-
Posts
21,791 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
6
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by IBatch
-
[Rumour] J.T. Miller Trade/Contract Talks
IBatch replied to Podzilla's topic in Trades, Rumours, Signings
For sure. And if he took a 5 year deal that had only 1 in salary per year, the rest in bonus money it's basically buyout proof as far as guaranteed money goes. A 7-8 year deal where he'd almost certainly get bought out like Suter and Parise ... he'd risk leaving money on the table. Add the future value of money, he's actually doing very decently on a 5-6 year deal compared to a 7-8 year one with significant money left on the table. I know it's about total dollars IN his pocket. And taxes matter for us too. Edit: This is comparing a deal at 9.5 x 5 to 55 to even 60 million dollar 7-8 year deal. Which i highly doubt he's getting anyways. Believe in this case he's guaranteed 42.5 gross at 9.5. If he sucks the hind tit and is bought out with 2-3 years left (likely)...well...then. No money for you. ROI on the extra money of course gets factored in. Plus he could still play and earn on one year deals if he wants too. Edit: So i'm going around in circles a little lol. For me it makes the most sense for the team and the player to do a 5 year deal. 6 tops but it has to work for the team in that case more then the player. -
This poll is pretty silly. It was absolutely a culmination of several factors. Coaching might be the biggest one, but it was also on EP and Brock to be ready by camp - and losing all our forward PKers but Motte (who was injured). We lost a lot of one goal games. Power play wasn't clicking (hard to do with EP and Brock not scoring isn't it...Horvat too) .... JB did it two seasons in a row with a lot of roster change. Ferraro said or commented on the team in the fall how in his experience in the NHL (which is worth listening too) it takes a year for most players to adjust once traded or signed. Green took an approach that focused on detailed puck possession this season (Bomber ..?) which was working, top five in the league 5 x 5. Special teams were abysmal. What got me off the fence was the pre-season ... trying to pick plugs. As it turned out Chia actually did finally pull through good for him. Green is too cerebral for his a team like ours. Bad with the media. Bruce was refreshing but i also have doubts his record would have been much better without EP/Brock clicking from the outset and our PK a total disaster. At one point we were on pace for worst ever all-time. People need to be realistic about these things. I'm glad we have new management and stoked with the coaching staff. Would we have made the playoffs? Yes i think we would have, but not by much.
-
Yes a lot more the a few. Our last core is a great example of that. Despite the MG cap saving deals none aged that well. It's the cost of doing business though. Difference is this team has cost control on EP, QHs, Demko, Garland ... and Podz
-
If EP does that then we are going to be a great team the next two seasons.
-
Deb - bottom line he's not replaceable. And nobody knows what's going to happen. He loves it here, the team loves him, the coach is coming back and he loves him (and playing him too - think he's 6-7th most played forward in the league right now), the fans love him. He's coming back unless his agent is a total douche (it happens). Miller is going to be rewarded by us most likely for his awesome play - and Miller is going to also reward us for giving him that chance. He's flat out said he's extremely appreciative for getting the chance. We are all a bunch of anxious ninnies talking circles around it lol. I kind of hope they just announce as soon as the season is over so we can stop. Miller is so easy to like. It's refreshing actually. Been awhile.
-
That's about where it would need to be. Right around 7.
-
It is if they bonus the money out. One million base, rest as bonuses. If he signs until he's 38 very high chance he's bought out like Parise and Suter. Won't get his money out. Close to 50 for us done this way (9.5 x 5) compared to 8 x 8 ... or 7.5 x 8 straight money he almost certainly ends up ahead. And so does the team. The guaranteed money plus ROI front loading it a little ... makes it work better for both parties. If Miller isn't injured and still is good at 36/37 then he makes even more money too.
-
I'm not so sure. That's a lot of money and he'd be one of the highest paid forwards in the league ... don't forget he's already made money for a decade ...
-
Yes. I've been beating this hobby horse for years. Stamkos deal is what really did me in. SJ offered him a massive deal. For 7 years. He turned it down. But didn't really turn the money down at all. That extra year and much smaller tax bracket added up to virtually the same ... saving a couple million a year plus that one added year (and the article even put him in at 50% for the last year somewhere else lol). Personally feel they need to take those six teams and limit their UFAs to 7 years. They've got a massive advantage on the bottom line. OR just take the actual average and adjust teams overall cap limits to be the same. That would give us around 95.6 million and TB 81.5 lol. Taxes for sure are part of players reasoning when it comes to free agency and where they want to play. It also for sure affects they actual signings team by team.
-
I'm also ok with moving on from Miller if talks are too far apart. Just read an interesting article on what a 5 year deal could look like. 9.5 x 5... All bonus laden so he get most of the money no matter what - compared to a 8.5 x 8 year deal with no bonus money (which he most certainly gets bought out from ages 36-38.75 ....) and decent ROI he'd come out with about the same or more possibly depending on when the buyout happens . That's not a bad deal at all for the club or Miller. It's designed the same way Zib's is. They also doubt he's getting a full term deal - the only guys getting 10% of their teams cap hit and still producing in their mid 30's are Ovi and Bergeron - two top 100 player all-time types. Miller isn't worth a deal to us that won't work. Better off cutting bait. Tough but that's the cap era for you. Both Sedins 11%ish cap hits cap at a time after a couple PPG seasons and weren't long term deals. I suspect the same will happen with Miller. We get two at most three boffo years out of him then a couple decent ones and that's it. Miller can make more later too IF he's still good ...
-
A lot more then that ... take a look: Directly from Gavin Group (Hockey Wealth specialists) ... Edit: This has been around for about decade. Back during the peak Sedin era - BC tax rates were virtually identical with Alberta's. TAX CALCULATOR Enter your salary and then compare NHL teams tax rates. Or check out the chart below to see all of the NHL teams tax rates at your salary. Enter an Annual Salary Compare Taxes of Two Teams Tampa Bay Lightning (36.32% x $5,250,000) $1,906,800 Vancouver Canucks (52.68% x $5,250,000) $2,765,700 Difference in Tax Paid $858,900 Compare Taxes to all NHL Teams Based on the Annual Salary entered above Anaheim Ducks TAX RATE 49.14% TAXES$ 2,579,850 Arizona Coyotes TAX RATE 40.80% TAXES$ 2,142,000 Boston Bruins TAX RATE 41.32% TAXES$ 2,169,300 Buffalo Sabres TAX RATE 44.71% TAXES$ 2,347,275 Calgary Flames TAX RATE 47.35% TAXES$ 2,485,875 Carolina Hurricanes TAX RATE 41.57% TAXES$ 2,182,425 Chicago Blackhawks TAX RATE 41.27% TAXES$ 2,166,675 Colorado Avalanche TAX RATE 40.87% TAXES$ 2,145,675 Columbus Blue Jackets TAX RATE 43.57% TAXES$ 2,287,425 Dallas Stars TAX RATE 36.32% TAXES$ 1,906,800 Detroit Red Wings TAX RATE 42.97% TAXES$ 2,255,925 Edmonton Oilers TAX RATE 47.35% TAXES$ 2,485,875 Florida Panthers TAX RATE 36.32% TAXES$ 1,906,800 Vegas Golden Knights TAX RATE 36.32% TAXES$ 1,906,800 Los Angeles Kings TAX RATE 49.14% TAXES$ 2,579,850 Minnesota Wild TAX RATE 46.08% TAXES$ 2,419,200 Montreal Canadiens TAX RATE 52.83% TAXES$ 2,773,575 Nashville Predators TAX RATE 36.32% TAXES$ 1,906,800 New Jersey Devils TAX RATE 46.45% TAXES$ 2,438,625 New York Islanders TAX RATE 48.59% TAXES$ 2,550,975 New York Rangers TAX RATE 48.59% TAXES$ 2,550,975 Ottawa Senators TAX RATE 52.80% TAXES$ 2,772,000 Philadelphia Flyers TAX RATE 43.26% TAXES$ 2,271,150 Pittsburgh Penguins TAX RATE 42.39% TAXES$ 2,225,475 San Jose Sharks TAX RATE 49.14% TAXES$ 2,579,850 St. Louis Blues TAX RATE 42.82% TAXES$ 2,248,050 Seattle Kraken TAX RATE 36.32% TAXES$ 1,906,800 Tampa Bay Lightning TAX RATE 36.32% TAXES$ 1,906,800 Toronto Maple Leafs TAX RATE 52.80% TAXES$ 2,772,000 Vancouver Canucks TAX RATE 52.68% TAXES$ 2,765,700 Washington Capitals - DC TAX RATE 45.19% TAXES$ 2,372,475 Washington Capitals - VA TAX RATE 42.07% TAXES$ 2,208,675 Washington Capitals - MD TAX RATE 42.04% TAXES$ 2,207,100 Winnipeg Jets TAX RATE 49.87% TAXES$ 2,618,175
-
If the Canucks make the playoffs this year I will _____
IBatch replied to Roberts's topic in Canucks Talk
Pretty sure he was eaten by an alligator on some golf course in Florida...or he was actually Green and hated himself so stopped posting once things got really sideways for him this season. -
If the Canucks make the playoffs this year I will _____
IBatch replied to Roberts's topic in Canucks Talk
No it's "the Guardian" .... the Nostradamus of the early mid JB era on the CDC... maybe? not sure but sure had strong opinions on what to do and what we were doing wrong. -
Why do you think that? These are the same owners who only gave the Sedins a four year deal after their couple decent seasons (Miller now 3) ... Aside from that ridiculous Luongo deal ... no player has got a deal 8 years have they? A few six. Sure they enjoyed eating Ballard and Booth as well. Even our RFAs have got six years at most (QHs that's you good job!).....Myers 5 and LE 6. Well who knows but i don't believe the owners are willing to watch this team flounder because of another anchor deal. Do think Miller has a good chance at signing - but the cap hit either is going to be low enough to make sense (55ish) ... 8 x 8 doesn't make any sense at all for me at least. Is there a team out there willing to do 7 x 9.15ish? Maybe i don't know. Doesn't work. Can see at most maybe a deal around 9.1 x 6.
-
You literally said the Sedins couldn't do it at 30 but they both did. Alfie did it at 33/34 (100 plus)...no it's not common and most are HHOFers to hit 100 plus points at that age. Is anyone even suggesting Miller will keep that pace up? Don't see anyone doing that. Likely he's had his career year. Maybe he does the same next year too maybe not. Odds are not likely. That said a PPG until he's 33/34 isn't at all out of the question given the age of our core and who he likely plays with. Why IF he stays here - his deal will look like Zibanejad minus a year or two. That's a fair deal. Add maybe a little bit given tax differences and cap going up eventually and you've hit the sweet spot. Edit: Miller doesn't play like Kesler did with reckless no care about his self. He's proven durable. Virtually everyone signed at or around his age - teams take the same risks - and do all the time. His extra two years that's the only crux given his age. 5 is likely his offer - 6 is likely where they end up to lose the cap hit. And maybe they don't even sign him this off season. Who knows. Naslund also was 27-28ish when he started to peak. And it lasted until he was 32 and then just blue chip average until he retired. Why we should be wary about trading Brock to keep Miller. Edit: Most guys have a 7-8 year run once they get their chance at top line duties and stick where they manage close to or around a PPG. That's what Naslund did. Also what the Sedins did. Miller had maybe 3 at most 4 years after his next deal starts that he realistically pulls it off, And he's also got the next two seasons to actually improve on his already 98 point year. I for one, looking at our lineup - think he could actually improve on it next season if he's healthy. That rest since Covid probably helped mitigate his prime as well. He's no bowling ball out there. Or jumping infront of every shot either. Or fighting guys.
-
I really don't see him making that much on his next deal with or without us. Only way would be if he has an even better season next year. Even then i don't think anyone is signing him until he's 37 almost 38 (a 7 year deal) but whomever does will regret it. Do see takers at six and it could be us. At 10.5 though? Wow that's a lot.
-
Sedins best seasons 29-31...
-
[PGT] Los Angeles Kings at Vancouver Canucks | Apr. 28, 2022
IBatch replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
Teams never stop rebuilding. Re-structuring is a better word for teams like ours and half the league at this point - know re-tool is used, but for me at least that definition is better suited for veteran cores that need a boost to keep producing like ours back in 2014 - and like SJ's which almost actually got them a cup - and like what LA just did with Blake (and seeing some dividends) around an aging core of Doughty/Kopitar/Quick (all the rest are gone - Muzzin, Pearson, TT, good to very good support guys and one core guy).... This team won't go into rebuild mode if we sign two of Miller/Horvat/BB unless it's just because we suck anyways. A complete tear down won't happen. Highly doubt it anyways. Edit: CHI re-tool became a rebuild by accident lol. Our rebuild around the last core - didn't start until 2017. When we traded Bieksa, Hansen and Burrows - all who finally waived. Edit: To be clear. IF we go back into rebuild mode - that means Miller, Brock and Horvat all get traded. We can only afford all of them for one more year as it is. Trading one doesn't put us back into rebuild mode it's just a hockey trade. Trading all 3 yes then back to the suckage. And we'd better pray it sticks. Likely EP is also traded and possibly Demko as well. If we are going to tank might as well just tank. Like Lou said when he was in TO "we worked awfully hard, and did everything possible to be as bad as we possibly could".... -
[Report] Dustin Brown announces retirement
IBatch replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in General Hockey Discussion
LA is the worst team i've seen win a cup and they did it twice. Thought the first one was a total fluke - mostly based on Quicks Roy like performance ... then of off course they didn't make the playoffs and then of course they won again lol. Also feel that Doughty was the most overrated D for 3-4 years because of those cups and a couple lucky goals at the Olympics ... to me Weber was a much better D and could of easily scored a couple too but didn't. And EK was otherworldly at the time playing on some really bad to mediocre OTT teams ... 3 times in the top ten in scoring. Cookes achilles' tendon stomp limited someone who was on his way to becoming something truly special. Dustin Brown. He's a scumbag of a player no doubt. But i do agree he's a scumbag most teams would be happy to have, just not at that cap hit lol. A tiny little bit of Bobby Clark in him. Losing in the first round after going to the final against a team that was supposedly going to be an easy first rep became a little more palatable given they went all the way. I do have a modicum of respect for that. But i still don't like them. And i was actually rooting for them against MTL in 93. That team made me no longer like LA. Blake was awesome to watch with Gretzky. Dionne and Taylor too. These guys are a bunch of bums. At least when Tyler Toffoli was traded they aren't nearly as ugly close up. Blake becoming their GM is probably the only thing i like about them at all. And that's still not enough. LA and Dallas getting in is just the rub. Loser points helped them get in back then too. -
I hope so. I also hope that they make the playoffs and beat TO in the first round just for fun lol. Can see that rivalry coming back ... It was fun watching Alfie and Co screwing with the peak Sundin teams ... only TO team to get 100 points with a loser point added.
-
Yes. And every other team in the league assumes the same risks when they sign their stars throughout their UFA years. It's about creating culture and winning as well. You need to have blue chip star vets that are often overpaid to help and to carry the mail while your younger stars catch up. To me both those guys are Miller and soon after Horvat. 98 points. There isn't one person on this site that would have predicted that when we traded our first (which became a 22nd) and a third that this would be the outcome. It's amazing really. Maybe not the correct strategy but wow we sure won that trade. Miller is close to exactly what i'd like our team to have as their best player(s). He compliments the lineup in a ton of ways. We won't have to worry about him earning his next deal until his 3rd or 4th year. Which also fits our own cycle. To me it's 50/50 if he's offered a 5 or 6 year deal given his age. If he was 25 we'd be talking about a 11.5 x 8 sort of deal right now wouldn't we? Edit: For context ... we traded our first plus a roster player for Ballard during the MG era. whoopsie.
-
Pavelski is an outlier. Only a few fringe or HHOF types have ever kept it up much past 33. That's been beaten to death already. Maybe Miller is one of those guys...but he'd be an outlier and the actual odds of that are quite low. Maybe not as low as some think - because he is durable. But their are also a lot of miles on him too. Was good enough to come in the league relatively young like Horvat. One thing i will say is if i had to make a bet, it is that he's going to get a nice fat deal. We can afford to have a couple vets on deals like that as well. But i also think we need Horvat and EP too. Brock is the odd man out if he wants the big bucks. But i also don't thing he's earned them either. Nobody does. What he has earned is a 4 year deal at around his current pay. That's it. As far as a comp for Pavelski ... his first year of his five year deal 6 million cap hit at 69 overall ... in 2014-2015. 8.7ish of the cap. That would put Miller at 7.2645 ... 7.26 x 5 .... Not going to happen. But for Pavelski it made sense at the time ... he'd only scored 79 points once the year of his deal and 41 goals ... becoming a UFA. Before that in the 60's. Miller might score 100 tonight plus. He's going to get more then Pavelski did cap percentage wise.
-
Sens did exactly what most fans wished JB could have done. But it came at a high cost as well. And was done around the same time Keenan blew up our team in the 90's - as far as a cores cycle goes. EK, Stone, Zib, Hoffman, Pageau etc etc ... those were some good/great players they lost, in their primes or close to it. Would be like us trading Miller, Horvat, Brock, Garland now ... JB of course couldn't do that ... didn't have that option either ... time to do that with that core would have been in 2008-09 lol. They did screw up with Duchene big time. But also corrected their mistake - and also really lost Zib's trade. But what they did do, was stockpile a couple extra years worth of picks when they were really bad. And already had Chabot in their stables. They are a good drafting team, for a very long time really. Look at Stone and Zib.. and seem to be doing it again with this round under Dorian. To me was about as a good rebuild as any club can hope for in the cap era. Wouldn't surprise me at all to see them start plugging some holes with more proven guys and going for it soon. Know Brock is in the doghouse for a lot of CDCers, and rightly so. Personally feel he's earned about 5.5-6 x 4 years and that's it. Definitely hasn't earned a longer deal then that unless the cap goes down to reflect the same money.
-
Brock becoming essentially a cap dump is a sad day. He's got 11 career goals less then Pearson, in 253ish less games... Maybe i'm still a little bit wary about cutting bait. This is to sign Miller no doubt which also needs to be factored in. I'd bet Brock scores about as many as him (and yes i know there is way more to hockey then just scoring goals...but Brocks shot/skillset is a hard to get commodity too) over the next six him playing 65ish games a year... And also bet he's going to be a 30 plus goal guy starting next season and keeps it up until his early 30's. That's a lot of goals we are passing up on. Also cost us 3 or so less million a year possibly. There is a way we can keep them all. Won't be easy and we'd need to trim the fat. But it's possible. Next season i'd rather we come back with the same lineup and do whatever surgery is required during the season or even after it's done. By trading Hamonic and bringing in Dermott (cost controlled next season - also in our teams age group), Allvin made sure he's got the dough to QO Brock and do a minor tweak here and there. At worst cap wise we pay him 7.5. Trading Brock now while his stock is so low isn't needed. Don't you folks think we'd be better off trading Brock when it's higher? Would anyone be shocked (aside from two posters that just don't like him at all), to see Brock have a 30/30 or even a 35/35 season? I wouldn't. EPs getting jacked since Bruce took over stats-wise. He's right their with Miller's season except he's scoring 50% more goals. I'm ok if we have to trade one of these guys (and think that's a likelihood down the road), but if we want to actually get something back why not do it after next playoffs? We can always trade Brock his UFA year ...
-
A lot of talk about a core piece not being here next year.
IBatch replied to Johnny Torts's topic in Canucks Talk
This is true but he did say on the "high end". Some could get more (Horvat)...so it does balance a little. But agree that we'd probably have 4 million or more in cap space. Which makes his/her point even more. As long as none of those guys are duds for the next 4/5 years we'd have a pretty solid window to be a top team in what's right now a very tough top 4 division. CAL has Johnny coming up to deal with ... but should be good for a while yet. Vegas will be much better next year unless injuries again screw them. EDM also will be good next season. LA is getting their re-tool hits in now as well. Personally feel we are a better team then both LA and Dallas right now. Being a top 3 team in this division is no small thing .... we've got a shot of being a top team though.