You could get both, and will probably need to, to make the salary work. It just could make more sense instead of having one pool of players/prospects to work from, that you might be able to get more value from two.
The cap has and will go up significantly since that trade was made. You’re comparing one team that is rebuilding and desperate to get some return for their aging player to another team hoping to start their contending window. What other teams were in for Karlsson? Edmonton wasn’t willing to make it work, who else was bidding against Pittsburgh when Karlsson was traded?
Maybe you’re right and maybe you’re wrong. I don’t recall Buffalo taking back a $7M+ player trending towards being a 40-50 point player though. If Pettersson is considered a “bad” contract then Cozens is in the same boat and I’m not swapping them for a prospect and $4M in cap space.
This sounds like “Detroit would like Pettersson but doesn’t have the trade able assets to acquire him so let’s use Buffalo to make it work” to me.
I'd love Petterson on the team, but I don't want to give up Seider for it to happen. That would probably be the starting point of the deal, well, Mo or Larkin. We can't afford to lose either of them.
Habs could use him but probably don’t have the pieces Vancouver would want.
Anyways, I would propose Dach, Matheson and Evans for Pettersson.
Change Dach to Suzuki, Matheson to Hutson and Caulfield for Evans and I think you are closer..Habs could use him but probably don’t have the pieces Vancouver would want.
Anyways, I would propose Dach, Matheson and Evans for Pettersson.
Also sounds like Buffalo would want Petterson but doesn't have the assets to make it work, as well.
The cap going up doesn't mean that moving high-priced contracts becomes easy. While it's true the Sharks and Canucks are in vastly different places, Pittsburgh made sense as a suitor because they were close to the playoffs. Buffalo sits in last in the East right now but you're framing them as a suitor when they likely aren't. At the time Karlsson was dealt to Pittsburgh, Karlsson admitted to talking to teams like Carolina, Seattle, and Toronto along with Pittsburgh. But the other thing though is that Karlsson's four year term is a lot less risky than Pettersson's seven with a full no-move. Cozens may be in the same boat as a contract to Pettersson but Cozens' contract expires when he's 29 rather than 33. Not a terribly large gap or that concerning for aging out but a difference to note nonetheless. Maybe Buffalo does it for Byram and a 1st and it would make more sense to both sides. I think the Sabres would be mistaken to move on from Byram though to get more top heavy when they can't compete as it is.
You are funny. I wouldn’t trade Suzuki for Pettersson 1 vs 1.
A rising cap doesn’t make it easy but it certainly makes it easier than the flat cap that both Eichel and Karlsson were moved under.
Buffalo wouldn’t have interest in adding a player like Pettersson? Why?
Less term doesn’t equate to less risk necessarily. Pittsburgh acquired Karlsson’s twilight years while any team acquiring Pettersson would be banking on getting his prime. Big difference.
You’re basically just deciding on what Buffalo would be better off doing despite many Sabres’ fans already saying and telling you you’re wrong. I’ll take their word and opinion over yours.
Not chance Nucks take that deal, great for ther habs though.
Miller has a full NMC for the next few years, he's already come out and said he's not going anywhere.
Even during the years where the cap was pretty consistently rising before the pandemic, you didn't see that many players making that percentage of the cap getting traded for a haul. Subban got Weber. Kessel got Kapanen and a 1st at a less percentage to the cap. Nash got a 1st. Pettersson will likely be in a similar boat. You ask why Buffalo might not have interest in acquiring Pettersson but there's many reasons why that include the contract, the player, and the asking price which may not make sense for them given their place in the standings. Less term equals less risk in far more instances than not in this context. Some players decline earlier than others for many different reasons. Pettersson could just not be happy in Vancouver and could end up being just as unhappy being shipped to a place like Buffalo. Just ask Huberdeau how that might go. I'm also not deciding shit. There hasn't been many Sabres fans saying that either. You just want that to be the case to help you in this but it's not actually the case and it wouldn't matter even if it did. Fans aren't managers so it doesn't matter what any of us think on these sorts of things.
Teams will not give you hypothetical value just because other guys have done better after leaving Buffalo. You can only evaluate a player based on what they have been, and the further out a player is from their draft, the less likely they get to achieve their potential. GMs aren’t giving Buffalo players an extra boost just because of these intangible reasons the players suck.
Your values are all over the place, these are wildly different offers.
