-
Posts
21,791 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
6
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by IBatch
-
Realistic best case / worst case cap implications [discussion]
IBatch replied to JM_'s topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
Stupid ideas indeed (JB)... scares me too. One of the silver linings of Luongo and LE is he’s forced to save for the future when we really need it (not that having it now wouldn’t be nice because of course it would). I’m hoping he will pull a MG and find the Hamhuis, Erhoff’s that the team needs right when it’s starting to peak. Add Bear, Sutter, Roussel, Beagle, Pearson to the cap and even with paying all the core players properly there will be enough for two more Myers like salaries on defense. What MG paid back then for those guys ( Ballard too) is around 6 these days.. even a little more. Pretty sure we have enough depth in our pool to replace the above guys for the most part, at least half of them.. and those ELCs and second contracts will become exactly what we need to compete. OJ looks ready for the third pairing spot and it’s not a stretch to hope he’s Tanev 2.0 plus some offense ... Edler will eventually need a replacement and this is for sure one way to do it. Seattle probably won’t want to trade with us ... but they will end up with a stockpile of extra 4th defenseman...could plan to do a three way deal (using another team as a middle man) to pry one of those guys out, and if Covid can be parlayed into some good for us the crop of UFAs next year and the following the team would be wise to be trying to get one defenseman at a bargain cap hit from each year. None of this can happen if we chew away at our prospects for cap dumps just to eat up more cap space on TT (so many of those guys don’t work out as planned...TT might never score 50 points again!). Not to mention the cap space could be used where we really need it (defense). I’d be looking at the next two or three even crops of UFAs very carefully and planning for it now - and the ED/Seattle as another strategy to get a solid second pairing D at a reasonable cost in a trade. We could always add a TT type too...but really folks I don’t see that as a priority. -
Realistic best case / worst case cap implications [discussion]
IBatch replied to JM_'s topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
I like your thinking and agree with most of this except for Tanev. If he stays it will only be on a one year deal. I also doubt he’d get what your saying in the open market with his injury history - teams will go for Hominic first, then Ceci then Tanev in that order. Gardiner thought he was getting around 6-7 last year and had to settle for 4 x 4 ... Tanev probably knows his best money will be sticking with the team he knows and signing one 1-2 year deals for as long as he can play. Team likes this as we have an extra protection spot...if for some reason he gets a 2-3 year deal he will be left unprotected for sure. I don’t think Tanev will get a great contract on the open market although he would find some takers. Not in this market. -
Realistic best case / worst case cap implications [discussion]
IBatch replied to JM_'s topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
Ceci and Homonic are also possible going to market, Lehner is likely a lateral move instead of Markstrom and Holtby might end up a bargain deal (that I’d still avoid). All I’m saying is “worst case” still comes with options. AP is staying in St Louis - which likely means one of their blue chip guys is going to be traded and likely for a song (some opportunity there as well instead of signing TT). Really from where I’m sitting if BB was never injured we wouldn’t have all these “cap issues” that we are all talking about . Take him (TT) out of the equation and only a few lineup tweaks are required. Like don’t re-sign Leivo and Fatenburg, and let Stecher walk ala Hutton and that’s about it. Big deal right? -
Realistic best case / worst case cap implications [discussion]
IBatch replied to JM_'s topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
Good post. Yet somehow Detroit will take LE off our hands for Demko...first odd why wouldn’t they just go after Lehner if they wanted to upgrade? Same with OTT for that matter....a Demko isn’t a slam dunk (yet at least). Allen recently signed for 2 million, he used to be a top ten right? If players like Miller and Horvat on good cap hits start becoming available, Sutter, Roussel and even Pearson who I keep bringing up as a way to help our cap won’t be high on anyone’s list unless we are willing to give up the farm for them (which if we do I will start a JB hate thread for the first time and switch to the dark side right away). We just need to get through two more years. The core will develop during that time with lots of depth still - and move on. It won’t be that difficult sign everyone with the exception of TT. We did fine without him most of the season. And our team should improve just through familiarity (we did add a boat load of new faces last off season right) and EP, QHs, Horvat, JV and BB taking steps. BB looks to be well on his way ... TG says he looks like he did his first year (he’s got his mojo back). It means there won’t be much room for new faces. Although next year OJ will for sure be getting games and could take the third pairing spot. So even with all these contracts new blood is on the horizon. The year after that Podz arrives and maybe Lind will have cracked the lineup too. Those guys are our golden cap tickets. Trading those out would be a complete disaster for us. -
Realistic best case / worst case cap implications [discussion]
IBatch replied to JM_'s topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
Before Covid SN feels TT would be asking and getting around a 5 x 5 deal so don’t be surprised if now he’s getting less then that... Markstrom is competing with Lehner and Holtby this summer ... Lehner has had a similar career and last summer the best he could find was a one year deal at 5. Holtby had a bad year but his pedigree is way better then both these guys .... goaltending is a fickle position. Doubt teams will be that willing to pay what any of these guys were hoping to get. Tanev is probably going to stay and probably going to get a flat one year deal. As far as the OP goes I’d hate to buy anyone out - it just prolongs the agony. We don’t have to either - just offer TT what we can and don’t budge. 4.5 x 4 would be as far as I’d be willing to go. And even then only if nothing else is dismantled other then trading Pearson....cash has to come from somewhere.... 5.5 x 5 on Markstrom is about what I see happening... JV one year at 2.5 show me deal. Neal was recently signed at 5.75....his stats are way better then TT and plays a heavier game. Also things haven’t worked out well have they? TT is a luxury at this point. Might as well enjoy the 3 guaranteed games and hope that it builds into a nice little run. Heck maybe Roussel will be a hero and teams will be interested in him .... or Beagle. -
Our problem at Center beyond Pettersson and Horvat
IBatch replied to Patel Bure's topic in Canucks Talk
To me it comes down to two things really. How bright our stars shine in their peak (and so far EP has the stuff to be a perennial Art Ross threat in his prime) and how well our “turbo” group of young players really are. CHI was so good for those exact reasons - their best guys were always some of the very best at their position and Kane still is, and they kept getting a crop of new guys come in year after year (and still do - Debricant got what - 45 goals two years ago? Good grief we’d think he was the second coming of Hull if he played for us). Drafting has absolutely become the very most important part of managing an NHL team. We’ve drafted in the top third of the league - AND also averaged around 7th to worst for a five year period. That for sure is going to get us competitive again - maybe even this year with Markstroms evolution. Back to your post - I do agree the next wave is going to determine where we end up. Could be in the middle - could be we are contenders. Think somewhere inbetween ... with parity that’s all we need to get to. Look at TB. They were top level when we went to the final and are still doing it but haven’t won yet. -
Our problem at Center beyond Pettersson and Horvat
IBatch replied to Patel Bure's topic in Canucks Talk
If we could get a third line like Niedermayer and Pahlsen I’d be over the moon. Maholtra could do that too... Im still a bit of a traditionalist and think a 4th line full of intimidating bruisers works best. But only if we also have a third line that can support the extra penalty minutes. ANA could of had a mini-dynasty if that team was capable of sticking together longer. A young Perry, Getzlaf and Penner as your third line is pretty darn sick. Understand why Burke went ballistic when Lowe offer sheeted Penner at a ridiculous contract. That team would have beat most Stanley Cup teams the past 30 years if their best players were a little younger and they were able to keep it together for 3-4 years. We have loads and loads of potential over the next 3-7 years. I don’t think we will be in a position to truly compete better then what we have right now for two more seasons (and that’s without any Coivid ramifications). The lineup isn’t ideal but our forward group is on par with the deepest in the league at the moment. 17 players fully capable of playing in the top 12. (I’m adding Bear). Wont have that again with this core ever again. JB/TG have their work cut out for them - we should be loading up the top two lines and then rolling all four lines and going with the hot hand(s) game to game. To me luck will play into this playoff and play-in round as much as anything ... we are definitely due for some more luck. Edit: On JV. He will absolutely play. They will not sit him (again) unless he plays a floating uninspired game in which case he will sit again. He’s a wild card. So is McEwen, so is Sutter, so is ... well a lot of guys really. LE is too. -
Our problem at Center beyond Pettersson and Horvat
IBatch replied to Patel Bure's topic in Canucks Talk
Horvats line was already taking a beating against the league best most of this season ... not sure how re-uniting them and playing them in exactly the same way is going to make much of a difference....and our first line without Miller and Roussel in his place is going to nose dive. Miller can play second line or third line that’s probably the safest way to go but really don’t see things quite as bad. One exhibition game where we outplayed them or at least on par most of the game ... Nothing wrong with three scoring lines if we can get to that point either ... hard to defend against that .. don’t see that happening for awhile though As far as centre depth goes without Madden it’s thin ... or non-existent. See draft picks going there and on D for the next long time .... wingers we should be sorted. -
The same discussions were around when Schneider was here and he was actually pushing Luongo - better stats and all... look how that turned out. Demko is for sure a risky proposition at this point. Absolutely zero chance JB parts with Markstrom and goes with Demko even with an experienced vet helping out (which I’m not really completely opposed to BTW, but it is what it is). As soon as we traded for Miller, JBs changed strategy for better or worse - we aren’t going to waste that and Horvats or EPs and QHs or anyone else’s time chasing more picks and bottoming out - that boat has sailed. Demko was a good pick, and he’s likely going to become a Kraken or be traded if possible (for about what he cost us in the first place)....would you really prefer we up him to around what Markstrom is getting now and make him our number one? Or hire another guy in the 2.5-3 million range to go at it 50/50? Personally I’d rather see what Markstrom can do and just accept the 2-3 million more in cap. Bishop wasn’t great until his late 20’s, of course there is Tim Thomas, Rinne, Luongo, MAF, Lundqvist or if you really want to go back Bower who didn’t start until he was 33/34 depending on what birth certificate you believe... Markstrom until he’s 34-35 seems just fine to me. Demko might never make it as a number one, often back-ups stats looks great but they aren’t playing elite teams either and once they become number ones they drop fast. Heck Demko did that this year right? Demko’s stats have been average and he’s proven he belongs that’s about it (and good for him for sure / not an easy thing to do). He had a golden opportunity and didn’t take it this season - management isn’t going to take a risk like that. Personally I’d be surprised if they can trade Demko anywhere with the ED coming up - both Detroit and OTT keep coming up but I don’t think those proposals are giving their prospects and goaltenders due credit / if the roles were reversed we’d be seriously questioning why bother. I’ve pretty much accepted that Demko is going to be traded for whatever we can get or get Kracking after this next season. Or even stay long term as our back-up and one day challenge for the starter spot.
-
JV will play ...
-
Going with Demko is ridiculous. Love the guy but he’s barely a mid-level back-up at this point. Sure his age is right but the team has already made a commitment to winning now, and Demko’s a super risky venture. Markstrom will be signed - and I don’t care for a minute about his age. There is a very long list of goalies who shined brighter in their 30’s, and he has no hard miles on him at all. We go with Demko it would be way too risky.
-
Demko unfortunately is no Schneider (yet).... at that time he was was considered a top 5 goalie and was worth a 9th overall. Demko at most is worth a very late first or early second. Nilsson and Lack ... both guys with .920 sp .... got exactly what again? Not to mention Talbot who’s stock was really high at one point also in the .920sp range and that guy who went to CAR from CHI who was also around .920 who didn’t work out. Point is we as a group are vastly overratting Demko’s value if we think for a second that we will get much better then any of these guys above ... two years of LE is worth two 1sts. He’s not going anywhere, well except maybe Utica at some point. Demko has to get a lot lot better before we can trade LE with him... like a top five goalie league wide. In that case we protect him and dangle Markstrom. Edit: Cap wise 2.5 for JV is a much much better deal then 4.5-5 x 4 for Toffoli IMO. I’d rather stay the course and re-sign both JV and Leivo then go after TT. He’s a luxury we simply can’t afford right now. Plus the cap space is much better off saved to go after top four D ... Edler and Tanev won’t do it forever. In two years we could sign two guys like MG did with Hamhuis/Erhoff and Ballard if JB can resist the temptation to go for it too early. We’d be much better off for it ... our team is pretty set prospect wise for wingers is it not?
-
They do have one prospect they are high on (and rightly so), he is a couple years behind Demko at least though so yes it’s a good idea for sure ... but they aren’t without anyone (two but one good one). Back-ups are the easiest position to fill - and I’d be all for trading Demko ... it won’t be a cap dump per say any way we slice it as still need to replace him. Might just be wise to keep both guys and if he’s picked he’s picked. Or trade Demko later if his stock goes higher ..
-
The only reason Markstrom is even staying for another contract is because of his development curve, who knew - not any of us that’s for sure. Hard to “calculate” that into your planning. Things couldn’t have worked out better for both Markstrom and the team. We’d be griping on how we lost out on Lafreniiere and watching the play-ins from the outside without Markstrom’s career year.... Its not a bad situation at all. His cap isn’t going to be crazy high as a result too, sample size is too small and all. What’s MAF making again and how long has CHI been paying for an oft injured Crawford now? I doubt he’d get a huge contract in this market anyways... 6 x 6 seems too high to me even without Covid. Case in point Lehner last season also had a career year, was also in the Vezina conversation but outside too, and the most he could get was one year at 5 million. Now he’s back on the market and competing again. Goalies are the most fickle position (Holtby, a perrenial Vezina threat had an awful season) ... Bobrovksy got bank like Price did because he’s considered about as consistent as they come (and so glad we didn’t have the money or we could be in their position now). Wouldn’t worry about it too much. Doubt he’d get more then 5 years anywhere - and at that term his price won’t be over 6. Guessing 5.5 x 5 at the most.
-
Don’t forget he’s competing with Holtby too... not many teams will have the cap space both these guys were likely hoping for as raises. And the ones that do aren’t that appealing as competing now goes (bad teams). Lehner is also a UFA ... add in Covid it’s a bit of a buyers market for goalies this summer. All three of these guys have been in recent Vezina conversations including one winner. One could argue it’s one of the better markets for high end goalies we’ve had in some time .. I doubt any of these guys are getting what they hoped they would - and bet Lehner wishes he had a better offer last year with some term on it (and he was brilliant). Think it was one year at 5. And Bobrovsky was off the table and still the best he could find.
-
Agree that our defense is our Achilles heel at this point, it won’t be whether or not we play JV, LE or Sutter that’s for sure .... and on that point OJ looked good or at least not out of place which is promising.... on Tanev id say there is a small possibility he leaves this summer, he won’t get a boffo deal anywhere with those miles but knows he’s needed and wanted still in Vancouver (and wants to stay too, at least that’s what he’s saying) ... a flat term one year deal makes sense for both parties. Won’t disagree that we have some cap issues - but cap hell looks like TO ... paying half your payroll to 4 guys does that. Just hope we keep that extra money tied up aside to use on the defense when it’s available in one to two years.
-
Ouch. I thought everyone knew this stuff. Of course plus minus isonly calculated at even strength. Doesn’t mean every plus minus is created equal as if your only facing bottom six guys it’s not the same as what Horvat’s line has endured (best quality of competition by far) ... but it does at a glance give one an idea of how a player does against his peers... really it’s not as an important stat as it used to be but still matters. Bure was usually around zero or minus or plus a couple - doesn’t mean he wasn’t crucial and valuable - because he was on both special teams just killing it most of the time.
-
Well of course it should be JV, because we lost and he didn’t play. And he’s super duper fast. And defensively sound. And can hit like a Mack Truck. Sarcasm aside I for sure get where your saying it is important. For me the best takeaway from this game is: OJ looked pretty darned good out there. Wasn’t shy along the boards, made good transition plays and quickly ... and also liked that TG stopped it when he did - good place as I’m sure he gained some confidence. IF OJ can make the team next year and be a good upgrade on the third defensive pairing then ... cool.
-
I think you need to go take a breath and not worry your head about this too much. We have absolutely no idea what’s going on or why he did it - sure we can speculate. Just like the talking heads did ... but aren’t privy to the actual information. So I speculated it was to see how Ferland would do (he did fine) and that JV is getting some tough love and will be motivated next time ... I will also admit right now that I could be 100% completely wrong about that ... maybe he’s just nursing a bruise who knows ... not me not you not anyone but the coaching staff.
-
Thanks Deb. If anything this is a perfect outcome for Jake. We lost. He’s got a chance to get back into the lineup and BE a difference maker. Perfect script because we will need depth scoring to get by MIN and a round in the playoffs. TG has 16 guys that can play...4 have to get cut. Not easy to do and a ton of pressure really. Both McEwen and Ferland and LE had a better camp - plus Ferland has valuable playoff experience and plays the type of game you want. It’s a very hard decision IMO. If we won instead I doubt this would even be a discussion right? And even if we did win doesn’t mean the roster won’t change. TG relied on JV all season - on three different lines. He’s not going to sit him folks so don’t get your panties in a knot over this - and if he does he knows intimately why where as we haven’t got much more then what we could get out of camp ... which isn’t a lot at all comparatively is it? Yes the media played it up ... which they likely would have even if we won. And definitely their goaltending was the biggest factor in the outcome. Sensational comes to mind - almost could have scored two in the opening shift on him (Tanev if you get that sort of opportunity top shelf bro not right into the goalie centre body good grief) ...It sounds like a bit of a broken record but as long as we do what we did last night we will win more then lose. We beat them in every stat except the scoreboard. Shots on net, quality scoring chances, face offs, take away, give aways etc etc well except for blocked shots they had three more but that is also a win in my books..shows how the ice was tilted a little more. We had a gap of maybe ten minutes where we were outplayed and only by a little bit - and they have some great players ... in their prime. If I was taking to my kids I’d say calm down. It’s only one game. Heads might explode if we lose game one against MIN and JV isn’t in the roster which is hilarious. I have no idea who TG should play... McEwen maybe ... Ferland for sure ... who else should sit out? Sutter? AG? Sure if we lose and he added JV and removed someone else this site will a lot more to talk about. It’s one game.
-
Because he was being honest. Everyone knows he’s got an extra four players and that JV didn’t have a great camp. And anyone who’s ever managed anyone knows you reward production. Not rocket science and wouldn’t have likely made much if any difference in the outcome. And now JV should have a bit of a fire under his ass right? Don’t make mountains out of molehills (not saying you are) folks. Not a big deal, let’s move on.
-
How is that mind games? TG just answered the question honestly. JV playing instead wouldn’t have made a difference in a 4-1 game ... like he’d score his second career hat-trick or something. Don’t read too much into it - to me both teams weren’t icing there final teams (well maybe but who knows) - and you can guarantee they know the score could have been much different then it was. Ok someone fact check that I don’t know how many he’s scored ... 1 or 2? Or zero can’t remember.
-
Maybe a little bit - combined with again not coming in conditioned enough to make it harder on guys like Ferland taking his spot. Ferland game is designed for the playoffs which didn’t make it easier for him either. I trust that TG knows how to push his buttons - JVs career might have been saved because of TG’s tough love. Bet he’s going to come in with a chip on his shoulder when he does slot in, and the team will be better for it.
-
PREDICT THE SCORE CONTEST: Canucks vs Wild, Game 1, August 2nd 2020
IBatch replied to goalie13's topic in Canucks Talk
3-1 Vancouver...EP with the game winner