GDT: 2018 Free Agency: Jay Beagle 4 x 3M, Antoine Roussel 4 x 3.25M, both w/ limited NTCs

Status
Not open for further replies.

I in the Eye

Drop a ball it falls
Dec 14, 2002
6,371
2,327
is that official somewhere that it is a 7 team ntc?

Unless I'm reading this wrong:

JAY BEAGLE
CLAUSE DETAILS: 2018-19 & 19-20: Player submits a 15 no team trade list. 2020-21 & 21-22: Player submits a 5 team no trade list.
Jay Beagle - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

ANTOINE ROUSSEL
CLAUSE DETAILS: 2018-19: Player submits a 15 no team trade list. 2019-20 & 20-21: Player submits a 8 team no trade list. 2021-22: Player submits a 5 team no trade list.
Antoine Roussel - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps
 

drax0s

Registered User
Mar 18, 2014
3,904
3,395
Vancouver, BC.
What terrible contacts. Heh. Even if these contracts make Sutter and Granlund tradeable, we're negotiating from a position of weakness because our roster is flooded right now. We HAVE to trade sometime or lose someone for free.

This has to be Benning's swan song. You don't get into a bidding war unless you're over concerned with what happens if you don't win. He must be feeling the heat.
 
Last edited:

Cogburn

Pretend they're yachts.
May 28, 2010
15,132
4,507
Vancouver
But it's managements fault. They could have let Pouliot and Gudbranson walk.

No doubt. But who does what Gudbranson does on our team? And are we really going to let Greens pet project walk after giving up a pick for him?

Not this group. Hutton needs a fresh start, I would be very happy if he became that top 4 D we were promised when he broke into the league. With DZ and Pou I don't think he gets the shot he needs here, so package him together and see if we can find a second line scorer for him. That can be made right.
 

canucksfan

Registered User
Mar 16, 2002
44,740
10,441
British Columbia
Visit site
No doubt. But who does what Gudbranson does on our team? And are we really going to let Greens pet project walk after giving up a pick for him?

Not this group. Hutton needs a fresh start, I would be very happy if he became that top 4 D we were promised when he broke into the league. With DZ and Pou I don't think he gets the shot he needs here, so package him together and see if we can find a second line scorer for him. That can be made right.

Gudbranson isn't good. He rarely plays physical. And yes we should let Green's pet project because he sucks.
 

krutovsdonut

eeyore
Sep 25, 2016
17,584
10,336
i have been trying to sort out the beagle/roussel contracts. the price and terms for both are way too generous relative to market in terms of viewing actual signings.

i understand the idea to an extent we have to overpay against average teams, but that does not explain it. i think there is a huge gap between what we gave these guys and what an average team pays these guys. i am doubtful any average team offered 4 years or the buyout protection contract loading or the ntc. i don't believe we needed to offer all those things to beat an average team offer. one year of term is $3 million dollars for guys who have never seen big money. either equivalent overpayment or an extra year of term was enough. and we should have gone with overpayment in our situation. $4m x 3 is not as good after taxes as 3 x $4m but is still a lot of dough. yet somehow we give 4 years plus buyout proofing plus an ntc.

so we basically got taken to the absolute wall here on both deals. why?

now it is possible that two different agents duped us into overpaying by lying about other offers but, all joking aside, that's a career limiting move by even one agent. gms talk. it seems really unlikely.

so let's assume it was a bidding war. why did we stay in? i wonder if we got into a bidding war with other bad teams who also have to overpay creating some kind of crazy secondary market. or else maybe a very good team made an offer close enough to ours.

now to me either of those situations is a "know when to fold them" moment for a team playing the canuck's hand. if you are already paying a premium you have to walk away and move on to other guys when things get silly.

which brings me to accountability.

i question whether we needed these guys bad enough to go silly, especially roussel who confuses me as a guy we would even target based on his personality and the various pious utterings of this regime.

so it seems to me that benning and co. had better be right about these guys, because given how far they stretched to sign them instead of just moving on to the next possibilities or standing pat or even making a trade, they get very little leeway from me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Drop

Cogburn

Pretend they're yachts.
May 28, 2010
15,132
4,507
Vancouver
Gudbranson isn't good. He rarely plays physical. And yes we should let Green's pet project because he sucks.

It's not a matter of sucks or not, it's how management, right or wrong percieves it. There is no physicality in our line up with out Gudbranson, and Green lives Pouliot, so according to management, both are assets. I don't agree with those statements, but you can read this management group. Right or wrong, they're predictable.
 

TruGr1t

Proper Villain
Jun 26, 2003
24,742
9,412
The good news is that these contracts are being pretty much universally panned outside of the shrinking "Canucks can do no wrong" demographic. I honestly don't know what it would take to get Benning/Linden fired at this point, but these moves seem like a good start.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Drop

Lindgren

Registered User
Jun 30, 2005
6,346
4,413
so it seems to me that benning and co. had better be right about these guys, because given how far they stretched to sign them instead of just moving on to the next possibilities or standing pat or even making a trade, they get very little leeway from me.

I think/hope that ownership's position may be the same. If Roussel and Beagle are universally regarded as bad contracts one year from now, one would think that would contribute to a decision to change management.
 

JanBulisPiggyBack

Registered User
Dec 31, 2011
3,858
2,749
The good news is that these contracts are being pretty much universally panned outside of the shrinking "Canucks can do no wrong" demographic. I honestly don't know what it would take to get Benning/Linden fired at this point, but these moves seem like a good start.

I agree I can’t see ownership being impressed with Benning if we have an equally terrible year this year as last. At some point Benning is going to have to go, look how fast Gillis was kicked to the curb once we started missing the playoffs
 

Cupless44

Registered User
Jun 25, 2014
7,200
3,352
I think/hope that ownership's position may be the same. If Roussel and Beagle are universally regarded as bad contracts one year from now, one would think that would contribute to a decision to change management.

I mean how much does it take for Aquilini to clue in?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Seattle Totems

canucksfan

Registered User
Mar 16, 2002
44,740
10,441
British Columbia
Visit site
It's not a matter of sucks or not, it's how management, right or wrong percieves it. There is no physicality in our line up with out Gudbranson, and Green lives Pouliot, so according to management, both are assets. I don't agree with those statements, but you can read this management group. Right or wrong, they're predictable.

I am saying they should have improved the defense. You said there is no room which now there really isn't. However, they choose to keep Gudbranson and Pouilot. Of course they have their reasons but those reasons are shit.
 

krutovsdonut

eeyore
Sep 25, 2016
17,584
10,336
I think/hope that ownership's position may be the same. If Roussel and Beagle are universally regarded as bad contracts one year from now, one would think that would contribute to a decision to change management.

maybe. but this same owner has signed off on a bunch of generous controversial ufa contracts dating back to sundin. the pattern was somewhat interrupted while we were up against the cap as a contender.

consider two canuck ufa startegy theories

1. benning makes a ufa plan each year and convinces the owner to let him implement regardless of cost and term.

2. the owner forces the team to make aggressive ufa moves and doesn't care what it costs or the term.

given how those moves have worked out and whose money is being spent and the fact benning is still employed, option 2 seems more likely to me.
 

Bobby Digital

Registered User
Jun 15, 2006
1,435
794
Its absolutely comical that Benning not only overpaid but also gave a limited NTC to Roussel and Beagle.

Also anybody see his press conference yesterday? When asked about the Beagle deal and the term Benning stated that when they met Beagle in person Beagle alluded to how good he felt last year and that hes never felt better in his career. It was one of the reasons why they felt Beagle could maintain his level of play for the next 4 years.

I stopped watching after I herd that. Just absolutely mind boggling rational. What do you expect Beagle to say you idiot hes a FA looking for the biggest payday in his career.
 

Lindgren

Registered User
Jun 30, 2005
6,346
4,413
maybe. but this same owner has signed off on a bunch of generous controversial ufa contracts dating back to sundin. the pattern was somewhat interrupted while we were up against the cap as a contender.

consider two canuck ufa startegy theories

1. benning makes a ufa plan each year and convinces the owner to let him implement regardless of cost and term.

2. the owner forces the team to make aggressive ufa moves and doesn't care what it costs or the term.

given how those moves have worked out and whose money is being spent and the fact benning is still employed, option 2 seems more likely to me.

Maybe. At some point I think ownership is going to get tired of seeing these signings fail. If it just keeps going on and on, I suppose there's that lacrosse team to follow ...
 

passive voice

Registered User
Jun 16, 2009
2,532
446
What a bipolar fan base we have here in Vancouver.
Clearly we can’t handle a rebuild around these neck of the woods.

lmao. "god I wish we wouldn't sign older guys to term" "hmmm seems like you can't handle a rebuild."

Didn't most of those outlets praise the Ladd, Lucic, Eriksson, Alzner and or Backes signings?

Hypothetically...what if they *did* praise those moves.....and then watched them fail............and then learned from it.......................
 

Muevelo

Registered User
Apr 7, 2018
80
30
Canucks most likely won't be competitive for 3-5 years. By then these bad contracts won't matter as much.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rimshot
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad