Elias Pettersson Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 (edited) It sounds like Benning doesn't want to give him a contract longer than 2 years, which makes total sense. So Edler will most likely test the free agent market. I doubt there is a team out there that will give him more than 2 years, or if they do they won't give him a NMC. Once Edler figures this out he will come back to the bargaining table and JB will get him a 2x6 deal. That's fair on both sides. Edler gets a nice salary as a 33 year old and the Canucks get the term they want. He can have his NMC as long as its only a 2 year term. There is no team that will give him 3 years with a full NMC given the expansion draft, I can pretty much guarantee that. Also, JB can just give him more money on the 2 year deal as others have mentioned. We won't have cap issues until the expansion draft when Petey and Hughes are up for renewal, so why not just give him 2x7 or 2x8? If he can get $16 million over the next 2 years that should take care of the money aspect of the deal for him. If he can get another contract after that then good for him. If not he got his $16 million and can retire. Edited June 11, 2019 by Elias Pettersson 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.Am.Ironman Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 5 hours ago, The 5th Line said: Hamhuis waived his NTC and Benning still failed to move him. More irrelevance and fakenews This is misleading. Hamhuis nixed a trade to send him to the Capitals. So no he didn't fully waive his NTC. He was willing to go to Dallas but the Stars were only offering like a 4th or a 3rd or something ridiculous so Benning and TL, rightfully, turned them down. Apparently Edler did the same thing this year. He wouldn't waive to go to Calgary in a trade which was rumoured to involve their 1st round pick and a grade A defensive prospect. The deal was contingent on Edler signing an extension which he wouldn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6string Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 It's Elliotte Fraudman, relax people! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ossi Vaananen Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 19 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said: what an obtuse thing to say. Hamhuis made it 100% clear he refused any trade for family and Edler the same. You cannot trade a player who has a NTC if they don't want to be traded. They don't "walk for nothing", they are entitled to leave once their contract ends and they choose not to re-sign. If you could not trade them (see above), there as "nothing" to get so they simply walk - that is it, nothing more. This is up to the players in each case. They both expressed interest to stay. Seems in both cases management didn't want them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
18W-40C-6W Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 6 hours ago, Agoork said: This shouldn't even be an issue. A 2 year contract expires and he will be a UFA when the expansion draft happens. Seattle would be unlikely to choose a UFA 35 year old (or whatever age he will be at that time). He can choose to sign with Seattle if they want him, or just say no thanks. Then when July 1st UFA window opens, he can re-sign with the Nucks if that is what he and management would like. That makes sense for us, but he will want the 2 years extra of certainty and clearly won't give up his NMC issue. at 35 re-signing for 6 mil will be hard. So he's got to make a decision, longer term with no protection and more money (which is what he should do if he's thinking logically). Or short term, but risk not getting close to those numbers if he's even able to find a suitor at 35 years old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 30 minutes ago, Ossi Vaananen said: They both expressed interest to stay. Seems in both cases management didn't want them. Again, odd thing to say. Management has to make business decisions. If they want more money/term than the team feels is reasonable, then you can characterize that as management "not wanting them there" but I view it as the player didn't accept their terms - period. If you are suggesting Canuck management do not like Edler that is at odds with evidence and logic. However, I doubt they would be doing their job if they give him whatever he wants. If they offer him something he/agent turn down, that isn't management not wanting the player. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 1 hour ago, stawns said: they've got 2.5 weeks to work out a deal, it's a long way from panic time Plus, the Canucks can apply pressure by putting tariffs on IKEA goods...... 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlastPast Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 I may have said it before but what about a three year deal with an NMC for the first 2 and a NTC for the last year ; but back load the contract so that a large proportion of the money is payable in the final year. If Seattle (or whoever he was potentially traded to) was on the hook for an ~8 mil signing bonus on July 1 along with an additional ~2 mil salary that could effectively serve as a barrier/deterrent to being selected/traded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spur1 Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 6 hours ago, The 5th Line said: Was Edler even asked to waive at the deadline? Shouldn't we have known we would have issues signing him? If he's not going to stay, he should of been moved Please remove your 20/20 hindsight glasses. You are embarrassing yourself. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 7 hours ago, HerrDrFunk said: So because he doesn't want to potentially leave Vancouver for Seattle, he'll leave Vancouver entirely? Makes sense. Would you rather have your choice of teams and a bidding war for your services or give a home town discount knowing you'll tossed into the expansion pool before the contract runs out? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post 48MPHSlapShot Posted June 12, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted June 12, 2019 So, considering Edler was asked and refused to waive at the TDL, it's obvious this was nobody's fault, except maybe Edler's. So of course let's make it about Benning. 2 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted June 12, 2019 Share Posted June 12, 2019 8 minutes ago, The 5th Line said: Wrong AGAIN. Hamhuis waived AFTER the season was done and the trade deadline long passed. Do you ever tire of being wrong or is it something you cherish? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted June 12, 2019 Share Posted June 12, 2019 8 hours ago, Goal:thecup said: Edler wants to be here; the Canucks want Edler here. Edler wants a full NMC; the Canucks do not want to have to protect him in the expansion draft. Edler wants a long-term deal; the Canucks do not. Edler wants the big bucks; the Canucks know he only wants to play for Vancouver. IMO, he should be offered: Either a 2 year contract with a full NMC for around 5 or 6 million per or, A 4 year contract with a No Trade Clause for around 4 or 5 million per. If he opts for the 2 year, he could still re-sign with the Canucks after the expansion draft. Edler earned his NMC on his last contract and the Canucks have honoured it. Since he doesn't want to play for any other team, he has lost bargaining power. The Canucks need his services and should pay a fair dollar but not the maximum UFAs get. They don't want to 'waste' a protection spot on a 35 year old defenseman. Edler will command more than $5 or $6 mill for 2 years. We have to be realistic. My suggestion is to overpay him for 2 years. Which might look like $7.5 million. Even $8. We wont have to protect him. It coincides expiring with having to re sign Petey. If he wants to stay longer? Repay us with cheaper short term deals then on... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted June 12, 2019 Share Posted June 12, 2019 4 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said: Edler will command more than $5 or $6 mill for 2 years. We have to be realistic. My suggestion is to overpay him for 2 years. Which might look like $7.5 million. Even $8. We wont have to protect him. It coincides expiring with having to re sign Petey. If he wants to stay longer? Repay us with cheaper short term deals then on... I'm 100% on board with this. We shouldn't be a cap team at the moment anyway so overpaying short-term makes a ton of sense. Full NTC so he knows he's staying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5Fivehole0 Posted June 12, 2019 Share Posted June 12, 2019 I'll lose all respect for Edler if he refused to be traded just to end up walking away in the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iceman64 Posted June 12, 2019 Share Posted June 12, 2019 (edited) 8 hours ago, NewbieCanuckFan said: It’s not entitlement in a sense that he’s earned that right given the time he’s put with the club. That doesn’t mean we have to bend over for him either. We don't owe eagle anything, nor does he owe us but a player over 30 with the injury history he has had is not worth keeping unless it's for cheap... he's made a pile of money playing for us over the years and that makes us owe him??? Edited June 12, 2019 by iceman64 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoneypuckOverlord Posted June 12, 2019 Share Posted June 12, 2019 Edlers wife will force him to stay. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spur1 Posted June 12, 2019 Share Posted June 12, 2019 7 minutes ago, MoneypuckOverlord said: Edlers wife will force him to stay. Unless it’s his wife who wants more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quantum Posted June 12, 2019 Share Posted June 12, 2019 This might be a blessing in disguise. He's aging quickly and the NHL is a young man's league where speed is paramount. I think opening up spots for Hughes, Juolevi, and whoever else comes up will be for the best. Edler's past his prime and doesn't fit the age range of this new core. As much as it'll suck/be weird to see him play for another team, it's gonna be best for all parties. Also -- my bet is that Edler ends up in Winnipeg. He used to play for the Moose and he seems like the kind of guy who prefers familiarity over anything else. With Myers, Trouba, and Hayes walking -- could open up a spot for him to go to a team that's chasing a cup. Again, a win/win for all involved in that scenario. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Rob_Zepp Posted June 12, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted June 12, 2019 26 minutes ago, 5Fivehole0 said: I'll lose all respect for Edler if he refused to be traded just to end up walking away in the end. You'll lose respect for a player for asking the team to honour a contract/terms negotiated in good faith? Really?! I don't get this condemnation of players who choose to NOT disrupt their family life mid-season given they have earned the contractual right to make a decision during the off-season when school is out etc. etc. Give the guy a break (any guy who doesn't "waive" a clause) as he earned it and he simply used it, if he signs elsewhere, in a manner he felt best for his family situation. If anything, from my perspective, people like that DESERVE your respect. I guess we view respect much differently. 2 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now