I think you are going to be shocked at what future cap hits are. That 11.6 is going to look good even at current production 4 years down the road let alone in 2032.
1. if you want Pettersson, part with one of the trio of Fantilli/Johnson/Marchenko + Voronkov. So two lines are weakened by two quality players and Petterrson is no Crosby.even if sillinger is the "perfect" third line center (he's not) a fantilli-monahan-sillinger trio down the middle isn't nearly as good as pettersson-fantilli-monahan in the long run.
compare that to:
chinakhov - pettersson - johnsonvoronkov - monahan - marchenkojenner - fantilli - xxxzar - danforth - olivierwhere xxx could be:
that's two top scoring lines, a third line center who should grow into carrying his own line, and boone jenner in a role where he can go all-out on every shift.
- a top prospect (del bel belluz or brindley)
- a gus nyquist type deadline add
- an under-the-radar UFA next year (a la marchessault/verhaeghe)
We can give them a year, they will not agree to the offer as proposed.They can want that til the cows come home, but if no team is offering anything close to that, then they're stuck with the pieces they want to move. The point is that they're underwhelmed with their offers. We don't need to outbid ourselves and hand them the moon.
this asserts that:No I would say he isn't very good the way he's playing right now. We could easily have a couple better centers than the current EP.
taking this at face value, you're saying that the trade can only be judged by the state of pettersson's play seven years from now, and not from the total value he would provide over the next seven years.Or some time before 2032 - this is a long term bet we're talking about.
yeah because if there's two groups of people whose hockey opinions you should take at face value, it's HF posters and Vancouver Canucks fans.What I have in mind is the constant debates on HF about what's wrong with EP.
real life isn't NHL25. pettersson is a distressed asset. their GM himself even said to temper expectations for a trade return, and the multiple sources (including the athletic yesterday) said that sillinger + picks would be the foundation of the trade.1. if you want Pettersson, part with one of the trio of Fantilli/Johnson/Marchenko + Voronkov. So two lines are weakened by two quality players and Petterrson is no Crosby.
if fantilli has to be in the top six, he can be swapped with chinakhov, making jenner the 3C.2. don't know what's the point of putting Fantilli on the 3rd line.
the third lines on the last two cup winners:3. if you watch the SC winners, the third line was like classic forchecking, played hard. Of course she had to be able to attack. For me the benchmark is the Coleman - Gourde - Goodrow line.
pettersson's NMC kicks in this summer. if they're gonna move him (seems likely!) now is pretty much the only time they can do it.We can give them a year, they will not agree to the offer as proposed.
If Pettersson costs any of Fantilli/Johnson/Marchenko + Voronkov/ Mateychuck the deal is off. EP40 is only a win for us if those guys are on the team. We are not desperate to add Pettersson and he is not gold plated (i.e. Rantanen). Using the Rantanen Deal as a similar format it was essentially Rantenan and Hall for Necas and a Third. Pettersson is much less valuable than Rantanen before you add any of the additional negatives that have appeared this year.1. if you want Pettersson, part with one of the trio of Fantilli/Johnson/Marchenko + Voronkov. So two lines are weakened by two quality players and Petterrson is no Crosby.
1. That doesn't mean he's going to agree with Sillinger and anyone.real life isn't NHL25. pettersson is a distressed asset. their GM himself even said to temper expectations for a trade return, and the multiple sources (including the athletic yesterday) said that sillinger + picks would be the foundation of the trade.
if fantilli has to be in the top six, he can be swapped with chinakhov, making jenner the 3C.
the third lines on the last two cup winners:
I'd wager that a "jenner-fantilli-[literally anyone]" line would stack up favorably against those two.
- florida: luostarinen-lundell-tarasenko
- vegas: howden-karlsson-amadio
pettersson's NMC kicks in this summer. if they're gonna move him (seems likely!) now is pretty much the only time they can do it.
this asserts that:
assertion #1 in particular is striking to me considering that you've spent the last few months on this board saying that fantilli isn't even a center!
- fantilli being a point per game player over his last 12 games is a better indicator of success than pettersson being a point per game player over his last 312 games
- monahan is less of an injury concern than pettersson (despite being older and having missed far more games per season)
- sillinger/DBB are better bets to far surpass their projection than pettersson is to keep his current form (let alone rebound to what he showed for 400 games before this year)
taking this at face value, you're saying that the trade can only be judged by the state of pettersson's play seven years from now, and not from the total value he would provide over the next seven years.
6 points in his last 17 games.It doesn't assert any of that. It's an acknowledgement of the uncertainty around EP's performance and I was specifically talking about his current play (6 pts in his last 17 games).
again, the idea is to have a 1-2 punch with him and fantilli.Again, not what I'm saying. Sure if he gets surpassed in 2030 or 2032 it wouldn't be a big deal but there are a lot of years between now and then and it wouldn't be a wild scenario if Fantilli or someone else or multiple players surpassed EP before then.
that current low bar is, based on the net ratings in the athletic's model, higher than all CBJ forwards except for monahan and marchenko.Depending on his play it might be a low bar for our boys to clear. We don't know. There are very big risks to our organization here.
you're assuming an asset cost that is far higher than what the actual reported asset cost is. that cost also clearly appears to be trending downward. if it happens to trend back upward and hit the level you said, it's a no-go for the jackets. simple as that.1. That doesn't mean he's going to agree with Sillinger and anyone.
right, i'm saying that tarasenko has been a plug for the last 2-3 years. a line of (for example) jenner-fantilli-brindley would be a great third line that could play defensively-focused minutes and present danger in the offensive zone.2. Tarasenko of the 2023/24 season is not Tarasenko of the days when St. Louis won the SC. That's why it wasn't a horror that he played on the third line.