Very good 👍 took all of the past Boeser trades comments and acted on them. 9.5/10
Both teams accept

Very good, took all the past Boeser trade comments and ignored that Van would lose Tanev if they traded for Dumba. Aka the most important part. Value wise this trade is great. Love it for both sides.

Van snap declines if we have any chance of signing Tanev still.

Good counter counter but my aim is to not gain cap. That is the underlying reason for any trade out of assets.

I think we all agree that in value there is certainly a deal that could be made here but in reality I would never trade for a defensemen of value without knowing how my own FA's will turn out. So this whole discussion would simply have to wait to be constructive anyway.

Thanks, but the issue I see here is that both teams are log jammed in their respective foward cores. I want a RHS top six winger like Boeser to give Fiala a proper playmate on the left side. Then you also have to factor in the hometown kid angle as well. He'd also be a good fit regardless of those reasons.

But the Wild can't afford to take on Sutter, he just simply puts us over the cap, and would also force us to move Greenway as well. Which I refuse to do. I'm comfortable moving one of Greenway or Donato, not both.

In this particular trade scenario acquiring Boeser makes having Donato redundant. So bringing in Boeser while moving out Donato keeps things equal. One in, one out. Donato will cost you less, is only a year younger and scored only 2 goals less than Boeser from a 4th line averaging 10 minutes a game. He's a top six potential talent, and a viable replacement for Boeser.

Dumba gives you the reinforcements on the back end you desperately need, and Stecher likely would play in a 3rd pairing for us, given that we have Soucy.

But I'm not a miracle worker, and I can't fix VAN's cap problems for you. In my first proposal, I left VAN about 1.9M in Cap space. In Nighthawk's response post, he cleared up 10M in cap for the Knuck's but put the Wild 2M over the cap. This proposal puts both teams at roughly 4.2M. It's not much, but it's something. The simple fact I managed to get the deal to a point where fans of both sides love it? I'll consider that a win, and take it and run with it.

Benning could still try to move Sutter or one of the other large contracts to clear up the necessary cap needed to sign Tanev. In the meantime, you addressed a critical need and still managed to get a cheaper viable option to replace what you did lose.

I'd say it's worth considering even if it would require more moves on Benning's part. I'd also highly doubt there're going to be any 1 trick fixes that take care of all of VAN's problems in one fell swoop.

This would be a good place to start.

I never discussed Sutter going to you guys. And I don't believe Dumba gives us something we desperately need. Hughes - Tanev Edler - Myers Stetcher - Fantenberg Is fine. Yes Dumba is a read RD and would make things easier but easier isn't the same as essential. We could have a 3rd line of Hoglander - Gaudette - Boeser if things go the way I would like them to. That is easily playoff level forward depth. We don't have to have Boeser to be a playoff team, Dumba would help. But if we were to get Dumba I would have to move Myers first in a separate deal. Until that happens or we 100% lose Tanev I personally would not want this trade.

Nighthawk also had Sutter coming back to us in his counter proposal while having removed Donato from the trade. That's what put us 2M over the cap, even if Donato had still gone back the other way, we'd have still been a Million over. It's all right there in his counter offer to Boeser trade topic.

I never said you did mention Sutter either. I had merely quoted your post and included talking points from Nighthawk's as well when I was writing the entire post out. I'm sorry if that brought some confusion to this.

I'm sorry but I respectfully disagree about VAN's chances in regards to being a playoff caliber team. You might very well knock the Wild out of the Play-in's but I don't see you going particularly deep. Your top six is loaded, but your bottom six are a mess. It's eaten up by underwhelming players on bad contracts. It'll be a couple of years before they come off the books, although, I'd grant you that a couple of them might be movable.

As for your Defense. Other than Hughes and Tanev it's widely considered to be a joke. It is certainly not considered to be a playoff caliber one. It came in at the bottom ten of defense's in the league, for crying out loud. The only reason the Canucks were relevant at all is due to your phenomenal goaltending you got from Markstrom this year.


According to you, Boeser should be on the third line? Ummm.... what? If that's the case and he's actually a middle six player he doesn't warrant the high price Vancouver fans are demanding in return for him, don't you think? So which is it? Top six star talent, or middle six fluff?

Alright, deconstruct time.

1. Apologies about the Sutter thing. I understand but please note that I know you are not taking his contract.
2. My discussion about being a playoff team is more next year and beyond which is why I mentioned Hoglander.
3. Our defense being laughable is laughable. Edler is great. Stetcher is good and has good overall numbers he just looked bad in a couple moments this year and people piled on. Fantenberg is playing like a second pairing guy and I hope we can get him signed. Myers is a problem but 1 player doesn't kill the entire core. I would ride or die with 5 of these 6 and you're fine to disagree.
4. Boeser should not be third like obviously. But thats where he is. Virtanen played most of the season top line and once we got Toffoli, he played with Tanner in LA and they both work great with Bo. So that's kinda where Brock fell.