aGENT Posted February 2, 2022 Share Posted February 2, 2022 7 minutes ago, timberz21 said: Yeah, guys like Corey Perry who went to play for a powerhouse like Tampa, But you also got guys like Goodrow and Coleman who signed for much more than Pearson and have the same production. It's a gamble, signing a guy for cheap is easy, signing a guy for cheap that will produce overproduce is another thing. Doesn't mean it will pan out. Pearson have been a 0.50 PPG guy in 4 years with Vancouver. He had a down year last year (in tough conditions), but otherwise been pretty consistent and at 3.25M$ is pretty decent. This. The time to trade Pearson is in his final year. Everything about the next two years should be building for their window. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanuck Posted February 2, 2022 Share Posted February 2, 2022 11 minutes ago, JM_ said: I guess I don't believe in the massive return scenario the more I look at Miller trade scenarios. It doesn't need to be a massive return, it just needs to be the 'right' return for both teams. Canucks fans need to change their mentality, we don't need to fleece other GM's in trade situations to feel like we 'won' the trade, which is how I perceive a lot of fans reacting, we just need to get the right assets back for whatever asset is let go. If we got a player, hypothetically speaking, like Schneider and a high pick (or other young promising roster player) in return for Miller I'd call that a success. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted February 2, 2022 Share Posted February 2, 2022 45 minutes ago, stawns said: nope, this team needs to move Miller to be competitive No, the team should move Miller for the right return. And it might not be this trade deadline. It might be next years. There's no absolutes. If the team gets a king's ransom and is set up for years and it means moving Petey. You have to at least look at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kobayashi Maru Posted February 2, 2022 Share Posted February 2, 2022 To me there is only one way to approach this. Miller is not the right fit for our timeline and I doubt he is so committed to the Canucks he takes a short term deal to go through that window. Turning Miller into two NHL ready prospects is the best move here (Kakko, Schneider etc). For Pearson and Hamonic, you only move them if you can do so for free or with a small return. When in the lineup they are productive enough, but are not part of the long term solution either. If we sign Miller to a big deal, we are essentially saying this team is ready and the additional development of Pettersson, Podz, Hogz, Hughes are what put us over the top. I don't think that is the case and we need two young NHL ready pieces that have high upside to give us a chance in a year or two. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shekky Posted February 2, 2022 Share Posted February 2, 2022 Yeah unfortunately Benning and Weisbrod were very poor at contract signings always spending to the cap on players that are declining in production. Never fully rebuilding properly. It made sense at the time but the players they brought in never produced at the level the Canucks needed them too. I'm of the mindset that we should sell high on Miller as much as I like having him with the team he will be declining in the next 2-3 years outside of his prime so at this time it would be best to get maximum return. Hamonic and Pearson I believe we would have to give up picks/prospects to move those contracts I don't think people realistically would want them but if we can get anything for them I am all for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucker 67 Posted February 2, 2022 Share Posted February 2, 2022 Imagine the assets they could get by trading Miller, Boeser and Garland. Canucks could get bigger, meaner and faster. Something they'll really need if they ever make the playoffs again. Miller is at an all time overvalue - cash in!!! MTL needs D after losing Petry. Myers to MTL for Anderson and a 2nd (recoup the 2020 2nd) Trade Miller, Boeser and Garland for bottom 6, a Top 4 D, prospects and picks. Let's stop spinning our wheels here. Time to get serious about building a winner again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted February 2, 2022 Share Posted February 2, 2022 Nothing. Stop bleeding assets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
higgyfan Posted February 2, 2022 Share Posted February 2, 2022 You are underrating Pearson. He is 6th in points among the FWs and his overall game is solid. Great along the boards, good forecheck and defensive skills. He is worthy of his contract. If need be, he could traded. He is not a cap dump. Hamonic is a decent middle pairing RD. He could be traded. He is not a cap dump. Halak could be traded. He is not cap dump. He is the best backup the team has. **Trade Boeser to LA for Rasmus Kapuri (C) + Helge Grans (RD) + Olli Maata LD (cap dump) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted February 2, 2022 Share Posted February 2, 2022 We are already talking about the cost to unload another round of Benning contracts? How are most of the contracts he signed negative value the moment he puts ink to paper. Even Boeser's contract has that poison pill reducing his value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanuck Posted February 2, 2022 Share Posted February 2, 2022 54 minutes ago, flickyoursedin said: Maybe Arizona will take some more bad contracts for another top 10 pick lol. https://www.tsn.ca/arizona-coyotes-nhl-trade-deadline-1.1753863 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bure_Pavel Posted February 2, 2022 Share Posted February 2, 2022 1 hour ago, stawns said: I'm not sure why they'd want to move Pearson, he's a glue guy, imo I dont think I would lose sleep if he was moved, he was always more of a place holder until we got someone better for me. Overpaid for a third liner, not quite good enough to be a top six forward on a really good team. I think we could find cheaper glue if needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted February 2, 2022 Share Posted February 2, 2022 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Shekky said: Yeah unfortunately Benning and Weisbrod were very poor at contract signings always spending to the cap on players that are declining in production. Never fully rebuilding properly. It made sense at the time but the players they brought in never produced at the level the Canucks needed them too. I'm of the mindset that we should sell high on Miller as much as I like having him with the team he will be declining in the next 2-3 years outside of his prime so at this time it would be best to get maximum return. Hamonic and Pearson I believe we would have to give up picks/prospects to move those contracts I don't think people realistically would want them but if we can get anything for them I am all for that. There's nothing wrong with the Canucks signing most of these guys (not every move works out obviously). IMO we had a mini-window recently with the young core on ELC and bridge deals to be a playoff (not contender) team and see what happens. We got one good run out of that mini window (not more, largely thanks to Covid). Great. Now however, is the time to follow through on that, and sell high on expiring vets that aren't part of the long term of this club and the young core's contention window. You sell those guys off to teams ready to win now and build around our guys, ready to win in 2-7 years from now. Failure to do that will be the failure of this core IMO. Edited February 2, 2022 by aGENT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shekky Posted February 2, 2022 Share Posted February 2, 2022 7 minutes ago, aGENT said: There's nothing wrong with the Canucks signing most of these guys (not every move works out obviously). IMO we had a mini-window recently with the young core on ELC and bridge deals to be a playoff (not contender) team and see what happens. We got one good run out of that mini window (not more, largely thanks to Covid). Great. Now however, is the time to follow through on that, and sell high on expiring vets that aren't part of the long term of this club and the young core's contention window. You sell those guys off to teams ready to win now and build around our guys, ready to win in 2-7 years from now. Failure to do that will be the failure of this core IMO. Yeah I agree it made sense at the time when we signed those contracts but they never panned out well for them and created the cap problems that followed. I am honestly excited to see what happens next with the team. Everyday is like a waiting game for something to happen so excited to see what JR/PA/AC do with this team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted February 2, 2022 Author Share Posted February 2, 2022 51 minutes ago, aGENT said: This. And definitely this @JM_ We have very real upcoming structural issues coming up on defense. Hamonic is done next year. As is Schenn. Myers the year after. None of whom are remotely long term, top 4 solutions regardless. Some of whom aren't NOW realistically, and certainly not on a contender. If you start giving $3-4m raises too retain Miller, how do propose we afford to replace them? We won't have the cap space to sign UFA's. If you don't trade Miller you're not getting young ones like Schneider in return. Keeping Miller means we don't get a contender level, right side D. And we keep up the same tired, poorly built good enough to be playoff team but not actually win, awful tradition this team has always done. No thanks. THAT is kicking it down the road @JM_. Build it. Build it properly. Focus everything on making the best, deepest team it can be 2-7 years from now. I guess it all hinges on getting that RHD for Miller. What's the plan if that isn't possible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted February 2, 2022 Author Share Posted February 2, 2022 16 minutes ago, Provost said: We are already talking about the cost to unload another round of Benning contracts? How are most of the contracts he signed negative value the moment he puts ink to paper. Even Boeser's contract has that poison pill reducing his value. can you tell me another way to make cap space, and keep Miller? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted February 2, 2022 Share Posted February 2, 2022 Just now, Shekky said: Yeah I agree it made sense at the time when we signed those contracts but they never panned out well for them and created the cap problems that followed. I am honestly excited to see what happens next with the team. Everyday is like a waiting game for something to happen so excited to see what JR/PA/AC do with this team. Meh, they're only 'cap problems' if we double down, giving $3-4m raises and term to 30 year olds instead of ripping the band aid off like we should and getting value for them. If we do what we should, we don't have 'cap problems'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted February 2, 2022 Author Share Posted February 2, 2022 2 minutes ago, aGENT said: Meh, they're only 'cap problems' if we double down, giving $3-4m raises and term to 30 year olds instead of ripping the band aid off like we should and getting value for them. If we do what we should, we don't have 'cap problems'. lets say Pearson, Hamonic and Dickie were all expiring this year. Would you still be looking to move Miller? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted February 2, 2022 Share Posted February 2, 2022 2 minutes ago, JM_ said: I guess it all hinges on getting that RHD for Miller. What's the plan if that isn't possible? One, it should be. Two, if we get a better, higher value package for forwards presumably, we can always flip those forwards for D. And/or clear the cap to eventually buy UFA's etc. What you don't do, is double down and extend 30 year olds to retirement deals that will wreck your cap allocation right through your core's window. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted February 2, 2022 Share Posted February 2, 2022 1 minute ago, JM_ said: lets say Pearson, Hamonic and Dickie were all expiring this year. Would you still be looking to move Miller? Absolutely. Build for the window. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shekky Posted February 2, 2022 Share Posted February 2, 2022 1 minute ago, aGENT said: Meh, they're only 'cap problems' if we double down, giving $3-4m raises and term to 30 year olds instead of ripping the band aid off like we should and getting value for them. If we do what we should, we don't have 'cap problems'. Yes? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now