The Chicoutimi Cucumber

As a BC guy, I feel like I should answer this…but the fact is I seldom get out to the Okanagan, being on the coast (about 5-6 hours away); so can’t speak to it with much authority. Summerland is in the Okanagan region, which is not so much skiing as wine county. Beautiful semi-arid climate. It certainly attracts a lot of tourists, although I don’t imagine it will be insanely chock-a-block with them like Disneyland or something. Its main appeal would be Okanagan Lake (with the usual lake-based activities) and the amazing vineyards and wineries in the area. This is probably not an option with your son, but if you *can* do it, you should absolutely take a wine tour. The wines are glorious and the views often exquisite, with good food often part of the set-up as well. Orchards abound too. As with anywhere in BC the hiking is probably excellent. The Channel Float in nearby Penticton has been recommended to me by friends though I’ve never done it myself. The Okanagan is a unique micro-climate unlike anywhere nearby. Enjoy the gorgeous vibe of it all. One thing to keep an eye on is wildfires. When we first moved out to BC near the turn of the century, my wife and I talked about retiring to the Okanagan someday. With climate change, that’s off the table because the region is semi-routinely targeted by apocalyptic fires. It’ll probably be fine though.

I have a feeling the Habs will never trade Price. Not even in a paper transaction like that. He is the only truly great Hab of the past 30 years. I suspect the marginal gains of moving his contract will not outweigh the sentimental desire to keep him in the fold, forever.

Individual prospects are generally over-hyped by fans and even media. The important thing is critical mass. You need to have sufficient numbers of promising prospects that 1-2 of them can get worked into your lineup, ideally on an annual basis. (That number is somewhat arbitrary; what you really need is to be able to reliably replace expensive veterans with cheaper youngsters). Other than Reinbacher, I'm not sure any of our current prospects should be considered crown jewels. The crown jewels, Demidov and Hutson, are already on the team.

Foote represents continuity in that he both knows Tocchet’s system and will presumably continue to deploy it. He also probably represents continuity in the Canucks’ approach to the Petterson enigma - an approach that seems to be rooted in the assumption that Petey doesn’t train hard enough or practice hard enough. Much is being made over the fact that Hughes likes Foote. It seems to me that liking a guy as assistant coach is one thing, liking him as head coach another. One aspect of this that I haven’t heard mentioned, but that seems relevant to me, is that the list of coaches Pettersson has seen off keeps growing longer. Green, Boudreau, now Tocchet. I’d be concerned that he is internalizing the message that he can just tune a coach out and the guy will eventually be gone, a mindset that compounds his uncoachability. Keeping Tocchet, which was their preferred position, would have removed that factor. Foote may be the next best thing in terms of communicating to him that ‘organizationally, we are committed to this philosophy long term.’ The ominous note is that Foote’s one experience as head coach in the WHL was an unmitigated disaster. He does have the mug to be an NHL coach, though.

I say that, if you are a team with lots of great young talent and prospects, do NOT get involved with offer sheets. That’s like painting a massive target on your back inviting predatory/retaliatory offer sheets for your guys. It would be different if offer sheets were just a normal part of doing business. But, although they’ve grown somewhat more normalized in recent years, there still seems to be a kind of GM’s gentleman’s code. The teams that should be doing it are teams like Pittsburgh that have zero prospects.

A lot of those AAVs and terms look low to me. Then again, I always just assume some jackanapse GM will commit to massive overpay. If we can get Granlund at 2 X5, we certainly should do that.

Thanks. As long as we avoid a NMC, we can always bury him in the minors if the term ends up being too long and he declines precipitously… That being said, he’s not big. Once you’re locked in on a 5’10 C, wouldn’t a 5’9 Rossi be a much better investment? Or is it that Granlund is a more proven commodity (and one we don’t have to trade for)? He’s also been bouncing around in the last couple of years after long stints in Minny/Nashville. Not sure if that tells us anything or not.

Word is that Canucks ownership is quite hostile to salary retention. Assuming minimal retention, Petterson is a guy that a team takes a flyer on when they're either desperate or trying to avoid a rebuild by stretching out the life-span of an aging core, like Washington did in signing PLD. We have a fair mass of young talent, so taking a huge risk on that contract seems an unnecessary swing for the fences. Definitely warming to the Granlund idea, if he hits the market.

It will definitely be easier to acquire an old guy who might have 2-3 years left in the tank. That could be done either via UFA or via a moderate-cost trade. Personally, I'm surprised we haven't heard more rumblings around Granlund. Is he a sure bet to re-up in Dallas? I've boldfaced your last sentence because that's what I'm asking. WHO is out there who is in the 25-ish age bracket and might plausibly be available. The only one I'm aware of is Rossi.

I’ve been avoiding this thread out of fear that some posters I like/respect would out themselves as MAGA neo-fascists. Phew. Carney handled Trump as well as anyone could. The main “win” would probably be that Trump respects him. This is different from moving that jackass toward a more reasonable position, but it’s something. Notably, the administration seems to be retreating from the massive damage it’s inflicted in a mere four months, given Vance’s comical “mistakes were made” speech in Europe recently and the shrinkage of tariffs against China announced this morning. Yeah, we need SERIOUS government that gets things done and has a steely-eyed assessment of Canada’s economic and strategic needs in an era when the USA is no longer a reliable ally or trading partner. The very early indications are that Carney understands the assignment. But will he be able to move the apparatus of government, known for its sclerotic tendencies, in the desired direction? We shall see.

So far Rossi seems to be the only genuine case of a 2nd-line C who is both within the Habs’ window, age-wise, and who might be realistically available via trade, for contractual reasons. This doesn’t mean we should trade for him. I’m non-committal on that. It does mean that we need to be realistic about the trade market. All the other names seem to be just wind whistling through the pines. Horvat? Maaaaaybe…if NYI decide to rebuild. So far we have no evidence that this will be their direction. Larkin? There’s some smoke out there (including here in Van), but that would be a radical move for that organization, not that far from us trading Suzuki. What other C is out there and has a REALISTIC chance of being on the market?

Yup. 2nd-line C are extremely valuable commodities. It takes a specific confluence of circumstances to motivate a team to trade one away. I can readily anticipate the same folks currently saying “make a trade” expressing outrage when said trade involves, say, Pettersson or Zegras or some other Hail Mary move. So: it has to be a trade for a relatively small handful of good candidates. And unless the teams that have those players is entering a rebuild/retool AND happens to see the player as disposable in that context, there’s no deal to be made. One guy whose name keeps floating around is Marco Rossi. He’s small but productive. Is that an option? Or are we wedded to the idea that the elusive 2nd-line C also has to be big and strong?

You live in Alberta, right? - so that position makes sense. For my part, I wouldn’t mind seeing McDavid a Cup. He’s one of the all-time greats and his story won’t feel properly told without winning one. 🤷‍♂️ As for Dallas, I’ve heard concerns raised about their blueline, but it does feel like it’s “time” for a franchise that has quietly been elite for several years.

Fair point about Newhook. He did seem to find another level once we moved him to C. The problems with him are (a) that “other level” is still not that productive and (b) he is absolutely atrocious in the dot. Even if we agree with @Commandant’s eccentric but well-argued view that FOs are vastly overrated, it’s still not ideal to have a guy whose percentage is in the 30s taking like 1000 draws a year. To my mind, if Giroux can stay at a 50-point level for a years or two, then he buys us a bit of time to fix the position properly. The worrisome thing is that he has had a 15-point drop in production for each of the last two years: from 79 to 64 points, then from 64 to 50. That rings alarm bells. So…maybe you’re right.

Add me as a fully paid-up charter member of the “anyone but the Leafs” club. Personally I don’t give a tinker’s fart about whether the Cup ends up in Canada, unless it’s in Montreal. In fact, if Ottawa won it would actively pain me, whereas the Cup being won by soulless franchises like Anaheim or Carolina only mildly irritates. But yes. Leafs winning is the ultimate worst-case scenario. It’d be like watching the opening sequences of “Fallout” or “Last of Us.”