Vancouver Canucks Messageboard

Mëds wrote: ↑Mon Jun 03, 2019 1:22 pm Had a bit of fun arm-chair GM'ing on capfriendly today with some downtime at work....

Started by trading Sutter, Gaunce, and 4th to Ottawa for Borowiecki and a 7th. From the Canucks perspective it's a cap dump.

Then I re-signed Edler, Hutton, Schenn, and Boeser, and grabbed Skinner from UFA.

Virtanen - Pettersson - Boeser ($8.5M)
Pearson - Horvat - Skinner ($6.5M)
Roussel - Gaudette - Baertschi
Schaller - Beagle - Eriksson
Spooner

Edler ($6M) - Tanev
Hutton ($3.2M) - Stecher
Hughes - Schenn ($1.2M)
Borowiecki ($1.2M) - Biega

Markstrom
Demko

Total cap hit is $73.65M.

Looking at it from that perspective and it's easy to see that if we could be in play for any of the blueline upgrades that people talk about, Karlsson, Trouba, Myers, Stralman, and even maybe a look at Gardiner, especially true if we were to move out Tanev and/or Eriksson.

lol so 40-goal UFA Skinner is going to sign for $6.5M while 30-goal RFA Boeser get's $8.5M?

If they could triple-up Hutton's salary for Karlsson, that would be swell. Move Hutton out for a 3rd round pick (or use him as an add to our 3rd for another 2nd) at the draft.

ESQ wrote: ↑Mon Jun 03, 2019 2:32 pm
If a kid burns a year off his ELC by joining after the college season ends, then the tradeoff is he isn't eligible for an offer sheet after the ELC expires.

It will apply to Q Hughes as well, and I assume it applies to Tryamkin?

I believe you, but where did you find that tid-bit? Google only seems to return searches that just say "RFA", or "RFA that did not select arbitration". I can't find any reference to a burned year of ELC.

Island Nucklehead wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2019 7:39 am

Mëds wrote: ↑Mon Jun 03, 2019 1:22 pm Had a bit of fun arm-chair GM'ing on capfriendly today with some downtime at work....

Started by trading Sutter, Gaunce, and 4th to Ottawa for Borowiecki and a 7th. From the Canucks perspective it's a cap dump.

Then I re-signed Edler, Hutton, Schenn, and Boeser, and grabbed Skinner from UFA.

Virtanen - Pettersson - Boeser ($8.5M)
Pearson - Horvat - Skinner ($6.5M)
Roussel - Gaudette - Baertschi
Schaller - Beagle - Eriksson
Spooner

Edler ($6M) - Tanev
Hutton ($3.2M) - Stecher
Hughes - Schenn ($1.2M)
Borowiecki ($1.2M) - Biega

Markstrom
Demko

Total cap hit is $73.65M.

Looking at it from that perspective and it's easy to see that if we could be in play for any of the blueline upgrades that people talk about, Karlsson, Trouba, Myers, Stralman, and even maybe a look at Gardiner, especially true if we were to move out Tanev and/or Eriksson.

lol so 40-goal UFA Skinner is going to sign for $6.5M while 30-goal RFA Boeser get's $8.5M?

If they could triple-up Hutton's salary for Karlsson, that would be swell. Move Hutton out for a 3rd round pick (or use him as an add to our 3rd for another 2nd) at the draft.

Boeser is 23 and projected by many to be a 70-80 point winger who should approach 40 goals on a regular basis over 82 games.

Skinner is 27 and has only hit that mark once, came close one other time, and he has maxed out twice at 63 points. Up until the rumor about him getting a possible offer from Buffalo for around $9M on an extension, I don't think I had ever heard of anyone putting Jeff Skinner in the salary range of Sidney Crosby.

That's not to say I disagree with your point. If Boeser is wanting that much it only makes sense that Skinner would get something similar.

Skinner may have somewhat of a concussion weakness, I don't know but you can't deny his excellent attendance record.
That probably means, like the Sedins, he knows how to manage himself.
I actually think Brock does too and although things didn't look right the first 3rd of the season, I think he was doing
a rehab on the fly sort of thing. He got stronger over time. He drooped some pounds, over time, but not before he should.

Boeser has a higher ceiling than Skinner. If Skinner only wanted 7, I''d be interested. On either of the top 2 lines.
Oh Well. F****** Cap.

Elliotte Friedman:

ALEX EDLER

EF: “I’ve heard some really interesting things about this whole situation. There is definitely a feeling this has gone off the rails. But one thing that people have always warned me about is the real deadline is coming up. If it’s not July 1 itself or June 23, when you can first start talking to players, this week is a big week for a lot of teams. They want to know where their guys are going, if they’re staying or going. I have heard San Jose if they lose some of their D. I still think there’s a chance that maybe Vancouver and him sort it out, but this is definitely more difficult than anybody expected it would be. And there are people convinced he will not be going back to Vancouver, but again, look, if he really wants to go back and they really want him there’s a path there. I hesitate to say 100 per cent yes or no, but there’s no question this has been a lot harder than everyone thought it would be.

“The issue is 1) Term, and 2) Expansion draft availability. They want him eligible for the expansion draft, he doesn’t want to be.”

Tciso wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2019 9:31 am

ESQ wrote: ↑Mon Jun 03, 2019 2:32 pm
If a kid burns a year off his ELC by joining after the college season ends, then the tradeoff is he isn't eligible for an offer sheet after the ELC expires.

It will apply to Q Hughes as well, and I assume it applies to Tryamkin?

I believe you, but where did you find that tid-bit? Google only seems to return searches that just say "RFA", or "RFA that did not select arbitration". I can't find any reference to a burned year of ELC.

To be eligible for an offer sheet the player must have completed 3 professional seasons.

A professional season under that definition is 10+ games.

I’d love Edler back but I hope Bennington holds firm

micky107 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2019 12:35 pm Elliotte Friedman:

ALEX EDLER

EF: “I’ve heard some really interesting things about this whole situation. There is definitely a feeling this has gone off the rails. But one thing that people have always warned me about is the real deadline is coming up. If it’s not July 1 itself or June 23, when you can first start talking to players, this week is a big week for a lot of teams. They want to know where their guys are going, if they’re staying or going. I have heard San Jose if they lose some of their D. I still think there’s a chance that maybe Vancouver and him sort it out, but this is definitely more difficult than anybody expected it would be. And there are people convinced he will not be going back to Vancouver, but again, look, if he really wants to go back and they really want him there’s a path there. I hesitate to say 100 per cent yes or no, but there’s no question this has been a lot harder than everyone thought it would be.

“The issue is 1) Term, and 2) Expansion draft availability. They want him eligible for the expansion draft, he doesn’t want to be.”

That's an interesting bit of info.

My take is that if Edler really wants to be in Vancouver, and he thinks he's actually worth a contract, then he would take 2 years now and be UFA at the time of the expansion draft to save a protection spot and then re-sign his retirement contract in Vancouver like he wants to.

The fact that he's not willing to go a 2 year deal to make that happen tells me he himself thinks that he won't be worth the money he gets now when that time comes.

Hockey Widow wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2019 12:43 pm I’d love Edler back but I hope Bennington holds firm

Ya, but I have no clue what Eddy is thinking these days. From his perspective; he knows this is his last contract, save 2 or 3 one year deals
involving moving around.
So it wouldn't surprise me one bit if the Edler camp is staying quite firm on something like 7mil. for 3, even 4; With protection.
That's why I said last week, doubt he's back.
My numbers may be a bit off but a 2 yr. deal ? No

If the cost of resigning Edler is protecting him in the draft, it better be a VERY cap friendly deal. Right now, from what I am reading if he isn't accepting a two year deal or a deal where he can be exposed I hope the Canucks walk away from him.

micky107 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2019 12:58 pm

Hockey Widow wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2019 12:43 pm I’d love Edler back but I hope Bennington holds firm

Ya, but I have no clue what Eddy is thinking these days. From his perspective; he knows this is his last contract, save 2 or 3 one year deals
involving moving around.
So it wouldn't surprise me one bit if the Edler camp is staying quite firm on something like 7mil. for 3, even 4; With protection.
That's why I said last week, doubt he's back.
My numbers may be a bit off but a 2 yr. deal ? No

Why does it have to be? If he goes 4 years it's probably that way for sure, but go 2 years and play well and the Canucks would want him back on another 2 year deal at 35 years old, and if the cap hit was acceptable possibly even 3. They would for sure be willing to go year to year with him after that.

I do have to start wondering what it is in the Vancouver water when it comes to our "loyal hometown" defensemen. Hamhuis refused to budge when pitched the idea of going away for 2-4 months and then re-signing here for a few more years. On one hand they want to stay in Vancouver and play out their careers here, but on the other they won't give anything up to make it happen. I do understand the professional athlete's desire to get a guaranteed payday with longer term and a promised paycheque should they get injured, but when you've raked in the millions that guys like this have, it's pure greed that stops them up from sticking somewhere they say they want to be.

I'm not faulting them, just saying that their desire to stay put is pretty limited and easily bought when it comes to any real loyalty to Vancity.

Benning can always give Edler a NTC instead of a NMC, it's pretty close to the same thing anyway. Does Edler really think Seattle would pick a 35 year old injury prone dman in the expansion draft? I guess it's a risk but it's a pretty darn small one, and if they do he goes to work a couple of hour drive down the I5 for a year or two.

It's an odd negotiation, if Edler wants to be here that badly then he should take a 2 year deal, or perhaps a 3 year deal with a NMC. Benning holds all the cards here IMHO, he's got Hutton, Hughes and perhaps Juolevi behind Edler if he doesn't come back, and he can always go sign another LHD in free agency as well. I'm not sure 50-60 games of Edler a season is as beneficial as most seem to think, so if he's back fine, but if not it's not a huge issue.

Diehard1 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2019 1:20 pm Benning can always give Edler a NTC instead of a NMC, it's pretty close to the same thing anyway. Does Edler really think Seattle would pick a 35 year old injury prone dman in the expansion draft? I guess it's a risk but it's a pretty darn small one, and if they do he goes to work a couple of hour drive down the I5 for a year or two.

It's an odd negotiation, if Edler wants to be here that badly then he should take a 2 year deal, or perhaps a 3 year deal with a NMC. Benning holds all the cards here IMHO, he's got Hutton, Hughes and perhaps Juolevi behind Edler if he doesn't come back, and he can always go sign another LHD in free agency as well. I'm not sure 50-60 games of Edler a season is as beneficial as most seem to think, so if he's back fine, but if not it's not a huge issue.

At the end of the day, my personal opinion is we'll be fine without him. Could actually be a God's send. Pains me to say that but the
idea of depending so hard on Eddy is, at this point, I gotta say, counter productive.
There is no question that extra cap space, (plus a bit) can replace him with a younger guy, eventually.
I was an advocate of punting Tanev in a deal but me thinks his value isn't what most canuck fans and media think.
So now, keep Chris and let someone else pay Edward.
Keep in mind, strengthening the offense with two top six forward, one for each line, makes us hard to defend and our D will
not be pressed as much, well not quite.

Let him walk. Re up Hutton to a contractbif it makes sense. If it doesn’t trade his ass at the draft. Sign Jordie Benn and scan the dumpster and the waiver wire. No big ass contracts to Myers or Gardiner.

Benning can always give him his NMC if he agrees in writing to waive for the expansion draft. Maybe Benning only wants to give him a modified NTC because he has tried to move him the past two TDD. If that's the case if I were Edler I wouldn't trust the deal.

Two years with whatever trade protection Edler wants or let him walk.