Valuations can be pretty fluid thing....he may be worth a 1st and a prospect if Vancouver was willing to take a bad contract back for instance . But the move has to be at the deadline to maximize return. That or get comfortable with keeping Hansen and be prepared to say goodbye to Sven Granlund or Sbisa....for nothing. # asset management
- Bullfrog77

Taking a bad contract doesnt make Hansen more valuable though. In a straight up deal, I cant imagine he is worth much more than a 2nd, but if the deal gets bigger then so too can the returns

you're right that we don't know but vrbatta actually said his attitude would be different had he been approached in the summer.
http://vancouversun.com/s...-have-traded-radim-vrbata

my problem at its base is the rebuild/retool fissure. it seems that retool means that decisions such as TDL moves are left to the very last minute b/c they honestly believe they can make the playoffs and compete.

accept reality and talk with the vets about moving them. these are grown men. you can have respectful grown up conversations about trading them even if they have NTCs. just don't wait until the day before (hyperbole).
- RealityChecker

Agreed.

Vrbatas credibility stinks.
His attitude & highly overrated estimate of himself is apparent.
- Nighthawk

If Tanev gets a 1st at TDL? Fetches at least that for sure.
Why only get picks? R there no prospects out there who r better?
Next season we r scaring nobody & its a growth year once again.
- Nighthawk

Better than what? Honestly, your argument is bereft of clarity and logic. Of course we want to "max value" I'm sure JB will isten to many offers and take the best one. A team has to want a player to make an offer, so there still is an "if'. Always. You are the classic overvaluing our player homer, I get that. There is no sound argument within your cryptic and nonsensical comments. You get picks because that's what a team offers, or you get a prospect. I leave that kind of stuff to the Pro's like JB, who will hopefully see that his players have much more value at the TDL than after the season. Waiting for an off-season move makes absolutely zero sense, that's the bottom line.

Taking a bad contract doesnt make Hansen more valuable though. In a straight up deal, I cant imagine he is worth much more than a 2nd, but if the deal gets bigger then so too can the returns
- WhiteLie

Yes it really does. If a contending team can shed say a 5 mil contract, add a Hansen...plus now have 5 million space to acquire more pieces to a cup run....that is incredibly more valuable

You're an avid and fast reader. Had accidentally put up a version of this and took it down in minutes. But the radical nature of the topic must have stayed with you. Let's carry on with the bashing of views on who should get traded and for what.
- Nuck4U

I read it as well and I am a slow reader, so must have (must've) been up longer than you think.
The concept you are.trying to emulate.is eerily similar to one that has been done before. Minnesota North Stars/ San Jose.
Remember that killed the franchise, helping with the relocation of the North Stars to Dallas.
No way anyone wants to see our Canucks relocated.


Enough on this, move on.

I read it as well and I am a slow reader, so must have (must've) been up longer than you think.
The concept you are.trying to emulate.is eerily similar to one that has been done before. Minnesota North Stars/ San Jose.
Remember that killed the franchise, helping with the relocation of the North Stars to Dallas.
No way anyone wants to see our Canucks relocated.


Enough on this, move on.
- Reubenkincade

No way the league would allow it. Nucks are still near the top of the league franchise value / revenue generators. Not pushing a payday out of town when they can drop in an Arizona or Carolina type franchise that struggles to stay afloat.

Taking a bad contract doesnt make Hansen more valuable though. In a straight up deal, I cant imagine he is worth much more than a 2nd, but if the deal gets bigger then so too can the returns
- WhiteLie

I disagree, Toronto did this(laich, torres) as did Carolina(bickell) which resulted in much more return for them. In today's cap-market, taking back the poop contracts is definitely something worth doing if you can afford it.

For example, Hansen to LA for 2nd.

Now if we throw in Mike Richards salary at 1.32 for another three years, we might get another 2nd out of the deal. Maybe we agree to pay 1 million of hansen's contract next year to again sweeten the deal, in this case maybe we end up with LA's first. I'm just using this as an example, please keep your heads attached

I disagree, Toronto did this(laich, torres) as did Carolina(bickell) which resulted in much more return for them. In today's cap-market, taking back the poop contracts is definitely something worth doing if you can afford it.

For example, Hansen to LA for 2nd.

Now if we throw in Mike Richards salary at 1.32 for another three years, we might get another 2nd out of the deal. Maybe we agree to pay 1 million of hansen's contract next year to again sweeten the deal, in this case maybe we end up with LA's first. I'm just using this as an example, please keep your heads attached
- neem55

Exactly...the new nhl currency is cap space and draft picks. People say oh it's just a 2nd or 3rd round pick. That's the currency that changes hands when you want your team to jump up a few spots in the draft to grab that 1st rounder you really covet. Or bundle a couple 2nd s to get another pick in the first round. It's currency....and we are currently making minimum wage

I disagree, Toronto did this(laich, torres) as did Carolina(bickell) which resulted in much more return for them. In today's cap-market, taking back the poop contracts is definitely something worth doing if you can afford it.

For example, Hansen to LA for 2nd.

Now if we throw in Mike Richards salary at 1.32 for another three years, we might get another 2nd out of the deal. Maybe we agree to pay 1 million of hansen's contract next year to again sweeten the deal, in this case maybe we end up with LA's first. I'm just using this as an example, please keep your heads attached
- neem55

i took the post to mean that hansen's value in trade does not increase meaning that taking a bad contract back is an asset in and of itself separate from hansen. similar to adding another player. hansen + taking the bad contract yields more than hansen alone. taking the bad contract allows a bigger return but that doesn't mean hansen's value from the trade has increased.

it's largely semantics though.

I disagree, Toronto did this(laich, torres) as did Carolina(bickell) which resulted in much more return for them. In today's cap-market, taking back the poop contracts is definitely something worth doing if you can afford it.

For example, Hansen to LA for 2nd.

Now if we throw in Mike Richards salary at 1.32 for another three years, we might get another 2nd out of the deal. Maybe we agree to pay 1 million of hansen's contract next year to again sweeten the deal, in this case maybe we end up with LA's first. I'm just using this as an example, please keep your heads attached
- neem55

I agree that you can get more and understand the concept. I am just pointing out that when you say "Hansen is worth a 2nd round pick", that is what he is worth. When you add other components to the deal, like negative value of a bad contract, it doesnt change the baseline of what Hansen is worth, it just lowers the value on one side of the trade and needs to be offset.

A players value is what they are worth in a straight up deal. In a deal where we take 3 bad contracts, pay half his salary and get a first round pick does not equate to Hansen being worth a first round pick was my point

i took the post to mean that hansen's value in trade does not increase meaning that taking a bad contract back is an asset in and of itself separate from hansen. similar to adding another player. hansen + taking the bad contract yields more than hansen alone. taking the bad contract allows a bigger return but that doesn't mean hansen's value from the trade has increased.

it's largely semantics though.
- RealityChecker

I agree that you can get more and understand the concept. I am just pointing out that when you say "Hansen is worth a 2nd round pick", that is what he is worth. When you add other components to the deal, like negative value of a bad contract, it doesnt change the baseline of what Hansen is worth, it just lowers the value on one side of the trade and needs to be offset.

A players value is what they are worth in a straight up deal. In a deal where we take 3 bad contracts, pay half his salary and get a first round pick does not equate to Hansen being worth a first round pick was my point
- WhiteLie

Fair. I guess I lost what you were saying in the mix. Hansen fro a 2nd is the value. Because he's not a rental, you have more flexibility with what you can do is what I was trying to show, other than that you're right.

Yeah Hansen's not really a draft day trade kind of player. That's more for guys like Tanev.
- golfingsince

Reasonable assertion.

Fair. I guess I lost what you were saying in the mix. Hansen fro a 2nd is the value. Because he's not a rental, you have more flexibility with what you can do is what I was trying to show, other than that you're right.
- neem55

I am all in favour of taking bad contracts for higher returns. Callahan, one of the Dallas goalies, Hartnell, Jimmy Howard, etc. can all join the Canucks as long as they are well-accompanied

Edit: any bad contract except for LA's. Too much term left on Brown, Gaborik

I read it as well and I am a slow reader, so must have (must've) been up longer than you think.
The concept you are.trying to emulate.is eerily similar to one that has been done before. Minnesota North Stars/ San Jose.
Remember that killed the franchise, helping with the relocation of the North Stars to Dallas.
No way anyone wants to see our Canucks relocated.


Enough on this, move on.
- Reubenkincade

I have and only answered questions. Final comment for you. Yes I said it was done before. Added twist getting picks. It was only for fun away from the usual. As for the Minnesota problem it was lack of a new stadium. Funny how they got a club when they built one.

I am all in favour of taking bad contracts for higher returns. Callahan, one of the Dallas goalies, Hartnell, Jimmy Howard, etc. can all join the Canucks as long as they are well-accompanied

Edit: any bad contract except for LA's. Too much term left on Brown, Gaborik
- WhiteLie

Haha well, in all honesty I'd be i favor of it if we got a first and a prospect. Gabbo in particular as he spends a lot of time on the LTIR anyway BUt yes, I agree.

I'd say it's a good move. Then draft Conor Timmins (might need to move up a handful of spots?
- walshyleafsfan

I have a feeling he could sneak into the 1st round.

Haha well, in all honesty I'd be i favor of it if we got a first and a prospect. Gabbo in particular as he spends a lot of time on the LTIR anyway BUt yes, I agree.
- neem55

LOL like a handy dandy Chris pronged like deal? Bury the contract in LTIR and save capspace plus add firsts...love it short term ie 3 seasons at the most. Hopefully by then we are trending forward and can start to look at adding to the team instead of banking futures

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/06/world/europe/europe-trump-parody-videos.html?_r=1
- golfingsince

Saw this before and CNN did a report. It's hilarious. Now Canadian government rushes with ministers and Trudeau to make sure Canada doesn't come up as last. Border tax rants and all. All hail the disruptor and the world of woe. HB is so much more upbeat then what's happening out there

to me personally its an asset for the future , but i am in no way a second round draft pick dreamer either.
if there was no expansion this year , i would not do it , but there is that elephant in the room to deal with
- onesmallleap

That seems to be the rub in a nutshell.

Not sure why people think we can take on a bad contract when we have to resign several players this summer which will eat up a lot, if not all that gets freed up from Miller & Burrows expiring contracts.

Some on here take this way to serious and Do Not live in reality. Others are already positioning themselves for the woulda, coulda, shoulda hysteria that will follow TDL and then again lead up to expansion draft.& carry on all summer (& well into the next several seasons).

Taking a bad contract doesnt make Hansen more valuable though. In a straight up deal, I cant imagine he is worth much more than a 2nd, but if the deal gets bigger then so too can the returns
- WhiteLie

Well said & beats just dumping players for anything.
Players r only worth what someone is willing to pay for them.
That does not mean selling at any cost is MANDATORY.
In the case of Hansen he is a valuable commodity all things considered.
Second when a deal makes sense it will happen.
Lastly many things can change in the fluid environment with expansion coming the offseason & the draft coming up. We may be sellers but our cap position is fine. Question is how well does that position us overall?
Many teams r in a different boat & IMO we r more so ready to pounce than panic.

To me he's worth a second round pick, maybe a project prospect or another low round pick thrown in. He had a career year at 30 and just had a season of shoulder and knee injuries, no one will trade for him thinking he will play top 6
- WhiteLie

Why would a low 1st from a Cup contender be out of line?

Why would a low 1st from a Cup contender be out of line?
- Nuck4U

It's not...could very happen. Especially if more then one team is in the bidding