2020 Roster and Fantasy GM Thread II

[Bleach Clean]

First and foremost, our glaring need is defense but we can circle back to that I guess.

That disgruntled top10 player in the game with a career high of 82 points is just the worst fit in my opinion.

- He plays a position we're doing the best at currently.
- He's signed for 10 million dollars a season.
- His origins are from Boston and they have many NHL teams in the area making us an unlikely landing spot.
- He had year long drama with the coach to the point they anointed him "GM Jack" after Byslma got turfed.

Those are facts that make me worry about trading Bo Horvat in a package for Jack Eichel.

My "Horse" analogy was supposed to represent Shea Weber. Also traded for the flashier player. A horse that he's been ever since he arrived in Montreal. I didnt say Horvat would become better, magically start putting up 90 point years. I said he'd be a horse. Dependable. Like Weber.

Touches are a thing in sports. GM Jack plays 22 minutes a game because Buffalo stinks and has no centers. He isnt going to play 22 minutes a game here. Not with Green. Even though he's supremely talented, I dont see him having the puck go through him quite like the offense in Buffalo does so yes, less touches which probably equals less production.


Who determined Jack is top 10 and Horvat is a 2nd line center, and why would I register it?

Horvat was 30th in center scoring.

In a list that included c/wingers like Wheeler, Miller, Aho, Nugent Hopkins and Strome.

Theres 31 NHL teams and Horvat scored in the top 25-30...

Jack Eichel has a career high of 82 points in 5 NHL seasons played.

Hes had injuries, hes on a bad team, hes under 10 million reasons of pressure, but lets cool the jets on calling him elite and demanding Eric Lindros ransoms.

And just to be clear, yes thats a gutting of the Vancouver Canucks.

Maybe if a different team had two extra Dylan Larkins, an extra Tristan Jarry, and a RHD they dont desperately need more of to begin with, they'd be up for adding Eichel.

Id assume they wouldnt also have their own Pettersson they'd be pushing aside by adding Eichel too though.

We dont have extra anything, other than garbage.

We dont need Stecher but we have nothing better and already probably cant keep Tanev.

We dont need Demko but he holds great value to us, in the right deal, this isnt it.

We cannot afford to trade 60 goals plus Stecher plus Demko for Jack Eichel.

We should not do anything to take away from how this is Petey's team. He's #1.

10 million dollar player to our cap structure right before we pay Pettersson and Hughes, come on!

Among centres who played 30+ games this year, Eichel finished 7th in P/GP and Horvat finished 31st in P/GP. Fair point though, let's re-label Horvat as a fringe 1st line C/top end 2nd C.

Let's also give Eichel his due for being an elite C, and being elite (12th overall) for scoring among all forwards this year. Do we now agree on the categorization for each?

Next, where does this Pettersson being "pushed aside" stuff come from? Is Malkin/Crosby pushed aside by the other player? Did Forsberg push Sakic aside?

You've listed quite a few reasons that I don't think make any logical sense. I will not refute those. However, I do understand the points about the cap and not having the depth to do the deal. Those are real concerns.

Let's suppose for a moment that you're not a Canucks fan. If you read that Eichel was just traded from BUF to VAN, what would you expect to be the return. Just as a what if? I'm curious.

 

[sandwichbird2023]

Is there smoke that Doubty is disgruntled and may ask for a trade? I didn't know. Absolutely, let's talk about it if there is something there. What do you give up for him?

My Eichel proposal stems from current rumours about Eichel.

On "reality": I actually think the opposite. I think the reality is that Eichel, if moved, moves because he's fed up. If that happens, odds are that BUF will not be getting an elite piece back. When has that ever happened for a team in a bind? In fantasy value, he deserves far more than he will get in reality.

On elite players: For me, always an automatic. No question. I understand that this organization lacks depth and has a thin core. Luckily though, it can trade from centre to gain at centre. That's something most teams cannot do. That's the thinking anyway.

I appreciate your counter-argument on this regardless. I'm learning from this.

I do agree that IF and WHEN Eichel is traded, it would be a quantity for quality trade. As far as I'm aware, there isn't another disgruntled young superstar that is demanding a trade. If Eichel forces a trade, Buffalo will have no choice but to hope for a similar package to what you offered.
As for an elite player being "an automatic". That shouldn't be the case if you are trying to build a competitive team in a cap world. For example, the Leafs should absolutely not be in the running for Eichel, with huge money already tied up in Tavares and Matthews. Where would Eichel even play? How many more holes will be created by the acquisition? The Canucks are in a somewhat similar situtaion in which this trade will destory what little depth and the non-existent cap space we have. Especially with how tight we are to the cap, we need cheaper depth players to fill out some key spots, not loading up on a luxury like a second #1 center. If we didn't have $20million tied up in Eriksson, Ferland, Beartschi, Sutter and Beagle, that would be different.
Also no way is the #1 pick this year worth Eichel, no matter what the poll says. A proven, young, top 5 center locked into a long term contract is worth way more than a #1 that isn't universally regarded as a generational talent, IMO.

 

[Fatass]

I do agree that IF and WHEN Eichel is traded, it would be a quantity for quality trade. As far as I'm aware, there isn't another disgruntled young superstar that is demanding a trade. If Eichel forces a trade, Buffalo will have no choice but to hope for a similar package to what you offered.
As for an elite player being "an automatic". That shouldn't be the case if you are trying to build a competitive team in a cap world. For example, the Leafs should absolutely not be in the running for Eichel, with huge money already tied up in Tavares and Matthews. Where would Eichel even play? How many more holes will be created by the acquisition? The Canucks are in a somewhat similar situtaion in which this trade will destory what little depth and the non-existent cap space we have. Especially with how tight we are to the cap, we need cheaper depth players to fill out some key spots, not loading up on a luxury like a second #1 center. If we didn't have $20million tied up in Eriksson, Ferland, Beartschi, Sutter and Beagle, that would be different.
Also no way is the #1 pick this year worth Eichel, no matter what the poll says. A proven, young, top 5 center locked into a long term contract is worth way more than a #1 that isn't universally regarded as a generational talent, IMO.

Agreed. Eichel is great, but we don’t need him. We have Petey and Bo. What we need is another young Dman.

 

[VanillaCoke]

Anytime a player like Eichel is available you have to make a pitch.
While some of the packages being thrown out there are probably too much to lose from the team to make it worthwhile there's always a chance like the Hall and Seguin trades.

IF there was an opportunity to get and eichel - EP punch I think the smart play is to try to center it around Boeser and keep Horvat, I just think cup winning teams need Horvats, even as a winger, far more than they need Boesers.

What other pieces would get it done I'm not so sure but I'd imagine Buffalo would want a C and or a G plus a couple top 50 picks and prospects. Figuring out the salary cap is another issue entirely.

 

[sandwichbird2023]

Anytime a player like Eichel is available you have to make a pitch.
While some of the packages being thrown out there are probably too much to lose from the team to make it worthwhile there's always a chance like the Hall and Seguin trades.

IF there was an opportunity to get and eichel - EP punch I think the smart play is to try to center it around Boeser and keep Horvat, I just think cup winning teams need Horvats, even as a winger, far more than they need Boesers.

What other pieces would get it done I'm not so sure but I'd imagine Buffalo would want a C and or a G plus a couple top 50 picks and prospects. Figuring out the salary cap is another issue entirely.

I guess you are right, the prudent thing for any GM to do in a situation where an Eichel level player becomes available, you inquire about the cost. But its hard to envision 1) how we don't get outbid by another offer, 2) how we can fit Eichel under the cap, 3) how do we make up the depth that is bound to be decimated by the trade. Is it worth it?
Only scenario I can see us getting involved is if another team, say Colorado for example, really want Eichel to go along with Mackinnon down the middle, however they don't have the pieces to make the deal (ie: a young cost control top 6 center, younger than Kadri, more proven than Jost). Maybe Eichel goes to Colorado, a prospect like Byram goes to us, and we send Horvat to Buffalo, with other pieces involved obviously. We then promote Gaudette to 2C, have Byram and Hughes anchor the blueline for the next decade, and free up some cap space in the meantime to keep Markstrom/Tanev/Toffoli?
I don't even know if that make sense, Sabres probably prefer Byram over Horvat so they can cut us out completely. Fun to speculate though.

 

[Diablo2020]

Among centres who played 30+ games this year, Eichel finished 7th in P/GP and Horvat finished 31st in P/GP. Fair point though, let's re-label Horvat as a fringe 1st line C/top end 2nd C.

Let's also give Eichel his due for being an elite C, and being elite (12th overall) for scoring among all forwards this year. Do we now agree on the categorization for each?

Next, where does this Pettersson being "pushed aside" stuff come from? Is Malkin/Crosby pushed aside by the other player? Did Forsberg push Sakic aside?

You've listed quite a few reasons that I don't think make any logical sense. I will not refute those. However, I do understand the points about the cap and not having the depth to do the deal. Those are real concerns.

Let's suppose for a moment that you're not a Canucks fan. If you read that Eichel was just traded from BUF to VAN, what would you expect to be the return. Just as a what if? I'm curious.

My Weber for Subban reference didnt go over that well so I'll go farther back for you.

This discussion reeks of Mike Peca, Mike Wilson and Jay McKee for Alexander Mogilny.

Mogilny was elite, and that package was underwhelming.

In hindsight, Peca went on to play 12 more years and wore the C on occasion. Was a warrior but never regarded as a #1 center.

Mogilny was elite. We already had a player we regarded as elite that also played the exact same position though.

Meanwhile, we had underwhelming centers. (Trevor Linden, Cliff Ronning, Josef Beranek, John McIntyre, like our defense now)

Very shortly thereafter, our homegrown superstar wanted to get paid. After years of screwing Bure around trying to keep his salary low, Mogilny was now the benchmark.

10x8 at the minimum for Pettersson that means, in my opinion, if we brought in Jack Eichel tomorrow.

On paper yes we'd have a Malkin/Crosby or a Sakic/Forsberg. But those players were with those franchises from the start or very shortly thereafter. Crosby and Sakic didnt lose four of their linemates and best friends so we could add a piece that takes away from their own top billing.

If no assets are involved, just cash, yes id bring in Tavares knowing our Matthews now cant be underpaid and we screwed our cap up going forward, even though we desperately need defense.

When assets going out are involved, for a position we dont need, I cant imagine trading for Jack Eichel, regardless of finding 10 million to shed elsewhere.

If I heard tomorrow there was a trade and I wasnt a Canuck fan, i'd expect the Matt Duchene, except id hope Nucks would include the prospects and not their own Turris.

Vlad Kamenev, Sam Girard, Shane Bowers, 1st, 2nd. Maybe a little more. (a 3rd was added to eat Andrew Hammond so not counting that)

Underwhelming on paper. But thats what disgruntled stars get. I dont know what the Canuck version of that is but it sure isnt Horvat, Boeser, Demko and Stecher.

 

[Fedz]

Is there smoke that Doubty is disgruntled and may ask for a trade? I didn't know. Absolutely, let's talk about it if there is something there. What do you give up for him?

My Eichel proposal stems from current rumours about Eichel.

On "reality": I actually think the opposite. I think the reality is that Eichel, if moved, moves because he's fed up. If that happens, odds are that BUF will not be getting an elite piece back. When has that ever happened for a team in a bind? In fantasy value, he deserves far more than he will get in reality.

On elite players: For me, always an automatic. No question. I understand that this organization lacks depth and has a thin core. Luckily though, it can trade from centre to gain at centre. That's something most teams cannot do. That's the thinking anyway.

I appreciate your counter-argument on this regardless. I'm learning from this.

No smoke on Doughty because his comments about being frustrated losing in LA happened during the season and not during a pandemic in a market that hasn't seen playoff success since Dominik Hasek and Miroslav Satan. Not to mention Buffalo's market is a bit more die-hard than Los Angeles' but that's nit picking.

Here's a question for you...How much cheaper is Doughty than Eichel? Given age difference? Does it cost that much less? Assuming you see Doughty as a legit #1 D for 3-5 more years, how different is the value between the two?

Agree to disagree on elite players. I've always found the most successful teams become even more dangerous when it was a different guy every night. Elite players push you over the edge, no question, but it takes a legitimate team to get through four rounds of Stanley Cup Playoffs.

Further, saying we can use our center depth to gain somewhere else is also getting a bit ahead of ourselves. In a world of negotiation, it's not easy to pull off two major trades, let alone one. So while, I agree adding an Eichel is great. Doing it in the thought that we could then easily pull off another trade trading center depth for a D is hard to see. Though, if it did happen...Whoever is the GM has my vote for favorite GM for life.

If I had to choose (Which if you're a GM in the NHL, you likely do) on whether I wanted to use my current assets to bring in an elite player, my focus would be on the back end and nowhere else. Specifically on the right side if I'm spending enough assets, though I wouldn't be entirely picky.

 

[Bleach Clean]

I do agree that IF and WHEN Eichel is traded, it would be a quantity for quality trade. As far as I'm aware, there isn't another disgruntled young superstar that is demanding a trade. If Eichel forces a trade, Buffalo will have no choice but to hope for a similar package to what you offered.
As for an elite player being "an automatic". That shouldn't be the case if you are trying to build a competitive team in a cap world. For example, the Leafs should absolutely not be in the running for Eichel, with huge money already tied up in Tavares and Matthews. Where would Eichel even play? How many more holes will be created by the acquisition? The Canucks are in a somewhat similar situtaion in which this trade will destory what little depth and the non-existent cap space we have. Especially with how tight we are to the cap, we need cheaper depth players to fill out some key spots, not loading up on a luxury like a second #1 center. If we didn't have $20million tied up in Eriksson, Ferland, Beartschi, Sutter and Beagle, that would be different.
Also no way is the #1 pick this year worth Eichel, no matter what the poll says. A proven, young, top 5 center locked into a long term contract is worth way more than a #1 that isn't universally regarded as a generational talent, IMO.

This is such an interesting conversation on so many levels. We bounce to and fro from ideology, to precedent, to attitude concerns, to cap space, to messaging from GM to his existing stars and so on...

On elite players being automatic: If I have interpreted your post right, this becomes about creating a competitive team (post trade) and centre heavy exceptions such as TOR. So let's address each:

- This current Canucks team has holes, yes? The defense is below par and the bottom6 is overpaid. 20 mil in dead cap. It's going to have holes with or without Eichel. Now saying that, the net loss over and above Horvat is Boeser, essentially. This means a net subtraction of a 1RW.

- The above then necessitates re-signing Toffoli and graduating Podkolzin. It's not a move made in isolation. These two pieces should be enough to level off the net loss in positional strength (~1C+1RW) while gaining significantly overall in quality (F1C+2RW).

- If TOR had the cap, it's automatic for them too. Or rather, if they could send enough cap back, it's automatic. Reason: This is more about asset management than it is fit. Play Eichel on the wing. Flip value elsewhere for futures. The point is, elite talent is always in demand no matter what the situation. Even if they had to flip Eichel right away, it's still better because they got more than they gave up.

Your point about the #1 pick: I agree, Eichel is worth more. But isn't that telling? If the initial package I offered for Eichel isn't enough to get the #1 pick, and the #1 pick wouldn't get Eichel, why do we then think that this package is overcompensation for Eichel? It does not follow.

 

[Bleach Clean]

My Weber for Subban reference didnt go over that well so I'll go farther back for you.

This discussion reeks of Mike Peca, Mike Wilson and Jay McKee for Alexander Mogilny.

Mogilny was elite, and that package was underwhelming.

In hindsight, Peca went on to play 12 more years and wore the C on occasion. Was a warrior but never regarded as a #1 center.

Mogilny was elite. We already had a player we regarded as elite that also played the exact same position though.

Meanwhile, we had underwhelming centers. (Trevor Linden, Cliff Ronning, Josef Beranek, John McIntyre, like our defense now)

Very shortly thereafter, our homegrown superstar wanted to get paid. After years of screwing Bure around trying to keep his salary low, Mogilny was now the benchmark.

10x8 at the minimum for Pettersson that means, in my opinion, if we brought in Jack Eichel tomorrow.

On paper yes we'd have a Malkin/Crosby or a Sakic/Forsberg. But those players were with those franchises from the start or very shortly thereafter. Crosby and Sakic didnt lose four of their linemates and best friends so we could add a piece that takes away from their own top billing.

If no assets are involved, just cash, yes id bring in Tavares knowing our Matthews now cant be underpaid and we screwed our cap up going forward, even though we desperately need defense.

When assets going out are involved, for a position we dont need, I cant imagine trading for Jack Eichel, regardless of finding 10 million to shed elsewhere.

If I heard tomorrow there was a trade and I wasnt a Canuck fan, i'd expect the Matt Duchene, except id hope Nucks would include the prospects and not their own Turris.

Vlad Kamenev, Sam Girard, Shane Bowers, 1st, 2nd. Maybe a little more. (a 3rd was added to eat Andrew Hammond so not counting that)

Underwhelming on paper. But thats what disgruntled stars get. I dont know what the Canuck version of that is but it sure isnt Horvat, Boeser, Demko and Stecher.

Appreciate the detailed response.

The equating of Duchene to Eichel is bothersome, but let's go with it for a moment: What do you think the equivalent of Kamenev, Girard, Bowers, 1st and 2nd is for VAN? Just curious.

We have to keep in mind the difference in quality between Eichel and Duchene. Eichel was near PPG when he was 20. He has 2 PPG+ seasons on his resume. This is on BUF, a bad team, not COL. In contrast, Duchene never went over a PPG in a season and his numbers were comparatively worse at the same age.

What is it that you expect Pettersson to get when his contract is up, I wonder? Aho got 10.37% of the cap for 5 RFA years and people thought it was a steal. Eichel received 13.33% of the cap for 8 years (2 UFA years). Even if you split the difference at 11.85%, Pettersson is getting paid 9.7 mil AAV...

Your point about Mogilny is multi-faceted. Can you clarify it? Is this just about money expectations for Bure (Pettersson) or is it about getting less value for Mogilny than BUF received from Peca? Unclear.

 

[Bleach Clean]

No smoke on Doughty because his comments about being frustrated losing in LA happened during the season and not during a pandemic in a market that hasn't seen playoff success since Dominik Hasek and Miroslav Satan. Not to mention Buffalo's market is a bit more die-hard than Los Angeles' but that's nit picking.

Here's a question for you...How much cheaper is Doughty than Eichel? Given age difference? Does it cost that much less? Assuming you see Doughty as a legit #1 D for 3-5 more years, how different is the value between the two?

Agree to disagree on elite players. I've always found the most successful teams become even more dangerous when it was a different guy every night. Elite players push you over the edge, no question, but it takes a legitimate team to get through four rounds of Stanley Cup Playoffs.

Further, saying we can use our center depth to gain somewhere else is also getting a bit ahead of ourselves. In a world of negotiation, it's not easy to pull off two major trades, let alone one. So while, I agree adding an Eichel is great. Doing it in the thought that we could then easily pull off another trade trading center depth for a D is hard to see. Though, if it did happen...Whoever is the GM has my vote for favorite GM for life.

If I had to choose (Which if you're a GM in the NHL, you likely do) on whether I wanted to use my current assets to bring in an elite player, my focus would be on the back end and nowhere else. Specifically on the right side if I'm spending enough assets, though I wouldn't be entirely picky.

A GM in the NHL has to choose from what is available first... Then, if he is lucky enough, there is an asset that aligns perfectly with his team's need. That's the holy grail of moves.

You're speaking about things in a vacuum. Meaning, when all things are equal and all player types are available, you choose a #1 RHD. Fair enough. I think most would agree (I agree). But all points are seldom, if ever, equal. And so, sub-optimal decisions have to be made in the interim. For example, when Myers went FA, was it prudent for Benning to tie him up to a heavy contract or should he have waited for a #1 RHD? Was one ever going to become available within the desired time frame? Would he have the right assets to get him? Etc...

The point of the above is to say: We have current rumours about Eichel potentially being on the move. He is clearly frustrated at BUF's situation. An opportunity like this comes along once every, what, 7-10 years? More? The rarity of something like this occurring cannot be overstated. There may be about 20~ players with equivalent value league wide (700+ players)...

To your statement about the Stanley Cup: Did PIT win the cup on the backs of elite players or with random heroes?

On Doughty's value: Much, much cheaper than Eichel. If it's 3 years at #1 (or #2) Dman status, then it's 4 years at mid-pairing or lower status. For 11 mil AAV, that would be a very difficult contract to manage for that return. Myers has to be going back the other way. And then, maybe structure the remaining deal around Gaudette/Virtanen + 1st. Something like that.

What would you offer?

 

[JanBulisPiggyBack]

So I’d like to chime in on the Eichel talk but add an element and maybe we can look at that here as well.

Eichel is a player like few others, seldom do they ever become available at this stage of the their careers it’s insane to think he can be acquired and whenever a team pays the kings ransom they usually come out ahead regardless of the amount they give up at the time, the only situation where I can see us being involved without losing Petey, Hughes, Horvat, Boeser or Podz would be if we were to win one of the top three lottery picks and use that as the meaty part of the trade.

So focusing on that asset, which is obviously the Canucks white whale, would you feel good about trading it for a player who is ready now or should we try and build up a pool of talented cost controlled players, I know the need for defensemen is high but there isn’t one in the 2020 draft that ranks in the top 3

 

[Bettman Returnz]

Trying to get eichel would be counter productive... we’d have to get rid of all depth we’ve worked hard to get over last handful of years. Don’t get me wrong eichel is a generational player that doesn’t come around often. But Is it worth it when you remove many very good complimentary pieces? Would rather focus on our D.

 

[Diablo2020]

Appreciate the detailed response.

The equating of Duchene to Eichel is bothersome, but let's go with it for a moment: What do you think the equivalent of Kamenev, Girard, Bowers, 1st and 2nd is for VAN? Just curious.

We have to keep in mind the difference in quality between Eichel and Duchene. Eichel was near PPG when he was 20. He has 2 PPG+ seasons on his resume. This is on BUF, a bad team, not COL. In contrast, Duchene never went over a PPG in a season and his numbers were comparatively worse at the same age.

What is it that you expect Pettersson to get when his contract is up, I wonder? Aho got 10.37% of the cap for 5 RFA years and people thought it was a steal. Eichel received 13.33% of the cap for 8 years (2 UFA years). Even if you split the difference at 11.85%, Pettersson is getting paid 9.7 mil AAV...

Your point about Mogilny is multi-faceted. Can you clarify it? Is this just about money expectations for Bure (Pettersson) or is it about getting less value for Mogilny than BUF received from Peca? Unclear.

Im gonna answer these backwards..

My point about Mogilny was the stark contrast to what everyone thinks in these last 3 pages of replies. "You have to make a pitch when elite talent is available!".

Mogilny with 381 games with the Sabres gets traded to Vancouver while we already had an elite player that played the exact same positon. (Eichel's played 354 games)

At the time we desperately needed center's as the ones on the roster and prospects we had, were very lackluster.

We had visions of our two dynamic superstars tearing the league up together, and truly we didnt pay close to what that elite talent was worth so at the time we won the trade.

What we got was 1 elite season. Then they split up our duo because the rest of the team lacked depth. In the end they hardly played together after that first year. Both players suffered. Bure wasnt the center of attention and soon his stats took a hit, Mogilny wasnt the center of attention and soon his stats took a hit. Bure demanded the 4 mill that Mogilny was making, almost immediately (1 year, like Petey's expiry status)

We got 5 years of Mogilny, one elite season, then we shipped him off because he was disgruntled and we couldn't afford his albatross of a deal anymore.

For some reason these are the vibes I get thinking about Jack Eichel to this current rendition of the Canucks.

Now I could be wrong, it could be a Patrick Roy for Jocelyn Thibault, Andrei Kovalenko and Martin Rucinsky type deal and Eichel goes on to win us cups and Horvat, Boeser, Demko all have decent careers but nothing like the player we receive back... I just dont see it. I see more Mogilny than Roy in this scenario with this current team we have assembled.


What do I expect Pettersson to get? Not 10 million. Because nothing says we have to. We dont have a benchmark like Eichel at 10 million to compare to.

I honestly wouldnt be surprised, with this current makeup of the team, to see BOTH Pettersson and Hughes take around 6 million, 1 or 2 yr bridge deals..

They know they're gonna get paid and are the faces of the franchise..

They can see we've set somewhat of a bar already with Edler and Myers at 6 million, a few forwards right under, and likely Markstrom this offseason around that 6 as well..

They have enough respect for Miller, Horvat, Boeser, Edler and Tanev to not immedietly demand 2x all their salary's a year, I hope..

They know we have 15 million expiring the year after they sign due to Luongo, Edler, Roussel and Beagle and can probably wait for some of that to get their pay bumps..

I'd hope they want to win, and keep the core together for the foreseeable future, so wouldnt hamstring us by demanding 20 mill combined, yet..


And I agree, Jack Eichel at this stage is a better player than Matt Duchene at that stage. So more would need to be involved.

The 4 million dollar difference matters to me in valuation, but I suppose one could argue the guarantee of 6 years compared to 1.5 makes a difference too.

I'd say our comparable is

Kole Lind is our Vlad Kamenev. A former 2nd rounder, 40-50 point AHLer at the time of the trade.
Nils Hoglander is our Shane Bowers. A recently drafted forward who if redrafted at the time of trade would jump a few spots.
Vasili Podkolzin is our Sam Girard. Not the best comparison but we dont have another stud 19 yr old prospect.
2021 1st
2021 2nd

Because I do believe Eichel to be better than Duchene, and since Buffalo has zero centers before trading Eichel, and because of salary cap..

I'd add Adam Gaudette, Brandon Sutter and a swap of Thatcher Demko for Linus Ullmark


Sutter, Gaudette, Lind, Podkolzin, Hoglander, Demko, 1st, 2nd
for
Eichel, Ullmark

I value that at five mid range 1st round picks, a 2nd to eat Sutter, and a swap where they get the cheaper, younger goalie with more potential to be a starter.

Final answer.

 

[Diablo2020]

So focusing on that asset, which is obviously the Canucks white whale, would you feel good about trading it for a player who is ready now or should we try and build up a pool of talented cost controlled players, I know the need for defensemen is high but there isn’t one in the 2020 draft that ranks in the top 3

Im paraphrasing Benning but..

"Everytime someone calls us they always want our best young players, and we're not trading Bo Horvat or Brock Boeser so its a quick conversation"

Now that we FINALLY have a core like Horvat, Boeser, Pettersson and Hughes, we could technically start dangling any Byfield/Stutzle's we lucked into yes.

Meanwhile letting any prospects we have currently, marinate as long as they need in the minors till they peak at their "nhl ready" value.

This is where im at. This is the "army" we need to be building. We need to have that core we never had a few years ago, and be able to pick and choose if our NHL ready talent is better suited for our roster as cost controlled homegrown product, or could be used to fill an immediate position of need of our choosing.

We're still a little far off at forward, but already I question where a fully developed Podkolzin or Hoglander fits into our top 6. Ideally if theyre kicking the door down theyre so ready, then obviously we'd find a spot for them at the expense of others but for once in many many many years we might have the ability to draft and develop for the purpose of filling in actual realtime holes.

On defense we cling to any Jamie Drysdale we can bless ourselves with if the gods graced us with a 3rd overall, for example.

But miracle win 2nd overall, i'd trade Quinton Byfield for the best cost controlled RHD I could find after an extensive like year long search while my asset goes back to the OHL to dominate and cook.

 

[sandwichbird2023]

This is such an interesting conversation on so many levels. We bounce to and fro from ideology, to precedent, to attitude concerns, to cap space, to messaging from GM to his existing stars and so on...

On elite players being automatic: If I have interpreted your post right, this becomes about creating a competitive team (post trade) and centre heavy exceptions such as TOR. So let's address each:

- This current Canucks team has holes, yes? The defense is below par and the bottom6 is overpaid. 20 mil in dead cap. It's going to have holes with or without Eichel. Now saying that, the net loss over and above Horvat is Boeser, essentially. This means a net subtraction of a 1RW.

- The above then necessitates re-signing Toffoli and graduating Podkolzin. It's not a move made in isolation. These two pieces should be enough to level off the net loss in positional strength (~1C+1RW) while gaining significantly overall in quality (F1C+2RW).

- If TOR had the cap, it's automatic for them too. Or rather, if they could send enough cap back, it's automatic. Reason: This is more about asset management than it is fit. Play Eichel on the wing. Flip value elsewhere for futures. The point is, elite talent is always in demand no matter what the situation. Even if they had to flip Eichel right away, it's still better because they got more than they gave up.

Your point about the #1 pick: I agree, Eichel is worth more. But isn't that telling? If the initial package I offered for Eichel isn't enough to get the #1 pick, and the #1 pick wouldn't get Eichel, why do we then think that this package is overcompensation for Eichel? It does not follow.

Yes there are many factors involved with a trade of this magnitude, it is a very interesting conversation. I think it comes down to a difference in team building concepts. Theres no right or wrong IMO, just preferences.
Trading your package for Eichel and equating it to "just losing a 1RW" is alittle over simplified. You also lose a backup goalie who is making just above $1m, young and is an RFA once the contract is up. His production vs pay ratio is excellent and he has the potential to provide the team with a net positive in the pay vs play ratio. Signing a replacement backup that can perform up to demko's standard should cost near double, with none of Demko's potential upside. Stecher is an effective 3rd pairing D that can play up the lineup, depending on his new contract he can provide the team with value. You replace him with a UFA and you may lock yourself up into a Jordie Benn/Pouliot/Del Zotto type situation. Or god forbide Benning trade a premium for another Gudbranson. I have no faith in this team's pro-scouting.
For a team so tight against the cap, the only way to stay competitive is to find situations with the potential for a massive pay vs play net positive, like leveraging ELC (ie: EP and Hughes), or utilizing bridge contracts (ie: Boeser). Re-signing Toffoli to a long term massive deal isn't ideal as he has likely passed his peak, and the net positive he provide should be on the decline. Integrating Podkolzin might be a necessity in the near future regardless of this Eichel trade anyways.
Hope I explained my position clearly, its a long read I know. The TLDR version is, Eichel might be a top tier player but he also carries a top tier contract. Your package contains players that provide production that outweights their contract, which is what this team need more than another superstar on a big contract. It is not going to make the team better IMO.
As for the Leafs part, its one thing to acquire a top player for nothing but cash (ie: Tavares), as supposed to trade a boat load of asset for one. First of all it would cost the Leafs what they wouldn't want to part with (ie: Marner or Nylander, plus picks/prospects). Secondly, if they were to move those pieces it should be for a top pairing RSD. Trading those pieces just to have Eichel play out of position makes no sense. You pay a huge market value just to underutilized the returning asset? Why even do it then? The only way it make sense for them is the same way it make sense for us. A 3 way deal. Send a package to Buffalo, Eichel goes to a 3rd team (randomly say Boston), and Mcavoy goes to the Leafs. Something like that is the only way it make sense for the Leafs (depending on the package though).

 

[Canadian Canuck]

Eichel would like require:

One of: Boeser/Horvat
One of: Gaudette/Podkolzin/Demko
And: A 1st round pick

More/less?

 

[VanillaCoke]

Much more

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Eichel would like require:

One of: Boeser/Horvat
One of: Gaudette/Podkolzin/Demko
And: A 1st round pick

More/less?

More. I just can't see Buffalo trading their most valuable player without an elite talent coming back (we only have 2 - Pettersson and Hughes). Buffalo just traded their #2 centre for quantity over quality and it bit them in the ass. There's no way Botterill makes a similar trade again - he'd get canned for sure. Also keep in mind that other teams would likely offer better deals.

I don't see how we would be able to manage our cap with Eichel coming in and only losing Horvat or Boeser along with Gaudette/Demko. Eichel carries a cap hit of $10 million, whereas Horvat is only signed to $5.5 million and Gaudette will be an RFA this offseason. In other words, Eichel would cost us about an additional $4 million in cap space...how do you re-sign Pettersson, Hughes, Markstrom, Toffoli, etc.? Just seems like a bad fit all around.

 

[Bob Long]

Eichel would like require:

One of: Boeser/Horvat
One of: Gaudette/Podkolzin/Demko
And: A 1st round pick

More/less?

Buffalo needs to surround Eichel with better players, not move their franchise guy. Its one of the reasons they overpaid so much for Skinner imo. If Buffalo moves JE they are back into tanking and rebuilding.

I'm sure they'd be very interested in Boeser, probably enough to move a 1st for him + a prospect. They also need to dump Okposo somehow.

 

[Cogburn]

3 of capfriendly's top buy outs are Eriksson (not worth it this year), Sutter and Baertschi. Baertschi's buy out would be a mercy to him, it saves us a few hundred thousand in cap this year, but he's a free agent. Sutter's cap hit is less than half with his buy out, and it drops the next year to 1 million. That gives us almost 21 million with no compensation going the other way to swallow these contracts. If the flat cap dramatically affects contracts, we might even be able to ADD an asset over the summer too. Tampa Bay, Toronto, New York Islanders, or just about every team looking to compete has a number of players needing new contracts...we could pull another Miller trade.

 

[Diamonddog01]

If the league would just allow one compliance buyout due to the current situation it would help us immensely, but unfortunately doubt that happens.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Yes there are many factors involved with a trade of this magnitude, it is a very interesting conversation. I think it comes down to a difference in team building concepts. Theres no right or wrong IMO, just preferences.
Trading your package for Eichel and equating it to "just losing a 1RW" is alittle over simplified. You also lose a backup goalie who is making just above $1m, young and is an RFA once the contract is up. His production vs pay ratio is excellent and he has the potential to provide the team with a net positive in the pay vs play ratio. Signing a replacement backup that can perform up to demko's standard should cost near double, with none of Demko's potential upside. Stecher is an effective 3rd pairing D that can play up the lineup, depending on his new contract he can provide the team with value. You replace him with a UFA and you may lock yourself up into a Jordie Benn/Pouliot/Del Zotto type situation. Or god forbide Benning trade a premium for another Gudbranson. I have no faith in this team's pro-scouting.
For a team so tight against the cap, the only way to stay competitive is to find situations with the potential for a massive pay vs play net positive, like leveraging ELC (ie: EP and Hughes), or utilizing bridge contracts (ie: Boeser). Re-signing Toffoli to a long term massive deal isn't ideal as he has likely passed his peak, and the net positive he provide should be on the decline. Integrating Podkolzin might be a necessity in the near future regardless of this Eichel trade anyways.
Hope I explained my position clearly, its a long read I know. The TLDR version is, Eichel might be a top tier player but he also carries a top tier contract. Your package contains players that provide production that outweights their contract, which is what this team need more than another superstar on a big contract. It is not going to make the team better IMO.
As for the Leafs part, its one thing to acquire a top player for nothing but cash (ie: Tavares), as supposed to trade a boat load of asset for one. First of all it would cost the Leafs what they wouldn't want to part with (ie: Marner or Nylander, plus picks/prospects). Secondly, if they were to move those pieces it should be for a top pairing RSD. Trading those pieces just to have Eichel play out of position makes no sense. You pay a huge market value just to underutilized the returning asset? Why even do it then? The only way it make sense for them is the same way it make sense for us. A 3 way deal. Send a package to Buffalo, Eichel goes to a 3rd team (randomly say Boston), and Mcavoy goes to the Leafs. Something like that is the only way it make sense for the Leafs (depending on the package though).

You have explained your position clearly, thank you rockets.

Thinking on this for a few days, I guess I'm just taken aback by the thinking that another Pettersson (for the sake of argument), is less valuable to this team than Horvat + Boeser due to either roster imbalance or the trading of surplus assets. This just seems highly illogical to me. No matter how ill the fit, the player's rarity and quality does not change. And so...?

Extra pieces can be replaced. Non-Elite top6ers can be supplemented. The only area that cannot be reasonably upgraded is the very top end.

I mean, just take a look at the structure of this team: It's a team being carried by a select few. The rest of the roster is largely pedestrian to outright anchors. The difference between them and other teams is the elite talent. The very top end. Yet here, the argument is against the acquisition of elite talent in order to maintain depth. Or, wait for exactly the right elite talent to surface for trade, as if these things are naturally timed?

I respect your opinion rockets. @Diablo2020, your write ups are appreciated as well. We still come back to the crux of the issue which is: How reasonable is it to A) Expect elite talent to become available and B) Be lucky enough to have the right assets to trade for it when it does become available.

Diablo put 5 1sts on the table, essentially. That might be enough. If a deal could be done without including Horvat, great. If not, I would include Horvat without hesitation. Now I'm more curious than ever what Eichel will garner if he's ever moved.

I wonder also, what the majority of HF would think if I put it to a poll? Maybe they would value Horvat and Boeser more? I don't know.

 

[Peter10]

3 of capfriendly's top buy outs are Eriksson (not worth it this year), Sutter and Baertschi. Baertschi's buy out would be a mercy to him, it saves us a few hundred thousand in cap this year, but he's a free agent. Sutter's cap hit is less than half with his buy out, and it drops the next year to 1 million. That gives us almost 21 million with no compensation going the other way to swallow these contracts. If the flat cap dramatically affects contracts, we might even be able to ADD an asset over the summer too. Tampa Bay, Toronto, New York Islanders, or just about every team looking to compete has a number of players needing new contracts...we could pull another Miller trade.

I have no idea how you get to $21m in cap space.

 

[Cogburn]

I have no idea how you get to $21m in cap space.

Sutter is apparently only worth two million as a buy out. We save about 2.4 million.

Baertschis buyout cap it is 1.7, meaning we save 1.6. We would bury him again, most likely, so thats still 600,000 ish in cap savings.

We have a 14 man roster, with 18 million in cap space, based on a flat cap, according to cap geek. A quick recalculation on said site gives me 20,858,461 in cap space before any signings, based on an 81.5 million spending cap.

 

[Peter10]

Sutter is apparently only worth two million as a buy out. We save about 2.4 million.

Baertschis buyout cap it is 1.7, meaning we save 1.6. We would bury him again, most likely, so thats still 600,000 ish in cap savings.

We have a 14 man roster, with 18 million in cap space, based on a flat cap, according to cap geek. A quick recalculation on said site gives me 20,858,461 in cap space before any signings, based on an 81.5 million spending cap.

So for these 21m you have to sign Markstrom, Virtanen, Gaudette, Motte, McEwan Tanev and Stecher just to get to a 20 men roster. Just taking a guess here but thats already about 19m you need for those guys, add in 1.8m in deferred bonuses to Pettersson and Hughes and you have pretty much hit the ceiling without any call ups, you havent resigned Toffoli and the team is still a playoff bubble team at the very best.

So with what cap space do you plan to prey on other teams cap casualties?