Discussion-What could we get for halak, hominic, poolman, Pearson, chaisson, quick retool without getting rid of our core

[Paul-walker]

We have quite a few trade chips without doing a full rebuild. And this way we can keep our young core and even Miller for 1 more year until we potentially trade him at next years trade deadline. Let me know your thoughts.

[aGENT]

Hamonic hasn't played and has likely negative value. Try again next year as a rental at the TDL.

 

Perason too much term. Try again in 2 years at TDL.

 

Poolman, likely too much term... But by all means if it doesn't cost us to move him (even if the return is meh). Probably more an offseason deal though.

 

Halak, absolutely, if he waives.

 

Chiasson, absolutely for a 5th or whatever.

 

Miller is not in the long term plans. Maximize his value NOW. Build for our window.

[smithers joe]

if you were another team, what would you give for them? maybe equally poor contracts.

[Guest]

Halak: 4th round pick, and that's after convincing him to waive his NTC.

 

Hamonic: probably nothing as he hasn't played much at all this year so a team isn't getting a dman that can step in and play.

 

Poolman: a player with three years left on his deal typically isn't the type to get dealt at the deadline.

 

Pearson: full NTC that expires at the end of the season, so if we're moving him it won't be until the summer.

 

Chaisson: 5th-6th round pick. 

 

If Hamonic somehow comes back and gets into 10 games before the trade deadline and acquits himself well, he would become fairly valuable compared to those other pieces.  An in-shape Hamonic could probably net us a 2nd or 3rd round pick back.  

 

So just to recap, I don't think that we're doing any sort of a retool with the pieces that you mentioned.  I think it would be very hard to look at the following three players and keep all three for the long haul: Horvat, JT Miller, and Boeser.  The players that you mentioned OP would net us a couple of late round picks only, which probably wouldn't even amount to one NHL player in the long run. 

[Alflives]

Miller is highly likely to leave as a UFA.  Sure we can add for next season, but what does our team look like after Miller leaves as a UFA and we don’t have the young assets we could have had trading him?  

[RetroCanuck]

If you want to get something good you have to give up something good.

 

Trading Miller or Boeser (or both even) gets you a lot of good pieces moving forwards. If one of these guys alone acquires you a potential top 6 forward, potential top 4 defensemen and a 1st then really you have to take it now since this team is clearly not contending the next 2 years.

 

I like both but somethings gotta give for this team to truly be good one day

[JamesB]

The net trade value of this group of players is (Halak, Hominic, Poolman, Pearson, and Chaisson) is probably zero.

 

Halak has positive value but Poolman and Hominic probably have negative value -- they are overpaid and have been disappointing with the Canucks. You would probably need to give up something to get someone to take them. Chiasson is a replacement level player. He has 9 pts in the 37 games, which is a pretty standard 4th line level, but that includes more PP time and more PP points than most 4th liners normally get. And his defence is below average. I don't think he has trade value. Pearson might have have positive value if the Canucks retain salary. He is a good enough player to improve a lot of teams but his cap hit is too high and he is signed for 2 more years after this year.

 

We could add Dickinson. Lammikko  and Highmore to the list of guys with very little if any trade value. 

 

If Allvin/JR can get any net positive from this group of players I would be impressed. Even if JR could get rid of Poolman, Hominic and Pearson for a net zero in terms of assets that would be probably be good as it would free up cap space that the Canucks desperately need. 

 

The Canucks do have players with significant positive value. This includes:

 

Miller

Boeser

Garland

Motte

Schenn

 

Possibly Myers could be added to the this group, although his cap hit is high. 

 

I am not saying these guys should be traded. It depends on what the Canucks could get in return. 

 

I don't think OEL is going anywhere. 

 

I think the list of untouchables consists of Demko, Hughes, Pettersson, Horvat, Hoglander and Podkolzin.. 

 

 

[khay]

The notion that we can retool without trading at least one of the core pieces is untrue.

 

Halak maybe a good draft pick. Not much for everyone else. 

 

Miller is leaving this team for sure, it's just the timing and in what manner.

 

1. This TDL at 50% retained to maximize the return on Miller. We don't need much use for cap space next year as we are in a retool.

2. In the off season after finding out that he wants to test the market.

3. Next TDL. Probably a 1st + B level prospect? He is not going to get us much back unless there is a bidding war.

4. Leaves via UFA. No asset recouped. But this is not the worst case.

5. There is an off chance that we do re-sign him. I would guess that scenario would involve us overpaying him well above his market value, in which case, his agent would advise Miller to sign the deal. I can see this case happening if Miller is offered something like 10 mil x 7 or 8 year deal. He would be stupid not to take that deal. Because his true worth isn't anywhere near that except on this team void of any star offensive player that can put the puck in the net with regularity.

 

If scenario 5 takes place, then he is leaving us in the similar way Player Name left. We will see Player Name Wat emoji be replace by Miller' Wat emoji in a few years.

 

I prefer scenario 1, then scenario 2, then scenario 3, and none of those work out, I'd still rather let him walk to UFA than to sign him to a back crippling contract suggested in scenario 5.

 

Those of you that think he will sign 8 mil x 5 years is just dreaming. I mean, if he signs that deal in the off season, I'd love to keep him. And I'd love to be proven wrong. I'd love for Miller to come out and say that he loves it here and he wants to stay a Canuck long term. Haven't heard once and he's had many chances to do so.

 

Edited February 6, 2022 by khay

[thrago]

1 hour ago, Paul-walker said:

We have quite a few trade chips without doing a full rebuild. And this way we can keep our young core and even Miller for 1 more year until we potentially trade him at next years trade deadline. Let me know your thoughts.

We would get a whole lot of not much is what we would get OP.

[Coconuts]

You're not accomplishing a retool by trading middling assets and scraps. 

[hammertime]

[Phil_314]

Halak and Motte have the most value as depth players (probably a 2nd-3rd round valuation for Motte if we're lucky, Halak probably 3rd-4th), then Chiasson gets you a late pick.  Hamonic/ Poolman/ Pearson/ Dickinson will be tough to move given their term and underperformance, and we don't really have prospects that we can move to sweeten the deal (Rathbone might be our "closest" prospect but even then he's not proven, then there's project draft picks like Woo, DiPietro, Klimovich, McDonagh... but those will take time).

If we can package Rathbone to take one of Poolman/ Dickinson/ Hamonic and maybe the returns for Motte and Halak to take another, then we can at least have more cap space, and we can try to pick up either a defensive or fleet-of-foot LD and pair with the 3rd RD who doesn't get moved to reshape the 3rd pair.  Other than that there's not much else (maybe swap bad contracts e.g. for a 3rd C or an older defensive D-man in the original Pearson-Gudbranson deal).

Edited February 6, 2022 by Phil_314

[Angry Goose]

Poolman would have some value, given hes a RH shot and could be of value to a rebuilding team that needs some stability in the back end.  Maybe a B level prospect, or 3rd round pick. I dunno. 

[Father Ryan]

3 hours ago, aGENT said:

Hamonic hasn't played and has likely negative value. Try again next year as a rental at the TDL.

 

Perason too much term. Try again in 2 years at TDL.

 

Poolman, likely too much term... But by all means if it doesn't cost us to move him (even if the return is meh). Probably more an offseason deal though.

 

Halak, absolutely, if he waives.

 

Chiasson, absolutely for a 5th or whatever.

 

Miller is not in the long term plans. Maximize his value NOW. Build for our window.

Me as a GM looking at this list.

Hamonic - pass; he would cost an asset and likely not provide more than 50 games total. And that's if he would even report. His preference for Western Canada leaves Calgary as the best option...and they likely would say "no".

Pearson - I'd be mildly interested, but the deal would have to be spiced up a little. Alone, maybe a 5th. Maybe

Poolman - hard pass. For what he provides, I can get that a couple of weeks after the start of Free Agent season, and probably for not much above league minimum

Halak - IF he waives, a 3rd

Chiasson - TDL...maybe a 7th. This summer...no more than a PTO

Miller - I'd be jumping up and down, until I realized the cost would be likely my best D prospect, a good C prospect and this year's 1st, at least. Likely would be my best young D already playing. I'd have to think on that, real hard

Boeser - I'll include him in the speculation. I'd open with a 3rd + 2nd best D prospect and a B+ wing prospect. Might get bargained up in one of those three, but not two of them. He really hasn't shown any serious consistency since his rookie year, and looks to be becoming "injury prone"

Garland - Bargaining starts with a 2nd, +either A- wing or D prospect. Not sure I'd part with three players there. 

[Paul-walker]

Getting rid of these player won’t get you anything back but what it will do is free up some cap space to get some better d men.
I don’t think we need too many prospects at moment we have a young core in Petterson, garland, podkolzin, hughs, brock, hoglander they are all in there early 20s.

 

if you look at Florida Tampa Boston, they are all older and their best players are in their prime.

[Paul-walker]

We have Martin, rathbone and Daniel k as prospects that will be joining us soon

[Paul-walker]

We have had podkolzin, petterson, hughs, brock, hoglander joins us in past yrs

[nameci]

A dial tone.

[BarnBurner]

9 hours ago, aGENT said:

Hamonic hasn't played and has likely negative value. Try again next year as a rental at the TDL.

 

Perason too much term. Try again in 2 years at TDL.

 

Poolman, likely too much term... But by all means if it doesn't cost us to move him (even if the return is meh). Probably more an offseason deal though.

 

Halak, absolutely, if he waives.

 

Chiasson, absolutely for a 5th or whatever.

 

Miller is not in the long term plans. Maximize his value NOW. Build for our window.

And who says he's not? And how do you know this to be true? 

[JustABandwagoner]

9 hours ago, Father Ryan said:

Garland - Bargaining starts with a 2nd, +either A- wing or D prospect. Not sure I'd part with three players there. 

Kinda salty we gave up the 9th overall pick for him. Shouldve stayed the course and not made that trade with ARZ for OEL as well sigh