Sign in to follow this  
Provost

[Discussion] Getting out of Cap Mess

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, captaincowbasher said:

As well, Leivo is not a top 6 forward on any good team, so why would we want him there. Ferland is done and he's only an asset as a LTIR cap space generator.

Ferland is skating and Benning hopes he can be an option for the play-offs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Provost said:

I don't think there are many folks still clinging on to the belief that we aren't in a huge cap mess that is going to cost us good players this year and probably next.  We are almost certainly facing being worse next season rather than better.  Bettman has also now repeatedly denied that compliance buyouts are going to be a thing. Owners don't want to spend more real money and it makes escrow worse for players.

There are moves to get out of it and actually improve, but I don't know that management has the boldness or creativity to do them.  Failing to do them or something similar means we are definitely a much worse team next year, especially on defence.

1.  Sign Toffoli and trade Boeser for a young top 4 D
         This says nothing about each of their relative abilities as players or potential.  It is simply about what we can afford and what assets we can get back.  If we don't sign Toffoli we just lose him for nothing.  Toffoli can do what Boeser does in our lineup at a similar rate so it is pretty much a wash.  With the current economics you can certainly get Toffoli for less than Boeser's cap hit, and aren't faced with a big raise that Boeser will get in two more years at a time that we will have spent all our money on our two superstars.  Boeser can get you a badly needed young top 4 RD in return... Dumba/Severson/Ristolainen or something similar (small pieces extra packaged going on way or another to even things up).

2.  Trade Virtanen and Demko for picks and cap dumps.
        Assuming it is a given that we sign Markstrom for 4 years or more, Demko becomes a luxury.  It is great to have luxuries, but we just can't afford it right now.  Virtanen is going to be expensive for what he brings, and there is quite a bit of evidence that he may have hit a high water mark this year.  There is enough shine on a young 1st round power forward who can score 20 goals.  You may be able to get rid of Baertschi and Sutter plus get some decent picks in return for moving these guys out.  It sounds crazy, but the opportunity cost of keeping Virtanen (what we lose in order to re-sign him) is huge at this point and doesn't make us better.  Those dollars can simply be better spent on another player.

3.   Demote Eriksson and tell him he isn't coming to camp.
        Put pressure on him to retire or mutually terminate his contract so he can go play in Dallas or somewhere at $1.5 million to finish off his career rather than riding a bus for two years.


So then we have filled a top 4 D hole and shaved over $7.5 million off the cap.  We have also opened up a 2nd line RW slot for Podkolzin who will be able to join us as soon as early next season (assuming our season doesn't start until Dec/Jan and the KHL still ends in Feb/March).

We sign Leivo, a cheaper veteran goalie backup, and if Ferland isn't an option, just sign or trade for a bottom 6 veteran winger on a 1yr cheap contract for some depth.  There will be lots of guys who aren't going to get contract offers because there will be so little money in the system.  Sign Tanev if there happens to be a cheaper deal for him, but assume that isn't the case.

Miller-Petterson-Toffoli
Pearson-Horvat-Leivo
Roussel-Gaudette-MacEwan
Ferland-Beagle-Motte

Hughes-XXX (Severson/Dumba/etc)
Edler-Myers
Juolevi/Benn-Tryamkin/Rafferty
Stecher

Markstrom
XXX

That is a $73-75 million dollar roster even with Eriksson buried that leaves room for pushed ELC overages as well as absorbing next year's ELC bonuses with lots of wiggle room.  It even allows the possibility of taking on a contract from a cap strapped team in either a Miller type deal or for futures.  20-40 games into next season we can also bring in Podkolzin to push guys on the right side down the roster.  If Eriksson bails on his contract we would be sitting VERY pretty in the short term and allowing us to sign both our superstars to max term contracts rather than bridge deals.

An alternative would be to not try to find a D this year and keep both Boeser and Toffoli.  Let our defence be horrible and test out to see who can actually play (Juolevi, Rafferty, Tryamkin, Rathbone, etc) so we know what we have.  Next offseason is a time to snipe D as teams will have solid #4 guys they can't protect in expansion and can be had for relatively cheap... you could get someone as good as Haydn Fleury who is probably exposed, or one of Boston's young D who can't be protected, probably 10 teams have guys they would hate to lose for free that would be legit top 4 guys as upgrades for us.  The downside of that is that we would almost certainly not be very good next season if that was the case (please in that scenario Tanev sign a bargain 1 year deal!)



 

The problem at the moment is, we have no idea at all what the cap situation will be like for the whole league. Teams are not going to be willing to pickup cap dumps etc, when all teams are dealing with the same situation.

 

I agree that we need to resolve the Eriksson situation, and I really do think that he should be sent to Utica unless he can show that he can out perform all other players who are pushing to make the team. I think that demoting him, will lead to terminating his contract as I don't believe that he will report to Utica.

 

I'm not surprised that we haven't seen any movement on resigning guys as Benning is facing an unprecedented situation. All GM's have no idea how much cap space they will have for the next season, and how reduced revenue in the league will be handled. Will they increase escrow (40% or more) and leave the cap the same, or will players agree to short term write down of contracts and a lower overall cap?

 

There's always the chance as well, that the NHL completes this season and then takes a whole year off as it may be that long before fans are allowed to return to the arenas and it may be more cost effective for everyone to just cancel the 20/21 season.

 

Until those questions are answered, its not just us that's speculating, its all the GM's as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
49 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said:

The problem at the moment is, we have no idea at all what the cap situation will be like for the whole league. Teams are not going to be willing to pickup cap dumps etc, when all teams are dealing with the same situation.

 

I agree that we need to resolve the Eriksson situation, and I really do think that he should be sent to Utica unless he can show that he can out perform all other players who are pushing to make the team. I think that demoting him, will lead to terminating his contract as I don't believe that he will report to Utica.

 

I'm not surprised that we haven't seen any movement on resigning guys as Benning is facing an unprecedented situation. All GM's have no idea how much cap space they will have for the next season, and how reduced revenue in the league will be handled. Will they increase escrow (40% or more) and leave the cap the same, or will players agree to short term write down of contracts and a lower overall cap?

 

There's always the chance as well, that the NHL completes this season and then takes a whole year off as it may be that long before fans are allowed to return to the arenas and it may be more cost effective for everyone to just cancel the 20/21 season.

 

Until those questions are answered, its not just us that's speculating, its all the GM's as well.

 

After Dreger and others here is Friedman talking of close to flat cap and capped escrow to recoup the losses over time.  The league isn't looking to dramatically drop the cap and/or increase escrow.

 

https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/31-thoughts-nhl-nhlpa-hard-work-cba-extension/

However, there are plenty of rumours that the NHL and NHLPA are working hard on a CBA extension, with multiple sources indicating there is a legit attempt to get something done by the time play resumes.

The league wants long-term stability. The players want a cap on escrow, and word is that it is being considered. If the season does not resume, their hit would be 35 per cent. Even if there are games, they are looking at 27 or 28 per cent. I heard rumblings of a 20 per cent escrow cap over the next few seasons — others said they heard slightly less.

A flat salary cap of $81.5 million for a few seasons is possible, too.

 

Edited by mll

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, captaincowbasher said:

You just set the team back 5 years, no thanks. Boeser only gets traded if we get a legit top line defender back; ala Seth Jones for Ryan Johansen deal, otherwise no way do you give Boeser up, as he;s far too valuable as our number one RW. Yes 100% to resigning Tofolli- 4 years 5.5 million per year. Our second line becomes legit, and when you add either Podkolzin or Hoglander to the team we'll have two very strong forward lines that will pull vault the Canucks into legit contender status for years to come. 

I agree that we need to move Demko, and We also need to move Sutter and Stecher. Is there a package where we might be able to recover some picks? I think the Islanders would love all three players so maybe there's a possible trading partner. Re-signing Tanev and Markstrom are priorities as well. Virtanen should not be moved, and I think time will bear out how important this young man will be to this team, with game changing goals, pace-making speed, physical presence, and heavy hockey which is required to win in the playoffs. He can play on any line and make a difference at any time. He'll get better with time and more exposure to JT Miller. I think the push your looking for on the back end will come from our prospects like Rafferty, OJ, WOO, and Rathbone. I think eventually one of those guys will be one of our top 2 defenders, and another one of them will be in our top 4. Way cheaper then bringing in a 6-7 million dollar Dumba.

Well since I don't have a magic wand to sign all those players and stay under a flat cap, I have to live in some semblance of reality.  It also gives us a better team on paper next season and not "set the team back 5 years" which is just outlandish rhetoric.

Your idea of just re-signing Markstrom, Toffoli, Virtanen, and Tanev is simply stuff of pure fantasy.  Not only won't it work this coming season due to... math.  It would destroy us next season when we have to pay Hughes and Petterson, and somehow also paying all the ELC bonus overages from next season which would be pushed into the following year.

My plan keeps us as good as last year or even better.  Not doing those kinds of moves means we lose Toffoli and Tanev just to start and squeeze under the cap.  Then we have to exit another useful player the following season to pay for around $3.7 million in ELC overages from next season that can't fit under the cap and are pushed.

I am actually stunned when folks can't consider the opportunity cost of keeping players and opportunities created when moving them.  It is shallow, simplistic thinking to say "oh, XX player is pretty good or might become pretty good, so we must keep him."  There are consequences to keeping  players, and it is losing other players and losing the ability to go out and fill holes in a lineup.

Share this post


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

 

The bonus overage for this season is missing. The Canucks only have 30'474.- in end of season cap space per CapFriendly.  Performance bonuses still have to be accounted for and anything in excess of these 30K will carry over to next season.  Pettersson/Hughes have 1.7M combined and others like Gaudette might have some games played bonuses. Both will still be bonus eligible next season and if the Canucks want to avoid another carry over, they will need to keep some space below the cap.

 

Owners/league are against compliance buyouts per Shannon, Friedman and MacIntyre.  They will already be operating at a loss and adding compliance buyouts just increases their losses further.

 

The league/owners will be operating at a loss next season and probably for several years beyond.  They will likely keep the cap somewhat flat and have a capped escrow - it's not realistic to drop the cap dramatically.  The cap will be artificial and won't reflect revenue.  They are going to have to make up their losses over time.  They are talking in billions.  Brian Burke was saying last week that the financial situation is a catastrophe and believes that media/the legue is downplaying the situation.

 

Some owners don't even want the league to resume without fans in the stands.  Several teams have cut back staff salary, furloughed employees and even fired them.

 

Some teams might elect to operate on an internal cap to limit their losses until better times.  It limits the ability to make trades especially for perceived overpaid bottom of the lineup players.  There might also be some unexpected names on the trade market as teams try and create cap space.

 

Would think that teams with cap space are more likely going to try and find their own JT Miller rather than add a Roussel, who has struggled this season or Benn who finished D7 or even Suter who has again missed time due to injury.

 

Teams also know that the Canucks wish to retain Markstrom, Toffoli and Tanev and have limited cap space and they could exploit the situation.  Some might even prefer that these guys hit UFA.

 

Yep, I don't think teams are going to be taking on our bad value contracts like most seem to think... unless it gets them a great asset in return.  There will be great UFA deals this offseason as well as a crap ton of Miller type cap constraint opportunities.  Who is going to take on our guys that are underperforming their contracts?

The point about the bonus overages is important and folks just keep ignoring.  Not only the pushed overages from this season, but saving room for the bonuses for next season so they don't push into 21-22 season.  That is around $3.7 million next season probably, maybe more if a guy like Juolevi or another ELC is in there.

It is pretty clear at this point that the cap will either be flat and escrow huge; or all contracts rolled back and the cap rolled back in relation to that (or a combination or both).  Mathematically either works out the same for our cap constraints.  Neither helps us make space.  The dream of a compliance buyout has long faded.

It seems like my moves look drastic, but they are ones that could actually be done pretty realistically and save a lot of pain in the next few years.  Heck, just giving us space to sign Petterson and Hughes to long term contracts rather than bridge deals makes it worthwhile.

Our current state alternatives are keeping one of Markstrom, Tanev, and Toffoli
Losing Stecher, Motte, and Leivo
Not signing any other players including a guy like Tryamkin.
Those moves keep us just right at the cap, and then we sign one of both of Petterson and Hughes to short term bridge deals next offseason to accommodate the lost cap space from their pushed ELC bonuses from next season.

Our forward corps depth becomes less and half our defence consists  of completely untested AHL players.  
Hughes-Myers
Edler-Rafferty
Juolevi-Benn
Brisebois

  • Vintage 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, mll said:

 

After Dreger and others here is Friedman talking of close to flat cap and capped escrow to recoup the losses over time.  The league isn't looking to dramatically drop the cap and/or increase escrow.

 

https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/31-thoughts-nhl-nhlpa-hard-work-cba-extension/

However, there are plenty of rumours that the NHL and NHLPA are working hard on a CBA extension, with multiple sources indicating there is a legit attempt to get something done by the time play resumes.

The league wants long-term stability. The players want a cap on escrow, and word is that it is being considered. If the season does not resume, their hit would be 35 per cent. Even if there are games, they are looking at 27 or 28 per cent. I heard rumblings of a 20 per cent escrow cap over the next few seasons — others said they heard slightly less.

A flat salary cap of $81.5 million for a few seasons is possible, too.

 

I really hope this is possible, but I also really have a hard time believing, after 3 lock downs, that the league and owners would be willing to just give the players more than 50% revenue for a undefined period of time, especially when it could easily amount to 80% + on the revenue side, based on constrained league finances.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/14/2020 at 3:28 PM, Provost said:


2.  Trade Virtanen and Demko for picks and cap dumps.
        Assuming it is a given that we sign Markstrom for 4 years or more, Demko becomes a luxury.  It is great to have luxuries, but we just can't afford it right now.  Virtanen is going to be expensive for what he brings, and there is quite a bit of evidence that he may have hit a high water mark this year.  There is enough shine on a young 1st round power forward who can score 20 goals.  You may be able to get rid of Baertschi and Sutter plus get some decent picks in return for moving these guys out.  It sounds crazy, but the opportunity cost of keeping Virtanen (what we lose in order to re-sign him) is huge at this point and doesn't make us better.  Those dollars can simply be better spent on another player.
 

Can you expand on this evidence?

I thought he had an excellent season - not saying it was a 'breakout' season, but he definitely showed marked improvement and should develop even more next season imo. 

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Fanuck said:

Can you expand on this evidence?

I thought he had an excellent season - not saying it was a 'breakout' season, but he definitely showed marked improvement and should develop even more next season imo. 

He didn’t have an excellent season.  
 

He had a terrible start, and a terrible end.  He had an excellent 6 week stretch in the middle, otherwise he was the same player he had always been.  There is no linear improvement, just a blip.

 

There is eventually a point where you have to believe the player is who he has shown you he is over several years.  

  • Confused 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Provost said:

He didn’t have an excellent season.  
 

He had a terrible start, and a terrible end.  He had an excellent 6 week stretch in the middle, otherwise he was the same player he had always been.  There is no linear improvement, just a blip.

 

There is eventually a point where you have to believe the player is who he has shown you he is over several years.  

Lack of consistency is a hallmark of young players - especially power forwards (and let's not kid anyone - JV was drafted as a PF and those who were objective knew his development wouldn't match the curve of his peer group).   This is where veteran mentorship and quality coaching come into play.  You take the stretches where he was excellent and, as I mentioned apply the coaching/mentorship, pro-rate that across a full season and that is where a guy like JV becomes a true asset.  Maybe you're right and he continues to be inconsistent - I think at 23yo he's too young to give up on yet.  I realize there's other assets who are UFA and this puts pressure on the franchise, but if JV could continue to improve next year by the same amount as he did this year he'd be a 20-25 goal, 40-50pt player who could be a physical presence - those players are few and far between.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our cap mess starts the following season ... or let’s just say it gets worse.   Trading JV and Demko (relatively cheap players) makes zero sense.   JV might get one million more in a show me deal that’s about it.   Demko - nobody is going to give us anything for him before the ED, can’t think of one team that would use their protection slot on him unless a full on tank mode is in play - so maybe, maybe Detroit.  OTT rebuild is coming along fast - maybe them but just can’t see it.  
 

Nobodies going to trade for Sutter without it costing us even with “retention”.   Players teams would be interested in our the same ones we want to keep!    Pearson is probably the odd man out.  We have a glut of wingers, middle bottom six ones.   His stock is high, his cap is very reasonable and we could get at least a 2nd for him.   Leivo will want a raise.  Don’t sign him and trading Pearson is enough cap to sign JV and Markstrom.   
 

All this talk on signing TT is mute if he’s not interested.   Say he is then we will have to do a cap dump...but what if Ferland comes back, plays a few games and his bell is rung again?  Can pretty much guarantee his cap will be in play and he can be on Robidas island.   We could spin this all day...TT can play on our bench if Ferland and Leivo are out.   Plus maybe one minor thing.   With no buyouts and a flat cap management could also appeal to the league to forgive the re-capture penalty.   Since we are already in fantasy land why not just take that off too ha ha.  
 

Yes I see that the teams going to be in some cap trouble once EPs and QHs are up.   But we aren’t in a “mess”.   We will lose a few players next year that’s for sure.  But we more then have the depth for it, and a prospect pool that’s ready to add 1-3 players a year for the foreseeable future.   For the record I don’t want to trade Pearson.   But I’d rather see him go then BB.   We  shouldn’t be trading core players.   As far as RHD goes .... well draft one.  Re-sign Tanev for one year (its in the works now and he’s interested for sure).  And when the timing is right use some of the extra money to make a trade or pick up another second pairing guy in free agency.  
 

Personally, compared to other teams, I think we will be in a great cap position going forward.   As long as no other dumb UFA signings are made.   Our top players make 5.25-6.   Two more years from now as of right now more then half the team is without a contract.   A lot of flexibility. 
 

Guys like Sutter, Beagle, Roussel, Ferland were brought in to insulate...hard to do from the infirmary ha ha.   The first three will be done soon enough.   Ferland has all the ear markings to be the “new” Sutter.   That sucks.   TT is a near shiny new toy - scores at a PGP (something Pearson almost did too when he first came) but he’s not a first line player.   If he couldn’t stick with Kopitar what makes everyone think he’s going to here?   4.75 is about his value as a UFA.   Have heard as high as 7 on the open market - ha ha laugh barf.   Neal got 5.75 and scored a lot more then TT has ever done.   And became and anchor...somewhat recovered from that but on McDavids wing Maroon scored 27 goals right?   
 

Maybe we sign him and things will work out.   It’s far more likely and best case we get his career normal production or 40-45 points.    Blinders are on hard right there.  
 

Personally I think the best thing to do is stand pat with who we have and let these contracts shed organically...don’t buyout anyone it doesn’t help our future we still have to pay it - just for twice as long.   Why buy-out Bear?  One million of his cap hit already doesn’t count .... want to save money put two or three of our extra middle sixers  in the AHL...starting with LE, and then maybe Sutter if AG can take his spot ...

 

Pearson and Leivo .... and LE in the minors.  That’s over 6 million right there. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
18 hours ago, Provost said:

He didn’t have an excellent season.  
 

He had a terrible start, and a terrible end.  He had an excellent 6 week stretch in the middle, otherwise he was the same player he had always been.  There is no linear improvement, just a blip.

 

There is eventually a point where you have to believe the player is who he has shown you he is over several years.  

What?  He played all over our lineup and was contributing most nights - often the best player on whatever line he was on.  Not sure who you were watching ... on pace for over 20 goals and 45ish points is excellent production for a guy who doesn’t pad his stats on the PP.   And you want to trade BB too and sign TT - wonder how they compared 5 x 5 and points per minute not including the PP?  He’s one was one of our best 5 x 5 players and at his cap hit a complete steal.   Give the guy another short bridge ... will still be cheap.    20 goal scorers have value...yeah he did great when he got better line mates go figure.  
 

For me at least, this wasn’t marginal improvement- and IF that’s his peak he’s doing exactly what Hansen did for 10 or so years for us.  Those guys are valuable - and I doubt we’ve seen the best from him yet.   Even if we have he’s still helped the team tremendously.   Compare his value to anyone else in the league - McDavid 12.5....did he score 300ish points?  
 

Edit:  BTW Hansens best season he scored 22 goals and 38 points.   In 81 games.   Next best goal totals 16...and he only broke 30 points a few times ... good grief.  As far as his “terrible start and terrible finish goes”. ... well he scored 9 points his first 20 games...14 his next 20...9 his next 20 and 4 his last 9 games...seems pretty consistent to me.  Also the most I could find was 5 games without a point - and pretty sure that was the stretch TG had him on the fourth line.   If he finished the final 13 games it’s pretty reasonable to suggest he’d easily of and a 20/20 season, which BTW is about an average TT season.

 

Id wager if he played on the first line, and got first unit PP time, played 18-20 minutes a game that with the way he played this year 30/30 would’ve been a certainty. 

Edited by IBatch
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/15/2020 at 4:42 PM, Provost said:

Yep, I don't think teams are going to be taking on our bad value contracts like most seem to think... unless it gets them a great asset in return.  There will be great UFA deals this offseason as well as a crap ton of Miller type cap constraint opportunities.  Who is going to take on our guys that are underperforming their contracts?

The point about the bonus overages is important and folks just keep ignoring.  Not only the pushed overages from this season, but saving room for the bonuses for next season so they don't push into 21-22 season.  That is around $3.7 million next season probably, maybe more if a guy like Juolevi or another ELC is in there.

It is pretty clear at this point that the cap will either be flat and escrow huge; or all contracts rolled back and the cap rolled back in relation to that (or a combination or both).  Mathematically either works out the same for our cap constraints.  Neither helps us make space.  The dream of a compliance buyout has long faded.

It seems like my moves look drastic, but they are ones that could actually be done pretty realistically and save a lot of pain in the next few years.  Heck, just giving us space to sign Petterson and Hughes to long term contracts rather than bridge deals makes it worthwhile.

Our current state alternatives are keeping one of Markstrom, Tanev, and Toffoli
Losing Stecher, Motte, and Leivo
Not signing any other players including a guy like Tryamkin.
Those moves keep us just right at the cap, and then we sign one of both of Petterson and Hughes to short term bridge deals next offseason to accommodate the lost cap space from their pushed ELC bonuses from next season.

Our forward corps depth becomes less and half our defence consists  of completely untested AHL players.  
Hughes-Myers
Edler-Rafferty
Juolevi-Benn
Brisebois


This I absolutely agree with... any cap dumps (Sutter) will come at a high cost...good post.   Not trying to pick on you - your posts are usually well thought out .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, IBatch said:

What?  He played all over our lineup and was contributing most nights - often the best player on whatever line he was on.  Not sure who you were watching ... on pace for over 20 goals and 45ish points is excellent production for a guy who doesn’t pad his stats on the PP.   And you want to trade BB too and sign TT - wonder how they compared 5 x 5 and points per minute not including the PP?  He’s one was one of our best 5 x 5 players and at his cap hit a complete steal.   Give the guy another short bridge ... will still be cheap.    20 goal scorers have value...yeah he did great when he got better line mates go figure.  
 

For me at least, this wasn’t marginal improvement- and IF that’s his peak he’s doing exactly what Hansen did for 10 or so years for us.  Those guys are valuable - and I doubt we’ve seen the best from him yet.   Even if we have he’s still helped the team tremendously.   Compare his value to anyone else in the league - McDavid 12.5....did he score 300ish points?  
 

Edit:  BTW Hansens best season he scored 22 goals and 38 points.   In 81 games.   Next best goal totals 16...and he only broke 30 points a few times ... good grief.  As far as his “terrible start and terrible finish goes”. ... well he scored 9 points his first 20 games...14 his next 20...9 his next 20 and 4 his last 9 games...seems pretty consistent to me.  Also the most I could find was 5 games without a point - and pretty sure that was the stretch TG had him on the fourth line.   If he finished the final 13 games it’s pretty reasonable to suggest he’d easily of and a 20/20 season, which BTW is about an average TT season.

 

Id wager if he played on the first line, and got first unit PP time, played 18-20 minutes a game that with the way he played this year 30/30 would’ve been a certainty. 

You are arbitrarily splitting up his season to even out his performance.
9 points in his first 25 games (29.5 point pace over 82 games)
22 point in his next 26 games (69 point pace over 82 games)
5 points in his last 18 games (22.7 point pace over 82 games)

So he had a stretch in the middle of the season where he caught fire, coinciding exactly with Roussel coming back on his line, not when he played with "great" linemates.  He had much longer stretches where he was performing just like he always has.  That would be fine in a vacuum to take a flier on the unlikely scenario he eventually becomes a 2nd line player.  Unfortunately we are facing him needing a new contract and having arbitration rights.  We just can't afford him to get a $3 million or more award because he was on pace for 20 goals, not only doesn't he deserve it based on all his history, we would have to lose other players to accommodate it.

The Hansen comparable is entirely invalid in my opinion.  Hansen was in the lineup for his defensive game.  Jake has a terrible defensive game.  Just comparing their offence ignores that they are entirely different players and Hansen would never have cracked the roster if it weren't for his defence.  Players don't get demoted to the 4th line regularly because they are playing well, so that is just thin rationalization to me.  "He would have played better if he was higher in the lineup!"... coaches aren't in the business of making their teams worse.  Jake was where he deserved to be based on his play.  When he played better he got moved up, when he played worse he got moved down.  It is really telling that Green felt Eriksson gave him a better option on the 2nd line rather than Virtanen.

9 of his 36 points were on the PP, so saying he didn't get to pad his stats on the PP is just wrong.  That is 25% of his points on the PP... top PP unit guys like Horvat/Petterson/Miller only had 30-35% of their points on the PP.  Guys like Pearson had less % on the PP than Jake.

I am not up for gambling our future on a guy who keeps having to be convinced to play hard.  Leivo was outperforming him offensively and is a very good defensive player who would come in at half the cost.  Leivo is the Hansen comparable, not Virtanen.  Slotting Leivo into that 3rd line winger spot is a wash offensively and a defensive improvement on Jake.

On top of all of that, moving Virtanen gets us an asset or cap relief which helps us keep our team together.  We also have Podkolzin coming along early next season to take another spot on the right wing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, Provost said:

You are arbitrarily splitting up his season to even out his performance.
9 points in his first 25 games (29.5 point pace over 82 games)
22 point in his next 26 games (69 point pace over 82 games)
5 points in his last 18 games (22.7 point pace over 82 games)

So he had a stretch in the middle of the season where he caught fire, coinciding exactly with Roussel coming back on his line, not when he played with "great" linemates.  He had much longer stretches where he was performing just like he always has.  That would be fine in a vacuum to take a flier on the unlikely scenario he eventually becomes a 2nd line player.  Unfortunately we are facing him needing a new contract and having arbitration rights.  We just can't afford him to get a $3 million or more award because he was on pace for 20 goals, not only doesn't he deserve it based on all his history, we would have to lose other players to accommodate it.

The Hansen comparable is entirely invalid in my opinion.  Hansen was in the lineup for his defensive game.  Jake has a terrible defensive game.  Just comparing their offence ignores that they are entirely different players and Hansen would never have cracked the roster if it weren't for his defence.  Players don't get demoted to the 4th line regularly because they are playing well, so that is just thin rationalization to me.  "He would have played better if he was higher in the lineup!"... coaches aren't in the business of making their teams worse.  Jake was where he deserved to be based on his play.  When he played better he got moved up, when he played worse he got moved down.  It is really telling that Green felt Eriksson gave him a better option on the 2nd line rather than Virtanen.

9 of his 36 points were on the PP, so saying he didn't get to pad his stats on the PP is just wrong.  That is 25% of his points on the PP... top PP unit guys like Horvat/Petterson/Miller only had 30-35% of their points on the PP.  Guys like Pearson had less % on the PP than Jake.

I am not up for gambling our future on a guy who keeps having to be convinced to play hard.  Leivo was outperforming him offensively and is a very good defensive player who would come in at half the cost.  Leivo is the Hansen comparable, not Virtanen.  Slotting Leivo into that 3rd line winger spot is a wash offensively and a defensive improvement on Jake.

On top of all of that, moving Virtanen gets us an asset or cap relief which helps us keep our team together.  We also have Podkolzin coming along early next season to take another spot on the right wing.

Wow you really don’t like this guy.   Nobody on our team produced at a better point per dollar off their ELC or beyond.  I just find it counterintuitive to propose singing TT and trading JV when cap space is the primary discussion.  Wonder how many points he’d manage playing mostly on the third and fourth line?    Again when he gets the better line mates his production goes up - go figure.  And don’t compare Leivo - that guy had plumb assignments and could still barely keep up.  Leivo is an easy cut, spent all his time in the top six ... until he was injured.  Glad you brought up his PP production.   On the second unit!  What could he do on the first?  Nobody on the team with the exception of Horvat has paid his dues more then JV.   Throw the guy a bone and see what he can do with it.  We can trade him later if his stock goes up. 

Edited by IBatch

Share this post


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

Wow you really don’t like this guy.   Nobody on our team produced at a better point per dollar off their ELC or beyond.  I just find it counterintuitive to propose singing TT and trading JV when cap space is the primary discussion.  Wonder how many points he’d manage playing mostly on the third and fourth line?    Again when he gets the better line mates his production goes up - go figure. 

I am not sure how I can make it more clear.

You don't get cap relief or an asset by letting Toffoli go.  You do get cap relief or an asset by moving Virtanen.

That cap relief means we can also sign someone else in another spot.  There is an opportunity cost to keeping Virtanen, it just isn't free.  If you didn't have cap constraints, keep Virtanen for the hope he develops into something.  After 279 career games, most players are who they have shown to be, so it is playing deeply against the odds to bet on Jake being one of the exceptions.

Toffoli is a legit top 6 guy and Virtanen just isn't.  That is a false comparison.  Do I want to keep a guy that has proven to be able to produce well on a top line, or do I want a guy who in his first 5 seasons has never been more than an inconsistent 3rd line winger?  Umm... I guess I want the top line guy?  I don't see that as a tough call even remotely.  Toffoli's worst offensive seasons are as good as Virtanen's best season.  Toffoli is also an excellent defensive player who has played a lot of short handed and shut down roles.  Jake is bad defensively.  Toffoli is just a far superior player in every single regard... so yes he should be a priority over some "possible future potential" of Jake suddenly turning a corner.

A guy who doesn't have great offensive numbers to merit being a top 6 fixture needs to be able to play defensively in a bottom 6 role.  Our team suffered because we had to take all the defensive responsibility away from our 3rd line and heap it on Horvat's line.  If we had a trustworthy 3rd line, then Horvat gets to go back into a more offensive role and that provides more production.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Demote LE to Utica.  Doubt he will want to ride a bus with the 2nd wave of Covid-19 coming and the civil unrest in the USA.  Canucks would get $6M in cap space/relief.

Share this post


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

Demote LE to Utica.  Doubt he will want to ride a bus with the 2nd wave of Covid-19 coming and the civil unrest in the USA.  Canucks would get $6M in cap space/relief.

That is the dream... though why this wasn't done at the start of last season, I have no idea.  It is really irresponsible to have not at least tried it.  It would have been more effective with him facing the prospect of riding the bus for three full seasons without a sniff at the NHL.  The closer it gets to the end of his contract, the easier it is to take a shorter time and bank the money.

Rumours were that Green wanted to, but management/ownership didn't want to bury that much money.  I prefer Alfives idea that he agreed to walk away this offseason, though that is just because I really want to believe it rather than any evidence it is true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm struggling with knowing it's wishful thinking that LE/JB mutually terminate his contract after his bonus is paid vs. how much real cap relief that gives the team vs. how realistic is this scenario is in the first place? 

 

Wishful thinking says do it and solve all our problems.

Reality says this is unlikely and even if it happens we still got some concerns. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
41 minutes ago, Fanuck said:

I'm struggling with knowing it's wishful thinking that LE/JB mutually terminate his contract after his bonus is paid vs. how much real cap relief that gives the team vs. how realistic is this scenario is in the first place? 

 

Wishful thinking says do it and solve all our problems.

Reality says this is unlikely and even if it happens we still got some concerns. 

I haven’t seen anything about cap implications from paying a bonus and then having the guy retire before the season.

 

It makes sense that the team gets hit with that portion of the cap, but the day by day way they calculate the cap suggests it wouldn’t count.

 

Do you have some source for how it works?  I legitimately have no idea.

Edited by Provost

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Provost said:

I am not sure how I can make it more clear.

You don't get cap relief or an asset by letting Toffoli go.  You do get cap relief or an asset by moving Virtanen.

That cap relief means we can also sign someone else in another spot.  There is an opportunity cost to keeping Virtanen, it just isn't free.  If you didn't have cap constraints, keep Virtanen for the hope he develops into something.  After 279 career games, most players are who they have shown to be, so it is playing deeply against the odds to bet on Jake being one of the exceptions.

Toffoli is a legit top 6 guy and Virtanen just isn't.  That is a false comparison.  Do I want to keep a guy that has proven to be able to produce well on a top line, or do I want a guy who in his first 5 seasons has never been more than an inconsistent 3rd line winger?  Umm... I guess I want the top line guy?  I don't see that as a tough call even remotely.  Toffoli's worst offensive seasons are as good as Virtanen's best season.  Toffoli is also an excellent defensive player who has played a lot of short handed and shut down roles.  Jake is bad defensively.  Toffoli is just a far superior player in every single regard... so yes he should be a priority over some "possible future potential" of Jake suddenly turning a corner.

A guy who doesn't have great offensive numbers to merit being a top 6 fixture needs to be able to play defensively in a bottom 6 role.  Our team suffered because we had to take all the defensive responsibility away from our 3rd line and heap it on Horvat's line.  If we had a trustworthy 3rd line, then Horvat gets to go back into a more offensive role and that provides more production.

 

The first two sentences are very strange, given that UFAs get paid for past performance mostly and rarely earn their entire paycheque’s when RFAs for the most part do.  Sure either TT or JV could under or over perform but the odds are definitely in JVs favour - how much of a raise are you expecting?   Again I wonder how many points TT would have managed playing mostly on the third and fourth line.  Even if JVs peaking now he’s still worth another 1 - 1.5 compared to 5-5.5 for say five years of TT.   
 

Yes I agree as of right now TT is the better player.  But this about cap.  And points per dollar and minutes played JV is a better option- especially considering age.

 

Edit: And on Horvat.  He’s used to being the top line on the Canucks for several years.  It’s not like the Sedins did much their final years.  Horvat and BB was the top line their final year.   So now with Miller EP and BB/TT I’d say he’s even more insulated (Pearson, Horvat and LE) then he’s used to.  
 

 

Saying our third line makes the second line take more of a brunt is simply ridiculous compared to how it used to be.   TG relied heavily on JV this year - don’t think any other player was moved around more then him because he’s VALUABLE.    He was criticized heavily for putting him on the fourth line - but he did it because it gave us better match ups.   I think your taking TT 13 or so games way more seriously then you should.   BB isn’t at all expendable.  Not many Canuck draft picks all-time have managed more then him in three years.    Saying TT is better cap management then JV may be right - who knows.  But the past shows that UFAs don’t often earn their pay-cheque’s where as RFAs do and that’s what I’m trying to say - as well as JV would have surpassed Hansen’s best season (where he had a lot of top six time) so he’s isn’t a terrible investment.  It really comes down to how much of a raise he gets and what TT could be signed for right?  So let’s leave it at that for now. 

Edited by IBatch

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.