shawn antoski Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 No Luongo Trade for now UFA --Jason Arnott SABERS ..................................CANUCKS F--Raymond ............................D--Andrej Sekera D--Sauve.................................. Columbus..................................Canucks D--Ballard,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,D--Aucoin 6th round pick........................... FORWARDS Daniel Sedin ($6.100m) / --------Henrik Sedin ($6.100m) / ----------Alexandre Burrows ($2.000m) David Booth ($4.250m) / --------Ryan Kesler ($5.000m) /----------- Zack Kassian ($0.870m) Chris Higgins ($1.900m) /------- Maxim Lapierre ($1.000m) /-------- Jannik Hansen ($1.350m) Manny Malhotra ($2.500m) /---- Jordan Schroeder ($1.025m) /---- Jason Arnott ($2.875m) -Dale Weise ($0.615m) / DEFENSEMEN Alexander Edler ($3.250m) / ---------Jason Garrison ($4.600m) Dan Hamhuis ($4.500m) / ------------Kevin Bieksa ($4.600m) Andrej Sekera ($2.750m) /----------- Chris Tanev ($0.900m) -Adrian Aucoin ($2.250m) / ------------Andrew Alberts ($1.225m) GOALTENDERS Roberto Luongo ($5.333m) Cory Schneider ($4.000m) ------ CAPGEEK.COM TOTALS (follow @capgeek on Twitter) (these totals are compiled with the bonus cushion) SALARY CAP: $70,200,000; CAP PAYROLL: $68,993,333; BONUSES: $375,000 CAP SPACE (23-man roster): $1,581,667 Line 1- no explanation needed Line 2 - give Kassian a shot at top 6 minutes Line 3 - played really good together last season Line 4 - Schroeder is surrounded be perfect influences, Arnott is able to play all 4 lines (injuries) DP-1- offensive threat DP-2- Shut down pairing DP-3- young Dpair Dp-4- 2 veterans that can slot in with no problems (Connauton still on farm) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avelanch Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 you'd trade for Aucoin and his 2.25 mil cap just to sit on the bench? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 Yup, Sekera and Aucoin add up to Ballard's salary and then some. We might as well keep the assets we move to get two guys that will be doing the same job as the one we already have and then use one of our upcomming players to fill the 7/8th role. I'd rather move those assets to get better picks in this upcoming draft. Then he signs Arnott but puts him on the 4th line wing? So, my answer is no, I wouldn't do be happy if Gillis made these moves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawn antoski Posted November 6, 2012 Author Share Posted November 6, 2012 you'd trade for Aucoin and his 2.25 mil cap just to sit on the bench? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawn antoski Posted November 6, 2012 Author Share Posted November 6, 2012 Yup, Sekera and Aucoin add up to Ballard's salary and then some. We might as well keep the assets we move to get two guys that will be doing the same job as the one we already have and then use one of our upcomming players to fill the 7/8th role. I'd rather move those assets to get better picks in this upcoming draft. Then he trades for Arnott but puts him on the 4th line wing? So, my answer is no, I wouldn't do be happy if Gillis made these moves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeak Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 Why would Columbus sign Aucoin then trade him before a game is played? He was brought in to 'mentor' Moore, Murray, and Erixon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 Those are just moves to make moves that don't really improve us. If we have to get rid of Ballards contract, we can do it for something other than a player who's ready to retire. He's not such a liability to us that we need to dump him for a pending UFA and include a low pick to sweeten the deal. It's hard to follow your logic when you end your explanation saying we need depth on defence in case of injuries. The reason for the Arnott rumours is because we're looking at someone who would be able to fill in for Kesler while injured and also play in our 3rd line center role after that. If the Canucks feel Lappy can step into the 3rd line center role, then why bother with Arnott? We can just use Ebbett and Schroeder to fill in for Kesler during his injury and then have cheaper options like Weise, Volpatti and Pinizzotto bringing energy to the 4th line. No need to pay $2.875M for Arnott to fill in on our 4th line (sorry, 3b) when you're already talking about having to dump Ballard's $4.2M. I just don't see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkstar Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 Buffalo doesn't make that trade. Sekera is severely underrated and a necessary part of the Sabres D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil_314 Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 I like the Arnott signing, just not at that price; I don't think that long-unsigned UFA's like him would still be able to demand so much, esp. for a 4th line role. Columbus won't take Ballard, their D-group is very strong already. For the Buffalo deal, I hope they would try to get McNabb instead of Sekera, even if his price is higher; Brayden's got size and meanness but also plays pretty well and I think that's the complement Tanev needs, an offensive guy with skill and meanness. (Nothing against Sekera, he's actually pretty decent but this team has enough "smaller" guys (NOT small but around 6') who are good at puck movement but lack a big, skilled D who is mean). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Mind Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 So basically you want to replace Ballard with Sekera, and get rid of Raymond for nothing. And on top of that get rid of Sauve and a 6th for a 7th D. Don't see how this helps us... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkeeterHansen Posted November 6, 2012 Share Posted November 6, 2012 you'd trade for Aucoin and his 2.25 mil cap just to sit on the bench? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Buffalo says no and no thanks to the Ballard/Aucoin deal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawn antoski Posted November 7, 2012 Author Share Posted November 7, 2012 So basically you want to replace Ballard with Sekera, and get rid of Raymond for nothing. And on top of that get rid of Sauve and a 6th for a 7th D. Don't see how this helps us... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawn antoski Posted November 7, 2012 Author Share Posted November 7, 2012 Those are just moves to make moves that don't really improve us. If we have to get rid of Ballards contract, we can do it for something other than a player who's ready to retire. He's not such a liability to us that we need to dump him for a pending UFA and include a low pick to sweeten the deal. It's hard to follow your logic when you end your explanation saying we need depth on defence in case of injuries. The reason for the Arnott rumours is because we're looking at someone who would be able to fill in for Kesler while injured and also play in our 3rd line center role after that. If the Canucks feel Lappy can step into the 3rd line center role, then why bother with Arnott? We can just use Ebbett and Schroeder to fill in for Kesler during his injury and then have cheaper options like Weise, Volpatti and Pinizzotto bringing energy to the 4th line. No need to pay $2.875M for Arnott to fill in on our 4th line (sorry, 3b) when you're already talking about having to dump Ballard's $4.2M. I just don't see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Those are just moves to make moves that don't really improve us. --- Sekera + arnott + aucoin > Ballard+sauve+raymond No need to pay $2.875M for Arnott to fill in on our 4th line (sorry, 3b ----I think arnott can line up on any line , I have him on the 4th line because come playoff time if we have a full healthy roster i wouldnt mind him and manny on the 4th line mentoring schroeder cheaper options like Weise, Volpatti and Pinizzotto --- I'd rather have arnott on my 4th line anyday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawn antoski Posted November 7, 2012 Author Share Posted November 7, 2012 Considering Sekera's the only guy not close to retirement in your return, more years of Ballard, Raymond and Sauve are better than the limited years Arnott and Aucoin would play. Sekera doesn't make up the difference. As far as Arnott, you immediately placed him on the 4th line in your proposal, so if you thought he'd be the 3rd line center for the most part, you would have put him there. If he's there to mentor someone or just because you think he's better than any of the three 4th liners I listed, then it's not a good use of cap space to pay him $2.875M. If he want's to come here for at least a million less, then it's something to look at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 we all know the salary cap is supposed to come down, getting Ballard and Raymond (UFA anyways) off the books would be plus for Gillis . Next years UFA crop is going to be one of the best ever so its not a big deal to loose Arnott and Aucoin, its all about cap space. Gillis does need to give a raise to Edler, Lapierre , Higgins, Tanev and maybe even Schroeder Arnott is more of a utility player forward, he can play any role. The reason I have him on the 4th line is because I hope Kassian makes the 2nd line and I like Lappy Higgy and Hansen together. I think this is a very strong bottom six if the team stays healthy come playoff time AV can play all 4 lines with confidence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Mind Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 Sekera + arnott + aucoin > Ballard+sauve+raymond Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawn antoski Posted November 9, 2012 Author Share Posted November 9, 2012 We don't fix cap issues though by bringing in as much as we send out. That doesn't make it ok just because we can 'afford' to lose those guys for nothing so we can go after more expensive UFAs. Why not just hang onto those players then move them to upgrade our draft picks like I mentioned in my first post and then go after UFAs if we feel we really want to do that? At least that way we'd have something to show for the players we moved out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.