Baggins

Most over value our players and under value other teams players. I saw somebody posted, Motte must go, we'll get a grade 'A' prospect plus a 2nd or 3rd round pick. I was like, "for Motte"? I don't think you could pull that off in EA let alone the real world.

Yup. But he's still undersized. Stetcher plays with heart and bigger than he is. It doesn't change the fact he's prone to losing physical battles along to boards and in front of the net because of his size. Edit: Just saw the mighty Stetch was traded for a whopping 7th rounder.

Remember our cup run duo of Edler and Ehrhoff? Both shot left. Ehrhoff spent his career a lefty on the right side. Hughes has also said he as comfortable on the right as he is on the left. Some lefties have the skill and are actually quite good on the right. I suspect it comes from doing it at an early age and getting use to it without over thinking it.

This team is at the build stage, not rebuild. At some point rebuild stops and building around your good must start. Otherwise you're just wasting years of your top young players. How much longer do you think Horvat wants to spin his wheels? The Sedins had a small window because it took to long to build around them. You need to build around your quality young players as quickly as possible if you want a decent window.

The problem with Rathbone is he's a poor mans Hughes. Not as good offensively and not as good defensively as Hughes. Plus he's a little under sized. How many under sized d-men do you really want? I've viewed him as a future trade piece after seeing how bad he was defensively. He'll help getting a valuable piece down the road.

Travis Quo...

Wait, haven't they been doing just that? Rutherford has said they've been getting calls after all. Is it not possible management made the decision what's being offered simply isn't good enough? They're certainly not actually under any pressure (other than from fans) at the deadline to move players that aren't pending ufa's. And if it's not a player they actually want to part with the offer would need to be too good to refuse.That's a decision. The truth is you don't know squat about what goes on behind closed doors. You make assumptions about things when what you want doesn't happen. The owner is simply the easiest target to blame. If he meddled half as much as fans believe why would waste his money on a president or GM? I'd be thinking, if I'm going be blamed I may as well just do the job myself so I actually deserve it. I'm sure something 'big' is run by the owner of every team. Management does have to answer to the owner after all. He is the one that made the investment of hundreds of millions. But I doubt they meddle nearly as often as most believe.

I know you're right? Lmao! The majority of deadline deals are players on expiring contracts and that market is always good at the deadline. Take a look at our expiring contracts and tell the great value we can get. Players under contract get traded at any time. Rutherfords's job is to assess what's best for the team, not do what willy-nillyfans want. You simply want trades for the sake of trades. Not getting that, you blame the owner. Easy-peasy. Maybe, just maybe, Rutherford is just smarter than the fans.

Drunker than Alf is quite the accomplishment!

That's easy. If JR/PA aren't doing what some want they are either idiots or it's the owners fault. They haven't been here long to write off as idiots yet so obviously the owner gets the blamed for not doing what they want.

Typically a seller at the deadline is moving pending UFA's you don'\t intend to re-sign. The best pending UFA we have is Motte. I'd rather re-sign him than than get a long shot mid round pick. Chaisson might get a late round pick as cheap insurance. The only other guy is Halak but he's reportedly declined to waive. If he changed his mind after getting put in the Calgary game (and likely not to start todays game as a result) I'd happily trade him for a 7th rounder if they take his bonus money as well. Hell, I'd trade him and our 5th for a 7th if they take the bonus money. Particularly if we could get a 6th for Chaisson. Schenn I wouldn't move. You keep guys like him on cheap contracts. Playoff teams don't tend to trade for guys like Poolman or Dickenson unless they are pending ufa's and both are injured anyway. The only guy with value under contract I'd move is Boeser. Mainly because at 25 even teams out of the playoffs would have interest. Meaning a much better 1st rounder in the return package. But that can be done for the draft if not now. Plus imo he's the most expendable of our high cap players. Considering the teams record under Boudreau cleaning house, moves for the sake of just doing something, at this point would be a fools game.

The Hawks missed the playoffs the season before signing Hossa. Somebody should have told Chicago they'd only have a two year window signing Hossa. Three cups in five years later... Let's look at some hopes and dreams we may get for Miller.... First round picks from #16 on from 2016 (The columns are GP - G - A - Pts - PIM) From 2017.. From 2018.... From 2019.... From 2020... But our window opens in two years with hopes and dreams. You never know what you'll get drafting in the bottom half of the first round. But the odds are good you will be waiting a while to find out. Tomorrow never comes if you keep moving your best players for hopes and dreams. Move Miller and next up is Horvat. Then Garland, Then...oh hell, let's just start over....

Even McJesus is held off the scoresheet at times. Way to ignore the big picture. But if your whole argument is we don't win when Miller doesn't pick up points what happens when we don't have him at all? A 2-78-2 record? (we have to luck out a couple of times )

What makes you think it's only two or three years? If all our players were around Miller's age I'd agree it's likely to be a smallish window. But there's already high quality youth on the team on the team. Consider this, Chicago's last cup was 2015. Hossa was still a top six forward at 36 with 61 pts in 82 games that season and 17 pts in the 23 playoff games. Chicago's cups came when Hossa was 31, 34 and 36. Hossa played a moderately physical game, was defensively responsible, a pretty decent playmaker, and played on both pp and pk. His last ppg season was when he was 28. I get that many are worried about another Player Name debacle. But Miller and Player Name are very different players. Player Name was a non-physical goal scorer and was never much of a playmaker. His game depended heavily on others and without goal scoring he really didn't provide much. Miller plays an aggressive physical game and is the best playmaker among our forwards by a country mile. Player Name wasn't a line driver, he was a passenger depending heavily on his line. Miller makes those around him better because he's a complete player. Among all forwards in the league over the past three seasons Miller ranks 9th in assists just behind 33 yr old Marchand, and 11th in first assists. Kane (33 yrs old) is 2nd in the league for 1st assists over the past three seasons. These guys are line drivers. Line drivers don't tend to decline at the same rate as the goal scorers. Given this teams record under Boudreau, a few smart moves and the window is open. Trading Miller for propsects and picks would only delay the window wasting more years of our quality younger players waitng to see if prospects and picks pan out. If Miller, and others, are moved for prospects and picks I'd say two years to open the window is rather optimistic.You're moving your best player, and prospects don't come with guarantees. The sooner our young guys get to the playoffs the longer the window will be open. That's why Chicago signed Hossa. To get that window open sooner for their young stars. Another thing to keep in mind is the Sedin era and it's decline. It took too long to build around them making for a small window, and too many core players in a similar age group makes for a really ugly rebuild. When Miller and Horvat are aging out Petey, Hughes, Demko, and Podz will all be in their prime. There's several years between now and then to draft and develop replacements and make trades to maintain the window.

Threre's no such thing as a gimme game. The Wings have beat Vegas, the Rangers, the Canes, etc. New Jersey has beaten the Caps, the Canes, the Panthers, etc. Sometimes bad teams have good games and/or good teams bad games. Sometimes a good team goes in with your gimme mentality and just bury themselves. The mistake of believing in gimme games. When Rutherford took over he said he saw what everybody else saw in the first twenty games, an "underperforming" team. He said it was obvious they were better than what they were doing, how much better, nobody really knows that yet. Well, since then we've seen how much better. He even says, the team might even better than most thought it should be. Rather the opposite of your version that they're over achieving since the coaching change rather than under achieving under Green. Go to about 1:40 in this video if you don't believe me... He has. But why panic before they explore what an extension would look like? That cup window could be open far sooner than you believe if Rutherford is right and Miller retained. I've maintained for much of the season that this team is closer than most think. That isn't to say the team can't be improved, but we certainly don't need to make moves to tank. Your "facts" are more your "fantasy". Watching the video above Rutherford disagrees with you completely, saying there's a lot to like about this team. Unlike many fans, he's not going to panic and tank the team out of fear. This isn't to say he doesn't want changes, but I don't don't believe he's planning on what you want.

Your welcome.

The "more" would need to be a proven top pair RHD age 22- 25 for me to say ok. Hopes and dreams don't make up for Miller.

Isn't that the same thing that was said after the Dec win streak? We're 22-9-5 since Boudreau took over.

Yes, Tavares has an embarrassing 57 points in 59 games this season. I can think of several worse contracts.

A gross exageration. But of our high cap forwards Boeser would be my first choice to move despite being the second youngest. But that has more to do with overall game rather than just speed or production. Some have argued moving Garland over Boeser. I believe that would be foolish and not just because Garland will be cheaper for the next for the next four years. That's just a great big cherry on top. Here's some interesting stats among our forward group: This season Boeser only has 3 more points than Garland despite 77 more minutes of PP time and 44 minutes of ES time. Meaning Boeser has played two hours more despite playing 1 game less than Garland. Even strength production per 60 minutes played: Garland leads all forwards in goals and assists slightly ahead of Miller in both Pearson is 3rd in points per 60 ES minutes Boeser is 10th in ES goals and 11th in ES points per 60 minutes. Highmore is the opposite at 11th in ES goals and 10th in ES points per 60 minutes. Motte, Podz, Hoglander and Lammiko all produce more ES points per 60 minutes Garland leads all forwards in penalties drawn per 60 minutes just ahead of Pettersson. Boeser is 13th in penalties drawn per 60 mites. Pettersson leads all forwards in drawn penalties to taken penalties 26-4 Garland is 2nd for drawn to taken ratio at 26-11 For comaprison Pearson is third at 15-11 Boeser is 9-7 tied at fourth with Chaison at +2 When translated to diferential per 60 minutes played Petterson, Garland and Pearson remain 1, 2 & 3 among regulars Boeser drops to 6th behind Chaison and Highmore Neither Garland nor Boeser are particularly physical. Sitting 13 and 16th respectively in hits per 60. Dickenson and Motte are 1 and 2 respectively Miller is 3rd and Pearson 9th (just behind Highmore and ahead of Horvat) I know many discount +/- but... Garland leads all forwards at +13 Foilowed by Miler +10 and Pearson +9 Boeser is 17th at -6 Only Hoglander is worse at -7 Bang for the buck, Garland is just more valuable to me and costs less. At very least Boeser should probably supply more physically considering he's 6'1 208 lbs. He has a considerable size advantage over Garland but doesn't use it. Garland is faster, better defensively, and simply does more with his ice time. It begs the question, how much more can Garland provide if given greater opportunity with Boeser moved? And if Garland moves up it also means greater opportunity for Podz who produces more Boeser at ES and is more physical than Pearson and Horvat. We can afford to move a high cap forward and Boeser would be my first choice as I don't think he provides enough beyond points.

Sure. But why would he sign that deal when he can just take his 7.5m QO and see how next year goes? If a player doesn't feel he's lived up to his deal and wants to do the right thing, he he might take a discount on a one year deal, believing he will prove his worth. He doesn't sign a five year major discount though. He's 25 not 35 after all.

Um, isn't that exactly what a prospect pool is - unproven rookies? What happens to the quality of your prospect pool when the best of it moves up to the team? Well. your team gets younger and you're no longer among the top prospect pools. Our prospect pool isn't as vacant now as when Benning took over. I get that you're an eternal pessimist, but even you have to admit Rutherford has a much better starting point than Benning had. I'm neither young nor naive. But I'm certainly more optimistic about our current prospects than I was about Shinkaruk (our future 1st line winger) , Gaunce (our future 2nd/3rd line center), and Corrado (our future top 4 D). If you expect to have a top prospect pool after adding the likes of Pettersson, Hughes, Demko, Podkolzin and Hoglander in a short period you're delusional. There's certainly room for some improvement on the roster. But rebuild at this point? Currently sitting with the 8th best win percentage in the league since Bouda took over in Dec, just how much of a mess is this team? Bouda's win percentage over his 35 games translates into a 110 point season. We certainly don't need to "rebuild". That's as stupid a statement as it gets. We're really not that far away.