[Discussion] Are You Afraid If They Blow It Up? Should They?

[the grinder]

On 5/8/2020 at 5:38 AM, Lazurus said:

The team also has Tryamkin for size.

 

It is draft picks this team still needs, top forwards that will be here and really good for the next 8 years.

 

I can see Horvat getting moved, it has to be getting to him that he has never been on a winning team in 6 years, well the one exception 5 years ago.

 

The covid shutdown may force the team to blow it up, all those LTIR's are healthy now and that puts the team 7+ mil over the cap, that is a lot of players to put through waivers or bury in the "imaginary" minors. And they will still be signed for next year too, most of them.

 

Benning has been very vague on how he plans to deal with the cap, he has been vague about how he is going to recoup the team's draft picks, it seems a lot of lip service with no guidance out of the fog, if anything is seems like creating more fog than clarity.

 

Boeser could help the team out of the cap problems quite a bit although a return of draft picks should be preferable both for the (cap) now and the future.

 ya  ok benning is in a fog right now and vague about the cap  , so are the other 30 teams and the nhl right now,  ,  what other gm has gone out and  told their plan going forward  during covid ?, not one , hell they don't even know how the playoffs are going to work or the draft ,  The NHL will have to figure  out  the cap  going forward first  , maybe there will be a buyout or 2  available  , till that is decided , your gonna have to deal with the lip service 

[Lazurus]

17 hours ago, the grinder said:

 ya  ok benning is in a fog right now and vague about the cap  , so are the other 30 teams and the nhl right now,  ,  what other gm has gone out and  told their plan going forward  during covid ?, not one , hell they don't even know how the playoffs are going to work or the draft ,  The NHL will have to figure  out  the cap  going forward first  , maybe there will be a buyout or 2  available  , till that is decided , your gonna have to deal with the lip service 

There are GM's talking about planning around the cap.

It is the cap that CAN be planned around.

But what could the Canucks do? Their cap is reduced by 7+ million due to bonuses and claw backs, that doesn't take a guess. The cap is not likely to go up by 4 mil, that may be a guess but a pretty good one, the cap could go down, again a guess but not likely either because it would put too many teams in trouble so as many media have speculated it will remain a flat cap.

The team's current salaries and cap hits should be known, so with two guesses, probably pretty good one's, add all the current contracts and one of the three cap choices with the certainty of the bonuses and claw backs and start estimating which players stay, which go and a plan to try to keep the team getting younger and save money.

 

All buyouts would have to be agreed to by NHLPA and any buyouts directly affect their escrow making it even larger for the sake of a half dozen or even 30 players, the buyout guys get 75% and the rest of the league gets 60% of their salaries due to escrow. Make sense? More possible is a salary roll back league wide.

 

No GM has tipped their hand but they are signing or resigning some players.

[the grinder]

2 hours ago, Lazurus said:

There are GM's talking about planning around the cap.

It is the cap that CAN be planned around.

But what could the Canucks do? Their cap is reduced by 7+ million due to bonuses and claw backs, that doesn't take a guess. The cap is not likely to go up by 4 mil, that may be a guess but a pretty good one, the cap could go down, again a guess but not likely either because it would put too many teams in trouble so as many media have speculated it will remain a flat cap.

The team's current salaries and cap hits should be known, so with two guesses, probably pretty good one's, add all the current contracts and one of the three cap choices with the certainty of the bonuses and claw backs and start estimating which players stay, which go and a plan to try to keep the team getting younger and save money.

 

All buyouts would have to be agreed to by NHLPA and any buyouts directly affect their escrow making it even larger for the sake of a half dozen or even 30 players, the buyout guys get 75% and the rest of the league gets 60% of their salaries due to escrow. Make sense? More possible is a salary roll back league wide.

 

No GM has tipped their hand but they are signing or resigning some players.

no team has resigned any big name roster players , the only players that were" signed" haven't got their contract approved by the nhl yet .  You cant expect jim benning to  come out and make a definite plan. First of all  the season hasn't even been completed yet  , Second  your guessing  , sure you can guess all you want  but with out  the actually facts of  the cap going forward , it is a guess . You really think a GM  wants to come out and just guess   in front of the media  ?   I am sure benning has a plan but till the season/ playoffs is completed  you can just keep on guessing  till the nhl comes out with a definite plan in place 

[Lazurus]

On 5/22/2020 at 6:46 PM, the grinder said:

no team has resigned any big name roster players , the only players that were" signed" haven't got their contract approved by the nhl yet .  You cant expect jim benning to  come out and make a definite plan. First of all  the season hasn't even been completed yet  , Second  your guessing  , sure you can guess all you want  but with out  the actually facts of  the cap going forward , it is a guess . You really think a GM  wants to come out and just guess   in front of the media  ?   I am sure benning has a plan but till the season/ playoffs is completed  you can just keep on guessing  till the nhl comes out with a definite plan in place 

All fans are guessing but a fact is revenues are not going up. Many hockey people, who are a lot closer than joe fan, are guessing a flat cap as a best case scenario so that could be a platform to start and some GM's have stated they are assuming or planning around a flat cap or that they don't think it will go up.

 

Benning has a huge problem to deal with being so far over the cap with all those clause contracts to older players and so many to sign this year, I believe he has 20 mil to sign 10 players according to CF. Letting players go for free is not good management.

The only plan Benning has shown is reactionary and essentially a "Plan, no plan" approach. The team certainly doen'ts look set up for cap issues or players in 3 years or even the expansion draft next year. No cap space to improve the team at expansion, certainly he can't be contemplating trading away more draft picks to keep the status quo.

While your reply might include "who knows in 3 years" or something like that, good GM's plan in those areas as well as the immediate future. Toffoli, like Kesler, has played very hard and like Kelser his shelf life could decline very fast besides all players that have played beside Miller and Pettersson has flourished so why him at his prices? He isn't going to take a cut to play here, he already does with the tax situation and cost of living and he will want to cash in on his last big contract. Another 6 year 6 mil deal with a clause for a player that will be 34 or 35? Ditto Markstrom, 6 years at 6 mil? Better to let him, Tanev and Markstrom go and build for the future, save money and protected spots for the expansion draft, play the younger kids and be better sooner than another 5+ years waiting. Just to point out, Ottawa, in much bigger issues all over, has followed what the owner dictated, internal cap with no long term older players signed and played 3 times as many young players, the type that Benning says, in all his brilliant genius estimation , can't play, but Ottawa was only 8 wins behind the Canucks and they have 13 draft picks and 42+ million cap space this year and 3 protected spots available to trade for players at the expansion draft. At least with Ottawa there is a definite plan, rebuild with young players down to when contracts will start being increased is planned out.

 

One thing for sure no fan can state that the Aquilini's are all about money, under Benning he has spent over 375 million in salaries, seen a decline in the team values of 300 million, had revenue from sales of team apparel decline and seen empty seats, they have shown immense patience for losing 250 games is so short a time.

 

If they bow out, an almost blow up could occur IMO, can't keep going the way of the last 5 years.

[BigTramFan]

3 hours ago, Lazurus said:

All fans are guessing but a fact is revenues are not going up. Many hockey people, who are a lot closer than joe fan, are guessing a flat cap as a best case scenario so that could be a platform to start and some GM's have stated they are assuming or planning around a flat cap or that they don't think it will go up.

 

Benning has a huge problem to deal with being so far over the cap with all those clause contracts to older players and so many to sign this year, I believe he has 20 mil to sign 10 players according to CF. Letting players go for free is not good management.

The only plan Benning has shown is reactionary and essentially a "Plan, no plan" approach. The team certainly doen'ts look set up for cap issues or players in 3 years or even the expansion draft next year. No cap space to improve the team at expansion, certainly he can't be contemplating trading away more draft picks to keep the status quo.

While your reply might include "who knows in 3 years" or something like that, good GM's plan in those areas as well as the immediate future. Toffoli, like Kesler, has played very hard and like Kelser his shelf life could decline very fast besides all players that have played beside Miller and Pettersson has flourished so why him at his prices? He isn't going to take a cut to play here, he already does with the tax situation and cost of living and he will want to cash in on his last big contract. Another 6 year 6 mil deal with a clause for a player that will be 34 or 35? Ditto Markstrom, 6 years at 6 mil? Better to let him, Tanev and Markstrom go and build for the future, save money and protected spots for the expansion draft, play the younger kids and be better sooner than another 5+ years waiting. Just to point out, Ottawa, in much bigger issues all over, has followed what the owner dictated, internal cap with no long term older players signed and played 3 times as many young players, the type that Benning says, in all his brilliant genius estimation , can't play, but Ottawa was only 8 wins behind the Canucks and they have 13 draft picks and 42+ million cap space this year and 3 protected spots available to trade for players at the expansion draft. At least with Ottawa there is a definite plan, rebuild with young players down to when contracts will start being increased is planned out.

 

One thing for sure no fan can state that the Aquilini's are all about money, under Benning he has spent over 375 million in salaries, seen a decline in the team values of 300 million, had revenue from sales of team apparel decline and seen empty seats, they have shown immense patience for losing 250 games is so short a time.

 

If they bow out, an almost blow up could occur IMO, can't keep going the way of the last 5 years.

"All fans are guessing but a fact is revenues are not going up. Many hockey people, who are a lot closer than joe fan, are guessing a flat cap as a best case scenario so that could be a platform to start and some GM's have stated they are assuming or planning around a flat cap or that they don't think it will go up."

 

- Agreed that revenue is not going up in the short term. I am sure Benning is quite aware of this.

 

"Benning has a huge problem to deal with being so far over the cap with all those clause contracts to older players and so many to sign this year, I believe he has 20 mil to sign 10 players according to CF. Letting players go for free is not good management."

 

- Yes Benning now has some major issues to deal with given that the cap is very unlikely to increase as initially expected it would. I don't think it's fair to expect him to have seen this coming. He may need to let players go for free, he may need to trade some picks to move certain players, if that is what it takes to be compliant. I believe they have 15 players on the roster for next season, so really only need 7 more with about $18m in cap space (assuming cap limit remains at $81.5m). BTW CF is assuming a cap limit of $84m, so need to be careful using it while they have it set at $84m!

 

"The only plan Benning has shown is reactionary and essentially a "Plan, no plan" approach. The team certainly doen'ts look set up for cap issues or players in 3 years or even the expansion draft next year. No cap space to improve the team at expansion, certainly he can't be contemplating trading away more draft picks to keep the status quo."

 

- I disagree that Benning has not had a plan all along. Not every plan works out though. Benning's cap structure leading into the next three seasons was looking very good and well planned. However, if the cap remains flat or declines then he has a problem. Again, I don't believe it is fair to expect Benning to predict that covid would occur. We should measure his ability as a GM on how he reacts to this unplanned global event and how he navigates the Canucks through what will be a tricky time. I believe he will be planning this right now, but he won't be telling us the plan - we will have to wait and see when it happens.

 

"Better to let him, Tanev and Markstrom go and build for the future, save money and protected spots for the expansion draft, play the younger kids and be better sooner than another 5+ years waiting."

 

- My opinion is that if we let Marky and Tanev walk (or without replacing with similar players) then we can kiss our chances of playoff hockey goodbye for a few years. I think playoff hockey is what Petey, Horvat and Hughes need in order to develop into great players. Their development will give us a shot at the cup in the next 8 years.

 

- A single contract compliance buyout would solve a lot of issues. Buying out Eriksson with no impact on cap would be a huge win. Resign the following:

Marky (6m), Tanev (5.5m), Virtanen (3.5m), Gaudette (2.5m), Tryamkin (2.5m), MacEwen (1m), Motte (1m). Bring Rafferty up as 7D. Roster for total cap hit of $80.2m including all recapture, buried and buy outs:

 

Miller Pettersson Boeser

Pearson Horvat Virtanen

Roussel Gaudette MacEwen

Ferland Beagle Motte

(Sutter)

 

Hughes Tanev

Edler Myers

Benn Tryamkin

(Rafferty)

 

Markstrom

(Demko)

 

 

 

"Just to point out, Ottawa, in much bigger issues all over, has followed what the owner dictated, internal cap with no long term older players signed and played 3 times as many young players, the type that Benning says, in all his brilliant genius estimation , can't play, but Ottawa was only 8 wins behind the Canucks and they have 13 draft picks and 42+ million cap space this year and 3 protected spots available to trade for players at the expansion draft. At least with Ottawa there is a definite plan, rebuild with young players down to when contracts will start being increased is planned out."

 

- Ottawa are in a completely different part of the team cycle than Canucks. It could be argued that Benning should have blown things up 5 years ago, but arguing that this should happen now when we have a clear core developing is not a good idea IMO. Ottawa was 11 wins behind the Canucks with less games played (Canucks win % = 51.2%, Sens = 35.2%). This difference is absolutely HUGE in professional sports. I don't think Ottawa is a good example for Canucks to follow at this stage. Again, maybe 5 years ago, but that is water under the bridge now.

Edited June 3, 2020 by BigTramFan

[the grinder]

3 hours ago, Lazurus said:

All fans are guessing but a fact is revenues are not going up. Many hockey people, who are a lot closer than joe fan, are guessing a flat cap as a best case scenario so that could be a platform to start and some GM's have stated they are assuming or planning around a flat cap or that they don't think it will go up.

 

Benning has a huge problem to deal with being so far over the cap with all those clause contracts to older players and so many to sign this year, I believe he has 20 mil to sign 10 players according to CF. Letting players go for free is not good management.

The only plan Benning has shown is reactionary and essentially a "Plan, no plan" approach. The team certainly doen'ts look set up for cap issues or players in 3 years or even the expansion draft next year. No cap space to improve the team at expansion, certainly he can't be contemplating trading away more draft picks to keep the status quo.

While your reply might include "who knows in 3 years" or something like that, good GM's plan in those areas as well as the immediate future. Toffoli, like Kesler, has played very hard and like Kelser his shelf life could decline very fast besides all players that have played beside Miller and Pettersson has flourished so why him at his prices? He isn't going to take a cut to play here, he already does with the tax situation and cost of living and he will want to cash in on his last big contract. Another 6 year 6 mil deal with a clause for a player that will be 34 or 35? Ditto Markstrom, 6 years at 6 mil? Better to let him, Tanev and Markstrom go and build for the future, save money and protected spots for the expansion draft, play the younger kids and be better sooner than another 5+ years waiting. Just to point out, Ottawa, in much bigger issues all over, has followed what the owner dictated, internal cap with no long term older players signed and played 3 times as many young players, the type that Benning says, in all his brilliant genius estimation , can't play, but Ottawa was only 8 wins behind the Canucks and they have 13 draft picks and 42+ million cap space this year and 3 protected spots available to trade for players at the expansion draft. At least with Ottawa there is a definite plan, rebuild with young players down to when contracts will start being increased is planned out.

 

One thing for sure no fan can state that the Aquilini's are all about money, under Benning he has spent over 375 million in salaries, seen a decline in the team values of 300 million, had revenue from sales of team apparel decline and seen empty seats, they have shown immense patience for losing 250 games is so short a time.

 

If they bow out, an almost blow up could occur IMO, can't keep going the way of the last 5 years.

you know what Benning plan is? get to the playoffs  aka  known as playing games that mean something and get the young core experienced in playoff hockey , ya he traded a first round pick for miller  , but you know miller brings  ? play off experience  and that bit of cockiness , yep traded a 2nd and madden for Toffoli  , guess what Toffoli brings  secondary scoring  and a cup , Beagle  faceoffs and a cup, Rousell   grit  and experience , myers size and experience . , Ferland  ,unfornately the concussion issues are sad but  playoff Ferland is what the Canucks  were looking for .;

 

with some of salaries yes it is a problem but some of those players will be gone ,in the next 2 years and  we can put  some high price players on the expansion list as well . So some free agents wont resign , every single team cant resign all their free agents   plain and simple  and playoff teams don't trade free agents 90% of the time  . Markstrom , yep he is 30 with no playoff experience  and  we haven't resigned him yet , so  maybe gets a 1 or 2 year contract because he doesn't want to go any where

 

Ottawa has a plan ? lol lets build a arena 45 mins out of town kinda of planning?  suck and lose for the last 3 years  ,  what happens if Ottawa doesn't get 1st over all?  would that not be a failed plan ?  you actually think Melnyk is going to spend all that cap space? how many draft picks did Edmonton have over last 8 years ?  hows buffalo doing with all those picks ,   

 

yep  as A Canuck fan we are lucky the Aquillini.s  own the Canucks ,  because it was their call to go for  the playoffs till the sedins  retired , FA is a hands on owner  you can bet  everything gets his stamp of approval  before it happens . so with that being said  you can blame FA for not tearing it down and rebuilding , because  when torts uttered those words ' the core is stale "  FA   sure didn't listen . No owner wants to be shown up  so no rebuild till the sedins retire 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Patel Bure]

On 3/9/2020 at 1:23 PM, Lazurus said:

Might as well have this thought expressed.

 

The team is a mess off the ice and a bit on the ice too.

 

Handcuffed with declining players with huge contracts with term and clauses.

Even though there is Horvat, Boeser, Hughes and Petersson that is not enough.

The cap situation is horrible even if the team had 20 million to spend they are in deep in another season.

The Seattle expansion is a great time if the team has cap space to trade for good players and if they have protection space.

After 6 years of whatever this group is struggling to make the playoffs, Markstrom is the primary reason they are even close but he was hiding a bunch of other problems by stealing so many games.

 

Other teams have rebuilt their prospect pools, have doubled or tripled their 1rst and 2nd round picks and been very entertaining and competitive in less than two years so it is not impossible.

 

Maybe they jettison Eriksson, Sutter, Beagle, Ferland (LTIR), Roussel and Baertschi. Maybe even Boeser. They will lose prospects hopefully "B" prospects to do this and draft picks, again hopefully only 3rds and up but they need to get a handle on the cap and open up roster spots for YOUNG players

 

Moving those players gives the Canucks over 33 million in cap space and one extra protection spot maybe two if Boeser moves.

For most of these moves it would cost the Canucks but a Boeser move could be a positive, he has very good marketability and reputation as a shooter, he would fit well with Eichel, in Minnesota or with New Jersey at least I think those teams would have the most to offer in return picks, prospects or both. Minnesota might want a center but that is not all they need, they are an team full of aging stars. To think that they would only trade for only one player is not reasonable, teams need many positons or to upgrade.

 

There will be some good UFA's available, younger or just fill ins for a season without clauses so they could be dealt at the TDL.

 

Sutter, Roussel, Baertschi and Beagle would not take much to move, maybe even just retention. Packaging up some of these players using retention and "B" prospects could get draft picks back.

 

The story here is rebuilding through the draft and doing it by increasing the number of 1rst round draft picks as each one equals a year of rebuilding.

 

This is not a total blowing up either but definitely shedding salary and setting up for two years from now as the target to not only try but succeed in getting to the playoffs by then Petersson and Hughes will have it figured out Horvat will be the new Miller and Miller and Pearson will be near the end of their prime but still effective, Gaudette will be the third line center, the team will know if Hoglander and what's left of the prospects can play in the NHL.

 

Playing lots of young guys hasn't killed Columbus, Colorado or the New York Rangers

 

IMO and I agree opinions are like A**h*s, everyone has one, but IF this happened and there was a solid statement like "we are going for the cup" or "in two years the team is not just a contender for a playoff spot" 

 

Okay, burn me, I know no topic that has anything to do with change is not rejected and ridiculed, but it is an opinion and now step up the "should not be thread", "you are a hater", "you are just trolling", "dimwit","you know nothing", "you are not a fan", the posters that actually believe everything is wonderful, perfect and planning the parade(s).

 

But think on it, IF they did, how bad could it be? Another 3 years?

I don’t agree with this post at all.  
 

Personally speaking, I don’t think we will have much of a cap issue, if any, going forward:

 

1) Eriksson can either be packaged with Demko, or might even be convinced to retire this Summer or next once he gets paid his bonuses (after this summer, he will have earned 31 or his 36 million).  
 

2) Baertschi can be moved with 50% retention

3) Sutter can be moved with 50% retention.

4) Stecher can be moved for a pick or can be unqualified like Hutton was. Rafferty replaces Stecher

5) Move Boeser (if the Canucks sign Toffoli and Podkolzin also becomes good enough)

6) Walk from Tanev and replace Tanev with Tryamkin (although I’d be cautious of this approach).

 

For the year after that, the Canucks would have the option to.....

 

1) Trade Beagle with 50% retention

2) Move Roussel at 50% retention

3) Not sign Pearson (Maybe Hoglander becomes good enough to replace Pearson).

4) Not sign Edler (although I would highly advise against considering that we do not have an Edler replacement within our system).

 

Long story short - I think the Canucks will have a lot of options as it pertains to their so-called cap problems.   Please don’t listen to the depressed and biased morons over at HF Canucks that would rather see Jim Benning fail over the Canucks winning hockey games.