[Report/Rumour] Elias Pettersson Contract Talks

[Provost]

29 minutes ago, JeremyCuddles said:

Friedman has said he thinks Petey is pushing for a 3-4 year deal. If that's true I am honestly okay trading him for a haul. Super unpopular opinion but it sounds like the bag is more important to Petey than winning. So let him chase the bag elsewhere.

That is becoming more popular so guys are still in their prime (barely) when a last contract comes up.   Agents are trying to line up the most career earnings.

 

After this one, they demand a max 8 year deal that takes them into their mid/late 30’s and is pretty much guaranteed to be an anchor at the end.

If he wants to drop his AAV now for a shorter term deal that is fine… but he will still want $12 million per or close to it without committing to the team long term.

Sign him for the 3-4 years, no trade protection.  Get a massive haul in a couple years and let the next team deal with the over payment in his later years.

[Coconuts]

39 minutes ago, JeremyCuddles said:

Friedman has said he thinks Petey is pushing for a 3-4 year deal. If that's true I am honestly okay trading him for a haul. Super unpopular opinion but it sounds like the bag is more important to Petey than winning. So let him chase the bag elsewhere.

 

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. 

 

6 minutes ago, Provost said:

That is becoming more popular so guys are still in their prime (barely) when a last contract comes up.   Agents are trying to line up the most career earnings.

 

After this one, they demand a max 8 year deal that takes them into their mid/late 30’s and is pretty much guaranteed to be an anchor at the end.

If he wants to drop his AAV now for a shorter term deal that is fine… but he will still want $12 million per or close to it without committing to the team long term.

Sign him for the 3-4 years, no trade protection.  Get a massive haul in a couple years and let the next team deal with the over payment in his later years.

 

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.

Edited November 17, 2023 by Coconuts

[Diamonds]

11 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

 

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. 

Yes and no. You're never going to get a player equivalent to Pettersson in a trade but that doesn't mean they can't get back pieces that would make the team more well-rounded. For example, a trade to Carolina could be for Aho and Pesce. Obviously Pettersson is better than Aho, but Aho is still a 1C who would make a great 1-2 punch with Miller and Pesce instantly upgrades our defense.

 

Personally I'd still rather keep Pettersson, but that doesn't mean trading him automatically makes the team worse.

[MeanSeanBean]

2 minutes ago, Diamonds said:

Yes and no. You're never going to get a player equivalent to Pettersson in a trade but that doesn't mean they can't get back pieces that would make the team more well-rounded. For example, a trade to Carolina could be for Aho and Pesce. Obviously Pettersson is better than Aho, but Aho is still a 1C who would make a great 1-2 punch with Miller and Pesce instantly upgrades our defense.

 

Personally I'd still rather keep Pettersson, but that doesn't mean trading him automatically makes the team worse.

I disagree with this. I think every trade makes you worse, at least short term. Even using your Aho/Pesce trade, it's not just about the players. yes, we become more well rounded, but we also add a large chunk to the cap decreasing from other opportunities. I don't believe it's possible to trade a player of Peteys caliber and not get worse unless it's a hockey trade for say a comparable player that plays D. But we almost never see young superstars get traded 1/1.

[Bure_Pavel]

58 minutes ago, JeremyCuddles said:

Friedman has said he thinks Petey is pushing for a 3-4 year deal. If that's true I am honestly okay trading him for a haul. Super unpopular opinion but it sounds like the bag is more important to Petey than winning. So let him chase the bag elsewhere.

I agree if he cant commit to this team long term time to move on. One player doesnt make a team we are seeing it with Edmonton.  

[J-23]

On 11/15/2023 at 3:56 PM, -AJ- said:

If Petey's smart, he'll bet on himself. If Pettersson can get 120 points along with solid defensive play, he's a legitimate Ted Linsday contender. At his age, it wouldn't be crazy to command north of $12.5M IMO. Best player in the league would deserve that kind of money. 6 months ago, I was saying 11-12M, but that number might be creeping above $12M now. The problem is, in order to have long-term success, we have to have some guys take a bit of a discount. Miller likely already took somewhat of a discount, so that definitely helps, but with Hronek coming up, it would be amazing if he would sign for $7M or less instead of pushing for the $8M+ he could maybe get on the open market. With guys like Demko and Hughes eventually being up, if we want to win a cup with this core, those guys will need to take signficant discounts IMO. Demko could be argued as worth $10M+ and Hughes is probably $11M+ in value right now.

120 points is too hard to reach, I would be surprised if Pettersson gets over 105. Season only gets more difficult from here.

 

1 hour ago, JeremyCuddles said:

Friedman has said he thinks Petey is pushing for a 3-4 year deal. If that's true I am honestly okay trading him for a haul. Super unpopular opinion but it sounds like the bag is more important to Petey than winning. So let him chase the bag elsewhere.

Not going to get an elite 1C back unless Jack Hughes or Bedard is requesting a trade.

[DeNiro]

1 minute ago, Bure_Pavel said:

I agree if he cant commit to this team long term time to move on. One player doesnt make a team we are seeing it with Edmonton.  

You can thank Benning for this.

 

If they had just signed him to a long term deal to begin with we would have got a bargain and he would have been locked in for another 5 years.

[Bure_Pavel]

Just now, DeNiro said:

You can thank Benning for this.

 

If they had just signed him to a long term deal to begin with we would have got a bargain and he would have been locked in for another 5 years.

Yeah I was furious when I saw the bridge deal announced. While all the other young stars around the league sign 8x8's

[JeremyCuddles]

29 minutes ago, Provost said:

That is becoming more popular so guys are still in their prime (barely) when a last contract comes up.   Agents are trying to line up the most career earnings.

 

After this one, they demand a max 8 year deal that takes them into their mid/late 30’s and is pretty much guaranteed to be an anchor at the end.

If he wants to drop his AAV now for a shorter term deal that is fine… but he will still want $12 million per or close to it without committing to the team long term.

Sign him for the 3-4 years, no trade protection.  Get a massive haul in a couple years and let the next team deal with the over payment in his later years.

Honestly, I agree. If he wants 3 or 4 years. Give him 10mil. But Friedmand also says that Petey's camp is eyeing 12mil. If he wants 4 years and 12 mil. I say trade him. People can talk about the cap rising all they want. At the end of the day we've had 10mil contracts for almost 15 years. And only one team won the cup with a 10mil player. That was LAST year. Now we think we can do it with a 12mil player? What has Toronto achieved with their 12-13mil player. Or Edmonton. Colorado is literally a 1 line team now after signing MacKinnon to his 12mil deal. Boston has Pasta at 11.25mil. But it helps when you have a 90+ point guy making 6mil and Lindholm only takes home 6.5mil and two starter goalies with a combined 8mil price tag. If the cap wasn't a thing, I wouldn't give a sh*t. Give em 16mil for all I care. But with the cap being a thing and the fact he wants max dollar and perfect term to leave as a UFA. The only player on this roster I give 12mil to is Huggy. But I'd bet he'd sign a long term deal on top of it too.

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

1 hour ago, Bob Long said:

 

When would his NTC kick in? After next year or right away? 

 

Based on what I've seen with other contracts that have both RFA and UFA years involved, I would expect that the team would have full control for the first year while they still have RFA rights over him, and then he can seek NT/NM clauses for years 2 onwards, when he would have been in his UFA years.

[Coconuts]

21 minutes ago, Diamonds said:

Yes and no. You're never going to get a player equivalent to Pettersson in a trade but that doesn't mean they can't get back pieces that would make the team more well-rounded. For example, a trade to Carolina could be for Aho and Pesce. Obviously Pettersson is better than Aho, but Aho is still a 1C who would make a great 1-2 punch with Miller and Pesce instantly upgrades our defense.

 

Personally I'd still rather keep Pettersson, but that doesn't mean trading him automatically makes the team worse.

 

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.

Edited November 17, 2023 by Coconuts

[Bob Long]

31 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

 

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.

 

What if Ottawa sent us Brady Tkachuk? Or CBJ sends us Fantilli and Jiricek? I know its remote, but there might be a deal that isn't a step back if some GM really falls in love with Petey. 

 

Ideally Petey signs something like 11x4 or 12x8 tho. A prolonged trade situation would likely get pretty nasty in this market. 

 

[Coconuts]

5 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

What if Ottawa sent us Brady Tkachuk? Or CBJ sends us Fantilli and Jiricek? I know its remote, but there might be a deal that isn't a step back if some GM really falls in love with Petey. 

 

Ideally Petey signs something like 11x4 or 12x8 tho. A prolonged trade situation would likely get pretty nasty in this market. 

 

 

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. 

Edited November 17, 2023 by Coconuts

[grumpyone]

9 minutes ago, J-23 said:

120 points is too hard to reach, I would be surprised if Pettersson gets over 105. Season only gets more difficult from here.

 

Not going to get an elite 1C back unless Jack Hughes or Bedard is requesting a trade.

OOOOHHHH, now THAT would be an interesting proposal.... Bedard for Petey...which team has to add? how much? would you do it?

I would say...even though Bedard hasn't even played a full season yet, and I'm not certain of how good his 2 way game is...

that Van has to add a 2-3rd round pick and if Petey is looking for a $11.5 + contract , I'd probably do it, but that's WHY I'm only an armchair GM. 

[Mike Vanderhoek]

10 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

You can thank Benning for this.

 

If they had just signed him to a long term deal to begin with we would have got a bargain and he would have been locked in for another 5 years.

 

I don't see why so many think this is a negative. If Petey signs an extension in the 3 to 5 yr term what is the big deal ?

 

Looking at this as a business has zero indication on how the player feels about the club or city.the flat cap created this scenario. You got 2 to 3 yrs until the cap starts climbing significantly again. It would be foolish to sign a deal say 8 years x 11m. That number with cap inflation will be more in line with say 15m+ per. This scenario is a benefit to the team's cap flexibility and allows the player to maximize earnings on his next deal.

 

 

[Bob Long]

3 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

 

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. 

 

Like I said, "if" some GM really wanted him. You could argue Petey and Stut's would make a hell of a pair for Ottawa. I don't really know what trade would make sense tbh, just blue skying it. We've seen GMs make strange moves before. 

 

But yeah, as you're pointing out it would be quite difficult to make it work all around. For us, it would likely have to be a 2-step process like with Bo leading to Hronek. 

[IBatch]

59 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

 

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.

Hey I love Petey.    But let's be real, he's hasn't scored at the same clip (goals), hasn't won a Hart (yet),  and isn't as marketable here as he would be in TO.   Also think he's hiding an injury.    Mathews also had a longer bridge taking him to free agency where as EP is still cost controlled.  Same taxes so that's mute.   Maybe 13.5 x 6, but that's about what it would take.    Waiting for someone to do it, versus them already doing it matters as well.   Not saying Mathews is the better player.     Just looking at it from the market lens.   EPs getting points, but i'd say Miller has been better so far this year and for sure QHs, Hronek maybe too.   Not sure why teams need to keep giving the farm based on potential.   EP got one more point then Miller last year, but hasn't put the team on his back yet either.  Miller did that.    And also was paid a heck of a lot less his last deal.    All I can say is i'm not into paying 13.5 million dollars for a player who hasn't even put the team on his back yet, just because maybe he might.   Are you?  

 

Edited November 17, 2023 by IBatch

[Mike Vanderhoek]

26 minutes ago, Bure_Pavel said:

I agree if he cant commit to this team long term time to move on. One player doesnt make a team we are seeing it with Edmonton.  

A little shocked how many people suggest to trade Petey if he doesn't extend to max term.

 

All these fans with a boner over his play and production and though he appears to be battling an injury or other right now he still continues to elevate his game. But heaven forbid the player wants to maximize his earnings because none of us fans care about how big money is in our lives.

 

Its absurd to suggest trading the Canucks top forward, probably one of what? already one of the best forwards this franchise has ever seen. 

 

Sign him, continue building around he, Hughes, and Demko.

 

 

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

7 minutes ago, Mike Vanderhoek said:

But heaven forbid the player wants to maximize his earnings because none of us fans care about how big money is in our lives.

 

The ones who have issues about players maximizing their earnings over the lifetime of their playing years are probably people of the same ilk that chased players like Luongo away.

 

edit: should probably also mention that those are likely the same people who would join the chorus of whining about why we can't have good things.  

Edited November 17, 2023 by 6of1_halfdozenofother

[J-23]

17 minutes ago, grumpyone said:

OOOOHHHH, now THAT would be an interesting proposal.... Bedard for Petey...which team has to add? how much? would you do it?

I would say...even though Bedard hasn't even played a full season yet, and I'm not certain of how good his 2 way game is...

that Van has to add a 2-3rd round pick and if Petey is looking for a $11.5 + contract , I'd probably do it, but that's WHY I'm only an armchair GM. 

It’s not happening but Bedard maybe signs a contract with a discount as well..from Vancouver and is a huge fan of the team.

 

Jack Hughes happens if our captain can convince him to request a trade.

 

Have to remember other teams would be in the mix, but they probably don’t have a player like Pettersson.

 

Anyways, none of that is happening, best thing to do is sign Pettersson for his 3-4 years and see what happens. Do not give him a no trade. If we have to trade him, it is what it is.

[Coconuts]

39 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

Like I said, "if" some GM really wanted him. You could argue Petey and Stut's would make a hell of a pair for Ottawa. I don't really know what trade would make sense tbh, just blue skying it. We've seen GMs make strange moves before. 

 

But yeah, as you're pointing out it would be quite difficult to make it work all around. For us, it would likely have to be a 2-step process like with Bo leading to Hronek. 

 

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. 

 

35 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Hey I love Petey.    But let's be real, he's hasn't scored at the same clip (goals), hasn't won a Hart (yet),  and isn't as marketable here as he would be in TO.   Also think he's hiding an injury.    Mathews also had a longer bridge taking him to free agency where as EP is still cost controlled.  Same taxes so that's mute.   Maybe 13.5 x 6, but that's about what it would take.    Waiting for someone to do it, versus them already doing it matters as well.   Not saying Mathews is the better player.     Just looking at it from the market lens.   EPs getting points, but i'd say Miller has been better so far this year and for sure QHs, Hronek maybe too.   Not sure why teams need to keep giving the farm based on potential.   EP got one more point then Miller last year, but hasn't put the team on his back yet either.  Miller did that.    And also was paid a heck of a lot less his last deal.    All I can say is i'm not into paying 13.5 million dollars for a player who hasn't even put the team on his back yet, just because maybe he might.   Are you?  

 

 

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.

Edited November 17, 2023 by Coconuts

[Bure_Pavel]

17 minutes ago, Mike Vanderhoek said:

A little shocked how many people suggest to trade Petey if he doesn't extend to max term.

 

All these fans with a boner over his play and production and though he appears to be battling an injury or other right now he still continues to elevate his game. But heaven forbid the player wants to maximize his earnings because none of us fans care about how big money is in our lives.

 

Its absurd to suggest trading the Canucks top forward, probably one of what? already one of the best forwards this franchise has ever seen. 

 

Sign him, continue building around he, Hughes, and Demko.

 

 

Anything less than five years, send him packing. We will be better in the long run, that greediness is contagious and will spread to the rest of the roster. We need guys who are serious about winning a cup.   

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

8 minutes ago, Bure_Pavel said:

We need guys who are serious about winning a cup. 

 

A player can be serious about winning a cup, and can also know their value and not be afraid to ask for it and be willing to stand their ground until there's agreement all-round.  The two are not mutually exclusive.

[Coconuts]

14 minutes ago, Bure_Pavel said:

Anything less than five years, send him packing. We will be better in the long run, that greediness is contagious and will spread to the rest of the roster. We need guys who are serious about winning a cup.   

 

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. 

Edited November 17, 2023 by Coconuts

[DownUndaCanuck]

His +/- has been shelled recently, -7 in the last couple of games so there goes all the Selke hype. Wonder if he's playing injured, his play has dropped off a bit and isn't running the show the way he used to. Might get him down to 9-10M.