Bunting wasn't a major part of the value in that deal, though. I totally believe Dubas would take back a NHL player to "stay competitive" in a deal, but taking back Hoglander as a big chip doesn't seem to line up with that. If Hoglander would be in the deal, I'd still expect a 2nd and a prospect to be included on top of him.
I could see something like Hoglander, Mynio and a 2nd for Pettersson and Beauvillier making some sense, and I don't really mind that deal on paper.
The "value" on this probably isn't too far off of what i'd expect it to cost for Pettersson, given the dearth of other steady, reliable Top-4D likely to be "on the market" this year. I actually like Mynio's trajectory and would push for that be maybe be a different guy...but realistically, he's still probably a B prospect at best and likely quite far away (if ever). So on "value", that's not unreasonable.
And Hoglander's value is tough to assess. He's such a weird player...in that he'll probably get you ~15G+ and ~35pts whether he's playing on your top line or your 4th line with scrubs. Like a Brandon Sutter...or Kasperi Kapanen type. Decent production "floor" but a very low "ceiling". Even the contract he just signed is ambiguous. It's either decent value in a rising cap world, for a very "self-sufficient 35pt - goal skewed" sort of 3rd/4th line player. Or it's too much for a "tweener". But i can also see where that may...or may not appeal to the Penguins, depending on what Dubas prioritizes.
Also, as mentioned, the Canucks really have no want or need for Beauvillier back. They just finished getting rid of him. Even at a lower salary, he really wasn't a Tocchet player, and the Canucks are pretty full up on "filler" utility players better than Beauvillier. Even moving Hoglander, they're probably fine...but even if not, i'd reckon they'd rather just go out and backfill that spot with a separate deal for someone who fits a "role" better.
