[Trade] Lightning trade J.T. Miller to Canucks for Marek Mazanec, 2019 3rd-round pick, 2020 conditional 1st-round pick

[aGENT]

5 minutes ago, Bure_Pavel said:

As much as I hate them Calgary had 107 points last year, not exactly sketchy. 

They still need a goalie and to jettison solid players to give raises to the likes of MT and 18YO. Are they going to be as good of a team after that....? Maybe? Depends on how well some of their prospects play on their ELC's, replacing the guys they're going to lose. And they still need a goalie.

Edited June 24, 2019 by aGENT

[18W-40C-6W]

7 minutes ago, Bure_Pavel said:

 

So wait for next year when you know what position you are drafting and trade the pick then for a top six guy like St. Louis did with Brayden Schenn. Instead of taking a page out of the Dorian handbook.

This isn't a page out of the Dorian handbook and they needed a top 6 NOW. Ottawa sold off the core of their team guy. Are we going to implode our team by selling, Bo, Petey, Boeser and Hughes? Very different situations, ages of the core, contract statuses etc,  think about that. You're acting like Miller is 32 years old. He's 26, he's going to be around for 8-9 years. Given his skill set, as he hits 31-32, he's still going to have value to us as a playoff team or any other playoff team because of his size, he's a center who's good at faceoffs, plays a hard gritty game and is solid defensively. As Podkolzin moves up from the 3rd line he starts rotating down. This is how you manage a roster. At worst you move him at that age at the deadline to another team looking for at big veteran playoff performer. I bet we recoup that first down the road if we ever move him,

Edited June 24, 2019 by 18W-40C-6W

[Silver Ghost]

3 minutes ago, Bure_Pavel said:

 

So wait for next year when you know what position you are drafting and trade the pick then for a top six guy like St. Louis did with Brayden Schenn. Instead of taking a page out of the Dorian handbook.

There is risk in that approach too though. Who is to say the player you want is going to be available next year?

 

Schenn is a perfect example. Rumors were flying at the turn of the new year that he would be dealt from St Louis. Now he is going nowhere for anything but a massive overpayment. 

 

Risk management is a moving target based on a ton of unknowns.

 

And what if the Canucks make the playoffs and their pick is too low to give them that currency to get that top guy?

 

Trade value of picks for those borderline teams is much higher before the position is known unless they totally flame out. Looking at the Canucks now, barring another run of massive injuries, they should be better this year. 

Edited June 24, 2019 by Silver Ghost

[goblix]

48 minutes ago, DeltaSwede said:

Alright, I'll admit it, I'm being lazy now but looking through 130 pages to find what I'm looking for is a bit rich for me right now. 

 

Anyone got a good idea on how this impacts the Canucks heading into the expansion draft?

  

Regarding the trade itself, i winged when the details first came out about the conditional first, but I'm starting to warm up to the idea of this trade and actually think it's ok. It's ok IF the Canucks make the playoffs in 2021 or even next year. It's certainly a gamble but sometimes you need to take a gamble to be successful. 

I think in general if you don't have an exposed forward leading towards the expansion draft that stings to lose then you are not a good team at all.

https://www.capfriendly.com/expansion-draft/seattle

 

the tool assumes we have what we have now under contract so really some of the names likely not in there and potentially may add a few more.

I believe the picks from 2018+ are exempt from the draft in no matter what happens (barring rule change).

 

you can protect:

7F / 3D / 1G 

 

so the easy choices

F - Horvat, Pettersson,  Boeser

D - Stecher

G - Demko

 

Most likely will protect:

F - Gaudette, Miller

D - Juolevi

 

Based on what we know and what we have now and how we think these guys will go ahead trajectory-wise the rest really depends on how they progress.

 

The unprotected notables:

Baertschi, Pearson, Virtanen, Lind, Jasek, MacEwen, Leivo, Hutton, (any other additions)

 

so really we have 2 flex forward spots and a flex defense spot to protect someone worthwhile. 

[Bure_Pavel]

9 minutes ago, Silver Ghost said:

There is risk in that approach too though. Who is to say the player you want is going to be available next year.

 

Schenn is a perfecf example. Rumors were flying at the tufn of the new year that he would be dealt from St Louis. Now he is going nowhere for anyyhing but a massive overpayment. 

 

Risk management is a moving target based on a ton of unknowns.

Less risk than giving up a lottery pick IMO.

[18W-40C-6W]

3 minutes ago, goblix said:

I think in general if you don't have an exposed forward leading towards the expansion draft that stings to lose then you are not a good team at all.

https://www.capfriendly.com/expansion-draft/seattle

 

the tool assumes we have what we have now under contract so really some of the names likely not in there and potentially may add a few more.

I believe the picks from 2018+ are exempt from the draft in no matter what happens (barring rule change).

 

you can protect:

7F / 3D / 1G 

 

so the easy choices

F - Horvat, Pettersson,  Boeser

D - Stecher

G - Demko

 

Most likely will protect:

F - Gaudette, Miller

D - Juolevi

 

Based on what we know and what we have now and how we think these guys will go ahead trajectory-wise the rest really depends on how they progress.

 

The unprotected notables:

Baertschi, Pearson, Virtanen, Lind, Jasek, MacEwen, Leivo, Hutton, (any other additions)

 

so really we have 2 flex forward spots and a flex defense spot to protect someone worthwhile. 

So we're fine. I think Baer will be moved this year. They will most certainly protect Jake, or he'll be traded. He has too much potential to be left exposed. Pearson is probably the other guy depending on how he plays. Leivo is too much of a tweener, McEwan is too much of an unknown as are the others

[Silver Ghost]

4 minutes ago, Bure_Pavel said:

Less risk than giving up a lottery pick IMO.

The risk of that actually ending up being a lottery pick is pretty low though if you look at the entire situation objectively. 

[18W-40C-6W]

6 minutes ago, Bure_Pavel said:

Less risk than giving up a lottery pick IMO.

What lottery pick? Can you tell the future? You seem to want the canucks to lose and chase first overall vs a cup. Go cheer for edmonton, they're good at doing that and continuing to lose for a decade after acquiring 'lottery pick after lottery pick' and usually first overall.

Edited June 24, 2019 by 18W-40C-6W

[goblix]

1 minute ago, 18W-40C-6W said:

So we're fine. I think Baer will be moved this year. They will most certainly protect Jake, or he'll be traded. He has too much potential to be left exposed. Pearson is probably the other guy depending on how he plays. Leivo is too much of a tweener, McEwan is too much of an unknown as are the others

Pretty much but in 2 seasons there's many things that can change with those tweeners and prospects.

Like Lind could become a stud and maybe Miller less than spectacular and we can risk the exposure and return the cap space with his contract.

Plus no clue on who we potentially add going forward. Lots of variables

[Rob_Zepp]

40 minutes ago, 18W-40C-6W said:

And it’s the right time and a brilliant move.

I am not prepared to say it is a brilliant move - I think it is a bold and risky move that has odds on the Canuck's side but there is a chance it could not work out as well as probability would otherwise suggest.    I will say that if the Miller that shows up in September is the one that has been in the league for the past few years, the Canucks will have added a player that they have not seen a lot of in Vancouver for a while, a real power forward who has emerged.   Another point some are not raising much is the positive impact this could have on Virtanen - Miller has learned to use his speed, edge and big frame without taking bad penalties but he is a physical presence on the ice and keep heads on swivels.    

[Bure_Pavel]

5 minutes ago, 18W-40C-6W said:

What lottery pick? Can you tell the future? You seem to want the canucks to lose and chase first overall vs a cup. Go cheer for edmonton, they're good at doing that and continuing to lose for a decade after acquiring 'lottery pick after lottery pick' and usually first overall.

There is a difference between making the playoffs and being a legit contender. You can go cheer for the Oilers, they can use a couple more homers. 

[wildwood12]

If we can get Tyler Myers, I will really look forward to this season. Match ups to Calgary and Edmonton will be very interesting.

[The Great Canucks]

2 hours ago, D-Money said:

The deal is fine if we make the playoffs in one of the next 2 years. But that is not a sure thing.

 

Ottawa's 1st in the Duchesne deal was also lottery protected, but they went on to sink to the bottom of the standings in both years. And this was after being a goal away from the Stanley Cup Finals. In 2017-18 they had Karlsson, Stone, Duchesne, Hoffman, Chabot, Dzingel, Brassard...but still were at the bottom of the standings, partially due to their goaltending falling apart.

 

Of course Pettersson, Boeser, Horvat, and Hughes are great young players...but so were Karlsson, Stone, Hoffman, Chabot, etc. And of course Miller is a great addition, that on paper is exactly what the team needs...but Duchesne was the same to Ottawa. And that is after Ottawa had proved they had the ability to be a successful playoff team - we haven't even came close to that the past few years. I suspect we will continue to improve...but if Pettersson has a sophomore slump and our goaltending falters, we might be back a the bottom again next season. And if that happens, the pressure will be on to make sure 2020-21 is different.

 

So because of that, I don't love the trade. If it all goes well this 1st year though, the potential downside will be wiped out.

There is one huge difference between us and Ottawa that you are ignoring: Ottawa has a cheap owner. Melnyk is the reason Ottawa is rebuilding. Their downfall started because Melnyk was too damn cheap to pay Turris.

[aGENT]

6 minutes ago, Bure_Pavel said:

There is a difference between making the playoffs and being a legit contender. You can go cheer for the Oilers, they can use a couple more homers. 

There's also a difference between making the playoffs and having a lotto pick.

[stawns]

44 minutes ago, Bure_Pavel said:

As much as I hate them Calgary had 107 points last year, not exactly sketchy. 

And they feasted on a weak Pacific Division and looked awful in the playoffs.  They are a perimeter team with very questionable goaltending.

[Silver Ghost]

13 minutes ago, Bure_Pavel said:

There is a difference between making the playoffs and being a legit contender. You can go cheer for the Oilers, they can use a couple more homers. 

In terms of the pick thoigh, making the playoffs or not is the only thing that determines if it is too high a price or not. And there are many more factors involved along the way.

[Rob_Zepp]

13 minutes ago, Bure_Pavel said:

There is a difference between making the playoffs and being a legit contender. 

As this year showed, EVERY team that made the playoffs was a legitimate contender.    Bruins get their Chara injury one round earlier, Carolina may be in the final....for but one example.   In the CAP era, you get a hot goalie(s) and some luck with injuries, you make it into the playoffs and you have a legitimate chance.    

[Bure_Pavel]

9 minutes ago, aGENT said:

There's also a difference between making the playoffs and having a lotto pick.

ya its either or

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, Bure_Pavel said:

ya its either or

Do you honestly see us as a bottom 10 team, two years from now?

 

And again, if we are, we have FAR bigger problems than whether we paid a 1st round pick for a player worth... a 1st round pick.

[Rob_Zepp]

49 minutes ago, Bure_Pavel said:

As much as I hate them Calgary had 107 points last year, not exactly sketchy. 

How did that translate to playoff success?   NO other team in the West that qualified for the playoffs won fewer playoff games ..... they were healthy and they (narrowly) won ONE playoff game.   As much as you hate them, you seem to have a short memory about their lack of success as well.