2020 Roster and Fantasy GM Thread II

[VanillaCoke]

Markstrom easily.

Obviously the toffoli trade was an enormous waste, and the defense will be much worse. But this management is building a winner..

 

[m9]

Just to show where things are actually at with the salary cap, here is a realistic lineup based on where things are now. Not saying this is what I would do:

Miller	5.25	Pettersson	0.925	Boeser	5.875
Pearson	3.75	Horvat	5.5	Gaudette	1.6		Forwards	47.775
Ferland	3.5	Sutter	4.375	Virtanen	3		Defense	19.267
Roussel	3	Beagle	3	Motte	1.2		Goal	6.55
MacEwen	0.8	Eriksson	6				Other	7.538
							Total	81.13
Hughes	0.917	Stecher	2.75
Edler	6	Myers	6				Cap	81.5
Fantenberg	0.9	Benn	2
Rafferty	0.7
Markstrom	5.5
Demko	1.05
Spooner	1.034
Luongo	3.034
Baertschi	1.77	(Buyout)
Bonuses	1.7

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

No cap space for Toffoli, Tanev, or Leivo. Bought out Baertschi which moves some cap into the following year and there is only enough room for the EP/Hughes 2019/20 bonuses meaning the 2020/21 bonuses will need to be moved into the following season.

Here was the roster I came up with, keeping Markstrom and letting the others go. It's.. not good. Lots of work this off-season for Benning.

 

[Diamonddog01]

Here was the roster I came up with, keeping Markstrom and letting the others go. It's.. not good. Lots of work this off-season for Benning.

Sadly unless Eriksson retires this is probably close to how things will go. But if we don’t qualify Stecher and Ferland is on litr there is room for Tanev.

 

[Didalee Hed]

Tanner Pearson played 19 games with the Canucks last year. Not even 1/5 of the season ........

It’s more than 1/5 of the season.

 

[UK Canuck]

Here was the roster I came up with, keeping Markstrom and letting the others go. It's.. not good. Lots of work this off-season for Benning.

good grief, this is horrific......and what's even more horrific is its entirely realistic

 

[Bleach Clean]

The player I keep coming back to for a trade target is PK Subban. Not only does the remaining term of his deal match that of Loui Eriksson, but his recent cost before his poor season was effectively two 2nd rounders.

This is a player that fits a positional need, has a bloated contract, and a moderate cost. It could work for both sides.

VAN would have to dump salary and a good asset or two to make it work. There was prior interest from Benning as well.

 

[Bettman Returnz]

The player I keep coming back to for a trade target is PK Subban. Not only does the remaining term of his deal match that of Loui Eriksson, but his recent cost before his poor season was effectively two 2nd rounders.

This is a player that fits a positional need, has a bloated contract, and a moderate cost. It could work for both sides.

VAN would have to dump salary and a good asset or two to make it work. There was prior interest from Benning as well.

Well I feel like JB has kicked tires on him in the past... but worried what assets we’d need to move out.

And could argue we need a tanev like replacement (if we let him walk). We have enough defensive liabilities on the team already.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Well I feel like JB has kicked tires on him in the past... but worried what assets we’d need to move out.

And could argue we need a tanev like replacement (if we let him walk). We have enough defensive liabilities on the team already.

I think it’s more: Odds are good he’s still a top4 dman and he’s always available with that contract. I mean, they signed Myers to a 6M AAV, what’s another 3M for a shade better Subban?

He’s still a target, IMO. He fits their short term and long-term needs on the right side.

 

[Blue and Green]

At this point I wouldn't take Subban at that cap hit as a giveaway, never mind parting with assets to acquire him. His last two seasons have not been good. He's 31, has back issues, and isn't the style of defenceman that the team really needs anyway. The priority should be clearing cap hit for 2021 so that Pettersson and Hughes can be signed to lengthy deals, not to take on even larger shaky contracts than the ones that are already on the books.

Next season might be played in front of ghost towns. There might never be a more pointless, uninteresting and unprofitable/anti-profitable NHL season than the next one. It's the perfect time to install some younger and cheaper players and take any lumps as necessary.

 

[Bleach Clean]

At this point I wouldn't take Subban at that cap hit as a giveaway, never mind parting with assets to acquire him. His last two seasons have not been good. He's 31, has back issues, and isn't the style of defenceman that the team really needs anyway. The priority should be clearing cap hit for 2021 so that Pettersson and Hughes can be signed to lengthy deals, not to take on even larger shaky contracts than the ones that are already on the books.

Next season might be played in front of ghost towns. There might never be a more pointless, uninteresting and unprofitable/anti-profitable NHL season than the next one. It's the perfect time to install some younger and cheaper players and take any lumps as necessary.

Subban has a larger contract than Eriksson, yes, but shaky still beats absent. Eriksson is a paper weight.

Further, the salary out and salary in would be a wash if another player is included. (That asset being necessary to facilitate the transaction.)

Subban for Eriksson + Virtanen works if Subban is still a top4 dman for another 2-3 years. It’s not ideal. I’d prefer to keep the younger player. However, to get RHD utility while dumping LE...Tempting.

 

[m9]

Subban at 9 in 2021-22 is the real issue. You have to assume they will have bought Eriksson out by then meaning his hit is "only" 4 million for that final year and I'm not sure taking on another 5 million is a great idea. I would rather add pieces to get Subban in the 4.5-6 range.

If you can get something like Subban @50% for Eriksson, Virtanen, Stecher and a pick/prospect then it starts making sense in terms of helping the team's salary structure.

 

[Blue and Green]

Subban at 9 in 2021-22 is the real issue. You have to assume they will have bought Eriksson out by then meaning his hit is "only" 4 million for that final year and I'm not sure taking on another 5 million is a great idea. I would rather add pieces to get Subban in the 4.5-6 range.

If you can get something like Subban @50% for Eriksson, Virtanen, Stecher and a pick/prospect then it starts making sense in terms of helping the team's salary structure.

New Jersey will probably be looking to reduce salary obligations in the short term, not add, so that retention on Subban seems unlikely.

Following Eriksson's $3M bonus payment for 2020, he will have $5M gross still due over the final two seasons. Deducting taxes, large escrow, agent's fee, pro-rating of base salary due to shortened season(s), away from home living expenses-- probably he wouldn't actually net more than half of that $5M. If the AHL returns and the Canucks can send him to Utica... does Loui really want to ride the buses for two seasons, especially during a pandemic, for a tiny fraction of the money that he's already made in his career? Mutual termination could be a genuine possibility.

 

[vancityluongo]

This is ideology more than it is disagreement. It's weighting what helps the team more over the top level years of Pettersson and Hughes. I say top level because vancityluongo makes a salient point about their prime years. These are different windows.

There is no getting around the fact that their 21-25 year old seasons are likely to be their best years. And I do agree that their value is unlikely to be the same after that. At the same time, I think the framework of this team is so bad in the short-term that those years will not be maximized anyway. There will not exist a time when VAN is considered among the most efficient rosters in the league. It's just not going to happen.

If we accept this, we move to playoff frequency and luck, rather than timing for the optimum window. I would like to create a scenario where the surrounding structure is made to be as sound as possible. Which then allows Pettersson and Hughes to shine regardless of their personal peaks. This is similar to what happened with the Sedins, whom had their best seasons beyond their prime aged years. It's because the proper supporting structure was finally put in place to allow them to flourish.

Without retaining their limited young talent coming up on ELCs, this team doesn't have a prayer. On quality, they are beat out by EDM, COL, soon to be LA and perhaps even ANA. And that's just in the West...

Agreed with this wholeheartedly.

From a strategic standpoint, whoever is in the GM role here really has to make a key decision, and rather quickly, if this team wants to have a hope of being something beyond middling. Either route has its merits - I tend to agree with you that there is so much junk on the current roster that the sacrifices to get it to a point of efficiency where it can contend with the Tampa Bay, Boston and St. Louis level teams of the league could have disastrous future consequences. And the compounding costs of moving numerous bad contracts would bleed so much value that the GM making these moves would need to be head and shoulders above the rest of the league.

On the other hand, I really cannot stress enough how much it seems, both from the transaction data, and from incorrect perceptions pushed in this market over the last 6 years, that futures are overvalued. The playoff frequency and luck strategy was Mike Gillis' downfall IMO - not trading futures and ending up with no prospects, as is the common misconception. Let's not forget that. Gillis might still be the GM today if he had traded Cody Hodgson and a 1st (used to pick Brendan Gaunce) in 2012 for Jeff Carter. Two assets that contribute absolutely zero value to this organization 8 years later (and with Kassian being moved with a pick for a negative value asset in Prust... it was actually negative value just 3 years later in 2015) may have been the difference between a Cup and a first round exit in 2012.

Now, we cannot even pretend for a second that the current roster is anywhere close to that tipping point, so the point really is moot for now. But for the purposes of this discussion, I'd be cautious about the "playoff frequency" strategy. Look at a team like Philly which is always in the running, but have never been able to surround Giroux (and Voracek) with the supporting cast needed, despite some home run prospects (Provorov/Konecny in the same draft...) over the years and no massive Eriksson/Okposo/Ladd/Lucic level cap blunders. The issue is that unless you can extract incredible value in free agency (nearly impossible), trades (takes a lot of skill and terrific pro scouting), or late round picks (throwing darts)... it is hard to improve the organization other than by just hoping for organic growth in your established core. That becomes nearly impossible once that core is starting to age. San Jose and Nashville are two more examples in the West. All of these teams made the Cup finals once and were beat by clearly better teams. None were repeat favorites to make it back the next year, or ever again. Is that really the goal?

It's certainly much easier at that point vs where the Canucks are now to take the next step like St. Louis/Washington eventually did, but I guess I think it is more likely that we can only ever get to that Philly level vs the Washington level, especially if the timing is around when Pettersson/Hughes are above age 25. Would anyone bet on Claude Giroux pulling off a Cup now at age 32, even with a decent supporting cast? Even if they added another superstar added by cashing in prospects via a deadline trade? That's already with further supporting role players added (Hayes/JVR) to bolster the depth. What if a player like Sanheim or Hart takes a massive leap forward in development? Could it happen for Philly? Sure. Is it likely?

And even that is kind of optimistic. Many teams led by superstars are only as good as the current Winnipeg Jets or maybe even the Calgary Flames. The latter just last season had 4 players hovering around a PPG, a Norris winner and lost in 5 games in the first round. Now they're hovering at mediocrity again. Would anyone bet on Mark Giordano winning a Cup as a Flame?

Instead, it seems like "going for it" on a consistent basis, while you have the core to do so - ie. Chicago, LA, Boston, Washington, Pittsburgh - is worth it, even at the potential cost of a very painful downward slide eventually. By having not picked in the first round 5 of 6 years between 2013 and 2018 (and trading that one 1st round pick in Kapanen), Pittsburgh is going to be f***ed once Crosby/Malkin/Letang retire, which might all happen at once. But maybe not, because by having those players they've had tremendous development success with players like Guentzel and Dumoulin that they may not have otherwise had. And they won two Cups during that stretch, so who gives a shit. Chicago still has Toews and Kane at age 32 to transition Dach and Debrincat. Would anyone be surprised if they pulled off another Cup in three years?

 

[m9]

Playing around with some numbers today, and if the team buys out both Baertschi & Sutter along with moving on from Toffoli, Stecher and Leivo it might be possible to keep both Markstrom & Tanev:

Miller	5.25	Pettersson	0.925	Boeser	5.875
Pearson	3.75	Horvat	5.5	Ferland	3.5
Roussel	3	Gaudette	1.6	Virtanen	2.7
Motte	1.1	Beagle	3	MacEwen	0.8
Bailey	0.8	Eriksson	6
Hughes	0.917	Tanev	5
Edler	6	Myers	6
Fantenberg	0.9	Benn	2
Rafferty	0.7
Markstrom	5.5
Demko	1.05
Spooner	1.034
Luongo	3.034
Baertschi	1.77	(Buyout)
Sutter	2.05	(Buyout)
19/20 Bonus	1.7
Forwards	43.8
Defense	21.52
Goal	6.55
Other	9.588
Total	81.46
Cap	81.5

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Obviously takes some team-friendly deals, pushing buyout charges into 2021-22 and the roster is still worse than 2019-20.. but it could be possible. I do think moving Sutter either via buyout or trade w/ retention is the easiest path to keep 2 out of Tanev/Markstrom/Toffoli.

 

[m9]

New Jersey will probably be looking to reduce salary obligations in the short term, not add, so that retention on Subban seems unlikely.

Following Eriksson's $3M bonus payment for 2020, he will have $5M gross still due over the final two seasons. Deducting taxes, large escrow, agent's fee, pro-rating of base salary due to shortened season(s), away from home living expenses-- probably he wouldn't actually net more than half of that $5M. If the AHL returns and the Canucks can send him to Utica... does Loui really want to ride the buses for two seasons, especially during a pandemic, for a tiny fraction of the money that he's already made in his career? Mutual termination could be a genuine possibility.

Eh, can't rely on that from Eriksson. If it happens it would be a nice surprise but it's not something that can be counted on at all.

 

[datboichoi]

Tanner Pearson is a guy I’d explore moving for help on the blue line, I think he had a very fortunate year in terms of production and could hold higher perceived value. His underlying are pretty poor and i don’t see him as a long term fixture here.

 

[Catamarca Livin]

Playing around with some numbers today, and if the team buys out both Baertschi & Sutter along with moving on from Toffoli, Stecher and Leivo it might be possible to keep both Markstrom & Tanev:

Miller	5.25	Pettersson	0.925	Boeser	5.875
Pearson	3.75	Horvat	5.5	Ferland	3.5
Roussel	3	Gaudette	1.6	Virtanen	2.7
Motte	1.1	Beagle	3	MacEwen	0.8
Bailey	0.8	Eriksson	6
Hughes	0.917	Tanev	5
Edler	6	Myers	6
Fantenberg	0.9	Benn	2
Rafferty	0.7
Markstrom	5.5
Demko	1.05
Spooner	1.034
Luongo	3.034
Baertschi	1.77	(Buyout)
Sutter	2.05	(Buyout)
19/20 Bonus	1.7
Forwards	43.8
Defense	21.52
Goal	6.55
Other	9.588
Total	81.46
Cap	81.5

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Obviously takes some team-friendly deals, pushing buyout charges into 2021-22 and the roster is still worse than 2019-20.. but it could be possible. I do think moving Sutter either via buyout or trade w/ retention is the easiest path to keep 2 out of Tanev/Markstrom/Toffoli.

I am good with letting Tanev go as he is a declining asset. Canucks cannot afford that luxury anymore. Our signing of Myers has made Tanev signing difficult. The team needs to make some decisive moves by cutting whatever is possible. Markstrom is likely to maintain form for a while. I would give Tryamkin Tanev's role and see what happens. I think he can play in his own end well and be a penalty killer, while losing no offense. Toffoli is a luxury as well. Need Jake to lift consistency but he excels on pp. and have Ferlund recover. It is not ideal but we can only hope the progress of the younger players offsets the lost of debt.

 

[m9]

I am good with letting Tanev go as he is a declining asset. Canucks cannot afford that luxury anymore. Our signing of Myers has made Tanev signing difficult. The team needs to make some decisive moves by cutting whatever is possible. Markstrom is likely to maintain form for a while. I would give Tryamkin Tanev's role and see what happens. I think he can play in his own end well and be a penalty killer, while losing no offense. Toffoli is a luxury as well. Need Jake to lift consistency but he excels on pp. and have Ferlund recover. It is not ideal but we can only hope the progress of the younger players offsets the lost of debt.

Relying on Tryamkin as anything more than a bottom-pairing guy at this point is a bit of a stretch. He wasn't good here in a limited role during his first run and based on reports there hasn't necessarily been much progression.

It's frustrating that they signed Benn for 2 years, as that's the the role/contract I would prefer for Tryamkin.

 

[Diamonddog01]

Obviously takes some team-friendly deals, pushing buyout charges into 2021-22 and the roster is still worse than 2019-20.. but it could be possible. I do think moving Sutter either via buyout or trade w/ retention is the easiest path to keep 2 out of Tanev/Markstrom/Toffoli.

Buying out Sutter does make a bit of sense imo. The other moving piece here is what happens with Ferland during the qualifying round, if he starts to suffer from concussion symptoms again I think it would be safe to pencil him under litr moving forward.

 

[sandwichbird2023]

Relying on Tryamkin as anything more than a bottom-pairing guy at this point is a bit of a stretch. He wasn't good here in a limited role during his first run and based on reports there hasn't necessarily been much progression.

It's frustrating that they signed Benn for 2 years, as that's the the role/contract I would prefer for Tryamkin.

If Tanev leaves, I think his role (top defensive match up and primary PK'er) would fall to Benn. There are nobody else that can play the right side that has any sort of experience in that role close to what Benn has, including Tryamkin. Asking Tram to take over the most difficult minutes after playing 2 years in the KHL is really setting him up for failure.
Problem is Benn was so bad last year, how can you trust him as the top PK pair, how do you ask him to play 20+ mins per game, and how can you feel comfortable anchoring Hughes with him? But if not Benn then who? Myers? Stecher (who might not even be on the team next year)? Rafferty?

 

[m9]

If Tanev leaves, I think his role (top defensive match up and primary PK'er) would fall to Benn. There are nobody else that can play the right side that has any sort of experience in that role close to what Benn has, including Tryamkin. Asking Tram to take over the most difficult minutes after playing 2 years in the KHL is really setting him up for failure.
Problem is Benn was so bad last year, how can you trust him as the top PK pair, how do you ask him to play 20+ mins per game, and how can you feel comfortable anchoring Hughes with him? But if not Benn then who? Myers? Stecher (who might not even be on the team next year)? Rafferty?

Agreed.

Benn's value to the team should be as a 7th defenseman who can fill in on other side for 40-60 games a year and that's probably about it. If he out-performs that then great but it shouldn't be expected.

I think you give Myers the bigger defensive role and hope he grows into it. What choice do you really have?

 

[m9]

Buying out Sutter does make a bit of sense imo. The other moving piece here is what happens with Ferland during the qualifying round, if he starts to suffer from concussion symptoms again I think it would be safe to pencil him under litr moving forward.

I think another team would take a chance on Sutter at 50% and you can avoid the buyout - taking that chance for 2 million for one year isn't a bad gamble. I just don't know if the organization wants to move on from him.

 

[VanillaCoke]

Information date: July 6 2020

assumptions: all rfa sign 10% min raise; ferland isn’t in ltir; Hughes/petersson bonus is at the full 1.7; we still need to sign a 5th dman ( min 2 mil?)

Forwards
Ericksson - 6 million
Boeser - 5.85 million
Horvat - 5.5million
Jt miller - 5.25
Sutter - 4.38 million
Pearson - 3.75
Rousell - 3 million
Beagle - 3 million
Peterson - .925
Ferland -3.5

RFA
Virtanen (1.375 million)
Motte (1.072 million)
Gaudette (1.008 million)
Mcewen (.932)
Forwards total:

If the 4 RFAs signed their 10% tender our 14 forwards here are 45.54 million

Defence:
Edler - 6 million
Myers - 6 million
Benn - 2 million
Hughes - .917k
RFA
stetcher ( 2.563)

Defence total: if stetcher resigns at his 10% tender our 5 dmen here are at 17.48 million

Goalies:
Demko: 1.05 million
Dipietro .812

Goalies: 1.862


Dead cap: 8.05 million
Sven - 2.29 million
Spooner - 1.03 million
Luongo - 3.03 million
Hughes/pettersson bonus(to be confirmed) - 1.7 million


Total: 74.932 million
Forwards: 45.54 million (14 forwards)
Defense: 17.48 million (5 dmen)
Goalies: 1.862 million (2 goalies)
Dead cap: 8.05 million


Current roster (ignore positions/lines)
Miller - pettersson - boeser
Ericksson- horvat-Pearson
Rousell - sutter - fearland
Virtanen-beagle- motte

Edler-Myers
Hughes-benn
Stetcher - ?????

Demko
Dipietro


UFAS/unsigned
Markstrom
Tanev
Toffoli
Traymkin

Playing around with some numbers today, and if the team buys out both Baertschi & Sutter along with moving on from Toffoli, Stecher and Leivo it might be possible to keep both Markstrom & Tanev:

Miller	5.25	Pettersson	0.925	Boeser	5.875
Pearson	3.75	Horvat	5.5	Ferland	3.5
Roussel	3	Gaudette	1.6	Virtanen	2.7
Motte	1.1	Beagle	3	MacEwen	0.8
Bailey	0.8	Eriksson	6
Hughes	0.917	Tanev	5
Edler	6	Myers	6
Fantenberg	0.9	Benn	2
Rafferty	0.7
Markstrom	5.5
Demko	1.05
Spooner	1.034
Luongo	3.034
Baertschi	1.77	(Buyout)
Sutter	2.05	(Buyout)
19/20 Bonus	1.7
Forwards	43.8
Defense	21.52
Goal	6.55
Other	9.588
Total	81.46
Cap	81.5

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Obviously takes some team-friendly deals, pushing buyout charges into 2021-22 and the roster is still worse than 2019-20.. but it could be possible. I do think moving Sutter either via buyout or trade w/ retention is the easiest path to keep 2 out of Tanev/Markstrom/Toffoli.

Nice work firstly, aside from the obvious lack of quality on paper to these rosters its really a sad , indefensible state to have to lose good players and or buyout contracts this very gm signed, to get close to cap compliant for next year (and following).

The only saving grace is the uncertainty of how the flat cap affects future contracts. But I have a hard time believing top players are going to take significant discounts. (Tanev &Markstrom under 6m aav)

Also Virtanen is way closer to the 3m aav than these ~1.5m projections.
And as I've said before Tryamkin at 2.5 is not a good deal.

Agreed.

Benn's value to the team should be as a 7th defenseman who can fill in on other side for 40-60 games a year and that's probably about it. If he out-performs that then great but it shouldn't be expected.

I think you give Myers the bigger defensive role and hope he grows into it. What choice do you really have?

Not much choice unfortunately, but the guy that caused this mess is going to have to figure something out. Most likely by icing a worse roster.
And I think we all know Myers cannot handle the bigger defensive role.

I think another team would take a chance on Sutter at 50% and you can avoid the buyout - taking that chance for 2 million for one year isn't a bad gamble. I just don't know if the organization wants to move on from him.

I doubt they do, but I also doubt they'll be able to move him. Every team is in the same boat rn, and nobody is going to do the canucks a favor.

A select few teams with cap space should be able to improve their teams with quality players other teams cannot afford. Cough Vancouver cough.

 

[Diamonddog01]

I think another team would take a chance on Sutter at 50% and you can avoid the buyout - taking that chance for 2 million for one year isn't a bad gamble. I just don't know if the organization wants to move on from him.

I think so as well, and yeah, moving him at 50% retained would save the team from a 1M cap hit from the buyout the following year so would be a better option. I also feel they may be able to move Baertschi if they retain on him too, and possibly Benn (like yourself I would rather give Tryamkin a shot in that role).

I don't think the organization has a choice in regards to moving on from Sutter. They need to clear out a lot of cap. Slim chance that other teams might actually want contracts with only 1 year left due to the economic uncertainty but that's more just optimism on my end and let's be honest...these players aren't great or remotely appealing. We will have a wait a while before we can see how things unfold but I've thought for a while that this is one of the most important offseasons for the Canucks in many years.

 

[Bettman Returnz]

We could really use rafferty and/or juolevi taking a large leap!