I would definitely do Garland + 2nd if the Devils were down. I get what you mean about Bratt > Miller in terms of value, but do the Canucks need another smallish forward? We already have too many of these do we not? Having 1-2 small players is ok in my opinion, but size and physicality always becomes a much bigger factor come playoff time.
Really? A guy like Coyle would help our PK tremendously and would be able to take on the tougher defensive match-ups. From a stats perspective, wasn't Coyle considered to be one of the best underrated defensive forwards in the league almost right up there with Zac Aston Reese, Nikhushkin, Eriksson-Ek, etc? A guy like Coyle could help free up Horvat for more offensive deployment. Also, as a self-proclaimed #1 fan of Chris Tanev, wouldn't you of all people appreciate a top 4 stay at home right sided defenseman that can move the puck? :-p. Carlo has a concussion history yes, but seems to be over it. He played 79 games last season.
Garland, Buchnevic, Bjorkstrand, Arvidsson, Rakell
Bratt is a guy that you can staple to Pettersson for the next 10 years and see success. You assemble the best hockey team possible then worry about adding grit later as I do believe it's a bit more important than the advanced stats nerds think.
Garland was traded for the 9th overall pick. Buchnevic fair. Bjorkstrand was traded by a team in a cap crunch with zero leverage he is also 27. Arvidsson was 28 coming of a 25 point season. Rakell was a penal UFA.
dude cmon he's the exception to the rule and we know why
Fair but again you're comparing 50 point Garland to 70 point Bratt, I also debunked pretty much every other comparison you had.
Even if we were to go with that, you said Bratt's value > Miller's value. If Bratt is equivalent to Fiala, you think Miller's value is less than Faber and a 1st?
I would say so, yes. Fiala is also two years older then Bratt which makes me say he's the more valuable piece.
You keep saying this and it's framed far too authoritatively. For one thing, I guarantee you would have led the chorus saying that about Sakic with Duchene, and secondly, we don't know what's been offered.
Work on your reading comprehension before you respond with unintelligent assumptions
Ah, can I assume you're feeling like I was attacking your knowledge level?
The problem with Bratt is he is going to arbitration where he will get a proposed one-year deal and a two-year deal the team gets to pick because Bratt elected to go to arbitration. The team will likely choose the one-year deal so he doesn't go straight to UFA. If this happens he is going straight to UFA the next year after taking another one-year deal. So potentially if you trade Bratt for Miller you only have one more year of control (and no cost certainty which teams hate). This isn't like Fiala who wanted to sign a long-term deal but the team didn't. I think the Devils want a long-term deal also, the Devils and Bratt are 2.35 million apart in their arbitration filling (not a great sign). My point could be moot if he signs tomorrow and avoids arbitration but who knows. But all I am saying is that trading for Bratt like Miller has a lot of risks.
Agreed that there is risk there, and if someone behind the scenes knows Bratt's troublesome, or driven exclusively by money, then don't make that deal.
The Duchene deal is not analogous. Sakic was not in the same position Allvin is in now. Duchene was traded in 2017-18, but he was not on the last year of his contract going into that season. Miller is. So no, I wouldn't have said Sakic had to trade Duchene the previous season - because he didn't. He literally had more time.
