Confirmed with Link: Canucks sign F Jason Dickinson to 3-Year, $7.95M Deal ($2.65M AAV)

[VanJack]

As bad as Dickinson has been, he's far down the list of the worst depth forwards Benning acquired and re-signed. Beagle, Roussel and Eriksson were all over-30 when Benning signed them. And incomprehensibly Tim Schaller got a two year deal. And acquiring Sutter cost them Bonino and a second-rounder. And of course Brandon Prust cost them Kassian and a fifth rounder.

Curiously enough, Benning's last trade for the Canucks is turning out as one of his better ones. Lammikko and Juulsen look like they have the potential to be nice depth pieces, and Boudreau obviously really likes Lammikko.

But of course the guy going the other way to Florida--Oli Juolevi--was Jimbo's biggest draft failure. And I see he's on IR again for Florida.

 

[Hit the post]

As bad as Dickinson has been, he's far down the list of the worst depth forwards Benning acquired and re-signed. Beagle, Roussel and Eriksson were all over-30 when Benning signed them. And incomprehensibly Tim Schaller got a two year deal. And acquiring Sutter cost them Bonino and a second-rounder. And of course Brandon Prust cost them Kassian and a fifth rounder.

Curiously enough, Benning's last trade for the Canucks is turning out as one of his better ones. Lammikko and Juulsen look like they have the potential to be nice depth pieces, and Boudreau obviously really likes Lammikko.

But of course the guy going the other way to Florida--Oli Juolevi--was Jimbo's biggest draft failure. And I see he's on IR again for Florida.

Tim Schaller was so much a nonentity as a Canuck. Didn’t particularly defend well. No offence. Didn’t hit. Didn’t do much of anything except cash his paycheques.

 

[sting101]

He was Dallas' best penalty killer

The thought of having any offensive uptick is dead that's for sure. Essentially a Brandan Gaunce that can keep up.
I will admit i was hopeful given my biggest exposure watching him was 19/20 playoffs where he looked pretty good but a good pro scouting staff should have an ongoing ranking of players at each position and be actively refreshing it and using data to have accurate reads on them

We essentially paid a 3rd and a million overpayment in cap space for a 4th line C that isn't great on faceoffs who is more of a LW

Pro scouting fail again.

 

[F A N]

...Roussel... were all over-30 when Benning signed them.

Roussel was 28 turning 29.

 

[sting101]

As bad as Dickinson has been, he's far down the list of the worst depth forwards Benning acquired and re-signed. Beagle, Roussel and Eriksson were all over-30 when Benning signed them. And incomprehensibly Tim Schaller got a two year deal. And acquiring Sutter cost them Bonino and a second-rounder. And of course Brandon Prust cost them Kassian and a fifth rounder.

Curiously enough, Benning's last trade for the Canucks is turning out as one of his better ones. Lammikko and Juulsen look like they have the potential to be nice depth pieces, and Boudreau obviously really likes Lammikko.

But of course the guy going the other way to Florida--Oli Juolevi--was Jimbo's biggest draft failure. And I see he's on IR again for Florida.

The whole idea of seeking out btm 6 players during the Benning era using draft picks or outbidding other teams in free agency was nonsensical. Should have done nothing but try to sign players that could score on short term deals and flipped for picks to stockpile to acquire long term solutions

 

[Peen]

Roussel was pretty good but a perfect example of why you don’t give that contract to that guy.

One injury and he goes from average third liner to AHL fodder who can’t keep up.

 

[sting101]

Roussel was pretty good but a perfect example of why you don’t give that contract to that guy.

One injury and he goes from average third liner to AHL fodder who can’t keep up.

The sad part was there was some good character guys who would have been great to have buried down the depth chart on cheap shorter term contracts but it was the same story not being able to punch at the weight of expectations and a horrible contract hanging around like an albatross

 

[Buresflyingelbow]

This is a contact we need to move along with Pearson. 6 million and if you lose Hamonic somehow thats 9 million.

 

[Breakers]

This is a contact we need to move along with Pearson. 6 million and if you lose Hamonic somehow thats 9 million.

2.5 mill comes back on next year with Holtby and Virtanen and another 1.5 mill for those franking bonuses from Halak which are soft to say the least.

 

[Get North]

This is a contact we need to move along with Pearson. 6 million and if you lose Hamonic somehow thats 9 million.

I get the idea, but those positions need to be replaced with superior players. The bottom of our line-up will dictate our success and it'll likely be filled via free agency essentially an expected overpayment leaving us in the same position.

I like Dickinson, Pearson and Miller as big bodies that can play two-way gritty game. Sure the skill level could be increased, but that's what you are giving up for extra size. It's a contrast from smaller forwards like Hoglander and Garland who can't easily absorb hits.

 

[Buresflyingelbow]

I get the idea, but those positions need to be replaced with superior players. The bottom of our line-up will dictate our success and it'll likely be filled via free agency essentially an expected overpayment leaving us in the same position.

I like Dickinson, Pearson and Miller as big bodies that can play two-way gritty game. Sure the skill level could be increased, but that's what you are giving up for extra size. It's a contrast from smaller forwards like Hoglander and Garland who can't easily absorb hits.

That won’t happen until we add picks and build depth through the draft and add college/European free agents. Trimming fat off the edges will help us give other opportunities or at least a sure fire NHL’er who could make a difference. Teams like Vegas need to shed cap and there will be good players available for cheap. Cap space is the key here. Building a fast and skilled lineup doesn’t apply to either of these players as well.

 

[kanucks25]

I know some don't like these player cards but I think we can agree this one is accurate lol

 

[VanJack]

Right to the end of his time in Vancouver, Benning continued to believe that somehow, magically, his UFA's would accomplish with the Canucks what they couldn't accomplish with the teams they had played with previously.

Eriksson would be a 30-goal scorer; Beagle a shutdown center who would get you 10-15 goals; Hamonic a top pairing d-man; Poolman a solid #4; Holtby a solid backup goalie who would give you 30-40 quality starts a year; and Dickinson a shutdown third-line center who was an ace on the dot, and would be good for at least 10 goals; . And that's only a partial list.

Of course they never came close to success in Vancouver for the most part they were either declining by the time they got here, or were never that good to begin with.

I guess it's easy to blame Jimbo for these UFA flops, because he ultimately signed the contracts. But it really makes you wonder about the Canucks pro scouting department.

 

[Pastor Of Muppetz]

Right to the end of his time in Vancouver, Benning continued to believe that somehow, magically, his UFA's would accomplish with the Canucks what they couldn't accomplish with the teams they had played with previously.

Eriksson would be a 30-goal scorer; Beagle a shutdown center who would get you 10-15 goals; Hamonic a top pairing d-man; Poolman a solid #4; Holtby a solid backup goalie who would give you 30-40 quality starts a year; and Dickinson a shutdown third-line center who was an ace on the dot, and would be good for at least 10 goals; . And that's only a partial list.

Of course they never came close to success in Vancouver for the most part they were either declining by the time they got here, or were never that good to begin with.

I guess it's easy to blame Jimbo for these UFA flops, because he ultimately signed the contracts. But it really makes you wonder about the Canucks pro scouting department.

This isn't really true..He tried to move Eriksson over a span of 2-3 years...He knew he had a donkey in that signing, but it was a millstone he could never move....Hamonic was never a top pairing D man, and you don't sign top pairing D men for $3M x 2 years ...

 

[F A N]

Roussel was pretty good but a perfect example of why you don’t give that contract to that guy.

One injury and he goes from average third liner to AHL fodder who can’t keep up.

Well that applies to anyone no? Roussel's knee injury came when he cut in front of the net trying to tuck the puck in and ran into a Rangers Dman that caused him to land awkwardly. The Canucks even scored a goal in that sequence. Most of the time the player gets up and shakes things off and not tear his acl.

 

[Peen]

Well that applies to anyone no? Roussel's knee injury came when he cut in front of the net trying to tuck the puck in and ran into a Rangers Dman that caused him to land awkwardly. The Canucks even scored a goal in that sequence. Most of the time the player gets up and shakes things off and not tear his acl.

I think you know that it’s just not true.

Sure, the injury was a freak accident.

However, you’re talking about a 3rd line grinder who played an intense game and was in the back nine of his career. Obviously, if that guy is going to get an injury versus some younger player who is more of a cerebral player, the impacts are going to be far more.

 

[F A N]

I think you know that it’s just not true.

Sure, the injury was a freak accident.

However, you’re talking about a 3rd line grinder who played an intense game and was in the back nine of his career. Obviously, if that guy is going to get an injury versus some younger player who is more of a cerebral player, the impacts are going to be far more.

Again, you can say that about anyone. There are a load of prospects who never developed due to injuries. Of course Roussell being 29 instead of 21 and playing a grinding brad of hockey makes him susceptible to injuries. But again, like you said, the injury was more of a freak accident. He was actually on his way to putting together a career season when he torn his ACL.

 

[Nucker101]

Again, you can say that about anyone. There are a load of prospects who never developed due to injuries. Of course Roussell being 29 instead of 21 and playing a grinding brad of hockey makes him susceptible to injuries. But again, like you said, the injury was more of a freak accident. He was actually on his way to putting together a career season when he torn his ACL.

Yeah, I thought the Roussel contract was fine. I expected this last year of it to be a bit rough, but had he avoided the ACL tear, I think he would’ve been decent at his cap hit for the majority of the contract.

 

[MS]

I think you know that it’s just not true.

Sure, the injury was a freak accident.

However, you’re talking about a 3rd line grinder who played an intense game and was in the back nine of his career. Obviously, if that guy is going to get an injury versus some younger player who is more of a cerebral player, the impacts are going to be far more.

As I said repeatedly when this signing was made, effective 30+ small bottom-6 energy players are not a thing.

It should also be noted that Roussel's production in 19-20 (the year following the injury) was basically bang-in line with his career production. He only really fell off last season, and it's very open to debate whether that was the result of the injury or just what happens when an old depth player hits age 32.

In his 18-19 career year, Roussel was basically stapled to Bo Horvat in the lineup spot that was taken by Tanner Pearson right after he got hurt. He was never going to maintain his level of production in future years on a deeper team, injury or not.

 

[Peen]

Again, you can say that about anyone. There are a load of prospects who never developed due to injuries. Of course Roussell being 29 instead of 21 and playing a grinding brad of hockey makes him susceptible to injuries. But again, like you said, the injury was more of a freak accident. He was actually on his way to putting together a career season when he torn his ACL.

If you look through my post history, I was probably the biggest supporter of Roussel's play in 18-19. i thought he played at a fantastic third line level. He was fast, tenacious, smart with/without the puck.

Regardless, i would have never given him that contract. When you factor in the age and style of play, he was always likely to fall off the map. A player of his style is also far more likely to be inhibited after a major injury relative to a younger, cerebral player.

I'm not sure how it is even debatable, honestly.

 

[sting101]

As I said repeatedly when this signing was made, effective 30+ small bottom-6 energy players are not a thing.

It should also be noted that Roussel's production in 19-20 (the year following the injury) was basically bang-in line with his career production. He only really fell off last season, and it's very open to debate whether that was the result of the injury or just what happens when an old depth player hits age 32.

In his 18-19 career year, Roussel was basically stapled to Bo Horvat in the lineup spot that was taken by Tanner Pearson right after he got hurt. He was never going to maintain his level of production in future years on a deeper team, injury or not.

This is not accurate. Certainly i would agree that Roussel came with higher risk potential due to mileage and wear and tear but plenty of good energy players can be effective during the ages Roussell's contract was for (29-32).

A 4yr deal was reckless because at the best of times it's a hazardous role to wear teams down engage in trench warfare and PK. At 29 expecting 82 games x 4 is almost nonsensical and that was hefty amount of cake for a 3/4 liner. His ACL injury finished him, he couldn't afford to lose a step at all as a 10-12 depth player 9 at his very best.

 

[TropicOfNoReturn]

Eriksson would be a 30-goal scorer

Eriksson scored 30 goals in the NHL twice before joining the Canucks.

I hate Benning as much as the next guy, but please don't spew inaccurate information when stats are hard facts and easy to look up

 

[Hit the post]

And Eriksson *DID* score 30+ goals as a Canuck. Just took him longer than a season to do it.

 

[F A N]

As I said repeatedly when this signing was made, effective 30+ small bottom-6 energy players are not a thing.

Yet, IIRC, you liked the deal Brandon Tanev signed.

If you look through my post history, I was probably the biggest supporter of Roussel's play in 18-19. i thought he played at a fantastic third line level. He was fast, tenacious, smart with/without the puck.

Regardless, i would have never given him that contract.

That's fair. I think the Canucks definitely did give up an extra year to get him.

When you factor in the age and style of play, he was always likely to fall off the map. A player of his style is also far more likely to be inhibited after a major injury relative to a younger, cerebral player.

I'm not sure how it is even debatable, honestly.

I'm not sure that is the case. Roussel is a decent skater to begin with and he's not a 4th line plug with low hockey IQ who runs around throwing hits.

He spent most of his NHL career playing a middle 6 role and has excellent defensive and even offensive metrics in his prime. There was a reason why he was the best winger Horvat had in Roussel's first season here. He's good 5 v 5 and can handle heavy defensive minutes. Most of his assists are also primary assists. Offensively and defensively, he's a step up from a guy like Dorsett.

 

[MS]

This is not accurate. Certainly i would agree that Roussel came with higher risk potential due to mileage and wear and tear but plenty of good energy players can be effective during the ages Roussell's contract was for (29-32).

A 4yr deal was reckless because at the best of times it's a hazardous role to wear teams down engage in trench warfare and PK. At 29 expecting 82 games x 4 is almost nonsensical and that was hefty amount of cake for a 3/4 liner. His ACL injury finished him, he couldn't afford to lose a step at all as a 10-12 depth player 9 at his very best.

How many small physical 30+ guys are there in the NHL right now? Careers are getting shorter and even skill players have trouble sustaining performances much past 30.

As per your second point, absolutely. You'll hear that Benning 'got unlucky' with injuries but he made is own bad luck by constantly signing guys for 1-2 years too long. Injuries to Roussel/Sutter/Baertschi and others would have been exponentially less significant if their contracts were 1-2 years shorter. When you sign guys too long, the risks you'll get bitten by an injury go way up.

Yet, IIRC, you liked the deal Brandon Tanev signed.

1) Tanev's game is based on speed and not physicality. There are definitely some Darren Helms out there who are great skaters and can play a checking line role until age 35. There aren't many Jordan Tootoos playing well into their 30s.
2) Tanev is probably the best 3rd liner in the NHL. I get that he is a guy who possibly falls outside of some rules I would generally have, but I'll make an exception because I think he's an absolutely outstanding player who is close to prime Burrows level at ES and should be on a team's 2nd line at ES.