Canucks News and Notes

[Blob Mckenzie]

Ryan Biech
14m14 minutes ago
Ryan Biech ‏@ryanbiech
Can confirm that Thatcher Demko has now officially signed his entry level deal with the #Canucks


Biech confirming the signing but nothing official from Canucks or NHL. Just a matter of time now.

Interesting discussion starting on a few sites now. Should the Canucks trade Markstrom while his value is high, go with Miller/Cannata until Demko is ready?

If you want the rebuild to keep progressing with us missing the playoffs again why not? But is Markstrom's value really that high.

If I'm Benning, which we all know I'm not, I'm looking to extend Markstrom ASAP, 4-5 year deal. But the trade talk will heat up.

The Canucks 2014 NHL draft, Thatcher Demko, Jake Virtanen, Jared McCann and Nikita Tryamkin. Not too shabby for one draft year.

Little too soon to be doing cartwheels about the 2014 draft considering the three players Elmer shoehorned into the roster wouldn't have gotten a sniff with a top 20 team.That said it is looking a little bit promising. Emphasize little however.

[Hockey Widow]

Ryan Biech
14m14 minutes ago
Ryan Biech ‏@ryanbiech
Can confirm that Thatcher Demko has now officially signed his entry level deal with the #Canucks


Biech confirming the signing but nothing official from Canucks or NHL. Just a matter of time now.

Interesting discussion starting on a few sites now. Should the Canucks trade Markstrom while his value is high, go with Miller/Cannata until Demko is ready?

If you want the rebuild to keep progressing with us missing the playoffs again why not? But is Markstrom's value really that high.

If I'm Benning, which we all know I'm not, I'm looking to extend Markstrom ASAP, 4-5 year deal. But the trade talk will heat up.

The Canucks 2014 NHL draft, Thatcher Demko, Jake Virtanen, Jared McCann and Nikita Tryamkin. Not too shabby for one draft year.

Little too soon to be doing cartwheels about the 2014 draft considering the three players Elmer shoehorned into the roster wouldn't have gotten a sniff with a top 20 team.That said it is looking a little bit promising. Emphasize little however.

Agreed Blob. It's just been so long since there has been a draft to have excitement over.

[Tciso]

Ryan Biech
14m14 minutes ago
Ryan Biech ‏@ryanbiech
Can confirm that Thatcher Demko has now officially signed his entry level deal with the #Canucks


Biech confirming the signing but nothing official from Canucks or NHL. Just a matter of time now.

Interesting discussion starting on a few sites now. Should the Canucks trade Markstrom while his value is high, go with Miller/Cannata until Demko is ready?

If you want the rebuild to keep progressing with us missing the playoffs again why not? But is Markstrom's value really that high.

If I'm Benning, which we all know I'm not, I'm looking to extend Markstrom ASAP, 4-5 year deal. But the trade talk will heat up.

The Canucks 2014 NHL draft, Thatcher Demko, Jake Virtanen, Jared McCann and Nikita Tryamkin. Not too shabby for one draft year.

Little too soon to be doing cartwheels about the 2014 draft considering the three players Elmer shoehorned into the roster wouldn't have gotten a sniff with a top 20 team.That said it is looking a little bit promising. Emphasize little however.

A little negative, Blobby? When was the last time we had a draft that even had 3 of the players -ever- play an NHL game??? And, Demko is as close to a sure thing as you can get. 2014 was our strongest draft year since the Sedins.

[Jovocop]

Ryan Biech
14m14 minutes ago
Ryan Biech ‏@ryanbiech
Can confirm that Thatcher Demko has now officially signed his entry level deal with the #Canucks


Biech confirming the signing but nothing official from Canucks or NHL. Just a matter of time now.

Interesting discussion starting on a few sites now. Should the Canucks trade Markstrom while his value is high, go with Miller/Cannata until Demko is ready?

If you want the rebuild to keep progressing with us missing the playoffs again why not? But is Markstrom's value really that high.

If I'm Benning, which we all know I'm not, I'm looking to extend Markstrom ASAP, 4-5 year deal. But the trade talk will heat up.

The Canucks 2014 NHL draft, Thatcher Demko, Jake Virtanen, Jared McCann and Nikita Tryamkin. Not too shabby for one draft year.

Little too soon to be doing cartwheels about the 2014 draft considering the three players Elmer shoehorned into the roster wouldn't have gotten a sniff with a top 20 team.That said it is looking a little bit promising. Emphasize little however.

A little negative, Blobby? When was the last time we had a draft that even had 3 of the players -ever- play an NHL game??? And, Demko is as close to a sure thing as you can get. 2014 was our strongest draft year since the Sedins.

2004 was another strong draft year for the Canucks with Schneider (26th), Edler (91st), Brown (159th) and Hansen (287th). Two of the them are still with the Canucks. Schneider was traded for 9th overall pick which was used to select Horvat. Sadly, it might be one of the best drafts in the Canucks history.

[BurningBeard]

A little negative, Blobby? When was the last time we had a draft that even had 3 of the players -ever- play an NHL game???

2011 - but considering the players we're talking about are Jensen, Grenier, and Corrado it's not saying much. You have to go back to 2005 after that...

[Strangelove]

But what if the Panthers were to buy out Lou's contract in 2018:

http://www.generalfanager.com/buyouts/9 ... &year=2018

Look at the big reach-the-floor cap-hits they'd get at only $583,333 real dollars (times 8 years)

Might be the best option for them at that point in time, given a declining Lou.

(if Lou retires in 2018, Cats would get a Cap Recapture "penalty" of $1,235,254, times 4 seasons).

I posted this in the Round One thread.

To spell it out, what I'm theorizing in the post above is:

There would be no Cap Recapture penalties on Luongo's contract if the Panthers bought out the contract.

We know that "Compliance Buyouts" wiped out Recap penalties... wouldn't regular buyouts do the same?

Perhaps not, but it makes perfect sense to me.

I've been looking around and I can't find a definite answer.

If anyone has a link that definitively shows this wouldn't work, please, help a guy out.

Yes, I've looked at the Mike Richards case, yes LA is paying Recap, but circumstances were entirely different.

[Hockey Widow]

But if the buy Lou out aren't we on for 20%? Still would be a lot easier to take $100,000+ over 8 years I guess. It actually would make the Panthers salary and cap smaller too.

[Hockey Widow]

Hey Doc, Article 50-50.5 in the CBA deals with this and gives examples. Example one shows what the buy out would be plus the savings the club recievd in the difference between salary and average cap. Interestingly, if the cap was higher than the salary, say the salary increases years 3-5 of the contract, then it shows the new cap after the buy out is likewise reduce to reflect that.

So the short answer is yes, if bought out then the CRP applies. I just can't figure it out for multiple years and varying amounts. They give simplistic examples. But the answer appears to be yes there will be capture recapture hell short of LTIR or death. Seriously, death voids the contract!!

So if Luongo for any reason other than those two fails to play out his contract we will be hit hard. The CBA deals with cap overage by saying the league has 30 days upon realizing there is overage to notify the team. The team has 30 days to take corrective measures but I'm unclear what the penalties are for failure to correct. It talks about this in terms of voiding a new contract or a trade that creates the overage but doesn't specifically deal with this situation. For sure they would reject any new contracts or trades until it was corrected.

When Calgary was perilously close to not being able to ice the minimum number of players the rules called for a default of the game. I'm not sure if that would happen here. Default all games until compliance? Loss of draft picks? Heavy fines? All of the above?

The one saving grace is that if a player retires mid season, defined as after the completion of the team's first game, any cap penalty or CRP is deferred until the start of the next season. If the retirement happens to be his last contract year then there is no penalty.

[Strangelove]

Hey Doc, Article 50-50.5 in the CBA deals with this and gives examples. Example one shows what the buy out would be plus the savings the club recievd in the difference between salary and average cap. Interestingly, if the cap was higher than the salary, say the salary increases years 3-5 of the contract, then it shows the new cap after the buy out is likewise reduce to reflect that.

So the short answer is yes...

I appreciate the response, I do, but I have a different interpretation of the article in question.

I believe you're referring to an example that talks about "retirement" (rather than "buyout").

Or perhaps you're referring to the example that talks about the original team buying out the contract?

(maybe you could quote the exact wording of the example here?)

I just did some more googling and found a great debate about this subject:

http://www.nhl.com/nhl/en/v3/ext/CBA201 ... 13_CBA.pdf

They are discussing possibilities regard Ehrhoff being traded and traded-to team buying Ehrhoff out.

You'll see that Sabretooth takes the same view as I... and that eventually he wins the debate.

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showt ... ?t=1592631

I don't believe this scenario could possibly play out more perfectly than Luongo in Florida + bought-out in 2018.

(as far as making perfect sense for the other team - Panthers)

I feel such a buyout would erase any potential Cap Recapture penalty for the Canucks.

[Hockey Widow]

Ya I was referring to the original team buy out that does talk about the potential for CRP. I assumed, perhaps wrongly, that that reasoning would apply to a subsequent team buying out. One argument I suppose I would have as the Canucks would be that I have no control over what Florida does and therefore should not suffer the CRP if they buy out.

I did see a debate on the hockey boards where someone commented that Nonis had said, subsequent to not trading for Luongo, was that he asked the league if they anticipated the CRP being applied to regular buyouts and they said yes. Thus he wanted a higher retention by the Canucks to offset any CRP they, the leaves might have. The deal broke down as Vancouver was not willing to have retention. Keeping in mind that these conversations would have happened before the new CBA so if true would have been indicative of what the league hoped would happen.

It raises some interesting arguments. Given that the league wrote the rules and if they are deemed ambiguous or silent on the issue, the Canucks would have a good legal argument.

After re-reading article 50.9 it does seem to state that any amounts cover end under the cap recapture apply only to the team buying out. Confusing enough for me to say if Panthers buy him out we are off the hook.

[Rocky Dennis]

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/canu ... extension/

Apologies if this has already been posted somewhere and i missed it. Word on the street is 2 years $900K AAV. And cue the Shinkaruk vs. Granlund debate again.
What i find most interesting is the timing. Why not wait until saturday and have a much better idea what hole you are filling through this year's 1st rounder. I know its laughable, but say we happen to win first overall...does this signing mean it's one of the other centres out the door to make room? Because i think its a lock Matthews steps right in. I presume the scenarios have all been thought through. Who do you think it would be? This would certainly be the death knell for Vey in these parts. Mccann would likely start in utica or on wing at best, Sutter a shift to wing as well? Would Gaunce get bounced back to wing yet again or traded like most of the past regime's picks? Probably end up being a moot discussion in the end but there is time to kill until saturday.

[SKYO]

Chill rock^

You act like we got a mad center depth when clearly we don't, our center depth got so demolished with injuries and rookies we had Linden Vey getting top minutes.

We need Granlund signed and it's pocket change he's getting for a couple years, he's got the skills, got training/experience, he's ready to breakout so to speak like Baertschi styles, just needs to get on a role, confidence.

[BladesofSteel]

Odds are very much in favour of Vancouver landing a Finn at the draft. Granlund would help ease the transition of said Finn both on and off the ice.

It's a fair deal for both parties. Baertschi and Etem should be next on JB's RFA radar.

[Rocky Dennis]

Chill rock^

You act like we got a mad center depth when clearly we don't, our center depth got so demolished with injuries and rookies we had Linden Vey getting top minutes.

We need Granlund signed and it's pocket change he's getting for a couple years, he's got the skills, got training/experience, he's ready to breakout so to speak like Baertschi styles, just needs to get on a role, confidence.

I didn't realize I said or acted like anything. I'm just asking a question or two about potential moves/tweaks SHOULD the team win the 1st overall pick. Between Hank, Sutter, Bo, and Granlund, I'd say the four centre spots are spoken for next year, for better or for worse. Obviously you need depth but you have got to have somewhere to put the displaced centres, especially if we are fortunate enough to snag Matthews. A logjam at centre is nice in theory but not always practical. In other words, it's a good problem to have but still a problem you have to figure out. They didn't give Sutter that contract to permanently play out of position. Same with Granlund to a lesser extant and he has said he much prefers playing centre (sorry don't remember the source). So something has to give.
Totally agreed on term and salary. Nothing to complain about there. I dont mind granlund, although i would prefer someone bigger and meaner for 4C but you cant have it all. I also don't think shinkaruk is going to amount to much so I didn't mind the trade. I will disagree with you on Granlunds upside though. I think what you see is what you're going to get especially for the minutes and role he's going to have. Happy to be wrong though.
As for Vey, as long as he has Willy as his coach he will continue to receive gift wrapped top line minutes regardless of any factors injury or otherwise.

[Hockey Widow]

Never a problem having a plethora of people to play centre. Sutter can shift to wing if need be. McCann I think is Utica bound. Vey I hope is traded, if not I hope we don't qualify him. If we win the lottery and draft Matthews I still see no problem. With Granlund signed for two years at a cap of $900,000 he is easily moved if we needed to move him. But we won't need to move him.

He figures in Benning's plan for now so getting him signed is the right thing to do. Keep the asset under contract. Besides, Matthews could end up in Utica to start the season. The knock on him, if there is one, is he is still learning to play a 200' game. I think Benning has his eyes on one of the Finns anyway. Maybe he secretly hopes we draft second so he isn't known as the GM who passed on Matthews

Treliving was quoted as saying Granlund did not adapt too well to wing, that he is uncomfortable there. When asked about it Granlund confirmed that but also said he'd play anywhere he is asked to.

Benning moving quickly to lock assets up at a good cap hit is a good thing. Getting them locked up to two year deals before he has to qualify them is smart. Nothing to worry about. What happens Saturday won't change the plans Benning has for his RFAs. It may however affect his decision on Burrows moving forward. Drafting in the top three pretty much means Burrows is gone, something Burrows commented on when he said his future is somewhat tied to the draft and free agency and he has to be patient to see what type of moves the club makes.