Arrow 1983 Posted January 15, 2020 Author Share Posted January 15, 2020 4 minutes ago, Provost said: Random, terrible... and entirely unrealistic. I don't think this even flies in a video game on cheat mode. Ludicrous. Lots of input here don't even know where to start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrow 1983 Posted January 15, 2020 Author Share Posted January 15, 2020 (edited) 14 minutes ago, qwijibo said: Thing is. You’re proposing that they take worthless “assets” and pay through the nose for them. They’re better off seeing if Subban bounces back. One other thing Sami Vatanen is 28 years old and is a UFA next season you think he is going to re-sign with NJ. So they are going to have to find a replacement Stecher could be that replacement. That's right Andy Geene retires most likely and Vatanen walks or gets traded before seasons end. Benn and Stecher are both decent replacements for those two guys at a cheaper rate. Edited January 15, 2020 by Arrow 1983 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwijibo Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 37 minutes ago, Arrow 1983 said: How are they paying through the nose $15m in cap space for cap dumps and bottom of the lineup quality players. Not to mention 5 wasted contract spots. Plus if Subban bounces back it looks even worse for them. I can’t imagine how you think this is a good deal for them 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 10 hours ago, Arrow 1983 said: To NJ Eriksson 6.00 mill Baertschi 3.367 mill Stecher 2.325 mill Benn 2.000 mill Leivo 1.500 mill Total 15.192 mill To Van Pk Subban 9.00mill Wayne Simmonds 5.00 mill Total 14.00 mill Why Van does this, Baertschi and Eriksson pretty much same cost as PK can still play in the NHL well Baertschi isn't even playing for the Canucks , Simmonds better then Leivo right now IMO, Simmonds has some playoff experience and just seems like a Benning player, Canucks probably will not be able to re-sign Leivo if he wants a substantial raise. Pearson Horvat Simmonds looks like a good Playoff line to me and if Simmonds does well in Vancouver then we might be abale to sign him for less than his 5mill cap hit as he is a UFA next season. Otherwise he walks and the Canucks gain the cap space by removing Benn and Baertschi off the books. Van Trades Stecher NOW cause if they plan on signing Markstrom they wont be able to sign both Tanev and Stecher and Stecher doesn't seem to be a Travis Green Player. Furthermore, Tanev could be signed for a 3-4 year deal at 5 mill from his current 4.45 mill that's only a 0.550mill raise. Well Stecher could ask for somewhere between 3.5-4.0 mill from his 2.325mill. Why give up Benn, again he doesn't seem to be A Green player. Why NJ does this, They're not making the playoffs so they should trade Simmonds for assets but at his current rate of scoring he's probably not getting them a high draft pick but Leivo is a younger version of Simmonds. They take Stecher Cause he adds another #4 dman or at least a solid #5 dman to their already young core of Dmen. They Take Benn Cause their stud Defensive defenseman Andy Greene is going to be 38 next season and a UFA. Benn comes with 1 more year at 2mill if he works out there they can re-sign him and if not let him walk or trade him at the next trade deadline. They take Baertschi, because he might still be able to play in the NHL and has 1 year left at his 3.367mill cap hit if he can't they can bury him and save 1.075mill of his cap hit. After next season they're only paying Eriksson 6 mill instead of PK's 9 mill cap hit. They take Eriksson to compensate for Pk's 9mil cap hit. So why take Pk Subban 9mill NJ Is 27th in GF well Van is 9th in GF this alone will give PK more opportunities offensively Edler Subban Hughes Tanev Fanteberg Myers This line up of Dmen give the Canucks an offensive threat on each pairing, Furthermore, Edler should be able to help Subban with the defensive part of the game well giving this pair an offensive threat on both sides. If this experiment fails then when the Seattle expansion draft comes along The Canucks can expose either or both of Myers and Subban. Love PK, but he is not a player who leads. Plus, now his game has fallen off a cliff. He’d fun for our city though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chickenspear Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 Why do we trade Leivo? He's been solid for us this year, can play up and down the lineup. Stecher is playing better than PK this year as well, I don't think its worth the risk to move a cheaper D for an expensive piece like this on the hope his career will bounce back. Simmonds would only be a rental, UFA at the end of the year. Never thought I'd say it, but I'd rather keep Eriksson and let his contract run the course, if this is the way you suggest to dump him. On your expansion explanation, you forgot we have to expose at least 1 goalie, and it'll either be Marky or Demko. Pretty sure Seattle will take one of them instead of an aging $9 mil dman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 Pearson-Bo-Loui is producing points and chances at a much better rate than Pearson-Bo-Leivo. So lets Levio this alone and not add more dead salary. (drumroll please). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 59 minutes ago, Alflives said: Love PK, but he is not a player who leads. Plus, now his game has fallen off a cliff. He’d fun for our city though. reality is we don't need PK anymore, at least not a declining PK. This year is when the new competitive window just gets cracked open, you can see this team is on the cusp of becoming a contender but it needs more talent to be consistent. We have some great prospects coming in the next two years, and lock up the young core, not take on more old guys who are already problems for other teams. its not like PK needs a change of scenery, he's in his 30s now and not what he once was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 Not even sure this is realistic by EA standards. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyndall2 Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 Do not resign Tanev for next year. Trade him first and get a draft pick or two. Too slow, too soft and no offensive side to his game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 29 minutes ago, Tyndall2 said: Do not resign Tanev for next year. Trade him first and get a draft pick or two. Too slow, too soft and no offensive side to his game. First, Tanev is by no means slow. He’s one of the quickest D men to pucks in the league. Second, Tanev is one of the toughest players EVER. He blocks shots, and takes hits for his team like few players with his level of skill. He might not put up points, but his work in his own zone creates offensive. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 38 minutes ago, Tyndall2 said: Do not resign Tanev for next year. Trade him first and get a draft pick or two. Too slow, too soft and no offensive side to his game. On pace for roughly 20 points, on top of being our best defensive presence, and I would not classify him as "too slow". Does he have super high end speed? No, but he doesn't have cement skates either. A decent skater, great defensively, and his offensive presence has been pretty decent this season. If he can be kept for 4mil or less I'd do it. Unless management is really confident Stecher can replace Tanev's minutes/presence. Rafferty looks like he may have a good chance at the 3rd pairing spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucker 67 Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 I think this might be more realistic: to ? - Eriksson and 1st (2021) to VAN - 5th and 7th (2020) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 6 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said: I think this might be more realistic: to ? - Eriksson and 1st (2021) to VAN - 5th and 7th (2020) And that ain’t happening. Only a complete “Dumbass” GM would give up a first just to dump a guy. #Leafs Suck Smelly Socks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the grinder Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 14 hours ago, Arrow 1983 said: Lets say the Canucks protect Miller Boeser Petterson Virtanen Guad Horvat Roussel Forwards remaining Ferland Beagle Sutter is UFA Pearson UFA Baer UFA Dmen Hughes exempt Edler UFA Benn Ufa Tanev if we re-sign longer than 1 year Juolevi Rafferty Myers my guess Canucks protect Tanev if re-signed Juolevi and Rafferty. Unless Myers proves worthy of keeping. dude so again your expecting seattle taking subban over one of the goalies we are going to have to expose don't think so , and when was the last time a team traded 5 roster players , not picks or prospects actual contract spots ,nj isn't clogging up their contract spots for those five Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 1 minute ago, the grinder said: dude so again your expecting seattle taking subban over one of the goalies we are going to have to expose don't think so , and when was the last time a team traded 5 roster players , not picks or prospects actual contract spots ,nj isn't clogging up their contract spots for those five Do the rules allow us to leave both Marky and Demko exposed, and using their protection spot for a forward? I’d do that, but think JB is trading Demko at the draft to get our first (from the Miller trade) back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwijibo Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 7 minutes ago, Alflives said: Do the rules allow us to leave both Marky and Demko exposed, and using their protection spot for a forward? I’d do that, but think JB is trading Demko at the draft to get our first (from the Miller trade) back. No “ In addition, all NHL teams must meet the following minimum requirements regarding players exposed for selection in the draft: * One defenseman who is a) under contract in 2021-22 and b) played in at least 40 NHL games the prior season or played in at least 70 NHL games in the prior two seasons. * Two forwards who are a) under contract in 2021-22 and b) played at least 40 NHL games the prior season or played in at least 70 NHL games in the prior two seasons. * One goalie who is under contract in 2021-22 or will be a restricted free agent at the end of his current contract immediately prior to 2021-22. If a team elects to make a restricted free agent goalie available to meet this requirement, that goalie must have received his qualifying offer prior to the submission of the team's protected list.” Also. It’s highly doubtful any team gives up a 1st for Demko. He doesn’t have the body of work to be worth that to another team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe-max Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 Why Vancouver does this: They replace one old, over-the-hill, overpriced non-factor with two. Two. That's twice as much. Double. That's good. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 17 hours ago, Arrow 1983 said: To NJ Eriksson 6.00 mill Baertschi 3.367 mill Stecher 2.325 mill Benn 2.000 mill Leivo 1.500 mill Total 15.192 mill To Van Pk Subban 9.00mill Wayne Simmonds 5.00 mill Total 14.00 mill 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrow 1983 Posted January 15, 2020 Author Share Posted January 15, 2020 6 hours ago, Chickenspear said: Why do we trade Leivo? He's been solid for us this year, can play up and down the lineup. Stecher is playing better than PK this year as well, I don't think its worth the risk to move a cheaper D for an expensive piece like this on the hope his career will bounce back. Simmonds would only be a rental, UFA at the end of the year. Never thought I'd say it, but I'd rather keep Eriksson and let his contract run the course, if this is the way you suggest to dump him. On your expansion explanation, you forgot we have to expose at least 1 goalie, and it'll either be Marky or Demko. Pretty sure Seattle will take one of them instead of an aging $9 mil dman. 1 hour ago, the grinder said: dude so again your expecting seattle taking subban over one of the goalies we are going to have to expose don't think so , and when was the last time a team traded 5 roster players , not picks or prospects actual contract spots ,nj isn't clogging up their contract spots for those five Mark my words their is zero chance that Markstrom is here next season even if he where to sign for 5 million it doesn't work under our current cap situation. Only way that Markstrom gets signed if Eriksson is off the books and we take no cap in return. Canucks could maybe retain 25% of Erikssons contract. For Leivo it is simple you are absolutely right he has been pretty solid for the Canucks, He is also a UFA next season currently making 1.5 mill and anything over 2 mill would make it difficult to retain him under our current cap situation. Stecher is younger and would be great to retain however as I said in the OP he is a RFA next season with arbitration rights and could easily garner 3.5 mill plus. We can take Subban 9.00mill cause the Canucks would be getting rid of Eriksson 6.00mill and Baer 3.367 mill next year total 9.367mill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrow 1983 Posted January 15, 2020 Author Share Posted January 15, 2020 (edited) There is a notion in the Canucks fan base that some how the Canucks have the Cap space next season to sign Markstrom Stecher Virtanen Gaud and some might want to also keep Leivo And that some how Sutter Eriksson Baer and maybe even Beagle are going to just magically be traded off this team with no cap in return or the Canucks not retaining cap. One thing I'm sure of is next years Canucks lineup is going to have to look much different then this years lineup Edited January 15, 2020 by Arrow 1983 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