All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. He just had a decent season. But I doubt he has any trade value. For a 5th round pick we got 4 seasons from the guy. Let him fight it out at training camp. It's a logjam on defence right now. Especially if you play the left side. Hutton, Teves, Rafferty, Juolevi, Hughes, Stetcher, Tanev. I'd like to see the team sign Schenn as an insurance policy. Not including Biega, Brisebois, and Sautner, and if they sign Edler to an extension. Honestly I'd say Stecher has more value than Hutton right now. At least he's Right Handed, and is better defensively. I think it's safe to say our defence is going to look very different at least in Utica, let alone in the NHL.
  3. You can't really answer a question like this not knowing: 1) what UFAs will be interested in signing here and 2) what trade opportunities will emerge in the offseason. What I think you can do regardless, is generate a framework of a plan you intend to pursue. Identify your shorter term needs - and then assess what the longer term projections at those positions are. For example, the team might need a top 6 LW to play with EP - or could opt for a center/winger to complement him.... It could also use another RHD in the absence of Gudbranson - one that could either fill a shutdown role, or play a dual role in supporting Tanev (to not have to handle the bulk of hard minutes - perhaps making him a bit more durable if they're fortunate) while also providing some two way minutes - perhaps ideally a guy that could anchor Hughes while also handling some larger minutes (pk, shutdown) at the same time. In whatever case you're also looking at who is in the system - and who they're likely to draft at 10 (something they will know before going to the UFA market July 1st). Presently the wingers in the system may be the least deep of ppsitions (not really a concern imo as they also tend to be the most readily available assest)....but before going out and signing a winger to maximum term/cap, the implications not only on future pieces at that position - but also the larger cap structure moving forward - have to be taken into account. This is why I'd lean strongly away from the big fish wingers in free agency, regardless of the shorter term uptick they might provide on Pettersson's wing. Another complication is the type of player that best complements him - imo a reason to again steer clear of a Panarin type signing - is the the EP line (with Boeser) - could use some size, forecheck and hard areas presence (and down low defensive support for a young, undersized EP). For these reasons I'd target a different 'type' of forward - and in addition, when looking at cap flexibility movign forward (and imo the most important phase in this respect will likely be a few years in the future, not the present) - when you look at those factors, I think it's 'better' to target the more mid range forwardsm, ideally ones that are more versatile, can play up and down the lineup in due course (for me those are guys like Brock Nelson, not Panarin). Like Panarin, Skinner imo is too (even more) one-dimensional and not the type of forward this team should target, in spite of the (isolated) upside it could bring (at too heavy an overall price imo). Likewise with the right side of the blueline.....before signing long term pieces, it's important imo to consider things like 1) what will be the effect on Hughes' role here - if for example - you were to sign an Erik Karlsson? EK may be a RHD - but as a puck mover and 1st unit PP guy - you're overlapping key roles in signing a player like that, for long term and huge cap. I'd be more inclined to stay the course, and let's see what we have in Hughes - imo if this team is going to win in the future it will be principally in the hands of the drafted players this franchise is developing. The necessary tweaks/situational additions necessary will emerge in due course, when theyre' in a competiive position - imo that is when you use your flexibility - as opposed to spend it up front as some advocates of big fish shopping this summer are on about. So I think the plan is this: 1) stay the course. keep drafting, developing and supporting those young players with the right 'foundation' players - the guys that can handle the hard minutes, shutdown minutes, etc while providing as much opportunity as possible for the emerging core. That depth is important -whether people realize it or not - in the present - whether or not the team is 'contending'. They provide the right conditions for young guys like EP and Hughes to be successful - critically important imo. 2) Avoid spending assets if possible, by looking to the reasonably priced mid range players in the free agent market, possibly as a priority over going to the trade market, which tends to be more complicated and less reliable source. So for me the principal shorter term needs are a LW with some size, and some harder elements to their game (or at least ability to survive/thrive in the harder areas) - so I'd target players like Nelson, Lee.....and lately my mind has changed to a certain extent regarding a player like Maroon. He's stilll not a great two-way player (still has not particularly impressive 'underlying numbers', etc) - but imo he is notably improved without the puck (over previous years) - and as annoying as he was, he's kind of grown on me as a player. What Maroon did on McDavid's line was a bit of a career-rescue for him - and watching him in the present, he's more mindful of a defensive player - who brings size, grit, and more consistency than in the past. I think I'd move him into a list of principal targets as a good placeholder option as a winger for EP - one that probably wouldn't take a great deal of cap and term to sign (he's at 1.75 million this year on a one year deal - I'd be open to offering him a couple years at a bit of a raise, while dangling the carrot of playing with EP if he shows up motivated. Secondly - the right side of the blueline - with a pretty solid Jet Woo on the way - I'd be avoiding the big fish - and looking principally at a guy like Stralman, who could help anchor that right side and be a reasonably termed placeholder who likely won't command a lot of term at 32 yrs of age - while being a very solid presence on any right side. 3) Failing the UFA market, and depending on what is added in the draft, particularly at 10th overall - there is always the trade market - particularly with teams starting to hedge their rosters heading towards another expansion draft - which is another reason to be 'conservative' in approach and retain as much flexibility as possible moving forward. Some folks in here proposing to take on Lucic type deals imo don't understand the lack of leverage Edmonton has in attempting to move a NMC at this stage. In any event, even if the trade market is not a priority - you always have to be looking to improve in any way or form possible - so if you can add a reasonably young RHD, you're always looking to do so. For me, the preferable way to do that (best case) is to sign a guy like Stralman, and then if you're able to move a Tanev for a younger fixture (like a Cernak, Foote, Mayfield) - you have made a pretty good step forward in 'rebuiding/tooling' the right side. Ristolainen is of course a nice option if that's a possibility, but hard to assess the 'reality' of an option like that. If they sign a versatile center/winger like Nelson, then you take the pressure off a player like Gaudette if you were to move a player like Sutter. I think if they were to manage to sign a pair of forwards - ie a two way center and a player like Maroon - they could be in a position to trade a more 'foundational' piece like Sutter - but in the absence of doing so, he remains very important in enabling a player like EP, and maintaining a secondary scoring second line like Horvat's - whose line could also benefit a lot from maintaining the depth it currently has with Sutter/Beagle lines. If they're looking to the trade market, a player like Boone Jenner would be at the absolute top of my wish list where forwards are concerned - and it may be an opportune time to deal with the CBJ, depending on their plans with expiring contracts and the cap flexibility they may or may not have this summer. Regardless, I think it's highly likely a few forwards are shed, maybe by trade, maybe simply waived/dumped in the process this summer. 1) stay the course 2) be active in the mid range UFA market 3) in spite of 1 and 2, remain vigilant in the trade market, because none of the above are necessarily mutually exclusive.
  4. Kapanen for Leivo would be great! LOL...……..that would sit the Toronto media on its butt ! Could you imagine! lol No....I do not think that is happening. But I could see something around Goldobin +
  5. Good point.....but that Opening day Cap compliance requirement should make some teams squirm Which is what I was thinking...…. I am sure most will wiggle out it with less damage than I suggest, but when you look at Cap friendly's tables There is a lot of teams very tight to the line......it will be interesting to see how Toronto works it out, amongst others
  6. Possible targets from each team that could benefit the Canucks and be cheap due to cap reasons: Vegas: Reilly Smith Pittsburgh: Hornqvist or Schultz Washington: Niskanen or Burakovsky Toronto: Kapanen or Johnson. If jim can get one or two of the guys listed then I think the Canucks are a better team next year. And I think these players will be cheap
  7. Oh wow... I totally forgot that was a thing.
  8. I don't think his value would be well spent on a forward in a 'hockey trade' scenario. Hutton had a decent year last year, and was able to step up into a solid top 4 position (could argue top 2 when our D Corp fell apart due to injuries) when it was required of him. That being said he had a pretty bad year the previous year and I'm not sure he would hold much trade value as is. In a 1v1 trade I could see him fetching a middle 6 forward, probably closer to a 3rd liner. He holds more value to our team, or part of a sweetener in a package deal. I would rather see Hutton packaged with another pick or player for a RD or even a top 6 winger, if he is traded. My personal preference is keep him. Run Edler/Hutton/Hughes on the left side until Juolevi is ready to make the NHL jump.
  9. I understand your argument and don't totally disagree with you but I do not think any team will be doing anyone a favour.....there will certainly be down grades, as I Toronto's case No doubt teams will try to get value when trying to get cap compliant but do you see teams with excess cap doing favours? I don't. I just brought the whole issue as a matter of discussion and hope we are in the mix, somewhere.
  10. Agreed, but that's not why I created this thread. I literally just want to know what's the "forward equivalent" value of Hutton.
  11. Played for the Canucks for a few seasons before playing for a different team where he thrived.
  12. Although @5Fivehole0 and I are on opposite sides of the debate, he is correct on one thing: This isn't just about "men wanting to control women's bodies". There are plenty of women who would love to see Roe v Wade overturned as well. I think it's more accurate to say that religion is trying to control women's bodies, although that isn't 100% accurate either. I'm sure there are atheists, men and women alike, who oppose abortion as well. Nothing is black and white about this debate, which is why we'll likely never come to an arrangement that is satisfactory to everyone. The Monty Python song, "Every Sperm is Sacred" was Satire, but there are people who think just that. No pill...no condoms....
  13. janis remember to read the ltir players on teams they are added to a team's cap and require compliance on opening day (only) and then the team can use that contract value to add someone else vegas is not in as bad shape as you suggest but they will likely move 1 contract to free up cap and have another 5 million in ltir
  14. I don't think that at all. Please don't assume things about my original post. I am literally just curious about the "forward equivalent" value for Hutton. Gudbranson apparently equals Pearson and so Hutton equals..............?
  15. Target vrana speed and skill fits fits our age bracket vrana-pettersson-boeser thats a dynamic line
  16. I could actually see this happening with all the trade talk last year.... Washington is hard to the cap when all 23 players are signed So something along the lines of Hutton at 50% for Burakovsky and a 2nd (very late) We might have to add a late pick???
  17. Years ago Brian Burke sounded the alarm that GMs around the league were effectively eliminating the "second contract". It used to be a guy signed his three year entry level deal, then normally signed a two, three or four year deal for incrementally more dollars. Once the second contract was done, that was when the player signed the big dollar, long term contract. Now, however, guys are coming off their three-year entry level deal and are getting seven and eight year deals at $5.5-$7+ million, thereby putting the team in cap hell if they happen to have three or four players like that (cough-Toronto-cough-Chicago-cough). How would we like it if, in the 21-22 season, the team has three guys making $10 million each and Vancouver has yet to make it out of the first round, assuming they even make the playoffs? Call me old-fashioned, but I'd offer Boeser $5.5 million per year for three seasons with the understanding that his next contract could well be eight years at 8-10 million per. I just don't believe in paying huge dollars when neither the player nor the team has had consistent, high-level success over time. Pay for performance, not for potential.
  18. Well you were discussing Schaller specifically to what I was responding to and my point is that you're over-simplifying the situation there as there will be more factors than simply them giving up assets to unload cap. Will they find value in the player in return? They may not save as much cap in a different deal and it may cost them slightly more to make the deal, but if the player they are actually getting back in return has more value to their actual on ice team, then they will take that deal. Also what's stopping them from simply waiving their player and burying them in the minors much like we did with Gagner if it's really only going to cost a couple million and the owners are okay with it? The perception is being made to look too simple and it's not simply about whether the numbers work out. There are things to consider for example Vegas has over 5 million in Clarkson that will go on LTIR. They could move him to the lowest buyer or move out Statsny to the higher bidder for a 2nd line center and bring up Glass for example. Washington has 10 million in cap space next year with all the major guys signed already. Pittsburgh could easily find a taker for Kessel and will be able to get a decent return for him and open up enough cap space to fill out their team. Toronto is really the only team that appears to be in the biggest bind right now, but I can think of creative ways for them to make it work (eg explore trading Matthews for defense and depth, using Kapanen or other asset and getting some team to take a Zaitsev dump). They're not in such a cap hell as perceived.
  19. sautner can be our 6 or 7th dman id package hutton and baertchi for picks at draft. and resign schenn edler and trade sutter tanev. and trade eriksson with 3 mill retained for picks and prospects opens up 18 mill in cap can sign pararin and a good d man and extend boeser with that huge cap savings
  1. Load more activity