jammin_jk

I understand the sentiment Deb and could agree... except Petey and Hughes aren't at the end of their careers (ala Sedins). They're professional hockey players and another year without the playoffs won't actually hurt them that much. I'd rather look three years down the road when they are in their prime. We longer have the option of Madden or a second round pick anymore in their futures. Would you rather have Toffoli for 24 games plus a few in the playoffs (I don't think he'll impact our playoff chances one way or the other very much) or a Gaudette (Madden isn't Gaudette... he's lighter (con) and more skilled (pro) at the same PPG as Gaudette) and a Hoglander (if we draft well... this is a deep draft) in our prospect pool. As a Canucks fan for about 35 years, I take the long sustainable view and choose Madden and a second everytime over a rental who really is a fringe second liner (doesn't drive play) for 24 plus a few... unfortunately our management agrees with your point of view and wants things now. That is not a rebuild! Man... I hate this trade... I get the sentiment and the meaning behind it, but it is so short sighted (focus on this year) and short term... in other words, we would be better overall and in the future without this trade. But, I respect your opinion...

Yes, it would shorten our window... that's why we shouldn't do it... we would be the Canucks circa 2011 with a younger small core, but our window would shrink... That was the purpose of this thread. To see if we can remain competitive over the next few years (not our cup window anyways) while retaining our assets. I think my answer is "yes", we can do it. If you will read my original post you will see this. The only thing I am hopeful for is that somehow someone takes on Baertschi, even if we have to give up a fourth round(-ish) pick.

Yes, but it would be good to get him off now... need to resign Jake and Markstrom among others. When you look at the numbers, we need him gone ASAP...

BINGO! I even forgot about Baertschi... I guess you could defend JB here because when he was signed it looked like Sven could be a top six winger so we gave him a bridge. But Beagle and Eriksson I never understood... Hence the reason I created this post... better times are coming, but not before these mostly "useless" players are gone. I also don't mind the Myers contract. He will be better next year. He's overpaid by about $1 million but the term is palatable. You only need to look at Winnipeg to see that he has value (I know they're missing Byfuglien and Trouba too).

Signing Eriksson (and Beagle for that matter) to crap contracts isn't a function of becoming a good team... it's just overpriced contracts. I'm not blaming JB for these contracts, but there's no way to defend them and "better" GMs just don't have these contracts on their teams. I haven't looked, but do Tampa or Washington have any terrible contracts?

It does if we manage to move Baertschi and don't resign some of our free agents. I feel like we're speaking two different languages so probably not worth arguing I'd love to see your forward list (14 forwards with contracts amounts) with and without Eriksson just to prove my point...

Your roster should also include a 14th forward, the Luongo recapture penalty, the Spooner buyout hit...

Your roster from page 2 has a few contracts that may be underestimated and I'd love to see the cap hits beside all of your players because I don't think they have the bonuses included (which Pettersson and Hughes will both hit for sure). There is no "relative ease" about the cap next year and we can't carry over bonuses because 2021-2022 is even worse. I'd love to see your rosters with actual numbers. I've also never heard any professional recently guess that Markstrom would sign for $5 million. If he does, that would be incredible but he's closer to 5.5-6...

Exactly what I wrote in my original post except I'm hopeful they can sign Edler to a one year deal after this one expires. Feel like he will take the hometown discount to be on a team that is getting close to contention...

I pray something like this happens but it isn't likely given JBs track record with trades like this... just don't bet on it... but nice find!

Hey... I'd love for this guy to retire but you can't depend on it. Everyone loves them some money! I promise there's no agreement between him and the team that he's retiring early. This is a professional athlete with pride... If we had to give up a second, it's not worth it. Not with our drafting... Demko and Hoglander (and later picks like Madden and Gaudette) say "Hi". I feel like you have a tendency to overvalue or undervalue our players to your benefit (overvalue Eriksson so he can be tradeable and undervalue Pettersson and Hughes to fit them under the cap).

Tell me a single D-man on that list you'd trade for Hughes and a single forward you'd trade for Pettersson and I'd love to be the GM to take Pettersson and Hughes off your hands. They are better than any of those you listed already... and younger. Brayden Point and Rantanen are the closest but they are on elite teams and their linemates are inflating their stats...

Not sure you're understanding... if we buyout Eriksson he is no longer on our roster so he needs to be replaced by another player... Here's the example: Don't buy him out = $6 million against the cap Buy him out = $4 million against the cap but need to fill the roster spot he leaves (so add Leivo at $2 million for example)... that also equals $6 million (basically replacing Eriksson with Leivo) What you're not understanding is that buying him out creates an extra "one player hole" on our roster that must be filled (replacing him is the cost of the buyout + the player you replace him with)

I agree 20 to get both done long term, that's why I think Hughes is getting a bridge deal next time around. He has no arbitration rights and we will have to play hardball with him. Not sure Petey is getting quite 11 (I predicted 10), but we're close for sure...

I'm not sure it's all doom and gloom... have you read my original post (bless you if you could make it through)? I do agree our D-depth will be impacted next year (Tanev), but our forwards won't be and I'm hoping that one of our promising D's can step up next year a bit (Rafferty, Juolevi, Brisebois). Also, Stecher would have to play more minutes, which I think he can. And Hughes will be better next year and I bet Myers will be better being his second year with a new team. I'd argue he's been a little bit better recently even (5 goals in the last month). I do not support setting draft picks or A-B+ level prospects just to dump cap. Gillis went all in in 2011 and we all know how that went. The team is finally recovering. I would rather build the way Tampa has. Give yourself a chance every year and don't sell your future to do it. I know we aren't there yet but I'd prefer a competitive team every year in the playoffs than one who's favored to win the cup one year (like our 2011 team).

No arguments here... he's learned along the way, but JB has signed some doozies early in his GM career. The point of this thread is to see how we can work around it while not getting "worse" and not giving up picks or prospects to do so (like some here have suggested).

Mitch Marner and Auston Matthews and a few other superstars say "Hi". Pettersson has more points in his first 100 games than Marner did (I think). The new trend is that RFAs sign their huge long term contract right away after their ELCs...

The only problem is if you replace him with a player that makes $2 million plus the actual gain against the cap is negative. Can you replace Eriksson with a $700,000 player?

I actually never said your opinion was stupid if you read the context. I actually said trading Eriksson for a first or second + prospect is stupid. However, I would say (in my opinion) your view that someone may take on Eriksson without leveraging our terrible cap situation (ie. demanding a prospect or pick or player) may be false. Marleau is still a serviceable player but it took a first to get him out of Toronto. No team is going to take your problems just because the actual dollar values are low when his cap hit is so high. Ottawa can find MANY other ways of hitting the cap floor and make their team better than picking up Eriksson (even if the owner doesn't want to spend $ to the cap floor).

I never said we can't sign two cornerstones. I just said that both of them can't be signed long term at the same time since the awful contracts in 2021-2022 still exist. However, I did not consider buying out Eriksson to save $2 million in cap space. Although, it wouldn't be $2 million in saving since he would still have to be replaced by a player at least at league minimum. Therefore the actual savings against the cap if we buyout Eriksson after next year is only $1.3 million... maximum. It does help, but it doesn't get us Pettersson and Hughes both signed long term (unless you sacrifice futures/prospects to do so)...

I'm enjoying this and really not getting worked up. However, I don't think "getting out" of cap hell just to keep Tanev is worth it. He will be getting 4.5-5 million for 4-5 years on the open market and won't be worth that in two years. In fact, this is the only healthy season he has had and actually earned his paycheque. Too risky of a player IMO for too much money. Also, Eriksson has no value, so don't go there. We aren't parting with him unless it's with a first or a second + prospect. That would be stupid. I don't mind the idea of buying him out after next year so his cap hit in 2021-2022 is $4 million instead of $6 million. That relieves a couple million. Also, you just stated Hughes/Pettersson would get 7/8 million on a 4 year bridge and earlier said they would get 7/8 million on a long term contract. Those are two different things. I agree on the four year deal, but that's a bridge. I would rather sign one to a long term deal (6-8 years) and the other to a 3 year bridge at less money. It staggers their next contracts and would save money over time. I wouldn't want to have to re up both of them in four years. That would be far worse because it would come soon after raises to Boeser, Horvat, and Miller.

I'm honestly not calling you out, I'm just having a discussion. I've been on these forums (reading) for probably 10-15 years so I'm not new, just haven't made many posts because didn't feel a desire to. I don't feel like searching for your proposed lineup for next year or in two years, so can you post it here? Also, saying I need decaf? You don't even know me and I haven't even tried to insult you or anybody. Just trying to poke people's brains...

Agreed that moving a guy and a draft pick doesn't bankrupt our future but I truly believe that it doesn't even help our cap situation moving forward that much. Would you rather have Madden (let's say he hits the middle of his ceiling... Gaudette style) in your lineup in 3 years or a replacement player like Beagle or Sutter or (enter name here) for significantly more money? That's just an example but I really don't think our cup window is the next two seasons. Also, to say that we may not get much worse on the back end because of our internal depth is THAT far fetched. I would expect Tryamkin and Juolevi (and Rafferty?) to get time next year.

Love your optimism and wish I was of the same ilk. There's literally no way Pettersson or Hughes come in at 7-8 million long term (6-8 years). Unless they become worse players than they are now. Compared to their draft classes Pettersson goes #1 in a redraft (unanimous) and Hughes goes anywhere #1-3 depending on who you ask. Hughes and Makar are literally putting up points in their rookie seasons that hasn't been seen for years. Also no chance the cap goes up 7 million over the next two years... 4 million maybe... Also, no sure anyone wants Woo. It looks like he was drafted right about where he should have been (his points have regressed since last year). I get the hesitation on Madden though... now THAT is a small body!

Not worth it to me. Sacrificing current cap crunches for future ones... to trade away futures ruins us in the future because those futures (draft picks or prospects... say Madden) come in on ELCs. This is exactly what I hope Benning avoids. There are too many factors when you make the playoffs to go "all in" or sacrifice for the future. Too many examples to list, but Arizona is worse right now with Hall (at least their record is). I say Benning keeps doing what he's doing.