Noseforthenet

I dunno. I kind of think Sutter gets bumped to the wing again. Still feels like Sutter gets traded out sometime soon here. He doesn't seem to fit and that may be why Baertschi got waived in the first place too. With how injury prone he is, teams could want to see him into some games before they make a move for him. Gaudette earned 3rd line center duties, IMO.

If anyone else here is crying about Baertschi being waived and not Eriksson, keep in mind he's probably the next to go. We're still starting with Roussel on IR. I'm sure Eriksson is on a short leash. If he doesn't pick it up (or maybe even if he does), he's being waived, so no matter what he will have to play his ass off if he wants a spot on an NHL roster. Not to mention, Gaudette still needs to keep playing well if he wants to keep his spot, so the roster isn't even set in stone yet. Not even close. Plus ya gotta think Baertschi and Goldy don't want to be sent down either, but they're going to Utica, so the internal competition with this depth happens to be a good thing after all.

Pretty sure he's laughing all the way to the bank.... I thought Baertschi gained some chemistry with Gaudette. Might just be a situation where Baertschi is more valuable in a trade if he clears. We could see him in a trade tomorrow maybe?

I was going with something a little less having to do with hockey and a little more having to do with Marvel getting Spider-Man back for at least a movie.

And for some reason, only the second best news for today.... Cool

You WOULD think, right?

This probably has something to do with him not really wanting to head out west and having his family uprooted. STL is kind of in the middle if that. I can imagine Vancouver was also on the no trade list along with Winnipeg (lack of doing anything good this summer for their team), LA maybe? Security seemed like a total must for this player and even the cup champs needed to sign him to a 7 year extension just to get him.

There could be more factors in this situation than we know. Just for an example, what if Brock is looking for a certain $ amount on his contract with a front loaded bonus to help deal with his dad's health issues? Also the way contracts have inflated over the years, signing the long one (unless it's closer to 9 or 10 mil a season) is foolish. He could get to the middle of his contract and wish he didn't sign for 6 or 7 when he could've gotten a shorter term and signed for 10+ after 4 years. Just not sure the higher dollar value on the short term is something Benning will go for. Tough call all around. This one is gonna be tough to hash out.

There's no way Boeser gets any less than 6. You just can't justify it unless Eriksson outright gets cut. They play the same position and one of them isn't doing his job like he's supposed to. You can't tell Boeser he deserves less than 6 million per year when all he has to do is look down the bench and see someone coasting thru his fat contract which NO TEAM wants to touch. The number will have to be 7. Line him up long term at that number. He's a core piece to this club. Just do it. He's only gonna get better.

Let's call this for what it is. Ferland has more of a defined role as to what he actually is, which at the moment makes him more valuable than Jake. JV is still trying to find his place or he keeps trying to punch above his weight class into top 6 forward territory. Maybe he gets there or maybe Ferland's tenacity rubs off on Virtanen and they get put on a line together with Beagle and become hell for anyone who's on the ice. Or maybe Gaudette goes in between them and that line becomes chippy and scores a few. TBH, I want to see those two on a line, playing together more than being in the blender, somewhere else or in a role they shouldn't be in.

Well the contract is definitely tradeable. Some team looking for a young top 6 forward in the bargain bin should come knocking before the season starts. I always like Ottawa for these sorts of things.

It's hard for the Canucks to justify not paying Boeser 7 mil. I mean, all you have to do is look on the ice and see Eriksson floating around like a squiggly line in his eye fluid.

Did you guys see how he celebrated his day with the cup? He made Poutine inside it!!! This man is a legend.

No, but they figure out how to lose the player if they don't perform and are always in on any big player. Not that THAT part is a big deal. It's just kind of a WTF thing. Say if Panarin sh!+$ the bed in a couple years, they'll get to lose him so quickly, it's not even funny.

Okay, is anyone else sick of the Rangers being able to get out of their salary problems, only to have more salary problems, which they can constantly get out of?! Meanwhile...in Vancouver....

I think we have a winner! There's no way the Sens do that trade if he wasn't insured. The swap is for a 5th and 6th Callahan is done Even if he isn't done, he'll probably pretend he's done so he doesn't have to play for the Sens

Goaltending is all about the "What have you done for me lately" mentality when it comes to the business aspect. You sign a guy to this, you had better be sure they're gonna be consistently good over their contract. I can count the goalies on one hand who were able to at least more than 50% fulfill their end of the bargain.

Ya know, with how the team is progressing, I'm happy we got him too. Everyone is going to forget about him because he's a couple years out still. In 2 years, we should "theoretically" be able to make some noise in the playoffs. Adding this kid after could be like getting another free asset.

That's some comforting news...sort of. That also sounds like a player you don't win with, however.

Just a less occupied person. I don't care that much. Again, this is a forum to discuss this stuff. Team doctors will check out all their signings. You invest millions of dollars into an asset, you do THAT, at least. That's common sense. That being said, any other issues a player might have between the ears can be a subjective thing. That plus the NHL isn't known for being good about dealing with head injuries on the whole. Which is WHY I'm not going to be a homer on this signing like everyone else is. Carolina decided that he wasn't part of the solution after making it to the conference finals as a team. They could have signed him for less than what he signed for here with the tax laws there. The team is on the up and up. Why leave there to come here? Even with the Aho offer sheet, it doesn't make a difference. My guess is that they didn't want HIM. I hope that's not the case though. As a fan, I want to see the team get better.

Thanks for posting the article. It helps. I just wanted to see more than blatant homerism regarding a new player and to know more history on the guy. A buddy told me he had some issues with Brindamour last year because of it. Between that and what Craig Button said on TSN about the signing, I think it's appropriate to be cautious and I really wanna know how much research our GM is doing on these things. Benning's lack of dudiligence on seeking out good trades and overpaying on contracts is starting to annoy me, personally.

So hey, not sure this was covered in the thread yet, but has anyone looked into Ferlands' apparent drinking/substance abuse issues along with concussion history? He was in the NHL program. The Canes decided on not re-signing him and now he has a no move for the 1st 2 years of the contract.

Nope. The slide applies. I'm sure of it.

Hughes contract rolls over because he only played 5 games. So Petey is in 2, Hughes is in 3 and so on. That's not the point though. The point is we are in a unique position where Bo's salary can more or less set the standard for our team because he's going to come to work every single night. He's gonna be the Captain soon, so if you think you deserve more money, you better outwork Captain Bo. Bo probably won't be the best player on the team, but you know damn well the effort is going to be there and he'll make the rest of em earn their big contracts. What if we sign Boeser short term, but bigger number than Bo and then he doesn't put up the numbers. Bo's contract will come up and then it inflates the salaries for the rest of the team. The new standard wouldn't even have a proper comparable to go by and that means good luck getting a deal on his contract. Then of course there's an arbitration year where our brass says, "Well we feel like you rode Petey's coat tails a bit." You give him his arbitration deal and he's gone in a year, anyways. Within that 5 years, you get the time to show the kid that we're going to be and stay competitive for years and that's what keeps him here. That's what we had better be relying upon anyways if we want any chance to keep our player's loyalty to the team.

Punch the deal up to 5 years. We don't want Bo, Boeser, or Hughes having to be re-signed at the same time. I think the thing is he's gonna have to out perform Bo to earn the big contract. We get Bo done first and then compare numbers and responsibility. Theoretically he could do it, but he hasn't done it just yet. 3 years would match the ending of Hughes' ELC and we don't want that. I would eat the higher cap hit for Boeser, so we wouldn't have to re-sign those two in the same season.