The Petey Predicament

[Cornuck]

The team needs a change in culture. That has been evident for over a year now.

.... since 2011.

[donlever]

EP is a franchise problem in many ways no longer requiring discussion.

In profitable businesses we cut out our problems, transition and adapt.

We do not wait around until a replacement entity arrives to "save the day"....

We proactively remove and replace....

...and move on.

[BoS]

EP is a franchise problem in many ways no longer requiring discussion.

No more from me, either.

[Megaterio Llamas]

I'm just about Petered out myself....

[donlever]

Time to Scoot on outta the EP chit chat...

[theman]

Time to Scoot on outta the EP chit chat...

This discussion is Alien to me.

[Carl Yagro]

If 1Cs the problem but still thinks it's better to keep the status quo until 1C's a real return... well then, you'll keep getting the same exact status quo.

[Lancer]

The team needs a change in culture. That has been evident for over a year now.

.... since 2011.

Or 1994, even… at least then, we had some guys who wouldn’t turn the other cheek if they were getting speed-bagged.

[Meds]

Arizona got a pretty high first rounder for OEL for minimal retention, never forget it. It just took two teams (the only two he would go to) interested in a player that most of the league would've paid to get rid of.

I recall that OEL exercised his NMC and limited the destinations to us and Boston. I don’t recall anyone saying that he was a distressed asset that most of the league would have paid to part with.

Vancouver got a pretty high first rounder for JT Miller. The asset was beyond toxic, he was on the wrong side of 30 with several years left. No retention.

It’s rare that I find myself fully disagreeing with you UW, but here I have to.

Miller was dealt the season after he led the team (with Quinn and Brock) back to the playoffs where only injuries to Demko and Boeser, and a no show from EP, prevented them from making it to the Conference Final. He had scored 103 points that year, and he was boasting 284 PTs in 242 GP over the previous 3 campaigns, and in terms of total playoff production with Van he was a 1.0 PPG player.

I don’t think he was at all “beyond toxic”. Sure, he had his known personality warts, but he was still our leading scorer amongst forwards with 35 PTs in 40 GP despite missing 3-4 weeks of time. This was a player that very much fit the description of needing a change of scenery. He was also on a very friendly AAV considering his resume in Vancouver as an all situations leader and point producer.

What both of these trades had in common (besides the Canucks....) was that there was a party willing to take a distressed asset as part of the return…

Stop considering adding a sweetner to move EP40. It is dumb. Consider taking back an overweight asset. Make EP40s bloated 11.6 look like 7 by taking a guy in return that makes 7 and should make 3. Then get the return that EP40 at $7M would get, and that's at a first +. Think like winners, boys.

As you pointed out, AZ only had to take on junk for a single season. They wanted out from under a contract blunder. They absorbed trash but still had to give us Garland on top of OEL…..who I still don’t think was as bad value as people thought. His play since leaving Vancouver would support that he was, like Pettersson, a bad fit for where his team was at and underperforming due to a myriad of issues.

The argument being made here is more opposed to the stance that a few here are taking, most recently HW, - don’t move Pettersson without getting a positional replacement in return. To that I say: Don’t wait for the “investment to mature”, as you put it. Pull the bandaid off, take short term junk, maybe part with a decent asset (like AZ did with Garland) if it makes the overall return more palatable. Enter the rebuild. The Coyotes-turned-Mammoth franchise is now in season 5 post OEL trade. They are in playoff position and considered a team on the rise (I grant that they also had ownership and location changes which are huge for culture) but they are nonetheless a rising team.

[Cornuck]

His [OEL] play since leaving Vancouver would support that he was, like Pettersson, a bad fit for where his team was at and underperforming due to a myriad of issues.

His cap hit also dropped by $6 million - if we could have somehow pulled that off, we would have kept him.

[Meds]

His [OEL] play since leaving Vancouver would support that he was, like Pettersson, a bad fit for where his team was at and underperforming due to a myriad of issues.

His cap hit also dropped by $6 million - if we could have somehow pulled that off, we would have kept him.

Of course. And if there is no issue with Pettersson beyond his production, then we would happily keep him if his cap hit dropped by even $4.5M. But we can’t pull that off either.

[UWSaint]

I recall that OEL exercised his NMC and limited the destinations to us and Boston. I don’t recall anyone saying that he was a distressed asset that most of the league would have paid to part with.

The OEL contract was widely panned when it was signed, and OEL followed up signing it with a poor season. Around Vancouver, the most positive response to the trade was, well, the (bad) defense is better. So there’s that. Objectively, the deal made sense for only the first year. 13M about to come off the books and spend on OEL and Garland and lost a high pick?

It was a great example of a Gm freezing on a target and then getting bent over for it.

Stuff about Miller

You and I have different views about how to judge the value of a player who lost his marbles (so stressed, need 10 games off, waaah!) and played terribly (no defense at all!) all while pointing a finger at his teammates for their preparation and effort (rich, so rich) after having a history of similar attitude problems earlier in his career.

But that’s okay. Because I love the good JT. Such a special player. And that’s sort of my whole point — we aren’t gms, but we know a bit about the sport. And one of us ended up focusing the worst of what JT had to bring and presuming it would follow him, and one of us had a longer memory and saw the external circumstances as a significant cause of Miller’s on and off ice problem such that changing those circumstances would recover the player.

The same is probably true with ep40.

And there were surely some GMs closer to my (yeah, probably too harsh) view of miller and some GMs far closer to yours. And it only took one to get a pretty good return—but they had to think he’d be able to turn it around. (He hasn’t really, though I don’t know whether anything other than his mediocre play has contributed to the Rangers serious underperformance).

To me, EP40 has developed a very good game to slot behind a a team with an offensively gifted first line center and but is otherwise has center issues, with neither a rock solid 2C from the perspective of 55-70 points nor a true shut down guy. Maybe I am wrong, but only a single Gm who freezes on this player as a solution is what the Canucks will need to get a pretty good haul (esp. if they take cap hit back).

Well, that and ep waiving the NTC.

[MJN]

If the gossip has any truth to it then JT has been proven right. Given how things have played out the obvious choice would have been to trade EP40 while there was still value there and keep JT.

Miller being toxic seems over-blown to me.

[donlever]

Miller being toxic seems over-blown to me.

Halle-fucking-lujah!!!

[5thhorseman]

Looks like the C's were traded in reverse order of what should have been.

Shoulda kept Bo, then Miller, and EP jettisoned first.

Ass-backwards.