Jerzey Devil
Jerzey-Duz-It
Or it just waits until free agencyHughes to NJ starts with Hischier and Nemec and then there's a +++
Or it just waits until free agencyHughes to NJ starts with Hischier and Nemec and then there's a +++
So 1 season 2 years ago, and a small handful of games this year? That's your sample size to justify his horrendous contract?Evidently judging by Rutherfords interview, this has been about the tension with Miller all along. And I already said, Petterson did start scoring and playing better when Miller took his leave of absents for his"mental reset"
As far as Pettersons cap hit goes, he's a career PPG center. Ppl said the same sh** about Jack Eichel and his issues.
NoJust do a full-scale rebuild. Mercer + Silayev + Nemec + 1st + contracts for salary for Q. Hughes to NJ.
And that's fine, NJD fans are free to wish that Hughes leaves Vancouver (could happen), that NJD isn't trying to compete for a cup and can afford 13m+ for Hughes, after Luke and company get theirs, etc, etc etc.Or it just waits until free agency
His rights would still be traded. Just like Bedards.Or it just waits until free agency
Just 2 weeks ago this board was full of Canucks fans saying that it's just Vancouver media blowing s*** out of proportion, and there's likely not to much to see here. If you can't see how the president of a team coming out and giving this kind of interview impacts value, there's no discussion to be had. I'm pretty sure if you made a poll fans of literally every other team would agree with me.
Would Boston do Miller for Lindholm with retention ?
best I can do is Cozens for EP 1 for 1
The Vancouver side would want some retention since that was a free agent deal with some overpay built in. And the deal runs a year longer.
Is Lindholm at least defensively responsible these days ?
Boston wins this trade. But Vancouver has to trade Miller. I wouldn't be thrilled but at least on paper, the 2nd line center is covered.
500-750k retention on Lindholm is probably all you can ask. He's 2 years younger than MillerIt would be about the retention amount.
I really feel for you VAN fans after the great season last year. But you're delusional if you don't think Vancouver has lost a lot of leverage with the way things have developed.It was already known they have to trade 1 if not both, nothing has changed.
How dumb do you think these GM's are?
Lindholm would have a no movement clause. Perhaps, He prefers Vancouver for lifestyle.Miller for Lindholm
The Vancouver side would want some retention since that was a free agent deal with some overpay built in. And the deal runs a year longer.
Is Lindholm at least defensively responsible these days ?
Boston wins this trade. But Vancouver has to trade Miller. I wouldn't be thrilled but at least on paper, the 2nd line center is covered.
Not sure if you know but Dylan Cozens had back to back 1 assist gamesBest be moving on then.
I was not aware of this, now I am intrigued.Not sure if you know but Dylan Cozens had back to back 1 assist games
Yea it’s more or less Rutherford explaining why we may see Miller and/or Pettersson moved at a discount but him also asserting that they aren’t just going to move them for nothing either.There isn't really a way to spin this interview into "it hurts the return".
If we ascribe to this notion, we also ascribe to the fact that NHL GM's, whose jobs and careers are on the line, and are (potentially) actively dealing with the Canucks on an ongoing basis, have not been aware that there was a rift. If Rutherford is now telling media? He has been telling other teams for ages. Why do we think these offers are so low in comparison to where they otherwise might be?
The interview does not lower a return even more, the content of the interview is why offers are already so low.
There is no shot on planet earth that a potentially interested GM, who may be deep in conversation about a deal, is on his way home from the office, flips on the radio, hears this interview and thinks "holy hell, now I've got him!".