Jeremy Hronek

Brady Tkachuk would cost an arm, a leg, and my grandmother's penis if we're being completely honest. No joke. I would love to have Brady here but that's probably going to cost you Kuzmenko, Willander, Lekkerimaki, and a 1st. Or something bat shit insane. I would absolutely LOVE to have Brady Tkachuk here but I can't see Ottawa ever moving him. If we're thinking Ottawa however, your buddy Jacob Chychrun might be someone that could realistically be had.

True but it seems like a terribly underwhelming return for Kuzmenko. We'd probably be better off waiting for Kuz to find his game again similar to what we did with Boeser.

I like this proposal a lot. Signed for two years, decent age, solid defensively, would probably contribute offensively, good size, and can play all three forward positions. My only criticism of this idea is the offer. It's a decent offer but think St. Louis would probably look for a 1st rounder at minimum at the deadline.

Agreed. I have zero interest in Mantha. I didn't even realize that they could stack crap that high.

Friedman likely mentions Capitals’ forward Anthony Mantha for salary cap reasons, but the Canucks aren’t believed to have any interest in him. However, the Capitals have seemingly been happy with Mantha’s play as of late and don’t seem to be in a rush to move him unless they see an opportunity to upgrade the roster. Fortunately for the Capitals, they have plenty of time to decide what they’re going to do and who they’re going to target at the trade deadline, but it doesn’t seem like there is much of a chance Kuzmenko gets traded to the Capitals. Hypothetical Kuzmenko Fit With The Capitals While there doesn’t seem to be much of a chance of a Kuzmenko trade happening any time soon and almost no chance he becomes a Capital, let’s take a hypothetical look at where he would fit if the Capitals were to somehow pull off a monster trade with the Canucks to bring him in. Under the assumption that Mantha would have to be traded if Kuzmenko is brought in due to the money issues, Kuzmenko could slot into the second line alongside Aliaksei Protas and Connor McMichael. While Capitals forward Evgeny Kuznetsov has been playing on the third line since he was a healthy scratch just a few games ago, his confidence and overall play could be rejuvenated playing alongside a fellow Russian player in Kuzmenko. Moving Kuznetsov up to the second line could be an option, but there is also the idea of spreading out the firepower and leaving him in the bottom six, which might be beneficial for the Capitals as a team. Kuzmenko’s strength is his ability to produce offensively. The Capitals haven’t been the worst team in the NHL, but they have struggled offensively on some nights. Adding a guy like Kuzmenko who is coming off of a 74-point campaign in his first season in the NHL and may simply need a change of scenery could be huge for the Capitals, and he could become a difference-maker in the team’s quest for a Stanley Cup. The only issue with this is the Canucks are also vying for a Stanley Cup this season. While Kuzmenko might be in Tocchet’s dog house because of internal issues with the team, whatever those may be, he is still a massive part of the Canucks and is a player who could help lead them to success in the postseason. With two contending teams potentially being trade partners, it becomes even harder to make a deal as neither one wants to give the other a better chance of winning, thus likely making any Kuzmenko deal to Washington close to impossible. The Capitals will be buyers come the trade deadline if they keep playing well up until that point, but they will likely have to look in another direction as far as trying to improve their roster. Hopefully, they will make the right moves and have a Stanley Cup-contending team late in the season, and a roster that can help lead the Capitals to their second Stanley Cup in franchise history. For some odd reason when I read saw the title of this thread, I was reminded of the time from Seinfeld when Sid Farkas was interested in Estelle Costanza and told Frank about this. Frank then lost his shit!

You're overlooking something obvious my friend. Believe it or not, the Canucks have not only had a player that was *closer* to being a generational talent than Pettersson, but nay, actually *had* a generational talent that actually played for them. Oh it's true......it's damn true! Now, "who is he talking about?" you may ask? Is it Pavel? King Richard? Henrik? Daniel? Smyl? Linden? Naslund? Who?!?! Whelp - here's my answer. It's about character. It's about commitment. It's about where we're from. p.s.____________________Betchya can't "kwat" just once!

No, you missed my point if you believe that Jack Eichel was the counter point to my original point (I'm the OP by the way). I don't give two Cameroonian shits what someone's cap hit is. Cap hit percentage relative to the salary cap (i.e. C.H.%) is key. Hence, why I made the point that Boston, LA, and Chicago won cups between 2010-2015 despite Crosby and Ovechkin being the two best players during that time. As the salary cap gradually started to increase however, Crosby and Ovie's C.H.% started to become lower (and as result, went from being 'premium' contracts to 'excellent value' contracts). Meanwhile, guys like Toews, Kane, and Kopitar received $10+ million dollar contracts (inappropriate high C.H%'s at that time), which contributed to Chicago and LA's downfalls. Pittsburgh and Washington however won the next 3 cups. That was my point. As far as Jack Hughes goes, his contract and 'value' is significantly higher than Pettersson's, Hughes, and Demko's because, along with his "high value" cap hit, his contract is much longer in length (and so you basically answered your own query here). Jack Hughes has arguably the best 'value' contract in the league when you take both term and cap hit into consideration.

Agreed although it's sometimes tough to predict how players will pan out. During the deadpuck era for example (1995-2004), I'm not sure if any of those players quite made it to 'generational' level. Forsberg and Lindros possibly would have had they stayed healthy, but I don't think any of them crossed over. Sakic, Modano, Sundin, and Yzerman were superstars, but probably not 'generational.' Dominik Hasek, Patrick Roy, and Marty Brodeur were probably close but even then, I'm not so sure. Jarmoir Jagr, Scott Niedermayer, and Nik Lidstrom were also probably on that border. I think that post Gretzky-Lemieux pre Crosby-Ovechkin era had a lot of high end superstars, but no one quite in that generational tier. Of course, that's just my opinion. My requirements for 'generational' are quite stringent.

Tremendous superstar but not generational. Generational talents are guys like Gretzky, Mario Lemieux, Crosby, Ovechkin, and McDavid. These are guys that 'define' a certain generation. In the NBA, that would be guys like Jordan, Kobe, and Lebron.

I think Pettersson has earned the right to be labelled a 'superstar', but you're 100% correct about identifying who is 'generational' in my opinion (although I'd remove McKinnon from that list). Crosby, Ovechkin, and McDavid are the only players over the last 20 years that deserve to be labelled as 'generational' in my opinion.

To Montreal: -Andrei Kuzmenko ($5.5 million x 2) -Ilya Mikheyev ($4.75 million x 3) -Total incoming cap = $10.25 million) To Vancouver -Joel Armia ($3.4 million x 2) -Josh Anderson ($5.5 million x 4) -Total incoming cap = $8.9 million What's in it for Vancouver: Size up front Significant help with the PK in Joel Armia What's in it for Montreal: Mikheyev, at this stage of his career, would likely be a better fit on the top line with Suzuki and Caufield than Slafkovski Kuzmenko would likely thrive more in Montreal's system (as an outside observer, I'm guessing that they aren't as structured/rigid as Tocchet's system but I'm not 100% sure). @qwijjibo - perhaps could shed some light on this?

Now - don't get me wrong - I'm often wrong a LOT, but can you imagine if the Canucks had done this at the time when I created this post? (October 20th)

I appreciate the Art. Now having said that, and to your poll question, I can't see why the Flames would give us Lindholm and Tanev for Kuzmenko and Myers. That would be highway robbery for us.

Apparently, Anderson has been playing half decent but has just had extraordinarily bad luck. But you're right - I could see Anderson fitting into Tocchet's system while Kuzmenko thrives in Montreal's more open system.

Josh Anderson perhaps?

Ughhhh, 7:00 AM here in my neck of the woods. Pulled an all-nighter to watch the Nucks-Hawks. This was a bad bad bad idea......but I'm glad we won. Night folks. Looking forward to my 5 hour (nap?).

re - Sedins. I'll have to check cap friendly but I seem to recall the twins taking up about 10.75% of the cap (each); so about 21.5%. during their cup window days. You are correct about Tampa as far as state tax is concerned. You might be right about Pettersson as far as an $11 million dollar contract goes (I actually just remembered that Dahlin received $11 million), but I still think it's going to be tough to win a cup with that C.H.%.

Ottawa wouldn't make that deal since Brady has a much better contract than Petey. That would definitely be something though: Petey + one of our wingers to Ottawa for Tkachuk ad Stutzle. Would never happen though.

It's funny that you mention the Leafs. While I'm often wrong about a lot of things, I absolutely fucking NAILED it with the Leafs (atleast as of this writing). After the Leafs signed Tavares in 2018 and gave him that monstrous deal, I knew that deal would indirectly hurt the Leafs.........why? Because - signing Tavares to that HUGE 11 million dollar contract basically eliminated any chance of Leaf core players "buying in." "This outside got paid at a premium and so we want to get paid at a premium as well." And sure enough, guys like Nylander, Matthews, and Marner broke the bank. To your other point, I also agree that Petey likely won't take a discount of any kind since his current deal was discounted. In theory, I would also probably consider moving Petey if he wanted more than $10.5 million but a move like that would always be easier said than done (btw - Petey+ to Buffalo for Cozens and Power is something that I'd have in mind if Buffalo were interested in discussing). We'd have more players signed to good long term cap hits while Buffalo could build around Pettersson, Dahlin, and Thompson.

Take me down to the paradise city where the cocks are black and the men are pretty, take.....me.....home.....yeeeeeeaaaaaah! [more than one word but I think it's safe to say that I absolutely crippled this masterpiece. :-p]

I'd be a little concerned with $11 million to be honest (unless, as @Elias Pettersson stated, the cap goes to atleast $92 million within the next two years or so). I mean, take a look at Tampa Bay for instance. They don't have a single $10 million dollar cap hit on their team. https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/lightning And yes, I do realize that those contracts were signed in a different time period and that all/most of those guys would get signed to $10+ million dollar contracts in 2023. Still - it bears worth mentioning. Cost controlled elite talent + depth = championships. Chicago, Boston, LA, followed by Pittsburgh, Washington, and St. Louis, followed by Tampa Bay, Colorado, and Vegas pretty much all followed that formula. Between 2010-2015, Pittsburgh and Washington couldn't win cups because their top players occupied too high a C.H.%. Same thing with teams like Edmonton and Toronto at present. Guys like McDavid, Matthews, and Marner are all at or near the top of the league but their teams can't win cups because their top players take up too high a C.H% which makes it too difficult to invest in depth. I look at a team like Tampa Bay and see Hedman with a $7.8 million dollar cap hit and say to myself, "Daaaamn!" So, that's where I stand with Petey. Something around $10.25.......I think that might be my upper limit, but $11M+?.......I'm not so sure.

I agree with this. I'd be comfortable with offering Petey $9.5 million, and around $10 million if he were to hit 100 points, but would draw a red flag if he was looking for Tavares money, or anything north of $11 million. At some point, a player needs to decide if they want to receive the most money possible or if they want to "buy in" to an organization and win multiple cups.

That's exactly what I said. With regards to the cap (potentially rising to $92 million in 2 years) do we know with utmost certainty that the cap is going to rise to that level? If not, it might be risky. Also, our situation might not be completely analogous to Pittsburgh's since Pittsburgh had their core players locked up for a very long time. Hence - they had the luxury of waiting for the cap to go up while the contracts of their top players naturally adjusted to a lower CH%. With the Canucks, all of Boeser, Kuzmenko, Demko, and Hughes will be UFA's within these next 4 years and so we might not have that luxury. Agreed with you about Sebastian Aho. I shouldn't have used him as an example. The Jack Hughes comparison is probably a more appropriate example.

History of Cock - Kid Rock

Let's make no mistake about it. Elias Pettersson is a damn good two-way hockey player when he's on his game, and likely falls somewhere in the Top 20 best overall players in the league.....likely even higher. In a Salary-Cap era however, there's a strong argument to be made that cup winning teams don't necessarily have the best players in the league, but rather, the players with the best value in the league relative to their cap hits and subsequent C.H. percentages that they occupy on said teams. Case in point - From 2010-2015, Sidney Crosby and Alex Ovechkin were probably the two best players in the game and yet it was Chicago and LA that won multiple cups largely because the cap hits and subsequent values to players like Toews, Kane, Seabrook, Hossa, Keith, Doughty, Kopitar, Quick, Brown, etc. were absolute steals at the time. The top players on those cup winning teams had cap hits that had relatively low C.H% relative to the team's overall cap. In fact, one can even argue that both Chicago and LA started to decline once guys like Toews, Kane, and Kopitar received those 10 million dollar contracts (which at the time, were high C.H% contracts). As this was happening, the cap was gradually rising which ultimately decreased the overall C.H% that contracts such as Crosby, Malkin, Ovechkin, etc. had. In other words, those contracts became the new "high value" contracts and so Pittsburgh and Washington won cups over the next 3 seasons. During the 2010's, Boston was arguably the most consistent team and again, it has to do with "value" cap hits and subsequent relatively low C.H% to top players. A few years down the road, history repeated itself Tampa Bay won multiple cups despite Connor McDavid being the best player in the game. Nathan MacKinnon, with his 6ish million dollar cap hit, also won a cup. The teams that have won cups since 2010, have done so with all/most of their top players having relatively low C.H%'s relative to the overall salary cup. From 2010-2015, Pittsburgh, despite having two of the best players in the game, were upstaged by Boston, LA, and Chicago because the latter teams had better value contracts. Toronto, despite having Matthews, Tavares, and Marner, have also been upstaged by Eastern rival teams that have relatively low C.H%'s (which has allowed said teams to invest heavier in depth). The Oilers with McDavid are in the same boat. In Toronto's case, many have argued that in retrospect, the Leafs shot themselves in the foot with the Tavares signing. Here is the ultimate point that I'm trying to make. The Canucks need to be careful with how much money they give to Elias Pettersson. Yes, Pettersson is an excellent player, but given what history has shown, how likely would it be for the Canucks to win a cup if Pettersson is making $11+ million dollars? Hopefully, Pettersson and his agent are committed to winning and would be willing to accept a modern day version of Jack Hughes' contract/cap hit, or a modern day version of Sebastian Aho's contract/cap hit. So, in the modern era, this might equate to a $9.5-$9.75 million dollar deal (I haven't done the exact math). Given what history has proven, teams will not win a cup if any one player takes up too high of a C.H% relative to the team no matter how good the player is. In other words, If Pettersson isn't willing to take at least a slight discount in order to "serve the greater good" in terms of building a winner, the Canucks might be better off moving him.