Noseforthenet

Bingo. That's what I've been saying...better, more consistent, inflation then a flat cap all make this contract look worse than it is.

I still feel like this is a pay Seattle to take cap space scenario. There's no one on that unprotected list worth losing sleep over losing. Should be easy enough. I'm glad our team has been positioned well enough not to lose an important piece.

Since somehow this thread got de-railed into talking about finding a hard hitting defenseman, how far off is Jett Woo? I always thought him being NHL read would be the perfect partner for Hughes.

When there gets to be an ask like this, you gotta think he doesn't wanna be there anymore. I don't care how successful Colorado has been getting. He's the captain who, if he stayed, would lose his captaincy. He's kind of lost in the shuffle. I often forget he's even an Av sometimes. Behind Mack and Ranty on the depth chart, it's easier to get lost in the shuffle. He likely has more to give than what he would be able to give in Colorado.

He doesn't like the Canucks AT ALL! I mean MAYBE he would come here because the entire core has been turned over, but this smells more like a waiving his NMC, so Seattle selects him. He's from Winnipeg, but his home is in the Okanagan. Was at the airport in Kelowna a few years back, saw him, and he made a very sarcastic comment about the Canucks. I forget what it was, but he definitely didn't seem like he's gonna be coming to Vancouver. Maybe Edmonton? That's my guess. Edmonton or Seattle.

So just assuming Nate Schmidt was on the move and the team didn't gel with him, trading him creates a hole on the back end we would have to hope Juolevi and Rathbone could fill. Edler may not even be coming back and even if he did, he's not gonna chew up the minutes he used to. Schmiddty playing the left side would be extremely important. Plus you have to lock up Quinn Hughes first, otherwise his contract could cost just as much as Jones'.

If we have a high pick that isn't being used on a defenseman, trading it for Sam Reinhart might be in the cards.

Funny though, how Tanev's injuries went down when Myers got signed. Could it be he was playing too many hard minutes all himself...?

I think they're gonna try their best to move a couple first. We might see some pretty low returns.

I must point out that if Virtanen gets moved, this contract doesn't even register as a big deal. Tanner Pearson fits in with the team well. That plus let's maybe remind people how disheartened Bo was when we lost the players we lost last off season. Losing Tanner Pearson, when the contract is reasonable is not an option.

I wish I could believe you...but on the off chance this actually is Petey, I hope this week off does the team well and that most of you get back and ready to go on Wednesday. Big push coming over April. My birthday is coming up and I wanna see some more Canucks playoff hockey!!

Oh Jim. Don't troll the board with these posts and go do your job.

I don't like long term contracts on goalies these days. It's such a tedious position. Binner is actually pretty good, but these can really screw your career. Should never be more than 3 when the AAV pops to 6.

Schmidt hasn't been the greatest fit, but he has been better recently. There's a danger here though. Edler goes, Schmidt goes as well, our left D gets looking decidedly thin past Quinn Hughes. Jordie Benn likely won't be re-upped. Oof, our D has already sucked. I don't wish to see it unravel anymore. We need to be building it up!!!

I almost dropped my phone when it said Shotgun Jake opened the scoring tonight.

Ha! They're interested because they've always been interested and think they can get him on the cheap right now because he's struggling. The Preds are dangling Ekholm out there right now because he's on IR and a great top 4, but down on the depth chart behind Josi and likely won't be moving on up in the foreseeable future. Maybe they figure they can take Jake and Adam Gaudette from us for him. We need a right hander though. I don't see a fit.

I'm interested in seeing how this one pans out. It looks like a very random move.

With Jake having a following with the Calgary Hitmen, I could see there being a want for it there. Bennett coming the other way though...that's hard to say. I don't get the feeling he'd like Vancouver. I could see Toronto figuring something out. Maybe Bennett and a Dman go to Toronto for Nylander? Yup, Hanifin and Bennett for Willie Nylander. Maybe Toronto adds a lower tier dman making a mil or so? Maybe Bogosian? Bennett would be back with Gilmour. Toronto gets that right sided top 4 guy with offensive upside and Calgary gets more scoring punch. Calgary's taxi squad has a decent amount of Dmen on it. They can handle the loss for the right thing coming back.

That's almost as bad as leaving Virtanen in Edmonton...but not quite.

He used to be the Captain of the Kelowna Rockets and spent time on the World Juniors. Personally, I'm wondering where his development went wrong. This guy SHOULD have turned out.

The trick is Laine didn't earn that 1st line spot. He should get it with Torts, but he still has to earn it. He has to know it's not gonna be gifted to him. Otherwise it's gonna be a loooong season for Patrick Laine.

Here's the thing though. How big would that number be if it didn't include the younger players who are in longer term contracts? Let's say longer than 2 years? That number is way overbloated with the McDavids, Matthews, and Marners of the league. None of those guys with larger salaries ever make it to arbitration now. The last one was Shea Weber from what I remember. That goes back about 8 years or so. That rule is so outdated.

This is exactly what I mean. I didn't remember the walk away being so high. That amount is pretty high and I hope they revisit that in the next CBA. Some young players are much better coming out of the minors than they used to be in '95 and teams are locking them up to long term deals quicker. Maybe if point totals were factored into this, we could be looking at fairer cap numbers. Or just making it so teams can walk away at any number.

I looked at this one statement from Cap Friendly. Although you're right, why put a dollar amount on the rule then. It makes no sense. It DID say clubs can not walk away from club elected arbitration. I feel like this was a change between this CBA and the last, which really sucks. Nobody is gonna want to give up anything for Virtanen with the amount of cap. We might have gotten something off Boston at one point. They have a decent amount of cap to play with, but right now, it's just kind of a crap situation.

They must have changed that in the last CBA then.