Jump to content

[Rumour] - Buchnevich linked to VAN


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

Geez that's high.

 

I get it, ask high, but I dunno if they'd come down much

 

We've already moved out one 1st, I'd really prefer not move out another let alone something equivalent to one on top

Edited by Coconuts
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

 

I get it, ask high, but I dunno if they'd come down much

 

We've already moved out one 1st, I'd really prefer not move out another let alone something equivalent to one on top

 

Id do it for a higher end RFA with say 4 years of control.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Pinot Noir said:

If we can’t add buchnevich don’t add anyone as they’ll be inconsequential to our quest. Get the play off experience and move on. 

 

Probably close to what we'll do

 

We'll probably add but I don't think we're big game hunting anymore

  • Wiener 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, IBatch said:

At the time, Lindholm was considered the best rental of the bunch.   So the cost was always going to be high.     Didn't have any issue with the team trading their first, started bringing that up in November as something they seriously need to consider to give this team a chance with what is likely our best cap window this year and next.    Was hoping for something a little different, but can't fault them for going for it either.   It's too early yet.   Losing Hunter was tougher than the first and everything else, but it's the cost of business.   Lindholm absolutely matches up with the cost of Horvat last year to the NYI.     Our first is late, CAL got a better prospect.   NYI got a higher first.   Kuzmenko's cap hit next year is something that's hard to gauge.    

 

Given where this team is at.   We will have two shots at it, this year and next.   Then an OEL thing hanging over our heads.  I'm not even sure how they will manage next season yet.   We've got four cracks at it.    Then a lull.   Re-tooling period, or possibly scortched Earth, in that case, 3 cracks at it.    Makes a lot of sense to trade for someone.   Maybe the wrong guy.   Won't know until all the dust settles.  

Yeah I don't disagree and I don't think they overpaid for Lindholm, I just don't think the Canucks are in a position to be pulling those moves. On paper Lindholm is what we need, but my bias is that deadline deals generally don't work out. The trade is still young, Lindholm may re-sign, Hunter B may not succeed at the next level, the first could be a bust, who knows.

 

IMO, the current western conference standings are the most favourable for the canucks. Nucks vs Preds, DAL vs Vegas, Col vs WPG, EDM vs LAK. Fingers crossed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

 

Probably close to what we'll do

 

We'll probably add but I don't think we're big game hunting anymore

Yeah not worth it.  COL and VGK look extremely strong.  Too risky sacrificing that much future to try and matchup against those teams.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Yeah not worth it.  COL and VGK look extremely strong.  Too risky sacrificing that much future to try and matchup against those teams.

If the stars align we can beat then as currently constructed. Im holding out hope we got hot at the right time next month!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HKSR said:

Yeah not worth it.  COL and VGK look extremely strong.  Too risky sacrificing that much future to try and matchup against those teams.

 

Aye, it'd be silly to push all our chips in now imo

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

2 hours ago, Coconuts said:

Blues ask is supposedly two 1sts, prospects are alright too

 

I'd rather not

My friend just texted me:

 

lindholm to boston for debrusk a 1st and lysell 

 

then we trade lysell and the 1st to St. Louis for buchnevich

 

I mean it would work it’s just a lot to do ina. Short period 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, R3aL said:

My friend just texted me:

 

lindholm to boston for debrusk a 1st and lysell 

 

then we trade lysell and the 1st to St. Louis for buchnevich

 

I mean it would work it’s just a lot to do ina. Short period 

 

Gotta think Lindholm would be held out of the game if anything was close no?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, R3aL said:

My friend just texted me:

 

lindholm to boston for debrusk a 1st and lysell 

 

then we trade lysell and the 1st to St. Louis for buchnevich

 

I mean it would work it’s just a lot to do ina. Short period 


I mean it would solve our winger problem.

 

Buchnevich Pettersson Hoglander

Debrusk Miller Boeser

Joshua Blueger Garland

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, R3aL said:

My friend just texted me:

 

lindholm to boston for debrusk a 1st and lysell 

 

then we trade lysell and the 1st to St. Louis for buchnevich

 

I mean it would work it’s just a lot to do ina. Short period 

 

Sounds decent in theory, but it sounds like they like being strong down the middle 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DeNiro said:


I mean it would solve our winger problem.

 

Buchnevich Pettersson Hoglander

Debrusk Miller Boeser

Joshua Blueger Garland

It really would. I wonder if it works salary wise. 
 

think it’s close and we’d hVe to drop a player probably to minors and run one player sheit but I’ didn’t look at it.

 

id absolutely love Acquiring buchnevich though 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Coconuts said:

 

Sounds decent in theory, but it sounds like they like being strong down the middle 

Lots of left hand shots too if we went that route

 

i don’t know it’s just tough not having. A legit top 6 guy with petey 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, R3aL said:

Lots of left hand shots too if we went that route

 

i don’t know it’s just tough not having. A legit top 6 guy with petey 

 

I get it, not sure that gets solved in season though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the way prizes are, if we make any moves I hope it’s for a player with another year on their contract eg. Vatrano - another year at 3.65 with no trade protection. Someone that we can expect as a top 6 F going into next season that we also retain as an asset instead of overpaying not to walk as a UFA. Love the idea of Toffoli but rental price is nuts. If any of these FA’s make it to UFA we can target then.  Will be more options available around the league for trade then too. 
 

I have no issue adding where we can now at minimal damage to our asset pool and giving the boys a chance to continue to prove why they are amongst the upper class of the league. 

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...