Missed that,

My Mistake
- classic321

He doesnt have all 7 next year

He doesnt have all 7 next year
- VANTEL

Toronto said you need all 7.

Not sure if that is true. I guess the Ranger owns our 6th for Emerson Etem

It does though. If flames want one of PLD or Tkachuk and you want the dman then trade back a spot and get a 2nd and get the guy you want. Why not pick up an asset and still get who you want??
- mauryballstein

Why would the flames do that? If the Canucks trade with them it's because they want a D which means the forward would be available anyways.

It does though. If flames want one of PLD or Tkachuk and you want the dman then trade back a spot and get a 2nd and get the guy you want. Why not pick up an asset and still get who you want??
- mauryballstein

Why would the Flames offer us a second when they know we will just pick Juolevi at 5? Perhaps a 4th.

So if Edmonton took a defenseman like Juolevi at 4 they are stupid? I am sure there is an Oilers fan commenting that they could easily trade back one spot and grab Vancouver's second next year as there is no way Benning takes a Dman. I don't understand why everyone is so caught up on consensus lists, there are always a few surprises at the top of the draft. I'd be surprised if the first Dman isn't selected before 7th overall.
- CanuckDon

I think it would be dumb. The oilers could deal that pick to the flames and still get there guy at 6 plus pick up assets to do so.

The Oilers need ready now right side dmen I see them moving it for someone further along shattenkirk etc

I think it would be dumb. The oilers could deal that pick to the flames and still get there guy at 6 plus pick up assets to do so.

The Oilers need ready now right side dmen I see them moving it for someone further along shattenkirk etc
- mauryballstein

Trading down two spots is a possibility for Edmonton as Calgary would pay to have there choice of PLD or Tkachuk. They would not pay Benning to move up one spot.

Why would the flames do that? If the Canucks trade with them it's because they want a D which means the forward would be available anyways.
- CubanBuffet

The flames have to pay to get there guy. They have no more idea who the nucks are taking thean anyone here. I think youll see the flames move in to the 3-5 range on friday.

I will also be very upset if one of PLD Tkachuk or JP are not taken by us with 50A.

The fact that there is so much uncertainty surrounding Dubois' Position makes me a bit nervous also.

My hope is we get Tkachuk as he seems like a sure fire first or second line NHL winger and can hopefully be a set up man for Boeser on a future first line.

I know for some this may be a stretch but I can a first line of

Boeser Horvat Tkachuk

With a second or third line of

Virtanen Sutter Baertschi
- kevingram

Ive felt the same about the uncertainty. And half of a season isnt enough to base the future of the franchise on.
I too believe tkachuk will be an elite nhl player and like the certainty better.
But at the end of the day I do trust JBs drafting

Why would the Flames offer us a second when they know we will just pick Juolevi at 5? Perhaps a 4th.
- CanuckDon

Obviously it happens on the draft floor you dont make a deal like this days before the draft. If joulevi is gone at 4 no kidding the flames arent making that trade and why would they

Trading down two spots is a possibility for Edmonton as Calgary would pay to have there choice of PLD or Tkachuk. They would not pay Benning to move up one spot.
- CanuckDon

Why wouldnt they?? If they want PLD and he is there at 5 and they want him they will have to pay a price to acquire the player they want...

Obviously it happens on the draft floor you dont make a deal like this days before the draft. If joulevi is gone at 4 no kidding the flames arent making that trade and why would they
- mauryballstein

If the Flames move up (highly unlikely) it will be to draft Tkachuk at 4. Edmonton would likely take Juolevi at 6. I'd be shocked if these to rivals made a swap like this. Calgary and Vancouver aren't trading partners. If Van moves down then Arizona and Montreal are the likely suitors. I don't think there will be any trades in the top 10.

The flames have to pay to get there guy. They have no more idea who the nucks are taking thean anyone here. I think youll see the flames move in to the 3-5 range on friday.
- mauryballstein

Or trade the pick for Fleury

If the Flames move up (highly unlikely) it will be to draft Tkachuk at 4. Edmonton would likely take Juolevi at 6. I'd be shocked if these to rivals made a swap like this. Calgary and Vancouver aren't trading partners. If Van moves down then Arizona and Montreal are the likely suitors. I don't think there will be any trades in the top 10.
- CanuckDon

Baerchi for Schroeder, just last year.

Or trade the pick for Fleury
- LordHumungous

Baerchi for Schroeder, just last year.
- moondawg

and granlund trade.

Baerchi for Schroeder, just last year.
- moondawg

Say what now ?

Ben Kuzma @benkuzma · 2h .


In response to queries about RFA winger Emerson Etem, he will be qualified by Monday's deadline. #Canucks

Baerchi for Schroeder, just last year.
- moondawg

What? Baertshi for a 2nd and Shink for Granlund I mean they aren't going to make a trade at the draft.

It does though. If flames want one of PLD or Tkachuk and you want the dman then trade back a spot and get a 2nd and get the guy you want. Why not pick up an asset and still get who you want??
- mauryballstein

We're not getting 2nd to drop 1 spot.

Listening to TSN radio on the way to work.

Grant Mccagg who runs Mckeens hockey was interviewed and he does not like Dubois.

Guy spent like 15 minutes saying he is overrated, and his 2 way game sucks, he'll never be a centerman, he should have done better in the playoffs, he should have put up more points in the QMJHL. His compete level is terrible


- classic321

While I admit my exposure to him is limited I agree. And i agree that Tkachuk is a better prospect

Btw Vesey apparently telling Buffalo he is signing in Boston. Lying (frank)er. The leaf fans gaurentee me him, Stamkos and eventually Tavaras were all signing in Toronto.

We're not getting 2nd to drop 1 spot.
- A_SteamingLombardi

This high in the draft we might

Long term, I think Logan Brown might be the best fit available. Yes, he will need to go back to JR for a year and probably need another year in the AHL to fill out. But, he does have potential to be another Joe Thornton. Imagine a solid big body center that can win faceoffs and likes to be a setup man feeding a sniper like Boeser in a few years? That is at least worth considering

Question is - how far down does he slide? Could we swap with Montreal and still get him? Get them to overpay for PLD and we are onto something.

We're not getting 2nd to drop 1 spot.
- A_SteamingLombardi

bizarro world around here. is it because it's Tuesday? or many posters are trolls? Or am I a troll?

bizarro world around here. is it because it's Tuesday? or many posters are trolls? Or am I a troll?
- CanuckDon

It crazy everywhere

Malkin to the Hawks
Hall for hamonic
Fleury for the 6th
The entire flames core for Murray (personal favourite)

I know we don't want Bartowski back on the team full time, but would it be a good idea to sign him to a 1 way 850k(he does this after July 1 if no team signs him) and play him in Utica as a call up? We need defensive depth and he was a decent 7d for us last year. I don't really see any upgrades that would sign for a low enough hit to be buried in AHL and still clear waivers.