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

[pgj98m3]

they definitely have to get some insurance. it's a huge stretch to think the various kids will all be ready and can carry a full load all season. they have to be sheltered and spelled off and eased into pressure situations. plus if the wheels fall off badly they need to send those guys down to utica to protect them from tire fire smoke inhalation.

last year i hated the vanek signing strictly on the vet numbers crowding out prospects. it turned out to be a silly concern.

as for contracts, i think we always underestimate market value just because all the numbers seem insane. it does seem ridiculous for a fourth liner to get over $2 million a year, but brad richardson got that for 3 years from az three years ago. proven competent reliable role players get paid.

And who in the current Canuck lineup fits that bill in your world??????

 

[iceburg]

I didn't miss the point. It's just a stretch to make up fake numbers and then guarantee the rest of the NHL would even be in on them. I think you are over valuing this player, like the Canucks did when they traded for him (as he is now worth pennies on the dollar). It does make a huge difference when half of your contracts are bad ones. It only doesn't because the team is generally horrible, so it's not like you can point to any one or two contracts and say "they need to get out from under this to have a chance at the cup".

The brutal contracts and selection of players does make a huge difference, because even if boeser and petterson become 'elite' if the rest of the team (save 1 or 2 players) assembled around them is overpaid garbage they will not compete with the elite teams int he NHL (as linden promised) for a long time to come. And when the team starts to become average, and not get these high draft picks every year and they are hemorrhaging more assets to become more competitive (all the while targeting poor players and signing them to huge deals) what will happen then? Why do they have to suck at this stuff now, just because they have a lot of cap space?

They just got out from under two big contracts that, while it's hard to call them terrible contracts because of the historical significance, were preventing them from developing a competitive team. We are now in a delayed transition where we are waiting for contracts to end that were signed to try to make the team competitive. Arguably one of the worst things that happened to this team was the false hope provided by the 14/15 season. It is the main reason the team refused to accept the short term situation - that the core would never be a contender again. The panic that ensued after the 15/16 down year resulted in overpayment in terms of $$$ for Eriksson, and in terms of assets for Gudbranson.
They miscalculated on strategy for sure. But it's incorrect IMO to assume, one, that each and all of the overpaid contracts are causing the team to be bad and limiting in the present and two, that this whole thing is fixable overnight. It will take a couple of years.
I'm just realizing though that we are so far from the topic of this thread that I better stop now.

 

[Caspian]

MTL just used cap space to get a decent youngish player in Joel Armia. Armia should excel with more ice-time. Burning cap space and term on bottom 6 FAs is gross. Only time its ever worked out for the Canucks was with Manny Malhotra.

 

[MS]

Sam Gagner is your Gaudette insurance. No other expensive #2 center option should even be considered.

 

[Cupless44]

Other than kicking the tires on Calvin de Haan, I wish Benning would take himself and his phone to a remote cabin for the July long weekend. How many too long contracts for mediocre veterans that don't make a difference to a bottom 3 team can one guy sign?

 

[Dab]

If we could flip Sutter wouldn’t mind bringing in beagle.

Would love to get a 2nd for Sutter- unrealistic?

 

[LickTheEnvelope]

I like Beagle to help the bottom 6. I like the other 2 as trade bait but not really as long term guys.

 

[RandV]

they definitely have to get some insurance. it's a huge stretch to think the various kids will all be ready and can carry a full load all season. they have to be sheltered and spelled off and eased into pressure situations. plus if the wheels fall off badly they need to send those guys down to utica to protect them from tire fire smoke inhalation.

last year i hated the vanek signing strictly on the vet numbers crowding out prospects. it turned out to be a silly concern.

Well it helped that Vanek actually proved to be pretty decent, while Gagner sucked and Burmistrov quickly found his way off the team. From the timing of the signing and with what we already had going into camp I'd still maintain that it was one UFA too many, Vanek would have been fine if they didn't sign one of Gagner or Burmistrov. Let's not forget Boeser started the first two games in the press box because of it.

 

[krutovsdonut]

And who in the current Canuck lineup fits that bill in your world??????

i was talking about the ufa candidates we are being linked to. i am saying they are getting paid because they are not a gamble.

among the canuck vets, i would categorize them this way if they were ufas

-high end ufas - edler, tanev - not a gamble
-proven reliable mid 6 role player - sutter - well above replacement - not a gamble
-granlund -unproven, unreliable with potential - replacement level player with upside - gamble
-gagner - reliable and skilled mid 6 player but borderline physicality for a bottom 6 roleplayer - above replacement level overall but a physically limited player who is a compromise to sign. gamble.
-del zotto - unreliable but very skilled utility dman able to handle 4/5 minutes most of the time - above replacement level but a gamble
-gudbranson - unreliable limited injury prone defensive roleplayer but able to handle 4/5 minutes and huge physical game at times - above replacement level but a large gamble

for trade bait, i would say edler, tanev, sutter, granlund and del zotto could be moved fairly quickly. gagner and gudbranson have no value unless they have good seasons.

 

[iceburg]

If we could flip Sutter wouldn’t mind bringing in beagle.

Would love to get a 2nd for Sutter- unrealistic?

Possibly if salary is retained. The bigger barrier is that I don't think the team wants to trade him.

 

[THE Green Man]

Agreed on this - however, if he has a strong summer and a great camp, I'd hate for him to be sent down purely because we signed too many veterans.

It could be just like Stetcher in his rookie year. Start in the AHL and get big minutes, then first injury is called up. Plays onto the team and injured player or the Gaunce/Granlund/Leipsic type gets waived to make space.

 

[Fire Benning]

 

[petrishriekandgo]

I have no real issues with Benning looking to add seasoned, tough minded vets to insulate and protect Pettersson, Boeser, Dahlen, Juolevi, Hughes etc. We all know how much Benning/Linden loved what Dorsett brought to the team and the group really dropped off without his presence after he retired. In a Vacuum I think it's a smart move as long as the terms are reasonable (2-3yrs at most) so we can sign the kids when the time comes and aren't blocking them from NHL roster spots they deserve.

In a Vacuum. The problem is we still have Del Zotto, Gudbranson, Eriksson, Sutter and Gagner as dead weight so adding two more vets (especially in the forward group) really limits roster spots.

My hope is that any signings = a few of those 'dead weight' veterans moved before the season starts.

We'll see how this all comes together.

 

[petrishriekandgo]

Kid didn't show the consistency needed to impress the team... I have no issues with this.

 

[ATypicalCanadian]

And right after:

 

[krutovsdonut]

looks like dhaliwal finished breakfast

 

[petrishriekandgo]

Rick Dhaliwal‏ @DhaliwalSports 2m2 minutes ago
Rieder is closing in on a team and it is not expected to be the #Canucks.

 

[Billy Kvcmu]

I’m guessing flyers

 

[timw33]

 

[MS]

Kid didn't show the consistency needed to impress the team... I have no issues with this.

Seriously, did anyone actually watch the last 30 games of the season?

The guy was doing an above-average job (at both ends of the rink) as a shutdown winger on a high-leverage 3rd line.

To actually watch the games, watch that 3rd line do such a good job, and then claim that Archibald couldn't even be a 4th liner here is just such brutal analysis I can't even ...

Same goes for Sutter, by the way. He was complete garbage in 2016-17. He was probably our 2nd best forward in 17-18. If he plays like that, his contract is fine and he absolutely has significant market value (not that we'd ever even consider moving him).

 

[Fire Benning]

Not willing to pay a serviceable depth winger 800-900k is something.

 

[Billy Kvcmu]

I can’t help but think Aquaman doesn’t want to pay for someone who probably won’t be a regular

 

[iceburg]

Seriously, did anyone actually watch the last 30 games of the season?

The guy was doing an above-average job (at both ends of the rink) as a shutdown winger on a high-leverage 3rd line.

To actually watch the games, watch that 3rd line do such a good job, and then claim that Archibald couldn't even be a 4th liner here is just such brutal analysis I can't even ...

Same goes for Sutter, by the way. He was complete garbage in 2016-17. He was probably our 2nd best forward in 17-18. If he plays like that, his contract is fine and he absolutely has significant market value (not that we'd ever even consider moving him).

Archibald had a great first few games but describing him as inconsistent after that is accurate. A few good moments but a lot of times not noticeable. I think the bigger issue is that he's 28 years old. Would rather give a chance to a player who has development years left.

 

[MS]

Archibald had a great first few games but describing him as inconsistent after that is accurate. A few good moments but a lot of times not noticeable. I think the bigger issue is that he's 28 years old. Would rather give a chance to a player who has development years left.

He was *consistently* playing high-leverage 3rd line minutes on a line getting the toughest zone starts in the NHL and doing a great job. He was *consistently* doing a solid job as one of our regular PKers. He was *consistently* our most physical forward.

The only thing he didn't do consistently was blow people up with massive highlight-reel checks every night. Or score on more penalty shots.

And when people who don't know what they're watching don't see big obvious things like that he's 'inconsistent'. And it's total rubbish.

 

[petrishriekandgo]

Seriously, did anyone actually watch the last 30 games of the season?

The guy was doing an above-average job (at both ends of the rink) as a shutdown winger on a high-leverage 3rd line.

To actually watch the games, watch that 3rd line do such a good job, and then claim that Archibald couldn't even be a 4th liner here is just such brutal analysis I can't even ...

Same goes for Sutter, by the way. He was complete garbage in 2016-17. He was probably our 2nd best forward in 17-18. If he plays like that, his contract is fine and he absolutely has significant market value (not that we'd ever even consider moving him).

Sutter is the vet I would be fine with keeping around, he can contribute in critical defensive areas for sure. As far as Archibald goes 'serviceable' is probably the best way to describe him but I expected more crash n' bang from him, more proactive play, more physical play especially on a team like the Canucks that desperately needs that physicality in the group.

My assumption is that Benning/Linden/Green would rather have a vet fill this role as finding a vet in that bottom six is easier/cheaper and also frees up space for the young talent on the Canucks to fill those top 6 spots.