't see Canucks management giving up anymore high draft picks and high-level prospects this TDL. There's Tanev but he's not going to cost an arm and leg as a rental. They already got the guy they need in Lindholm.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...