Toggle sidebar

GDT: [GM49] Vancouver Canucks @ St. Louis Blues | Mon, Jan. 27th | 4:30pm | Amazon Prime | Sing Me a Sweet Tune

Status
Not open for further replies.
bbud said:
He shouldn't just to make a trade to placate the media if there is a trade that really makes this team better sure but not unless that's the deal
Click to expand...
No trade needs to happen in-season. Miller’s value will be better in the off-season. Pete’s no trade doesn’t kick in until July.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bleach Clean
Nothing wrong with the way EP25 played that, unfortunate

I was also going to say, Myers is a much better defender when you take out his need to be a puck mover. You give him someone who can move the puck with ease, and he can focus defensively
 
Just A Bit Outside said:
What does it say when you use DeepSeek?
Click to expand...
Okay, so the user is asking whether the Vancouver Canucks should trade JT Miller, Elias Pettersson, or neither. Let me start by breaking down the key considerations for each player and the team's situation.

First, I need to recall the current status of the Canucks. They've been rebuilding for a few years but have some core players. Miller and Pettersson are both key pieces. Let's think about each player individually.

Starting with JT Miller. He's a forward, probably in his late 20s or early 30s. He had a good season recently, maybe a point-per-game player. His contract status is important. If he's on a long-term deal, that affects trade value. If he's older, maybe the Canucks might consider trading him for younger assets or draft picks to build for the future. But if the team is trying to compete now, keeping him makes sense. Also, his leadership and versatility are factors. Maybe he plays center and wing, which adds value. On the other hand, if his contract is expensive and the team is not contending, trading him could free up cap space.

Now, Elias Pettersson. He's younger, probably early to mid-20s. A center, which is a premium position. He's likely one of the team's top players, maybe even a franchise cornerstone. His potential is higher, so trading him would be a massive decision. If the Canucks are rebuilding, trading a young star like Pettersson might fetch a huge return, but it could set the team back if they don't get enough. However, if they're looking to compete soon, keeping him is essential. Also, his contract situation: if he's due for a big extension, the team's ability to re-sign him is crucial. If there's uncertainty about him staying long-term, maybe trading him before he becomes a free agent is a consideration. But that's risky because he's a key player.

Team context: Are the Canucks close to contending? If they made the playoffs recently or have a solid core, maybe they should keep both and build around them. If they're stuck in mediocrity, not making the playoffs but not getting high draft picks, trading one for assets might help. The salary cap is another factor. If they have cap issues, moving a higher-paid player like Miller could provide flexibility. But if they have space, keeping both might be feasible.

Potential returns: What could they get in a trade? For Miller, maybe a first-round pick and a prospect. For Pettersson, the return would be much larger—multiple high picks, top prospects, or young NHL-ready players. But trading a young star like Pettersson is rare unless he wants out or the team is in a full rebuild.

Injury history or performance trends: If Miller's performance is declining, trading him while his value is high makes sense. If Pettersson is still improving, keeping him is better.

Leadership and locker room presence: Both players might be leaders. Losing them could affect team chemistry.

Fan base and market considerations: Trading a popular player like Pettersson could upset fans, especially if he's a homegrown talent. Miller might be a fan favorite too, but maybe less so if he was acquired via trade.

Recent rumors or statements from management: If there's been talk about the team's direction, that could influence the decision. For example, if the GM has mentioned a retool vs. rebuild.

Also, looking at the NHL landscape, teams often hesitate to trade young superstars unless forced. Pettersson is likely in that category. Miller, being older, might be more expendable if the team isn't contending.

Another angle: contract status. If Miller has a few years left, his trade value is higher. If Pettersson is an RFA or approaching UFA status, the urgency to trade or re-sign him increases.

So, putting it all together. If the Canucks believe they can compete in the next 2-3 years, keeping both makes sense. If they're further away, trading Miller for future assets might be smart. Trading Pettersson would be a last resort unless he wants out or the return is too good to pass up. But generally, you don't trade a young star unless you have to.

Possible risks: If they trade Miller, they lose a top-six forward. If they trade Pettersson, they lose a potential franchise player. If they keep both but don't improve the team, they might stay mediocre.

In recent years, the Canucks have had some struggles, maybe not making the playoffs consistently. They have some young players like Hughes, Demko, etc. So if they have a core with Pettersson, Hughes, Demko, maybe they should build around them. Miller, being older, might not align with their timeline if they're still a few years away.

But maybe Miller's experience helps the younger players. It's a balance between competing now and building for the future.

In conclusion, the Canucks should probably not trade Pettersson unless forced. As for Miller, if they can get a good return that helps the future, trading him might be beneficial. But if they aim to compete soon, keeping both could be the way to go.
The decision to trade JT Miller, Elias Pettersson, or neither hinges on the Vancouver Canucks' strategic direction, balancing short-term competitiveness with long-term rebuilding.


Here's a structured analysis:

1. JT Miller​

  • Pros of Trading:
    • Age & Contract: At 31 (as of 2023), Miller’s prime window may not align with a prolonged rebuild. His $8M AAV through 2026-27 could net assets (e.g., 1st-round picks, prospects) to accelerate a retool.
    • Cap Flexibility: Moving his salary could free space to address weaknesses (e.g., defense, depth).
  • Cons of Trading:
    • Production & Leadership: A consistent point-per-game player and vocal leader, his absence would create a short-term offensive and leadership void.
    • Competitive Timeline: If management believes the core (Pettersson, Hughes, Demko) can contend soon, retaining Miller adds veteran stability.
Verdict: Trade Miller only if the return significantly boosts the future (e.g., top prospects/picks) and the team isn’t poised to compete in the next 2–3 years. Otherwise, retain him as a bridge contributor.

2. Elias Pettersson​

  • Pros of Trading:
    • Historic Return: A 25-year-old franchise center could command a massive haul (e.g., multiple 1sts, blue-chip prospects, young NHL talent).
    • Risk Mitigation: If extension talks stall (he’s a 2024 RFA), trading him preemptively avoids losing him for nothing.
  • Cons of Trading:
    • Franchise Cornerstone: Pettersson is a top-10 NHL center with MVP upside. Trading him resets the rebuild and alienates fans.
    • Alignment with Core: He fits the age timeline of Hughes (24) and Demko (28). Moving him undermines the foundation.
Verdict: Trade Pettersson only if he explicitly requests a move or extension talks collapse. Otherwise, prioritize signing him long-term as the franchise centerpiece.

3. "Trade No One" Scenario​

  • Case For:
    • Competitive Core: With Pettersson, Hughes, Demko, and a supporting cast (Boeser, Hronek), the Canucks could contend with strategic additions (e.g., top-4 D, depth scoring).
    • Stability: Retaining stars maintains fan engagement and avoids the volatility of a rebuild.

Final Recommendation​

  • Keep Pettersson unless he forces an exit. His age, skill, and position make him irreplaceable.
  • Consider trading Miller if a contender offers a premium return (e.g., 2024/25 1st-round pick + NHL-ready prospect). Otherwise, retain him to support playoff pushes.
  • Overall Strategy: Use cap space and draft capital to build around Pettersson/Hughes/Demko. Target young, cost-controlled talent to sustain contention.
Trading Pettersson would signal a full rebuild, which seems premature given the core’s potential. Miller’s status depends on balancing immediate competitiveness with future flexibility.
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: Bleach Clean, LemonSauceD, Tv9924 and 1 other person
Quinn Hughes leading all defensemen in points. If Pettersson and Miller can’t keep up, then i suggest moving on and finding centers that can gel more with Hughes. What a player. He can turn any center to star status.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SillyRabbit and platotld
Sasson not getting it deep enough. Caught trying to make a cross-blueline play a couple times off the rush. Tocchet will notice
 
DFAC said:
Saad is still in the league? Seems like he's been around forever
Click to expand...
Saad was always a frustrating fantasy hockey player. Night by night he'll do nothing and then at the end of the year he had like 50-60 points.
DFAC said:
He's been pretty good tonight
Click to expand...
Oh yeah I'm not saying he's been bad or anything I'm just not used to hearing heaps or praise like this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DFAC
xtr3m said:
Okay, so the user is asking whether the Vancouver Canucks should trade JT Miller, Elias Pettersson, or neither. Let me start by breaking down the key considerations for each player and the team's situation.

First, I need to recall the current status of the Canucks. They've been rebuilding for a few years but have some core players. Miller and Pettersson are both key pieces. Let's think about each player individually.

Starting with JT Miller. He's a forward, probably in his late 20s or early 30s. He had a good season recently, maybe a point-per-game player. His contract status is important. If he's on a long-term deal, that affects trade value. If he's older, maybe the Canucks might consider trading him for younger assets or draft picks to build for the future. But if the team is trying to compete now, keeping him makes sense. Also, his leadership and versatility are factors. Maybe he plays center and wing, which adds value. On the other hand, if his contract is expensive and the team is not contending, trading him could free up cap space.

Now, Elias Pettersson. He's younger, probably early to mid-20s. A center, which is a premium position. He's likely one of the team's top players, maybe even a franchise cornerstone. His potential is higher, so trading him would be a massive decision. If the Canucks are rebuilding, trading a young star like Pettersson might fetch a huge return, but it could set the team back if they don't get enough. However, if they're looking to compete soon, keeping him is essential. Also, his contract situation: if he's due for a big extension, the team's ability to re-sign him is crucial. If there's uncertainty about him staying long-term, maybe trading him before he becomes a free agent is a consideration. But that's risky because he's a key player.

Team context: Are the Canucks close to contending? If they made the playoffs recently or have a solid core, maybe they should keep both and build around them. If they're stuck in mediocrity, not making the playoffs but not getting high draft picks, trading one for assets might help. The salary cap is another factor. If they have cap issues, moving a higher-paid player like Miller could provide flexibility. But if they have space, keeping both might be feasible.

Potential returns: What could they get in a trade? For Miller, maybe a first-round pick and a prospect. For Pettersson, the return would be much larger—multiple high picks, top prospects, or young NHL-ready players. But trading a young star like Pettersson is rare unless he wants out or the team is in a full rebuild.

Injury history or performance trends: If Miller's performance is declining, trading him while his value is high makes sense. If Pettersson is still improving, keeping him is better.

Leadership and locker room presence: Both players might be leaders. Losing them could affect team chemistry.

Fan base and market considerations: Trading a popular player like Pettersson could upset fans, especially if he's a homegrown talent. Miller might be a fan favorite too, but maybe less so if he was acquired via trade.

Recent rumors or statements from management: If there's been talk about the team's direction, that could influence the decision. For example, if the GM has mentioned a retool vs. rebuild.

Also, looking at the NHL landscape, teams often hesitate to trade young superstars unless forced. Pettersson is likely in that category. Miller, being older, might be more expendable if the team isn't contending.

Another angle: contract status. If Miller has a few years left, his trade value is higher. If Pettersson is an RFA or approaching UFA status, the urgency to trade or re-sign him increases.

So, putting it all together. If the Canucks believe they can compete in the next 2-3 years, keeping both makes sense. If they're further away, trading Miller for future assets might be smart. Trading Pettersson would be a last resort unless he wants out or the return is too good to pass up. But generally, you don't trade a young star unless you have to.

Possible risks: If they trade Miller, they lose a top-six forward. If they trade Pettersson, they lose a potential franchise player. If they keep both but don't improve the team, they might stay mediocre.

In recent years, the Canucks have had some struggles, maybe not making the playoffs consistently. They have some young players like Hughes, Demko, etc. So if they have a core with Pettersson, Hughes, Demko, maybe they should build around them. Miller, being older, might not align with their timeline if they're still a few years away.

But maybe Miller's experience helps the younger players. It's a balance between competing now and building for the future.

In conclusion, the Canucks should probably not trade Pettersson unless forced. As for Miller, if they can get a good return that helps the future, trading him might be beneficial. But if they aim to compete soon, keeping both could be the way to go.
The decision to trade JT Miller, Elias Pettersson, or neither hinges on the Vancouver Canucks' strategic direction, balancing short-term competitiveness with long-term rebuilding.


Here's a structured analysis:

1. JT Miller​

  • Pros of Trading:
    • Age & Contract: At 31 (as of 2023), Miller’s prime window may not align with a prolonged rebuild. His $8M AAV through 2026-27 could net assets (e.g., 1st-round picks, prospects) to accelerate a retool.
    • Cap Flexibility: Moving his salary could free space to address weaknesses (e.g., defense, depth).
  • Cons of Trading:
    • Production & Leadership: A consistent point-per-game player and vocal leader, his absence would create a short-term offensive and leadership void.
    • Competitive Timeline: If management believes the core (Pettersson, Hughes, Demko) can contend soon, retaining Miller adds veteran stability.
Verdict: Trade Miller only if the return significantly boosts the future (e.g., top prospects/picks) and the team isn’t poised to compete in the next 2–3 years. Otherwise, retain him as a bridge contributor.

2. Elias Pettersson​

  • Pros of Trading:
    • Historic Return: A 25-year-old franchise center could command a massive haul (e.g., multiple 1sts, blue-chip prospects, young NHL talent).
    • Risk Mitigation: If extension talks stall (he’s a 2024 RFA), trading him preemptively avoids losing him for nothing.
  • Cons of Trading:
    • Franchise Cornerstone: Pettersson is a top-10 NHL center with MVP upside. Trading him resets the rebuild and alienates fans.
    • Alignment with Core: He fits the age timeline of Hughes (24) and Demko (28). Moving him undermines the foundation.
Verdict: Trade Pettersson only if he explicitly requests a move or extension talks collapse. Otherwise, prioritize signing him long-term as the franchise centerpiece.

3. "Trade No One" Scenario​

  • Case For:
    • Competitive Core: With Pettersson, Hughes, Demko, and a supporting cast (Boeser, Hronek), the Canucks could contend with strategic additions (e.g., top-4 D, depth scoring).
    • Stability: Retaining stars maintains fan engagement and avoids the volatility of a rebuild.

Final Recommendation​

  • Keep Pettersson unless he forces an exit. His age, skill, and position make him irreplaceable.
  • Consider trading Miller if a contender offers a premium return (e.g., 2024/25 1st-round pick + NHL-ready prospect). Otherwise, retain him to support playoff pushes.
  • Overall Strategy: Use cap space and draft capital to build around Pettersson/Hughes/Demko. Target young, cost-controlled talent to sustain contention.
Trading Pettersson would signal a full rebuild, which seems premature given the core’s potential. Miller’s status depends on balancing immediate competitiveness with future flexibility.
Click to expand...
Deepseeks knowledge cut off is July 2024. I know because I was using it today and asked the same question lol. You can manually give it knowledge but it's not up to date on anything from this season
 
wonton15 said:
Is D-Petey a player that plays better at higher levels? He legitimately looks like he belongs so far.
Click to expand...
Screenshot 2025-01-27 at 6.54.23 PM.png


He's been pretty sheltered ice time wise.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom