If we trade him to NJ, the time is next year near the trade deadline ... Say a major player , a top prospect and 2 1st's and a 2nd. Assuming NJ is looking like a "contender".
I agree at the TDL BUT not to NJD. They can't or wouldn't destroy their line up to equal the value of Hughes and those they would trade would be the one's they feel they can do without, leftovers. Unless it is a three team trade.
If Hughes continues to blow out scoring records here and stay in the apex of NHL defencemen there would be almost no forwards of the same stature available in the league now.
IMO there are 3 that could equal or be close to his value that MIGHT be attainable, Misa, McKenna and DuPont, all very young and as much pro experience as Willander, which is none. But all are starting off so there is nowhere but up and offer years of watching player improvement. Any could step into the show immediately and score as well as most of the forwards do now.
GMs seeking INSTANT GRATIFICATION would snap at a chance to trade a player not on their roster for a player of his caliber and a first(s) can be forgotten with success.
Buffalo doesn't need more top picks, that market has had great ones, they need wins and QH would help them do that, they have the future star level players already.
SJ is the same, they need wins more than hope
And Chicago need to "please" their super star and pump up the defence.
IMO him going to any of those teams give them instant winning at a invisible cost because like Vancouver, those markets have milked "hope" until there is very little left.
Why trade a super star for merely decent players? Why not do something similar that took 10 years here in 2 yrs instead. Making the playoffs next year for one year isn't the same as 10 years.
They should know enough to make their plan, I think July1 this year for negotiating with his agent/him, I think they can do that but not sign if agreed until he is in the last year of his contract. I doubt there would be much to discuss, he gets 20% of the cap and then only the term and clauses need be worked out. Obviously the Canucks will want to max out everything but the term would be an issue because after the first 100 million in 5 years he still might want to move on to play for a cup. Or resign for an additional 200 mil, that would be around 6 years or 30 mil a season by then and he would be THE player they have to keep. He would be 37/38 at the end of those two contacts and had over 20% of the total cap every year. 1/5th of the entire team's payroll.
It isn't like Edmonton, Vegas, Minnesota, Colorado, Dallas, Los Angles, Utah, even Calgary (with 4 1rst's the next two years) are suddenly going to tank. Utah has had 3 times the number of injuries to starters than the Canucks and still have 18 picks in the next two years. They all have more younger players on those teams and Utah and Buffalo both have the same number of RW's (26) as the Canucks.
That doesn't mean I am calling for a tank, just a bold and daring trade while QH is still under team control for the betterment of the franchise. One player for 2 or 3 studs and playoffs for another decade. One player does not make a TEAM, Bure didn't, Linden didn't, Naslund didn't, the Sedins were almost enough but did help keep the team in the playoffs for 11 of 14 years.
