We can't sign Barker to an offersheet that's around 3 million because we don't have a second round pick in 2010. Correct me if I'm wrong of course...
It would have to be the next tier up so we give up our 1st and 3rd round picks in 2010.
Canucks Community: [Rumour] Cam Barker open to being stolen - Canucks Community
[Rumour] Cam Barker open to being stolen Chicago's hands are almost tied if Barker gets an offer
#21
Jimmy.crack.corn 
- Canucks Third-Line
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 3,130
- Joined: 01-January 07
Posted 01 July 2009 - 02:26 PM
woooo no sig!!!
MultiQuote
#23
TheGhostOfRazor
- Canucks First-Line
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 5,698
- Joined: 11-January 03
Posted 01 July 2009 - 02:30 PM
They have 11.6 million left, and 16 players under contract.
That means they need to sign 6 more players. They have plenty of money to do so. Versteeg and Barker may take up about 6 million of that, which would leave around 5 million to sign 3 depth guys.
They are tight, but they are not "screwed".
BY COMPARISON:
The Canucks have 10 million left, and 7 players to sign, and the Canucks only have (4) legitimate top-6 forwards.
The Canucks are more tight than the Hawks are at this point.
That means they need to sign 6 more players. They have plenty of money to do so. Versteeg and Barker may take up about 6 million of that, which would leave around 5 million to sign 3 depth guys.
They are tight, but they are not "screwed".
BY COMPARISON:
The Canucks have 10 million left, and 7 players to sign, and the Canucks only have (4) legitimate top-6 forwards.
The Canucks are more tight than the Hawks are at this point.
This post has been edited by TheGhostOfRazor: 01 July 2009 - 02:30 PM
Busy cultivating useless good taste.
SUNDIN IS COMING. LOOK BUSY.
SUNDIN IS COMING. LOOK BUSY.
QUOTE (Dirtbag#1 @ Nov 3 2008, 11:36 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
We're pretty much where I'd thought we'd be - out of the playoffs and no Demitra in the lineup. Coming in to this season anyone with a brain would be able to recognize that this isn't a playoff team, and they're performing just as I suspected they would.
#24
Reggie_Dunlop
- Manitoba Moose Prospect
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 223
- Joined: 07-August 07
Posted 01 July 2009 - 02:36 PM
baxter, on Jul 2 2009, 08:21 AM, said:
We'd have to offer $3,013,433 to $4,520,150 since we don't have our second round pick in 2010 (Traded for Bernier)
Yea, but then you'd need to ask is Barker worth our first rounder and 3rd rounder next year? I hear it's a poor draft year, but we could throw an offer sheet to Kessel for $4m and give up our first and third there for a superior player. Essentially it's trading our first rounder for a player the other team can't sign, so why not get someone who's actually worth over $3million
This post has been edited by Reggie_Dunlop: 01 July 2009 - 02:38 PM
#25
Gelato
- Manitoba Moose Regular
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 415
- Joined: 01-May 09
Posted 01 July 2009 - 02:36 PM
baxter, on Jul 1 2009, 02:21 PM, said:
We'd have to offer $3,013,433 to $4,520,150 since we don't have our second round pick in 2010 (Traded for Bernier)
Remove V-A-N-C-O-U-V-E-R word-mark on our home jerseys please...
At least make it C-A-N-U-C-K-S for our home jersey.
At least make it C-A-N-U-C-K-S for our home jersey.
#27
Gelato
- Manitoba Moose Regular
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 415
- Joined: 01-May 09
Posted 01 July 2009 - 02:42 PM
We don't have our 2nd rounder this upcoming draft, and I don't think we should offer up a 3rd AND 1st rounder for Barker (even if he's proven).
Maybe trade for him? Although Chicago needs to shed salary not increase it...
Maybe trade for him? Although Chicago needs to shed salary not increase it...
Remove V-A-N-C-O-U-V-E-R word-mark on our home jerseys please...
At least make it C-A-N-U-C-K-S for our home jersey.
At least make it C-A-N-U-C-K-S for our home jersey.
#28
georgeparrosesmustache
- Canucks Rookie
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1,636
- Joined: 23-December 08
Posted 01 July 2009 - 03:27 PM
i'd be so happy if we got him
<<Posting pictures of of poop when asked how the nucks are doing during a game is bad, check the warn status.<<
#29
ninja321
- Canucks First-Line
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 5,243
- Joined: 02-July 08
Posted 01 July 2009 - 03:47 PM
lets offer for him then
C R O Y L E
Sig by me and Avatar Made By Me
[Accepting requests for Sigs,Avatars,Userbars]
[ PM me for sigs ]
#30
SalsaShark
- Manitoba Moose Regular
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 327
- Joined: 19-December 03
Posted 01 July 2009 - 04:16 PM
TheGhostOfRazor, on Jul 1 2009, 02:30 PM, said:
They have 11.6 million left, and 16 players under contract.
That means they need to sign 6 more players. They have plenty of money to do so. Versteeg and Barker may take up about 6 million of that, which would leave around 5 million to sign 3 depth guys.
They are tight, but they are not "screwed".
BY COMPARISON:
The Canucks have 10 million left, and 7 players to sign, and the Canucks only have (4) legitimate top-6 forwards.
The Canucks are more tight than the Hawks are at this point.
That means they need to sign 6 more players. They have plenty of money to do so. Versteeg and Barker may take up about 6 million of that, which would leave around 5 million to sign 3 depth guys.
They are tight, but they are not "screwed".
BY COMPARISON:
The Canucks have 10 million left, and 7 players to sign, and the Canucks only have (4) legitimate top-6 forwards.
The Canucks are more tight than the Hawks are at this point.
Chicago still has to consider that they have to sign their top two guys in Kane and Toews next year who will absorb a minimum of 5-6 mil each. I only see Chicago going after some rental players to fill this years cap space so that they can sign those two next year.
"You consent to assault when you lace up your skates." - Tiger Williams
#31
Moondawg
- Canucks Prospect
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1,054
- Joined: 17-March 04
Posted 01 July 2009 - 04:25 PM
TheGhostOfRazor, on Jul 1 2009, 02:30 PM, said:
They have 11.6 million left, and 16 players under contract.
That means they need to sign 6 more players. They have plenty of money to do so. Versteeg and Barker may take up about 6 million of that, which would leave around 5 million to sign 3 depth guys.
They are tight, but they are not "screwed".
BY COMPARISON:
The Canucks have 10 million left, and 7 players to sign, and the Canucks only have (4) legitimate top-6 forwards.
The Canucks are more tight than the Hawks are at this point.
That means they need to sign 6 more players. They have plenty of money to do so. Versteeg and Barker may take up about 6 million of that, which would leave around 5 million to sign 3 depth guys.
They are tight, but they are not "screwed".
BY COMPARISON:
The Canucks have 10 million left, and 7 players to sign, and the Canucks only have (4) legitimate top-6 forwards.
The Canucks are more tight than the Hawks are at this point.
Yes thats true since they let Khabby walk, but as is they have Huet in net and we have Luongo.
#32
Shaun O Mac
- Canucks Star
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 7,905
- Joined: 02-September 06
Posted 01 July 2009 - 04:25 PM
5 year deal worth 3 mil per season.
Ilya Kovalchuk- Russian Snipe.
#33
Dortmund
- Canucks Regular
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 2,217
- Joined: 09-July 06
Posted 01 July 2009 - 04:31 PM
TheGhostOfRazor, on Jul 1 2009, 02:30 PM, said:
They have 11.6 million left, and 16 players under contract.
That means they need to sign 6 more players. They have plenty of money to do so. Versteeg and Barker may take up about 6 million of that, which would leave around 5 million to sign 3 depth guys.
They are tight, but they are not "screwed".
BY COMPARISON:
The Canucks have 10 million left, and 7 players to sign, and the Canucks only have (4) legitimate top-6 forwards.
The Canucks are more tight than the Hawks are at this point.
That means they need to sign 6 more players. They have plenty of money to do so. Versteeg and Barker may take up about 6 million of that, which would leave around 5 million to sign 3 depth guys.
They are tight, but they are not "screwed".
BY COMPARISON:
The Canucks have 10 million left, and 7 players to sign, and the Canucks only have (4) legitimate top-6 forwards.
The Canucks are more tight than the Hawks are at this point.
I think the other poster is making reference to the fact that you maybe correct for this year, they'll need to sign Toes, Kane and Keith next year. They are cap screwed right now. So I could see them trading Barker for sure, because they aren't trading Keith.
Thanks to mr7 for the sig
#35
Gelato
- Manitoba Moose Regular
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 415
- Joined: 01-May 09
Posted 01 July 2009 - 04:53 PM
All I know is that he has a heck of a slapshot. Is he also considered a puck-moving defensemen?
Remove V-A-N-C-O-U-V-E-R word-mark on our home jerseys please...
At least make it C-A-N-U-C-K-S for our home jersey.
At least make it C-A-N-U-C-K-S for our home jersey.
#37
lateralus
- Manitoba Moose Star
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 834
- Joined: 27-June 09
Posted 01 July 2009 - 04:57 PM
Reggie_Dunlop, on Jul 1 2009, 02:36 PM, said:
Yea, but then you'd need to ask is Barker worth our first rounder and 3rd rounder next year? I hear it's a poor draft year, but we could throw an offer sheet to Kessel for $4m and give up our first and third there for a superior player. Essentially it's trading our first rounder for a player the other team can't sign, so why not get someone who's actually worth over $3million
Ummm Kessel for 4M, yeah you the Bruins could match right?
With a big THANK YOU to boot.
CDC is a reflection of society.
#38
AmazingNuck
- Canucks Franchise Player
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 10,991
- Joined: 27-December 06
Posted 01 July 2009 - 04:58 PM
TheGhostOfRazor, on Jul 1 2009, 02:30 PM, said:
They have 11.6 million left, and 16 players under contract.
That means they need to sign 6 more players. They have plenty of money to do so. Versteeg and Barker may take up about 6 million of that, which would leave around 5 million to sign 3 depth guys.
They are tight, but they are not "screwed".
BY COMPARISON:
The Canucks have 10 million left, and 7 players to sign, and the Canucks only have (4) legitimate top-6 forwards.
The Canucks are more tight than the Hawks are at this point.
That means they need to sign 6 more players. They have plenty of money to do so. Versteeg and Barker may take up about 6 million of that, which would leave around 5 million to sign 3 depth guys.
They are tight, but they are not "screwed".
BY COMPARISON:
The Canucks have 10 million left, and 7 players to sign, and the Canucks only have (4) legitimate top-6 forwards.
The Canucks are more tight than the Hawks are at this point.
I think you're making our situation seem more dire than it really is. We've got a capable top six (granted, it's not the best, but it's capable) with the Sedins, Burrows, Kesler, Demitra, and Bernier. I think Bernier is the only question mark at this point, as Demitra is a top six forward when he's healthy.
Henrik, without Daniel, stat track: 9gp 3g 7a 1 6PIM
#40
BramptonDuchene
- Manitoba Moose Prospect
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 224
- Joined: 26-June 09
Posted 01 July 2009 - 05:01 PM
luongo55, on Jul 1 2009, 04:59 PM, said:
i would rather get kessel
We need a puck-moving Dman more.
My priorty would be Seidenberg, and then Barker.
Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership. NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P. Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League. All Rights Reserved.