Protect Virtanen over Motte, Virtanen has more trade value and isn't worth losing for nothing. Protect Myers over Hamonic. Sure you can argue the contract of Myers is rough, but Hamonic is a pending UFA and isn't worth protecting

It doesn't make sense to protect Motte either trade him or expose him. I'd also protect Bowey over Hamonic

Hamonic is a UFA... why protect him? he won't get selected.

I agree with protecting Motte over Virtanen (but that's my opinion) motte is more valuable to the canucks than virtanen is IMO

Virtanen has negative trade value, is a worse hockey player then Tyler motte, and has a bigger contract. If Virtanen isn’t selected, Canucks would be wise to buy him out



If the Canucks has another good impact forward, I would have no problem exposing motte, but as of right now he is the 7th most valuable forward on the team



I know Hamonic won’t get selected but basically Canucks have literally no other D-man worth protecting. Myers getting taken would be a blessing for their cap problems, Bowey is an 8th dman who is easily replaced, And everyone else is either exempt or bad.

Even though there is a 0% chance Seattle takes Hamonic, and even if they did there is no way he’d sign with them, I think it would endear him to the organization to use a protection spot on him. It would play favourably into contract negotiations saying “you’re our guy, we’re loyal to you, we want you back”. Maybe some of that loyalty would be returned and he signs cheap again. If not, oh well. You didn’t lose anything trying

This can't be be further from false. Virtanen has low trade value, but it's definitely not negative for a 24 year old that's having 1 rough season. Sam Bennett just got traded for a 2nd and a prospect, I'd be shocked if that's not what Vancouver is looking for. Hell, what makes a lot of sense is a swap with Philadelphia for Nolan Patrick. Just because a guy is having 1 season where he's struggled, doesn't mean he has negative trade value. If Benning leaves Virtanen exposed and he's gone for free then Benning needs to be fired. That's not good asset management.

Virtanen is very bad. He’s had one good season offensively, where he was highly sheltered and had insane luck on the power play. He was still getting caved in defensively and offered very little 5v5 outside of good zone entries. This year he has cratered, has a 2.55 million cap hit, and is owed $3.6 million in real dollars next year. Florida overpaying for Bennet at the deadline doesn’t mean Virtanen, a worse player who Plays a different position with a worse contract, has any value in a trade at all. Canucks had been shopping him for the most of the season and had no takers, why would that change this year?

Edit: lol I just saw you said “this can’t be further from false” in response to my comment. So, what I said is true then?

The fact that can't be further from false is you saying he has negative value. He doesn't. Calgary shopped Bennet for years with multiple trade requests, that didn't give him negative value.

The fact is he's still 24 with upside in the right situation. Saying he is negative value would be saying that there's no chance for improvement in his game and his contract is so far off his value that it negates his value - which it doesn't.

You can not like his game all you want and say he's bad. Sure, you're entitled to your own opinion. But to say he has "negative value" is just outright wrong.