Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Enter Search Term. Use arrows to navigate between autocomplete results. If no results appear, use Enter to do a full site search.
Forum Closure ×
Canucks Community
Forum Closure

NHL will Allow Teams Two Contract Buyouts for '13-'14. Who are yours?

TOMapleLaughs

By TOMapleLaughs
in Canucks Talk

Recommended Posts

Pears Canucks Hall-of-Famer

Pears

Posted
Posted

I'll give it a go:

Anaheim: None, none

Boston: None, none

Buffalo: Leino, none

Dallas: None, none

Detroit: None, none

Edmonton: Horcoff and Hemsky maybe?

Florida: Upshall, none

Los Angeles: None, none

Montreal: Gomez, none

New Jersey: None, none

NY Islanders: DiPietro, none

NY Rangers: Redden, none

Ottawa: None, none

Philadelphia: Pronger (if his injury is that bad), none

Pittsburgh: None, none

San Jose: None, none

St. Louis: None, none

Toronto: Komisarek, Connolly/Lombardi

Vancouver: None, none (players like Booth and Ballard can be tradeable)

Washington: Ward, none

Winnipeg: None, none

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Canuck Surfer Canucks Hall-of-Famer

Canuck Surfer

Posted
Posted

I sure hope thats the case.

Anybody who accepts a buyout should also have to pay back all if they sign elsewhere; as its a pure bonus for a player who can abuse it. And because the player is being paid twice; of course it should all count to the 50% player share!

Anyone remember Alonzo Mourning refusing to report to the Raptors; getting a buyout for tens of millions of dollars? He said it was over health issues, a kidney or something (which I think he had removed 2 years earlier). But somehow it did not stop him from turning around and signing with the Miami Heat, where he won a ring, just 2 weeks later. Suddenly he was pocketing more money than Michael Jordan and talking trash on how Toronto should never have had the nerve to trade for him.

What a Derp!

The last buyout you couldn't re-sign a player you bought out. I highly doubt it will be different this time for exactly that reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SamJamIam Canucks Star

SamJamIam

Posted
Posted

Booth is never getting bought out. Anyone who looks at his advanced stats will see that he's one of our best players for controlling the play. Only our first line does it better. He also faces some of the hardest opposing lines and was battling injuries. Without the missed games (not counting that his injuries and recovery meant he wasn't at his finest) he was on pace to score 23 goals and have 19 assists. If he and Kesler weren't having injury problems, he'd likely have put up 50 points. As it is he's our 5th goal scorer.

Booth isn't going anywhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
elvis15 Canucks Hall-of-Famer

elvis15

Posted
Posted

Booth is never getting bought out. Anyone who looks at his advanced stats will see that he's one of our best players for controlling the play. Only our first line does it better. He also faces some of the hardest opposing lines and was battling injuries. Without the missed games (not counting that his injuries and recovery meant he wasn't at his finest) he was on pace to score 23 goals and have 19 assists. If he and Kesler weren't having injury problems, he'd likely have put up 50 points. As it is he's our 5th goal scorer.

Booth isn't going anywhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SamJamIam Canucks Star

SamJamIam

Posted
Posted

And if we have a buy out left but still need to drop $4-5M after Ballard is dropped and Luongo traded, who would you pick? That's the only real argument for dropping him, is if we have no other choice in order to get under $60M next year but still be able to re-sign Edler and our other up and comers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lundymaphone Junior Prospect

Lundymaphone

Posted
Posted

Ballard is a definite yes. Very good for a bottom 2 guy, serviceable 4th but just too damn expensive for what he is. The debate is essentially Luongo or Booth. Luongo certainly has a much higher trade value, but the complications in moving him may end up with him not being moved (or moved for relatively little). Frankly Booth still has a potential role on the team, and it is not as though he is unmovable. I would probably choose Luongo simply to get that contract off the books, the risk in keeping him is too great given the opportunity. Contrary to the (semi) popular opinion, you are not getting 3 firsts and Bozak from Toronto for Luongo and a 2nd...The danger with Ballard of course is that the Canucks are dangerously low on quality defensive depth as it is. With Ballard gone there is a bottom 2 role to fill (let alone serviceable 7th's, 8ths). Plus there is the issue of who plays top 4 during an injury, Tanev is the only current candidate, and even he is a big maybe.

Edit: As the OP stated, choosing Raymond/Malhotra makes no sense due to their relatively small contracts and the upcoming UFA status. Plus Raymond is still a serviceable player. The face off machine's status is a bit more up in the air.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wai_lai416 Canucks First-Line

wai_lai416

Posted
Posted

lol.. if MG end up buying out Luongo and Ballard. Sorry he's going to go down in my books just as bad of a gm as Burke and Nonis was. Not handling the goalie situation properly ie trade Luongo while there was a some what decent package rather than trying to rob other teams and now end up getting nothing for it. and trading away our 1st in 2010 and Grabner for nothing once again. and imagine kassian and booth doesn't pan out either.... I like Garrison.. .but if all goes according to history.. he'll not pan out either.. all the players we have ever gotten from Florida or played for Florida never works out in vancouver.. Jovo was the only exception.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bodee Canucks Third-Line

Bodee

Posted
Posted

Booth and Garrison for me.

I think Lu is still crucial for us either as a saviour if CS ------ the bed or in a trade.

If losing Garrison means keeping Edler then that works for me. I am not saying Garrison is a bust, how could he be he hasn't even put on the jersey for us yet, however he was not/and isn't the player I was looking for..............which brings me to Booth.

I don't think his first season was a failure, it's just I saw too many things I didn't like and above all, like Garrison, he was not what I thought we needed or what we were looking for. A big in your face sniper who could bully defences and play if required with the Sedins.

So that is my opinion and I know MG is not going to jettison Garrison now but I quite honestly think Ballard is more in the mould of what we need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bodee Canucks Third-Line

Bodee

Posted
Posted

"Wisniewski just came off a season in which he scored 10 goals and 53 points in 81 games. Since arriving in Vancouver, Ballard has had 15 points in 126 games. At that rate, Ballard will need 445 total games with us to reach what Wiz got in that one season."

That kind of biased statement probably sounded good in your head. Unfortunately it withers in black and white.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...