LeBrun: CBJ will be looking for a 1st round pick for Provorov once they are ready to move him

noncents

Registered User
Feb 25, 2022
1,652
2,064
Voronkov is trending to become one of the best power forwards in the NHL. You’re not going to like the price tag for him
see my earlier question - who might fit as a cost controlled middle 6 F.
 

DingDongCharlie

Registered User
Sep 12, 2010
11,727
9,836
I doubt he'd be the best D available before the deadline. That aside, he is a D that can play both sides, PP and PK and log 20 mins a night. He will fetch a 1st.

I'm sure Edmonton would want him if the money could work. 2026 1st + prospect/pick for him with some more retention.
 
Last edited:

LokiDog

Get pucks deep. Get pucks to the net. And, uh…
Sep 13, 2018
11,935
23,691
Dallas
I frankly think whether or not that'd work for us would be heavily dependent on whether or not Lindgren-Severson can be expected to be a good functional pairing. (Either that or we dodge the whole question and move on from Severson, but that's much easier said than done.)

If the Rangers had a good deal lined up for Provorov I could see them making Lindgren available to a different playoff team for a pick to recoup a bit. Doesn’t necessarily have to be Lindgren going to CBJ. Also Lindgren could go to CBJ as a pure cap dump for a couple months since he’s UFA and we don’t factor him into the price for Provorov so much, more just a temporary stop in Columbus to make the money work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EdJovanovski

Viqsi

"that chick from Ohio"
Oct 5, 2007
55,832
35,483
40N 83W (approx)
see my earlier question - who might fit as a cost controlled middle 6 F.
We don't really have good spares in that regard because we're trying to develop the depth we have rather than trade it for more deferred futures.

EDIT: Closest equivalent would be Olivier, but 1) he's more "high bottom-6" than "middle-6", 2) we'd much prefer to keep him rather than throw him in a futures package, and 3) while he has been working more on his offensive contributions in practice, his current offensive output relies on an unreasonably high shooting percentage.
There's one other name, too, but y'all don't get to ask about him.
 
Last edited:

biturbo19

Registered User
Jul 13, 2010
27,268
12,401
I'd be surprised if they didn't at least get very close to that, or "equivalent value". This deadline market for Top-4D who can play significant minutes looks pretty barren.

He's also the sort of "built for playoffs" type, with stout, rugged build, gets around pretty well, not a soft little offensive specialist or whatever. Teams always covet those types.


The other thing is...he's "cheap" which makes him easier to fit into more suitors cap situation at the deadline. Even more so if Columbus were willing to retain additionally on him for the rest of the season. Columbus could basically act as their own "cap intermediary" on secondary retention (and reap the extra trade value of that themselves). Heck, you could get him down to less than $2.5M. I believe CBJ still have the retention slots for that, right? That would add a lot of potential "value" and "demand" for sure.




I think he'd be a great fit for Vancouver. It's sort of risky, if they can't end up finding the right partner for him. I'm not sure who that would be tbh. Demonstrating an ability to play both sides now is a nice bonus, though probably a moot point with Foote's reluctance to play guys on their off side. But he's the sort of guy they're looking for, would add some more mobility and a bit of puck-moving ability...but still with that size they desire. I also feel like the Canucks coaching staff have had good success with defencemen like that who need to really "simplify" their game to be more effective.

I'd spend a 1st, particularly if there's additional retention.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BKarchitect

HockeyVirus

Woll stan.
Nov 15, 2020
19,556
29,937
Sure, I don't disagree, but all they have to offer is a future 1st, which will be beaten by any other teams offer of a current 1st

I mean, a 1st doesn't mean a 1st I think it just means 1st round value. Oilers could get creative to make it work. Prospects, first next year, they have the picks they got from the Blues, etc.

2026 1st and Blues 3rd this year for Provorov 50% probably gets it done
 

Brodeur

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
26,767
17,567
San Diego
What are they waiting for? They're in 7th place

If I'm reading CapWages correctly, 20 teams wouldn't have the cap space for Provorov without additional retention. Waiting until the deadline would hypothetically increase the number of suitors. At this point of the season, there's probably a few bubble teams who don't know if they'll be buying or selling at the deadline.

Trying to think of other examples of impending UFAs who were dealt relatively early. Buffalo shipped Thomas Vanek to the Islanders in October 2013 (with the Islanders intending to extend Vanek). New Jersey traded Taylor Hall in December 2019.

While you risk Provorov to injury (I think partly why the Devils traded Hall early), Columbus could also gamble on other teams having a top 4D get hurt which would increase the price tag potentially.
 

Rowlet

Registered User
Sponsor
Oct 13, 2018
4,463
5,252
I mean, a 1st doesn't mean a 1st I think it just means 1st round value. Oilers could get creative to make it work. Prospects, first next year, they have the picks they got from the Blues, etc.

2026 1st and Blues 3rd this year for Provorov 50% probably gets it done

Pretty sure a 1st means a 1st. Most teams would probably rather make their own picks than Edmonton's picks from a few years ago. Even if Edmonton offers next year's 1st and a 3rd, any other team can still offer this year's 1st and a 3rd.
 
  • Like
Reactions: biturbo19

SteelCityCannon

Registered User
Mar 25, 2017
684
1,310
I would love to keep him. He's been really good this year when not paired with Severson. He eats minutes and is durable.

Whoever asked for Voronkov is out to lunch. Dudes turning into a unicorn. He's huge, great in front of the net, and has soft hands. Had a great rookie year. If he was on the leafs you'd know who he was.
 

CannonFire1

Registered User
Jun 22, 2023
191
264
I'd be surprised if they didn't at least get very close to that, or "equivalent value". This deadline market for Top-4D who can play significant minutes looks pretty barren.

He's also the sort of "built for playoffs" type, with stout, rugged build, gets around pretty well, not a soft little offensive specialist or whatever. Teams always covet those types.


The other thing is...he's "cheap" which makes him easier to fit into more suitors cap situation at the deadline. Even more so if Columbus were willing to retain additionally on him for the rest of the season. Columbus could basically act as their own "cap intermediary" on secondary retention (and reap the extra trade value of that themselves). Heck, you could get him down to less than $2.5M. I believe CBJ still have the retention slots for that, right? That would add a lot of potential "value" and "demand" for sure.




I think he'd be a great fit for Vancouver. It's sort of risky, if they can't end up finding the right partner for him. I'm not sure who that would be tbh. Demonstrating an ability to play both sides now is a nice bonus, though probably a moot point with Foote's reluctance to play guys on their off side. But he's the sort of guy they're looking for, would add some more mobility and a bit of puck-moving ability...but still with that size they desire. I also feel like the Canucks coaching staff have had good success with defencemen like that who need to really "simplify" their game to be more effective.

I'd spend a 1st, particularly if there's additional retention.
I'm sure Columbus will retain 50% to improve their return.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad