Proposal: Vancouver - Columbus
- Thread starter Kshahdoo
- Start date
bandwagonesque
I eat Kraft Dinner and I vote
- Mar 5, 2014
- 7,375
- 5,729
The Canucks' front office might consider this. Most fans of the team, who believe a rebuild of some kind is necessary, would not.
Killer Orcas
Registered User
Canadian Canuck
Hughes4Calder
Tempo
Registered User
- Jun 13, 2019
- 390
- 653
Couldn’t we consolidate all the junk JT Miller proposal into one thread?
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
I'd really like to know what it is that has so many people so hopelessly, foolishly, wrongfully convinced that we'd be willing to move Gavrikov at all. "Look, here is a young blueline that's still developing and consists almost entirely of puckmovers and offensively-minded guys. I know who can be spared - the one and only primarily defensive guy in the whole group!" NO. Quit it. Whatever is making you think this is WRONG. Stop indulging it and give us a damn break already.
And no, trying to make the proposal value seemingly biased in our favor is not going to change that. All that does is create a proposal that everyone hates.
And no, trying to make the proposal value seemingly biased in our favor is not going to change that. All that does is create a proposal that everyone hates.
What are Columbus' needs? If they want a top-flight center, the plus for Gavrikov would either be Roslovic (IMO) or a pretty high pick. Miller's a point per game scorer who can play center or wing, wins draws and is good on both #1 PP and PK units (he's the PP QB alongside Hughes, and you'd have another left shot one-timer threat opposite Laine). Getting a top-4 D and 3rd C for that doesn't seem too far fetched, or feel free to suggest an add from Vancouver to make this work.
Dumais
It's All In The Reflexes
- Jul 24, 2013
- 1,715
- 749
You mean a guy who is 28, a year away from FA and about to get paid? How about we keep Gav and Ros and keep getting better by adding another pretty high pick (which is going to be a lottery ticket) and keep developing the team we got. JT doesn't make us a Cup contender. It puts us into that make the playoffs maybe, and get bounced from the first round group. And if we really want him and he wants to be "back home" he can come via FA.
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
Development time for the kids and a lack of poaching attempts for the folks showing them around. Defensively-oriented experienced RHD would also help, but Vancouver is pretty definitely not the team we should ask about that, so...
If they didn't have Gavrikov, he would be the biggest need.
He plays a lot of minutes and is an excellent shutdown defender. There's no internal replacement.
Gavrikov is not available.
TheHelmet
Registered User
This is like the 100000th thread about vancouver targeting a left shot defenseman
They have +$14 million on that side now, so they are going to give up a big asset for a 3rd pairing.
They have +$14 million on that side now, so they are going to give up a big asset for a 3rd pairing.
bandwagonesque
I eat Kraft Dinner and I vote
- Mar 5, 2014
- 7,375
- 5,729
2-3 posts below this one another Columbus poster has shown you how you could have said basically the same thing without screaming at everyone.
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
2-3 threads prior to this one you could have seen me doing the same thing. Patience is a limited resource.
Just A Bit Outside
Playoffs??!
- Mar 6, 2010
- 17,444
- 17,058
Miller is from Ohio which is probably the driving motivator here, but if the Canucks are trading him I'd want Boqvist, Sillinger, or Johnson. None of those will be entertained by Columbus.
Columbus and Vancouver are probably bad trade partners because they're kind of in the same stage of development; not playoff teams, not bare bones strip it down to the ground rebuilding teams. They're both teams with good young players that need a combination of time and restructuring. Neither should be getting older, neither should be trading prospects.
Columbus and Vancouver are probably bad trade partners because they're kind of in the same stage of development; not playoff teams, not bare bones strip it down to the ground rebuilding teams. They're both teams with good young players that need a combination of time and restructuring. Neither should be getting older, neither should be trading prospects.
Eh, I'd at least consider trading Boqvist for Miller. But Boqvist doesn't seem like the type Vancouver needs for their D core. They need a Tanev replacement not a discount Quinn Hughes.
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
In our case the restructuring might already potentially be bearing fruit (see: the really nice start to the season so far, which hopefully will continue, and which is probably why folks keep thinking we might be willing to buy), but otherwise, yeah, this is pretty accurate.
WannabeFinn
Beloved One
Viqsi
"that chick from Ohio"
As for those who want to accuse me of having a short fuse... this is how my reply progression tends to go in these discussions.
Thread #1 OP: "<player> for <other asset>"
My reply: "It's fair in a vacuum, but we'd nonetheless decline; <player>'s a bit too important to our team because <situation>."
Thread #2 OP: "<player> for <other asset>"
My reply: "No thanks. <situation> applies so we kind of don't want to move <player>, and <other asset> does not change or improve that situation."
Thread #3 OP: "<player> for <other asset>"
My reply: "We really aren't going to move <player> because of <situation>. We'd need a replacement for <player> immediately, and <other asset> won't do that. This has been reiterated before. Please stop asking. Thanks."
Thread #4 OP: "<player> for <whatever, don't care anymore>"
My reply: "Ugh. Quit asking about <player> already. <situation> still applies and will continue to apply, as plenty of Jackets fans including myself have kept pointing out. Stop it. Please. For the love of G-d."
Random whoever: "OMG what is wrong with you yelling at people like that"
Me: <quietly contemplates the many cleansing qualities of fire>
Thread #1 OP: "<player> for <other asset>"
My reply: "It's fair in a vacuum, but we'd nonetheless decline; <player>'s a bit too important to our team because <situation>."
Thread #2 OP: "<player> for <other asset>"
My reply: "No thanks. <situation> applies so we kind of don't want to move <player>, and <other asset> does not change or improve that situation."
Thread #3 OP: "<player> for <other asset>"
My reply: "We really aren't going to move <player> because of <situation>. We'd need a replacement for <player> immediately, and <other asset> won't do that. This has been reiterated before. Please stop asking. Thanks."
Thread #4 OP: "<player> for <whatever, don't care anymore>"
My reply: "Ugh. Quit asking about <player> already. <situation> still applies and will continue to apply, as plenty of Jackets fans including myself have kept pointing out. Stop it. Please. For the love of G-d."
Random whoever: "OMG what is wrong with you yelling at people like that"
Me: <quietly contemplates the many cleansing qualities of fire>
"You're going to take Girard for Pettersson and thank us for the opportunity"
"Ryder. Halak and a third"
"Dermott, Engvall and a third"
I get it.
koteka
Registered User
I think Gavrikov would be available for the right offer. He is UFA after next season and will want to be paid. I dont think the Jackets will blow him away with an offer that will keep him from testing free agency like his buddies Panarin and Bob. I am for trading him when he has max value and that might be now.
I don’t know that JT Miller is the right guy for the Jackets rebuild / retool. But I’d probably make that trade. And flip Miller at the deadline next season.
I don’t know that JT Miller is the right guy for the Jackets rebuild / retool. But I’d probably make that trade. And flip Miller at the deadline next season.
Double-Shift Lasse
Just post better
Jackets have 500 forwards, 87 of which can line up at center. Jackets have maybe 2 guys who can play shutdown d. And the 1 guy who for sure can play shut down d is also 2-8-10 in 17 games and +13.
I mean, of course I like JT Miller. He’d be a benefit to pretty much any lineup. But I’m not at all interested in giving up quality assets, potentially foundational assets, to acquire him.
I mean, of course I like JT Miller. He’d be a benefit to pretty much any lineup. But I’m not at all interested in giving up quality assets, potentially foundational assets, to acquire him.
Last edited:
I’m curious which RHD types does Vancouver have on their radar? Some names? Getting a top 4 RHD seems like a hard spot to fill via trade.
that would help in construction of a trade.
Schnieder
Lundquist
Dobson
Carrier
Fabbro
Barron
Seversson
We could also do with some more C's
Nashville seems like a decent trade partner for this. What’s a Carrier or Fabbro proposal look like to you?
Same question. what about Schneider?
I really doubt NYI trade Dobson for Miller. That’s bad value for them.
