Elias Pettersson Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 (edited) To Chicago: Andrei Kuzmenko To Vancouver: 2024 2nd round pick (LAK) To Calgary: 2024 1st round pick 2024 2nd round pick (LAK) Linus Karlsson Hunter Brzustewicz To Vancouver: Elias Lindholm (50% retention) Chris Tanev (50% retention) Pettersson Miller Boeser Suter Lindholm Mikheyev Joshua Blueger Garland Hoglander Aman Lafferty Hughes Hronek Zadorov Myers Cole Tanev Soucy Juulsen Demko DeSmith Will Flames’ Elias Lindholm turn a Stanley Cup contender into a frontrunner? - Daily Faceoff How much can the Calgary Flames get for Chris Tanev at the NHL Trade Deadline? (msn.com) These trades instantly turn us into the Stanley Cup favourites IMO. We have the best scoring line in hockey in the Lotto Line and our second line now becomes one of the best shutdown lines in hockey. Our defence is now 8 deep and ready for a true playoff run against the best teams in the NHL. Can this team win the Stanley Cup? Edited January 30 by Elias Pettersson 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wai_lai416 Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 tanev would solidify the backend.. however i'm not sold on this forward group.. Mikheyev and suter don't belong in the top 6 i don't care what anyone say about mikheyev he's not a top 6 period.. if our 2nd line is struggling now.. replacing EP and kuz on the 2nd line with suter and lindholm it's still going to struggle.. there's 0 play driver on that line.. and i think it's only a matter of time before teams start to overlap their top pairing defenceman and 2nd line against our 3rd line and that's where i think we'll start struggling for goals if the lotto line is shutdown.. the 3rd line is amazing right now but they are mostly playing 3rd/4th lines.. the moment other team up the ante and put their top 2 pairing/ forward lines against them.. will they have the same success?? i'm going to venture towards no.. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted January 30 Author Share Posted January 30 25 minutes ago, wai_lai416 said: tanev would solidify the backend.. however i'm not sold on this forward group.. Mikheyev and suter don't belong in the top 6 i don't care what anyone say about mikheyev he's not a top 6 period.. if our 2nd line is struggling now.. replacing EP and kuz on the 2nd line with suter and lindholm it's still going to struggle.. there's 0 play driver on that line.. and i think it's only a matter of time before teams start to overlap their top pairing defenceman and 2nd line against our 3rd line and that's where i think we'll start struggling for goals if the lotto line is shutdown.. the 3rd line is amazing right now but they are mostly playing 3rd/4th lines.. the moment other team up the ante and put their top 2 pairing/ forward lines against them.. will they have the same success?? i'm going to venture towards no.. The only way that second line gets any better is to make more trades and trade away more assets. At this point, Kuzmenko isn't producing much and Tocchet isn't even using him on PP1, so might as well switch him with Lindholm, who can check the other teams best line. The other option is to play Petey as a winger with Lindholm. Suter Miller Boeser Pettersson Lindholm Mikheyev So, if the Lotto Line gets shut down, then Tocchet can switch to this setup for the top 6. At the end of the day, Lindholm provides more than Kuzmenko, especially defensively. If Petey and Lindholm were to play together then Petey could focus on offence and Lindholm would be the first man back on defence. So this setup could work even better than having the Lotto Line together... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Korea Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 Today is the bold and ballsy version of @Elias Pettersson. He wants to trade with not just one, but two division rivals. I have no idea how to valuate Andrei Kuzmenko right now. Some think he has good trade value, others think he has negative value. It's certainly not helping his case that he keeps getting benched/scratched. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownUndaCanuck Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 Kings don't have 5.5M cap space though? They'd have to trade away a decent forward which I doubt they'd do unless someone goes on LTIR. I think there's probably just a direct trade with Calgary here cap-wise - something like Kuzmenko + 1st + prospect like Hunter + either a 2nd or another prospect/Juulsen for the pair of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted January 30 Author Share Posted January 30 17 minutes ago, Miss Korea said: Today is the bold and ballsy version of @Elias Pettersson. He wants to trade with not just one, but two division rivals. I have no idea how to valuate Andrei Kuzmenko right now. Some think he has good trade value, others think he has negative value. It's certainly not helping his case that he keeps getting benched/scratched. Chicago is in a different division Bob. C'mon get with the program... 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted January 30 Author Share Posted January 30 1 minute ago, DownUndaCanuck said: Kings don't have 5.5M cap space though? They'd have to trade away a decent forward which I doubt they'd do unless someone goes on LTIR. I think there's probably just a direct trade with Calgary here cap-wise - something like Kuzmenko + 1st + prospect like Hunter + either a 2nd or another prospect/Juulsen for the pair of them. The first trade is with Chicago not LA. They have like $20 million in cap space... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Future Considerations Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 i'm down with this. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Korea Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 2 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said: Chicago is in a different division Bob. C'mon get with the program... I see what you're trying to do here. You're trying to use Chicago as leverage. Again. You have to admit they are doing us a massive favour here so I doubt Davidson to be as willing as you think he'll be. Again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucks curse Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 I think this is very realistic and fair, I think we could squeeze out another late pick from CHI, I think that is the top end of what CGY could expect from moving those 2 in a package together. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 3 hours ago, Miss Korea said: I see what you're trying to do here. You're trying to use Chicago as leverage. Again. You have to admit they are doing us a massive favour here so I doubt Davidson to be as willing as you think he'll be. Again. Hawks need elite skill to play with Bedard. They don’t want Bedard to regress because he’s on his own. Kuz Missile is a proven 39 goal scorer who clearly has elite skill. Plus, he’s signed to a short term so they can move off him at the TDL in 2025 (gaining assets in return) if they do choose. The Empties see the Hawks paying a second and a third to acquire Kuz Missile. Bow to the Empties. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Korea Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 2 hours ago, Alflives said: Hawks need elite skill to play with Bedard. They don’t want Bedard to regress because he’s on his own. Kuz Missile is a proven 39 goal scorer who clearly has elite skill. Plus, he’s signed to a short term so they can move off him at the TDL in 2025 (gaining assets in return) if they do choose. The Empties see the Hawks paying a second and a third to acquire Kuz Missile. Bow to the Empties. What Chicago would like is a playmaking winger who can help Bedard utilize his insane wrister. Bedard's passing is solid, but let's be honest - he should be the primary shooter on any team. Andrei Kuzmenko is an unproven 39 goal scorer. His play this year has made last season seem like a total fluke. If he was a proven 39 goal scorer as you suggest, I would want a hell of lot more than a 2nd round pick. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockemSockem Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 Elias…. Love the trades and I’m in agreement. Super realistic and could very well happen. If we do acquire Lindholm and Tanev, I’d want to extend both in the offseason for sure. I’m not a cap expert but can we feasibly re-sign both with letting Blueger, Lafferty and Myers go? Replacing Blueger and Lafferty with Bains and Podkolzin next season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timberz21 Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 Kuz, 1st and Brzustewicz is an expensive price for 2 rentals IMO. While he was a 3rd rounder, Brzustewicz season value skyrocketed to a near late 1st rounder IMO. Lindholm-type player is a great addition for help our 2nd line for sure, but I'm sure we could trade for a poor-man version of Tanev for much cheaper. I'd love to have him but at that price, it seems like overkill to me. Let's not forget were one year removed for missing the playoffs. Let's not mortgage the future to open the window for 1 year. Keep our assets and build a 3-4 year window of opportunities is my philosophy. Plus, teams making the biggest splashes at the deadline rarely get a ROI. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boziffous Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 Like the trade. I think it's pretty close. I think Calgary may want a little bit more though if they are retaining half on both Tanev and Lindholm's salary while also dealing with a division rival. Also, I think I like the balance of the lines better with Pettersson playing the wing on Lindholm's line instead of overloading the top line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 (edited) Not sure Chicago goes for it tbh, and I'm not sure Kuzmenko does either. He's got a 12-team NTC, I'd be a bit surprised if a bottom feeder in Chicago wasn't on it. He may not be playing how he wants to play here, or getting the minutes and linemates he'd like, but Vancouver's still near the top of the standings. Players want to win, better chance of him doing that here. Although I do understand the argument of him potentially having a larger role on a bottom feeder. Vancouver will have to navigate around Kuzmenko's limited NTC, I don't see him giving them carte blanche to just ship him wherever. The rest of your proposal is moot if Kuzmenko isn't moved to free up space, we need to move cap out to bring cap in. As for Lindholm, I'd be interested depending on the price, not so sure about Tanev though. Can't help but wonder if we couldn't find a cheaper option. Edited January 30 by Coconuts Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sell.the.team Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 (edited) A bit skeptical on selling the farm for Lindholm given his production this year and UFA status. Edited January 30 by Sell.the.team 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted January 30 Author Share Posted January 30 4 hours ago, RockemSockem said: Elias…. Love the trades and I’m in agreement. Super realistic and could very well happen. If we do acquire Lindholm and Tanev, I’d want to extend both in the offseason for sure. I’m not a cap expert but can we feasibly re-sign both with letting Blueger, Lafferty and Myers go? Replacing Blueger and Lafferty with Bains and Podkolzin next season. We could probably re-sign one but not both if we walked away from Blueger and Lafferty and Myers. I would say Lindholm would be the priority. Not sure what he would want. Based on his production this year I wouldn't give him the Horvat contract. I'd do maybe $7 million max on a 7 year deal. 7x7... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockemSockem Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 13 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said: We could probably re-sign one but not both if we walked away from Blueger and Lafferty and Myers. I would say Lindholm would be the priority. Not sure what he would want. Based on his production this year I wouldn't give him the Horvat contract. I'd do maybe $7 million max on a 7 year deal. 7x7... 6x6 since he’s 30 next season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Hronek Posted January 31 Share Posted January 31 16 hours ago, wai_lai416 said: tanev would solidify the backend.. however i'm not sold on this forward group.. Mikheyev and suter don't belong in the top 6 i don't care what anyone say about mikheyev he's not a top 6 period.. if our 2nd line is struggling now.. replacing EP and kuz on the 2nd line with suter and lindholm it's still going to struggle.. there's 0 play driver on that line.. and i think it's only a matter of time before teams start to overlap their top pairing defenceman and 2nd line against our 3rd line and that's where i think we'll start struggling for goals if the lotto line is shutdown.. the 3rd line is amazing right now but they are mostly playing 3rd/4th lines.. the moment other team up the ante and put their top 2 pairing/ forward lines against them.. will they have the same success?? i'm going to venture towards no.. This is a really good point which is why I’d be interested in revamping the identity of our 2nd line, in terms of making it a premier shut down line that can chip in goals. So, even if opposing top pairing defensemen + 2nd lines counter our 3rd line, we could use a newly created premier shut down 2nd line (Suter-Couture-Mikheyev as an example) to shut down opposing top lines…..which would leave our Lotto Line and 4th line to annihilate what’s left. I’ve mentioned Logan Couture from above (as opposed to a Boone Jenner or Elias Lindholm), because I believe that acquiring Logan Couture would cost us the least amount of picks and prospects relative to other pieces (due to Couture’s age, cap hit, and term). Perhaps I’m wrong but I think Myers + Kuzmenko + B level prospect + 2024 1st gets you Couture + Rutta. Pettersson-Miller-Boeser (Lotto Line) Suter-Couture-Mikheyev (shut down line) Joshua-Bluegar-Garland Hoglander-Aman-Lafferty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigTramFan Posted January 31 Share Posted January 31 Definitely an improvement to our lineup with Kuz out and Lindholm in. But that 2nd line still feels like more a 3rd line with Suter and Mikheyev on it. IMO our #1 need is for 2 top 6 players at the TDL. One to play with Miller-Boeser and one to play with Petey-Mik. Keep Suter as our 4C (and Hogs on 4th line) with the ability to step up in case of injuries. Then we actually have depth in our forward ranks. I'd be happy if Lindholm @50% was one of them (would Raty + 1st round pick get it done?) playing with EP+Mik. Maybe someone like Henrique @50% as the other (2025 2nd round pick?) with JT-Boes. That feels like two legit top 6 lines. For me our #2 need is another Dman, one that can step up to top 4 minutes in the playoffs if required. Tanev fits that need for sure, but he will be expensive to acquire and has a large-ish cap hit even at 50%. I really like Alex Carrier ($2.5m on an expiring deal) from NSH as a puck moving defensive defenceman. He is like a younger version of Tanev. Not as good, but cheaper to acquire and half the cap hit at 50% retained. Plays a ton of PK and does it very well. Good puck mover, doesn't get hemmed in very often. NSH looking to push for the playoffs, has a wealth of talent on D and a shit ton of cap space, maybe they'd be interested in trading Carrier @50% for Kuzmenko + say a 4th round pick. Finally #3 need is maybe some gritty size in our bottom 6 perhaps even a RH center that could take the odd draw, play some PK and steady the 4th line if Suter is moved up to the top 6. I think Sam Carrick would be ideal and pretty cheap to acquire, only $850k and expiring this season. CURRENT CAP SPACE = $1.2m CAP OUT = Kuz $5.5m CAP IN = Lindholm $2.43m + Henrique $2.91m + Carrier $1.25m NEW CAP SPACE AFTER TDL = $0.11m 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Hronek Posted January 31 Share Posted January 31 26 minutes ago, BigTramFan said: Definitely an improvement to our lineup with Kuz out and Lindholm in. But that 2nd line still feels like more a 3rd line with Suter and Mikheyev on it. IMO our #1 need is for 2 top 6 players at the TDL. One to play with Miller-Boeser and one to play with Petey-Mik. Keep Suter as our 4C (and Hogs on 4th line) with the ability to step up in case of injuries. Then we actually have depth in our forward ranks. I'd be happy if Lindholm @50% was one of them (would Raty + 1st round pick get it done?) playing with EP+Mik. Maybe someone like Henrique @50% as the other (2025 2nd round pick?) with JT-Boes. That feels like two legit top 6 lines. For me our #2 need is another Dman, one that can step up to top 4 minutes in the playoffs if required. Tanev fits that need for sure, but he will be expensive to acquire and has a large-ish cap hit even at 50%. I really like Alex Carrier ($2.5m on an expiring deal) from NSH as a puck moving defensive defenceman. He is like a younger version of Tanev. Not as good, but cheaper to acquire and half the cap hit at 50% retained. Plays a ton of PK and does it very well. Good puck mover, doesn't get hemmed in very often. NSH looking to push for the playoffs, has a wealth of talent on D and a shit ton of cap space, maybe they'd be interested in trading Carrier @50% for Kuzmenko + say a 4th round pick. Finally #3 need is maybe some gritty size in our bottom 6 perhaps even a RH center that could take the odd draw, play some PK and steady the 4th line if Suter is moved up to the top 6. I think Sam Carrick would be ideal and pretty cheap to acquire, only $850k and expiring this season. CURRENT CAP SPACE = $1.2m CAP OUT = Kuz $5.5m CAP IN = Lindholm $2.43m + Henrique $2.91m + Carrier $1.25m NEW CAP SPACE AFTER TDL = $0.11m Re: Suter-Lindholm-Mikheyev You’re correct that the line above would be more 3rd line-ish than a 2nd line, but my thought is that it would be an elite shut down line…..so much so to the point that you could throw them out there against another teams’ top line (ultimately resulting in more offensive deployment for our other lines). I also think that a guy like Jenner, Lindholm, or Couture would be able to help ignite a little bit of offense from Suter and Mikheyev which would give this line a little bit of offensive production (even if the primary focus would be on shutting down) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-23 Posted January 31 Share Posted January 31 Lindholm is going to need to play with Pettersson. Maybe the team should just trade for Henrique (50% Retained) and Vatrano instead. Hoglander - Miller - Boeser Pettersson - Henrique - Vatrano Joshua - Blueger - Garland Lafferty - Suter - Mikheyev Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdgarM Posted January 31 Share Posted January 31 The Lotto Line is not a long term solution, also, were we not listening to the "Tankers" not so long ago now we have moved right from that to selling the farm now? Wow! We have improved,yes, but are we there already at the going to the SCF stage? We have finally found some real chemistry, I wouod rather let them see if they can build off a great season myself , and see how far they can go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Hronek Posted January 31 Share Posted January 31 Can someone please explain to me why “the Lotto line is not a long term solution?” Was the WCE line from 2002-2004 not a long term solution? Was Sedin-Sedin-Burrows from 2010-2012 not a long term solution? The Canucks are currently an elite team and the Lotto line, for the most part, has tilted the ice whenever they’ve been on. What am I missing here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.