[ARTICLE] What it might take to sign Nikita Zadorov and if it makes sense for the Canucks

[Pears]

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

It would be cool if Allvin could trade for both Guentzel’s and Pesce’s rights?

Hronek + Garland for the rights to Geuntzel and Pesce. 
Hughes, Pesce

Z, Tanev

Soucy, Myers

Juulsson

 

Geuntzel, Petey, xxx

xxx, Miller, Boeser

Why on earth would any team trade two players under contract for two players who aren't? I don't know why you hate Garland so much but he's not going anywhere after how valuable he proved he was this year. 

[tas]

food for thought: when kevin bieksa signed his big contract after the 2010-11 season, $4.6m x 5 years, that represented 7.15% of the salary cap. 

 

if you consider zadorov as someone filling the same role, as I do, the current equivalent value would be $6.3m x 5, full NTC. 

 

bieksa's previous contract, $3.75m x 3 years, actually ate up a larger piece of the pie at 7.46% of the cap, which would prorate to $6.565m today. 

[Captain insano]

1 minute ago, Pears said:

Why on earth would any team trade two players under contract for two players who aren't? I don't know why you hate Garland so much but he's not going anywhere after how valuable he proved he was this year. 

Yah I don’t understand the garland hate, 3rd line mins and very little power play time and still pushing to be a 20 goal 50 point player, if you throw him on a team with little depth he instantly becomes a 60-70 point guy with all the power play points and added ice time, and never mind he’s one of those small guys that play bigger than they are 

[Déjà Vu]

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

It would be cool if Allvin could trade for both Guentzel’s and Pesce’s rights?

Hronek + Garland for the rights to Geuntzel and Pesce. 
Hughes, Pesce

Z, Tanev

Soucy, Myers

Juulsson

 

Geuntzel, Petey, xxx

xxx, Miller, Boeser

neither tanev or pesce will be a canuck, but i guess alflives matter, and see if he correct or myself ^.^

[Alflives]

6 minutes ago, Pears said:

Why on earth would any team trade two players under contract for two players who aren't? I don't know why you hate Garland so much but he's not going anywhere after how valuable he proved he was this year. 

PA is rumoured to be trying to clear off Garland and Mik. IMHAO Garlsnd is home before the draft because we need his cap dollars to get Geuntzel. Geuntzel is a huge upgrade on Garland. 

[Alflives]

4 minutes ago, Déjà Vu said:

neither tanev or pesce will be a canuck, but i guess alflives matter, and see if he correct or myself ^.^

we could certainly sign both and get Geunzel too. We need to get better, especially in our top six forwards. Garland, a third liner, out and Geuntzel, a top liner, in. That makes us better. 

[dannydog]

2 hours ago, HKSR said:

Yeah, even at the same age, Chara was a far superior defenceman.  It's not even close.

Lmao , honestly was just trying to say what a chara did for Boston is what Zads could do for us.bring confidence, play with an edge ect.But time will tell, let’s see what Canucks coaches can pull out of Zads . Maybe he could be “half a chara”.

[HKSR]

2 minutes ago, dannydog said:

Lmao , honestly was just trying to say what a chara did for Boston is what Zads could do for us.bring confidence, play with an edge ect.But time will tell, let’s see what Canucks coaches can pull out of Zads . Maybe he could be “half a chara”.

Half a Chara is still a helluva defenceman.  I'd take that.

[Pears]

12 minutes ago, Alflives said:

PA is rumoured to be trying to clear off Garland and Mik. IMHAO Garlsnd is home before the draft because we need his cap dollars to get Geuntzel. Geuntzel is a huge upgrade on Garland. 

Mikheyev is the only one they've been trying to move. They haven't tried to move Garland since October. 

[GrammaInTheTub]

1 minute ago, Pears said:

Mikheyev is the only one they've been trying to move. They haven't tried to move Garland since October. 

And I hope they don’t revisit the idea. Garland’s production is worth is cap hit. Garland’s drive makes him a great value contract.

[dannydog]

5 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Half a Chara is still a helluva defenceman.  I'd take that.

He’s got lots more potential than “half a chara”. Calgary fans weren’t to ass hurt when we picked Zads up for a 3rd round pick claiming he was prone to atrocious brain farts then what he offered. Thankfully management knew what they were gonna get and fleeced Calgary. He will sign and it will be good for Van.

[Alflives]

10 minutes ago, Pears said:

Mikheyev is the only one they've been trying to move. They haven't tried to move Garland since October. 

650 talks about the Garland rumours pretty much everyday. I posted a show when Sat Shaw was taking about it. 
So we are trying to clear off Garland. And hopefully PA is able to accomplish that so we can sign Guentzel, who is a legit top six winger. 
 

[Pears]

15 minutes ago, Alflives said:

650 talks about the Garland rumours pretty much everyday. I posted a show when Sat Shaw was taking about it. 
So we are trying to clear off Garland. And hopefully PA is able to accomplish that so we can sign Guentzel, who is a legit top six winger. 
 

You need at least three good lines if you want to be a legitimate contender, and we can afford Guentzel without having to move Garland. 

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, Pears said:

You need at least three good lines if you want to be a legitimate contender, and we can afford Guentzel without having to move Garland. 

Exactly. We need to move off all of Garland, a good third liner, to bring in Guentzel who is a good first liner. 

[FlippersUp]

7 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Exactly. We need to move off all of Garland, a good third liner, to bring in Guentzel who is a good first liner. 

If the playoffs showed us anything its that the guys with the biggest balls are your MVP's 

 

To me that was Miller, Hughes, Zadorov, Garland, Dak, Lindholm, PDG. They each drove the bus in various essential ways.  

[Alflives]

Just now, FlippersUp said:

If the playoffs showed us anything its that the guys with the biggest balls are your MVP's 

 

To me that was Miller, Hughes, Zadorov, Garland, Dak, Lindholm, PDG. They each drove the bus in various essential ways.  

And did we win? We need Demko, Petey, and Hughes all healthy to win the Cup. And we need Miller and another star forward - Geuntzal - supporting those key three. 5 mil allocated to Garland is money we can spend elsewhere because we have Hogs to play those 5 on 5 minutes. Garland doesn’t play pp or pk. 

[stawns]

1 hour ago, EdgarM said:

I think when Soucy went down with injury, we did not skip a beat because we had Zadz in the line up. I actually see them interchangeable with Zads having the potential to produce more offense and definitely more physicality moving forward.

 

If I remember correctly, when soucy went down, so did the Canucks play and everyone was counting the days until he returned.

Edited June 15 by stawns

[ArmchairGM22]

2 minutes ago, Alflives said:

And did we win? We need Demko, Petey, and Hughes all healthy to win the Cup. And we need Miller and another star forward - Geuntzal - supporting those key three. 5 mil allocated to Garland is money we can spend elsewhere because we have Hogs to play those 5 on 5 minutes. Garland doesn’t play pp or pk. 

I agree with both of you. I’m a big fan of garland but if it costs garland to get space for Guentzel you do it. 
 

would be better to find a way off Mik as the cap solution though 

[Rick_theRyper]

1 minute ago, stawns said:

 

If I remember correctly, when soucy went down, so did the Canucks play and everyone was counting the days until he returned.

Yeah their record with Soucy healthy was insane, I remember it being brought up when he came back during a broadcast was something 11-1 just spit balling a number. But it was very obvious he brought a calming factor to the defense as a whole. He helped Myers have his best season in a long time! 

[stawns]

3 minutes ago, ArmchairGM22 said:

I agree with both of you. I’m a big fan of garland but if it costs garland to get space for Guentzel you do it. 
 

would be better to find a way off Mik as the cap solution though 

 

And then they've got a big hole in the lineup for garland......not only in terms of a spot, but in his style, his effectiveness, his presence/leadership etc

 

Seems like robbing peter to pay Paul 

Edited June 15 by stawns

[ArmchairGM22]

1 minute ago, stawns said:

 

And then they've got a big hole in the lineup for garland......not only in terms of a spot, but in his style, his effectiveness, his presence/leadership etc

 

Seems like robbing peter to pay Paul 

I think you’re ignoring what Guentzel adds over and above him 
 

You increase our team points by 25-30 at least 

 

you lose a very valuable piece for sure in what he brings but he’s replaceable and you hope Hogs can take another step and that podz can step up as well. 
 

I don’t like losing most of our third line (inc Joshua) either but if it ups our ceiling you do it. It should also help our PP and Petey tremendously 

 

as I said, I prefer getting off Mik, even if it means giving up a pick over Garland but if it comes down to it, you can’t say no to Guentzel to keep Garland imho.

[FlippersUp]

15 minutes ago, Alflives said:

And did we win? We need Demko, Petey, and Hughes all healthy to win the Cup. And we need Miller and another star forward - Geuntzal - supporting those key three. 5 mil allocated to Garland is money we can spend elsewhere because we have Hogs to play those 5 on 5 minutes. Garland doesn’t play pp or pk. 

youre drawing lines that don't connect though. 

[stawns]

6 minutes ago, ArmchairGM22 said:

I think you’re ignoring what Guentzel adds over and above him 
 

You increase our team points by 25-30 at least 

 

you lose a very valuable piece for sure in what he brings but he’s replaceable and you hope Hogs can take another step and that podz can step up as well. 
 

I don’t like losing most of our third line (inc Joshua) either but if it ups our ceiling you do it. It should also help our PP and Petey tremendously 

 

as I said, I prefer getting off Mik, even if it means giving up a pick over Garland but if it comes down to it, you can’t say no to Guentzel to keep Garland imho.

 

I think there's better options to dump mik's deal than losing the guy who was, arguably, their best fwd in the playoffs.  Imo, Garland is as much the identity of this team as anyone in the lineup.  He's a core player to me and not someone you add as a sweetener to get rid of another player.

 

And we can all be gung ho on guentzal, but he's played his entire career riding shotgun to one if the goats in the history of the game. 

 

I pass on JG at the cost it's going to take to get him

Edited June 15 by stawns

[EdgarM]

22 minutes ago, stawns said:

 

If I remember correctly, when soucy went down, so did the Canucks play and everyone was counting the days until he returned.

Are we thinking the same injury period? Was Zadorov even on the team when Soucy first got injured I can't rememember. I do remember though that the LAST time Soucy was injured, we tolerated it a lot better with Zads in the line up.

[ArmchairGM22]

6 minutes ago, stawns said:

 

I think there's better options to dump mik's deal than losing the guy who was, arguably, their best fwd in the playoffs.  Imo, Garland is as much the identity of this team as anyone in the lineup.  He's a core player to me and not someone you add as a sweetener to get rid of another player.

 

And we can all be gung ho on guentzal, but he's played his entire career riding shotgun to one if the goats in the history of the game. 

 

I pass on JG at the cost it's going to take to get him

I’m not suggesting you add Garland as a sweetener, he’s got good value now 

 

was suggesting adding a pick as a sweetener to get off Mik’s contract for that cap room instead 

 

The point was, if you’re able to sign JG and you can’t get off Mik’s contract without say giving up a fist, Then, a trade of Garlamd makes sense.

 

we would still get a quality prospect or pick back