WWYDW: Should I Stay Or Should I Go?


It’s bye week for the Canucks, which means that we won’t have any games to reflect on until Saturday. That’s in part why the talk of the town this week has been the trade deadline, which is one week away. The Canucks have a few players on expiring contracts and could use to recoup some assets, as well as shed non-exempt players in preparation for the expansion draft. 

After asking how the Canucks should approach the deadline this time around, this week we’ll get more specific. Who would you like to see traded at the deadline? Don’t be afraid to get creative.

Last week I asked: 

At the deadline, do you buy, sell, or stand pat? 

clutch fan: 

Sell old/buy young and undervalued with first line potential (obviously Evander Kane was that guy this year for example/but too much personal baggage for management to take the risk). Acquire picks/prospects where possible.

Since the main thing the Canucks need to do is replace the first line, so they should start drafting and acquiring talented young forwards with potential/or proven first line talent. They have to be controllable over a reasonably lengthy number of years for it to make sense.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

Demote/split up or replace the Sedins (if they was something workalble that made sense), as it’s currently not appropriate to have them at the very core of this team.

It’s really important to have the vision and confidence to make swift decisions when opportunity arises (as with the Canadians this week in their hiring of Claude Julien).

It’s not an easy skill, but that’s why management make the big bucks. We’re counting on you JB. 

Pat Quinn Way: 

Hansen and Burrows are of more use to the Canucks long term than a couple of low-ish draft picks and I don’t expect either to waive in order to go to a ‘contender’ that is so hard for anyone to call in todays NHL (no one picked a SJ- Pens final last year). Chicago and Pitts are probably the cup favourites (maybe Washington) but i can’t see any of those teams needing either player to put them over the top.

Advertisement - Continue Commenting Below

Montreal is a long shot for the Cup imo and they already have Brendan Gallagher so why would they need Burrows who plays the same kind of game.

Miller could go to LA as a back up (If Quick is done for the year) at best though.  


At this point, if anyone calls with the deal of a lifetime and you can easily protect the assets you get, everyone not named Bo would have a for sale sign hanging on his neck.

Obvious choices are the trifecta of Miller, Burrows and Hansen.

Gudbranson, Edler and Tanev, Sbisa would be fine depending on return.

Anyone of the ‘Hardly scoring Boys’ of Skille, Megna, Chaput for cab fare to get them to the airport works for me.

Anyone calling for Loui gets priority status and a jersey of their choice. Heck, I’d retire their beer league jersey in the rafters if they took Loui and actually gave an asset back!

The depleted ‘rebuild’ team now has a top line of Bo, Baer, Granlund. Second line of Sedins and Boeser or Virtanen.

Third line of Sutter, Boucher and a Utica call-up.

Fourth line is Gaunce and some fill-ins from what’s leftover.

And then draft the best players available! 


Approach Hansen, Miller and Burrows with the prospective teams that have come calling. I am sure there will have been at least a few offers on them whether good or not. As much as they have earned the right to have NMC/NTC’s it’s unlikely they’ll say no — it will only improve their potential appeal as UFAs to go to a playoff contender and hopefully do well enough to earn one more decent contract. If they really want to they can come back here next year (not Hansen and I realize it’s a different story for him but even then being placed on a good team might be appealing to him).

I’m not sure who else would be in the mix — maybe Sbisa or Sutter for a team wanting a somewhat cost-controlled (if still a bit expensive) player in their “prime” (and despite all the bashing on CA I think they’ve both been pretty good for what they bring to the table this year).

At any rate, I don’t see the point of standing pat — all the losing of late has probably removed any delusions of the playoffs. And if we god forbid actually were to toss picks and prospects at someone for a veteran to help us make the playoffs then I would jump onto the CA hate train.


Sell and then sell some more.

Here’s my wish list: A) Hansen has some contenders on his ‘list’ and they can strike up an actual bidding war. B) Burrows gets to go play for the Habs with a pick coming back C) a goalie gets injured and Miller becomes a hot commodity D) Benning makes some unforeseen move and trades another vet (Sutter,Guddy, Edler?) for some sort of respectable haul.

In reality, my expectations are so low that getting an extra second rounder from the deadline would be cause for celebration.

  • TD

    I like the consistent effort the team has played with this year, but they are in need of a rebuild and hopefully ownership now sees it. Hansen may have some real value, but Burrows and Miller are worth a mid round pick at most.

    The Canucks need more help than a mid round pick or two. They need to look at trading one or more of the veteran D men. I would love to see Gudbranson or Spisa get traded for some young talented forward prospects but that isn’t likely. The Canucks probably need to look at trading Elder and/or Tanev. They have real value and could jump start the rebuild. With Tavares and now Strom playing well for NYI, would they consider trading Mathew Barzal?

  • Vanoxy

    With so few sellers this year the Canucks are in a position of strength for the first time in a long time.

    Hutton and Tanev will both be hot commodities and should both be on the block. Hutton is exempt from the expansion draft, making him even more attractive.
    Also, one of Biega or Sbisa could be moved to a team who needs an eligible player to expose to Vegas.

    Up front, Sutter and Hansen should both be in play, but only for the right return.

    Benning should take advantage of the seller’s market and maximize return on as many players as possible.

    • DJ_44

      What evidence is there that it is, or will be, a “Sellers” market?

      LeBrun stated the goaltending market is saturated (and that don’t mean “Sellers Market”).

      I would think that, due to expansion adding complexity to everything, more teams may be looking to unload players that are not on pending UFA status.

      I am all for trading Hutton, simply because I do not see him being a part of the left-side defense moving forward. I have a lot more patience than most, but I do not see a big upside to his game. He will arguably turn into a competent bottom pairing/depth guy. Trade while there is still hope (similar to the Shinkaruk deal). There is not imperative to move Hutton at the TDL, unless it is part of a larger package.

          • Freud

            Oh, sorry. I meant to say Aquilini told Benning to say that.

            Because you have clear proof it’s all Aquilini. Just need to trust you when you say you can’t divulge your source who told you it’s Aquilini.

        • DJ_44

          Actually he didn’t. He stated there were not many sellers, immediately followed by the statement that teams have not decided whether they are buyers or sellers. ….. that sounds like there is not really any market. ..let alone a sellers market.

      • Vanoxy

        It’s a seller’s market due to supply and demand. Only about 6 teams are clear sellers, since most teams are still within range of the playoffs.

        The goalie market is saturated, which is why I didn’t bother even mentioning Miller.

        Several teams are reportedly shopping for defence, and nobody in the seller category have the depth that we do at that position. A team like Tampa, who are going to lose a quality forward to Vegas would be wise to swap for an expansion exempt, cost controlled young D like Hutton.

  • apr

    You have to pull a Guns and Roses and “have a little patience”. The Sedins weren’t drafted and then the Nucks got to the Stanley Cup the next year. Winnipeg got Laine last year (who is beyone awesome) and are worse than the Nucks. Benning and Co. need a level head to navigate rabid Nucks fans and media, and stick to their plan of integrating youth, drafting well, and building a culture of not rolling over.

    Its boring as hell – but when you have media and fans wanting a complete rebuild, and at the same time berating the team for losing, whilst making fun of the team busting their asses to win – its a tough, tough market….

    • Freud

      I’m not surprised the apologists are setting the bar really low to justify the team’s direction. They try hard and are better then Winnipeg. Great.

      But apologists twisting the story? This is new.

      It was Benning and Linden who set the agenda.

      They were going to compete. This was a team Benning could “turn around in a hurry”.

      They gave up significant chances to build for the future to “compete” over the past 3 years.

      Now we look at the team under Benning’s parameters. Bottom 3 in most predictive measures. He has failed to make this a competitive team. He has failed to maximize future assets at the same time.

      It was the management team that set the agenda, the fans are reacting to significant failures in both realms.

      • TheRealRusty

        Sorry. It is Mr Aquilini with the agenda of making the playoffs in order to generate playoff revenue. GMJBTL just happen to be the yes men who said it can be done… How about the owner stay out of hockey decisions and letting the hockey people come up with a proper plan to rebuild?

        • Hockey Warrior

          Another DUMB, UNINFORMED post from ‘real Crusty’, who has NEVER owned a season ticket in his LIFE despite what he tells you!

          The Aquilinis have EVERY RIGHT to be involved in any decision that involves the hockey club MUPPET… THEY OWN IT! As long as they write all the checks, when they say jump… YOU say how high?!

          Besides, show us any HARD PROOF from the Aquilinis own mouths that they have demanded playoff hockey?! Clue: THERE IS NONE

          As Freud says Benning and Linden were HIRED to do a job, after three years they have NOT delivered despite the promise of a quick turnaround. Under them and Wille D the club is going backwards, the rink is half empty and SEASON TICKET sales are at their lowest in DECADES, so, they have to go… and on that day there will be MUCH rejoicing from TRUE Vancouver Canucks fans.

          • Bud Poile

            “As Freud says Benning and Linden were HIRED to do a job, after three years they have NOT delivered…”

            Management said they would remain competitive and they have,in spite of the moans and whines from your sorry lot.

            What was absolutely necessary was drafting and development because the previous regime blew their wad and left the Canucks hotel bill unpaid.

            Benning has done that in SPADES.

            It’s a five year plan,not 1.5.

          • Hockey Warrior

            Bud, what part of this CLASSIC quote from Benning THREE YEARS AGO DON’T you understand…

            “This is a team we can turn around in a hurry” – Benning 2014

            or perhaps you prefer this blatant LIE instead..

            “We’ve never once said this was going to be easy or fast.” – Jim Benning 2016

            Bud, a humiliating one and done against CALGARY followed by TWO YEARS of no playoffs after promising a QUICK TURNAROUND and NOT a FIVE YEAR PLAN with a fantastic GIFTED core including HORVAT, TANEV, EDLER, HANSEN, BURROWS and the SEDINS is grounds for INSTANT DISMISSAL… under LinBenning we are going backwards and I cannot WAIT until AQUILINI pulls the plug on this CLOWN GM.

            I hope when that happens we won’t be hearing from you again either, you are an utter DISGRACE to the Vancouver Canucks fanbase.

      • Jamie E

        Love the folks who are still completely twisted that they swallowed the PR spin hook, line and sinker.

        NEWSFLASH – All GMs lie. None of them show all their cards. Some even say one thing and then, because of changing circumstances, subsequently do something different. You judge an NHL GM on what they do, not what they say.

        Add to that the special “Aquilini factor” where the Canucks GM has to manage the unreasonable expectations of an unreasonable owner to make the playoffs every year no matter how crummy the team is and I am quite happy with how much of the organization GMJB has turned over in just three years without having his butt fired.

        This is going to be a boring and disappointing trade deadline, not just for the Canucks, but for everyone. A record number of “buyer” teams are pressed up against the cap and expansion looms. You know when Patrick Eaves and his $1 million expiring contract is being touted as the most coveted player at the deadline that this is not a typical year.

        I have one solitary goal for Jim Benning this deadline: move Jannik Hansen so we can protect both Baertschi and Granlund from expansion. Get a 2nd round pick and a B+ prospect for him. Do that and I am happy. Even this one simple request can be sabotaged by Hansen if he uses his eight team NTC list to scuttle a trade by listing only non-playoff teams like Vrbata did.

        • Freud


          I did judge Benning on what he did.

          Currently bottom 3 in predictive measures.

          Numerous opportunities missed to accumulate futures over the past 3 years.

          Middling future compared to other teams within the division, let alone the conference.

          I did not say Benning was telling the truth or not. I said he set the agenda. He often sets the agenda without even being asked a question.

          I also find it amusing you tell me to be wary of PR, then rely on rumours to place blame on the owner.

      • Bud Poile

        Year one- competitive season.

        Year two- injury laden season.

        Year three- competitive season.

        Fans like Freud weren’t around in the 70’s and 80’s so most have the devotion and attention span of a teenager with a Penthouse magazine on school lunch hour.

  • TheRealPB

    We’ve talked about Miller, Hansen and Burrows to death so I won’t repeat them. Beyond that I would like to see a strategy to protect the young players who are proving themselves to be NHLers no matter the bumps in their game (as mentioned by others any commitment to rebuilding and a youth movement has to have way more patience than this fanbase often shows with the hate for Hutton a case in point). This means making moves that increases the likelihood of us moving forward with a D of Hutton, Tryamkin and Stetcher from this year’s group, and Horvat, Baertschi, Gaunce and Granlund from the forwards.

    I don’t see us moving Sutter because despite all the “evidence” to the contrary I think he has value in multiple areas. One thing I have liked about Benning has been his ability to sell high on some players even when everyone else thought he was crazy (e.g Shinkaruk). In that vein I would really like to see us move Sbisa (since JB is likely going to double down on the acquisition of Gudbranson which is scary). He’s developed into a pretty solid 4-5 D with much better positioning and decision-making to go along with a decent amount of physicality and good skating.

    I know this will never happen but I did wonder if there was any scenario in which we moved the Sedins to a contender to play in a more suitable 2nd (or probably even 3rd) line role. It would likely mean eating half of each salary this and next year and it would likely be a tough sell for them given their families and roles in the community but they both seem like pretty competitive guys and this year in particular can’t have been easy. If we could get a prospect each or even a couple of 2nd or 3rd rounders it might again be a win-win situation. But I know it probably would never happen.

  • I’d trade Hansen and Burrows to St. Louis for Barbashev and Kyrou. The Blues could use a bump in scoring from the wings and have the cap space to absorb both players. Both Barbashev and Kyrou were considered to be near-first rounders who are strong two-way, C/W middle 6 prospects. Hansen could be a temporary cap-friendly replacement for Berglund next year and while Burrows is straight rental.

    I’d throw in a mid-to-late round draft pick for Yakupov if they would give him up. He’d be worth rolling the dice on.

  • sh1t4brains

    The top teams will have at least their top 2 lines, their top 4 D pairings and Goalie set. They may seek an upgrade on their 3rd/4th line and a depth D.

    The Wildcard teams will have at least their top line set and may need a D upgrade and maybe a Goalie.

    So, if you were these teams, who would you target with the Nucks and what will you be willing to give up?

    The obvious choices will be Hansen, Burrows, Miller, and Tanev. All of whom have NTC or MNTC and can kibosh the deal just like Hamhuis and Vrbata did.

    And when Hansen is traded…most likely, the whining about how JB got fleeced won’t stop.

  • natevk

    I’d like to see Sutter moved. His usage and goal numbers likely inflate his value on the market and he’s still young enough that he may be able to fetch a relatively decent return.

    Obviously that leaves a hole in the third-line C spot but I think that’s something Gaunce may be able to grow into in the future, and Sutter could be replaced in the meantime by a minor-leaguer or off-season cheap UFA while the Canucks aren’t close to contending anyways.

  • Bure's Flow

    #1) Need top line talent
    #2) Veterans for prospects or picks
    #3) Tanev is best asset for priority number 1
    #4) Dont sell future assets
    #5) Benning sells future assets in Demko or Virtanen maybe even this years first

  • Dirty30

    Simply put — if your name isn’t Bo, you’re going to go!

    There should be no limits on what Benning does to improve this team except that name above and some of the guys in the system shouldn’t be moved.

    If there is the right pitch from any team, JB should swing for the fences!

    The damage of the last decade can’t be undone (and yes Bud, that includes a few questionable moves by your hero), but it’s time to open shop and build this team.

    I’m not saying trade everyone, I’m suggesting that any player on the team that can get you a return better than what you have to protect should be considered. It might be a D for a forward, or vice-versa, but everyone should be in discussion.

    Gillis gambled and lost, and maybe Benning has to gamble to win.

  • Nuckleston

    Looking down the roster,I think Miller should go for anything as getting a replacement goalie this summer should be straight forward.

    One of Edler, Tanev, Gudbrandson, or Spizza should go as well as we need to make room for a younger defenseman next summer; if one doesn’t step up, replacement level defensemen are usually available on the cheap. Personally, I’d like to see Subban brought up; if you are going to watch losing hockey, you might as well watch high event losing hockey.

    Hansen and Burrows should both be moved, for reasons stated before.

    Finally, to make things interesting, you eat half their salary and move the Sedins to a contender. The window in Vancouver is almost closed(almost), and I can’t imagine they haven’t already thought about it.

    The Sedins are intensely competitive people, and going out with a whimper is really hard on them; the quotes from them at the end of last season was really telling.

    To make this work you have to take back junk, but at least you get some assets, and you get to watch the Sedins hopefully pull a Ray Bourque. Seeing them win a cup is worth doing whatever is needed to make this happen.

    Follow my plan, and I guarantee you will be just as good, or better, than last year (and probably this year too).