• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


theo5789 last won the day on February 24

theo5789 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

8,134 Gaming the system

About theo5789

  • Rank
    Canucks First-Line

Profile Information

  • Location
    Canucks, B.C.

Recent Profile Visitors

10,023 profile views
  1. They could pay that 21 million out or they could pay 17.5 million and still get to that same floor with LE's contract and thus save money for a team that doesn't draw crowds even prior to the pandemic. Not saying this will happen, but that's the incentive. Even if this becomes moot, whether he gets paid his bonus now or have it deferred is moot as well. But with it paid out, we can at least explore this option and LE could explore the idea on if he's ready to retire (especially if we choose to waive him). Getting this bonus paid out starts the next chapter in this tale of Eriksson.
  2. The funny thing is that the safest hockey would likely be played in BC. However seeing that there's currently like a 6-10% infection rate of the players, perhaps it's best to not bring them here and potentially cause an outbreak. If there is an outbreak, I wouldn't our city to be marred with that. Doesn't look good that the NHL wanted to force us to change our rules for health and safety and I'm glad we didn't sell out for them.
  3. Well like I said, it's to artificially raise their cap while paying less salary. We will see how the market affects teams. I'm not saying it's a certainty that it will happen, but it's a much better possibility than before his bonus being paid out. I was replying to a poster suggesting that he was hoping the bonus payout would be delayed to give us more time to move him, but I'm saying it's easier to potentially move him (or have him consider his future) now that the bonus is paid out.
  4. The sooner that bonus is paid out, the sooner he could potentially be moved (more enticing for teams to pay less of his contract) or at least consider his future (5 million salary left over two years). Postponing it does nothing for us and he is getting that bonus regardless. With the market now, there may be more teams that want to artificially eat up the cap while paying less salary and now LE fits in that category of player.
  5. I agree with not having a lottery. However I would have a "reverse playoff" for that 1st overall pick. Have all of the teams that missed the playoffs play a mini tournament. The teams that just missed the playoffs may have the advantage, but that should encourages teams to not tank and play the best hockey possible even right to the end as it's setting yourselves up for this tournament. It's extra games for the teams that missed out on the playoffs, but their incentive is to bolster their team into a better position for the future (perhaps some UFAs that aren't staying with their teams don't give a damn, but it could also be a showcase for their next contracts). The NHL would get more games played for more revenue and the fanbases for these teams have something further to root for. The increased level of competition should allow for even more parity in the league creating more exciting games throughout the season. Teams that want to get that 1st overall will have a harder time tanking and then turning it back on for the tournament, so they will have to remain competitive. It would be kind of like how in Europe where they have relegation that it keeps the games for the bottom teams more interested and hungry to keep going.
  6. The season has gone pretty much exactly as expected. Couldn't predict the ups and downs of the season, but we are right in that wildcard bubble which is a continuation of our upward trend over the last couple of years.
  7. Did they plan to have draft eligible kids at the same time? Talk about chemistry.
  8. I don't get why some think Benning is hanging onto LE to save face. It's like they truly believe Benning isn't trying to make this team the best it possibly can. These people clearly play too much EA sports and think it's so simple. I agree that his play has dropped off and he's not simply floating. His defensive work and his ability on that stretch with Pearson and Horvat that was one of our more effective lines was true to that effort. He isn't worth his contract for sure and no teams are chomping at the bit to take him and we don't want to use assets to unload him as long as we are able to manage the cap with him and we had done so this past season. People think it's so easy to just waive him and believe he will retire. He might, but what if he does report? You're only saving just over a million in cap in which you have to replace him with a player which basically negates that savings anyway (unless you go with a minimum wager and save 300k or so). Then you have the drama which the media will create or fan the flames on continuously, is that worth it? He could walk away from his contract after his bonus, but he isn't going to making that kind of money on another team given his age and play and the current market, so I don't think it's going to be that simple to remove him unless there's a compliance buyout (which sounds like it won't happen).
  9. Stecher's money next season for us is currently $0. Not sure how much of that we could spend on re-signing Tanev. Andersson doesn't seem to fit the bill of the type of player/character we have been looking for (he seems like he has a bit of a Dahlen type mentality), so not sure if there's even any interest from us at this point. If he isn't in their plans anymore, then perhaps they could be interested in a vet that help now with their young group like Sutter along with a prospect like Gadjovich maybe.
  10. Hopefully his mates bought him a few beers after getting lit up in the NHL in that one game
  11. I think the key word is "mutual" here. If the Canucks could trade him, surely they would. If we could simply terminate the contract, then we probably would if he isn't in our plans any longer (we would've done it with other players as well surely if it were that easy) because why pay them for nothing? I think Palmu's side knows that he likely isn't cracking any NHL rosters, so is he willing to toil in the AHL for another team for a couple more years assuming he even gets a look? He likely isn't going to get a better contract with any European team, so he's likely just collecting his paycheque at this point. A 6th round overager pick that is 5'6 playing in Finland and not even the best player on his team isn't likely to be getting a lot of attention where he's comfortable passing up on the guaranteed money. Just sounds like another type of post that assumes that Canuck management is always in the wrong.
  12. You're right that his PPG play has exceeded all of our expectations. However, everything else that he has brought was exactly as advertised. He was surely a top 6 player for us (despite many criticisms of him was that he as a bottom 6 player). Many of us believed he would be a 60 point guy (over a full season) in this top 6 role with us with some optimism that he could be a 70 point guy playing alongside someone like EP and Boeser. Let's remember that we didn't have many 60 point guys prior to his arrival so it was always going to a welcomed offensive boost (however many same his previous 47 point season, in 3rd line minutes no less, and considered him to be "regressing" already. So with that expectation, we also looked at his contract and with 4 years and 5.25 million for a top 6 player is a pretty darn good contract, another added value here. Yes this is expensive for a 3rd liner in which he was for Tampa, but it was more an abundance of riches for them rather than them trying to "dump" him. This is where I think the idea of a cap dump is debated, where some think they should've paid us to take him like in other cap dump type deals. I think we found out he was available and jumped on it. We could've played games to try and lower the price, but it also could've opened up to other teams and potentially driven his price up. Another example here is when we traded Toffoli pre-trade deadline. Many still think we overpaid here as well, but had we waited until the TDL, we can see the prices were much higher than what we gave up. As you've mentioned, we scouted him as a player that fit into the system we wanted. Miller was good a retrieving pucks and finding open players. This is something he had done in Tampa on their PP mainly, but we used him similarly in 5v5 play as well. He could play all forward positions, most importantly center, and he has proven that being our 2nd most used player on faceoff duties and is tops in FO win%. Because of this, many of us had pegged him even prior to the start of the year with Pettersson (who is weak on faceoffs currently) and would support him while others had pegged Ferland in the same spot instead. Which also adds that Miller could play that physical game and also stand up for EP and others, which was also something that we lacked in our top 6. On top of all of this, Miller could PK as well, so he was known to be defensively responsible as well and was an added asset there when needed. So yes a 1st is always a high price to pay, but it was also somewhat protected. The ones who thought we had a fighting chance at the playoffs this season felt confident we were going to at least hit the playoffs no later than next season, where many of the ones that were disparaging the trade kept mentioning how we would lose a top 10 pick (which there was potential, but would've taken a pretty colossal collapse in the direction we were headed in especially with the addition of Miller). So we were almost always looking a bottom half of the 1st round pick where the odds of a potential HHOF player would get picked up and likely a player of Miller's calibre would be on the high end of the spectrum at that range anyway. So we got the player now to help our young core get to the next level instead waiting a couple more years down the road on a hope for a player like Miller. I think value-wise at the time of the trade, it was fine (it wasn't a steal, but nowadays GMs mostly make hockey trades and it's very rare to have majorly lopsided trades where one side swindles another). The fact that he has far exceeded our expectations (points-wise and in his leadership in which I didn't expect) is only gravy on the top.
  13. He does get connected on the head though (although not principle point of contact), but I agree that he may have sold any injury he had. That doesn't take away that Hoglander should've been smarter and not taken himself out of an important game like that.
  14. If Hoglander bodies him rather gets his elbows up, then it's a clean play that still likely knocks him over. It doesn't look like Denisenko was engaging to hit him and his attempt at avoidance is what would shift his balance to be easy to knock down. I disagree that it was a dive, but he may have sold the severity of the hit.