Rumor: Canucks Now Looking to Add Mid 20s Impact Forward

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Kind of an off-the-board option, but I would be very interested in Troy Terry from Anaheim. I know they signed him long-term, but he is one their "older" core players and might not really be on the roster post-rebuild.

Love the transition ability and crafty inside-triangle chance creation. Cost certainty is key.
 
Lots of people making the joke of 'har har everyone needs that', but this management group in Vancouver doesn't mess around. They are one of the most active groups in the league if not the most active. So if you were to gamble who would make a move like this you'd be smart to short list the Canucks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DekeyPete and Kegs
Of those three (Mitts, Cozens, Norris) which would Allvin/Rutherford prefer? Are they all kind of even, except Cozens because he’s a right shot might be preferred?

In only my opinion, its Norris because we've been linked to him before, the Hughes connection, and his faceoff skills.

I dont like any of the 3 though but its slim pickings unless they actually do trade Petey, in which case id hope a Sillinger, McTavish, ect is included.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fatass
The islanders are going no where. You get essentially 2 firsts for him (garland would get a 1st) and a good middle six wing prospect. Not sure how much better they could do. Hoglander isn’t a dump in either
Still doesn’t benefit the Islanders. With the return. They’d be losing their offensive catalyst and top play driving winger to get back Connor Garland, a 3rd liner in Hoglander, late 1st and Lekkerimaki. It’s a quality for quality type of trade that the quantity doesn’t make losing the quality worthwhile. To move Barzal it would involve a hockey trade where a similar style/skillset type of player would have to come back. None of that does it at this moment.
 
I mean you’re right about sustainability being important, but Miller also has a 99 point year

Yes, it's right there, but still isn't.

It's like back in the day when Kessel was traded to the Leafs. Both sides seemed happy and both sides called him a 40 goal scorer because he was on pace for it and only need 1, or 3 goals and missed 10 games.

The main difference here is he didn't score 40 and never did in his career.

It might be just a slight chance, but McDavid is a 100 point player, because you know he's going to hit 100+ points a season if he's healthy. Maybe even if he isn't fully healthy.

In the previous three years, he has had a 103 and a 99 point season. Are we really going to get that pedantic?
Yes, mainly because he didn't actually hit it.
If someone scores 50 goals, they are, by definition, a 50 goal scorer. It just requires context to tell the full story. You just made one of the dumbest f***ing posts I’ve ever seen.

Unless you’re trying to gaslight the entire hockey community into thinking it’s the way you’ve described?
A 50 goal scorer is Ovechkin.

Is Chris Kreider a 50 goal scorer ? f*** no. Is he a player who scored 50 goals once in his career ? Yes, pretty simple.

If I saw Marner is a 90 point player while Miller is a 100 point player, you'd make the assumption that Miller is better when he isn't.

If last week I said name a team that has 2 100 point centres. You're naming Edmonton, but Vancouver would be acceptable in that instance because both Miller and Pettersson have reached the 100 point mark.

Based on your logic and the person who first didn't get it, it's like anyone saying Toronto got a sick deal on a 30 goal scorer by signing Pacioretty for league minimum.

You'd laugh and say despite having a few 30+ goal season under his belt he is no longer a 30 goal scorer.

You also know players have career years and sometimes they reach a new plateau and never reach it again.

Calling Miller, or Pettersson a 100 point centre is disingenuous.

I can't make it anymore simpler for you. If you don't get it.

Actually, I can. How can a player be labeled something if he averages less than that average ?

He can't

Phone drop.

Now the screen is cracked, but worth it
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Szechwan
Vancouver
-Tom willander/lekkarimaki
-2nd round pick
-Nils hoglander

Anaheim
-Mason McTavish

Who says no, and if so how would you balance it
 
Damn, in what universe does Miller have multiple 100 point seasons ?

Ahh yes that's right he doesn't and people just like to over inflate a player's value
Feel like it’s been pointed out to you already that he’s played at a 96 pt pace for the last 3 years. So yeah he’s being overinflated… by 4%. This is the “well ACTUALLY” hill to die on?
 
  • Like
Reactions: IComeInPeace
No. It's a stupid statement. They just made a horrible trade and want what everyone in the NHL wants..but for free!

...are you okay? Why are you lying? What were they supposed to do, keep everyone and tank the season while everyone fights?

What makes you think for a second that team Jim Rutherford of all people wouldn't pay to acquire a player he wants?
 
they traded a 100 point center for a 26 year old 40 point scorer with back problems.

they’re looking for a lot of things.

Yeah ……a chiropractor and some Vicodin . Oh and a giant bottle of scotch for those poor Nucks fans that have to endure the sell off that started with Horvat
 
Hmm... I will probably get blown up for this, but hey, it's fun to speculate and propose ideas that could make some amount of sense. So, that said, how about this (gasp!) 3-way deal:

To VAN: Pinto, Jeannot, '25 1st (LA - top 10 protected)
To OTT: Clarke, Hoglander, 25% retain on Boeser
To LA: Boeser (25%), Jensen, Mynio, Yakemchuk

Not sure how much of an "impact" forward people would consider Pinto to be... but a young top 6 capable RHC? Yes...

I really don't think Clarke will get moved, but if he did, this would give LA Boeser + Jensen, along with dumping Jeannot and not retaining on anyone, so they can do this with the minimal cap space they have, plus gaining an A RD prospect and a B LD prospect...

And for OTT, I know someone just said Pinto shouldn't move, but for Clarke? And your C depth is still Stutzle-Norris-Grieg? Yakemchuk would be a big loss, but Clarke fits their timeline better...

Go easy :help:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Caboose and David71
Yeah ……a chiropractor and some Vicodin . Oh and a giant bottle of scotch for those poor Nucks fans that have to endure the sell off that started with Horvat

To be completely honest a lot of us just didn't care anymore, and are just glad the JT/EP drama is over.

Miller didn't bring back amazing value but one of them had to be moved and the Canucks addressed their biggest weakness in the process.

New day, time to move forward.
 
Feel like it’s been pointed out to you already that he’s played at a 96 pt pace for the last 3 years. So yeah he’s being overinflated… by 4%. This is the “well ACTUALLY” hill to die on?
Yes, especially since he's not, you know getting what he's called to be

He's also not 24 where there's a good chance he can top that.

He gets 100 points next year, or somehow this year I'll easily say that he's a 100 point player, but I doubt he does.
 
Vancouver has been playing cap gymnastics all season. Creating that extra space with the trades means they are hunting big and most likely have some one in mind.

Read a article about Ottawa/Van talking Norris but it doesn't make sense. We just don't have something they need unless they flip the first we give them for something.
Would love a trade for Norris but the package wouldn't make sense.

Owen Tippet
Kyle Palmeri
Ryan O'Rielly & Shenn

I keep thinking they need a veteran presence to pull it together.
As stated lot of teams still in the hunt and think more names shake out closer to the deadline for better value.
 
Kind of an off-the-board option, but I would be very interested in Troy Terry from Anaheim. I know they signed him long-term, but he is one their "older" core players and might not really be on the roster post-rebuild.

Love the transition ability and crafty inside-triangle chance creation. Cost certainty is key.
What would Vancouver offer?
 
If you're doing finances and you reach a million dollars, but then drop below that and haven't gotten back to it, are you still a millionaire ? No

If you weight 160lbs a few years ago, but now you're over 200 lbs, are you still a 160lbs individual ?

is Chris Kreider someone you can expect 50 goals from a year ? No. Why ? Because he's done it once..

If Miller gets 100 points again, then yes, that would be a 100 point player as he's proven he can do it more than once.

Now, put your red nose on and enjoy being the clown that you are.
He has a 99pt season and a 103pt season, are you really writing all that because he was a single point short of doing it twice?
 
Vancouver has been playing cap gymnastics all season. Creating that extra space with the trades means they are hunting big and most likely have some one in mind.

They never in their wildest dreams thought this season would go off the rails like it has.

Every callup and recall ounce of savings was entirely for Marcus Pettersson or comparable D, after we have a great year, in managements eyes.

Space for a top 4 D. Thats been the goal.

We woulda traded our own 1st, plus a 2nd to dump whatever salary was required even after the cap gymnastics.

The fact they now have all this capspace because they had to trade away a core member, before they even got to Boeser, must sicken them.

I feel like Allvin's added chippyness this year has been a bit of frustration, and a bit of being pissed he finally was out of LTIR, screwed around every waivers eligible player he could all year, and now its all for nothing HAHA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cloudedthought
Yes, it's right there, but still isn't.

It's like back in the day when Kessel was traded to the Leafs. Both sides seemed happy and both sides called him a 40 goal scorer because he was on pace for it and only need 1, or 3 goals and missed 10 games.

The main difference here is he didn't score 40 and never did in his career.

It might be just a slight chance, but McDavid is a 100 point player, because you know he's going to hit 100+ points a season if he's healthy. Maybe even if he isn't fully healthy.


Yes, mainly because he didn't actually hit it.

A 50 goal scorer is Ovechkin.

Is Chris Kreider a 50 goal scorer ? f*** no. Is he a player who scored 50 goals once in his career ? Yes, pretty simple.

If I saw Marner is a 90 point player while Miller is a 100 point player, you'd make the assumption that Miller is better when he isn't.

If last week I said name a team that has 2 100 point centres. You're naming Edmonton, but Vancouver would be acceptable in that instance because both Miller and Pettersson have reached the 100 point mark.

Based on your logic and the person who first didn't get it, it's like anyone saying Toronto got a sick deal on a 30 goal scorer by signing Pacioretty for league minimum.

You'd laugh and say despite having a few 30+ goal season under his belt he is no longer a 30 goal scorer.

You also know players have career years and sometimes they reach a new plateau and never reach it again.

Calling Miller, or Pettersson a 100 point centre is disingenuous.

I can't make it anymore simpler for you. If you don't get it.

Actually, I can. How can a player be labeled something if he averages less than that average ?

He can't

Phone drop.

Now the screen is cracked, but worth it
Keep posting it is making you look very smart
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad