Benning trying to get to "common ground" with Boeser

[Krzysl]

Brock should get traded. Great value, will fetch us a first and top six winger. Brock hasn’t proven 7 mill contract , 5 maybe 6 mill yes. Plus he is willing to to screw his development. Not the type of character we need. Hasn’t had a full season and tbh looked kinda sluggish last season. I am not sold he will be more then a 25-30 goal scorer. 

[The Great Canucks]

It's crazy what's going on with these RFAs. Now they want big money contracts with a short term. Short term contracts used to mean a smaller cap hit. NHL contracts are starting to be like NBA contracts.

[stawns]

9 minutes ago, Smashian Kassian said:

Exactly. This guys a stud goal scorer. 0.85 PPG this early on a bad offensive team. This is a critical signing for us.

I don't think anyone is arguing that at all.

[Smashian Kassian]

Just now, stawns said:

I don't think anyone is arguing that at all.

I know that. I just think the point needs to be highlighted & underscored, he's really really good. I don't think we should entertain trading him at all. 

 

10 minutes ago, RowdyCanuck said:

Your right , he can work the PP like a boss but 5on5 his not a driver sorry....Bo and petey are the drivers and Brock knew where to go and boom that's why they work. 

Except Brock was a driver in his rookie year when he wasn't playing with Bo. 

[stawns]

1 minute ago, Smashian Kassian said:

I know that. I just think the point needs to be highlighted & underscored, he's really really good. I don't think we should entertain trading him at all. 

 

Except Brock was a driver in his rookie year when he wasn't playing with Bo. 

if he doesn't want to re-sign at a team friendly price, then they may have no choice and it's not like they'd be giving him away, he'd bring a huge return.

Edited September 13, 2019 by stawns

[Smashian Kassian]

Just now, stawns said:

if he doesn't want to re-sign at a team friendly price, then they may have no choice and it's not like they'd be giving him away, he'd bring a huge return.

Yeah but whatever the return is it won't be equal to Brock Boeser.

 

Your not likely to get a fair return because he's so good at such a young age as a single asset. Plus you'll be dividing the value you do get likely amongst multiple assets of which individually (again, most likely) won't come close to Boeser's impact. 

 

Unless its a team offering a similar young player one for one, I wouldn't be all that interested. Provorov or McAvoy would fit that for us, but your negotiating with them too. 

I personally don't think Brock is demanding the moon, sun and stars here. But we do need to set a standard. Out of curiosity, what's your ideal 'team friendly' range? Both short & long term?

[*Buzzsaw*]

This is all being driven by the agents and GM's, not the players.

 

The Agents have all agreed to cooperate and hold out for the dough... the GM's are all agreed they won't make big offers.

 

The players are all probably getting pissed and anxious and wanting to play.

 

The real driver for all this is the CAP ceiling set by the league... cause the league is greedy.

 

Which is why there will be a player strike or a lockout next year.

 

Which is also too bad, cause the Canucks will just be on the cusp of being a contender next year.

[stawns]

Just now, Smashian Kassian said:

Yeah but whatever the return is it won't be equal to Brock Boeser.

 

Your not likely to get a fair return because he's so good at such a young age as a single asset. Plus you'll be dividing the value you do get likely amongst multiple assets of which individually (again, most likely) won't come close to Boeser's impact. 

 

Unless its a team offering a similar young player one for one, I wouldn't be all that interested. Provorov or McAvoy would fit that for us, but your negotiating with them too. 

I personally don't think Brock is demanding the moon, sun and stars here. But we do need to set a standard. Out of curiosity, what's your ideal 'team friendly' range? Both short & long term?

2-3 years, $5.5m per.  He has zero leverage and has had 2 partial good years behind him and I think that's a fair "show me" contract.  Bottom line is he is an RFA with absolutely no leverage and a cpl 50+ point seasons.  He's an emerging star, but he's still got a lot to prove to get to that kind of earning power.

[RWMc1]

30 minutes ago, Smashian Kassian said:

Boeser definitely was the one driving the play his rookie year. He created offense with Vanek & Gagner ffs.

 

The PP went from 14.1% (29th) to 21.4% (9th), and Brock was the addition to that PP. 

 

 

Vanek was the one going hard to the net and creating havoc.  Boeser relied on his quick release shot to score from good spots, but Vanek was the one driving the play and creating most of the chances on that line.

 

 

[RowdyCanuck]

18 minutes ago, Smashian Kassian said:

I know that. I just think the point needs to be highlighted & underscored, he's really really good. I don't think we should entertain trading him at all. 

 

Except Brock was a driver in his rookie year when he wasn't playing with Bo. 

And now his not a player driver....when he wasn't playing bo wasn't he playing with the Sedins?.....

[winthecup]

32 minutes ago, Krzysl said:

Brock should get traded. Great value, will fetch us a first and top six winger. Brock hasn’t proven 7 mill contract , 5 maybe 6 mill yes. Plus he is willing to to screw his development. Not the type of character we need. Hasn’t had a full season and tbh looked kinda sluggish last season. I am not sold he will be more then a 25-30 goal scorer. 

Are you seriously questioning Brock's character?

Wow!? Canucks fans are the worst sometimes.

Get out of here with that bullcrap!

[Smashian Kassian]

3 minutes ago, RowdyCanuck said:

And now his not a player driver....when he wasn't playing bo wasn't he playing with the Sedins?.....

 

Brock was playing more with Gagner if I recall correctly. Didn't Bo miss a bunch of time that year? The Sedins 5 on 5 were almost the third line that year.

 

6 minutes ago, RWMc1 said:

Vanek was the one going hard to the net and creating havoc.  Boeser relied on his quick release shot to score from good spots, but Vanek was the one driving the play and creating most of the chances on that line.

 

 

 

Agree to disagree then. Vanek had slowed down then, a decent trigger man for the Sedins, still had a nice shot & instincts but became more opportunistic. At that point he wasn't a line driver IMO. 

[RowdyCanuck]

19 minutes ago, Smashian Kassian said:

Yeah but whatever the return is it won't be equal to Brock Boeser.

 

Your not likely to get a fair return because he's so good at such a young age as a single asset. Plus you'll be dividing the value you do get likely amongst multiple assets of which individually (again, most likely) won't come close to Boeser's impact. 

 

Unless its a team offering a similar young player one for one, I wouldn't be all that interested. Provorov or McAvoy would fit that for us, but your negotiating with them too. 

I personally don't think Brock is demanding the moon, sun and stars here. But we do need to set a standard. Out of curiosity, what's your ideal 'team friendly' range? Both short & long term?

I would pull that trigger so fast....

cause then that opens a few different doors.....

charlie and tram or OJ looks like a top pairing in my books and even elder and Charlie could be great....

would it hurt yea sure but I think we will still be a playoff team thx to the depth we have and I think goldy will be a decent place holder until podz comes over....there's a lot that could happen but having Charlie would be a lot harder to replace then Brock. 

[Smashian Kassian]

19 minutes ago, stawns said:

2-3 years, $5.5m per.  He has zero leverage and has had 2 partial good years behind him and I think that's a fair "show me" contract.  Bottom line is he is an RFA with absolutely no leverage and a cpl 50+ point seasons.  He's an emerging star, but he's still got a lot to prove to get to that kind of earning power.

5.5 is pretty low. I think its 6+ on a shorter term deal.

 

I don't agree he has 'zero' leverage. The team has alot of pressure to improve & compete. They can't really afford not to have him IMO. His importance would be his area of leverage.

[TheRussianRocket1994]

1 hour ago, winthecup said:

Are you seriously questioning Brock's character?

Wow!? Canucks fans are the worst sometimes.

Get out of here with that bullcrap!

Yeah, I’m extremely tired of the media and some of the fans, but when I call them out for it, I’m the bad guy. It’s unreal!!

Edited September 13, 2019 by IRR

[Smashian Kassian]

3 minutes ago, RowdyCanuck said:

I would pull that trigger so fast....

cause then that opens a few different doors.....

charlie and tram or OJ looks like a top pairing in my books and even elder and Charlie could be great....

would it hurt yea sure but I think we will still be a playoff team thx to the depth we have and I think goldy will be a decent place holder until podz comes over....there's a lot that could happen but having Charlie would be a lot harder to replace then Brock. 

Yeah someone like that is a different story. He's a bonefide top pair D. I doubt Boston would do it but he's a stud.

 

It would have to be a Johansen/Jones type deal like that, not quantity for quality. 

[RowdyCanuck]

10 minutes ago, Smashian Kassian said:

 

Brock was playing more with Gagner if I recall correctly. Didn't Bo miss a bunch of time that year? The Sedins 5 on 5 were almost the third line that year.

 

 

Agree to disagree then. Vanek had slowed down then, a decent trigger man for the Sedins, still had a nice shot & instincts but became more opportunistic. At that point he wasn't a line driver IMO. 

Bo and Brock played about the same amount of games ha. 

I remember most of the time he played with bo and Sven. 

I even had to go look at Brock's rookie highlights and a lot of his goals were with bo.....

if you watch his highlights, you can tell his not the driver but the finisher. 

[RowdyCanuck]

6 minutes ago, Smashian Kassian said:

Yeah someone like that is a different story. He's a bonefide top pair D. I doubt Boston would do it but he's a stud.

 

It would have to be a Johansen/Jones type deal like that, not quantity for quality. 

Yea I agree. But it wouldn't hurt my feels to make a trade like that....

I agree it would have to be a one for one or one for a huge haul

Edited September 13, 2019 by RowdyCanuck

[stawns]

9 minutes ago, Smashian Kassian said:

Yeah someone like that is a different story. He's a bonefide top pair D. I doubt Boston would do it but he's a stud.

 

It would have to be a Johansen/Jones type deal like that, not quantity for quality. 

Someone in another thread used Connor and a 1st for BB and Tanev.  I'd do that deal

[Smashian Kassian]

4 minutes ago, RowdyCanuck said:

Bo and Brock played about the same amount of games ha. 

I remember most of the time he played with bo and Sven. 

I even had to go look at Brock's rookie highlights and a lot of his goals were with bo.....

if you watch his highlights, you can tell his not the driver but the finisher. 

Sure but that's the nature of a goal scorer to look just like the trigger man. He's so smart he really can elevate a line though, maybe that's my point more than technically 'driver'. Like with Vanek & Gagner, playing with someone else they're a middle 6 line chipping in here & there but with Brock on that line he was able to still produce at a good rate with those guys. He's more than just a good shot he makes the line he plays on better, and overall drives or adds offense for the team.