Around the NHL 2024-2025

[Frenzy31]

Why would we trade Thomas for EP? That helps the Nucks out of there situation, but doesn’t help us. Just makes use more cap?

 

[Dr Robot]

I think Thomas and EP are comparable value wise. EP probably puts up a few more points but also makes 3 million more. Unless there’s a quiet issue with Thomas, i don’t see a reason to make that swap.

 

[Memento]

Wes McCauley is a character and arguably the best ref in the NHL in terms of sheer respect from the players. That exchange between him and Parayko is awesome.

On a topic-related note, I'd trade anyone short of Thomas for Pettersson, and I'm including Kyrou, Neighbours, and any prospect. He's that good. I also think we don't have a shot at getting him, considering what other teams could give and what Vancouver should rightfully ask for him.

 

[Frenzy31]

Wes McCauley is a character and arguably the best ref in the NHL in terms of sheer respect from the players. That exchange between him and Parayko is awesome.

On a topic-related note, I'd trade anyone short of Thomas for Pettersson, and I'm including Kyrou, Neighbours, and any prospect. He's that good. I also think we don't have a shot at getting him, considering what other teams could give and what Vancouver should rightfully ask for him.

I don’t know about that. I am not sure he brings back a Kyrou type player plus significant assets. An established 1line forward, signed long term that can be a difference maker.

Most top contenders have a center at EPs level. And I don’t see them moving their top center for him. Maybe top center prospect, but if you are Columbus are you moving Fantinelli (spelling). I am not. I would want to add to him. But Johnson would be available….

I think they will get high end future package, or top player and 1st. Top 6 forward or #3 dman and 1st and top prospect. I don’t see a team moving top pairing or number 1 center for him. As at best it would be a lateral move.

 

[BlueMed]

I think Thomas and EP are comparable value wise. EP probably puts up a few more points but also makes 3 million more. Unless there’s a quiet issue with Thomas, i don’t see a reason to make that swap.

Agreed. I will also point out that while EP is putting up 5 extra points per year, Thomas is averaging 5% higher on face offs.

 

[Xerloris]

Agreed. I will also point out that while EP is putting up 5 extra points per year, Thomas is averaging 5% higher on face offs.

having Thomas and EP as our 1C and 2C would be a pretty epic combo and then have Dvo slot in at 3C. We'd really be cookin and I think we would be contending in no time but there is noway we can do that without giving up Probablt Kyrou AND Dvo to get EP. So it's probably best to just not f*** with it.

 

[Brian39]

Can you give the number of games from Binnington vs the others during that same 284 games?

The 284 games is the total number of team games since the start of the 2021/22 season. The games played breakdown was included in my post, but I'll paste the relevant part and bold it:

"Since the start of the 2021/22 season Binner has a .902 SV% through 182 games played. Blues goalies not named Jordan Binnington have a .912 SV% through 118 games played during that same time frame. That's a 10 point SV% gap over (just shy of) a 3.5 year sample. I'm going to type that out again because it is something I don't think many would have expected."

182 games to 118.

If we change it to starts, the total is 178 to 106. Adjusted to an 82 game season, that would be a 51.4 to 30.6 start split between Binner and 'everyone else.'

 

[Brian39]

https://puckpedia.com/salary-cap/no-trademovement-clauses#:~:text=Clauses%20after%20Trades,keep%20it%2C%20which%20is%20rare.

Appears there is a bit to it and really becomes a case by case whether clauses stay or go and depending on if the clause was waived or not, and used to be that the whole thing could be deleted in any trade, but now seems that part is different.

In the past at least there are examples where all the future clauses left after a trade. I’ll remember if I have to but I’m struggling today.

But I do think:

If some fantasy world where we trade for Petey - if he waived to come here then his clauses are gone. They don’t come back after he’s waived them unless that’s part of some bigger negotiation. I feel that’s how it works, or at least it did for some period of time.

All no trade and no move clauses remain in effect when the player is moved. Your link includes an update with the key info:

"Update in 2020 MOU: No-Trades & No-Moves travel with the Player when traded or waived. This means that if a player is traded before the clause goes into effect, the clause will no longer be removed with the new team. If players have already lost their clause due to being traded prior to it starting, they will not be re-instated."

It is baffling to me that Puckpedia hasn't rewritten that page in the last 4 years to more clearly reflect the current CBA that went into effect in 2020. Having the current rule as a bottom-of-the-page update while still including the now-incorrect info as the main text is really dumb. But the update is correct. It used to be the case that a player could lose his NTC or NMC if he was traded before it went into effect. Changing that was a major priority for the PA when they were extending the CBA during the COVID stoppage and it was in fact changed. Starting in 2020, NTCs and NMCs remain with the player when they are traded no matter what.

If we acquired Petey, we would be acquiring him with a full NMC that kicks in 7/1/25. That NMC would remain in effect through the duration of the contract. There is no ambiguity or way to get around it. He would have that full NMC.

 

[StlBigFly]

All no trade and no move clauses remain in effect when the player is moved. Your link includes an update with the key info:

"Update in 2020 MOU: No-Trades & No-Moves travel with the Player when traded or waived. This means that if a player is traded before the clause goes into effect, the clause will no longer be removed with the new team. If players have already lost their clause due to being traded prior to it starting, they will not be re-instated."

It is baffling to me that Puckpedia hasn't rewritten that page in the last 4 years to more clearly reflect the current CBA that went into effect in 2020. Having the current rule as a bottom-of-the-page update while still including the now-incorrect info as the main text is really dumb. But the update is correct. Starting in 2020, NTCs and NMCs remain with the player when they are traded no matter what.

If we acquired Petey, we would be acquiring him with a full NMC that kicks in 7/1/25. That NMC would remain in effect through the duration of the contract. There is no ambiguity or way to get around it. He would have that full NMC.

I need to pay better attention! lol. My bad.

I wonder if a nmc would be a deal breaker for us.

I wouldn’t be mad if it was, but I wonder after Petrangelo if they’d reevaluate. I mean if Thomas comes due and we want him still and he just absolutely has to have one…I’d do it.

 

[Brian39]

I'm extremely interested in Petey for the right price.

Robert Thomas is the only asset that is truly untouchable in a Petey deal for me. The contractual risk of Petey vs Thomas is just too much for me. I'm not completely sold that Petey will be the better player over the next 7 years. But even if you convince me of that with 100% certainty, I don't think the margin will outweigh the contract differences.

I would include any other asset we hold in a deal for Petey. I wouldn't make significant additions to some of those assets and I'd be willing to overpay in 'quantity' in order to avoid including certain assets.

I'd trade Kyrou for Petey 1 for 1 and frankly I'm not sure that the Canucks will get a better offer than that unless they are content with getting the highest value futures package offered. Kyrou had more points than Petey in 2021/22 despite playing fewer games. Petey obviously had better years in 2022/23 and 2023/24 (102 points and 89 points), but Kyrou is outscoring him this year. Petey is the better player and plays a more valuable position, but the gap is probably not much larger than the gap in their contracts. Kyrou can't block a deal to Vancouver (unlike lots of the 'better' players they could target) and he has significant term left on his deal (unlike lots of the younger 'better' players they could target). We have the cap space to fit Petey in a 1 for 1 swap with Kyrou (unlike a decent chunk of teams looking to make a 'hockey trade' of their $8M-$9M player for Petey's $11.5M).

I hope that we are offering Kyrou for Petey 1-for-1 and hoping that Vancouver can't drive up the market. But push comes to shove, I'd add futures to Kyrou. I wouldn't include Lindstein or Jiricek, but they could pick their favorite one of our D prospects besides those two. I'm not including Dvorsky, but I could get talked into any of our other forward prospects. They would have to add future draft capital to their side of the deal to get a guy like Snuggy or Stenberg, but I could see the logic in giving them a really nice D+2 or D+3 aged 1st rounder in exchange for a future 1st to help their goal of keeping a current window open. I'm really pleased with the development of the forwards we've grabbed in the middle rounds the last few drafts and I'm still fine giving Dean a couple years to see what is there. But I'd be more than content losing any one of those guys to tip the scales on a Petey deal.

If Vancouver wants to make a hockey trade instead of flipping Petey for pure futures, I'm not sold that they will find a better offer than one centered around Kyrou. We can add some mid-value prospects and/or include a high value prospect nearing NHL-readiness for a 1st rounder that wouldn't help them until years down the line. We have a couple vets that we could retain 50% on.

I think a Kyrou-for-Petey deal framework is a fairly reasonable discussion and probably gives us the ability to beat the offers of most teams.

And while Petey's contract carries its own risks, I very much believe that a Thomas/Petey 1A/1B punch down the middle would be a Cup-caliber center duo and I'd be fully content having that duo locked in at a combined $19.725M for 6 seasons (plus whichever portion of this season you may or may not get depending on when the trade takes place). Limit Dvorsky's NHL games to 9 this season and then we'd have 3 more years with him on an ELC starting in a 3C role behind that duo next year. Bridge him after that and we could genuinely be looking at half a decade of a top 5 NHL center trio before Dvorsky is even due a serious contract. Thomas and Petey's contracts would have 1 and 2 years left and the cap will have risen $20M+ by then, so you could absolutely extend Dvorsky at market value by then.

Army took advantage of Edmonton's cap situation to pry a couple talented young players free. He took advantage of Buffalo to pry ROR away. We've spent thousands of words talking about how a successful non-tear-down-re-whatever likely requires him to find a way to pry an elite talent out of someone. This is one of those handful of situations where such a talent may be available. I want to see Army get aggressive chasing him even though the contract is a tough pill to swallow. Our cap structure is positioned to swallow that pill.

 

[PocketNines]

Kyrou + Stancl

 

[Xerloris]

The 284 games is the total number of team games since the start of the 2021/22 season. The games played breakdown was included in my post, but I'll paste the relevant part and bold it:

"Since the start of the 2021/22 season Binner has a .902 SV% through 182 games played. Blues goalies not named Jordan Binnington have a .912 SV% through 118 games played during that same time frame. That's a 10 point SV% gap over (just shy of) a 3.5 year sample. I'm going to type that out again because it is something I don't think many would have expected."

182 games to 118.

If we change it to starts, the total is 178 to 106. Adjusted to an 82 game season, that would be a 51.4 to 30.6 start split between Binner and 'everyone else.'

I swear that information was not there the first time I read it but thank you. It just goes along perfectly with my thinking that the workload when there is no reason to have that workload is a problem.

I'm extremely interested in Petey for the right price.

Robert Thomas is the only asset that is truly untouchable in a Petey deal for me. The contractual risk of Petey vs Thomas is just too much for me. I'm not completely sold that Petey will be the better player over the next 7 years. But even if you convince me of that with 100% certainty, I don't think the margin will outweigh the contract differences.

I would include any other asset we hold in a deal for Petey. I wouldn't make significant additions to some of those assets and I'd be willing to overpay in 'quantity' in order to avoid including certain assets.

I'd trade Kyrou for Petey 1 for 1 and frankly I'm not sure that the Canucks will get a better offer than that unless they are content with getting the highest value futures package offered. Kyrou had more points than Petey in 2021/22 despite playing fewer games. Petey obviously had better years in 2022/23 and 2023/24 (102 points and 89 points), but Kyrou is outscoring him this year. Petey is the better player and plays a more valuable position, but the gap is probably not much larger than the gap in their contracts. Kyrou can't block a deal to Vancouver (unlike lots of the 'better' players they could target) and he has significant term left on his deal (unlike lots of the younger 'better' players they could target). We have the cap space to fit Petey in a 1 for 1 swap with Kyrou (unlike a decent chunk of teams looking to make a 'hockey trade' of their $8M-$9M player for Petey's $11.5M).

I hope that we are offering Kyrou for Petey 1-for-1 and hoping that Vancouver can't drive up the market. But push comes to shove, I'd add futures to Kyrou. I wouldn't include Lindstein or Jiricek, but they could pick their favorite one of our D prospects besides those two. I'm not including Dvorsky, but I could get talked into any of our other forward prospects. They would have to add future draft capital to their side of the deal to get a guy like Snuggy or Stenberg, but I could see the logic in giving them a really nice D+2 or D+3 aged 1st rounder in exchange for a future 1st to help their goal of keeping a current window open. I'm really pleased with the development of the forwards we've grabbed in the middle rounds the last few drafts and I'm still fine giving Dean a couple years to see what is there. But I'd be more than content losing any one of those guys to tip the scales on a Petey deal.

If Vancouver wants to make a hockey trade instead of flipping Petey for pure futures, I'm not sold that they will find a better offer than one centered around Kyrou. We can add some mid-value prospects and/or include a high value prospect nearing NHL-readiness for a 1st rounder that wouldn't help them until years down the line. We have a couple vets that we could retain 50% on.

I think a Kyrou-for-Petey deal framework is a fairly reasonable discussion and probably gives us the ability to beat the offers of most teams.

And while Petey's contract carries its own risks, I very much believe that a Thomas/Petey 1A/1B punch down the middle would be a Cup-caliber center duo and I'd be fully content having that duo locked in at a combined $19.725M for 6 seasons (plus whichever portion of this season you may or may not get depending on when the trade takes place). Limit Dvorsky's NHL games to 9 this season and then we'd have 3 more years with him on an ELC starting in a 3C role behind that duo next year. Bridge him after that and we could genuinely be looking at half a decade of a top 5 NHL center trio before Dvorsky is even due a serious contract. Thomas and Petey's contracts would have 1 and 2 years left and the cap will have risen $20M+ by then, so you could absolutely extend Dvorsky at market value by then.

Army took advantage of Edmonton's cap situation to pry a couple talented young players free. He took advantage of Buffalo to pry ROR away. We've spent thousands of words talking about how a successful non-tear-down-re-whatever likely requires him to find a way to pry an elite talent out of someone. This is one of those handful of situations where such a talent may be available. I want to see Army get aggressive chasing him even though the contract is a tough pill to swallow. Our cap structure is positioned to swallow that pill.

Thomas and EP down the middle would definitely be a cup caliber 1/2 punch and imagine Dvo as #3. I just don't see how we could do it without them demanding Thomas or Dvo+Kyrou. ofcourse, Thomas is off the table for me in any trade.

 

[Majorityof1]

I'm extremely interested in Petey for the right price.

Robert Thomas is the only asset that is truly untouchable in a Petey deal for me. The contractual risk of Petey vs Thomas is just too much for me. I'm not completely sold that Petey will be the better player over the next 7 years. But even if you convince me of that with 100% certainty, I don't think the margin will outweigh the contract differences.

I would include any other asset we hold in a deal for Petey. I wouldn't make significant additions to some of those assets and I'd be willing to overpay in 'quantity' in order to avoid including certain assets.

I'd trade Kyrou for Petey 1 for 1 and frankly I'm not sure that the Canucks will get a better offer than that unless they are content with getting the highest value futures package offered. Kyrou had more points than Petey in 2021/22 despite playing fewer games. Petey obviously had better years in 2022/23 and 2023/24 (102 points and 89 points), but Kyrou is outscoring him this year. Petey is the better player and plays a more valuable position, but the gap is probably not much larger than the gap in their contracts. Kyrou can't block a deal to Vancouver (unlike lots of the 'better' players they could target) and he has significant term left on his deal (unlike lots of the younger 'better' players they could target). We have the cap space to fit Petey in a 1 for 1 swap with Kyrou (unlike a decent chunk of teams looking to make a 'hockey trade' of their $8M-$9M player for Petey's $11.5M).

I hope that we are offering Kyrou for Petey 1-for-1 and hoping that Vancouver can't drive up the market. But push comes to shove, I'd add futures to Kyrou. I wouldn't include Lindstein or Jiricek, but they could pick their favorite one of our D prospects besides those two. I'm not including Dvorsky, but I could get talked into any of our other forward prospects. They would have to add future draft capital to their side of the deal to get a guy like Snuggy or Stenberg, but I could see the logic in giving them a really nice D+2 or D+3 aged 1st rounder in exchange for a future 1st to help their goal of keeping a current window open. I'm really pleased with the development of the forwards we've grabbed in the middle rounds the last few drafts and I'm still fine giving Dean a couple years to see what is there. But I'd be more than content losing any one of those guys to tip the scales on a Petey deal.

If Vancouver wants to make a hockey trade instead of flipping Petey for pure futures, I'm not sold that they will find a better offer than one centered around Kyrou. We can add some mid-value prospects and/or include a high value prospect nearing NHL-readiness for a 1st rounder that wouldn't help them until years down the line. We have a couple vets that we could retain 50% on.

I think a Kyrou-for-Petey deal framework is a fairly reasonable discussion and probably gives us the ability to beat the offers of most teams.

And while Petey's contract carries its own risks, I very much believe that a Thomas/Petey 1A/1B punch down the middle would be a Cup-caliber center duo and I'd be fully content having that duo locked in at a combined $19.725M for 6 seasons (plus whichever portion of this season you may or may not get depending on when the trade takes place). Limit Dvorsky's NHL games to 9 this season and then we'd have 3 more years with him on an ELC starting in a 3C role behind that duo next year. Bridge him after that and we could genuinely be looking at half a decade of a top 5 NHL center trio before Dvorsky is even due a serious contract. Thomas and Petey's contracts would have 1 and 2 years left and the cap will have risen $20M+ by then, so you could absolutely extend Dvorsky at market value by then.

Army took advantage of Edmonton's cap situation to pry a couple talented young players free. He took advantage of Buffalo to pry ROR away. We've spent thousands of words talking about how a successful non-tear-down-re-whatever likely requires him to find a way to pry an elite talent out of someone. This is one of those handful of situations where such a talent may be available. I want to see Army get aggressive chasing him even though the contract is a tough pill to swallow. Our cap structure is positioned to swallow that pill.

I agree, but you won't find much discussion with Vancouver fans. They seem adamant a 2C at least needs to be in the package. We rightfully won't add Thomas. So that leaves us out cold if their take on the required return is correct. I don't think we could make the cap work for a futures package around Dvo, and Dvo + Kyrou is too rich.

 

[Linkens Mastery]

Pettersson feels like a guy we will trade for and his production is going to drop substantially because of our supporting players. Then add on his 11.6m cap hit, NMC, and signing Bonuses.

Sounds like the exact type of player this fanbase would turn on.

 

[Majorityof1]

Pettersson feels like a guy we will trade for and his production is going to drop substantially because of our supporting players. Then add on his 11.6m cap hit, NMC, and signing Bonuses.

Sounds like the exact type of player this fanbase would turn on.

Fans shouldn't care about signing bonuses. EP is a great 200-ft all situation player. If we can't support him with decent linemates, we have more problems than fans turning on him. It's not like he is a passenger that needs a play driver. He creates.

In his best 100+ point season, his top wings were Kuzmenko and Mikheyev. If we can't beat that, we're screwed.

If we can get EP for a good acquisition cost and fit cap, you do it.

 

[joe galiba]

I agree, but you won't find much discussion with Vancouver fans. They seem adamant a 2C at least needs to be in the package. We rightfully won't add Thomas. So that leaves us out cold if their take on the required return is correct. I don't think we could make the cap work for a futures package around Dvo, and Dvo + Kyrou is too rich.

Miller is getting up there in age, Vancouver almost has to have a center coming back

 

[Stealth JD]

Buchnevich is a 2C. Send him to Vancouver.
I’d include Neighbors too to balance the cap and make them think long and hard.

 

[Xerloris]

Buchnevich is a 2C. Send him to Vancouver.
I’d include Neighbors too to balance the cap and make them think long and hard.

Send Buch and Kyrou and Tex and Saad. They have to accept cus we're offering 4 guys to their 1.

 

[Brian39]

I agree, but you won't find much discussion with Vancouver fans. They seem adamant a 2C at least needs to be in the package. We rightfully won't add Thomas. So that leaves us out cold if their take on the required return is correct. I don't think we could make the cap work for a futures package around Dvo, and Dvo + Kyrou us too rich.

That's fine, I'm not really interested in discussing a trade with their fanbase.

The ship is (arguably) sinking in Vancouver. They are outside of playoff positioning by points. 3-4-3 since Demko came back. Miller came back 9 games ago and Petey immediately went on a 6 game scoreless streak. Now Petey and Hughes are both out of the lineup with injuries. The rumors that Miller and Petey's relationship has passed the point of no return have started gaining real traction. You have former players going on podcasts talking about the divide. Miller has a full NMC. Buying him out would offer no mid-season solution and would put them on the hook for 10 years of dead cap ($5.3M or more in 3 of the next 4 seasons). Absolutely nothing about this scenario suggests that Vancouver is going to win a Petey trade and the realities of Petey's contract drastically limits the types of offers the will get.

I don't care what the fans want; I care what they could realistically get. More power to them if they find a better offer. But I've clicked through Puck Pedia a decent amount and I can't really find a talented 2C that will fit the bill and be feasible. Most 2Cs are old enough to have robust trade protection and will have zero interest in going into that market as the replacement for Petey. Or they are overpaid. Or they hit UFA very soon and might walk for nothing unless you massively overpay. Or they are simply too old to be the asset you get back for a guy like Petey. Or they are currently on a team close enough to the cap that the money won't work mid-season.

Ryan O'Reilly is currently a really good 2C level player without trade protection and the Preds have enough space to make that kind of swap work. Would you rather get 2.5 years out of a 33 year old ROR as the centerpiece of a Petey trade or would you rather get 6.5 years out of a 26 year old Kyrou?

I heard Elias Lindholm liked Vancouver, so he might waive to go back. Would you prefer him (and Korpisalo to make the money work) to a package around Kyrou?

Johs Norris plus a cap dump to make the money work?

Dylan Cozens out of Buffalo? I'd say this is probably the best fit, but I'm not quite sure what he does to make the team better in the short term.

Am I missing any 2Cs who could actually get moved to Vancouver?

The reason I say that Kyrou might be the best they can do is because the pool of trade targets who can't veto the deal, aren't soon-to-hit-UFA, come from teams that can make the money work, and aren't uncomfortably old is pretty damn shallow. "We need to get at least a 2C" sounds great in theory until you start eliminating all the 2Cs that aren't feasible and start looking at the 2Cs that you could actually end up with if that is a non-negotiable. I think it is pretty likely that dying on that hill means they either badly lose the trade or they simply don't trade him and hope that the situation resolves itself. The latter might be the best option, but I want Army to be offering them another door.

 

[Brian39]

Pettersson feels like a guy we will trade for and his production is going to drop substantially because of our supporting players. Then add on his 11.6m cap hit, NMC, and signing Bonuses.

Sounds like the exact type of player this fanbase would turn on.

His most frequent linemates since the start of the 2022/23 season are Kuzmenko and Mikheyev. The next 3 most-frequent are Boeser, Hoglander, and Garland. Yes, he has about 40% of his minutes with Hughes and he gets PP time with a good unit. But he is not playing with a bunch of studs.

 

[BadgersandBlues]

I think Buffalo should be all over this. If I'm Kevyn Adams I'm offering Dylan Cozens and either Byram or Samuelsson (Preferably Samuelsson if you're Buffalo). It's cap neutral and it gives Vancouver a solid LHD to play behind Hughes (Something that I think has been a huge issue for Vancouver from following the Athletic/social media) as well as a young C with upside. Buffalo gets a legit star who's locked up for the next 8 years and would probably flourish outside the bright lights of a hockey crazy city. Honestly I think that might be a really good trade for both teams.

Fun fact - now that it's 2025 Capwages is only showing 25-26 contracts lol. Someone needs to ping their database manager.

 

[Majorityof1]

That's fine, I'm not really interested in discussing a trade with their fanbase.

The ship is (arguably) sinking in Vancouver. They are outside of playoff positioning by points. 3-4-3 since Demko came back. Miller came back 9 games ago and Petey immediately went on a 6 game scoreless streak. Now Petey and Hughes are both out of the lineup with injuries. The rumors that Miller and Petey's relationship has passed the point of no return have started gaining real traction. You have former players going on podcasts talking about the divide. Miller has a full NMC. Buying him out would offer no mid-season solution and would put them on the hook for 10 years of dead cap ($5.3M or more in 3 of the next 4 seasons). Absolutely nothing about this scenario suggests that Vancouver is going to win a Petey trade and the realities of Petey's contract drastically limits the types of offers the will get.

I don't care what the fans want; I care what they could realistically get. More power to them if they find a better offer. But I've clicked through Puck Pedia a decent amount and I can't really find a talented 2C that will fit the bill and be feasible. Most 2Cs are old enough to have robust trade protection and will have zero interest in going into that market as the replacement for Petey. Or they are overpaid. Or they are simply too old to be the asset you get back for a guy like Petey. Or they are currently on a team close enough to the cap that the money won't work mid-season.

Ryan O'Reilly is currently a really good 2C level player without trade protection and the Preds have enough space to make that kind of swap work. Would you rather get 2.5 years out of a 33 year old ROR as the centerpiece of a Petey trade or would you rather get 6.5 years out of a 26 year old Kyrou?

I heard Elias Lindholm liked Vancouver, so he might waive to go back. Would you prefer him (and Korpisalo to make the money work) to a package around Kyrou?

Johs Norris plus a cap dump to make the money work?

Dylan Cozens out of Buffalo? I'd say this is probably the best fit, but I'm not quite sure what he does to make the team better in the short term.

Am I missing any 2Cs who could actually get moved to Vancouver?

The reason I say that Kyrou might be the best they can do is because the pool of trade targets who can't veto the deal, aren't soon-to-hit-UFA, come from teams that can make the money work, and aren't uncomfortably old is pretty damn shallow. "We need to get at least a 2C" sounds great in theory until you start eliminating all the 2Cs that aren't feasible and start looking at the 2Cs that you could actually end up with if that is a non-negotiable. I think it is pretty likely that dying on that hill means they either badly lose the trade or they simply don't trade him and hope that the situation resolves itself. The latter might be the best option, but I want Army to be offering them another door.

You may be right. Just offering context from their side, as they know their team/needs best.

Cozens+ Byram was floated on the main board and seemed to get some traction from both sides with the usual HF trade board bickering as well. It was also mentioned Petey and Dahlin have a friendship, so it
may make EP not miserable going to Buf, if that matters without trade protection.

 

[Brian39]

You may be right. Just offering context from their side, as they know their team/needs best.

Cozens+ Byram was floated on the main board and seemed to get some traction from both sides with the usual HF trade board bickering as well. It was also mentioned Petey and Dahlin have a friendship, so it
may make EP not miserable going to Buf, if that matters without trade protection.

I don't hate that for either side, but Vancouver would need to be comfortable with a pretty decent risk that Byram plays out his 2.5 years to UFA eligibility and then walks. He has made it pretty clear that he views himself as a top pair D man and he is just never going to jump Q Hughes on the depth chart there. Maybe he becomes insurance for Hughes walking away that same summer, but Vancouver needs to do absolutely everything in their power to keep Hughes there.

I wonder if Adams has the authority to trade Cozens and Byram in one move (for a player making that much). I don't think that deal turns Buffalo's season around, but Petey is the type of talent that they've been lacking (since they traded that talent away).

 

[SirPaste]

I don't hate that for either side, but Vancouver would need to be comfortable with a pretty decent risk that Byram plays out his 2.5 years to UFA eligibility and then walks. He has made it pretty clear that he views himself as a top pair D man and he is just never going to jump Q Hughes on the depth chart there. Maybe he becomes insurance for Hughes walking away that same summer, but Vancouver needs to do absolutely everything in their power to keep Hughes there.

I wonder if Adams has the authority to trade Cozens and Byram in one move (for a player making that much). I don't think that deal turns Buffalo's season around, but Petey is the type of talent that they've been lacking (since they traded that talent away).

I think Byram is from the Vancouver area so that could help things, not sure

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

That's fine, I'm not really interested in discussing a trade with their fanbase.

The ship is (arguably) sinking in Vancouver. They are outside of playoff positioning by points. 3-4-3 since Demko came back. Miller came back 9 games ago and Petey immediately went on a 6 game scoreless streak. Now Petey and Hughes are both out of the lineup with injuries. The rumors that Miller and Petey's relationship has passed the point of no return have started gaining real traction. You have former players going on podcasts talking about the divide. Miller has a full NMC. Buying him out would offer no mid-season solution and would put them on the hook for 10 years of dead cap ($5.3M or more in 3 of the next 4 seasons). Absolutely nothing about this scenario suggests that Vancouver is going to win a Petey trade and the realities of Petey's contract drastically limits the types of offers the will get.

I don't care what the fans want; I care what they could realistically get. More power to them if they find a better offer. But I've clicked through Puck Pedia a decent amount and I can't really find a talented 2C that will fit the bill and be feasible. Most 2Cs are old enough to have robust trade protection and will have zero interest in going into that market as the replacement for Petey. Or they are overpaid. Or they hit UFA very soon and might walk for nothing unless you massively overpay. Or they are simply too old to be the asset you get back for a guy like Petey. Or they are currently on a team close enough to the cap that the money won't work mid-season.

Ryan O'Reilly is currently a really good 2C level player without trade protection and the Preds have enough space to make that kind of swap work. Would you rather get 2.5 years out of a 33 year old ROR as the centerpiece of a Petey trade or would you rather get 6.5 years out of a 26 year old Kyrou?

I heard Elias Lindholm liked Vancouver, so he might waive to go back. Would you prefer him (and Korpisalo to make the money work) to a package around Kyrou?

Johs Norris plus a cap dump to make the money work?

Dylan Cozens out of Buffalo? I'd say this is probably the best fit, but I'm not quite sure what he does to make the team better in the short term.

Am I missing any 2Cs who could actually get moved to Vancouver?

The reason I say that Kyrou might be the best they can do is because the pool of trade targets who can't veto the deal, aren't soon-to-hit-UFA, come from teams that can make the money work, and aren't uncomfortably old is pretty damn shallow. "We need to get at least a 2C" sounds great in theory until you start eliminating all the 2Cs that aren't feasible and start looking at the 2Cs that you could actually end up with if that is a non-negotiable. I think it is pretty likely that dying on that hill means they either badly lose the trade or they simply don't trade him and hope that the situation resolves itself. The latter might be the best option, but I want Army to be offering them another door.

What about Barzal? He is from BC so might waive. Isles have to realize their core ain’t winning as is. Haven’t seen this one mentioned, but seems like potential base of trade to me.