Friedman: Rutherford/Allvin done assessing Canucks - Everyone available except Pettersson, Hughes, Demko

[Eggtimer]

Not a hot take at all but I feel that a Rangers and Canucks trade is pretty likely. Rangers are very deep in assets and Miller would be an amazing fit for them.
As a Devils fan , I’d hate to see that and want Miller myself on the Devils but I can’t see Miller wanting to resign there and no point giving up a ton of assets for Miller when we are not going to be competing durig his current contract. If we knew we could resign him , then hell yes I’d offer a crap ton for him.

I really like Horvat as well but with Hughes Nico and Mercer already in place, would t make sense to pay what it would take.

Only other player that fills a need would be Podkolzin but can’t see the Canucks move a very good young prospect.

 

[BlueBaron]

I was under the impression they were warming to keeping Miller which I think they should.

It says a lot about the last guy they covet so little of what he left behind

 

[kanucks25]

I was under the impression they were warming to keeping Miller which I think they should.

It says a lot about the last guy they covet so little of what he left behind

Benning obviously provided some good pieces through his accidental tank (the 3 untouchables) but the roster is flawed, he had no idea how to build a team.

As for Miller, I'm sure they would prefer to keep him but it's a major risk - both in terms of what his next contract will be, and if he even wants to stay.

 

[kanucks25]

Is Vancouver retooling or rebuilding? If it's retooling, would they have interest in Burns with a max retention of two mil? Don't think there's a deal to be had if they're rebuilding.

Won't be fully rebuilding.

JR said himself that he wants to open up cap space but I don't think that's to take on bad contracts or cap dumps. It's likely to get players on the cheap via trade without giving salary back.

 

[Boondock]

Garland

for

OTT 2nd (~40th overall) or Jarventie (33rd in 2020)
Canucks 3rd

I'm probably way off but I also have no idea what the Nucks want/need

A 2nd and a 3rd!! how could the Canucks say no????? Might be a 7th or future considerations light, but pretty clo.........

What type of reply where you honestly hoping to get with such an poor offer?

 

[pld459666]

NYR Fans please just stop...

I have seen numerous posts about a 1st, 2nd and top prospect for either guy.

in this offer, you get the 1st, 5th and 9th prospects on the Rangers, you are also getting a solid player in Chytil that has shown the ability to produce points at .5 pts per game clip.

I'm not going to try to convince you it's a good deal, you can determine that on your own, but it's not like you are getting crap either.

 

[KevinRedkey]

A 2nd and a 3rd!! how could the Canucks say no????? Might be a 7th or future considerations light, but pretty clo.........

What type of reply where you honestly hoping to get with such an poor offer?

I expected no less than a childish reply. Was hoping for more, but no such luck today.

 

[The Nightman]

Garland is gonna have to grow a few inches before any team takes interest. Right @The Nightman ?

Great player, but he’s tiny. As my evidence showed. I mean just look at those pics that were definitely not edited, especially by me.

 

[elitepete]

Cost on Horvat/Miller to NYR? I get both have different values but I don’t see how Vancouver keeps them both with EP40 there as well

Horvat for Lundkvist+1st+2nd?

Miller for ???

Schneider and Kakko are off limits.

You're not getting Horvat for that dogshit offer

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Won't be fully rebuilding.

JR said himself that he wants to open up cap space but I don't think that's to take on bad contracts or cap dumps. It's likely to get players on the cheap via trade without giving salary back.

I don't think Burns with some retention is a bad contract or cap dump but it doesn't mean it makes sense for them.

 

[GirardSpinorama]

Gonna be a long rebuild if they want to tear the team down to the bones like that. You'd think at least a couple of more players would be worth keeping as part of the core.

 

[elitepete]

Chytil, Lundkvist, Kravtsov, Robertson NYR 1st in 22, Blues 2nd in 22

for

Horvat and Garland

Lol. Price for both of them is Lafreniere, Schneider, 1st

 

[kanucks25]

I don't think Burns with some retention is a bad contract or cap dump but it doesn't mean it makes sense for them.

Maybe not but yeah doesn't fit what we're aiming for.

 

[elitepete]

Garland

for

OTT 2nd (~40th overall) or Jarventie (33rd in 2020)
Canucks 3rd

I'm probably way off but I also have no idea what the Nucks want/need

Garland is ridiculously underrated. I don't see him going anywhere if these are the types of offers.

 

[Boondock]

I expected no less than a childish reply. Was hoping for more, but no such luck today.

Provide content where a childish reply is not the only option and you might get a difference response.

 

[KevinRedkey]

Garland is ridiculously underrated. I don't see him going anywhere if these are the types of offers.

Fair enough

 

[kanucks25]

Gonna be a long rebuild if they want to tear the team down to the bones like that. You'd think at least a couple of more players would be worth keeping as part of the core.

Everyone is available but they won't be trading everyone, I assume. Probably just 1 or 2 guys depending on the return.

 

[pld459666]

Lol. Price for both of them is Lafreniere, Schneider, 1st

I can appreciate that as an ask.

I will politely decline and wish you all the best.

Horvat and Garland are two very nice players. If I were the Canucks, they would both be on that untouchable list

 

[Boondock]

Gonna be a long rebuild if they want to tear the team down to the bones like that. You'd think at least a couple of more players would be worth keeping as part of the core.

Are you misunderstanding that a player not being untouchable is the same as a player being traded for sure? No one said they were tearing the team down to the bone, no one said they were trading anybody. What was indicated is that there are 3 players that the management group will not be taking offers on, everyone else they will listen. Listening and tearing the team down to the studs are very different.

 

[elitepete]

I can appreciate that as an ask.

I will politely decline and wish you all the best.

Horvat and Garland are two very nice players. If I were the Canucks, they would both be on that untouchable list

I don't think it's that likely that they get traded. Management is just exploring offers. More likely that Miller, Boeser, and depth players like Motte & Schenn get traded.

 

[GirardSpinorama]

Are you misunderstanding that a player not being untouchable is the same as a player being traded for sure? No one said they were tearing the team down to the bone, no one said they were trading anybody. What was indicated is that there are 3 players that the management group will not be taking offers on, everyone else they will listen. Listening and tearing the team down to the studs are very different.

That's just "hockey GM" talk. No GM ever says they want to get rid of all their players. If the evaluation comes back and only three players are untouchable. That speaks volumes of how much management thinks about the team's readiness for contention.

 

[iFan]

I have seen numerous posts about a 1st, 2nd and top prospect for either guy.

in this offer, you get the 1st, 5th and 9th prospects on the Rangers, you are also getting a solid player in Chytil that has shown the ability to produce points at .5 pts per game clip.

I'm not going to try to convince you it's a good deal, you can determine that on your own, but it's not like you are getting crap either.

it's crap, we don't need or want Lundkvist or depth players for one of our top players.

 

[GirardSpinorama]

3 players is not a core. Even borderline playoff teams need more than 3 players in their core. When you are willing to "listen to offers" on all players except for 3, it means the core isn't sufficient and the team needs to find two more core pieces. That generally means high picks, or super good trades.

 

[Boondock]

That's just "hockey GM" talk. No GM ever says they want to get rid of all their players. If the evaluation comes back and only three players are untouchable. That speaks volumes of how much management thinks about the team's readiness for contention.

I think it definitely speaks volumes of how much the new management group liked the team the previous brain trust built. But I don't think this is any different than any new management group looking at all options since they don't have any personal connection to the players they inherited.

 

[Peter Griffin]

I don't think Burns with some retention is a bad contract or cap dump but it doesn't mean it makes sense for them.

Vancouver needs to shed salary from their defense, adding Burns doesn't help.