Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Cap Hell for Canucks!!! (GREAT NEWS from Daly re: CAP for next year!!)

Rate this topic


HKSR

Recommended Posts

When did I praise the Leafs?  When they were tanking.

How did that go?  

Captudre.JPG.2c790dff79a94884a0dd80d918077df2.JPG

Hmm, those rookies seem alright.  

The Leafs have done pretty much everything else wrong.  It's all good though.  Unlike you turncoats that also cheer for the Bruins, I only cheer for the Vancouver Canucks.  

 

Back to our original point oldnews.  

Where are the Canucks if they never #stealthank

What prospects got ruined by our #stealthank

 

I mean, you argued those things for like 4 years bro!

 

Do you claim the Canucks would be as good without our high picks, and that our prospects got ruined?  LOL

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, CanadianRugby said:

When did I praise the Leafs?  When they were tanking.

How did that go?  

Captudre.JPG.2c790dff79a94884a0dd80d918077df2.JPG

Hmm, those rookies seem alright.  

The Leafs have done pretty much everything else wrong.  It's all good though.  Unlike you turncoats that also cheer for the Bruins, I only cheer for the Vancouver Canucks.  

 

Back to our original point oldnews.  

Where are the Canucks if they never #stealthank

What prospects got ruined by our #stealthank

 

I mean, you argued those things for like 4 years bro!

 

Do you claim the Canucks would be as good without our high picks, and that our prospects got ruined?  LOL

so sad.

 

must be realy hard watching your #proper-rebuild Leafz get spanked year affer year by a team whose 1st line is:

 

centered by a 45th overall pick, with a 25th overall and 71st overall on the wings....

 

#proper-rebuildz!  tanktard teardown nation unitezz!

 

Leaf-homer confirmed though - anyone not on their bandwagon is a 'turncoat'. 

 

you were so RIGHT! 

 

The "next Blackhawks" did everything other than Matthews wrong? What a comical walkback on your part.   Can't smell how strong your contradiction is?

You should probably quit before some Rugby Leaf-fluffing quotes get pulled out.

Edited by oldnews
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, oldnews said:

so sad.

 

must be realy hard watching them get spanked year affer year by a team whose 1st line is centered by a 45th overall pick, with a 25th overall and 71st overall on the wings....

 

#proper-rebuildz!

It's really hard watching the Bruins succeed at anything.  But I can just look at this and smile.

Captdudre.JPG.c87733ba3fb76b722f0a7c6371da98c0.JPG

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, CanadianRugby said:

It's really hard watching the Bruins succeed at anything.  But I can just look at this and smile.

Captdudre.JPG.c87733ba3fb76b722f0a7c6371da98c0.JPG

 

You can thank a #properly built team for that ironically, lol.

 

oh, btw....Ryan O'Reilly....33rd overall.

 

The blues last decade of top picks....

62nd overall

25th

20th

26th

56th

21st

47th

25th

32nd

14th

 

Thanks for coming out tanknation.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, oldnews said:

You can thank a #properly built team for that ironically, lol.

 

oh, btw....Ryan O'Reilly....33rd overall.

 

The blues last decade of top picks....

62nd overall

25th

20th

26th

56th

21st

47th

25th

32nd

14th

 

Thanks for coming out tanknation.

 

 

 

Literally every other team other than the Blues/Bruins that won the cup in the cap era says hi. 

 

But hey, I'm sure in your head you're right and we could be just like the Blues if only we never drafted Hughes, Pettersson and Horvat.  

 

I'm sure the Blackhawks would be a REAL dynasty if they never bothered with high picks like Kane & Toews. 

Have high draft picks ever done ANYTHING for the Penguins?  

Edited by CanadianRugby
  • Wat 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, CanadianRugby said:

Literally every other team other than the Blues/Bruins that won the cup in the cap era says hi. 

 

But hey, I'm sure in your head you're right and we could be just like the Blues if only we never drafted Hughes, Pettersson and Horvat.  

 

I'm sure the Blackhawks would be a REAL dynasty if they never bothered with high picks like Kane & Toews. 

Have high draft picks ever done ANYTHING for the Penguins?  

Derp.

The Detroit Red Wings "say HI!"  LOL  A team that literally went more than 20 years without a pick in the top half of the draft - exclusively 20th and lower.

The Anaheim Ducks also say "HI!"

Please.

I think you're actually being wilffully obtuse here.

 

You seem to believe that a hopelessly oversimplified belief/argument on your own part - ie that a team must #proper-rebuild/lottery champion their way to a Cup - necessarily means that the argument countering your delusion, must be equally simplistic/deluded.  No one ever argued that a team can't win with high picks -  you completely whiff on the point, endlessly.  Conveniently.   Are we supposed to believet that the Hurricanes were SCC because of Eric Staal?  One Scott Neidermeyer pick lead to a Devils SCC 12 years later?   Such an absurd argument wadr.

Your Leaf dynasty #proper-rebuild argument is/was a failure - that commits no one else to your own equally absurd counterpoint.   Reality is so obviously and evidently more complicated, with more outliers from your fantasy than you realize.

 

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, oldnews said:

Derp.

The Detroit Red Wings "say HI!"  LOL  A team that literally went more than 20 years without a pick in the top half of the draft - exclusively 20th and lower.

 

thats kind of the dream isn't it? to be perennially in the playoffs and be able to develop players out of that 20-30 range in the draft? 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

thats kind of the dream isn't it? to be perennially in the playoffs and be able to develop players out of that 20-30 range in the draft? 

More of a reality - than having turned the Leafs into a dynasty, with all due respect.  

 

The Redwings actually accomplished it.....4X.    Drafting and developing doesn't end once lottery picks are taken.  As evidenced by the numerous teams noted above. 

More of a reality than a host of other lottery championship failures.

 

Further does one Drew Doughty make the Kings a SCC?   For example - had the Kings traded down to 15 in that same draft and taken Erik Karlsson, could they still have won a Cup?  Or to 27th and taken John Carlsson?  Could they still have won?

The question is not whether the RedWings were the '#proper/ony way' to build - they are actually the 3rd or 4th among the examples I evidenced - it's whether there's only one way to build a team = tanknation/#proper-rebuild.  The evidence is obvious imo.

Edited by oldnews
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, oldnews said:

More of a reality - than turning the Leafs into a dynasty, with all due respect.  

 

The Redwings actually accomplished it.....4X.    Drafting and developing doesn't end once lottery picks are taken.  As evidenced by the numerous teams noted above. 

More of a reality than a host of other lottery championship failures.

 

Further does one Drew Doughty make the Kings a SCC?   For example - had the Kings traded down to 15 in that same draft and taken Erik Karlsson, could they still have won a Cup?  Or to 27th and taken John Carlsson?  Could they still have won?

The question is not whether the RedWings were exceptional - it's whether there's only one way to build a team = tanknation/#proper-rebuild.  The evidence is obvious imo.

one way is sustainable, the other requires a lot of luck. Sure, both can work but I'd rather go with how Detroit did things. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

one way is sustainable, the other requires a lot of luck. Sure, both can work but I'd rather go with how Detroit did things. 


being able to draft and develop throughout the draft is critical.  Detroit may be an extremely successful example - running 20 years of playoff appearances without any 'high picks' but their drafting and developing throughout the draft prevented them from bottlenecking their assets into a teardown/tankdown window....

As much as Gillis may have cited that model - he did not produce it - so the Canucks inevitably found themselves transitioning - also arguably further along in the cycle than most of their counterparts - but what they certainly did not do was race their way to last place, dump every asset they could, stockpileallthepickz in a short window, etc.

 

Bottom line though - if you look at the lottery teams that have won - they built incredibly deep, talented, balanced teams regardless.  The Blackhawks that people like to cite - (they won when Toews and Kane were 'kids', 20/21 yrs old) - were insanely deep, balanced, teams from top to bottom - they do not win otherwise, period - and that goes accross the board for teams built to win.  So - as evidenced, you can win with or without those top picks driving your team, but you certainly cannot without a relatively complete built - that is the bottom line, not a lottery pick or two - as we've seen endlessly - ensures literally nothing.  

Some folks around here saw a few shiny lottery forwards in Toronto and ordained them a dynasty, entirely prematurely....imo that is ignorance of what an actual SCC build takes.

 

Edited by oldnews
  • Cheers 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, oldnews said:

More of a reality - than having turned the Leafs into a dynasty, with all due respect.  

 

The Redwings actually accomplished it.....4X.    Drafting and developing doesn't end once lottery picks are taken.  As evidenced by the numerous teams noted above. 

More of a reality than a host of other lottery championship failures.

 

Further does one Drew Doughty make the Kings a SCC?   For example - had the Kings traded down to 15 in that same draft and taken Erik Karlsson, could they still have won a Cup?  Or to 27th and taken John Carlsson?  Could they still have won?

The question is not whether the RedWings were the '#proper/ony way' to build - they are actually the 3rd or 4th among the examples I evidenced - it's whether there's only one way to build a team = tanknation/#proper-rebuild.  The evidence is obvious imo.

I've been enjoying this page immensely but don't think the Red Wings is quite as simple as that.  They were horrible in the 80's and got some decent picks from that time that helped them gain relevance in the early 90's... 

 

Money bought a lot back turn and they used their wallets for 2002 which is pretty easy to figure out - iced a virtual all-star team.   They only thing that kept it going after that were two lucky/great picks in Datyuk and Zetterberg since the cap came in.  Holland was considered top bar during that period but since they finally are paying the piper.

 

One thing every great team has had in common over the past 50 years is a period of terrible seasons, followed with drafting a nucleus of stars.   It's generally a lot easier to do with better picks.   But not impossible.  The real exception is  EDM 79-81..but they started with Gretzky so not really them either.  

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, oldnews said:

You seem to believe that a hopelessly oversimplified belief/argument on your own part - ie that a team must #proper-rebuild/lottery champion their way to a Cup - necessarily means that the argument countering your delusion, must be equally simplistic/deluded.  No one ever argued that a team can't win with high picks -  you completely whiff on the point, endlessly.  Conveniently.   

I was going to point this out to him last night but thought I'd have more fun and go repeatedly hit my head against a wall instead :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, IBatch said:

I've been enjoying this page immensely but don't think the Red Wings is quite as simple as that.  They were horrible in the 80's and got some decent picks from that time that helped them gain relevance in the early 90's... 

 

Money bought a lot back turn and they used their wallets for 2002 which is pretty easy to figure out - iced a virtual all-star team.   They only thing that kept it going after that were two lucky/great picks in Datyuk and Zetterberg since the cap came in.  Holland was considered top bar during that period but since they finally are paying the piper.

 

One thing every great team has had in common over the past 50 years is a period of terrible seasons, followed with drafting a nucleus of stars.   It's generally a lot easier to do with better picks.   But not impossible.  The real exception is  EDM 79-81..but they started with Gretzky so not really them either.  

Agree the money bought the support back then for sure. They needed a D man they outspent everyone else to get it. What was an undiscussed benefit of being able to do that was their low Draft picks didnt have to step into the lineup at 18-19 years old and could develop in their system until the big league team decided to move on from one of the high priced veterans. By then their next level was ready to play in the NHL. Detroit did go through a lot of years at the bottom of the 21 team league before they hit on Yzerman.

Teams can be built in different ways. Drafting is a solid building block for sure. Quinn  did it here with trades. I say there's no sure way to guarantee success. Theres a lot of luck involved. Good and bad.

  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/7/2020 at 1:36 PM, oldnews said:

Derp.

The Detroit Red Wings "say HI!"  LOL  A team that literally went more than 20 years without a pick in the top half of the draft - exclusively 20th and lower.

The Anaheim Ducks also say "HI!"

Please.

Good job Red Wings.  Now all we have to do is pretend that the salary cap existed for those 20 years and you'd have a point. 

Derp.

 

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Updated original post for trade deadline moves. 

 

- Sutter, Baertschi, and Stecher all need to go.

- Ferland needs to retire or stay on LTIR (for his health).

- Handed Toffoli a $5.5M AAV deal.

 

Remaining cap is over $4M+, so plenty of tweaking available including retention of salaries on Sutter and Baertschi if need be.

 

The sky isn't falling my friends.  Our Top 6 moving forward will be:

 

Miller-EP-Toffoli

Pearson-Bo-Brock

 

Looks great to me!

 

Edited by HKSR
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Updated original post for trade deadline moves. 

 

- Sutter, Roussel, Baertschi, and Stecher all need to go.

- Ferland needs to retire or stay on LTIR (for his health).

- Handed Toffoli a $5.5M AAV deal.

 

Remaining cap is over $4M+, so plenty of tweaking available including retention of salaries on Sutter and Baertschi if need be.

 

The sky isn't falling my friends.  Our Top 6 moving forward will be:

 

Miller-EP-Toffoli

Pearson-Bo-Brock

 

Looks great to me!

 

I'm guessing ^^^ Don't see Benning cutting NHL capable C depth. Injuries happen, we need players able to capably play C at this level. He'll be gone soon enough anyway (next TDL or summer).

 

Also wouldn't be shocked to see us retain and move Eriksson after his bonus is paid. Even if we have to add an asset.

 

After his bonus, his actual dollars owed is $5m over 2 years or $2.5m/year. Retain 50% on that and it becomes $1.25m (and only $500k of actual salary next year). Take back a +/- $1m AHL contract (preferably a vet AHL C for better C depth in Utica) that we can keep in the minors and it becomes basically cost neutral for his new team. Add a B prospect for their trouble.

 

That or we just bite the bullet on a buyout. Doesn't save us much next year, but the year following it does (and the two after that are negligible).

 

Still, short of retirement or mutual termination (both unlikely), retention is is our best route if we can swing it.

 

Either way, as you point out, we have options and it's far from dire.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, aGENT said:

I'm guessing ^^^ Don't see Benning cutting NHL capable C depth. Injuries happen, we need players able to capably play C at this level. He'll be gone soon enough anyway (next TDL or summer).

 

Also wouldn't be shocked to see us retain and move Eriksson after his bonus is paid. Even if we have to add an asset.

 

After his bonus, his actual dollars owed is $5m over 2 years or $2.5m/year. Retain 50% on that and it becomes $1.25m (and only $500k of actual salary next year). Take back a +/- $1m AHL contract (preferably a vet AHL C for better C depth in Utica) that we can keep in the minors and it becomes basically cost neutral for his new team. Add a B prospect for their trouble.

 

That or we just bite the bullet on a buyout. Doesn't save us much next year, but the year following it does (and the two after that are negligible).

 

Still, short of retirement or mutual termination (both unlikely), retention is is our best route if we can swing it.

 

Either way, as you point out, we have options and it's far from dire.

Yeah, found this on Eriksson's buyout scenarios... I'd be tempted to say if buyout is the route, it should be done this offseason even though it means a big cap hit next season.  We could probably get one of our prospects some ice time and eat the big cap hit for next year, but have it drop to $3.667M the year after:

 

https://canucksarmy.com/2019/05/17/what-would-an-eriksson-buyout-look-like/

 

Your scenario of retention would be best.  A 50% retention would be better than a buyout IMO.

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another interesting thing to note, is that based on what I see in terms of cap space, if Tanev is re-signed this year, it'll mean goodbye to a 35 year-old Edler after next season.  There simply won't be the cap space available to keep him with EP40 and QH getting the massive pay increases. 

 

So in 2021-22, I see Pearson and Edler both gone.  Likely replaced by Podkolzin and Juolevi.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Another interesting thing to note, is that based on what I see in terms of cap space, if Tanev is re-signed this year, it'll mean goodbye to a 35 year-old Edler after next season.  There simply won't be the cap space available to keep him with EP40 and QH getting the massive pay increases. 

 

So in 2021-22, I see Pearson and Edler both gone.  Likely replaced by Podkolzin and Juolevi.

 

I'd be shocked if Edler didn't sign 1-2 year deals to stay here until he retires. So long as he's still able/worth a contract, we'll find the cap/he'll take the cut IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, aGENT said:

I'd be shocked if Edler didn't sign 1-2 year deals to stay here until he retires. So long as he's still able/worth a contract, we'll find the cap/he'll take the cut IMO.

It'll have to be a major cut.  Well, I think Roussel or Beagle would or could be moved to make it work.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...