Viking Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Mikheyev needs to go and likely is Tocchet’s next player they want to move on from. so why not try to send him to the Penguins for 1 of: R Smith 5m cap hit for another year or Rakell 5m but has few years left Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cripplereh Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Think that won't happen as he plays well with both Elias's and we will wait a few games to see if that line is as good as last game. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Korea Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Wow. Never thought I'd see the day, but there is actually already a proposal for this exact trade. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rounoush Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Why is everyone looking to get rid of Mikheyev? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wai_lai416 Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 10 minutes ago, Rounoush said: Why is everyone looking to get rid of Mikheyev? because they are in love with garland now and we realistically can't afford to have 2 5mil ish fringe top 6 and only 1 of them playing actual top 6 even though not producing like one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zombieksa Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 I'm okay with the idea of trading Mik, but it would be for the cap space next year. Neither of those players bring that. So I'll say no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucks curse Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Milky could be traded but it would be for cap space which means we would have signed EP40, FH and EL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook007 Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 (edited) 6 hours ago, Rounoush said: Why is everyone looking to get rid of Mikheyev? Because Allvin hasn't made a trade in like nearly a week.... Edited February 8 by spook007 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Do you remember when we lacked speed? I remember. If you actually listen to Tocc , he's not upset about Mik. Yes we'd like more production, which will come with that new line. Kuzy banana was a party, but Mik carried the defensive load. Lindholm is not that kind of player. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odjickwillkillyou Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Miky is not the same player obviously, but he is still one of the most defensively responsible wingers in the league and in the POs you need that to go far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurn Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Mikheyev, rips up some ligaments-goes through surgery. doctors, pundits, commentators, and people that have had that surgery " It's going to take at least a year, before he gets back to 100%" Fans- " O.K." 50 games into next season some fans " Why does Mikheyev suck?" 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 7 minutes ago, Gurn said: Mikheyev, rips up some ligaments-goes through surgery. doctors, pundits, commentators, and people that have had that surgery " It's going to take at least a year, before he gets back to 100%" Fans- " O.K." 50 games into next season some fans " Why does Mikheyev suck?" I don't think Mik sucks. In fact, I don't want the Canucks to trade him THIS season. I think he's an excellent complementary piece with great defensive ability. I think he might be overpaid a little bit as I believe his ceiling is a 15 to 20 goal, 40 point forward. He's no anchor though. The only reason I have him on the top of my list to trade away this offseason is because we need his cap space to re-sign Lindholm. If the question is who would you rather have -- Lindholm or Mikheyev? I think the answer is obvious. Some are in the trade Garland camp, which I can understand, but when you look at the metrics and what Garland does for that 3rd line, it doesn't make sense to move him. Our 3rd line is greater than the sum of its parts in large part due to Garland being the driver of that line. We've got Garland driving the 3rd line and Hogs driving the 4th. Can't be understated how important that is. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.