habs already had a version of him named Nic Deslauriers and traded himRoussel is a good bottom liner and I like him in VAN and would like him in MTL, but he is overpaid and has not played a full season the last three years. It is hard to build a team with bottom liners making 3m in a flat cap world even more. VAN can do it because Boeser Horvat have good contracts in place, Markstrom has been playing like an elite goalie while ring paid like a 1B goalie, Pettersson and Hughes have ELCs and are performing tremendously. I don't think the same can be said about MTL (overpaid goalie and good youth but not elite like VAN)
So Roussel in himself does not hold a lot of value and the only interest of VAN to trade him would be to dump cap. Regarding Virtanen I believe he can be a good 3rd liner, does not seem to be a fit in VAN though, but I get why some fans don't want to trade him for a low return while he was 6 OA. Not sure he returns a 1st at this point though.
Proposal: Montreal - Vancouver
- Thread starter JAK
- Start date
- Status
habs prolem is not the wing. They need to lets their C's mature and find a quality PMD to play with weber. As per the franco overvaluing? posters need to check out roster before blurting out nonsense. Hudon, danault and Drouin. And AHLer Ouellet That's it . They have as many Finns
604
Registered User
- Nov 1, 2011
- 7,390
- 1,617
Usually guys with intangibles that don't show on the stat sheet (i.e. speed to back defenders off, size and speed to forecheck and lay big hits) tend to be great value after arbitration. Jake put up a 20/20 season but seems to be on an upward trajectory so his award shouldn't be a problem value wise.
Being tight to the cap means the Canucks need to move some overpaid assets but assets that contribute beyond their cap hits is not a problem.
Jake should fall into the latter category after arbitration.
To be clear. I don’t want Virtanen on Montreal. I think Canuck fans seriously over sad our him because he was taken so high in the draft. But saying he’s cost controlled while ignoring his RFA status with arbitration rights is clearly incorrect. His cost is unknown right now. He’s only making $1.25m atm so you can probably guarantee that number is going up
604
Registered User
- Nov 1, 2011
- 7,390
- 1,617
right, and habs are going to help you with your overpaid assets especially when it comes to giving up our lovely cap space and abundance of picks
I don't think we're on different streams of thinking.
I don't think the Canucks should trade Virtanen.
You don't think the Habs should trade their picks or take on cap dumps.
We have mutually exclusive thoughts.
The only potential blurred spot being whether you consider Jake Virtanen a bad contract/cap dump. I do not.
I believe cost controlled generally means a guy who will be an RFA rather than a UFA (and has a contract that will be easily qualified).
Jake's QO is low so IMO he is cost controlled as he will not have unfettered access to the open market.
I’d define “cost controlled” as knowing what the cost is and it staying the same. Since he’s RFA with arbitration rights I wouldn’t call him cost controlled right now. As soon as he signs or is given an award through arbitration he’ll be cost controlled. Until then his salary is an unknown (although you can estimate the range)
HuGort
Registered User
Virtanen is no cap dump by any means but Roussel at 3m kind of is (which is the original OP) as mentioned above, Virtanen is a 3rd liner with upside, and as MTL I would have no problem trading for him but adding Roussel in a flat cap world is not a solution for MTL. Now I d be happy with something around Brook or Fleury or Mete (ELC) + for Virtanen but I would likely be flamed by MTL fans and VAN fans
- Status
