Boeser

What in tarnation

Joined: Oct. 2017

Posts: 32,785

Likes: 31,485

Despite some of Boeser's shortcomings, there's just no way they'd sell him without at least one first going their way.

I think Zacha+lottery protected 2023 1st should be where the negotiations start.

kingkanuck, QualityTrades1 and Knuckl3s liked this.

Feb. 19, 2022 at 2:34 p.m.

kingkanuck

AN "ORIGINAL SIX"

Joined: Oct. 2016

Posts: 1,796

Likes: 184

I'd hate to lose Boeser, but he may be to costly for the Canucks. I'd suggest Zacha, Zetterlund, Walsh and 2023 1st.

Knuckl3s liked this.

Feb. 19, 2022 at 2:36 p.m.

Joined: Jul. 2021

Posts: 1,550

Likes: 1,276

Quoting: justaBoss

I'd do that over this trade honestly. Gritsyuk and two seconds > a protected 2023 first in my opinion.

Devil and Knuckl3s liked this.

Feb. 19, 2022 at 2:37 p.m.

QualityTrades1

Joined: Oct. 2021

Posts: 902

Likes: 538

Quoting: MellowK

I'd do that over this trade honestly. Gritsyuk and two seconds > a protected 2023 first in my opinion.

Quality > Quantity. I think Zacha and a 1st is a great starting point too

Knuckl3s liked this.

Feb. 19, 2022 at 2:40 p.m.

Joined: Jul. 2021

Posts: 1,550

Likes: 1,276

Quoting: QualityTrades1

Quality > Quantity. I think Zacha and a 1st is a great starting point too

You'd be lucky to get a prospect like Gritsyuk from that first, and he'll be ready for the show sooner. But to each their own.

Feb. 19, 2022 at 2:40 p.m.

What in tarnation

Joined: Oct. 2017

Posts: 32,785

Likes: 31,485

Quoting: MellowK

I'd do that over this trade honestly. Gritsyuk and two seconds > a protected 2023 first in my opinion.

I think it's a starting point. I don't think VAN will accept it as it is, but it certainly starts the negotiations pretty well. Both teams probably add on that some pieces.

Feb. 19, 2022 at 2:42 p.m.

QualityTrades1

Joined: Oct. 2021

Posts: 902

Likes: 538

Quoting: MellowK

You'd be lucky to get a prospect like Gritsyuk from that first, and he'll be ready for the show sooner. But to each their own.

I like what limited I've seen from Gritsyuk but a 1st gives you a player in a better quality bracket than 2 2nds and a quality middle-6 roster player would probably have to go back so Zacha seems like a good fit

Feb. 19, 2022 at 2:42 p.m.

Joined: May 2019

Posts: 41,449

Likes: 18,829

If we dealt Gritsyuk, that would be it.
Gritsyuk for Boeser.

Devil liked this.

Feb. 19, 2022 at 2:43 p.m.

TheAlien

Joined: Apr. 2019

Posts: 7,904

Likes: 6,402

Y'all are really shoehorning Zacha into every Canucks trade because of one 30 second segment two weeks ago. I also don't see a fit with Zacha anyways they need a RHD center not another LHD one. Boeser is also playing at a 39 goal and 67 point pace under Boudreau. You also bring up injuries but aside from COVID he hasn't missed any games since 2019-2020. His qualifying offer is also actually under 7.5mil and as long as he's willing to sign long term (which it sounds like he is) I would have no problem giving him. That package just isn't enticing enough to move Boeser.

Feb. 19, 2022 at 2:47 p.m.

#10

Joined: May 2019

Posts: 41,449

Likes: 18,829

Quoting: MellowK

I'd do that over this trade honestly. Gritsyuk and two seconds > a protected 2023 first in my opinion.

Gritsyuk, 1st and two 2nds for what could very likely be one year of Boeser?!

Waaaaaaaay too much

Feb. 19, 2022 at 2:50 p.m.

#11

Joined: May 2019

Posts: 41,449

Likes: 18,829

The comps to use here should be:

Reinhart: late 1st and Levi
Buchnevich: 2nd and Blais
Maybe Pacioretty: Tatar, B prospect, 2nd

Anything that includes a 1st or an A prospect is fantasy land.

Feb. 19, 2022 at 2:57 p.m.

#12

Joined: Jul. 2021

Posts: 1,550

Likes: 1,276

Quoting: NHLfan10506

Gritsyuk, 1st and two 2nds for what could very likely be one year of Boeser?!

Waaaaaaaay too much

Nobody said Gritsyuk, 1st and two 2nds and he's 2 QOs away from UFA.

I'd do neither. I've said it before that I'm not big on Boeser. But do you disagree that Gritsyuk and two seconds > a protected 2023 first? I'm surprised that Nucks fans would rather have the first.

Feb. 19, 2022 at 3:04 p.m.

#13

Joined: May 2019

Posts: 41,449

Likes: 18,829

Quoting: MellowK

Gritsyuk probably has value of a top-15 prospect.
Add that to a #37 and another 2nd.
Yes in most cases that would be more valuable.

Feb. 19, 2022 at 3:05 p.m.

#14

QualityTrades1

Joined: Oct. 2021

Posts: 902

Likes: 538

Quoting: MellowK

Protected 2023 1st + Zacha > Gritsyuk + two 2nds***

SK101 liked this.

Feb. 19, 2022 at 3:08 p.m.

#15

Thread Starter

KingDavis

Joined: May 2018

Posts: 94

Likes: 29

Quoting: NHLfan10506

If we dealt Gritsyuk, that would be it.
Gritsyuk for Boeser.

The reason why Gritsyuk does not have as much value as Boeser is because there’s no guarantee that Gritsyuk ever comes over to North America. There’s risk with a prospect like Gritsyuk and unfortunately he is a former 5th rounder and unfortunately that does play a factor.

QualityTrades1 liked this.

Feb. 19, 2022 at 3:09 p.m.

#16

Thread Starter

KingDavis

Joined: May 2018

Posts: 94

Likes: 29

Quoting: justaBoss

Hence why I said I wouldn’t trade an unprotected first round pick but would be open to trading a protected first round pick.

Feb. 19, 2022 at 3:13 p.m.

#17

Joined: Jul. 2021

Posts: 1,550

Likes: 1,276

Quoting: QualityTrades1

Protected 2023 1st + Zacha > Gritsyuk + two 2nds***

Zacha is in both trades...

Read the whole conversation if you're going to reply.

It's

Protected 2023 1st + Zacha

vs.

Zacha + Gritsyuk + two 2nds

Feb. 19, 2022 at 3:13 p.m.

#18

Thread Starter

KingDavis

Joined: May 2018

Posts: 94

Likes: 29

Quoting: TheAlien

Then I would want NJ to look elsewhere than Boeser. If they are going to trade an unprotected first round pick of Holtz, they need to get a better player than Brock Boeser.

Feb. 19, 2022 at 3:14 p.m.

#19

What in tarnation

Joined: Oct. 2017

Posts: 32,785

Likes: 31,485

Quoting: KingDavis

Hence why I said I wouldn’t trade an unprotected first round pick but would be open to trading a protected first round pick.

Indeed. But say the NJ deals the 2023 1st to VAN in exchange to Boeser as Top10 protected one, and NJ still remains in the bottom-10, then the following pick because of that is likely 2024 1st. Which would have to be an unprotected one. I don't see VAN accepting a deal where they'll only get the pick once NJ gets to the playoffs. And given their status it still might take a while.

I think lottery protection is the best you can do. At the highest the pick is going to be third overall.

Feb. 19, 2022 at 3:16 p.m.

#20

What in tarnation

Joined: Oct. 2017

Posts: 32,785

Likes: 31,485

Quoting: TheAlien

His QO is $7,5M as it was signed prior to the new CBA coming to play. The last year's salary still apply to him.

Doesn't prevent him from signing with VAN cheaper though.

Feb. 19, 2022 at 3:17 p.m.

#21

Tjmac22

Joined: Feb. 2017

Posts: 110

Likes: 7

would new jersey entertain zacha Walsh and a 2nd for boeser? or zacha Walsh and McLeod with an add from van? as a van fan I'd be happy with either 2 of those trades I like Walsh cause he's a righty who played well with Rathbone in the past. and I know McLeod is probably a no but man is he exactly what vans 3rd line needs a righty center who can win faceoffs

Feb. 19, 2022 at 3:18 p.m.

#22

Thread Starter

KingDavis

Joined: May 2018

Posts: 94

Likes: 29

Quoting: justaBoss

I would happily give a 2024 unprotected first rounder for Boeser. Just not 2022 because of NJ’s current standings and not 2023 because of how deep and talented that draft is.

In my description I mentioned a top 10 protected first round pick and I think a top 10 protected 2023 1st rounder would be the most ideal pick for both teams.

Feb. 19, 2022 at 3:19 p.m.

#23

What in tarnation

Joined: Oct. 2017

Posts: 32,785

Likes: 31,485

Quoting: KingDavis

I don't think that's ideal for VAN honestly. I think they go for lottery protected one. Someone is bound to offer that, should Boeser get traded.

Feb. 19, 2022 at 3:23 p.m.

#24

TheAlien

Joined: Apr. 2019

Posts: 7,904

Likes: 6,402

Quoting: justaBoss

His QO is $7,5M as it was signed prior to the new CBA coming to play. The last year's salary still apply to him.

Doesn't prevent him from signing with VAN cheaper though.

CapFriendly has it wrong. Rutherford himself has said it's lower but yeah people don't realize he can sign for less than the QO. 7.5 isn't even far off from what I'd give him so I'm sure they can work something out.

Knuckl3s liked this.

Feb. 19, 2022 at 3:23 p.m.

#25