[proposal] At what point, would using our 9OA as a sweetener be acceptable?

[Nucker 67]

I'd only be comfortable trading the #9 for a top pairing D partner for Hughes - 28 and under.

 

 

[Nucker 67]

VAN traded the #71 pick in 2019 - TB [(G) Hugo Alnefelt]  and the #20 pick in 2020 - NJ [(D) Shakir Mukhamadullin] to get JT Miller - for Petey.  Was it worth it?

 

VAN needs to get Hughes a top pairing partner. Will they re-sign Hamonic and say that's done?  I wouldn't say that's aggressive though. 

 

I really think VAN needs to make the #9 pick, unless they get an offer they can't refuse for a youngish, true #1-2 Dman. Preferably right shot, but not crucial.

 

 

[Ballisticsports.]

3 hours ago, nzan said:

The whole concept is doubling-down on previous mistakes.

We made a bad move in the past - now we'll throw a giant asset at it to try and erase/reset back to the point the bad move was made, and we'll hopefully not make a similar bad move with the reclaimed cap space.

Much better to swallow the fact that everyone makes bad moves and ride it out.

And use assets such as this draft pick to build forward rather than erase back.

Agree with you 

We barely make the playoffs, we are selling to make the playoffs?

You might consider trading this pick when you have depth and are a powerhouse and want to be that much better to win it all

The Canucks are not that team yet

Keep the pick, it should be a good player to make the team a younger stronger more talented team in the near future

[Alflives]

14 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said:

VAN traded the #71 pick in 2019 - TB [(G) Hugo Alnefelt]  and the #20 pick in 2020 - NJ [(D) Shakir Mukhamadullin] to get JT Miller - for Petey.  Was it worth it?

 

VAN needs to get Hughes a top pairing partner. Will they re-sign Hamonic and say that's done?  I wouldn't say that's aggressive though. 

 

I really think VAN needs to make the #9 pick, unless they get an offer they can't refuse for a youngish, true #1-2 Dman. Preferably right shot, but not crucial.

 

 

For sure the Miller trade was worth it.  Those two players selected with those picks are bustaroo bonsais.  Miller is a legit great winger/centre, who is big, mean, and on a great contract.  If 9 OA gets us a player equal to Miller (age, contract, impact on the game) then that’s a good trade.  

[qwijibo]

13 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said:

VAN traded the #71 pick in 2019 - TB [(G) Hugo Alnefelt]  and the #20 pick in 2020 - NJ [(D) Shakir Mukhamadullin] to get JT Miller - for Petey.  Was it worth it?

 

VAN needs to get Hughes a top pairing partner. Will they re-sign Hamonic and say that's done?  I wouldn't say that's aggressive though. 

 

I really think VAN needs to make the #9 pick, unless they get an offer they can't refuse for a youngish, true #1-2 Dman. Preferably right shot, but not crucial.

 

 

You may as well say you’d move your magic beans for the right young unicorn.   Seriously.  What team has an extra “young true top pairing D” that they’re willing to give away for a pick in an unscouted draft?  Those players are incredibly hard to get and extremely valuable 

[Fanuck]

9 hours ago, Coconuts said:

 Loui is up in a year, Beagle is likely LTIR. 

 

Unless JB is thinking of pulling some shady TB cap BS with Beagle I think it would be financially prudent to plan as if Beagle will be ready for camp in the fall.  Doing otherwise wouldn't be good cap management:

 

https://canucksarmy.com/2021/07/05/report-jay-beagle-ready-vancouver-canucks-training-camp/

 

 

But I definitely agree with others in that JB should not be using 9oa as a cap dump incentive.   Use the pick, stay the course,  build through the draft. 

[Coconuts]

6 hours ago, IBatch said:

To me it has to be part of a larger plan like open the window now.   The only thing i could think of that could do that, and of course comes with risk (any strategy has, picking at 9th and busting for sure could happen too, and this year probably more so given the lack of sample size with these guys) is if Reinhardt really wants out as reported, and our 9th overall is the best offer (that's all id give them) ... then we go a step further and trade QHs...plus minus to even it's out for Chychrun, Ekblad or whomever - a more mature, bigger and better balanced D who can also defend. That would open the window while Miller and Horvat are here or at least before they become UFAs.   It's not what i want the team to do, id rather just stand pat and follow up last off season with a similar plan to let the cap shed.   But if it did happen i'd at least understand it.  Winning the cup is the ultimate goal and these guys need playoff reps to do that.    

 

Getting a 9th overall this year, and say a 12th next season probably is the best medicine over the long haul.    But at some point a team needs to start going for it.   

It's tricky, because like I said, you gotta balance competing with drafting that next wave. We very well could move the pick, buy It's gotta be for a player management thinks could help us now, not to relieve a headache. 

 

We could hold the 9th and have them bust, or trade it and have the player underwhelm. All one can do is project and analyze. Nobody is untouchable for the right price, it's why GM's take calls on players they'd prefer not to move. At this point I trust our drafting enough to keep it, I'm a bit more wary of our player acquisition, but who knows? 

 

We will have to start taking risks eventually. Petey and Quinn will have to be re-upped again, Horvat, Boeser, and Miller sooner than later. Demko, Podz, Hoglander, time keeps ticking. Miller may not be here in four years, things change. On the flip side, players naturally taking larger pie pieces is exactly why drafting cost controlled players is so important.

[Coconuts]

50 minutes ago, Fanuck said:

Unless JB is thinking of pulling some shady TB cap BS with Beagle I think it would be financially prudent to plan as if Beagle will be ready for camp in the fall.  Doing otherwise wouldn't be good cap management:

 

https://canucksarmy.com/2021/07/05/report-jay-beagle-ready-vancouver-canucks-training-camp/

 

 

But I definitely agree with others in that JB should not be using 9oa as a cap dump incentive.   Use the pick, stay the course,  build through the draft. 

Def, plan as if you won't have that cap space so as not to be caught off guard. And agreed on the drafting, for sure.

[JM_]

10 hours ago, qwijibo said:

I’m curious. Other than Vegas who actually came out ahead in the last expansion draft by “weaponizing cap space”?  I can’t think of anyone.  There were just teams who tried to minimize losses by making deals with Vegas. Pretty much every single team that made a deal ended up regretting it 

you see that phrase a lot, but it doesn't actually happen very often. I guess Detroit maybe? 

[Nucker 67]

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

For sure the Miller trade was worth it.  Those two players selected with those picks are bustaroo bonsais.  Miller is a legit great winger/centre, who is big, mean, and on a great contract.  If 9 OA gets us a player equal to Miller (age, contract, impact on the game) then that’s a good trade.  

I agree, well worth it for the #20 and #71. Miller brings more than just offence, he brings leadership and intensity.  But this is a #9 pick, much more valuable.

 

1 hour ago, qwijibo said:

You may as well say you’d move your magic beans for the right young unicorn.   Seriously.  What team has an extra “young true top pairing D” that they’re willing to give away for a pick in an unscouted draft?  Those players are incredibly hard to get and extremely valuable 

Yes, probably won't happen for this reason, so I hope they make the pick. 

[qwijibo]

9 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said:

I agree, well worth it for the #20 and #71. Miller brings more than just offence, he brings leadership and intensity.  But this is a #9 pick, much more valuable.

 

Yes, probably won't happen for this reason, so I hope they make the pick. 

Definitely the smartest play 

[PhillipBlunt]

13 hours ago, VegasCanuck said:

9OA is NOT a sweetener, it only gets used to acquire a major piece on the TJ Miller type of level.

[CaptKirk888]

13 hours ago, VegasCanuck said:

9OA is NOT a sweetener, it only gets used to acquire a major piece on the TJ Miller type of level.

Cool, is that JT’s brother or cousin? Or totally unrelated? 

[PhillipBlunt]

As a few others have stated, and to which I agree, the only scenario that makes sense to jettison the 9OA pick is if there is an impact player coming back in the trade. To merely gain cap space is shortsighted in my opinion. 

[kloubek]

I certainly wouldn't want to use the 9oa as a sweetener to move cap space. We may be better off sucking it up for a year and then going all in a season later.

 

That said, if there's a steal of a trade to be made with another team that brings a difference maker to the lineup, I could be convinced...

[Patel Bure]

2 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

As a few others have stated, and to which I agree, the only scenario that makes sense to jettison the 9OA pick is if there is an impact player coming back in the trade. To merely gain cap space is shortsighted in my opinion. 

If a 9OA as a sweetener was used to move out 9 million in cap space, the Canucks would be able to use that cap space to bring an impact player or significantly increase their depth (i.e. Hamilton, Danault+, weaponize cap space to help elite cap strapped teams, etc.).

 

Personally?   I probably wouldn’t go this route (I.e. my own personal route would be to likely use a 2nd or 3rd + mid level prospect to move Roussel and Beagle in independent deals to clear 6 million in cap space), but even those Beagle and Roussel ideas might not work.

 

I know a lot of us are fantasizing about the idea of trading our 9thOA for Reinhart, but Reinhart isn’t going to come that cheap.  

 

Since Evander Kane has significant off ice baggage, I think a 1st + Eriksson for Evander Kane would be realistic/within reason.

[PhillipBlunt]

1 minute ago, Patel Bure said:

If a 9OA as a sweetener was used to move out 9 million in cap space, the Canucks would be able to use that cap space to bring an impact player or significantly increase their depth (i.e. Hamilton, Danault+, weaponize cap space to help elite cap strapped teams, etc.).

 

Personally?   I probably wouldn’t go this route (I.e. my own personal route would be to likely use a 2nd or 3rd + mid level prospect to move Roussel and Beagle in independent deals to clear 6 million in cap space), but even those Beagle and Roussel ideas might not work.

 

I know a lot of us are fantasizing about the idea of trading our 9thOA for Reinhart, but Reinhart isn’t going to come that cheap.  

 

Since Evander Kane has significant off ice baggage, I think a 1st + Eriksson for Evander Kane would be realistic/within reason.

I'd rather have Kane than Reinhart. 

[VegasCanuck]

1 hour ago, CaptKirk888 said:

Cool, is that JT’s brother or cousin? Or totally unrelated? 

Good catch...fixed. This is what happens when you  do posts on your phone lol

[Patel Bure]

1 hour ago, PhillipBlunt said:

I'd rather have Kane than Reinhart. 

I mean, Reinhart is a much younger asset and has no off ice baggage, but I think people are kidding themselves if they believe 9OA gets you Paul’s kid.  On the flip side, would you trade Bo Horvat for 9OA?  No right?  So why would Buffalo?  
 

Given the acquisition cost of what it might take to land Evander as opposed to Reinhart, I also agree with you that I’d rather have Evander Kane.  Turning useless Eriksson into a massive asset would be a huge advantage (of course, I’m just assuming that Eriksson + 1st for Evander Kane would be fair).

[Bell]

Best off season moves,  EP40 longterm