Would You Pay Big for Pettersson Over Eichel?

[RangersIn7]

Obviously the Eichel situation has stalled. He needs 1 of 2 surgeries that will keep him out of the lineup for some time and there are questions about the long-term viability of his health coming off such a surgery.

The question then becomes this…

Elias Pettersson is available. Despite any unwillingness on Vancouver’s part to trade him, he has rejected every offer they have thrown at him thus far, and by all accounts they haven’t tried to lock him up long-term. All reports say their offers are in the 2-4 year, 6.5-7 million range.

If he could be gotten, he would actually be preferable to Eichel and I think this may have been Drury’s intention all along. We know they’ve coveted him since his draft year as he was their target in June of ‘17 but Vancouver backed out.

What package could get that done that you could live with?

Keeping in mind that Vancouver can’t seem to get him signed?

 

 

[BlairBettsBlocksEverything]

I definitely don't offer sheet him. 4 first rounders is a huge ask

The issue with any of these big names is, is it worth losing Zibanejad after this year to bring in any of these big name guys, be it Pettersson or Eichel.

Zib for 8 years is scary, but its the only way to get him in for for the first 4 years of that contract when we reasonably can say we'll have a solid window to win. Is Pettersson worth Zibanejad and 4 first round picks? I would say no.

 

[RangersIn7]

Just now, BlairBettsBlocksEverything said:

I definitely don't offer sheet him. 4 first rounders is a huge ask

The issue with any of these big names is, is it worth losing Zibanejad after this year to bring in any of these big name guys, be it Pettersson or Eichel.

Zib for 8 years is scary, but its the only way to get him in for for the first 4 years of that contract when we reasonably can say we'll have a solid window to win. Is Pettersson worth Zibanejad and 4 first round picks? I would say no.

 

I’m not saying offer sheet.

Not at all. They aren’t real.

Im saying a straight trade.

It is my belief, however unfounded, that Pettersson doesn’t want to be in Vancouver long-term.

 

Just trade for him. And what’s the price

[RJWantsTheCup]

Kravtsov, Robertson, Strome & a #1 pick.

 

Vancouver is probably going to ask for Fox & Zibanejad plus as a starting point.

[BlairBettsBlocksEverything]

Trade-wise, Idk. Hard to put together a package for Pettersson

1st round pick

Conditional 2nd (highest pick of our two we have next year)

Strome

Gauthier

Jones

 

IDK, tough to make a deal that doesn't seem like we're throwing our spare parts at them for their top end player.

Also, signing him to a big money long term extension means less money for Fox and Kakko next offseason

[LindG1000]

3 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

I’m not saying offer sheet.

Not at all. They aren’t real.

Im saying a straight trade.

It is my belief, however unfounded, that Pettersson doesn’t want to be in Vancouver long-term.

 

Just trade for him. And what’s the price

I don't think there's a way Vancouver entertains a trade without a forcing function. An offer sheet does that. 

[Drew a Penalty]

I own a Pettersson jersey. That says everything that needs to be said with regards to my feelings on this.

[RangersIn7]

6 minutes ago, RJWantsTheCup said:

Kravtsov, Robertson, Strome & a #1 pick.

 

Vancouver is probably going to ask for Fox & Zibanejad plus as a starting point.

Which you can’t do and neither can they. Fox for them = no Hughes.

They can’t do both.

 

Chytil, Kravtsov, Lundkvist, Strome, plus a 1st

[Pete]

17 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

I’m not saying offer sheet.

Not at all. They aren’t real.

Im saying a straight trade.

It is my belief, however unfounded, that Pettersson doesn’t want to be in Vancouver long-term.

 

Just trade for him. And what’s the price

If he doesn't want to be in VAN long-term, wouldn't he just sign the 2-4 year deal?

[Pete]

8 minutes ago, Drew a Penalty said:

I own a Pettersson jersey. That says everything that needs to be said with regards to my feelings on this.

That you're a Pett-ophile?

[Drew a Penalty]

4 minutes ago, Pete said:

That you're a Pett-ophile?

[josh]

No, too expensive to offer sheet. And the asking price via trade is going to be outrageous.

[RangersIn7]

22 minutes ago, Pete said:

If he doesn't want to be in VAN long-term, wouldn't he just sign the 2-4 year deal?

But he hasn’t.

That sounds to me like someone who won’t spend another 1-2 years there, let alone more.

Again… all just speculative.

[Pete]

1 hour ago, RangersIn7 said:

But he hasn’t.

That sounds to me like someone who won’t spend another 1-2 years there, let alone more.

Again… all just speculative.

Yea I don't know about that. If that were the case they wouldn't wait 2 weeks before the season to say so nor would team waste the summer trying to sign someone they knew didn't want to be there. 

[Phil]

Nope. Devil you know.

The Rangers are either beginning a window or will be very shortly given their recent investments and the ones right around the corner (Fox, most notably).

I'm not gutting the next four years' worth of futures on a player with fewer than 200 games played, good as I think he is and will be.

[RangersIn7]

6 minutes ago, Pete said:

Yea I don't know about that. If that were the case they wouldn't wait 2 weeks before the season to say so nor would team waste the summer trying to sign someone they knew didn't want to be there. 

You would if you’re desperate to keep a player you thought was your franchise that you could maybe turn around.

 

It’s not as if we haven’t seen this before. 
 

To me, Pettersson seems like he’d only stay there for extreme dollars, which they aren’t wiling to give him at this point. Which means his heart isn’t there. Which means he desires to be elsewhere 

[RangersIn7]

3 minutes ago, Phil said:

Nope. Devil you know.

The Rangers are either beginning a window or will be very shortly given their recent investments and the ones right around the corner (Fox, most notably).

I'm not gutting the next four years' worth of futures on a player with fewer than 200 games played, good as I think he is and will be.

Again… not talking about an offer sheet.

Saying a trade.

I’ll give you what amounts to 2 premium assets plus 3 more at a B+ level, and you give me Pettersson and I’ll pay him. Cause he likely doesn’t want to stay in Vancouver. Or you aren’t willing to commit to him.

Either way, he isn’t there. So what’s the difference?

 

 

[Phil]

I mean, I guess, but I don't think you'd be willing to pay what it will likely take to acquire him. I doubt many would. The likelihood he could be had for whatever amalgamation didn't land Eichel either is fantasy, IMO. In fact, the trade probably begins (and ends) with Lafreniere and/or Kakko. If I were Vancouver, I'd literally say I want both to even entertain the idea.

[RangersIn7]

Just now, Phil said:

I mean, I guess, but I don't think you'd be willing to pay what it will likely take to acquire him. I doubt many would. The likelihood he could be had for whatever amalgamation didn't land Eichel either is fantasy, IMO. In fact, the trade probably begins (and ends) with Lafreniere and/or Kakko. If I were Vancouver, I'd literally say I want both to even entertain the idea.

Even if you know he isn’t signing or staying long-term? And you can get a good package for him?

 

Too many GM’s ignore that when they’re in this spot. 
 

Im saying Vancouver seems like they might be.

[Pete]

31 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

You would if you’re desperate to keep a player you thought was your franchise that you could maybe turn around.

 

It’s not as if we haven’t seen this before. 
 

To me, Pettersson seems like he’d only stay there for extreme dollars, which they aren’t wiling to give him at this point. Which means his heart isn’t there. Which means he desires to be elsewhere 

seems like not so much?

 

 

[RangersIn7]

2 minutes ago, Pete said:

seems like not so much?

 

 

I started this saying it’s purely speculative. 
They could well keep him and both. Which they honestly should. But we don’t know if they truly can or will based on cost and implications, etc.

 

Intense talks don’t mean a contract. 
 

Im sure Vancouver would love to keep him. But can they?

Will they?

 

Im just saying they should make an offer and pursue

[Pete]

6 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

I started this saying it’s purely speculative. 
They could well keep him and both. Which they honestly should. But we don’t know if they truly can or will based on cost and implications, etc.

 

Intense talks don’t mean a contract. 
 

Im sure Vancouver would love to keep him. But can they?

Will they?

 

Im just saying they should make an offer and pursue

Separately from "should they make an offer" is the idea he doesn't want to be there. There's no evidence of that besides hard negotiations.

[Phil]

44 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

Even if you know he isn’t signing or staying long-term? And you can get a good package for him?

 

Too many GM’s ignore that when they’re in this spot. 
 

Im saying Vancouver seems like they might be.

Yes, because worst case, I can almost certainly get him to sign a one-year deal and kick the can down the road. They're not without options.

[Phil]

10 minutes ago, Pete said:

Separately from "should they make an offer" is the idea he doesn't want to be there. There's no evidence of that besides hard negotiations.

Right. Just fan projections/speculation based on that quote he gave over the summer about wanting to play for a winning team.

[josh]

46 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

I started this saying it’s purely speculative. 
They could well keep him and both. Which they honestly should. But we don’t know if they truly can or will based on cost and implications, etc.

 

Intense talks don’t mean a contract. 
 

Im sure Vancouver would love to keep him. But can they?

Will they?

 

Im just saying they should make an offer and pursue

It would have to be a drastically overpayment to get him in a trade.

Then, it's going to be an overpayment to get him signed- or he'd already be signed.