Coryberg Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 1 minute ago, stawns said: Try again without being a dick If Cole is #7 who is your #3, #4 and #5? Myers #6 Zadorov #8 Soucy #9 Juulsen #10 There is a salary cap and a roster limit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 (edited) 1 minute ago, Coryberg said: If Cole is #7 who is your #3, #4 and #5? Myers #6 Zadorov #8 Soucy #9 Juulsen #10 There is a salary cap and a roster limit. Hughes Hronek Soucy Myers/Zad Cole Juuls And discussions go much better if we show a little mutual respect. Thank you Edited January 27 by stawns Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coryberg Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 Just now, stawns said: Hughes Hronek Soucy Myers/Zad Cole Juuls Try again without being a donkey 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 Just now, Coryberg said: Try again without being a donkey Well you kind of pulled the pin on that grenade dint ya. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 4 hours ago, HKSR said: Just carrying on with this thought. Monahan at 50% retained would be a nice addition to round out the forward group without costing a fortune. Miller-Petey-Boeser Mik-Monahan-Vatrano Garland-Blueger-Joshua Hoglander-Suter-Lafferty Aman Hughes-Hronek Soucy-Tanev Zadorov-Myers Cole Juulsen Friedman Rather target Bjugstad. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coryberg Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 9 minutes ago, stawns said: Try again without being a dick 3 minutes ago, stawns said: And discussions go much better if we show a little mutual respect. Thank you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 55 minutes ago, stawns said: I don't see Tanev as an upgrade on Myers, at all. At best, a lateral move To me, Cole is a 6/7 dman........he's got some great attributes, but he's defintely slowing down and he gives the puck away, alot Yeah, I'd put Zadorov ahead of Cole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 3 minutes ago, aGENT said: Rather target Bjugstad. Not sure if ARZ would move him... which likely means he'd be costly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 1 minute ago, HKSR said: Not sure if ARZ would move him... which likely means he'd be costly. But Monahan is going to be comparatively cheap? I bet you could get Bjugstad for less, if he is available. And ARZ has been falling out of the playoff picture for a while now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 2 minutes ago, aGENT said: But Monahan is going to be comparatively cheap? I bet you could get Bjugstad for less, if he is available. And ARZ has been falling out of the playoff picture for a while now. The fact most people would want Bjugstad over Monahan says Bjugstad would cost more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 2 minutes ago, aGENT said: But Monahan is going to be comparatively cheap? I bet you could get Bjugstad for less, if he is available. And ARZ has been falling out of the playoff picture for a while now. Honestly, despite what JR said about owing it to the team, depending on where they are in the standings as the tdk approaches, I think they owe it to them more not to tinker much, to say "we believe in this particular group of players" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 4 minutes ago, HKSR said: The fact most people would want Bjugstad over Monahan says Bjugstad would cost more. "Most people"? There's like me and one or two other guys on here posting about Bjugstad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 2 minutes ago, aGENT said: "Most people"? There's like me and one or two other guys on here posting about Bjugstad. I'd prefer Bjugstad too. I think if you put up a poll, you'll find most people would prefer Bjugstad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 Bjugstad is as much of a top 6 forward as Dickinson is. We don’t need more third liners we need legit top 6 players if we’re making a trade. Guys that can drive a line. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 10 minutes ago, stawns said: Honestly, despite what JR said about owing it to the team, depending on where they are in the standings as the tdk approaches, I think they owe it to them more not to tinker much, to say "we believe in this particular group of players" I think it's quite likely we see them continue to do what they have been doing. Shore up roster weaknesses as opportunity allows. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 Just now, DeNiro said: Bjugstad is as much of a top 6 forward as Dickinson is. We don’t need more third liners we need legit top 6 players if we’re making a trade. Guys that can drive a line. Like Monahan? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 3 minutes ago, aGENT said: Like Monahan? He at least has more of a pedigree of being a top 6 than Bjugstad. That being said he would be like plan F or G if the prices are too high for other players. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 5 minutes ago, aGENT said: Like Monahan? Monnohands is not a player we need. He wouldn’t be in our top six. That and he’s a softy. So he doesn’t fit anywhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 (edited) 10 minutes ago, DeNiro said: He at least has more of a pedigree of being a top 6 than Bjugstad. That being said he would be like plan F or G if the prices are too high for other players. 17 minutes ago, HKSR said: I'd prefer Bjugstad too. I think if you put up a poll, you'll find most people would prefer Bjugstad. Funny, HK seems to think most people would prefer Bjugstad (They should IMO). FWIW, he wouldn't be my only move in a perfect world, I'd still try to move Kuz for a better fitting top 6 winger (Guentzel or otherwise). Bjugstad would give us a solid 2 way, RHd C with size, to tandem with Petey (and take draws on their strong sides) and said winger, and is good enough to hang with/complement legit top 6 players (even if only a borderline one himself). Something like: Guentzel, Petey, Bjugstad Mikheyev, Miller, Boeser Would be a LEGIT top 6 and miles ahead of where we are currently. Edited January 27 by aGENT 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lionized27 Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 5 hours ago, Alflives said: Monnohands is not a player we need. He wouldn’t be in our top six. That and he’s a softy. So he doesn’t fit anywhere. Monahan is close enough to Malhotra to make the difference. *Possibly* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tas Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 scott oake: ~65 of 70 questions for chris tanev are about Vancouver marky: tanny is the toughest human he's ever known hanifin: tanny makes every single defense partner he's ever had better. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain insano Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 3 hours ago, tas said: scott oake: ~65 of 70 questions for chris tanev are about Vancouver marky: tanny is the toughest human he's ever known hanifin: tanny makes every single defense partner he's ever had better. The interview was pretty much like a recruitment from our fan base it was hilarious 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Vanderhoek Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 13 hours ago, aGENT said: Like Monahan? 13 hours ago, DeNiro said: He at least has more of a pedigree of being a top 6 than Bjugstad. That being said he would be like plan F or G if the prices are too high for other players. There is a lot of indifference if not disinterest in Monahan by many here. He is exactly the player who could help Vancouver. This year he is rejuvenated after being healthy after several injuries eating at him. He's not the most physical but can be effective and productive. Absolutely plays a game that fits into Vancouver's system. A big reason he is a decent option as well is the ability if the Canucks to work with his caphit vs the other players out there starting in the 4.5m per range. I believe Kuzmenko is very likely staying put and if a move is made where the team adds to the roster versus trading tangible pieces out to match pieces coming in a player like Monahan is quite appealing. Preference would be to work on bringing in a younger longer term piece though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
48MPHSlapshot Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 (edited) Bjugstad all day over Monahan. Monahan just isn't the playdriver we need. He gets nearly half of his points on the PP, and with him likely being relegated to the 2nd unit here, those numbers would likely decline. Monahan only has 17 even strength points. For the sake of comparison, Kuzmenko, who's in the doghouse and has been regularly sat, only has 3 less even strength points. In fact, most of our forward group has more even strength points than Monahan. He's not the guy that gonna kickstart our second line. Bjugstad himself has 21 even strength points, and that's despite starting in the defensive zone about 65% of the time, while Monahan splits his zone starts about 50/50. Edited January 28 by 48MPHSlapshot 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownUndaCanuck Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 Sounded like PA wasn't keen on acquiring any more defencemen after his last interview, and that we're going for a top-6 forward who can ideally play center. Makes a lot of sense obviously and I prefer Zadorov on our team because it gives us the option to extend him and build going forward, whereas Tanev is a fairly short-term solution. That being said, Tanev might be serviceable even next year and means we can let Cole and Myers go. We've got Hughes and Hronek solidly for the next 5+ years, then Zadorov and Soucy in our bottom-4 rotating around but we really need a solid 4th overall guy. Myers is going to ask for too much money so we'll let him walk. Cole could maybe come back for 2-3M but he'll be a year older and much slower next year surely. Tanev at 33-34 years old could fit that role to a tee and maybe we could get him to sign cheaply, say 2-3M and play him a good 16-17 minutes? There are a few RDs out there in the UFA list for next year but we might as well acquire one now for a good playoff run while we're peaking. I don't think Tanev's worth a 1st, he's not playing 20+ minutes anymore. Lindholm as a rental is worth a 1st and decent prospect. Tanev is surely worth something like a 2nd and lesser prospect. There is certainly a big deal there which could be done with Calgary revolving around Kuzmenko + 1st + decent prospect. I'd be tempted to even give up D.Petey if it means we get Lindholm and Tanev but obviously they'd have to retain enough to get them in. Pettersson - Miller - Boeser Hoglander - Lindholm - Mikheyev Garland - Blueger - Joshua Aman - Suter - Lafferty Hughes - Hronek Zadorov - Tanev Cole - Myers Soucy That's a Cup-worthy defence and will be the only opportunity we have to get all these guys together before the old guys leave. Up front, if we break up the Lotto line we have unreal depth and you could argue that's the deepest center pool in the league. Our weakness is arguably on wing - the least important position for the playoffs. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.