Because Dermott is a better player.
Unless they have another deal in place to acquire another D man on top of Schenn then Dermott for Schenn makes Toronto worse
Proposal: Schenn to TOR
- Thread starter DangleBojangle
- Start date
Because Dermott is a better player.
Unless they have another deal in place to acquire another D man on top of Schenn then Dermott for Schenn makes Toronto worse
kanucks25
Chris Tanev #1 Fan
TBF we were lucky that we weren't blown out
No, we're lucky we drafted Demko in the second round.
The Canucks are in a draft pick deficit, have been so consistently, and have a terrible prospect pool. Absolutely they should be desperate for draft picks. At the least, they can inject a B-level prospect into their pool. At best, maybe they can use the draft pick capital to take advantage of a good opportunity on a player (something like the Buchnevich or Nedeljkovic moves).
Does Dermott improve the team? Short-term, probably no effect. But in the short-term, the season is already lost anyway. In the long-term? Maybe. I'm of the mind that I think you can get a quality player out of Dermott, still. I've used the Schmidt (pre-Vegas) comparable before. Schenn isn't (or shouldn't) be on the team long-term anyway. I personally like Schenn, he's a nice fit, and is seemingly well-liked in the room. But keeping him around doesn't really do anything for the medium or long-term trajectory of the organization.
A guy like Gudas isn't going to be moved, for obvious reasons. The Canucks need to be looking at buy-low gambles on players with some upside. If the price is a bottom-pair defenseman (and you get a pick added the Canucks' way), that is absolutely a good deal for Vancouver.
Boreal01
Registered User
Dermott is better than Schenn and considerably younger
Holl for Schenn would be more realistic but even then the Leafs probably wouldn't want to give up a pick for a (best case scenario) slight upgrade
And if there's no pick being added then Vancouver has no incentive to take on the extra cap hit
Holl for Schenn would be more realistic but even then the Leafs probably wouldn't want to give up a pick for a (best case scenario) slight upgrade
And if there's no pick being added then Vancouver has no incentive to take on the extra cap hit
ACC1224
Super Elite, Passing ALL Tests since 2002
- Aug 19, 2002
- 76,635
- 43,158
I could not disagree more with this. Yes, we're short a 2nd round pick this year due to the OEL/Garland trade, but what do you think the odds are of one of these picks contributing anything to our team, at any point in their careers? A third round pick has about a 12% chance of seeing the NHL.
The way our team is structured, cap wise, having another midding player (he's 26, isn't he? I don't see a meteoric rise in his play in the cards) making between 1-3 million a season (after his present 1.5/season is up) is kind of where we, as a fan base and an organization, seem to get stuck. We have Pearsons, and Poolmans, and Dickinsons, and Hamonics, and in the dark times even more players that were brought in at the level Dermott is, and, well, if we're pushing a youth movement, why not try someone younger, even if brought in through another trade? Plus, I mean Dermott brings nothing into this organization we don't already have, is signed for more than Schenn, and as long. Even with Dermott being 6 years younger, how long are we expecting him to contribute to this team? I'd say the end of his contract, not unlike Schenn. Unless we're pulling a fire sale, a draft pick doesn't really make up the differences here.
In my defense, I did say "like Gudas". Then again, Schenn is like Gudas, for the criteria I have in mind.
Dermott is 25. Sure, if you could find a younger, better defenseman to trade for Schenn, go ahead. But it's not happening.
I would just trade Schenn for a 3rd and call it a day. But if the Canucks could acquire an interesting, young-ish reclamation project at the same time? Why not?
This team needs draft picks. Like I said, having more draft capital gives you more flexibility to pounce on opportunities that arise (like a Buchnevich or Nedeljkovic). They need more prospects. It's not like Schenn is going to help this team long-term. Schenn is not at all like Gudas. On a good team, Schenn shouldn't be in your lineup everyday. Gudas is a top-four defenseman. This would be like me saying Derrick Pouliot is "like" John Klingberg.
Leafs are confident that they are going to go on a run, a 1st in the 29-32 range is basically a high second round pick. Even if the Leafs 1st round collapse again, it'll most likely be the 24th pick.
Schenn got another year at low cost.
Schenn for Leafs 1st.
Anything else, I would hang up as the Canucks GM.
Schenn got another year at low cost.
Schenn for Leafs 1st.
Anything else, I would hang up as the Canucks GM.
Nucklehead Supreme
Registered User
- Jul 10, 2011
- 4,387
- 2,377
Ever heard of sarcasm? Or maybe go back and look at the comment I replied to?
Realistically we don't need Dermott either, so......
ACC1224
Super Elite, Passing ALL Tests since 2002
- Aug 19, 2002
- 76,635
- 43,158
If Schenn is playing in your top 6 then of course you could use a Dermott.
Whole thing is dumb anyway.
Nucklehead Supreme
Registered User
- Jul 10, 2011
- 4,387
- 2,377
Oh look another person who has zero idea about our team, Schenn has been fine with Hughes, watch a game bud.
I'd still value Schenn and his year and a half more then that third though, again, barring a complete tear down of the roster.
From here on out, if we get 82 games out of him, this remaining season and next, he will have done more then any but the most degenerate gambler would count on from a draft pick we make, their whole career.
We've had some good, early picks, and a couple of stand out 2nd round picks in Hoglander and Klimovich, but our drafting hasn't been a strong point for us, especially with stand out scouts not returning (ie Judd Brackett), so I don't see a need to stock up on picks until scouting and player development are overhauled. 3-7th round picks that have gotten us anywhere are K-Conn, Hutton, Forsling and Gaudette. with DiPietro and Rathbone looking good at present. That's 6 in 16 years, on 78 picks (not as short as I thought, only 2 down), which I think is pre-Nonis. That's a 7.7 percent chance of playing 82 games. Even the 10 years prior, we have Edler, Hansen, Brown, Bieksa, Ruutu, Cooke, Schaefer and Sopel. 14 in 26 years, in 152 picks. That's less than a 10% chance of making a pretty low threshold of a full seasons' worth of games.
Draft picks are not our friends. At least until we can have our new braintrust revamp our scouting and player development departments.
Is Pouliot top 5 in any shared stats with Klingberg, this year though? The Gudas-Schenn comment was meant as cheeky sarcasm, not as an actual comparison.
Cupless44
Registered User
- Jun 25, 2014
- 7,200
- 3,352
You are probably right, but right now Schenn brings alot more to his team right now than Dermot brings to his team.
Schenn is playing effectively, playing 20 minutes a night, hitting everyhing that moves. he had 12 hits the other night. Top 5 in the NHL in hits, dropping the gloves to stick up for team mates against heavy weights. He also has 10 points.
What is Dermott doing for the Leafs? Does he help you in the playoffs when you disappoint and dont measure up physically every year?
Last edited:
Legitimately the only metrics that Dermott leads Schenn this season: More Offensive zone start and higher salary, everything else favors Schenn by a landslide. He has been excellent this season. He won't be dealt for spare parts.
paulhiggins
Registered User
- Feb 4, 2006
- 2,807
- 827
Would love this just so I can bring out my Schenn jersey again lol.. been banished to the back of my closet.
Toronto already has traded away their 3rd - 4th - 5th and 6th round draft picks ...
Schenn is on a league minimum contract of $750K
Dermott is a fine 5 / 6 D man ... not a top 4 ... adding Schenn would help Toronto but not guarantee post season success
T.O. Leafs are a fabulous team but their biggest hurdle is to get past FLA TB PIT CAR NYR?
Likely they'd need more substantial than Luke Schenn OR Nick Foligno ... that WAS a horrible trade.
Goaltending ??? Hmmm
Price is Wright
Registered User
Wait, do Canucks fans think they are going to make a trade they like here?
They gave up Nate Schmidt for a third to make room for the OEL/Garland trade which included a first and second. OEL has 14 points in 46 games. Schmidt has 23 points in 45 games.
Dermott and a 3rd is an overpayment for what the Canucks will probably end up accepting.
They gave up Nate Schmidt for a third to make room for the OEL/Garland trade which included a first and second. OEL has 14 points in 46 games. Schmidt has 23 points in 45 games.
Dermott and a 3rd is an overpayment for what the Canucks will probably end up accepting.
No, we're not inclined to move Schenn is what most of us are saying.
Schmidt had a 6 million dollar cap hit as well, Schenn makes league minimum, which is a huge plus, both for Vancouver and Toronto. I'd argue Schmidt should've/would've/could've got more, but with the OEL trade (and likely a request from Schmidt), we were in the same spot as Vegas was. OEL is also behind Hughes, and with Schmidt in the same position he only scored 15 over a whole season, OEL was by and large considered a trade for our cap dumps, so I'm not sure what bringing him into this accomplishes.
We don't want to trade Schenn, for the most part, but are setting our stated prices based on prying him from our cold, dead hands, based on his fit and role with the team, hence the outlandish proposals and replies.
Last edited:
I see NO Canucks fans seeking a trade of Luke Schenn
Unless a team replicates an insane price paid for a solid veteran D man - like Toronto paid for Foligno : the Canucks are happy to keep the team first Luke Schenn to play alongside our superstar Quinn Hughes.
A prospect of our choosing, perhaps. Once again, we have no incentive to move him for what's considered fair.
REALTALK81
Pro Log Driver
- Nov 16, 2009
- 1,108
- 481
