Management Threads | Structure. Standards. Habits.

[MS]

This.

The confirmation bias hindsight nonsense is endless.

Recall please that we all laughed at that proposed deal and found it insulting.

But then Miller had a rough start, Chytil had a good stretch. And the hindsight bias folks come out in droves.

It's double hindsight because there's also this LUNDQVIST WOULD HAVE GOT A 1ST thing because a failing prospect received an shocking return in a trade after the deal. And a) we probably don't trade Lundqvist if we get him and b) there was no way to know a random team overvalued him like that.

That trade offer sucked.

It was a fungible middle-6 mostly-winger in Chytil, a failing prospect in Lundqvist (who finished this year being healthy scratched 28 straight times) and the #30 overall pick in the worst draft in recent memory. There's just nothing of substantial value there and the team was 100% correct to walk away from it, which pretty much everyone agreed with at the time until Chytil had a fluke run and someone else overpaid for Lundqvist.

 

[MarkusNaslund19]

It's double hindsight because there's also this LUNDQVIST WOULD HAVE GOT A 1ST thing because a failing prospect received an shocking return in a trade after the deal. And a) we probably don't trade Lundqvist if we get him and b) there was no way to know a random team overvalued him like that.

That trade offer sucked.

It was a fungible middle-6 mostly-winger in Chytil, a failing prospect in Lundqvist (who finished this year being healthy scratched 28 straight times) and the #30 overall pick in the worst draft in recent memory. There's just nothing of substantial value there and the team was 100% correct to walk away from it, which pretty much everyone agreed with at the time until Chytil had a fluke run and someone else overpaid for Lundqvist.

It was, at best, the very opening volley in a trade negotiation. But one that you leave the table insulted by if that's literally a team's final offer.

 

[mriswith]

No one who was fine with passing on it at the time expected that we'd extend Miller in summer to a 7 year deal. We were fine passing on it in expectation of a better offer or at worst an equivalent deal but with a 2023 1st and players that were a better stylistic fit at this years deadline.

Lots of people who disapproved of taking the deal at the time would have changed their opinion on whether the deal was acceptable or not if they knew the alternative was a massive extension in summer. And that's overlooking that it seems to have been an opening offer, not necessarily their best, and retention was certainly not discussed.

Also every contending GM is stupid for not beating that offer out and landing 2 years of Miller for cup runs.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

It's double hindsight because there's also this LUNDQVIST WOULD HAVE GOT A 1ST thing because a failing prospect received an shocking return in a trade after the deal. And a) we probably don't trade Lundqvist if we get him and b) there was no way to know a random team overvalued him like that.

That trade offer sucked.

It was a fungible middle-6 mostly-winger in Chytil, a failing prospect in Lundqvist (who finished this year being healthy scratched 28 straight times) and the #30 overall pick in the worst draft in recent memory. There's just nothing of substantial value there and the team was 100% correct to walk away from it, which pretty much everyone agreed with at the time until Chytil had a fluke run and someone else overpaid for Lundqvist.

This is only true if you ignore Millers age and cap hit and our potential contention window.

 

[MarkusNaslund19]

This is only true if you ignore Millers age and cap hit and our potential contention window.

He's going to have one year at this year's percentage of cap at which point he will be an elite top line winger or 2nd line center.

The cap is going to go up appreciably after next season. 8 million will fairly soon likely be about what 6.5 is now.

Add to this that the free agent market is bereft of talent this season.

For the record, if we can swing two firsts for him, use one of them and trade one for a younger decent 2nd line center prospect/young guy then I'm all for it.

But trading him for peanuts is how you become a salted earth team like Chicago and that's not where we are.

 

[MS]

It was, at best, the very opening volley in a trade negotiation. But one that you leave the table insulted by if that's literally a team's final offer.

It seems like that was the point NYR got to pretty deep in negotiations. And fair enough.

They wanted to get an impact player without touching their core high-value young players, with a quantity over quality package. We were demanding a prime young asset. Both teams held their ground.

Sometimes both teams play their hands correctly but there just isn't a deal to be worked out.

 

[Diversification]

It's double hindsight because there's also this LUNDQVIST WOULD HAVE GOT A 1ST thing because a failing prospect received an shocking return in a trade after the deal. And a) we probably don't trade Lundqvist if we get him and b) there was no way to know a random team overvalued him like that.

That trade offer sucked.

It was a fungible middle-6 mostly-winger in Chytil, a failing prospect in Lundqvist (who finished this year being healthy scratched 28 straight times) and the #30 overall pick in the worst draft in recent memory. There's just nothing of substantial value there and the team was 100% correct to walk away from it, which pretty much everyone agreed with at the time until Chytil had a fluke run and someone else overpaid for Lundqvist.

A big factor at the time was the likelihood that Miller was going to walk as a UFA and we would be left with no return or whatever we could grab next TDL. I remember that many people were worried about that scenario at the time, that we had missed our opportunity to unload him at peak value.

 

[MS]

A big factor at the time was the likelihood that Miller was going to walk as a UFA and we would be left with no return or whatever we could grab next TDL. I remember that many people were worried about that scenario at the time, that we had missed our opportunity to unload him at peak value.

That NYR deal wasn't peak value and isn't any better than you would have expected to get at the 2023 deadline for a pending UFA Miller.

I wanted a big haul for Miller, too, and I'm still confused as to why he was so undervalued by the league. But they tried to deal him and there just wasn't the market.

 

[Hodgy]

Provorov worth nothing at 30% retained is just another reminder that its going to be extremely difficult for the Canucks to make any meaningful improvements to this team this summer without mortgaging more of the future.

I guess we can hope that Provorov's worth was even further depreciated due to off ice issues.

 

[arttk]

Provorov worth nothing at 30% retained is just another reminder that its going to be extremely difficult for the Canucks to make any meaningful improvements to this team this summer without mortgaging more of the future.

I guess we can hope that Provorov's worth was even further depreciated due to off ice issues.

The reason his value is down is due to his play + the whole LGBTQ thing.

 

[credulous]

provorov is a good comparable for myers because both were highly regarded but can't actually play hockey

 

[geebster]

The reason his value is down is due to his play + the whole LGBTQ thing.

I second this. If a player's off ice actions make the team have to defend their brand or they lose potential customers/money because of you....you are not going to be a valuable commodity. I doubt Provorov is a positive revenue player right now.

His on ice performance wasn't enough to make up for it either in the way Evander Kane's might for example.

 

[F A N]

Provorov worth nothing at 30% retained is just another reminder that its going to be extremely difficult for the Canucks to make any meaningful improvements to this team this summer without mortgaging more of the future.

I guess we can hope that Provorov's worth was even further depreciated due to off ice issues.

Well Provorov wasn't traded for nothing. He was traded for Grens (who was talked about here as a trade target), Walker (worth a mid round pick at the deadline), this year's 1st (22nd), and two future 2nds. They had to take Cal Petersen's contract of course. It's a good return if you don't view Provorov as a 1st pairing Dman (which most don't).

A simpler way to look at it is that Columbus gave up Kings' 1st and a 2nd round pick for a salary retained Provorov.

 

[arttk]

I second this. If a player's off ice actions make the team have to defend their brand or they lose potential customers/money because of you....you are not going to be a valuable commodity. I doubt Provorov is a positive revenue player right now.

His on ice performance wasn't enough to make up for it either in the way Evander Kane's might for example.

Yeah I imagine he is probably not an option for a lot of teams based in progressive cities.

 

[racerjoe]

Well Provorov wasn't traded for nothing. He was traded for Grens (who was talked about here as a trade target), Walker (worth a mid round pick at the deadline), this year's 1st (22nd), and two future 2nds. They had to take Cal Petersen's contract of course. It's a good return if you don't view Provorov as a 1st pairing Dman (which most don't).

A simpler way to look at it is that Columbus gave up Kings' 1st and a 2nd round pick for a salary retained Provorov.

That value seems familar for a top 4 dman... and I can't remember why...

 

[me2]

You're agreeing with my point, I think. Because I concur that it's basically a platitude trending towards positive. I was speaking to those who read the tea leaves to say 'he's gone for sure. He said he want to win! That's code for he's gone!!!".

That describes the anti-rebuild crowd for the last few years. Yet they sucked anyway and he's still here...

 

[strattonius]

provorov is a good comparable for myers because both were highly regarded but can't actually play hockey

Provorov is so much better you can't be serious.

 

[Cancuks]

The Kings paid a lot to dump Peterson and Walker. I really like Grans as a prospect and I would have given up the 11th for him no problem. Exactly what we needed for Hughes.

 

[MS]

The Kings paid a lot to dump Peterson and Walker. I really like Grans as a prospect and I would have given up the 11th for him no problem. Exactly what we needed for Hughes.

Grans was shit in the AHL this year and regressed badly.

 

[Nucker101]

The Kings paid a lot to dump Peterson and Walker. I really like Grans as a prospect and I would have given up the 11th for him no problem. Exactly what we needed for Hughes.

Yikes. Thank God you're not GM

 

[aight]

Yikes. Thank God you're not GM

No kidding. The 11th is imperative for creating cap space to make a Cup run this coming season. Not some stupid long term futures fluff.

 

[Canuck Luck]

The Kings paid a lot to dump Peterson and Walker. I really like Grans as a prospect and I would have given up the 11th for him no problem. Exactly what we needed for Hughes.

This right here folks is an example of why you look at more than just height, weight and stats,

I guarantee this poster didn't look at anything else because if he did, he would know Grans is an OFD and probably worse than Hughes defensively. Aside from having size, everything else about Grans is the opposite of what we need for Hughes.

 

[MS]

I've watched Grans probably 10 or so times against Abbotsford over the past two seasons.

I was intrigued by his size/puck skills last year as a teenager in the AHL and kind of excused the defensive issues because he was very young for the level but he didn't really improve defensively this year and regressed badly offensively. Timid player.

The upside there is probably Cody Franson who was a tall, skilled #5 defender who was never better than rickety defensively. Or he might be a Patrick Wiercioch.

 

[HairyKneel]

No kidding. The 11th is imperative for creating cap space to make a Cup run this coming season. Not some stupid long term futures fluff.

Says who?

Nobody thinks the team is making a cup run.

Speaking of fluff…….

 

[ahmon]

This right here folks is an example of why you look at more than just height, weight and stats,

I guarantee this poster didn't look at anything else because if he did, he would know Grans is an OFD and probably worse than Hughes defensively. Aside from having size, everything else about Grans is the opposite of what we need for Hughes.

was going to post that. Grans is a puck moving dman with size, who still needs to work on his Dzone coverage. He's also not very physical or mean.