MattWN.

Hard concept for people to understand in this thread. Well said.

It's not? Just because you end a hot take with your personal version of "Cause Stone Cold said so" doesn't make it true? Sure, they're going to be happy to take bad contracts to make the cap floor. That is true. But if you take a look around the league, and see how many teams are capped out, you'll realize that Chicago is in a position to ADD ASSETS to take on bad contracts (Garland/Boeser/Beau/Myers) they sure as f**k aren't about to do it for free. You're insane if you think they're going to be giving assets up to take contracts.

I know it's hard for you, but keep trying? If I was able to make it through the dumbest trade proposal I've seen this week, I think you can manage. Just go slow and sound it out. I also suggest doing some reading about the value of RHD, and what they command on the market. Especially ones who are big and young, with a steal of a contract. Once you're done that, try looking into the cost of moving bad contracts out. We gave up a 2nd round pick to move Dickinson with only 1/3 of the term that Garland has, and he was a C which is a more valuable position. We also had to take a $%^@ player/contract back in Stillman. Your proposal would be rejected even if you were playing NHL23, let alone in the real world.

Doesn't matter dude. Every single team in the league is aware of the Canucks cap situation, nobody is taking his contract with the term left without getting assets back. He's paid more than he's worth, with 3 more years making nearly 5 million. If he couldn't routinely crack the top 6 on a terrible basement dwelling team like Vancouver, why would you expect another team to look at him and think he'd be able to make an impact in their top 6? He ranked 383 in cost per point last season amongst forwards. That isn't good.

You know who else was at the bottom of the plus minus category? Kyrou, Debrincat, Batherson, Hertl, Karlsson, Fowler. It's a stat that on its own means a whole lot of nothing. Peeke averaged 21.5 minutes a game on the worst team in the league, often playing a shutdown roll, as a 24 year old. No $%^@ he's going to be a in the minus.

JFC, this board... Garland will be a cap dump. We will pay a team to take his contract. Peeke is a 25 year old 6'4 RHD. Even with his poor numbers last year, he's still fetching a 1st round pick, and maybe a sweetener. He's cost controlled for another two years at 2.75 per. He has a massive amount of value. You aren't even on the same planet of value here. If you want to move Garland and his 3 remaining years of bloated contract for Peeke, you're going to be adding the 11th overall pick, and maybe be getting a 2nd or 3rd round pick back if you're lucky. Guys like Garland aren't hard to find. Big, cost controlled, young, RHD are extremely hard to find. Please for the love of god people, stop posting these asinine trade proposals.

There is no path that brings us close to Vegas and Colorado. Not right now at least. We'll see what the team looks like on opening night, but for now.. There is no visible path to contender.

lol. If you say so dude. We're almost 2 mil over the cap for next year, and garland still has term on a bloated contract. But yeah, they're purposely keeping him instead of moving him for a 2nd round pick, because of reasons.

If Garland was worth a 2nd round pick, he wouldn't still be here my dude. He's going to be a cap dump with negative value in any trade.

No, it's really not. This team on paper should have been competing for a playoff spot, and every year we are bottom of the basement. If it wasn't for the last two late year runs, we would have been bottom 3 the past two years. That is a f**king crime when you look at the guys we have on this roster. I would be waiting until December before I start making massive changes that impact the future flexibility of the roster. Locking in free agents for dollars and term are only going to prolong the suffering if this team can't figure out how to play consistently. Adding Rhonek on the backend should be enough to rid some of the built in excuses Let them run for the first couple months of the season and readdress then. Your alternative right now is to trade assets attached to bad contracts like Boeser/Garland/Myers, and hope players like Severson pan out. Severson in a vacuum is fine, but you need to pay somebody to take a contract before you can entertain the idea. So is Severson worth moving a high pick/hoglander to add a 29 year old defenseman to a long term deal? Not to me he isn't, not when you consider where this team is at, and where our prospect pool sits.

Ok.. so you think the teams we've iced the last 3 years with our current core is a consistent bottom 5 place team? Or do you think they're underachievers? Because either they underachieve as their full time job, or we're more than a #4 D and a #3 C away from being a contending team. All the people clamouring to sign Severson or Graves are the same idiots who wanted Myers, or the myriad of other free agents who ended up being overpaid underachievers.

Routinely "improving" a flawed team is why we're in this mess. Every year we throw a bandaid over a team that on it's core are constant underachievers. You sure as f**k don't improve a team by consistently adding overpaid players with inflated contracts (Free Agency)

This team hasn't earned the addition of players like Severson. Until this core stops underperforming and sputtering along, I wouldn't be spending any more assets/dollars-term. We're only prolonging the problem.

Fun watching him and Wifi play. Glad he got some safety there with the two years.

Sure, if it's a one year deal for peanuts. He can still face punch at a high level, so thats nice.

s

100%, this core hasn't done a f**king thing, yet people are ready to crown them. It's the same with the previous core under Horvat, nothing but underachieving, year after year. They haven't even earned the right to have this management add more pieces. Until they prove they're a capable bunch, im really getting tired of spending assets to fill holes on a sinking ship.

They have a few prospects ready to push into the lineup, so I could see them moving out some of the aging players. I would think they'd look into moving Tanev or Zadorov before they do Andersen. On 32 thoughts, Friedman said something to the effect of Backlund wanting the C, and if he didn't get it there was a chance he'd be looking for a change of scenery, moving any of those guys would make enough space to bring up Pelletier, Phillips or some of the other top prospects. They'll also almost certainly be moving Vladar, as Wolf is ready for the NHL. Maybe there is even an outside chance they try and move Markstrom, and go with Vladar and Wolf tandem. After the year Marky had, maybe it's not a bad plan. There are a lot of teams in dire need of a starting goaltender.

You're assuming he won't just pee in his sleep?

We have a great 4 players, like Gawd said. That isn't even close to being enough.

Calgary is looking to compete, I don't think they're going to be looking to unload players for picks. If we're moving the pick for a D, I think we could do better than Andersen in a 1for1 move. I'd be retaining on Boeser/Beau before I move down in the draft on that 11th.

PDG in the top 6 too

I'd only move that pick for Keller or Theodore. Other than that, i'd keep the 11 and swing for the fences with the pick. We're in no place to be trading another 1st unless it's an absolute steal.

I'm saying our roster is pretty f**king poor if that's what we start with. You really think because PDG played top 6 down the stretch during meaningless games, against the weakest schedule in the league, somehow that means he's a legit top 6 winger? Good luck with that.

f**king hope not. He's going to overpaid in dollars and in term. Contracts like the one he's about to get are exactly why this team has been and will stay mediocre.