Wow. That’s a 1OA pick team. Your 3rd line is far better than the 2nd

Don't think the Pens are gonna move two first rounders for anything short of an unbelievable trade

Didn't put really any thought into the lines. The point of it all is to get out from long term contracts by taking on short term bad ones and also gaining picks. So after 23-24 the Canucks are all of sudden building again. Theyd have cap space and a pretty good chest of prospects.

You never know what to believe but the rumour was they had offered 2 1st for JT Miller at this deadline. Not sure if anything else was involved. That said Pitts 1st have literally no value to them. You have a shrinking window. Gotta give Crosby and co one last chance to go for it.

Yeah while Hextall was the gm. Just not sure if OEL is worth paying that much for four more years. Reminds me of trading for Petry and don't think the pens need another Petry.

Really bad team.

Rebuilding the next few seasons is really going to waste EP and QH seasons while you have them. 3-4 years later, what’s left with their contracts?

I would hate to lose out on the 40oa pick but how can you not do this? Capitals say yes

That is WAAAAAAAYYYY too much money to retain on OEL

Man you made this team even worse and only got back 2 late 1st rounder picks

So you're on board with what management are doing currently I take it.

To me it's short sighted. We wont be able to build a contender if we trade so many picks and don't obtain extra picks. Especially given the bad contracts we have and we know we will have.

If you take a yr or two to sort the problem out all of sudden you have the depth and ELCs to compete. And Petey and Hughes are still only like 26-27.

I did a lot more than that. I got out of the contracts that are sure to kill us in the future. It was kinda the point of the whole exercise. It's called rebuild.

Whatever you do you gotta just go all in. This isn't a bad idea. OEL at 3.6 is fine.

You missed the point of the exercise I think.

Not really. We are considering buying him out currently. The guy is useless if anyone is willing to take him an eat half his salary that is a huge win for the Canucks.

So ELC are good to have IF they are legit NHL ready. Most aren’t… that 1-2 years becomes 3-4 for sure. And the picks you recouped are low so that’s more of a sign that 3-4 years is realistic. You mention the age of EP and QH but their contracts years is the important part. That’s also the age they become UFAs and could relocate. There’s no reason to move some of those guys with term. I would be happy with what they are doing yes. Bad year but once Demko found his game they were a hot team. JT and Garland at their best is better than the cap hits. If they have a bad season which most players have from time to time then sure, it sucks.. the move might be trade BB this TDL or next depending how VAN is doing. That will free up enough space and ass the cap goes up you could sign a big name but without the current core it’s less appealing. VAN should have been higher in the standings had Demko played like Demko. Trying to tank isn’t the answer when you’re basically a playoff team. Garland and Mikeyev will be better, Kuz was excellent. OEL is probably the only piece I would desperately try to move but that’s on the GM that’s made that move… so bad. Actually much of the D is making too much and needs upgrades/overpaid. The route you want to take is instantaneous rebuild which could only happen if you got bedard this year, but then again, you would have an even better team with him.. trying to sign UFAs in the summer will be fun. Which ones are better than JTM?

I wouldn't call what I'm proposing a rebuild. It's more take one step back to take two forward. And we should have done it this yr so what im proposing is even more difficult but still the right decision despite that. The biggest problem I see with this team is that they want to try to win now and don't have the depth or the d core to compete and then if you assume the future means cap space and prospects it doesn't really because we have two obvious anchors. OEL and JTM. OEL we agree. As for JTM he is a really good player but most of what he does is score. That is to say his overall game and underlying numbers aren't good. The problem comes that he is signed until he is 38 yrs old at 8 mil. Each yr that is gonna look a little worse. Hell for the first half of this yr we almost didn't want him. He also has a NMC that kicks in with the new contract so this is the time.

As for your idea that Petey or Hughes would walk they are both secured long term and the main reason they would walk is if the team isn't competing which they wont do by making win now moves every yr and never just accruing picks and prospects. The teams window now is one yr while Petey and Hronek take up 11.7 in cap because the yr after that it could be 18-19 between the two.

As for UFAs I don't think you need to sign anyone this yr. I'd be open to taking expiring contracts with the little cap we'd have and turning them into picks. Then looking to make a splash on a UFA in 24' perhaps. Wow would Bedard be the savior here. In reality we have a 3.5% chance of being good in the next half decade. My proposal improves the d, gets 1st round picks that won't be super late, gets out from onerous contracts and leaves a whole at 2c. I think that is better than no picks, no cap space, same terrible d core, bad contracts going forward and JTM as your 2c till hes 38.

Well as long as you don’t expect ELC guys to be big contributors and that 4 years from now of grooming those ELC they are legit competitors then those 2-3 big names on the roster might be happy enough

It's not just about ELCs too. It's about developing players in roles you set for them. And then signing them to relative bargain deals as RFAs too. You basically never get a bargain in UFA and don't even know what you're getting much of the time.

I think I'm gonna say this to anyone who says the picks are gonna take 3-4 yrs...do you think we will want good young players in 3-4 yrs or not?

Guys like Petey and Hughes want to win the cup not trade all our futures so we can sneak into the playoffs.

Honest question, given that we've been going all in for the last 4 yrs do you think it's been the right decision each yr? is there an excuse for each yrs failure? what do we have to show for just continually trading picks?

Last year you drafted in the 1st round. That’s not all in. 2 or 3 years ago you went all in sure, conference finals isn’t failure. Lol. I imagine you paid a 1st for OEL and that is just absurd but I guess the GM wanted to boost the team back to playoffs success. Last season and this season wasn’t all in and now what do you have to show for it? None of the prospects will be close to JTM for quite some time. You won’t get a UFA of his caliber for his cap hit either. So a player that can’t be replaced should be kept unless tank/rebuild is the plan

This franchise has missed the playoffs 7 of the 8 yrs. The one yr they made the playoffs was the bubble yr. They got lucky and won a couple rounds but it was bubble hockey. Not a lot can be learned from it. At that point they had number of really good young players and some bad contracts with guys like Eriksson, Beagle, Roussel. Instead of just letting the contracts expire they tried to make a hero play and went all in acquiring OEL and Garland. They gave up a top 10 pick and their 2nd a top 40 pick. Before that in 2019 they traded their 1st and 3rd for Miller only for it to be lottery pick and pushed to the next yr. Meanwhile in the time they traded picks for Toffoli and then let him walk 3 months later. They let their MVP Markstrom walk, Tanev walk. Without getting anything for them because they were all in. So they've missed the playoffs 7 of 8 yrs and have never acquired any picks higher than a 3rd in that time which they quickly traded for depth players. Then they finally acquired a 1st and traded it at a top 42 pick for a dman. They traded a 2nd to shed Dickinson's 2.6 mil contract before this season. They've never added picks in all that time of failure and always been pressed against the cap and your solution is keep doing that. I think you missed this teams story it is an embarrassment rivalled only by Philly since we fired Mike Gillis. And those are just some of the short sighted moves theyve made over the yrs. There are plenty more.

Acquiring players for long term success isn’t all in. Trade for Kane and tarasenko as rentals is. The playoffs in the bubble was just hockey and no fans watching in person. I think it’s pathetic when teams try to claim TB winning wasn’t a real cup. You and I could never see eye to eye about anything ever. Let’s just call this conversation over. If you need to feel like you’re right then sure bud, you win haha I’m out

You didn't address any of the points I made and now you're going to run and hide? Is that your way of conceding you were wrong? No need to get upset or embarrassed.

I didn't say tampa's cup wasn't real. I said having success in that playoffs isn't something you'd wanna put a lot of stock into. Players were locked inside away from their families and the outside world it was just different. A lot of odd things happened. And we've now missed the playoffs 7 out of 8 yrs and that was the one yr we made the playoffs so the data kinda shows im onto something.

I’m not upset or embarrassed. This is your acgm and everyone else above thinks it’s laughable. I’m not running or conceding anything other than there’s no point to continue this.. you are desperate to hear someone say you’re right and you have every right to believe you are. We aren’t going to see eye to eye and I’m fine with that. Your organization Has been playing coach roulette and starting a retool but they sure as heck aren’t selling JTM. They moved Bo and that was the big change along with coaching, and I’d bet they make playoffs next year. When I say 3-4 years for players to be nhl ready that’s not even star quality. Look at Raty along with so many others. Your late 1sts will be “good” in 6 years, but nhl ready in 3. Your stars want to compete now not in 5+ years or high is likely when they are ready to sign new contracts too. What I’m saying doesn’t seem to be getting through to you and that’s fine. You’re certainly not going to be the GM and the real GM certainly isn’t going to do your master plan. So you’ll have the rest of your life to believe that you’re correct 👌🏼

You seemed upset because you've somehow claimed we're never going to see eye to eye, and you're walk away completely exasperated by having had to talk to me. Mostly based I think of misinterpreting what I said about the bubble yr.

Atu Raty is a 20 yr old 2nd rounder. And we're really happy to have him. He's played NHL games. You wanna look at guys who've gone late 1st and 2nd round in the last few yrs that are excelling? Try Wyatt Johnston, JJ Moser, Dawson Mercer, Braden Schneider, Yegor Chinakov, Bjornfoot, Krebs, Tomasino, Kaliyev. Do you think the Canucks want Hoglander or would we prefer to have dealt that pick for a high priced veteran?

I get that it takes time and patience to draft and develop but it's the only way to be successful. It's basically the only way to acquire top talent. The problem I have is your solution is literally what the Canucks have done every yr for the last 5 seasons. Trade picks and make hero swings to get better short term at the expense of future assets. And it hasn't worked. We were near the bottom of the league again and that was with obtaining a 40 goal scorer for free and paying him 900k. Every yr its we have to go all in or Petey and Hughes will walk. Hughes is signed for 5 more yrs. Petey is an RFA when his deal is up. The only way these guys walk is if we keep doing this thing where we try to make the playoffs as soon as possible at the expense of actually acquiring depth through the draft and not being pressed right up against the cap with a team that at best squeaks into the playoffs. Our roster is crippled by our cap situation.

I'm not expecting management to do what I've suggested. They've made it clear their agenda is making the playoffs asap. I made this to show what I would do and why. I am here backing up my reasoning and you are suggesting the Canucks do what they've been doing. You gotta come with some actual reasoning if I am going to be persuaded. And don't just give up on the conversation because you got overwhelmed with facts. Integrate them or show why they're less convincing that what you have to say is.