Proposal: Leafs and Canucks

vancityluongo

curse of the strombino
Sponsor
Jul 8, 2006
18,936
6,896
Edmonton
uh, sure.

Two guys who are going to walk in a year or two plus a boat anchor contract for a stud first line winger, a good prospect, a 1st and other stuff? Let's do it lol
 

Hockey 4 Life

Registered User
Feb 10, 2012
6,272
3,260
Horvat and Miller are excellent players and I'd love to have them both,but no way leafs move Nylander and sandin and their first, and although muzz is getting older hes still a big part of their d core.
 

notDatsyuk

Registered User
Jul 20, 2018
11,493
9,506
Kerfoot, Ritchie, Robertson, Sandin, Engvall, Mrazek, 1st

FOR

JT Miller, Horvat, Halak


or


Nylander, Sandin, Kerfoot, Ritchie, Muzzin, 1st

FOR

Miller, Horvat, Myers


Both are ridiculously one-sided trades (one each way).

Which is worse?
 

13pacheco31

Registered User
Jan 17, 2014
2,178
1,081
Pretty sure this guy is trolling. I like the idea of dumping mrazek though... Any takers? :sarcasm:
 

Cogburn

Pretend they're yachts.
May 28, 2010
15,132
4,507
Vancouver
Kerfoot, Ritchie, Robertson, Sandin, Engvall, Mrazek, 1st

FOR

JT Miller, Horvat, Halak


or


Nylander, Sandin, Kerfoot, Ritchie, Muzzin, 1st

FOR

Miller, Horvat, Myers


Both are ridiculously one-sided trades (one each way).

Which is worse?

Both are awful.

Robertson, Sandin and a 1st aren't enough for Miller or Horvat. Sandin is a LHD, which we don't have room for now or in the future barring other moves.

Nylander is redundant id we move out Miller and Horvat, as there goes a bulk of our offense. Muzzin, a LHD, is also a piece we have 0 use for with OEL and Hughes signed long term. Sandin has the same problem.

I mean, even if you find a way to argue the value doesn't matter, both offers seem engineered to miss the point of why any Vancouver pieces would be made available.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad