Which of the core should be signed long term this summer?

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

Which player(s) would you sign to a long term contract this summer?

Poll runs till Wed Sep 08, 2021 10:44 am

Pettersson
0
No votes
Hughes
3
16%
Demko
2
11%
Pettersson and Hughes
3
16%
Pettersson and Demko
0
No votes
Hughes and Demko
1
5%
All - Pettersson, Hughes and Demko
9
47%
None - Neither Pettersson, Hughes nor Demko
1
5%
 
Total votes: 19

User avatar
SKYO
CC Legend
Posts: 12557
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:34 pm

Re: Which of the core should be signed long term this summer?

Post by SKYO »

Meds wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:11 pm
Doyle Hargraves wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 1:01 pm It’s about leverage and designing a future team cap. May as well keep the costs down where you can. Two -three year bridges make a ton of sense considering this team is cap crunched for another year. Then go eight years. Walking them straight to free agency with five year deals is pure stupidity and takes away a lot of leverage.
Yeah. And it’s funny how SKYO doesn’t seem to grasp that the age of a player is important.

I actually don’t care about the ceiling or AAV that these guys sign for. If they are worth it when the ink the deals then get ‘er done.

What we don’t want is huge AAV on players for 2 or 3 years after they start to naturally decline due to age.

3 year (max) bridge deals now for Hughes and Petey means that when they sign their monster 8 year deals we get to re-assess value when they are 32-33 instead of at 35-36.

We have rich owners? Who cares. Those owners are still paying Loui and he’s well past his expiry date and costing the team $6M per.
What Meds doesn't seem to grasp is the flat cap, don't you think the player and his agent care about that sort of thing?

You care a lot about age/term, but that's the cost you pay as a successful franchise to maintain and keep a young core together for a long period of time.

It's not like we'll be giving contracts till they are 41 (ala Weber, Luongo), but mid-30's ish, you bridge and sign long term, that's how you keep and maintain a successful franchise core together for numerous years. It's how the Pens and Hawks leveraged and succeeded winning multiple championships in the modern cap era, sure they are paying for it now, but really who gives a shit when they won 3 Cups each with that tactic of bridging, then paying em for that success afterwards with $/term.
A long time ago, a baseball player remarked: "If I owned a ballclub, I'd hire a $5,000 coach and a $15,000 scout."
User avatar
Cousin Strawberry
MVP
MVP
Posts: 14877
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:19 pm
Location: in the shed with a fresh packed bowl

Re: Which of the core should be signed long term this summer?

Post by Cousin Strawberry »

Meds only cares about why the exit lights are always so low. It makes him rage
If you need air...call it in
User avatar
Meds
MVP
MVP
Posts: 8788
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Which of the core should be signed long term this summer?

Post by Meds »

The Brown Wizard wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:32 pm Meds only cares about why the exit lights are always so low. It makes him rage
You. Have. No. Idea.
User avatar
Meds
MVP
MVP
Posts: 8788
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Which of the core should be signed long term this summer?

Post by Meds »

SKYO wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:30 pm
Meds wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:11 pm
Doyle Hargraves wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 1:01 pm It’s about leverage and designing a future team cap. May as well keep the costs down where you can. Two -three year bridges make a ton of sense considering this team is cap crunched for another year. Then go eight years. Walking them straight to free agency with five year deals is pure stupidity and takes away a lot of leverage.
Yeah. And it’s funny how SKYO doesn’t seem to grasp that the age of a player is important.

I actually don’t care about the ceiling or AAV that these guys sign for. If they are worth it when the ink the deals then get ‘er done.

What we don’t want is huge AAV on players for 2 or 3 years after they start to naturally decline due to age.

3 year (max) bridge deals now for Hughes and Petey means that when they sign their monster 8 year deals we get to re-assess value when they are 32-33 instead of at 35-36.

We have rich owners? Who cares. Those owners are still paying Loui and he’s well past his expiry date and costing the team $6M per.
What Meds doesn't seem to grasp is the flat cap, don't you think the player and his agent care about that sort of thing?

You care a lot about age/term, but that's the cost you pay as a successful franchise to maintain and keep a young core together for a long period of time.

It's not like we'll be giving contracts till they are 41 (ala Weber, Luongo), but mid-30's ish, you bridge and sign long term, that's how you keep and maintain a successful franchise core together for numerous years. It's how the Pens and Hawks leveraged and succeeded winning multiple championships in the modern cap era, sure they are paying for it now, but really who gives a shit when they won 3 Cups each with that tactic of bridging, then paying em for that success afterwards with $/term.
The Blackhawks already had a Cup winning team when they signed Kane and Toews to bridge deals. We aren’t there. We don’t have that proven nucleus. And I’ll bet that Bowman would like a do over on that now that Kane and Toews are chewing up $20M and the Shithawks haven’t won anything for the better part of a decade. In fact their last Cup was the year before Toews and Kane got their big payday.

Pittsburgh has done what they’ve done because they have the best player to lace up skates in the last 20 years and his understudy is a franchise level talent on 30 other teams.

Pettersson hasn’t shown us anything more than a guy who might produce at an 82 point pace. He hasn’t won anything besides a Calder. He’s not in the same category as those guys you mention, and the state of the organization isn’t where those ones were either.
User avatar
Vin Tanner
MVP
MVP
Posts: 22248
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: Which of the core should be signed long term this summer?

Post by Vin Tanner »

Crosby is one of the five best players of all time and is a poor comparable. But Chicago and Pittsburgh had early success. It’s a different time. Short bridge 2 - 3 years then lock them up through their primes or get them to agree to eight year deals. Walking them straight to UFA could bite the team in the ass especially if they continue to stink. They won’t give a fuck how much money is on the table they will leave at first opportunity if they’ve missed playoffs six of eight years. Petey is going to miss 2 of his first three years. Keep your leverage if you are the GM. If the team stinks or they are good having one to two years of team control at the end of their next contract is a good thing. They are 24/25 and then you lock them in for their prime.
We wan out of da time- James Elmer Benning
User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 29932
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 12:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: Which of the core should be signed long term this summer?

Post by Strangelove »

Micky wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 8:08 am Locking in all three is obvious to me and what I voted.
Obvious to you Mick... but not to the rest of us.

I don't see the point of a poll or discussion on this.

We should simply ask Micky what we should do!

Mick you strut around wrapped in your layers of wisdom like so many silk robes

... you don't know what it's like for the rest of us! :(

We're like blind beggars on the street hoping you'll swing open your mansion window and toss out a crumb.

Alms for the poor. ALMS FOR THE POOR!! :cry:
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!
User avatar
Cousin Strawberry
MVP
MVP
Posts: 14877
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:19 pm
Location: in the shed with a fresh packed bowl

Re: Which of the core should be signed long term this summer?

Post by Cousin Strawberry »

Does Mick come down from his tower once a year to wash our feet with his hair?
If you need air...call it in
User avatar
Vin Tanner
MVP
MVP
Posts: 22248
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: Which of the core should be signed long term this summer?

Post by Vin Tanner »

Strangelove wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 4:41 pm
Micky wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 8:08 am Locking in all three is obvious to me and what I voted.
Obvious to you Mick... but not to the rest of us.

I don't see the point of a poll or discussion on this.

We should simply ask Micky what we should do!

Mick you strut around wrapped in your layers of wisdom like so many silk robes

... you don't know what it's like for the rest of us! :(

We're like blind beggars on the street hoping you'll swing open your mansion window and toss out a crumb.

Alms for the poor. ALMS FOR THE POOR!! :cry:
:lol:
We wan out of da time- James Elmer Benning
theman
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1724
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 2:51 pm

Re: Which of the core should be signed long term this summer?

Post by theman »

Chef Boi RD wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 7:31 am You lock all 3 down long term. They are the hub like Terrace is to Prince Rupert, Kitimat and Smithers. You need a hub of core players surrounded by your satellite players, plain and simple
Never thought I would see those city’s names on this message board, but you forgot Stewart.
User avatar
Micky
MVP
MVP
Posts: 15878
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 5:27 am
Location: Richmond, B.C.

Re: Which of the core should be signed long term this summer?

Post by Micky »

Strangelove wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 4:41 pm I should simply ask Micky what I should do!
tart cherries
magnesium
ginger
apple cider vinegar
celery
nettle tea
dandelion
milk thistle seeds

:drink: kidding, k?
"evolution"
User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 29932
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 12:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: Which of the core should be signed long term this summer?

Post by Strangelove »

Micky wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 5:54 pm
Strangelove wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 4:41 pm I should simply ask Micky what I should do!
tart cherries
magnesium
ginger
apple cider vinegar
celery
nettle tea
dandelion
milk thistle seeds

:drink: kidding, k?
I'm glad it makes you happy to pretend I have gout Mick.
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!
User avatar
SKYO
CC Legend
Posts: 12557
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:34 pm

Re: Which of the core should be signed long term this summer?

Post by SKYO »

Doyle Hargraves wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 4:35 pm Crosby is one of the five best players of all time and is a poor comparable. But Chicago and Pittsburgh had early success. It’s a different time. Short bridge 2 - 3 years then lock them up through their primes or get them to agree to eight year deals. Walking them straight to UFA could bite the team in the ass especially if they continue to stink. They won’t give a fuck how much money is on the table they will leave at first opportunity if they’ve missed playoffs six of eight years. Petey is going to miss 2 of his first three years. Keep your leverage if you are the GM. If the team stinks or they are good having one to two years of team control at the end of their next contract is a good thing. They are 24/25 and then you lock them in for their prime.
Both of those teams had dark years to tank to get those 1st/2nd overall picks.
A long time ago, a baseball player remarked: "If I owned a ballclub, I'd hire a $5,000 coach and a $15,000 scout."
User avatar
SKYO
CC Legend
Posts: 12557
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:34 pm

Re: Which of the core should be signed long term this summer?

Post by SKYO »

Meds wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 4:08 pm Pettersson hasn’t shown us anything more than a guy who might produce at an 82 point pace. He hasn’t won anything besides a Calder. He’s not in the same category as those guys you mention, and the state of the organization isn’t where those ones were either.
Then by that token, you shouldn't have to worry about Petey's contract, bridging etc, and by all means an easy re-sign down the road.
A long time ago, a baseball player remarked: "If I owned a ballclub, I'd hire a $5,000 coach and a $15,000 scout."
User avatar
Meds
MVP
MVP
Posts: 8788
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Which of the core should be signed long term this summer?

Post by Meds »

SKYO wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 10:32 pm
Meds wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 4:08 pm Pettersson hasn’t shown us anything more than a guy who might produce at an 82 point pace. He hasn’t won anything besides a Calder. He’s not in the same category as those guys you mention, and the state of the organization isn’t where those ones were either.
Then by that token, you shouldn't have to worry about Petey's contract, bridging etc, and by all means an easy re-sign down the road.
Who's worried?
User avatar
SKYO
CC Legend
Posts: 12557
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:34 pm

Re: Which of the core should be signed long term this summer?

Post by SKYO »

Meds wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 10:33 pm
SKYO wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 10:32 pm
Meds wrote: Sat Mar 13, 2021 4:08 pm Pettersson hasn’t shown us anything more than a guy who might produce at an 82 point pace. He hasn’t won anything besides a Calder. He’s not in the same category as those guys you mention, and the state of the organization isn’t where those ones were either.
Then by that token, you shouldn't have to worry about Petey's contract, bridging etc, and by all means an easy re-sign down the road.
Who's worried?
You and Hargraves seem concerned.
A long time ago, a baseball player remarked: "If I owned a ballclub, I'd hire a $5,000 coach and a $15,000 scout."
Post Reply