Rumor: Just Kidding! Pettersson and JT Miller Trade Reunion!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Canucks fans, what's the pulse with respect to which player you move, and is there any appetite to move both and really change the DNA of the roster? Maybe Miller now, and Pettersson in the off-season? I realize it's the nuclear option, but if you can tap into some young players with upside, maybe you can do a quick "retool."
 
I don't know what this is accomplishing. Moving Swayman for a broken Demko is a rebuild move and adding Miller is a win now move.

The simplicity (if the NMCs can be worked out so maybe not so simple) of Elias Lindhom with a million bucks in retention for JT Miller is appealing. Lindholm slides into #2C in Vancouver and at 6.75 can be fine at 3C if Vancouver can upgrade over the next few years.

For Boston

Marchand Miller ???
Geekie Zacha Pasta
Frederic ??? ???

And fill in with Coyle, Poitras, Lysell, Merkulov, Brazeau depending on the chemistry. You probably want to move Carlo out to a team like Buffalo or Ottawa that is young forward rich but really could use a defensive minded RD to balance out the top 4 pairings.
It was more of a joke/attempt to get as many Canucks in Boston and vice-versa.

I wonder if a Canucks fan could compile a trade using the largest amount of players swapping for laughs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wintersej
Byram is no Dahlin or Quinn Hughes, but he will 100% be a dynamic player to anchor the second D pairing in VAN. He still has some potential upside left as well. Power is technically higher value due to his age and potential (and size). Cozens is a good player; he is not at his peak. He will fill a center role in VAN. I still think there is 2C in him.
 
Byram is no Dahlin or Quinn Hughes, but he will 100% be a dynamic player to anchor the second D pairing in VAN. He still has some potential upside left as well. Power is technically higher value due to his age and potential (and size). Cozens is a good player; he is not at his peak. He will fill a center role in VAN. I still think there is 2C in him.
In fact, he sometimes shows it, he’s just inconsistent, like most of our players.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WeDislikeEich
Been seeing some smoke with Rangers (again) about Lafreniere and Vancouver, maybe a base there or maybe Drury is getting impatient and its a 1 for 1. Who knows, even though it has been posted of why the last trade between the two failed (draft pick), Elliotte said that was not the case and that they do not know all the details of why that trade failed. Maybe the Canucks are holding out for Laf (Peteys wing) or Schneider or maybe it is something bigger like Miller and Boeser together?

Who knows but I hope this all figures itself out soon and the Canucks can move forward. I know people are blaming the front office for this drama but I think they have done as well as they can. They tried to fix it internally, talked to both players and they seemed to make it work (last year) but something happened this year to make it untenable. I just hope this drama ends and we can build a team around Hughes and Petey (over a point a game without Miller in the lineup).
 
Very much so. The line "it might not even be a second line centre." is so strangely specific and unnecessary unless that's exactly what they're getting back, a guy who's more of a 3C and not a 2C lmao.

If the Sabres are as much into the EP40 talks as is rumored -- that quote could easily describe both Cozens and Krebs. Cozens has 2C upside.....but has lost his way the last 12 months or so. Krebs likely doesn't have 2C potential anymore, but he could be a very good 3C.

I mean......I think it's entirely in the realm of possibility that Vancouver could snag Cozens AND Krebs in an EP40 deal with Buffalo, figuring that at worst Krebs is a top 6 winger who could be a center and Krebs could be the long-term 3C (or 4C)
 
Its interesting to see two minds on Rutherford's interview yesterday.
I tend to view this as a positive.
Denial would have created more questions, well relinquishing the opportunity to relieve pressure from the issue.

Teams now know he is serious in moving one or both and it could create more interest. It could go the other way but injuries on teams are starting to factor for contenders needing to push.
 
Is there a reason why Rutherford decided to reveal everything in that interview? Talk about adding fuel to the fire.
 
You believe Barzal is a higher impact player?
I think I would rather have Barzal at 9M than anyone with any type of question mark at 11.6. Work ethic question marks, long term injury question marks, being half of the equation of needing to completely blow up a team. You don’t trade your most talented player on a gamble.

That’s not saying I don’t want Petterson on the Isles… it just doesn’t really make sense to deal Barzal for him. I would make Dobson available in a trade for either Petterson or Miller though.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad