Sign in to follow this  
canuktravella

youth versus vets direction benning should go

Recommended Posts

So next yr  benning should cut bait with some of the vets in my eyes if nhl gives us two free cobtract buy outs.

 

eriksson bought out or waived to minors 

sutter bought out  or waived

roussel retain half cap trade for a 3rd rounder

benn for a third rounder 

tanev rights traded for a 3rd and 4th

leivo rights traded for a 4th

stecher rights for a third 

 

this frees 22.5 mill if theres buyouts or 14 if no buyouts 

markstrom sign one yr 6 mill  trade or resign after seattle expansion

give tryamkin 3 yr deal 3.5 mill  per show me deal could be a steal when he dominates 

virtanen 3 yr 3.5 mill per 

gaudette 4 yr 2.75 mill per

toffoli 4 yrs 5.5 

motte 2 yr 1.5 

rathbone 3 yr elc 900k

mcewen 2 yr 1.4 per  should leave us with plenty of cap to resign petersson hughes the following yr 

 

line up 20-21 

miller petersson brock

pearson horvat toffoli

mcewen gaudette virtanen 

motte beagle lind 

 

edler myers 

hughes tryamkin

juolevi rafferty 

rathbone brisebois 

 

line up 21-22 lose myers 2 seattle trade pearson and marky for premium picks at deadline 21

 

miller petey boeser

podzolkin horvat toffoli

hoglander gaudette virtanen

motte   young center   lind

 

edler tryamkin 

hughes rathbone

juolevi rafferty

brisebois

 

demko

depietro 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not sure about your math, but I'm sure the plan is to move on from at least two regulars from this season. A compliance buyout changes everything.

 

I don't see anyone trading for rights tho, as Tanev is a UFA and Stecher isn't viewed as a top 4. 

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

benning has said they have decisions to make this off season and hope to get get some draft picks back. i’ve always been a believer that you young guys have to push the older guys out. i can see eriksson, baertschi and stecher being moved. otherwise, lind, macewen. juolevi and rafferty have to show they can be nhl regulars. 

  • Hydration 1
  • Vintage 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It may sound simple but I think this is a no-brainer. I am definitely on the side of youth over veteran players. Teams that wait too long usually end up in the bottom half of league standings. Does this approach have risks involved, absolutely, however the potential upside is worth it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck signing Markstrom to a one year deal.  Why would he do that?  A 3rd round pick for Benn who is a 7-8 Dman?  Leivo is a UFA and hasn't played in months, how are we going to flip his rights for a 4th?  And why would anyone give us a 3rd AND and 4th just to talk to Tanev a few weeks before free agency?

 

If there are 2 compliance buyouts then I hope we buy out Eriksson and Roussel.  We still need vets like Sutter to help in the transition.  With the compliance buyouts we'd have more than enough money to re-sign Markstrom and Toffoli.  Tanev most likely walks regardless as I don't think Benning is going to sign him to a long term deal.

 

I'm sure we will see a few new faces next year.  Tryamkin and Rafferty are sure bets I think.  Kole Lind could be another.  Rathbone could also be in the mix, but I see him playing a year in Utica.

  • Hydration 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Good luck signing Markstrom to a one year deal.  Why would he do that?  A 3rd round pick for Benn who is a 7-8 Dman?  Leivo is a UFA and hasn't played in months, how are we going to flip his rights for a 4th?  And why would anyone give us a 3rd AND and 4th just to talk to Tanev a few weeks before free agency?

 

If there are 2 compliance buyouts then I hope we buy out Eriksson and Roussel.  We still need vets like Sutter to help in the transition.  With the compliance buyouts we'd have more than enough money to re-sign Markstrom and Toffoli.  Tanev most likely walks regardless as I don't think Benning is going to sign him to a long term deal.

 

I'm sure we will see a few new faces next year.  Tryamkin and Rafferty are sure bets I think.  Kole Lind could be another.  Rathbone could also be in the mix, but I see him playing a year in Utica.

I'm interested to see what happens with Tanev. Losing him to UFA isn't ideal and I definitely see a place for him, especially if we actually want to be competitive/playoff team next season. D is our biggest weakness, losing our best shutdown D for nothing won't help that at all. I really don't see any of our prospects or even anyone on the roster capable of stepping in for Tanev. Myers sure as hell can't.

 

I love Stecher, I actually believe he's better than Myers in his own zone, but he's as good as gone.

Benn could be moved for a 5th or waived and I'm pretty sure Fanny is UFA.

Leaves room for Tree, Rafferty and Joulevi or Breeze.

Breeze could be moved, he's young and showing promise as a Tanev type dman, but he's not ready to fill that role in the NHL. Bottom pairing/#7.

 

I'm unsure of Chatfield and Sautner's contract status, but they'll be vying for NHL jobs too, probably not in Van though.

 

Rathbone could surprise, but I doubt we'll see Lind in anything more that a few games if he's called up.

 

Hopefully Loui can be a compliance by out and Baer can be taken off the books somehow. I thought both Graovac and Bailey looked pretty good this year which makes Rooster good trade bait, and we know Big Mac is a gamer and will most likely be on the roster moving forward.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Benning has a plan and he's sticking with it.  A team needs a good mix of players to provide leadership and experience and they need youthful enthusiasm.  Benning has that now so he's not just cutting bait with vets unless they are pushed out by younger players.

 

We can go down the depth chart and there are players who you can move and players you can't.  2 groups.  Next, you pick the players from the players who you can move the ones that you want to keep and prioritize the list.  Then you try and fit under the cap.

 

The wild card is the possibility of a compliance buy out.  The league has used this before to help teams fit under the cap so there's a possibility that they go there again.  So the list of players who you can't move right now might change.  But before the season is declared over, we have no idea what the cap will be.  So there are unknowns and they need to plan ahead to be able to react to the various scenarios.  

 

I'm not going to try and do Benning's job here but to give you the idea....

The cap has to be followed so players who the move along from are clearly not just the bottom of the priority list.

There are players off the list who could take spots on the list like Rafferty or Tryamkin etc

 

Can't move list:

Eriksson (NMC)

Edler (NMC)

Myers (NMC)

Ferland (NMC)

Sutter (who wants him?  I think Benning has been trying.....maybe he should be in the other list)

 

Can move list:

  1. Hughes
  2. Pettersson
  3. Markstrom
  4. Horvat
  5. Miller
  6. Toffoli
  7. Boeser
  8. Tanev
  9. Beagle
  10. Pearson
  11. Demko
  12. Gaudette
  13. Stecher
  14. Virtanen
  15. Motte
  16. Fantenberg
  17. Benn
  18. MacEwen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Good luck signing Markstrom to a one year deal.  Why would he do that?  A 3rd round pick for Benn who is a 7-8 Dman?  Leivo is a UFA and hasn't played in months, how are we going to flip his rights for a 4th?  And why would anyone give us a 3rd AND and 4th just to talk to Tanev a few weeks before free agency?

If Marky really wants to stay a Canuck, then, I am sure he sees the way to get around loosing Demko. A hand shake agreement and Marky gets to play on a contender. But I see your point that it is only as good as The general manager that is in control. There is risk, for sure.

 

I agree in the rest, except Tanev, who I think there would be lots of teams that want an exclusive chance at Tanev....the trade gives them that...….not much value in a 3 and a 4th

I don't see the obstacle, like you do.

3 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

If there are 2 compliance buyouts then I hope we buy out Eriksson and Roussel.  We still need vets like Sutter to help in the transition.  With the compliance buyouts we'd have more than enough money to re-sign Markstrom and Toffoli.  Tanev most likely walks regardless as I don't think Benning is going to sign him to a long term deal.

But letting Tanev walk or trading him for 3 and a 4th, confuses me, as your point is the youngsters need veteran leadership and Sutter has exactly 1 complete year in the last 5, not much difference than Tanev, really.......................and Tanev is a sight more than Sutter.

 

3 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 

I'm sure we will see a few new faces next year.  Tryamkin and Rafferty are sure bets I think.  Kole Lind could be another.  Rathbone could also be in the mix, but I see him playing a year in Utica.

Just to throw a curve ball, maybe Benning has something bigger in mind...…….Can MacEwen play 3rd line center?

 

:bigblush:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, -AJ- said:

I think it's a false dichotomy. You need both to be successful.

we have vets in edler beagle and horvat miller virtanen and toffoli pearson motte   some of youth entering prime like bo we dont beed old vets that cant keep up like eriksson sutter 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

If Marky really wants to stay a Canuck, then, I am sure he sees the way to get around loosing Demko. A hand shake agreement and Marky gets to play on a contender. But I see your point that it is only as good as The general manager that is in control. There is risk, for sure.

 

I agree in the rest, except Tanev, who I think there would be lots of teams that want an exclusive chance at Tanev....the trade gives them that...….not much value in a 3 and a 4th

I don't see the obstacle, like you do.

But letting Tanev walk or trading him for 3 and a 4th, confuses me, as your point is the youngsters need veteran leadership and Sutter has exactly 1 complete year in the last 5, not much difference than Tanev, really.......................and Tanev is a sight more than Sutter.

 

Just to throw a curve ball, maybe Benning has something bigger in mind...…….Can MacEwen play 3rd line center?

 

:bigblush:

we got tryamkin and gaudette and other gems in later rounds  theres value in way we draft

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, canuktravella said:

we have vets in edler beagle and horvat miller virtanen and toffoli pearson motte   some of youth entering prime like bo we dont beed old vets that cant keep up like eriksson sutter 

I wouldn't call Virtanen or Horvat vets.

 

Still, this post implies you do agree in that a good mix is helpful. Your thread title implies that you want to go hard one way or the other, so it misled me evidently.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, canuktravella said:

we got tryamkin and gaudette and other gems in later rounds  theres value in way we draft

yes, I think so too...….I was looking from the other side, meaning it isn't that much to pay to have exclusive bargaining rights with a team....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, -AJ- said:

I wouldn't call Virtanen or Horvat vets.

 

Still, this post implies you do agree in that a good mix is helpful. Your thread title implies that you want to go hard one way or the other, so it misled me evidently.

 300 and 450 games they arent rookies bud 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, canuktravella said:

 300 and 450 games they arent rookies bud 

Sure, they're not rookies, but "vets"? Just because someone has played a few years, doesn't mean they're "veterans", at least not by my definition of the word. I'd say a combination of age and experience would make a veteran. I wouldn't call anyone under the age of 26 a veteran. Bo turns 25 in about a week.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, -AJ- said:

Sure, they're not rookies, but "vets"? Just because someone has played a few years, doesn't mean they're "veterans", at least not by my definition of the word. I'd say a combination of age and experience would make a veteran. I wouldn't call anyone under the age of 26 a veteran. Bo turns 25 in about a week.

and hes the captain and jake drives the play if u take out his 35 points we have like 10 more losses and are fighting for a top give pick again they  are out vetting sutter and eriksson by a million fold

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, canuktravella said:

and hes the captain and jake drives the play if u take out his 35 points we have like 10 more losses and are fighting for a top give pick again they  are out vetting sutter and eriksson by a million fold

Being a Captain doesn't necessarily make one a veteran in my view. Was Yzerman a veteran when he was named Captain at 21? What about Landeskog when he was given the 'C' by the Avalanche at the wise old age of 19?

 

I'm not denying that Jake is a great player, but since when does good play make one a veteran? You're talking about two entirely different things with Virtanen. He is a good player, but I wouldn't say he's a veteran.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, -AJ- said:

I wouldn't call Virtanen or Horvat vets.

 

Still, this post implies you do agree in that a good mix is helpful. Your thread title implies that you want to go hard one way or the other, so it misled me evidently.

Horvat has played more NHL minutes in his career than Beagle and Miller.

 

Virtanen is will be in his draft+7 next season - he is nearing 300 NHL games.  Some GMs/scouts say at around 300 NHL games you know what a player is about.  Weisbrod uses 300 games as threshold for a successful NHL career - in last year's pre-draft video he was saying that in any draft there are less than 30 players who reach 300 NHL games.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mll said:

Horvat has played more NHL minutes in his career than Beagle and Miller.

 

Virtanen is will be in his draft+7 next season - he is nearing 300 NHL games.  Some GMs/scouts say at around 300 NHL games you know what a player is about.  Weisbrod uses 300 games as threshold for a successful NHL career - in last year's pre-draft video he was saying that in any draft there are less than 30 players who reach 300 NHL games.  

 

Like I said, age is a factor for me too. Miller isn't much older so I'd hesitate to call him a veteran as well, but at 27, he's definitely starting to enter that territory. At 34, Beagle's been around a while and of course his minutes will be a bit lower given his usual 3rd/4th line usage. I wouldn't necessarily call Horvat fresh-faced young gun, but I'd hesitate to classify him as a veteran at just 24 (almost 25). He's sort of in-between for me.

 

Either way, it's just semantics at the end of the day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.