Gotta give to get. He is at his absolute peak value, with 22 goals last season and a cap friendly contract. He's a nice piece to have, but we have other needs right now.
- we_are_all_canucks

I've heard this a few times and can't quite get my head around it. You trade Hansen if you're going to totally reload the team top to bottom. We're not doing that at all.

Team was in the playoff race until the TDL last year, without a number 2 centre, an omni-shambles defensively and no secondary scoring. They were in the playoffs in the year before...this team hasn't totally bottomed out at all.

Benning has loaded up on Defensive prospects (though we are still really weak here IMHO), we have a #2C that won't get slaughtered this year and a host of young guys that could (hypothetically) bring some secondary scoring this year. And we have cap space, only 3 guys older than 30 and a #5 pick. The worst offenders on this team are either gone or being put into better roles. Just my HO (and what do I know) but I think they make the playoffs next season.

There's also an argument to be made that Hansen is a fantastic role model for the younger players. He is an extremely hard worker who keeps his head down and does what he has to.

I've heard this a few times and can't quite get my head around it. You trade Hansen if you're going to totally reload the team top to bottom. We're not doing that at all.

Team was in the playoff race until the TDL last year, without a number 2 centre, an omni-shambles defensively and no secondary scoring. They were in the playoffs in the year before...this team hasn't totally bottomed out at all.

Benning has loaded up on Defensive prospects (though we are still really weak here IMHO), we have a #2C that won't get slaughtered this year and a host of young guys that could (hypothetically) bring some secondary scoring this year. And we have cap space, only 3 guys older than 30 and a #5 pick. The worst offenders on this team are either gone or being put into better roles. Just my HO (and what do I know) but I think they make the playoffs next season.
- Ronning4ever

I'm not sold on making the playoffs but I for one am hoping they do

Look at Hansens point totals throughout his career, he is very consistant, and he's not old. I don't expect to see an immediate drop off, whereas with Vrbata we all knew he was streaky, one year up one year down.
- NorthNuck

Never cracked 40 points mostly playing top 6?

There's also an argument to be made that Hansen is a fantastic role model for the younger players. He is an extremely hard worker who keeps his head down and does what he has to.
- NorthNuck

Just make sure Scott Stevens aint around

Somebody put out the bat call for Vantel.

Tough call. Vey can distribute the puck better, Hansen can retrieve it. Either way, it's probably safe to say that if either one gets significant PP time next year it's probably not going to be a very good PP.
- CubanBuffet

It sounds like we should put Vey and Hansen together just find a good LW.......Lucic

That one was just put in to rub people the wrong way........(frank) I rule at trolling.

Look at Hansens point totals throughout his career, he is very consistant, and he's not old. I don't expect to see an immediate drop off, whereas with Vrbata we all knew he was streaky, one year up one year down.
- NorthNuck

I disagree, Hansen has been more volatile than Vrbata. He has .35, .48, .57, .28, .40, and .57 points per game since 2010-2011, Vrbata has done .61, .61, .81, .82, .64, .80, and .43 in the same span.

If you think Hansen will replicate a career year, you'll be sadly mistaken. He scored on an insane 18.8% of his shots, well above his career average of 11% (which includes this past season). You need to sell high on a guy who is closer to decline, coming off a career year, that will net your largest return. Smart teams make tough decisions, this one would be the first for the Canucks in a really long time IMO

EDIT: Filtered for a minimum 100 shots taken last season. Hansen in remarkable company on the list, plus a few others we wouldnt value that high... http://www.nhl.com/stats/...ilter=shots,gte,100&pos=S

It sounds like we should put Vey and Hansen together just find a good LW.......Lucic

That one was just put in to rub people the wrong way........(frank) I rule at trolling.
- A_SteamingLombardi

I've heard this a few times and can't quite get my head around it. You trade Hansen if you're going to totally reload the team top to bottom. We're not doing that at all.

Team was in the playoff race until the TDL last year, without a number 2 centre, an omni-shambles defensively and no secondary scoring. They were in the playoffs in the year before...this team hasn't totally bottomed out at all.

Benning has loaded up on Defensive prospects (though we are still really weak here IMHO), we have a #2C that won't get slaughtered this year and a host of young guys that could (hypothetically) bring some secondary scoring this year. And we have cap space, only 3 guys older than 30 and a #5 pick. The worst offenders on this team are either gone or being put into better roles. Just my HO (and what do I know) but I think they make the playoffs next season.
- Ronning4ever

You trade Hansen if you can replace his on-ice contributions for nothing via free agency, even if you pay a little more. I'd much rather have a 2nd round pick and sign another middle six forward than just have Hansen on the cheap. Trading him is good asset management.

"Remember, the Canucks finished 12 points behind Minnesota for the final wild-card spot this spring, and 21 points back of any other playoff team in the West. That’s a lot of ground to cover, especially with four teams finishing between them and the playoff bar; so it’s not just the points to make up, but the teams to leapfrog, too, to get where the Canucks want to be."

They may make a valiant effort at the playoffs, but they don't have the lineup or talent to get it done.

You trade Hansen if you can replace his on-ice contributions for nothing via free agency, even if you pay a little more. I'd much rather have a 2nd round pick and sign another middle six forward than just have Hansen on the cheap. Trading him is good asset management..
- LeftCoaster

Agreed 100%

I disagree, Hansen has been more volatile than Vrbata. He has .35, .48, .57, .28, .40, and .57 points per game since 2010-2011, Vrbata has done .61, .61, .81, .82, .64, .80, and .43 in the same span.

If you think Hansen will replicate a career year, you'll be sadly mistaken. He scored on an insane 18.8% of his shots, well above his career average of 11% (which includes this past season). You need to sell high on a guy who is closer to decline, coming off a career year, that will net your largest return. Smart teams make tough decisions, this one would be the first for the Canucks in a really long time IMO

EDIT: Filtered for a minimum 100 shots taken last season. Hansen in remarkable company on the list, plus a few others we wouldnt value that high... http://www.nhl.com/stats/...ilter=shots,gte,100&pos=S
- WhiteLie

Volatile? That's the incorrect word. Hansen puts in an effort game in game out. We watched Vrbata simply stop trying and pout like a small child for most of this year. I realize that Hansen had an insanely high shooting percentage but his point totals have been in the same range for years and i don't expect this year to be any different. I personally think it's a good idea to keep him around because he is a strong positive influence and with free agents(Lucic) you can easily get someone who will foster bad attitudes.

You trade Hansen if you can replace his on-ice contributions for nothing via free agency, even if you pay a little more. I'd much rather have a 2nd round pick and sign another middle six forward than just have Hansen on the cheap. Trading him is good asset management.

"Remember, the Canucks finished 12 points behind Minnesota for the final wild-card spot this spring, and 21 points back of any other playoff team in the West. That’s a lot of ground to cover, especially with four teams finishing between them and the playoff bar; so it’s not just the points to make up, but the teams to leapfrog, too, to get where the Canucks want to be."

They may make a valiant effort at the playoffs, but they don't have the lineup or talent to get it done.
- LeftCoaster

This

People are just going to have to except it.

You trade Hansen if you can replace his on-ice contributions for nothing via free agency, even if you pay a little more. I'd much rather have a 2nd round pick and sign another middle six forward than just have Hansen on the cheap. Trading him is good asset management.

"Remember, the Canucks finished 12 points behind Minnesota for the final wild-card spot this spring, and 21 points back of any other playoff team in the West. That’s a lot of ground to cover, especially with four teams finishing between them and the playoff bar; so it’s not just the points to make up, but the teams to leapfrog, too, to get where the Canucks want to be."

They may make a valiant effort at the playoffs, but they don't have the lineup or talent to get it done.
- LeftCoaster

I have no problem trading him I'm just saying it might be worth keeping him around for 1 more season. I realize he's not going to be a part of us competing for the cup but do we really need another hole in the forward lineup?

I have no problem trading him I'm just saying it might be worth keeping him around for 1 more season.
- NorthNuck

Better value at TDL?

I have no problem trading him I'm just saying it might be worth keeping him around for 1 more season.
- NorthNuck

If we were getting Eriksson hell be with the sedins, Hansen will decline, a late first early second is alot better then late third

Better value at TDL?
- A_SteamingLombardi

I don't think his trade value will necessarily be higher but i don't think its falling off a cliff like some are implying...

You trade Hansen if you can replace his on-ice contributions for nothing via free agency, even if you pay a little more. I'd much rather have a 2nd round pick and sign another middle six forward than just have Hansen on the cheap. Trading him is good asset management.
- LeftCoaster

Personally, just me: I don't think we can replace him for $2.5 million. Middle 6 forward yes. One that can move up and down the lineup for that price, no.

"Remember, the Canucks finished 12 points behind Minnesota for the final wild-card spot this spring, and 21 points back of any other playoff team in the West. That’s a lot of ground to cover, especially with four teams finishing between them and the playoff bar; so it’s not just the points to make up, but the teams to leapfrog, too, to get where the Canucks want to be."
- LeftCoaster

Everyone thought the same thing the year post-Torts. They went back to the show that year.

Pre TDL - team played .500 hockey (and they shouldn't have been given the issues). Post TDL they went 6 - 15. They'll need to maintain first line scoring (no guarantee) have better D and secondary scoring. Again, none of it's a guarantee, but looking at the line-up today and the moves made, I think it's more possible than people are giving credit for.

You trade Hansen if you can replace his on-ice contributions for nothing via free agency, even if you pay a little more. I'd much rather have a 2nd round pick and sign another middle six forward than just have Hansen on the cheap. Trading him is good asset management.

"Remember, the Canucks finished 12 points behind Minnesota for the final wild-card spot this spring, and 21 points back of any other playoff team in the West. That’s a lot of ground to cover, especially with four teams finishing between them and the playoff bar; so it’s not just the points to make up, but the teams to leapfrog, too, to get where the Canucks want to be."

They may make a valiant effort at the playoffs, but they don't have the lineup or talent to get it done.
- LeftCoaster

No they don't, as it stands right now.

Growing up in O6 days i was a Wings fan & Howe my idol.
When Orr broke onto the scene he also was my idol since i played D.
I was a high risk taker & blame Orr when i chose wrong😂😂

Better value at TDL?
- A_SteamingLombardi

And, more importantly..he's not gunna agree to a trade. Kinda a moot point.

Personally, just me: I don't think we can replace him for $2.5 million. Middle 6 forward yes. One that can move up and down the lineup for that price, no.



Everyone thought the same thing the year post-Torts. They went back to the show that year.

Pre TDL - team played .500 hockey (and they shouldn't have been given the issues). Post TDL they went 6 - 15. They'll need to maintain first line scoring (no guarantee) have better D and secondary scoring. Again, none of it's a guarantee, but looking at the line-up today and the moves made, I think it's more possible than people are giving credit for.
- Ronning4ever

My point. If we add Eriksson and he gets injured for 60 games, as we saw happen with Sutter, why not keep a guy who's played there before instead of throwing a player who doesn't know what he's doing into the fire? We all know Horvats development was slowed this year because of the responsibility he had to take on.

I thought their gm was the biggest idiot in the league. Every move he made was a headscratcher, including hiring Sullivan. I couldn't understand why he wasn't bolstering the backend. Shows what I know. He should win gm of the year.
- CubanBuffet

Same.

Buy out period should be interesting. Not only to see if the Canucks buy out Burrows and Higgins but also to see if a few UFA's come available for cheap.
- fiveandagame

I see Burriws bought out.
Sign Eroksson for top 6 looks good.
Sign Brouwer if he's ok with a lil discount for top 6-9.
From there i like Sven Bo ? 3rd line
If not Brouwer then martin as bottom 6 banger & some goals.
Possibly Martin Gaunce Dorsett 4th liners.

All in all we have the 4 solid lines WD likes to roll.
D is shaping up ok

Volatile? That's the incorrect word. Hansen puts in an effort game in game out. We watched Vrbata simply stop trying and pout like a small child for most of this year. I realize that Hansen had an insanely high shooting percentage but his point totals have been in the same range for years and i don't expect this year to be any different. I personally think it's a good idea to keep him around because he is a strong positive influence and with free agents(Lucic) you can easily get someone who will foster bad attitudes.
- NorthNuck

Volatile - "liable to change rapidly and unpredictably, especially for the worse". Meaning regardless of the hot streaks that Hansen gets on, we all know the cold streak is coming, like a goal production in the low-teens next season. If he shot his usual percentage, his goal production would have been around 13 goals and 30 points. Still a good season by his standards, but if you can sell him as a guy that can play everywhere then you'd be dumb not to move him

Also, effort is an entirely different thing, production is what counts. People always questioned Ovechkin's efforts but the guy still produced goals. As Vantel would say, how many more character/effort guys do you need? If he can be moved for skill and youth, you do it. Sell high since he wont be around after his contract expires anyways...