[Discussion] Should Edler be resigned?

[aGENT]

10 minutes ago, kilgore said:

Its not the same as Edmonton.  We still have Tanev, and Stecher and Hutton are pretty well considered vets on the team as well.

 

You really want to bring up Sutter and Beagle as shining examples of "sheltering".   Beagle 9 points, minus 9.  And for all that Sutter's played, 6 points, and a minus 12. What do you mean by "sheltering"?  Teams know that lines made up of those minus players are not to be worried about.  They are place holders. (4 year place holders!). And those positions could be held by half the players in the league at least, at probably half the price and term.  There is nothing special about them. And Pettersson would get his ice time no matter who played on the other lines.

Yup, we're done here 

[Rim Jobson]

3 hours ago, coastal.view said:

i understand the arguments people make on here about ensuring that edler does not get protection for seattle expansion

 

but in what world is it reasonable

that any nhl team's best dman 

is expected to take a salary discount

when he is an ufa

 

people often post criticism on here about asset management

edler arguably is better then meyers

people throw salary numbers for meyers in the 7 million range with term

how is elder not worth similar numbers on a 1 or 2 year contract

 

canucks cannot afford to have their best dman simply walk away

there is no one in ufa who has demonstrated his commitment to this team

and brings his experience and talent level

that sort of player will demand a premium to sign in vancouver

this whole "let's grind edler" approach makes little sense to me

people completely over estimate the canuck's bargaining power here

 

Can you refute any of the points I made? Were any of them inaccurate in your opinion?

 

Regardless of whether you agree with me or not, there are a few things that I dont think can be debated.

 

The Canucks with Edler on the team have been mostly terrible for several years.

When he's not injured and actually in the lineup, the Canucks still aren't good. Prior to this contract year, Edler was not that good going back several years; coincidence? I dont think so.

He is our best defenceman, which is more of an indictment of the group because he's not that special. In my opinion he's a #3 on a good team, a #4 or #5 on a great team.

He's old.

He should have very little leverage with this management group in terms of a new contract because of his supposed desire to stay here, and if he plays hardball and walks away, he wont get paid very handsomely based on the points I've made above and in my original post.

 

To add strictly an opinion; if he's willing to walk away based on a less than extravagant contract offer, after all the years of BS about wanting to play only in Vancouver and never being receptive to a trade proposal that would help this team; well I personally wouldn't want him back just based on that. I already think he's not a winner, that would make him a fraud as well.

[City-in-state-of-emergency]

It's hard to say no on how rooted he is in this community. His wife Amanda is from Vancouver his children are from Vancouver. The guy has a big part of his family in Vancouver he has stated he will not up root his family an he plans to always live here so any team who would get him knows they'll get a half dedicated man. 

 

He is good guy to show young prospects what it is to be a Canuck and to the community.

 

An with our younger D core coming up we can give him less ice time over te years till Thanos out. 

 

 

[coastal.view]

1 hour ago, Rim Jobson said:

Can you refute any of the points I made? Were any of them inaccurate in your opinion?

 

Regardless of whether you agree with me or not, there are a few things that I dont think can be debated.

 

The Canucks with Edler on the team have been mostly terrible for several years.

When he's not injured and actually in the lineup, the Canucks still aren't good. Prior to this contract year, Edler was not that good going back several years; coincidence? I dont think so.

He is our best defenceman, which is more of an indictment of the group because he's not that special. In my opinion he's a #3 on a good team, a #4 or #5 on a great team.

He's old.

He should have very little leverage with this management group in terms of a new contract because of his supposed desire to stay here, and if he plays hardball and walks away, he wont get paid very handsomely based on the points I've made above and in my original post.

 

To add strictly an opinion; if he's willing to walk away based on a less than extravagant contract offer, after all the years of BS about wanting to play only in Vancouver and never being receptive to a trade proposal that would help this team; well I personally wouldn't want him back just based on that. I already think he's not a winner, that would make him a fraud as well.

well apparently calgary wanted him

and made a trade proposal

with a contract extension included

but edler did not want to sign that extension

(it does appear he would have agreed to a trade for the balance of the year though? but i'm guessing on that)

 

there will be a demand for edler as an ufa

and he likely will sign in the range of 6 to 7 million

for at least 2 years

so not sure why you think he'll take so much less here

and that he can somehow be forced to accept less

 

i also do not agree with your sentiment that edler played harder due to his contract expiring

he is a pro, and i think he brings his best as often as he can

it is well know that he encountered significant back injuries after signing his current contract

the injury occurred playing for this team

he appears to have found a way to overcome or moderate that injury

and has been able to play more physically again

 

it does not help the poor nuck d core to improve

by letting their best dman walk for nothing

if he was a lesser dman on this team it would matter less

but he currently is not replaceable without paying more for someone of his calibre

 

i do find it fascinating that you consider it to be bs

when a player has strong allegiances to the canuck team

i thought that might impress a fan

and cause a fan to like such a player more

but you appear to despise player loyalty somewhat

 

edit:  ps:  2 things

1.  your whole post is opinion, not just the last paragrah

2.  you are completely focused in your negative viewpoint on edler.  the team was involved in signing him to this contract - why not focus some of your negative views on the team?  and he negotiated a nmc - in exchange for salary.  you appear to simply wish to ignore this fact.  let's presume he gave up 1/2 million per year of salary for it.  are you willing to pay him 3 million to buy this clause back from him?  or you simply think terms of a contract do not matter when the contract no longer suits your interests as a fan ?

[Where'd Luongo?]

Yes, we don't need him anymore, let him resign. 

[spur1]

43 minutes ago, Where'd Luongo? said:

Yes, we do need him let him re-sign. 

Fixed it. 

[spur1]

4 hours ago, Rim Jobson said:

Can you refute any of the points I made? Were any of them inaccurate in your opinion?

 

Regardless of whether you agree with me or not, there are a few things that I dont think can be debated.

 

The Canucks with Edler on the team have been mostly terrible for several years.

When he's not injured and actually in the lineup, the Canucks still aren't good. Prior to this contract year, Edler was not that good going back several years; coincidence? I dont think so.

He is our best defenceman, which is more of an indictment of the group because he's not that special. In my opinion he's a #3 on a good team, a #4 or #5 on a great team.

He's old.

He should have very little leverage with this management group in terms of a new contract because of his supposed desire to stay here, and if he plays hardball and walks away, he wont get paid very handsomely based on the points I've made above and in my original post.

 

To add strictly an opinion; if he's willing to walk away based on a less than extravagant contract offer, after all the years of BS about wanting to play only in Vancouver and never being receptive to a trade proposal that would help this team; well I personally wouldn't want him back just based on that. I already think he's not a winner, that would make him a fraud as well.

Speaking of fraud I can’t help but think if Jim was on CDC he would not be happy you using his name in such a manner. 

[wildcam]

7 hours ago, erkayloomeh said:

I think Brock still has something to prove before he gets 7.2 million. So I think that's a bit high at this point. Same for Hutton. Last year he was bad and reported to camp in poor shape.  I'd like to see him have more than one good year.  

Contracts are everything. You can really screw yourself up with a bad contract or two . 

Look at the impact of LE contract on this team. 

Also leivo should get more than 2 million 

I'd like to see boeser at 6 mil. Hutton at 3.5 and leivo at 3 

Boeser is on pace for 68-70 points, 30 goals if playing a full 82 games? This type of player will demand between 7.2 - 8 million at least..Go look at some of the contracts? Canucks might try and sign Boser for 6.7 million but it will be like a 3 yr contract...If you want to sign Boser for 6 yeats it will cost you between 7.2 - 8 

Hutton will get at least 4 million on the way he has played and minutes he has logged the last 4 months...

Hope they can sign Leivo at around 2.5 million over 3 years?

[erkayloomeh]

1 hour ago, wildcam said:

Boeser is on pace for 68-70 points, 30 goals if playing a full 82 games? This type of player will demand between 7.2 - 8 million at least..Go look at some of the contracts? Canucks might try and sign Boser for 6.7 million but it will be like a 3 yr contract...If you want to sign Boser for 6 yeats it will cost you between 7.2 - 8 

Hutton will get at least 4 million on the way he has played and minutes he has logged the last 4 months...

Hope they can sign Leivo at around 2.5 million over 3 years?

Boeser is putting up the points yes but I haven't been impressed with some of his other play.  

Based in minutes alone with Hutton yes. It's just that I would like to see the level of play we have seen from him this year ( which I've been happy with ) for more than one year. 

When a player shows up out of shape and has a bad year I tend to not trust him to much 

[sockeye]

I'd give Edler 3 years at $6 million per year and a No Trade Clause but definitely no No Move Clause.  If he will only accept a NMC then I would let him walk.  If Benning caves and gives him a NMC then I will no longer support Benning as our GM.  We cannot be forced to protect a 35 year old Edler at the Seattle expansion draft in two years (absolutely not!); especially, with his age and injury history.  He is a good D but on a Stanley Cup contender he would be a 3/4 D at best.  I would rather tank one more year than sign Edler with a NMC or sign a 29 year old Karlsson at an enormous cost.  I like Edler and he has been a loyal Canuck but we don't owe him anything more than 3 years at $ 6 million a year with a NTC (even $6 million a year might be a little too high given his age and injury history).

 

Realistically, we are not close to a Cup contender until about 3 years from now.  We don't need anymore 28+ year old players unless they are average players with average salaries and short terms.  We will need to throw tons of money (reducing our cap space) at our young high end core players over the next couple of years, so we better save our money.  We need to add players that fit our core (20 to 24 years old) so that they can mature and develop together.  As Linden realized, there is no shortcut to building a successful franchise.  Our biggest mistake was delaying our rebuild with the Sedins.  We should've started the rebuild earlier and scrapped the retool plan.

[Wanless]

7 hours ago, coastal.view said:

well apparently calgary wanted him

and made a trade proposal

with a contract extension included

but edler did not want to sign that extension

(it does appear he would have agreed to a trade for the balance of the year though? but i'm guessing on that)

 

there will be a demand for edler as an ufa

and he likely will sign in the range of 6 to 7 million

for at least 2 years

so not sure why you think he'll take so much less here

and that he can somehow be forced to accept less

 

i also do not agree with your sentiment that edler played harder due to his contract expiring

he is a pro, and i think he brings his best as often as he can

it is well know that he encountered significant back injuries after signing his current contract

the injury occurred playing for this team

he appears to have found a way to overcome or moderate that injury

and has been able to play more physically again

 

it does not help the poor nuck d core to improve

by letting their best dman walk for nothing

if he was a lesser dman on this team it would matter less

but he currently is not replaceable without paying more for someone of his calibre

 

i do find it fascinating that you consider it to be bs

when a player has strong allegiances to the canuck team

i thought that might impress a fan

and cause a fan to like such a player more

but you appear to despise player loyalty somewhat

 

edit:  ps:  2 things

1.  your whole post is opinion, not just the last paragrah

2.  you are completely focused in your negative viewpoint on edler.  the team was involved in signing him to this contract - why not focus some of your negative views on the team?  and he negotiated a nmc - in exchange for salary.  you appear to simply wish to ignore this fact.  let's presume he gave up 1/2 million per year of salary for it.  are you willing to pay him 3 million to buy this clause back from him?  or you simply think terms of a contract do not matter when the contract no longer suits your interests as a fan ?

We'll said

 

It's embarrassing how butthurt CDC can get over players using their contracts to their advandage.

 

[coastal.view]

40 minutes ago, sockeye said:

I'd give Edler 3 years at $6 million per year and a No Trade Clause but definitely no No Move Clause.  If he will only accept a NMC then I would let him walk.  If Benning caves and gives him a NMC then I will no longer support Benning as our GM.  We cannot be forced to protect a 35 year old Edler at the Seattle expansion draft in two years (absolutely not!); especially, with his age and injury history.  He is a good D but on a Stanley Cup contender he would be a 3/4 D at best.  I would rather tank one more year than sign Edler with a NMC or sign a 29 year old Karlsson at an enormous cost.  I like Edler and he has been a loyal Canuck but we don't owe him anything more than 3 years at $ 6 million a year with a NTC (even $6 million a year might be a little too high given his age and injury history).

 

Realistically, we are not close to a Cup contender until about 3 years from now.  We don't need anymore 28+ year old players unless they are average players with average salaries and short terms.  We will need to throw tons of money (reducing our cap space) at our young high end core players over the next couple of years, so we better save our money.  We need to add players that fit our core (20 to 24 years old) so that they can mature and develop together.  As Linden realized, there is no shortcut to building a successful franchise.  Our biggest mistake was delaying our rebuild with the Sedins.  We should've started the rebuild earlier and scrapped the retool plan.

be creative

i have posted this elsewhere

 

18 million 3 year contract

 

year 1 - 4.5 million, nmc

year 2 - 4.5 million, nmc

year 3 - 9 million, ntc - doubt seattle claims him, or that nucks can trade him

 

a win win for all involved

[coastal.view]

3 hours ago, wildcam said:

Boeser is on pace for 68-70 points, 30 goals if playing a full 82 games? This type of player will demand between 7.2 - 8 million at least..Go look at some of the contracts? Canucks might try and sign Boser for 6.7 million but it will be like a 3 yr contract...If you want to sign Boser for 6 yeats it will cost you between 7.2 - 8 

Hutton will get at least 4 million on the way he has played and minutes he has logged the last 4 months...

Hope they can sign Leivo at around 2.5 million over 3 years?

well your discussion holds a bit more water

when brock actually scores 30 goals

so when has he scored 30 goals?  never in the nhl, and likely not to this season

he so far has lacked durability to achieve that

and yes.. that counts in contract negotiations

prorating performance over time missed is not realistic

no player will play 100% of games

so actual production counts more then speculated production

 

i do think brock is an 8 million player if actually as productive as you indicate he could be

but he has not achieved that production

so if he wants a long term contract he gets less aav.. or he signs a 1 or 2 year bridge (or even 3 years)

and proves his production

and then a higher value long term deal can be discussed

 

[aGENT]

14 minutes ago, chilliwiggins said:

I think Edler will wait to see what unfolds  with the management in the off season as it seems clear to me this current regime has come to the end of their tenure.   With a record like they have it will be refreshing to have someone who is a legitimate NHL GM.    Lots to pick from this year.    Hunter McCrimmon maybe Lombardi.      Times up for this circus act to be exchanged

[snucks]

Edler is ok sometimes but is very over rated. He consistantly gets caught playing goal tender and blocking his goaltenders view or just lost in the play. In the Vegus game recently he was on the ice for 3 of the 5 goals Canucks gave up. This team is not tough enough and management has let down the fans. Almost every game a player or 2 gets injured by dirty play from opponents. The team needs to get bigger and tougher. Soon Seattle teams will be pounding Canucks into the ice like the Golden Knights do.