Proposal: NYR- Vancouver

[Nucklehead Supreme]

Seems more like you're going with potential franchise players. In which case, most teams will risk the boom/bust with those prospects, rather than trading them away for a "Top 30 D-man."

I'd assume the Canucks would take JT Miller over Buch. He's more proven, and still has potential to do more. Miller got a little over 100 minutes on the powerplay this season. The next one on the list? Lindberg, with just over 50 minutes. I think JT can do a lot more, and is worth more to teams than Buch, at least for now. I mean, he's only 23.

Miller isn't close to enough. We have enough young players that are similar to him. The only way we trade Tanev is for an overpayment, something the Ranger would never give up along the lines of Kreider plus, yes I know that would never happen.

 

[TGWL]

Miller isn't close to enough. We have enough young players that are similar to him. The only way we trade Tanev is for an overpayment, something the Ranger would never give up along the lines of Kreider plus, yes I know that would never happen.

I'm not saying he's enough. I'm saying I could see the Canucks wanting him over Buch.

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

I'm not saying he's enough. I'm saying I could see the Canucks wanting him over Buch.

Honestly I disagree, we have very little in the cupboard in terms of young potential top 4 blue liners. We have plenty of middle six prospects though.

 

[PetterssonSimp]

The Rangers should have been doing what Vancouver has been doing. Acquiring top players to supplement their own and acquire established players to push them back into the contender territory. They've been way too mediocre for a roster that isn't far off, like you guys made he finals with only what else more a mostly in the sack Brad Richards?
We both seem to be in the wrong spots to trade with each other. Your team should be getting better for winning sakes, my team should have been trying to move out some unneeded depth if acquiring Eriksson was their first priority in FA. Utilizing 6 milliong, hell even 3 if we had to retain half on Miller would be a good start. Get worse right now, either player top rated would help Vancouver's long term winning goals over trading a prime age defender signed for reasonable rate. We just brought one in who I hope comes in at a similar number.

 

[Lindberg Cheese]

The Rangers should have been doing what Vancouver has been doing. Acquiring top players to supplement their own and acquire established players to push them back into the contender territory. They've been way too mediocre for a roster that isn't far off, like you guys made he finals with only what else more a mostly in the sack Brad Richards?
We both seem to be in the wrong spots to trade with each other. Your team should be getting better for winning sakes, my team should have been trying to move out some unneeded depth if acquiring Eriksson was their first priority in FA. Utilizing 6 milliong, hell even 3 if we had to retain half on Miller would be a good start. Get worse right now, either player top rated would help Vancouver's long term winning goals over trading a prime age defender signed for reasonable rate. We just brought one in who I hope comes in at a similar number.

As I look around the league looking for a success formula, the winning model....... and sorry but the Canucks don't really resonate with me there.

 

[Canadian Canuck]

Honestly I disagree, we have very little in the cupboard in terms of young potential top 4 blue liners. We have plenty of middle six prospects though.

Buch isn't a defenseman

 

[canuckster19]

What's with all the Tanev proposals? The perpetual pessimist flank of the Canucks fan base is irritating.

 

[Nucklehead Supreme]

Buch isn't a defenseman

My bad, nevermind.

 

[clunk]

What's with all the Tanev proposals? The perpetual pessimist flank of the Canucks fan base is irritating.

I'm pro tank and I still wouldn't trade Tanev for anything short of an overpayment. I don't really get the need to ship him out. He's a model d-man. Arguably the 2nd best defensive d-man in the whole sport. Younger guys can learn a lot of things from the way he plays the game.

 

[Shootertooter]

I'm pro tank and I still wouldn't trade Tanev for anything short of an overpayment. I don't really get the need to ship him out. He's a model d-man. Arguably the 2nd best defensive d-man in the whole sport. Younger guys can learn a lot of things from the way he plays the game.

I think that will get plenty of argument actually. Top 2? Really? Who is #1?

 

[Addison Rae]

Girardi, Staal, Tanev, are u suggesting they pile up all the same type of D playing in the NHL in the same team?

That's like saying a team doesn't need Erik Karlsson because they have Yannick Weber and Mark Streit.

 

[Vatican Roulette]

"Rebuilding" doesn't mean trading 26 year old top pairing defencemen for magic beans, just because.

magic beans.

Kreider and Klein are magic beans.

Graves may be a bean...I don't know how much magic he knows.

 

[Addison Rae]

magic beans.

Kreider and Klein are magic beans.

Graves may be a bean...I don't know how much magic he knows.

Why would Vancouver have any interest in trading a 26 year old top pairing dman on an excellent contract for a packaged based around Chris Kreider? Kreider is a 20/20 forward with good physical tools, but hardly enough to be the main piece in a deal for Chrsitopher Tanev.

 

[Vatican Roulette]

Why would Vancouver have any interest in trading a 26 year old top pairing dman on an excellent contract for a packaged based around Chris Kreider? Kreider is a 20/20 forward with good physical tools, but hardly enough to be the main piece in a deal for Chrsitopher Tanev.

Fair, but he isn't a magic bean. And neither is Klein.

 

[Isles_Guy*]

Why would Vancouver do this? Buchnevich, Skjei and a pick I could see because the Canucks need to build for the future and Tanev will be 30 or older before they win anything if not older but Kreider would be 30+ also.....

Both teams should be looking to move older players for younger assets. Getting Eriksson and Gudbransson is a fools game as far as I'm concerned. A total bandaid designed to fool season ticket holders. While the Rangers, smartly are focused on getting younger, but that doesn't mean Vancouver should just give away Tanev for something that doesn't help them.

Maybe Tanev and Miller for Lundqvist and Klein and Kreider if Benning insists on going all in. To me it's good money after bad

 

[JAK]

Gudbranson isn't a stop gap, he is the cornerstone of the bottom four dman in Canucks future core.

Eriksson is a bandaid though, to generate ticket sales, but his playstyle should keep him as an effective second line scorer at the last few years.

 

[Isles_Guy*]

Gudbranson isn't a stop gap, he is the cornerstone of the bottom four dman in Canucks future core.

Eriksson is a bandaid though, to generate ticket sales, but his playstyle should keep him as an effective second line scorer at the last few years.

If Gudbransson is a cornerstone, the canucks are in even more trouble than I thought. He's not Sbisa level BAD but it's close. I live in Florida so I know. Tallon was dead set on moving him because he knew he was already overpaid and he wasn't gonna get any better.

 

[gianni]

If Gudbransson is a cornerstone, the canucks are in even more trouble than I thought. He's not Sbisa level BAD but it's close. I live in Florida so I know. Tallon was dead set on moving him because he knew he was already overpaid and he wasn't gonna get any better.

To be fair to Erik Gudbranson, I feel that the Panthers rushed him to the NHL out of necessity. And much like Jacob Markstrom, I believe that there's untapped potential that the Canucks development system can bring out of him.

For the package the Canucks traded to acquire him, I'd be happy if he became a #3 d-man; and would be ecstatic if he reached his initial draft year potential as a #2 d-man.

 

[Shootertooter]

As I look around the league looking for a success formula, the winning model....... and sorry but the Canucks don't really resonate with me there.

Darn you and your pesky facts. Sorry but Van. has not been a model of a winning franchise for some time now, they missed the playoffs in 2 of the last 3 seasons. They aren't quite Toronto, so you still have that!!

 

[PetterssonSimp]

As I look around the league looking for a success formula, the winning model....... and sorry but the Canucks don't really resonate with me there.

Funny seeing as one team in this discussion was a hell of a lot closer to winning a championship than the other. Both still failed but I'd take 3 wins over 2 anyday of the week in the playoffs.
Neither team is a model of winning, just seems the Rangers were a lot closer to making the playoffs and being an impact team had they supplemented their core with a bit more support. That was my point. But hey if you wanna start a pissing match I'm sure we can talk Free Agent frenzy all day with Ranger fans

 

[Shootertooter]

Funny seeing as one team in this discussion was a hell of a lot closer to winning a championship than the other. Both still failed but I'd take 3 wins over 2 anyday of the week in the playoffs.
Neither team is a model of winning, just seems the Rangers were a lot closer to making the playoffs and being an impact team had they supplemented their core with a bit more support. That was my point. But hey if you wanna start a pissing match I'm sure we can talk Free Agent frenzy all day with Ranger fans

Other than Chicago and LA(maybe), I don't think any NHL team has played more playoff games than NYR is the last 4 or 5 seasons. It sucks for fans that they haven't won in the finals but it is cool having the confidence that one's team should go far....as opposed to not.

 

[Lindberg Cheese]

Funny seeing as one team in this discussion was a hell of a lot closer to winning a championship than the other. Both still failed but I'd take 3 wins over 2 anyday of the week in the playoffs.
Neither team is a model of winning, just seems the Rangers were a lot closer to making the playoffs and being an impact team had they supplemented their core with a bit more support. That was my point. But hey if you wanna start a pissing match I'm sure we can talk Free Agent frenzy all day with Ranger fans

No pissing match warranted, and I have nothing but Respect for the Canucks. I was only commenting on a post saying that the NYR should follow the Van team strategy which did not convince me based on recent history. Peace and love.

 

[Sergei Shirokov]

Love Tanev, but Buch has the potential to be a star. I'd rather offer them JT Miller+, which is still a great deal. I wouldn't give up a guy with Buch's ceiling to acquire a one-dimensional shot suppressor, albeit the best shot suppressor in the league last season.

I don't think JT Miller works for us, we have alot of two-way centers in our organization, even 2 on our roster that leave him no room in the lineup.

I know he's played Wing in the past but if we are giving up Tanev we would want a natural winger and an offensive one at that. (Not that Miller can't be, but I'm sure u know what I mean) Or else a young defenseman like Skeji.

Wait, Vancouver is rebuilding?

Signing top UFA's, trading for established players, keeping high priced depth.

First off, What?

Secondly, while he's established, remember Gudbrandson is still in his early 20's and could be apart of this team for a long time.

And lastly, trading for a player like Eriksson should only help the development of younger player. Stripping it down and tanking isn't the way to do it, it was before because players as UFA's would go where they want, but now with the cap its about development more than anything.

given correctness of post 33 above,
counter:
Stepan for Tanev
straight up

We have too many centers ATM but good offer.

My counter to this would be something around Sutter/Tanev for Stepan/Skeji.

Although now that u guys have moved Brassard, you'd be looking one of Sutter/Zibanejad/Miller to play on your top line which idk if I would like if I was a Rangers fan, even though I do think if they want to win a cup they should try to do it now while they have Lundqvist still playing at an elite level and upgrading from Skjei to Tanev while getting a good middle 6 center back (in his prime) could help them if they were in a position to do such a thing.

As I look around the league looking for a success formula, the winning model....... and sorry but the Canucks don't really resonate with me there.

Well, historically, the Canucks have developed players for the next core under the wing of the top players from the previous era.

Did it with the Sedins, Kes, Edler, exc. Under the WCE guys, and it led to the best team and the best stretch of success in franchise history, and they are doing the same thing now with the young players coming in without pressure of having to carry a team and they learning how to be pros under Sedins.

But please enlighten me on how teams that tank (now that we are out of the first handful of years after the 04/05 lockout) are doing it right

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

given correctness of post 33 above,
counter:
Stepan for Tanev
straight up

would prefer from Canes expansion exempt ELC = expansion exempt Pesce + Murphy + cap dump Bickel + favorable swap of comparable picks. However interested in view of this as fallbck option.

Stop trying to trade Stepan. It is not happening. He has a NTC in years 3 through 6 and he has earned it. He is worth 6.5m and will be 31 when he contract is up. It's a good deal

 

[clunk]

I think that will get plenty of argument actually. Top 2? Really? Who is #1?

Vlasic. Tanev and Hjalmarsson can be interchangeable in the 2nd and 3rd spots but to me, that's the top 3.