• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Days Won


SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME last won the day on November 18 2018

SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

14,716 Gaming the system

1 Follower


  • Rank
    Canucks First-Line

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

18,149 profile views
  1. I think it was Sat Shah. Reported that Brackett was offered two years and basically the same salary.
  2. Two of the original six teams were in 12th place (in their respective conferences). Coincidence that the league decided on a 24 team format?
  3. I just clued into the fact that the Canucks would need to win 19 playoff games to take home the Cup. Best of five plus 4 rounds of best of seven. So, we could, for the first time ever, win 16 games and lose the Cup. Heck, we could win 18 games and still lose. Wouldn't that be typical Canuck luck? Win 18 playoff games, only to lose, in Game 7 of the Finals, to one of the teams that had a bye and only won the standard 16 playoff games. We finish with the most wins of any team in the 2020 playoffs, but still lose the Cup.
  4. I think he’s a better player today too, than when he left. More mature, more seasoned, more experienced, more committed to his fitness, wiser to the expectations in the NHL, etc. I just don’t feel like he’s raised his value all that much. Generally speaking, when guys go over to Europe, they don’t add significant NHL value, as far as next contracts, unless they post eye-popping numbers, or show a significant upward trajectory. I agree there are reasons for optimism. And I’ve been pretty consistent in batting down claims by folks that seek to portray Tryamkin in the most negative light, whether that’s his “entitlement issues” or his quality of play. I’ve been a backer of Nik, over the past three seasons. And I still am. It just irks me to see people thinking we should just throw $3-4 million at Tryamkin, when it shouldn’t be necessary to spend anywhere near that much to get him back here. Sure, the rumours coming out suggest he wants $3+ million. Those are “feelers” coming from his camp. It’s an agent’s job to start high in any negotiation. Management starts low, and they meet in the middle. I guess it just rubs me the wrong way to see folks saying, just give Tryamkin his asking price and whatever term he wants. Why? This is not a player with that kind of negotiating power. Nowhere near it. And as far as the “we’re only talking about a difference of $1 million” argument, that money does matter. Every salary matters. Every negotiation matters. Paying too much for one player affects the next negotiation. It affects the overall salary structure. Certainly, in isolation, paying a million over market value on a single player will not break the bank. But habitually paying over market will significantly impact team building in a cap system. It’s management’s job to get the best value possible out of contracts. And I’m hopeful they will, in the case of Tryamkin.
  5. At first glance, I actually suspected “Marc Edge” was a parody account set up by some “statistics nerd” using a random boomer pic from google images and writing Benning fan fiction as some sort of joke for Canucks twitter. But he appears to be a real guy. And it appears that he’s writing his real opinions. Although after reading the first couple paragraphs of that piece, I’m still not 100% sure whether or not this is all an elaborate joke.
  6. ^^ The above post was tongue in cheek, but it’s definitely going to be a big loss whenever Tanev moves on. He’s been our most stabilizing and effective defensive Dman for years, but he’s also a huge presence off the ice—kinda the glue that holds the team together—and has become the honorary “Dad” to most of the young bucks. Of course, teams move on, evolve, and mature, and everyone can be replaced, but whenever Tanev walks, the team’s culture and character will be taking a significant hit. Not sure what kind of value you can place on that off-ice stuff, or if it’s worth the cost of his next extension (especially with our cap situation), but Tanev is definitely a big part of what makes our group so tight knit.
  7. I do worry about our prospects and young players, if and when Tanev finally leaves. Chris and Kendra are basically the billet parents for every young Canucks player. Don’t know how those kids are gonna keep themselves fed without regular dinners at “Dad’s” place.
  8. On a two year contract, fine by me. An AAV of $1.5-1.75M seems about right for Tryamkin. Probably not what you meant, though. * * * * * (The following section of this post is just general observation and not really directed at @aliboy, or anyone in particular) Honestly, when you look around for comparables, I have a hard time justifying Tryamkin getting a better deal than a guy like Jamie Oleksiak. 3 years, $2,137,500 AAV Oleksiak signed that deal as an RFA at age 25. He’s 6’7, 255 lbs. Was coming off a season where, after the trade to Pittsburgh, he averaged 17:24 TOI, and scored 14 points in 41 games. Oleksiak profiles like this: A huge defenseman with terrific reach and strength. Moves very well for a man his size. Has superb agility and athleticism. Oleksiak can deliver thunderous hits and uses his stick effectively to break up passes. He also has good hands and puck skills, which could see him blossom into a very solid two-way defenseman. (from Elite Prospects) Sound like anyone we know? Oleksiak hits as hard and often as Tryamkin, and he actually fights a lot more. He also scores more points, has better underlying numbers than Tryamkin in the NHL (both today and in 2017), has played on better teams, and has played (especially since the trade) in less sheltered roles. When Tryamkin was here, he averaged 16:52 TO/G, often in sheltered minutes, and on one of the worst teams (and defenses) in the league, and he scored 11 points in 79 games (over two seasons). So tell me again how that’s deserving of over $3 million a season? I’m the first to acknowledge that Tryamkin has the potential to be a very special player, but he’s proved nothing yet. At least nothing more than Jamie Oleksiak had proved when he earned his current three year deal. The deal Tryamkin was reportedly offered in 2017 (2 years @ $2 million AAV) was very fair at the time. Since then, Tryamkin really hasn’t done anything that should push his NHL value higher than it was when he left. I would agree that Nik is older, wiser, more mature, and in better shape than he was when he was here. Those are all great things. He’s also been away for three seasons. He had one really good KHL year (and I think his NHL value would have increased if he’d come back in 2018), and then two years of declining minutes and production. And also some rumours of questionable effort and motivation: “I don’t know what happened in a year, but something changed,” Sports-Express KHL insider Igor Eronko said earlier this year. “Nikita and I are well acquainted, I know him a lot, I’ve had some interviews with him so I know him as a person and as a hockey player. But something wasn’t good for him after that year. He was kind of not feeling in the right place and right position.” “He got the ‘C’ on the jersey and then the coach took it off later because of effort,” Eronko said. “The coach saw three or four other D, showing much better effort and he wants top determination from every player.” And here are Tryamkin’s KHL stats in black and white: So, has Tryamkin increased his NHL value by 50-75% in the three seasons he’s been away? For me, it’s a big no. He’s worth around the same money as when he left, at least until he proves he’s worth more in the NHL (and I’m optimistic that he eventually will). But a player with a very similar stat line, profile, and physical characteristics, to 2017 NHL version Nikita Tryamkin, was given a three year deal for just north of $2 million per season. That’d be right around where I’d be looking to sign Tryamkin, if he wants term. And that’s right about the kind of argument I’d hope to see management bring to their dealings with Nik’s agent. I don’t see how he can command $3+ million right now. He wasn’t worth that kind of money in 2017. And he really hasn’t done anything (yet) that should dramatically increase his NHL value in 2020. Hopefully the best is yet to come for Tryamkin. And hopefully it’s in a Vancouver uniform. But he needs to prove himself to be a $3+ million player, on NHL ice, before he should get paid that kind of money.
  9. Seems to add up, when you read the story. WorkSafeBC operates an $18 billion “accident fund” that’s invested through the BC Investment Management Corporation. If that fund took a roughly 15% hit due to the market crash, and an additional $400 million of premium revenue was lost due to business closures and layoffs, it would add up to around a $3 billion loss for WorkSafeBC.
  10. Body checks are penalties in the women’s game, but you just have to watch any game between Canada and the USA and you’ll see that the women definitely “go all out.” And sometimes, they don’t let the stricter rules stop them from mixing it up as good (or bad, depending on your perspective) as the men
  11. Nice story with the Hughes bros: But in this age of Covid-19, I can’t help looking at this pic and thinking, oh ****, Quinn doesn’t have his mask on properly. And then I see this pic and think, oh ****, some of the people getting food aren’t wearing masks. And then I think, oh ****, this is happening in Michigan, where people do this **** during a pandemic And then I think, please oh please, for the love of Gord, let the hockey gods protect our dear Quinn from the Rona.
  12. I hear you. And I’m not really all that scared. Even a bad contract is manageable, and guys Tryamkin’s size, even if they play like dog**** (not saying he will) seem to tradable commodities, at least for a while (there’s always a GM who covets size that will believe a change of scenario will somehow redeem a hulking pylon). Again, not saying Tryamkin’s gonna suck, but if he does, we can probably get out of it. I guess mostly I’d just like to see him come back as a “bargain,” especially after him leaving for three years, and everything that’s happened in the interim. We already have enough overpaid boat anchors on this roster, so I’d hate to see another one added (even if it’s not necessarily going to hurt us too bad). My feeling is that Tryamkin can play NHL hockey, at least at a third pairing level. I’d like to see him paid as a third pairing guy, and then hopefully he outperforms his deal.
  13. I’d be really scared of a 4+ year term at 3+ million per. It could be the deal of the century, if Tryamkin becomes the next Chara. It would even be a great deal if he hits a more realistic ceiling of an NHL level 2nd pair/shutdown Dman. But Tryamkin could also easily be the next Erik Gudbranson, or even the next Griffin Reinhart. Getting locked into a lengthy term with that kind of player would arguably be a worse fate for our overall cap health than the Luongo recapture penalty. I’m hoping for a one year “show me” deal that’s fair, even generous IMO, at somewhere around the $2 million mark.
  14. I’m curious what everyone’s “walk away” number is for Tryamkin? Like what’s the max AAV you’d find acceptable? For me, I’m thinking $2.25 million max (and would prefer under $2 million). I’d probably play hardball with his agent if they’re pushing for $3 million. I just feel like his time away from the NHL shouldn’t have increased his value. The rumoured extension offer when he left was $2 million, and I’d say his value today should be flat or reduced, compared to when he was still here (maybe a slight increase in dollar amount due to cap%). Plus, he really doesn’t have a strong negotiating position. Canucks hold the NHL rights. If he wants to come back, he needs to sign with Vancouver. And, while I know all the arguments for why stat-watching doesn’t tell the whole story with Tryamkin, he’s nonetheless had his minutes and points decrease over the length of his KHL deal, and that trajectory needs to be considered in assigning a value for any new contract.