Elias Pettersson: Double down or sell?

[Coffee]

It’s a serious discussion to be had, and I’m curious to hear what everyone across the board has to say about this situation if you were Vancouver.

I know players have bad stretches, bad years so I don’t believe it’s a black and white subject, but man, it’s a dark topic for Vancouver

What’s your honest say?


Thanks

Click to read more...

 

[LOFIN]

While the Canucks could technically do it before July 1st, I think that ship has sailed. They hedged their bet on EP40 instead of Miller. What value are you going to get for EP40 during the offseason, if this continues?

 

[Numba9]

The chances of Pettersson getting out of his bad stretch are better than selling low. In fact there was a 17 game stretch in November/December where he had 22 points. So he's still got it, but at the moment it's not consistent like it's been in the past.

 

[Luigi Lemieux]

They're going to hold onto him and hopes he rebounds next year. With that cap hit and his performance i imagine his value has cratered and they'd be selling at his lowest value.

 

[TheSuperElite]

don't think they have much of a choice, really. you love to see it.

 

[Else Ermine]

If he gets his confidence back he's a player I absolutely want. If he remains as he is, chances are he'd be open to a fresh start almost anywhere else. On that basis I don't worry about the NMC kicking in.

Before you could play off the situation as having to pick between Miller and Pettersson, now if the Canucks attempt to trade him everyone knows that the team has absolutely given up on him. You get no trade value and get worse at the same time.

You can't replace the player Pettersson can be, so to my mind they had better do their absolute best to help him get back to that.

 

[centipede2233]

Id do what I think what Rutherford and Alvin do, let the season play out, assess, discreetly see if you can make a deal if your not happy with EP play, if no decent value can be had no choice but to keep EP and cross your fingers and toes he resembles close to an 11 million dollar player.

 

[TheDoldrums]

Didn’t they already double down on Elias Pettersson with the defenseman?

 

[Bard Marchand]

Trade him to the Rangers for maximum chaos

 

[Quinntessential]

Trade him to the Rangers for maximum chaos

Trade with the Islanders to get Bo Horvat back first, then trade both Pettersson and Horvat to the Rangers.

 

[GeeoffBrown]

Canucks have one of the 2 best defenseman in the league in his prime. They pretty much have to go for it and hope Petterson bounces back

 

[Fatass]

If he gets his confidence back he's a player I absolutely want. If he remains as he is, chances are he'd be open to a fresh start almost anywhere else. On that basis I don't worry about the NMC kicking in.

Before you could play off the situation as having to pick between Miller and Pettersson, now if the Canucks attempt to trade him everyone knows that the team has absolutely given up on him. You get no trade value and get worse at the same time.

You can't replace the player Pettersson can be, so to my mind they had better do their absolute best to help him get back to that.

Imo there are two paths here. First trading Miller. Why? He was a problem to the whole club of just to Pettersson? If the team keeps Pettersson then it’s clear Miller was a problem to the whole club. If Van trades Pettersson too then Miller and Pettersson were both at fault.
Seems like Van is keeping Pettersson. So Miller, by my thinking, was a problem across the whole room.

 

[kevsh]

So Miller, by my thinking, was a problem across the whole room.

Certainly possible, but you'd think the Rangers would have done their homework on Miller and have gotten inside info on what really played out in Vancouver before they made that deal.

So either they just brushed it off (how many teams have brought in D'Angelo with all his baggage, to name just one) or they figured he wasn't the (main) problem?

 

[CaviarAndRinkFries]

 

[Fatass]

Certainly possible, but you'd think the Rangers would have done their homework on Miller and have gotten inside info on what really played out in Vancouver before they made that deal.

So either they just brushed it off (how many teams have brought in D'Angelo with all his baggage, to name just one) or they figured he wasn't the (main) problem?

I’m only providing a theory. Canucks trade both means both were the problem. Canucks trade only one (Miller) and that guy was the problem.
They could still trade Pettersson but with Miller is the one gone so far.
I’m sure the Rangers dug into Miller. Trotchek and Miller are close friends and so are their wives.

 

[Just Linda]

Trading Miller meant they handed the keys to not just EP but also his philosophy/ ideals. The question then becomes... Do they want to shape their locker room into EP40's?

This reminds me a lot the Subban/Pacioretty locker room split. There was a problem identified, management picked sides and invested in Pacioretty as a leader. Turns out, they were wrong to double down on Pacioretty and he has to get shipped out so that the room could get the culture they wanted into it.

The problem was caused because there was issues with EP40's work ethic and lack of intensity. Miller was asked to fix it, that created a split. The fact that fixing the original problem created this mess means that the original problem still likely exists.

Do the Canucks feel comfortable moving forward with a locker room that doubles down on EP40 as a leader with the alleged concerns with him as a leader?

With the information available publically, I'd say that trading him is the right choice for their long term success. On the ice, it's ridiculous but off the ice, it's the only way forward.

That being said, there might be a fix that we don't have access to. I don't truly have enough information to know for sure.

I would love to see what Vancouver looks like with an intense and/or leader to work with Hughes. Someone like Tkachuk, Weber, MacKinnon, etc, someone who the team wants to follow.