Gaudette Celly Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 34 minutes ago, AlwaysACanuckFan said: What idiocy in the comments. I just don't get it, it's like some sort of obsessive-compulsive group despair. No, the (real) fans do not "want him out of here"; in fact, no doubt the ones that do say that are the same ones parroting Pratt and Botchford's whining about "no pushback." It's 1984 doublethink and doublespeak. As if a single defenceman making $4mil for a few years will completely destroy the team. It's even worse than the obsessiveness over Sbisa. Embarrassing, frankly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnarcore Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 1 hour ago, AlwaysACanuckFan said: Bob was saying in the article that he's hearing around 4m for 3 years. I'd be quite happy with that or even 4 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Li'l Fra Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 As long as there is no NTC we can trade him later. I'm of the opinion he will still have value around the league for a few more years if only for his size, draft position, and handedness. Can't lose him for nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush17 Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 17 minutes ago, Gnarcore said: Bob was saying in the article that he's hearing around 4m for 3 years. I'd be quite happy with that or even 4 years. 3 years seems a tad light but it makes sense for the situation. I was ok with 5 years but having a bigger body of work would be nice. His AAV will probably only go up by 1-1.5 million tops if he ups his game. So a 3 yr is very much more reasonable. His cap would be off the books when Pettersson's contracts up if he signs this summer. he's going to cost a pretty penny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush17 Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 Just now, Li'l Fra said: As long as there is no NTC we can trade him later. I'm of the opinion he will still have value around the league for a few more years if only for his size, draft position, and handedness. Can't lose him for nothing. Would you be ok with a limited NTC? Guddy was saying how he wants to have some stability and term so he can stay here for a while. A full NTC I hope is off the table. An 8 team no-trade list I'd be ok with. If his contract is a mess having more partners is ideal. I think he's actually going to maintain his play of the last week. (but you bank on what you know and not what you think or feel.) or you give the team a headache down the road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nancouver Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 Was just listening to sat and his crew of donkeys on 650 whining about signing EG. what a bunch of trolls, it’s as if they don’t even watch the games and just check stat lines after to draw their conclusions. “ news flash” haters he’s not here to score goals he’s here to clear the crease and make things easier for our goaltenders . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
86Viking Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 limited ntc are not an issue in my opinion. Its full on NMC or NTC for the entire deal that are the crippling ones. Gudbranson 5yr 19m 10 team no trade list throughout the deal. 21 teams he can go team lots of room for a move down the road Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
86Viking Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 1 minute ago, Nancouver said: Was just listening to sat and his crew of donkeys on 650 whining about signing EG. what a bunch of trolls, it’s as if they don’t even watch the games and just check stat lines after to draw their conclusions. “ news flash” haters he’s not here to score goals he’s here to clear the crease and make things easier for our goaltenders . I think Gudbranson would be a good guy to pair with Juolevi. Bigger stay at home physical D to watch out for our prized D prospect when he enters the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nancouver Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 1 minute ago, Yotes said: I think Gudbranson would be a good guy to pair with Juolevi. Bigger stay at home physical D to watch out for our prized D prospect when he enters the league. Totally. He’s going to provide much needed leadership back there especially when/if this team makes the playoffs in the next few years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 1 hour ago, Hutton Wink said: What idiocy in the comments. I just don't get it, it's like some sort of obsessive-compulsive group despair. No, the (real) fans do not "want him out of here"; in fact, no doubt the ones that do say that are the same ones parroting Pratt and Botchford's whining about "no pushback." It's 1984 doublethink and doublespeak. As if a single defenceman making $4mil for a few years will completely destroy the team. It's even worse than the obsessiveness over Sbisa. Embarrassing, frankly. Probably around the same percentage of 'real fans' that were upset about the Benning re-up. I believe they accounted for around 7-8% in the CDC poll Sorry 'real fans', your a vocal but decided minority. Suck it. As for your last paragraph, I had to laugh at 'Murph' on the 650 this morning parroting that nonsense as well. The Canucks have ZERO cap issues for whatever the term on Erik's contract is likely to be. I'm not saying we should pay him anything close to $6m but we likely 'could' and it wouldn't remotely effect our cap situation (short of perhaps setting a poor precedent). He was also going on about 'if he's on your 3rd pairing...' nonsense. You pay the player for the player they are, not where he falls on your depth chart. Was he a '3rd pair D' a month ago? Is he a '1st pair D' now that he's playing on the 1st pair with Edler? Absolute stupidity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nancouver Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 He just signed! 3 years at 4 per! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garthsbutcher Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 look for the canucks to resign Vanek before the deadline and for the twins to announce retirement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 2 hours ago, Nancouver said: Was just listening to sat and his crew of donkeys on 650 whining about signing EG. what a bunch of trolls, it’s as if they don’t even watch the games and just check stat lines after to draw their conclusions. “ news flash” haters he’s not here to score goals he’s here to clear the crease and make things easier for our goaltenders . And to think, he was the "reasonable counter-balance" to Pratt when on 1040. Maybe they told him, "Hey, now that you're here we need you to switch over to Vancouver Sports Media Mode and start the standard whinging and thrashing of the team and management. Got it?" 2 hours ago, aGENT said: As for your last paragraph, I had to laugh at 'Murph' on the 650 this morning parroting that nonsense as well. The Canucks have ZERO cap issues for whatever the term on Erik's contract is likely to be. I'm not saying we should pay him anything close to $6m but we likely 'could' and it wouldn't remotely effect our cap situation (short of perhaps setting a poor precedent). Once the anti-Gudbranson crowd were challenged over their despising of him, they would settle into "better not overpay him", as if we have cap issues. The comments today by Aynsley Scott exemplify that our cap is being handled beautifully. We have TONNES of space coming up, and all the contracts that have been complained about (Sutter, Eriksson, and now Gudbranson) expire right at the time when our primary ELCs will need re-upping. I'd really like to hear what Gilman thinks of how they're structuring things. Btw, he has a whole string of tweets today that are right on the money in regards to where this team is at and where it's going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 20 minutes ago, garthsbutcher said: look for the canucks to resign Vanek before the deadline and for the twins to announce retirement. Source? Or wishful thinking Would rather they get an asset for Vanek regardless of what the Sedins do. We need the roster spots, perhaps even all three, but can always re-sign him if the kids project to look ready. Moving him now also gives us a spot to audition some kids, whether cycling them in from Utica or bringing in college FAs like Molino last year or perhaps even Gaudette if he's available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garthsbutcher Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 4 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said: Source? Or wishful thinking Would rather they get an asset for Vanek regardless of what the Sedins do. We need the roster spots, perhaps even all three, but can always re-sign him if the kids project to look ready. Moving him now also gives us a spot to audition some kids, whether cycling them in from Utica or bringing in college FAs like Molino last year or perhaps even Gaudette if he's available. I agree on the asset for Vanek but he has been a very good roll model for Virtanen from what some are saying and I think they are going to reward him as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Vanderhoek Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 8 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said: And to think, he was the "reasonable counter-balance" to Pratt when on 1040. Maybe they told him, "Hey, now that you're here we need you to switch over to Vancouver Sports Media Mode and start the standard whinging and thrashing of the team and management. Got it?" Once the anti-Gudbranson crowd were challenged over their despising of him, they would settle into "better not overpay him", as if we have cap issues. The comments today by Aynsley Scott exemplify that our cap is being handled beautifully. We have TONNES of space coming up, and all the contracts that have been complained about (Sutter, Eriksson, and now Gudbranson) expire right at the time when our primary ELCs will need re-upping. I'd really like to hear what Gilman thinks of how they're structuring things. Btw, he has a whole string of tweets today that are right on the money in regards to where this team is at and where it's going. Was listening to his assessment on where the Canucks are at and where this signing will fit in and be a non-factor in any other plans the team may or may not have in terms of negatively impacting cap. This guy knows his stuff! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nancouver Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 12 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said: And to think, he was the "reasonable counter-balance" to Pratt when on 1040. Maybe they told him, "Hey, now that you're here we need you to switch over to Vancouver Sports Media Mode and start the standard whinging and thrashing of the team and management. Got it?" Once the anti-Gudbranson crowd were challenged over their despising of him, they would settle into "better not overpay him", as if we have cap issues. The comments today by Aynsley Scott exemplify that our cap is being handled beautifully. We have TONNES of space coming up, and all the contracts that have been complained about (Sutter, Eriksson, and now Gudbranson) expire right at the time when our primary ELCs will need re-upping. I'd really like to hear what Gilman thinks of how they're structuring things. Btw, he has a whole string of tweets today that are right on the money in regards to where this team is at and where it's going. Ugh not sure why I listen to any of them what a bunch of blow hards. You’re right about sat though he seemed decent on 1040. They must’ve told him “ we need more drama and negativity towards the team if you want to make it in this biz” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 16 minutes ago, Nancouver said: Ugh not sure why I listen to any of them what a bunch of blow hards. You’re right about sat though he seemed decent on 1040. They must’ve told him “ we need more drama and negativity towards the team if you want to make it in this biz” He used to be one of the few voices of reason on 1040 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentSam Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 Happy to hear we have him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheYjUstMaKeYoUwooZy Posted February 21, 2018 Share Posted February 21, 2018 On 2/19/2018 at 9:35 PM, Hutton Wink said: Considering the source... which isn't a source cuz he has none and nobody else reported such a thing. Same with the Guddy 4x4, probably just guessing or going by what others think. He was close on Guddy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.