Blight for Wright - Canucks already at less than 10% chance to make the playoffs

[Wanless]

15 minutes ago, Provost said:

Well you have to have a more sophisticated view of things.  Contract status and cap considerations come into play, not just if a player is good or not.

 

We have Miller and Horvat under club control for the next 1.5 seasons.  That is it, they are UFAs soon.

Both are at an age where they can either chase the most money, or their best chance to win a Cuo by going to a contender.  The Canucks represent neither of those things in the short term.  Our chances of signing them both to to reasonably priced contracts is negligible.

 

Picture our team without those two players and no assets in return for them.  That is not a playoff team, never mind a contender...  not for years more of drafting high in hopes of eventually replacing them.  We simply aren’t in a place in our cycle to be able to afford to risk that.

 

It is all about growing our assets so we have currency to fix our roster.  Trading club controlled young assets like you suggest in favour of a low chance of being able to sign expensive veterans at overpriced UFA rates is a genuinely terrible idea.

 

I had suggested one possible type of trade for Miller as an example.

 

Miller + Poolman (or Hamonic)

for

Carlo

Debrusk

Senyshyn

2023 1st round pick

 

Boston gets the best player for another couple deep playoff runs.  We get a huge upgrade on D to partner with Hughes and signed long term to a cheap contract.  Plus we get younger and futures.

 

 

Just because you call others unsophisticated does not make you more

 

Every year CDC complains of cap complications. Every year there are cap complications on teams. But the top players stay unless there is a clear cut replacement knocking on the door example is demko allowing the canucks to move on from Markstrome the way they did

 

but what we very very rarely see is the top scorer moved for assets and the better the team is doing the rarer it gets

 

if there are cap problems players like dickenson hoglander pearson even garland get moved not players worth more because of stand out play. This is also where players like Klimovich and lockewood get their opportunities from

[Wanless]

56 minutes ago, DefCon1 said:

If they do those trade  I will just cheer for another team. What is the point of drafting high, developing players and seeing them develop into good players just to turn around and trade them for draft picks again? Its beyond idiotic, worst than Millbury trades.

 

Canucks dont need to trade their young players that will put them back into Arizona/Buffalo territory. They will just reshuffle some players for another players like Pearson or Dickenson for other NHL players that make similar salaries. Dollars in/dollars out kind of trade JR was talking about. But Getting rid of players like Garland or Hoglander is beyond idiotic unless you are getting young NHL ready star players back.

First off

 

that was not a proposal, just a suggestion as to who should be traded before miller, our top scorer

 

second

 

it wouldnt be all of those players that would be idiotic

 

third

 

if any of those players were traded it would be because the return fit the needs of the team better than the player leaving

 

[Coconuts]

9 hours ago, Wanless said:

Youre really pushing this but what do you think the haul is going to be?

 

I dont think its wise to trade a top 10 scorer for even a 18-32 first round pick and blue chip prospect. If we could get a top 10 unprotected pick then id consider it, but it seems like poor asset management.

 

and really, the teams that can afford him probably want to keep their picks and prospects and the top teams would look at how they cant afford to have him next year. Also the top teams would likely have an even higher 25-32 pick, not good enough.

 

we bought well with miller, keep nice things

 

Guys i would look at trading first

 

Hoglander - blue chip prospect

Pearson - a couple seconds

Garland - a first protected 

Pettersson - good hockey trade or prospect/roster player and unprotected first

Rathbone - d prospect with different skillset

 

 

But in all reality, this team is working well and this road trip will tell us a lot of where they are at and what is needed

 

 

 

 

You think Pearson could get a couple 2nds? You're out of your mind. 

 

Also, JR's repeatedly emphasized wanting to get younger if he makes trades, one can safely assume he's more interested in retaining youth than moving it out at the expense of vets. We'd be stupid to move our first 2nd round hit in a good while in Hoglander. 

 

Pettersson hasn't gotten ringing endorsements, but he'll probably be allowed to work through it. We aren't getting Barzal for him. One season doesn't negate what he's done up til now. 

 

Garland is found money, plays with intensity and produces. He's also young enough that we'll get him through what's likely the remainder of his prime, on a good contract no less. 

Edited January 3, 2022 by Coconuts

[Wanless]

1 hour ago, Coconuts said:

You think Pearson could get a couple 2nds? You're out of your mind. 

 

Also, JR's repeatedly emphasized wanting to get younger if he makes trades, one can safely assume he's more interested in retaining youth than moving it out at the expense of vets. We'd be stupid to move our first 2nd round hit in a good while in Hoglander. 

 

Pettersson hasn't gotten ringing endorsements, but he'll probably be allowed to work through it. We aren't getting Barzal for him. One season doesn't negate what he's done up til now. 

 

Garland is found money, plays with intensity and produces. He's also young enough that we'll get him through what's likely the remainder of his prime, on a good contract no less. 

Values aside you think he would trade Miller?

[Coconuts]

3 minutes ago, Wanless said:

Values aside you think he would trade Miller?

I think there's absolutely a chance he'll trade Miller.

[Wanless]

1 hour ago, Coconuts said:

I think there's absolutely a chance he'll trade Miller.

Ok

[Provost]

1 hour ago, Wanless said:

Values aside you think he would trade Miller?

Yep.  Timing is everything.

 

This is from Rutherford’s Friday interview.  Guess what player is older and isn’t under contract in a couple years when Rutherford thinks the window starts?  it doesn’t matter how good Miller is if he isn’t going to be here when we have a decent chance at being a winning team.
 

It isn’t the first time he has said it either.  He wants to get younger in each trade so guys are ready with this core… not already declining by the time we are really ready to compete.

 

 

“And because of that, with the trades that we make going forward, if we make trades, it’d be for draft picks, it’ll be for younger players, so we can bring this team together hopefully within a year or two, to be that consistent playoff team.”

 

That says guys like Miller, Pearson, Hamonic, Poolman, Myers are absolutely trade bait.

Edited January 3, 2022 by Provost

[Guest]

To everyone arguing here about who should be traded....  why are we having this debate?  

 

We can afford to keep everyone that we want to keep.  In fact this next off-season will be one of the easiest in a long time as we will only have to take care of Boeser, Motte, Highmore and fill out the rest of the roster with young guys.  

[Wanless]

22 minutes ago, VancouverHabitant said:

To everyone arguing here about who should be traded....  why are we having this debate?  

 

We can afford to keep everyone that we want to keep.  In fact this next off-season will be one of the easiest in a long time as we will only have to take care of Boeser, Motte, Highmore and fill out the rest of the roster with young guys.  

I dont get it either

 

When our players start doing good they want to trade them

 

moving forward with this line up with a tweak here and there is all that is needed

 

what is not needed is trading away our top performers 

[N4ZZY]

4 hours ago, Coconuts said:

I think there's absolutely a chance he'll trade Miller.

Yeah, I think Rutherford actually might trade Miller for a huge haul as well. 

 

[N4ZZY]

2 hours ago, Wanless said:

I dont get it either

 

When our players start doing good they want to trade them

 

moving forward with this line up with a tweak here and there is all that is needed

 

what is not needed is trading away our top performers 

how exactly are we going to fit Boeser, Bo and JT under the cap? 

[N4ZZY]

3 hours ago, Provost said:

Yep.  Timing is everything.

 

This is from Rutherford’s Friday interview.  Guess what player is older and isn’t under contract in a couple years when Rutherford thinks the window starts?  it doesn’t matter how good Miller is if he isn’t going to be here when we have a decent chance at being a winning team.
 

It isn’t the first time he has said it either.  He wants to get younger in each trade so guys are ready with this core… not already declining by the time we are really ready to compete.

 

 

“And because of that, with the trades that we make going forward, if we make trades, it’d be for draft picks, it’ll be for younger players, so we can bring this team together hopefully within a year or two, to be that consistent playoff team.”

 

That says guys like Miller, Pearson, Hamonic, Poolman, Myers are absolutely trade bait.

Miller, Pearson, Hamonic even I can see as other teams wanting and having interest. 

 

Myers it really depends. He's playing great right now, so if he's traded, Rutherford is selling high on the man. How many years does he have left on his contract? That'll depend on whether teams are interested. Cap issues aren't just with the Canucks, lots of other teams have them too. 

 

JR can say he wants to get younger, doesn't mean he can make that happen. 

 

[N4ZZY]

11 hours ago, Wanless said:

Just because you call others unsophisticated does not make you more

 

Every year CDC complains of cap complications. Every year there are cap complications on teams. But the top players stay unless there is a clear cut replacement knocking on the door example is demko allowing the canucks to move on from Markstrome the way they did

 

but what we very very rarely see is the top scorer moved for assets and the better the team is doing the rarer it gets

 

if there are cap problems players like dickenson hoglander pearson even garland get moved not players worth more because of stand out play. This is also where players like Klimovich and lockewood get their opportunities from

Klimovich isn't going to be ready next season. It's going to be a few more seasons in the AHL before he's ready to make the jump. 

 

Lockwood I can see maybe pushing for a bottom six role. Not sure if that's next season, though. 

 

[Wanless]

5 hours ago, N4ZZY said:

how exactly are we going to fit Boeser, Bo and JT under the cap? 

By making up 3 million in cap space by the 23/24 season to bump miller into the 7 mil range and horvat into the 6

 

this could be as easy as moving garland

 

for people who don’t understand or want to hear this. If you can move a secondary scoring piece to clear cap to keep a save a primary scoring piece you do it. This is how we ended up with miller.

 

by moving Garland, using his money to sign the two above and hoglander, then the money freed up from the holtby and virtanen buyouts as well as hamonic being off the books the GM can strengthen the D

 

 

 

 

[Gawdzukes]

Is this the Leafs site? What a crap thread. Percentage predictions in sports are beyond dumb, especially with 800 games left. Ugg, lol.

[Me_]

Canucks now 10 points away from tops in the West with one game in hand on VGK.

[Me_]

6 hours ago, N4ZZY said:

how exactly are we going to fit Boeser, Bo and JT under the cap? 

 

CAP ——————————————————

Boeser

Bo

JT

 

 

 

 

 

There.

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, Wanless said:

By making up 3 million in cap space by the 23/24 season to bump miller into the 7 mil range and horvat into the 6

 

this could be as easy as moving garland

 

for people who don’t understand or want to hear this. If you can move a secondary scoring piece to clear cap to keep a save a primary scoring piece you do it. This is how we ended up with miller.

 

by moving Garland, using his money to sign the two above and hoglander, then the money freed up from the holtby and virtanen buyouts as well as hamonic being off the books the GM can strengthen the D

 

 

 

 

We're not moving Garland. Young enough to complement the core in its prime and under a club friendly deal.

 

Guess who's older and not under contract through the core's prime...?

[BigTramFan]

9 hours ago, N4ZZY said:

how exactly are we going to fit Boeser, Bo and JT under the cap? 

The cap is likely to go up. And there are countless ways to do it. Here is an example 2023-24 roster I made on capfriendly assuming $83m cap with minimal roster changes, it is more likely some trades and other signings would be made, but its not difficult to keep all three.

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, BigTramFan said:

The cap is likely to go up. And there are countless ways to do it. Here is an example 2023-24 roster I made on capfriendly assuming $83m cap with minimal roster changes, it is more likely some trades and other signings would be made, but its not difficult to keep all three.

Who is Mayfield, and how do we get him?