Player Discussion Dakota Joshua | Shut up and give him his money!

[Blue and Green]

He's scored on 20% of his shots on goal since joining the Canucks, thus I don't think they should be getting carried away in terms of reasonable future expectations. If someone wants to give him a Goodrow-like contract, I'd say thanks for your contributions and good luck with your next team.

 

[F A N]

He's scored on 20% of his shots on goal since joining the Canucks, thus I don't think they should be getting carried away in terms of reasonable future expectations. If someone wants to give him a Goodrow-like contract, I'd say thanks for your contributions and good luck with your next team.

I wouldn't focus on his shooting percentage that much. Joshua's goals are pretty much all from in front of the net. The shots he takes are high percentage shots. How often do you see Joshua take low percentage shots? He isn't a high volume shooter either.

Goodrow is a 4C who actually put up career high numbers after signing with the Rangers. Joshua you're looking at someone who was on his way to 23-25 goals 40ish points in a career season. If you can sign Joshua to a Goodrow-like contract you do it (with term being the concern).

I do agree on not getting carried away.

 

[Blue and Green]

I wouldn't focus on his shooting percentage that much. Joshua's goals are pretty much all from in front of the net. The shots he takes are high percentage shots. How often do you see Joshua take low percentage shots? He isn't a high volume shooter either.

Goodrow is a 4C who actually put up career high numbers after signing with the Rangers. Joshua you're looking at someone who was on his way to 23-25 goals 40ish points in a career season. If you can sign Joshua to a Goodrow-like contract you do it (with term being the concern).

I do agree on not getting carried away.

15% is very difficult to maintain over the long haul, never mind 20%.

Goodrow had 33 and 31 points in his first two NYR seasons; this season he plunged to 12 points.

 

[F A N]

15% is very difficult to maintain over the long haul, never mind 20%.

There's obviously going to be some fluctuations, but Joshua also increased his shot totals from last year. Increased ice time helps. There's been a marked increase in shooting percentage since ~2020. Saad has shot over 15% the past 5 seasons. Kuzmenko is over 18%. Marcus Foligno (aside from last season) has shot 17.9%+. Barbashev has shot 17+% in his career. Nic Dowd has shot over 19% last two seasons.

Goodrow had 33 and 31 points in his first two NYR seasons; this season he plunged to 12 points.

The point is that Goodrow was a 4C with low offensive production at the time he signed with the Rangers. Goodrow has never come close to what Joshua has put up this season.

 

[Icebreakers]

Has anyone actually done the math and see what we can afford?

Everyone talks about re signing Dak, Zadorov, Lindholm, Hronek but it sounds likely that we probably keep one or two.

 

[Blue and Green]

There's obviously going to be some fluctuations, but Joshua also increased his shot totals from last year. Increased ice time helps. There's been a marked increase in shooting percentage since ~2020. Saad has shot over 15% the past 5 seasons. Kuzmenko is over 18%. Marcus Foligno (aside from last season) has shot 17.9%+. Barbashev has shot 17+% in his career. Nic Dowd has shot over 19% last two seasons.


The point is that Goodrow was a 4C with low offensive production at the time he signed with the Rangers. Goodrow has never come close to what Joshua has put up this season.

Barbashev is almost a shooting % unicorn in a career sense for a middle-six player. Dowd and Foligno are both below 14% for their careers, Saad is under 13%. Expecting anybody, never mind a third-liner who doesn't play much on the PP, to shoot 20% in the long term is a mug's game, even allowing for the increase in goals in recent seasons.

The Goodrow contract, accounting for expected upcoming cap increases, would be around $3.9M-$4M x 6 plus a 15-team NTC for all six seasons. No thanks. For that money, I'd limit it to a three-year term without any movement protection, which would put him more in line with Vatrano-- who, like Goodrow, went to market to get his contract. Usually there's a small hometown discount comparatively when a guy who is coming off of a good season re-signs with his current team. $3.75M x 3 seems like a fair basis, with some shaving off of the annual cap hit for additional term and/or movement protection.

 

[Luck 6]

Has anyone actually done the math and see what we can afford?

Everyone talks about re signing Dak, Zadorov, Lindholm, Hronek but it sounds likely that we probably keep one or two.

Mikheyev	4.75	Pettersson	11.6	Hoglander	1.1
Boeser	6.65	Miller	8	Suter	1.6
Garland	4.95	3C	2	Joshua	3.5
4W	0.88	4C	1	Podkolzin	1
Aman	0.88
Hughes	7.85	Hronek	7.5
Soucy	3.25	4D	4
Zadorov	5.8	Cole / Myers	3
Demko	5
Silovs	0.79
Ferland LTIR	0
Poolman LTIR	0
OEL Buyout	2.35
Estimated Salary Cap	87.5​	Mil
Total Cap	87.442​	Mil
Cap Space	0.058​	Mil

If we pay Zadorov 5.8mil and Joshua 3.5mil, we have the following remaining:

1. 3C for about 2mil
2. 4C for about 1mil
3. 4W for under 1mil
4. 4D (or something) for about 4mil

If we wanted to upgrade our top 6 forward group, we would need to find a way to move Mikheyev out.

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

Has anyone actually done the math and see what we can afford?

Everyone talks about re signing Dak, Zadorov, Lindholm, Hronek but it sounds likely that we probably keep one or two.

It really boils down to whether we can convince Zadorov to take 5M and Joshua 3M, or close enough to it. I'm really hoping we can leverage term to both of them in the 6-8 year range to keep the dollar amount lower.

Regardless, there's just no way around dumping Mikheyev at this point. We simply can't afford to see if he actually rebounds.

 

[docbenton]

Just a really smart player above all else, obviously has some good skill and finish along with his size as well. Constantly makes good plays including under duress. As long as his feet can keep up I think there's more upside than risk for a falloff moving forward.

 

[LaP]

15% is very difficult to maintain over the long haul, never mind 20%.

Goodrow had 33 and 31 points in his first two NYR seasons; this season he plunged to 12 points.

Since 1990 no player has sustained a s% of 20% and over (minimum 400 games played). Since 1990 only 61 players has sustained a s% of over 15% (minimum 400 games played). Number 1 is Gary Roberts with a s% of 18.7.

It always amaze me how many fans think a s% of over 20% is sustainable. It was the same with CH fans and Paul Byron. In his two good seasons he was shooting over 20% and fans were like "all his shots are scoring chances".

 

[Jerry the great]

Since 1990 no player has sustained a s% of 20% and over (minimum 400 games played). Since 1990 only 61 players has sustained a s% of over 15% (minimum 400 games played). Number 1 is Gary Roberts with a s% of 18.7.

It always amaze me how many fans think a s% of over 20% is sustainable. It was the same with CH fans and Paul Byron. In his two good seasons he was shooting over 20% and fans were like "all his shots are scoring chances" and i was like bro don't do that to yourself.

I don't want to put words in anyone else's mouth, but I don't think anyone here believes the shooting % is sustainable. Thankfully there's a lot more to his game than scoring. As we see every year in the playoffs, physical play is huge difference maker over the course of a best of 7 series. He's as disruptive on the forecheck as they come and just punishes opponents every chance he gets. reads the play well and has great hands which is why he's great on the PK and has produced well at 5v5. there's a good chance that he becomes a PP threat as well. There are a multitude of reason why he's going to be extended and I sure AF wouldn't let him walk because his shooting % is too high.

 

[ScottishCanuck]

In both series had a great game 1 and then disappeared.

I thought he had a great season for us and you can’t take that away from him, but it makes me hesitant to pay him what he’s going to be looking for. He has it in him to be a good, good player, but it’s a risk.

There’s a chance he was injured of course. But really frustrating nonetheless.

 

[rea]

In both series had a great game 1 and then disappeared.

I thought he had a great season for us and you can’t take that away from him, but it makes me hesitant to pay him what he’s going to be looking for. He has it in him to be a good, good player, but it’s a risk.

There’s a chance he was injured of course. But really frustrating nonetheless.

I feel he was injured too, and agree on your points. But the way he played this year, it's like that turning point u see in all power forwards that finally figure it out.

It'll be about dollars and cents for sure, prob wouldn't try to sign for more than 2 to 3 yrs, but the traits he's shown in his ability to read the game, it's kinda like on a lower scale, how bertuzzi finally figured out the game to work for him.

 

[Brookbank]

If we wanted to upgrade our top 6 forward group, we would need to find a way to move Mikheyev out.

If Bouvillier is worth a 5th twice then Mik is worth a 5th or 7th

 

[Icebreakers]

If Bouvillier is worth a 5th twice then Mik is worth a 5th or 7th

Mik is gonna take our first to move at this point. He has negative value.

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

Mik is gonna take our first to move at this point. He has negative value.

It might not cost that much for teams with no expectations like Chicago or San Jose. Either way, it's going to cost us something.

 

[Bertuzzzi44]

Excellent at the beginning of both series but faded slightly as both progressed, still a solid player overall that should be resigned.

 

[EpochLink]

Showed up in only 2 games these playoffs, what a shame. I thought he’d be better than this.

 

[Szechwan]

Really thought he'd step up and hit another level in a grinding series. Guess not

 

[Icebreakers]

It might not cost that much for teams with no expectations like Chicago or San Jose. Either way, it's going to cost us something.

He's got a 12 team NTC. He's not going to those teams.

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

He's got a 12 team NTC. He's not going to those teams.

A NTC doesn't guarantee anything. If he tries to prevent us from moving him, we can simply waive him and he can enjoy taking a bus for two years. Sucks for our cap but he's gone no matter what.

Keep in mind, Kuzmneko also had a NTC and waived it for Calgary.

 

[Nucker101]

I'm fairly confident that his skating has been f***ed up since early in the Preds series due to a blocked shot.

Would happily bring him back at a reasonable number. Issue is that he was a member of the PDO booster club so his ask will be high for a player of his caliber, but this team's forward group would look soft/small without him, you'd just have JT left as a powerforward.

 

[Zippgunn]

How this thread has changed in only 70 days...

 

[biturbo19]

How this thread has changed in only 70 days...

Ehhh...easy come, easy go.

I think what Dakota brings to the Canucks is important...but there definitely has to be a "walk away" number. On both $$$ and Term.


He rose quickly once he found that chemistry with Garland. His game is perfectly built to complement the little whirling dervish. But i'm not really sure how much you can afford to invest in a "3rd line" like that...when Garland is clearly the line-driver there, and already costs $4.9M by himself. Joshua hasn't really been as effective outside of that duo and he doesn't have the utility of being a great scoring line presence who can slide up and play well with Pettersson or Miller. He's mostly looked well out of his depth in the moments it's been tried. So you're ultimately talking about a Bottom-6 board rattler here...who scored goals at a pretty unsustainable rate this season, and is likely going to want to be paid based on that. There will probably be teams that line up to give him ~$4M with significant term. I just don't see that as prudent.


His PK utility is probably one of the biggest losses if they have to let him walk. But you can find good PKers for less than he'll cost. That skillset isn't valued nearly the same way as "big guy who scored goals".



For me...his contract number has to start with a 2 or less. With 3-4 years of term MAX. Players of his type do not age gracefully. He's already 28 years old and the game he plays takes a huge physical toll on the body. We already got a little preview of how ineffective he looked when he got banged up blocking that shot against Nashville. Mostly a non-factor after that...and that's probably a decent representation of what he'll look like a couple years into whatever contract he signs.

He's also a guy who has worked incredibly hard and made serious strides in his skating...but is still fundamentally not a very quick guy. When the "wheels fall off" for those types it can be absolutely catastrophic. They simply do not have a step to lose. And it tends to happen around that ~Age30 range that he's encroaching on. He doesn't play a game that works if he's even just a beat slower and he's already walking that tightrope where his skating improvements have allowed him to transform into a very useful player...but when that regresses, he'll be too far behind the play to make the desired impact, chasing the play (think Lucic when the wheels came off - and Dakota isn't nearly as talented in the first place).



It sucks to find this "diamond in the rough" and have them turn into a very likeable, effective, fan favourite player...only to have to let them go. Especially when he offers the sort of size and physicality that is badly needed on this team. But i think they have to be really careful about the "endowment effect" here. The realities of our cap situation dictate that hard choices will have to be made. The fact that Joshua is such a great "feel good story" of finding this hidden gem and having him emerge as a force at the right moment...can't translate to a blank cheque to keep him.

I really hope that they can find a way to keep him at a sub-$3M number with only a few years of term attached. But pragmatically speaking...he's got all the hallmarks of the sort of player that gets a bunch of completely stupid, regrettable contract offers that i think will eclipse those benchmarks. So unless he takes a real haircut just to stay with Vancouver, Tocchet, Garland...i think he's probably gotta be one of the "cap casualties".

 

[Nucker101]

How this thread has changed in only 70 days...

Lot of hot takes. I’m curious to learn how banged up he was during the playoffs before suggesting he should be let go.

Tocchet’s offensive system is basically built on cycling the puck and vegetating point shots with traffic in front. Not sure how losing Joshua helps that system be more effective