Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Rumour] Nail Yakupov has interest signing with Canucks


Recommended Posts

What's the definition of waiver eligible again? ie, what's the rule? I'm a little fuzzier on the rules off the ice lol.

I don't think he'd sign a two way contract unless that was all that was being offered to him, regardless. He's worth a look at anything below 1.5 mill, I figure, but I'm thinking we may not need to offer that much.  We took Baerschi from Calgary under similar negative expectations, and look how that turned out for us. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Us fans shouldn't care if he's on a 1 way or 2 way deal... it'll only affect aquamans pocket which means nothing to him. 

 

Give him 1 way, give him up to 2 million and give him a year...

 

Jimbo just needs to pick up the phone and give it a shot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SilentSam said:

I'd go 2 years / 2 way 700k per. (with bonuses at the NHL level, games/assists)

Kid got a horrible start in Edmonton with 2 of the worst Coaches..  If he is game to prove himself, he would sign a 2 way offer.

 

 

 

1 hour ago, howswedeitis76 said:

@stawns I think the 2 way contract thing is because he's widely regarded as a bust, not even NHL caliber...think Cody Hodgson ineptitude. Now, I think it's too early to make that call yet, but I can understand why some folk are insisting on the 2 way deal. 

I think that the only way he accepts such a deal if absolutely noone offers him anything. And someone will take a flyer on him, it's all but guaranteed. I think it'll have to be a 1 way with at least 1 mill +bonuses to sign him. And the Canucks should take the chance on him if he will take anything below 1.5 mill. even if it is one way.

 

Per the CBA bonuses are only allowed on ELCs or Age 35+ contracts.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Shekky said:

easily Weal but if both can be had then I'd take both over megna and chaput

It's more like a choice between Yak, Weal, Gagner and Rodin/Boucher.

 

Megna's already res-signed and if I recall, Chaput was qualified. They'll be depth in Utica/13th forwards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, stawns said:

why 2 way?

Keeps the pressure on him to get his game on track in the NHL,  or head South East for more ice time and situational play to work on what he may need to.

Why end up with a one way situation where he may be benched if not playing to a standard,. When 2 weeks of reflection and steady ice in the AHL could correct that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, SilentSam said:

Keeps the pressure on him to get his game on track in the NHL,  or head South East for more ice time and situational play to work on what he may need to.

Why end up with a one way situation where he may be benched if not playing to a standard,. When 2 weeks of reflection and steady ice in the AHL could correct that.

I don't think his ahl salary, the only thing determined by 1-way vs 2-way contracts, would have any effect on his deployment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, J.R. said:

It's more like a choice between Yak, Weal, Gagner and Rodin/Boucher.

 

Megna's already res-signed and if I recall, Chaput was qualified. They'll be depth in Utica/13th forwards.

I'd take Boucher over all of them. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if he scored 20 goals next year. He's young, he's cheap, he has one of the best shots on the team and knows where to go to get open for quality scoring chances. Defense is his only question mark, largely due to his foot speed. But Yak/Weal/Gangner aren't exactly defensive wizards either. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, VIC_CITY said:

I'd take Boucher over all of them. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if he scored 20 goals next year. He's young, he's cheap, he has one of the best shots on the team and knows where to go to get open for quality scoring chances. Defense is his only question mark, largely due to his foot speed. But Yak/Weal/Gangner aren't exactly defensive wizards either. 

Wouldn't that be two question marks?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, VIC_CITY said:

I'd take Boucher over all of them. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if he scored 20 goals next year. He's young, he's cheap, he has one of the best shots on the team and knows where to go to get open for quality scoring chances. Defense is his only question mark, largely due to his foot speed. But Yak/Weal/Gangner aren't exactly defensive wizards either. 

Weal runs laps around Boucher

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, VIC_CITY said:

I'd take Boucher over all of them. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if he scored 20 goals next year. He's young, he's cheap, he has one of the best shots on the team and knows where to go to get open for quality scoring chances. Defense is his only question mark, largely due to his foot speed. But Yak/Weal/Gangner aren't exactly defensive wizards either. 

I'd gladly take any of Boucher, Rodin, Weal or Gagner on the team. I figure we've got room for 2...maybe 3 of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, howswedeitis76 said:

@stawns I think the 2 way contract thing is because he's widely regarded as a bust, not even NHL caliber...think Cody Hodgson ineptitude. Now, I think it's too early to make that call yet, but I can understand why some folk are insisting on the 2 way deal. 

I think that the only way he accepts such a deal if absolutely noone offers him anything. And someone will take a flyer on him, it's all but guaranteed. I think it'll have to be a 1 way with at least 1 mill +bonuses to sign him. And the Canucks should take the chance on him if he will take anything below 1.5 mill. even if it is one way.

 

He's contributed more to the NHL at his age than Baertschi did at his.  He's worth a chance, nothing to lose

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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