BlastPast

J.T. Compher would be nice but not sure if doable.

Yes, he is an offensive defenseman but his ideal partner should also have some offensive acumen. If Hughes is in the offensive zone his partner will be as well and I can see the argument that the partner should have some complementary offensive skills (eg. a good shot).

The ideal complement to Hughes doesn't necessarily have to be a player that is diametrically opposed to him in terms of skillset or type.

I would be surprised if the expectation is for Hronek to single-handedly take the team to a .600+ P%. He's 25 years old; this is not a short-term addition. That quote from the Athletic is dumb. It takes some things for granted when evaluating the deal that are far from determined. Sidebar: Is there some prerequisite to working at the Athletic that you must be a jumped-up, snarky douchebag? This is a risk without a doubt, but opportunities to acquire even a middle-class right-side defenseman are relatively scarce --especially a 25-year old. It's going to be interesting to see how it pans out but obviously morons are making the definitive call right away.

Are you expecting them to acquire the perfect defenseman? If he was especially strong defensively he would have been unavailable or more expensive. He is suitable for the Canucks' purposes and as a young defenseman there is a tendency to retain value.

Very possible that this (or a comparable ) deal was not available last year. Right-side defensmen (especially young ones) are so difficult to come by and you can't count on the draft to provide them. Between this and the Bear acquisition they are at least making a concerted effort to improve that part of the roster.

Bold move.

1) Fans typically overvalue draft picks 2) Fans undervalue actual proven middle-class (and even working-class) players. 3) Teams have memories that extend further than just the current season -- especially for younger players. This seems like a lot and TB are definitely gambling here but it's not shocking. People had the same reaction to the Hagel trade and that was a similar deal.

{'23 1st + Holtz + something conditional ?}

Hate that they had to give up a 7th from this decade. Couldn't they have pushed it back a little further?

Yes. There is a difference between a player being expensive and a player being useless/bad.

I'm going to guess NJ.

You know this isn't Jean-Gabriel Pageau, right?

He's cheaper because he isn't as good.

Have to think that an extension is incoming. Otherwise it's a strange deal for NYI as it is far from guaranteed they make the playoffs this year. Worst case scenario has the pick rolling over to '24 and the Islanders have a strong season.

I wasn't aware of any retention. I'm not concerned so much with the cap hit this year as next.

Have to think that part of the {1st + Raty} component is an incentive to take Beauvillier; 4.15 X 2 seems a little rich for what he brings but maybe he can find a new level here.

Would there be two of him?

Yes, and then if this guy goes on to be a 40-goal scorer for another team after the Canucks took a guy who ends up being a #4 defenseman, all is forgiven? Small, scoring wingers can be great players too. If a team thinks he can give them even a decent chance at a Pasternak/Debrincat/etc. quality player -- the kind you can't just go shopping for-- they aren't going to pass just because they have a current need for defensemen. Maybe the reason they had him at #7 is that they think he has great potential.

Who cares what his position or player type is? If they had him at #7 and pick at 15 it's an easy choice regardless of other considerations -- unless someone higher than #7 is available, of course.

It does not go unnoticed that the numbers immediately preceding and following the decimal point are both fives. That can only mean one thing ! What that is I have no idea.

And the significance of this is what, exactly?

Allvin mentions that they are still talking to Bo's agent and "we'll see where it goes". I wonder if they are still entertaining the notion of re-signing him.

Nice, thoughtful response! However, some of the things you mention aren't really within the purview of the GM. In-arena experience is someone else's domain. I am talking more about specific player personnel maneuvers. Who do you keep? Who do you move, or consider moving? What are the short-term ambitions vis-a-vis playoffs? I do agree that making Bruce twist in the wind has been a regrettable moment for the team and it isn't just optics.

Ok OP, if you were GM, what are your first 5-10 objectives for this team and how do you plan to accomplish them? I'll extend that query to anyone. Let's hear your first ten steps.