Coconuts

Hopefully he gets the help he needs, hopefully she does too. I didn't care for him as a hockey player but his fighting hundreds of times over the course of his career probably hasn't helped. Being wealthy doesn't excuse people from having their demons.

Wouldn't be surprised if the Flames pull this one out Jack with an assist to go with his goal, no signs of rust

Hey, some of us haunt both forums

Jack picking up where he left off

Panarin is having a helluva year Up to 25 points in 15 games now, half a game to go

We're all undead spirits here on CFF

I skipped the release, the FSJ selection didn't move the needle enough and I needed to go to Grande Prairie Wound up getting these two at the Costco liquor store, saved about $30 and $40 plus tax on them respectively (so about $85 and $55 compared to what I'd have paid at the BC liquor store First time in 4-6 years I haven't gone and lined up early in the morning

They did, Cats should be much more dangerous going forward

OEL with his fifth goal of the season, 11th point in 17 games OEL has one less goal than Quinn Hughes, didn't think I'd be saying that for either of them at this point

Not surprising that Calgary wouldn't want to trade with us, they've been better of late and aren't that far out of a playoff spot. If they trade their pending UFA's, and they likely will, they'll probably look for a mix of picks, prospects, young NHL'ers with potential, or players under contract I don't think they'll be tearing things down, I reckon they'll try to do more of a competitive retool Could see Zadorov in Toronto or Jersey, could see Washington or Boston having interest in Lindholm as they both have a clear need for a #1C Lot of teams could easily fit Tanev in if Calgary retains, and if they're smart they'll retain on three of Tanev, Hanifin, Lindholm, and Zadorov Hanifin should command a lot of interest, he's the guy Calgary probably gets the most for imo

I'm not actually sure how I feel about those tbh, I don't hate them

Does EP extend with a rebuilding club? That seemed to be one of the counterarguments when rebuilds came up on CDC

I actually forgot about that point, he could just accept his qualifying offer and walk Just another factor in EP's favour For sure, sometimes it just takes players a bit longer, we saw that with our own prized Sedin twins

I think Laffy is interesting, he's one of several younger players around the league who look to be taking the next step (him, Byfield, Kotkaniemi to name a few) All the aforementioned are examples of why sometimes you've just got to be patient with young top players who don't step in and immediately make top notch impacts I think the Rags would be hard pressed to make a Pettersson deal work capwise though, almost all their top players have NMC's and New York is a destination that sells itself https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/rangers

They get paid in the hopes and dreams of their respective fanbases! If our window is three seasons such a trade probably doesn't help us get to the final though, Pettersson's being a Canuck gives us our best chance at winning a cup during this window and that's the crux of the matter. A Rangers 1st would likely be middling to late, Laffy is off to a good start but has plenty to prove, Kakko is young and could be more than he is but he also has 2 points in 14 games despite putting up a career high of 40 last season. Management is in a tough spot if they truly want to chase a cup, playing ball with Pettersson is their best chance at bringing Vancouver a championship. They'd be hard pressed to immediately replace what he's brough the last season and a bit. Maybe they could get a hodgepodge, but would that help them capitalize on having Demko and Hughes on smaller contracts than they'll inevitably command? I'm not going to presume that us winning a Pettersson trade is impossible, or that our finding a deal that could help us go deep sooner than later is impossible, but I don't think such a trade is likely. But that's just my two cents.

I don't buy it. Almost every NHL player in the league is serious about winning the cup, but most players are also lucky if they reach the final even once throughout their careers. Every player wants to win, but every player also wants to get paid. It's a lot easier to secure the bag than it is to win a cup, and taking less probably doesn't increase one's odds of doing so all that much. There are thirty two teams in this league, that number will likely increases before the decade is done. The Stanley Cup is the hardest championship in spots to win, that's not going to get any easier as more franchises are added to the mix. There's nothing wrong with players wanting to be paid market value. It seems fans want top players but frequently balk when it's time to pay the piper. The cost of success is plenty of zeroes at the end of guys contracts whether a team wins a championship or not. Fans have the luxury of viewing it all from the perspective of a fan, they want the best cap outlooks for their teams. But the reality is the NHL is a billion dollar business and for players it's a career first and foremost.

Sure, theoretically a deal could be out there, GM's have indeed made some weird moves. But yeah, I think the magnitude of what it'd cost to acquire Pettersson would have a lot of teams out of the running. More than likely you're right, we'd have to take assets like young NHL'ers, picks, and likely a degree of players/caps coming back. A Pettersson trade would probably be a hodgepodge. We'd have to either be content with such a deal or set on using pieces to try and make subsequent moves. All in all, I think it could be very hard to get fair value for Pettersson in either a direct or roundabout manner. One could argue that the more pieces involved, the better the odds things work out, but one could also argue that more pieces likely makes each piece less valuable than fewer pieces would potentially be. Could very well fizzle out. It's why I have a hard time seeing us win a Pettersson trade, he has to be willing to play ball with any team that's interested in acquiring him. Doesn't matter what you or I think, it matters what management is willing to do. I reckon they'll pay him. No, its not the same as the Matthews scenario but I do think Matthews having taken the approach he has will influence other top players to take similar routes. Miller took the security, good for him, probably could have gotten more but the cap scenario when he was looking for his extension is a bit different than the scenario Pettersson is in. Pettersson is younger and a different player, he's a franchise player and he showed that last season. If he's nursing an injury and still sharing a portion of the NHL points lead that just emphasizes my point. You don't hear Draisaitl whining because McDavid gets paid 4M more. Players are paid on potential all the time, now more than ever. Difference is Pettersson just topped 100 points is on pace to do it again. Just wait til Hughes's deal is up some folks don't want to pay him market value either. Or Demko, or Boeser if he keeps this up.

Ottawa doesn't need Pettersson, they have 21-year-old Tim Stutzle who put up 90 points last season. He's in the first year of an 8.35x8 deal and has 20 points in 14 games. Fantilli and Jiricek doesn't help us if the goal is contention, they'd be great futures to acquire though, certainly. The problem with such a deal is it would likely be contigent on Pettersson signing long-term, I don't see him being interested in signing long term with a bottom feeder in Columbus if he isn't willing to do so with a competitive Canucks team. If Pettersson is set on a medium term extension that also impacts our ability to maximize any return imo.

Carolina seemed more than happy to pay Aho, not sure they'd be in on Pettersson. They just gave him a 9.75Mx8 extension, if anything the argument that paying a single player too much could be a reason Carolina would stick with Aho. I don't see us winning a trade that involves Pettersson if we're looking for top tier NHL players. Top tier 1C's, let alone 1C's, are on of the hardest pieces for a team to find, I'm not convinced many teams are going to offer up their 1C plus other key pieces just to upgrade their 1C. It goes against the argument of depth vs paying top pieces. Sometimes you gotta pay the piper, we've rarely had a talent like Pettersson throughout our organizational history and I reckon Pettersson will probably get what he wants if Allvin and co are set on trying to contend sooner than later.

If the Canucks plan on trying to contend they can't afford to not give Pettersson what he wants imo, they lose any trade that involves sending Pettersson out if the goal is to chase a cup. They'll be hard pressed to find a prime aged #1 center who puts in the effort at both ends Pettersson does. I'm probably going to call this the Matthews effect. When one of the league's most marketable superstars takes a medium term deal so he can cash in again late in his twenties of course it's going to encourage other stars to take a similar approach. He signed a 4x13.25M deal, you've gotta think the Leafs will pay him the same or more later if he keeps it up. Pettersson doing the same wouldn't be remotely surprising. More money for stars in two medium term deals than a single long term deal given how the cap is supposed to rise. Not only that, but if gives them a chance to hit UFA and switch teams if they aren't happy.

Agreed. I also truly believe we'd have to pay more than any other team, because I haven't heard of any other Pacific division teams being linked to Calgary, it's just been us. Only other Pacific team I could see poking around at D is Edmonton, and Calgary's even less likely to help them than they are to help us imo. If we really want to upgrade our D I'd be looking at who might be available out east. Also lost in all this seller's talk is the fact that Calgary is 4-2-1 thus far in November, they're 4 points out of a playoff spot. If they can continue to play respectable hockey I think that'll be a factor that encourages Calgary to try and reload vs rebuild.

Ties won't come back, they won't. I'm not keen on shootouts either but the NHL sells entertainment and both OT (in any form) and the shootouts are a more entertaining ways to end games than a tie. How often do we see OT/shootout highlights? It's a way to market excitement.

Isles would probably be better off with someone who isn't Lou Lam as their GM