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

[krutovsdonut]

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

tough situation. we are well into the ufa window and dhaliwal is not tweeting about other suitors. i don't think archy gets a 1 way and i hope he doesn't talk his way out of a two way which i assume is on the table.

nobody including us would give him an nhl contract last year even with green in love with him. so the canucks had made up their mind to move on.

to his credit he eked his way up anyway, but you have to assume that if folks in the organization where he did that are still skeptics so is the rest of the league.

 

[MS]

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.

Just because he wasn't the Derek Dorsett replacement you were expecting doesn't mean he wasn't very effective (playing the same style and role as a guy like Beagle does, incidentally, albeit at wing instead of center).

Our best line for the last 1/3 of the season was that line anchored by Sutter and Archibald who played very well together.

 

[Archangel]

with Rieder he maybe looking for a non-hockey market where he can float

 

[sting101]

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.

except their targetting Roussel right now at a crazy term

 

[Boose Brudreau]

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.

why do they have to get insurance? and what is it we should be insuring against? Are you worried that we'll break one of our young players if we don't insulate them with veteran leadership? If we're adding veteran leadership(IMO, we shouldn't be) , it should be on 1 year deals and we should be picking over the scrap heap on week 2 of the UFA signing season and beyond. adding players like Roussel or beagle on 3/4 year deals is a mistake IMO. the next couple of years should be about evaluating our younger players, not forcing them out of the lineup by signing zero upside free agents. where we are in the standings next year is irrelevant IMO....actually, strike that, the worse the better.

 

[sting101]

Rieder would be a terrible signing thank goodness

 

[Fire Benning]

If people thought Archibald was inconsistent they're in for a surprise when the 2 or 3 scrubs they sign tomorrow are even more inconsistent with a significantly higher paycheck for the next 3 years.

 

[Cupless44]

I’m guessing flyers

I think it is the Oliers

 

[Fire Benning]

Rieder would be a terrible signing thank goodness

Why? He's faster player which is something this team should be striving to be and he's 2 years younger than the average UFA age. Not saying I'd be willing to massively overpay just to ensure we land him but I'd much rather sign him than get Roussel or Beagle on multi-year deals.

 

[sting101]

Archibald played admirably but he certainly doesn't make us a faster team to play against.

I'm pretty sure the mandate is to get faster and more tenacious to suit the way Travis Green wants to play.

Beagle gets a pass in this regard because he plays centre and he wont be asked to be 1st on the forecheck and we absolutely needed one C to provide some depth barring everything not going 100 percent on the development front.

Roussel on a long term is completely unecessary. What the f*** did you go and get Motte for if he can't be the tenacious pain in the ass player and re signing Archibald would make us tougher and harder to play against if Gaunce continues to be nothing but a puck dumper.

 

[PG Canuck]

All these FA’s we are targeting is pointless and I’m just laughing.

 

[krutovsdonut]

why do they have to get insurance? and what is it we should be insuring against? Are you worried that we'll break one of our young players if we don't insulate them with veteran leadership? If we're adding veteran leadership(IMO, we shouldn't be) , it should be on 1 year deals and we should be picking over the scrap heap on week 2 of the UFA signing season and beyond. adding players like Roussel or beagle on 3/4 year deals is a mistake IMO. the next couple of years should be about evaluating our younger players, not forcing them out of the lineup by signing zero upside free agents. where we are in the standings next year is irrelevant IMO....actually, strike that, the worse the better.

it's a question of how bad you are willing to let the team be while trying to develop players. opinions differ.

 

[iceburg]

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.

It wasn't the lack of big hits. It was that, after a very good start, his intensity faded a little. It would come back in spurts but wasn't there all the time. And for a player like Archibald, he needs that intensity all the time. But, if you prefer to just say I don;t know what I'm watching, then fine.

 

[sting101]

Why? He's faster player which is something this team should be striving to be and he's 2 years younger than the average UFA age. Not saying I'd be willing to massively overpay just to ensure we land him but I'd much rather sign him than get Roussel or Beagle on multi-year deals.

Roster composition.

Leipsic Goldobin Dahlen would immediately get downgraded or waived. If JB is going to acquire these guys then he better bloody give them a shot to prove themselves. Leipsic is 24 Goldobin will be 23 it's unnecessary.

 

[Boose Brudreau]

Beagle gets a pass in this regard because he plays centre and he wont be asked to be 1st on the forecheck and we absolutely needed one C to provide some depth barring everything not going 100 percent on the development front.

Why? what will happen if we don't? We finish 31st instead of 26th?

 

[iceburg]

except their targeting Roussel right now at a crazy term

Sure. And that's the down side of signing Roussel to a longer term contract. He's better than Archibald but there is a cost to younger players. But, like I said earlier in the thread, if it's a shorter term (2 years or less) there could be good balance as the younger players transition.

 

[Ryp37]

Gonna wait until the ink is actually put to paper but lol@these reports

 

[MS]

Archibald played admirably but he certainly doesn't make us a faster team to play against.

I'm pretty sure the mandate is to get faster and more tenacious to suit the way Travis Green wants to play.

Beagle gets a pass in this regard because he plays centre and he wont be asked to be 1st on the forecheck and we absolutely needed one C to provide some depth barring everything not going 100 percent on the development front.

Roussel on a long term is completely unecessary. What the **** did you go and get Motte for if he can't be the tenacious pain in the ass player and re signing Archibald would make us tougher and harder to play against if Gaunce continues to be nothing but a puck dumper.

You need a mix of fast checkers and bigger bodies that can win puck battles. Archibald and Gaunce were both very effective last year and have a role to play. So does Sutter.

The problem is the guys who are soft, slow, and contribute nothing. Granlund being the biggest culprit and he should have been fired out of a cannon.

 

[sting101]

Why? what will happen if we don't? We finish 31st instead of 26th?

Thats a terrible way of looking at it. I mean sure we all want Jack Hughes but even if we finish dead last we will get the 4th pick with our luck.

If Pettersson struggles at C and so does Gaudette as he needs some AHL time i dont want Tanner Kero playing for us. I've seen enough of Chaput and Megna thank you very much.

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

Beagle and Roussel - if they sign - do make our forward group better in the short term. Both are capable bottom six players who can fill roles on most teams in the league.

Throwing too much money and term at such players is counter intuitive to a rebuild if (and when) their presence starts to block the development of younger players, and/or their cap hits prove prohibitive in bettering the team. I'm not saying one or both of those things happen this fall, but the longer the deal, the more likely one or both of those scenarios end up playing out.

 

[Fire Benning]

It's going to be hilarious when the Wings trade Vanek for picks at the deadline.

 

[Cupless44]

The Canucks are not taking advantage of this off season and their cap space. They should be cutting deals like Montreal just did to free Jets of cap space. This is still happening despite Linden's foolish comments that Vegas last year made it impossible now to weaponize cap space.

This would be a far better approach than signing 33 year old to term.

 

[y2kcanucks]

A little perspective...
The amount overpaid to players not named Eriksson barely adds up to Eriksson's contract.
All are NHL players (not waiver wire fodder) and it's certainly arguable that the following numbers are reasonable:
Sutter $3.5
Gudbranson $2.5
Gagner $2.275
Roussel $2.0*
Del Zotto $2.5
Beagle $2.0*
Nilsson $1.75

I'll save you the math. The difference adds up to $6M. Eriksson's contract and about 7.5% of the salary cap. Yes, the others are overpaid. But they are not waiver wire fodder and their contracts don't compare to the disaster that is Eriksson's contract. And I actually like Eriksson as a player deployed correctly and at the right price.

Actually Gudbranson should probably be closer to $1M. Sutter probably closer to $2M. Nilsson probably closer to $1M.

I honestly don't like any of those contracts. On a short, 1-year deal okay, but those players (except for MDZ and Nilsson) are/would be signed to multi-year deals. That's why the Canucks are as bad as they are. Benning has loaded up on a lot of bad players and spent a lot of money to do so.

 

[MS]

It wasn't the lack of big hits. It was that, after a very good start, his intensity faded a little. It would come back in spurts but wasn't there all the time. And for a player like Archibald, he needs that intensity all the time. But, if you prefer to just say I don;t know what I'm watching, then fine.

No player stands out every game and every night.

How did this perceived 'drop in intensity' affect his game? The Archibald/Sutter line was playing the toughest minutes in the NHL and sawing off their matchups. They were exceptionally good. He was generating good results on the PK throughout. He was throwing the most his of our forwards throughout. He was scoring at a level above what you'd expect for his role throughout.

When every possible measure of a player's effectiveness goes against what you're getting from your eye test, your eye test is probably wrong.

Archibald was sold as a physical Dorsett replacement when he was called up. He ended up being a much more effective player than anyone could have dreamed but because he was less obviously physical than people expected he was an 'inconsistent disappointment'. And it's just ridiculous.

Especially when the same people are ok with paying Beagle 4x as much to be the exact same type of player.

 

[y2kcanucks]

The Canucks are not taking advantage of this off season and their cap space. They should be cutting deals like Montreal just did to free Jets of cap space. This is still happening despite Linden's foolish comments that Vegas last year made it impossible now to weaponize cap space.

This would be a far better approach than signing 33 year old to term.

This is why I laugh at people who point to Linden and Benning and say they're rebuilding now because they say they'll take on bad contracts to acquire more draft picks. I've said this before and I've been proven right again (as have others). What Linden and Benning say, and what they do have always been two completely different things.

Will the Canucks be adding bad contracts this summer? Yes. Of course. But they will be signed directly with the player, and won't be acquiring draft picks or prospects to take on those bad contracts.