Gave up on the ACGM didn’t like how it could end up. For starters any signing of Klingberg starts with a bigger trade beforehand aka Miller & probably a cap dump somehow.
- Nighthawk

I would assume that if they were trying to sign Kilngberg, it would be at the expense of trading Myers.

If the guesses on here were right, and it was Miller and Myers to the Islanders, I would assume some of the money freed up on that would go to sign Klingberg. That would fit with Allvin's and Ruthy's desire to have better puck-movers and decision-makers on the back end.

I would assume that if they were trying to sign Kilngberg, it would be at the expense of trading Myers.

If the guesses on here were right, and it was Miller and Myers to the Islanders, I would assume some of the money freed up on that would go to sign Klingberg. That would fit with Allvin's and Ruthy's desire to have better puck-movers and decision-makers on the back end.
- NewYorkNuck

If that case then it was Myers who's M-NTC said NO if rumour is true.

I would assume that if they were trying to sign Kilngberg, it would be at the expense of trading Myers.

If the guesses on here were right, and it was Miller and Myers to the Islanders, I would assume some of the money freed up on that would go to sign Klingberg. That would fit with Allvin's and Ruthy's desire to have better puck-movers and decision-makers on the back end.
- NewYorkNuck

Why wouldnt it be Garland. As many have said wingers are a bit expendable. Screw myers long run but we really dont have to move d to add. Really need to add to d rather than subtract imo

Why wouldnt it be Garland. As many have said wingers are a bit expendable. Screw myers long run but we really dont have to move d to add. Really need to add to d rather than subtract imo
- neem55

Speculate it was maybe Miller/Myers for Puloch/Wahlstrom/1st.
Adding Klingberg.

Hughes/Puloch
OEL/Klingberg
Rathbone/Schenn

A well rounded 3 pairings.

Why wouldnt it be Garland. As many have said wingers are a bit expendable. Screw myers long run but we really dont have to move d to add. Really need to add to d rather than subtract imo
- neem55

I'm just going off what people talked about here. It could have been Garland, it could have been any number of players. The only person who thinks he knows is Nucker, and he's being a tight lipped little b!tch about it, so...

Same. I’d trade Quinn for Dobson now
- CanuckDon

To be fair, trade downs always look good in hindsight because people only think about the good players that got drafted after(Dobson/Bouchard) but conveniently forget the other players who were also being debated here back then(Wahlstrom/Boqvist).


Imagine how much pooptier this team would look if we had Wahlstrom or Boqvist over Hughes
- Nucker101

Hughes has 165 points in 205 career NHL games. As a comparison Adam Fox has 163 points in 203 career games. One is considered a slam dunk top 5 guy where as the other barely cracks some folks top 10 especially in here lol.

Almost a 70 point dman and Nucks fans want him gone you honestly have to love this facking stufff...

Hughes has 165 points in 205 career NHL games. As a comparison Adam Fox has 163 points in 203 career games. One is considered a slam dunk top 5 guy where as the other barely cracks some folks top 10 especially in here lol.

Almost a 70 point dman and Nucks fans want him gone you honestly have to love this facking stufff...





- LordHumungous

Fox is has a Norris and is an all-around 1D, Hughes, while offensively gifted in spades struggles in the defensive department if he doesn't have Myers or Tanev to back him up when he roves around the ice.

Fox is has a Norris and is an all-around 1D, Hughes, while offensively gifted in spades struggles in the defensive department if he doesn't have Myers or Tanev to back him up when he roves around the ice.
- DariusKnight

Ya...going from a -24 to a +10. Still struggling heavily. Nothing to say that Hughes won't be in Norris conversation in a year or two.

Ya...going from a -24 to a +10. Still struggling heavily. Nothing to say that Hughes won't be in Norris conversation in a year or two.
- LordHumungous

That's a reach, he'll definitely get better no doubt, but I don't see him ever winning a Norris. He'd have to pull Coffey numbers to overcome his defensive defeciencies when you run him up against Makar, Hedman, Fox, etc.

That's a reach, he'll definitely get better no doubt, but I don't see him ever winning a Norris. He'd have to pull Coffey numbers to overcome his defensive defeciencies when you run him up against Makar, Hedman, Fox, etc.
- DariusKnight

I still maintain that Hughes should have won the Calder but it's clear Makar is the Superior player at this point. I like where Hughes is trending and would not be surprised to hear his name in Norris conversation in the future. It gets overshadowed next to Makar Hedman Fox and such but he's not far off at all IMO.

I still maintain that Hughes should have won the Calder but it's clear Makar is the Superior player at this point. I like where Hughes is trending and would not be surprised to hear his name in Norris conversation in the future. It gets overshadowed next to Makar Hedman Fox and such but he's not far off at all IMO.
- LordHumungous

I'm just going off what people talked about here. It could have been Garland, it could have been any number of players. The only person who thinks he knows is Nucker, and he's being a tight lipped little b!tch about it, so...
- NewYorkNuck

The player that apparently rejected the trade had a NMC, Garland doesn't have one.

I'm just going off what people talked about here. It could have been Garland, it could have been any number of players. The only person who thinks he knows is Nucker, and he's being a tight lipped little b!tch about it, so...
- NewYorkNuck

Nucker knows SFA.

- Marwood

If the Canucks had made the playoffs it would have been Hughes with the Conn Smythe and probably the Norris too.

If the Canucks had made the playoffs it would have been Hughes with the Conn Smythe and probably the Norris too.
- 1970vintage

Well, almost winning things is a pretty high bench mark for a few posters.

Hughes has 165 points in 205 career NHL games. As a comparison Adam Fox has 163 points in 203 career games. One is considered a slam dunk top 5 guy where as the other barely cracks some folks top 10 especially in here lol.

Almost a 70 point dman and Nucks fans want him gone you honestly have to love this facking stufff...






- LordHumungous

I don't want him gone. I just want Tanev back so we can have THAT Hughes again.

I don't want him gone. I just want Tanev back so we can have THAT Hughes again.
- Sayros

Tanev for Miller and a 2nd!

At the time I had no prob with Hughes falling to us. In hindsight a trade down would’ve looked great today. There I go again 😂
- Nighthawk

Hughes is seen as a top 10 defender in the league. Dobson still has a long way to go for a trade down to have been a good idea.

need dmen who can play tough minutes, top PK unit. Kling was bad defensively last year
- Nucker101

That's why I like the idea of trading for Severson. 29 of his 46 pts were at 5v5, he is defensively responsible and is his teams PK1. We can also get a decent prospect back with him. Resigning shouldn't be too pricey and likely less than Miller.

I don't want him gone. I just want Tanev back so we can have THAT Hughes again.
- Sayros

lol nope. How's that working out for Calgary?

Well, almost winning things is a pretty high bench mark for a few posters.
- Marwood

About the same as Gaunce hoisting the cup as the 4LC for the Bruins...

Hopefully they circle back and can make it work – Miller and Myers to the Islanders would be great
- NewYorkNuck

lol nope. How's that working out for Calgary?
- LordHumungous

Hughes had better defensive numbers beside Schenn than Tanev. We really don't need Tanev for Hughes to Flourish.

Hughes is seen as a top 10 defender in the league. Dobson still has a long way to go for a trade down to have been a good idea.
- Retinalz

I’m not so sure that’s the consensus outside Vancouver (fan base). He’s definitely a dynamic player though.