13231
-
Posts
123 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by 13231
-
-
21 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:
A few more trades from the olden days that came to mind...
Ron Sedlbauer for Dave Logan and Harold Philippoff. Sedlbauer was 25 and partway through the season after becoming the first 40 goal scorer in Canucks history. The thing is, he was done a year later, got sent to the minors and never came back, but that was after a 20 goal season. A trade that just didn't seem to be good for any of the teams or players.
The Canucks traded 25 year old Curt Fraser in his prime and shortly after the 1982 run for 19 year old prospect Tony Tanti, who promptly joined the Canucks and became one of very few players in NHL history to have five straight seasons with 39 goals or more.
Petri Skriko was 28 when the Canucks moved on from him after being a top scorer for the team throughout the 80s. They got back a 2nd round pick that was used to select Mike Peca.
Barry Pederson was also 28 when the Canucks traded him away after a similar run to Skriko. He was a very good player for the Canucks, just maligned for not being Cam Neely. Tony Tanti was also given away in this trade (age 26). The Canucks got back Andrew McBain and Dan Quinn, two good players on the back nine of their careers. Dan Quinn was a notable piece in the trade to then acquire Ronning, Courtnall and Momesso. All in all that's two top scorers to give away in Tanti and Pederson and doesn't seem like a very good deal...but both were done in the league within a couple years and it ended up indirectly providing half of the forward core for the 94 run. I think the team was just trying to change for the sake of change and start a new thing under Linden. Kind of like when the Canucks didn't re-sign Markus Naslund at the end even though he was willing to play good hockey for a moderately low salary.
Brian Bradley (represented the Canucks at the all star game) was 26 when he was traded for Tom Kurvers. Tom Kurvers was one of the respectable B-tier offensive defensemen of the time like Doug Crossman or Reed Larson. Kurvers was almost immediately traded to acquire Dave Babych.
I guess what's worth noting is that the Canucks managed to recoup notable assets for at least half of their entire 1980s core. Richard Brodeur, Petri Skriko, Barry Pederson, Garth Butcher, Curt Fraser. The only ones that retired or whose contracts ended and went elsewhere or were traded for peanuts that I can think of offhand are Stan Smyl (age), Darcy Rota (injuries), Harold Snepsts (free agent), Tiger Williams and Doug Lidster (not really a justifiable throw in for a trade and then beat the Canucks as a Ranger in the 94 final).
These are great recounts, I've really enjoyed reading your posts. What was it like being a fan back in the 70s, 80s & 90s? How did fans connect back then and what were the most prevalent ways to keep up with the team?
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, gurn said:
5-0 in the first period of the last game.
Team gave up a 2 on 0, and Halak managed to stop that., but the defence did not wake up,-or the rest of the team either.
Halak should have had 1
could have had another
but 3 were just crappy coverage- bad defense.
A sample size of one period defines Boudreau's tenure now? Is this really what we're resorting to? I'd rather go by the numbers of all the games played overall. Every team in the NHL, even statistically the best ones, have gotten blown out at some point or another this season. Look at all the games we've played under Boudreau, which included several games impacted by Covid, and you will find more clarity. Not saying the defense can't be better and that we're going to win a cup with what we have. But it is not even close to as bad as some of the twitter echo chamber believes, and definitely not so bad that we start trading our top 6, which is the baffling idea from where this discussion all started.
-
1 hour ago, Harold Drunken said:
Lol I cite statistics stating our team numbers in various metrics and this guy's rebuttal is a Jeff Paterson tweet
It took you two days to come up with this? What is it with you man? I genuinely cannot tell if you're serious or just trolling at this point. Either way, it's completely hilarious. Unless you can provide concrete evidence to me that our defense is as bad as you say it is, especially since Boudreau took over, don't bother replying and embarrassing yourself further. I will definitely not engage any further with this nonsense unless there's some legitimate conversation with facts to be had.
-
4 minutes ago, IBatch said:
Duchene was traded twice all by himself. The first one got COL the best odds for first overall - that would be the best case scenario for Miller. Trade him to SJ. And ask for a 2023 pick and hope they crash and burn.
I highly doubt SJ trades their first this year for Miller given their cap situation and the fact they are not contenders, factored in with the players they still have to sign. That is just wishful thinking. I also doubt any teams that are in a position to trade for Miller even come close to what CDC is expecting (A high first or an undisputed tier 1 prospect+picks). I also doubt Miller even gets moved this trade deadline. If he does, it will probably be at the draft.
I'm all for keeping Miller, but if he does get traded, I hope it's for a return that doesn't have us struggle without what he brings to the team, while we wait and hope for the players we get in exchange to develop into impact players. That is a higher risk move than keeping Miller, and building around what we already have as a team. And before the "we are up against the cap" argument, it is much easier to get rid of dead cap than it is to develop players of Miller's caliber. I'll lastly say that if Miller and the team both want him to stay, they will figure out a way to do it, it is not as improbable as many people believe.
-
3 minutes ago, IBatch said:
Ask someone for examples, provide them and then the goal posts widen or change lol. "It's cap era" is the one that made me chuckle the most, like for some reason the first decade of the cap era didn't count...
Who said the first decade didn't count? I appreciate the examples @Kevin Biestra gave, that was some amazing knowledge that I had no idea of myself. What makes me chuckle though is disregarding the trends and workings of the NHL of more recent years and simply deducing that to "moving the goalpost". The game and management styles are changing every year, it's not a bad idea to measure potential trades by current metrics while also reflecting on the distant past.
-
1 minute ago, Kevin Biestra said:
I never said that. I don't know. But that's more or less what we did in the off season.
I hear what you're saying but my original question pertained to asking for an equivalent example we could reference for a potential Miller trade, given similar circumstances. Imo neither the Scheider/9oa pick or the OEL & Garland trades match in context with what we're discussing with Miller and our team's position at this moment. I would be interested to know of a trade from the past that mirrors our situation right now, that helped a team in our position long term, because I honestly cannot think of one in the cap era. @IBatch
-
2
-
-
19 hours ago, Kevin Biestra said:
The Canucks have either acquired or traded away the 9th overall pick twice in less than a decade. Once for Schneider, once for OEL / Garland.
So you're thinking a bottom 10 team trades for Miller at the trade deadline this year? @IBatch
-
4 minutes ago, HKSR said:
I'm not ignoring other teams deals. I'm actually looking for examples of them other than the ones in my OP.
What I'm trying to state is that because of the high value of prospects and picks in the cap era, when trading an elite player in their prime for futures, it generally doesn't result in a great haul. Teams are much less likely to move top tier prospects and high draft picks even for a bonafide elite player right in their prime than they were before the cap era.
This is a very good point. When we're talking a JT Miller trade, we have to look at the post cap era equivalent examples. Gone are the days when teams trade their tier 1 prospects or high draft picks in a trade, it is extremely rare. The odds are not in our favor when we're parting with the bpa in the trade. For those in favor of trading Miller, which trade in recent years is an ideal example of a haul that would be beneficial for the Canucks, with all factors considered?
-
10 hours ago, Harold Drunken said:
No no you're right, I concede you are just too sharp of a hockey mind for me. So you are saying:
5V5 stats directly reflect how good you're blue line is. It's a blue line stat only
5v5 GAA stats have nothing to do with the forward group at all - they don't check or play any defense so you're totally correct
5v5 GAA stats have nothing to do with the play of your goaltender either, we all know GAA is not a stat used for them anyway
You're literally insane if you think we have a top 15 D core in this league....that's just a crazy take based on a stat that reflects the teams play AS A WHOLE. The only desperation i see is coming you're your insane illogical argument that we have a top 15 Din the league because of 5v5 GAA....
You are fascinating to conversate with...you really are. Let's look at the definition of 5v5 "Where both teams have 5 skaters and a goalie on the ice" The fact you're arguing this is mind boggling. Saying we rank top 15 in this category therefore we have the 15th best blue line in the league so, so obviously flawed and illogical. Get real.
Dude you are completely unhinged. I gave you links to check out our stats at ALL strengths within different metrics and you are still ranting about 5v5. You have still not provided a single shred of evidence to support anything you have said. You keep throwing around words like flawed, illogical, insane, etc while basing everything you've said on your own brutal and uneducated subjective opinion. You are the embodiment of the very words you are using because nothing you have said about anything can be quantified. Even if you ignore factual stats, there are still so many holes in your arguments and logic that it would take me another couple of paragraphs to explain those to you and your feeble mind. Take my advice and reflect on the description you've posted under your photo, the most ironic thing I've seen in a while.
-
2 hours ago, IBatch said:
That was exactly what i was saying - three of our best players all-time did it, but they were obviously special look at the hardware they won, best players in the entire league during that time. Miller? Not even close. We've had dozens of players have a couple PPG seasons and like him 17-40ish in league scoring for a period of years (like him)...how many of them kept it up until they were 34/35?. Covid also scews things - we haven't seen a full season yet. Can he keep it up? Absolutely. Will he? My guess is he's a lot closer to a Stastny then a Naslund or Sedin (as in the one playing in WNP).
Edit: Just curious - what do you think is a fair cap hit for JT Miller in Vancouver (keep in mind - Vegas, Dallas, Kraken, Florida and TB have zero state taxes ... 36.4/53% in BC, highest in the league now - back in 2010 we were 7th highest taxed team in the league) Patches would have to get paid 1.25 more here for the same money ... Stone double digits ... Duchene over 9...by the end of the year, Miller will have lost close to 2 million in wages just from his trade...hasn't bought a house...what do you think it would take to keep him? More then QHs that's for sure ... my guess is over 8 and 7/8 years is what it would take to keep him. He can go to one of those teams and have the same take home at around 6.8 as what 8 is here, our team would have to accept a decline to keep him and make him whole at least. The only thing that might change that is a miraculous run this year or next... Then maybe he'd want to see this thing out and leave money on the table he'd get somewhere else.
You bring forward some good points, these are all legitimate things to consider. Of course neither of us can say anything for certain, but I will put forth a few counter arguments to what you've stated.
It is indeed hard to gauge Miller's full potential because Covid messed things up right as he became a top scorer. But his numbers & consistency can be fairly evaluated (in both the regular season and the bubble run), amounting to him surely being a player better than Stastny, and below the marks of people like the Sedins who are former Art Ross winners. I believe Miller is a player who can be counted on to deliver .80-1.00 PPG (like many players into their mid 30s who a not future HOFs), and he is also someone we have success with on special teams, as well as being considered a leader in the locker room. These attributes, along with the way he plays the game, makes him a very valuable member to the team who will not be easy to replace either by draft or trading. Even if he is in the top 30 in scoring for the next 5 years and keeps up with his overall style of play, he is definitely worth keeping. Can he keep up? I also absolutely believe he can. Will he? The odds seem to be in his favor, especially if our other young players continue on an upward trajectory.
As for his cap hit, I think its a bit redundant to speculate. I don't think any of us expected Petey, Hughes or even Demko to sign at the cap hits they signed to. I don't think a single soul believed we would get rid of Loui, Roussel, and Beagle in a single trade. We are not privy to even 10% of what goes on behind the scenes, but I do believe if Miller wants to stay and if the team wants him around, they'll find a way to make it work. Both sides look to want to do that as of right now, and let's see how that plays out. I also don't think its likely Miller signs with Tampa, Vegas, Florida or any other team that plays in a state with lax tax laws. They'd have to move mountains to accompany Miller at even 6.8 million/year. I doubt he leaves Vancouver to join the mess in Seattle because of tax laws either. Dallas? Really can't say.
I guess I come back to my original point that personally, I find the Miller trade rumors to be a distraction to a team that is playing very well and coming together amazingly after everything it has endured. I think worries about his age are overstated and not factually supported, and I also think our team takes a step back short & long term with a Miller trade. And historically, as the OP pointed out, trades of this nature hugely favor the teams getting the better player.
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, Harold Drunken said:
So the goalies and forwards have nothing to do with those stats hey? Are you insane lol You're using 5v5 stats when there's 3 forwards and a goalie on the ice too ....How about us having the third highest paid D in the league and fewest goals? Or a $7+ million dollar defenseman with 9 points in 43 games. I think our entire structure and system might have something to do with those stats eh? You think?
Lol this is just pure desperation and utter incompetence on your end to provide any basis for your poorly constructed opinions. "Our D is bad, but our defensive stats are good because of our forwards and goalie. But we have to trade some of our best forwards to get better". You do realize there are goalies and forwards present in every strength of the game right? And while you're at it, check out our stats at all strengths as well. Let's forget about actual professionally tabulated team stats for a second, you seem to be very enlightened about what makes a good defense in the NHL, can you provide me any one metric or stat to support anything you've said so far? Can any point you've made be supported by evidence, and not your feelings? I don't think so. And if OEL scoring 9 points in 43 games according to you is bad team defense, I have nothing left to say to you.
-
6 hours ago, IBatch said:
Yes and the Sedins peaked at 29/30 and then kept it up for awhile ... HHOFers likely kept it up for awhile. Naslund 27-30ish ... Miller won't keep this up until he's 34/35. I sure doubt it anyways. Yes it happens - but it's not the norm either. Most guys aren't even in the league for 15 years.
Daniel Sedin won the Art Ross in his age 31 season. Henrik was PPG in his age 32 season. Both the Sedins were almost a PPG in their age 34-35 season. Naslund was a near PPG player until his age 34 season. And the trend of multitude of players playing even better into their mid 30s is happening in front of our eyes right now. Players can be very productive & useful beyond their perceived "peak".
-
10 minutes ago, Harold Drunken said:
No, The notion that Miller is our most tradeable player who we'll get the most return from is implicit in my posts. You're obviously entitled to your many opinions.
You assume Miller wants to be here long term too? You don't know what's going on behind the scenes, there's lots of assuming going on both sides of the argument.
And how did you arrive to that conclusion? Because your worries about his age are everywhere in your posts and on the posts you've liked. You're entitled to your opinion as well, I am simply addressing it with what is actually happening in NHL with players of Miller's age and skill set. And as for your last question, he has literally said he wants to stay in Vancouver, I can provide the link to that quote to you as well if you'd like.
-
1
-
-
17 minutes ago, Harold Drunken said:
Interested to what metrics and statistics you're using in saying our D is top 15 in the league??
https://www.foxsports.com/nhl/team-stats
Check out the GA and GAA%
https://www.naturalstattrick.com/teamtable.php
Check out literally any 5v5 stat here.
What metrics are you using to determine we should trade 3/6 top 6 to improve our D?
-
Just now, Harold Drunken said:
The league is becoming younger and players are contributing sooner and at a younger age, there was no notion made that having a player past 28/29 is a risk - don't know where you're getting that from we were simply discussing when a players prime is. Nowhere did I say you must get rid of players at this age or they aren't useful any longer lol. I also never said players over 30 can't and don't produce. You're taking this one conversation out of context is spreading it onto the plethora of others why why he should/shouldn't be traded. I simply said he wasn't "entering his prime" he was "in his prime" big different age and timeline wise.
You saying Miller has the capability to sustain his productivity to 34-35 is based on what? Unless you can see into the future that's pure speculation and a guess.
The notion to trade Miller because of his age is visibly implicit in your posts, and there's people throughout the fan base who are adamant that that is the reason they want him out. My post is to address and counter that opinion with what is actually going on in the NHL right now, and for the past several years, in terms of scoring.
You can also say Miller entered his prime at age 26/27. He is 28 now so there isn't as big a difference age/timeline wise as you think, you can give or take one season. I also said based on the way he plays the game (which isn't based on speed or extreme toughness), you can foresee to a good degree that he will sustain his productivity. I didn't say it is a guarantee, but an educated guess based on actual trends, especially if guys like Kadri, Pavelski, Wheeler, Marchand, Kessel and a multitude of others in the cap era can be a PPG into their early-mid thirties.
The Miller trade rumors are nothing but typical ill informed hysteria started by our own fan base that is serving as a blatant distraction to the team which is coming into its own and doing very well in the last few months they've played together. Let's see them play out the games they have and let the management get a good look before we start pestering the internet about trading our leading scorer.
-
1 hour ago, HKSR said:
I really don't get this mentality. Petey and Boeser are not playing well at all. Are we expecting that they will be this way forever? Do we feel Podz and Hogs will not improve? Heck, even Bo is underachieving this year. We've seen a dramatic improvement with a coaching change, why not see what they can do?
I've reiterated in previous threads... this is the timeline...
2018-19: Pettersson rookie year
2019-20: Hughes rookie year
2020-21: Pettersson injury after 26 games
2021-22: Give up on this group???
How on Earth do we KNOW that this team is not good enough? Arguably, they have barely had any seasons TOGETHER yet... (by together, I mean Petey, Hughes, Miller, Boeser, Bo, Demko).
The only season they have had TOGETHER prior to this one is 2019-20. They finished 4th in the division with a 36-27-6 record, eliminated the Wild in the play-in round, eliminated the Blues in the 1st round, and took Vegas to game 7 in the 2nd round.
We have a very emotional and volatile fan base. We're infamous for our overreactions and negativity around the league. What you have stated are facts and reason and these will not suffice here unfortunately.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, Harold Drunken said:
Yeah the opinions obviously range on this but the NHL is getting younger and younger, 30's isn't really considered prime anymore. Players are better younger now and when you look at the best players in the league they are well under 28.
Your second question, sheesh that's loaded and you'd have to ask ownership and management that one. I would argue Goalies reach their prime later, that's been the case for a long time as they take longer to develop. And if Pettersson is playing like a player in their prime then we have even bigger issues, let's say hopefully he's still developing.
You're right, we don't know the outcome if we trade him. We also don't' know the outcome and consequences if we keep him either. It's a crap shoot. I can tell you one thing, doing nothing and accepting the status quo isn't very good either.
The majority of the top 20 scorers in the NHL right now, and 5/10 of the top 10, are 28 and older. The notion that there's a risk in keeping a player past 28/29 because they will fall off is very short sighted and ill informed. The fact that the trade Miller echo chamber is using his age as the determining factor for their opinion just strikes me as lazy and uneducated, tbh. Would you have traded Daniel & Henrik away in 2008? Luongo in 2007? Bertuzzi & Naslund in the early 00s? This obsession with age and draft picks is quiet baffling, especially when you have the examples of Edmonton, Buffalo, etc right in front of you.
The way Miller plays the game, he has the capability to sustain his productivity to age 34-35. I would definitely want a player of his character and caliber on the team long term as we get better with Petey, Hughes, Demko and Brock emerging even stronger in their game.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, NUCKER67 said:
Starting to think that if they traded Miller, Boeser and/or Garland, they could sure get a real good Dman. I hope they transform that D.
Trade 3 top 6 players, one of them a top 10 scorer in the NHL, to improve a D that is already top 15 in the league while battling injuries?
-
7 minutes ago, Alienhuggyflow said:
You really need to delve into what the situation will look like in the summer of 2023.
My previous post shows several options that are completely doable and keep the core together even with our top 3 D making 20 million our top 9 is in pretty good shape with Petey being the highest paid. This is a good hockey team and not to steal a line from Holland but the answers are in the room.
The biggest bump this team can get is not from a trade but simply our best players continuing get back to the level they are capable of plus the natural progression as they enter their prime.
Complaining about a D group that is the best defensive team 5on5 and have been all year seems odd, when our d sucked but put up points people complained, now they go from 31st for 5on5 GA and 12th best all situations compared to 31st and people complain about that and this is a group that literally hasn't been healthy since day 1.
Picking out Quinn who has a plus 35 goal differential is easy but Myers and OEL are much improved from last season .
And I know Demko has been good but the Rangers, bolts and Canes all have goalies with far better stats yet all 3 teams have allowed more goals 5on5.
Very solid points in this post and your previous one as well. Extremely well articulated based on factual information. It is sad how loudly some of the fan base whines while having the bare minimum grasp on the actual situations surrounding the team. It is that kind of toxicity from where a lot of these baseless rumors start that end up creating so much negativity and distraction for the team and fan base. Glad to read your points, hopefully a lot of the detractors are able to comprehend even half of what your wrote.
-
26 minutes ago, Canuckfanforlife82 said:
How do you suppose they build around what we have? Our money is spent on defense and we don’t have anything of significance in the farm system. So there is really only one way and that is to trade some core players. It’s really the only way unless we luck out on college free agents or players from Europe but that is a long shot. How else do you suppose they build around them?
You do not need to move core players when 4/6 players of the core are already locked up in contracts. You have to understand that the group is collectively taking a step back by trading a core player when you're not getting one back in return. It's a futile situation that will end with you coming back to the same problem in a few years time when the prospects you've traded for earlier, and your current roster, is up for new contracts. And that is assuming the picks and prospects you traded for even end up being core players in the subsequent 2-3 years after the trade.
The way people are losing their minds now about the cap and how we'll not be able to keep Miller is exactly the reaction we used to have when we had Loui, Beagle and Roussel around. People were also pretty much guaranteeing we wouldn't be able to sign both Hughes and Pettersson. A good management team will find a way to keep Miller and build around our core. They are not paid the big bucks to make simpleton moves and trading the team's leading scorer and leader away because he's up for a new contract at age 28.
-
1
-
2
-
-
What a game, I'm so proud of this team and how they're working collectively to win these games. These guys are a close knit group who know they can achieve greatness together. On top of that, their skill sets and personalities compliment each other so well too.
For those who are adamant about trading Miller and enamored with collecting picks and prospects, JT Miller is the type of player you hope and pray those picks and prospects become some day. This man is a beast; scoring, killing penalties, and providing priceless leadership. Ya'll are worried that he's 28 years old? I think people need to get a grip and shut down this narrative, players like Miller don't just come along conveniently in every draft. I truly hope JR and Allvin build around what we already have.
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
-
34 minutes ago, Timråfan said:
Well, with Malkin, Letang, Guentzal and Crosby, do you believe Boeser would take a place on PP1?
Absolutely. There's not a single sane coach in the NHL that would not try Boeser with either Crosby or Malkin on PP1, maybe even with both. You're grasping at straws here to prove for whatever reason that Miller and Boeser aren't talented enough to be top line players when all data says otherwise.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Timråfan said:
Did he play with better players etc…
Look at Miller, our best players and didn’t get in Lightnings top 6.
I don't understand your point. Boeser is not just gifted a spot on PP1, he's there because of his competence and the numbers prove it. And Miller has outscored the entirety of Lightning's top 6 in the regular season since the time he's been traded. Once again, your point is incoherent and poorly constructed.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, Timråfan said:
Has Kapanen been on first line and PP1 with that teams best players?
Has Kapanen been good enough or have the offensive attributes to be on PP1? Would that net him 85 more career points in the same time frame as Brock?
It took you two days to come up with this? What is it with you man? I genuinely cannot tell if you're serious or just trolling at this point. Either way, it's completely hilarious. Unless you can provide concrete evidence to me that our defense is as bad as you say it is, especially since Boudreau took over, don't bother replying and embarrassing yourself further. I will definitely not engage any further with this nonsense unless there's some legitimate conversation with facts to be had.
Trading Elite Players in their Prime -- Are we expecting too much?
in Canucks Talk
Posted
That is awesome man, it's great to hear about parts of the team's past from people who witnessed it. Thanks for sharing