Horvat is a Boss

Fair enough on expecting less to be pleasantly surprised. But if your estimates are too far off then you're not evaluating anything realistic. Budgeting Pearson in at 5M instead of 3M would do more harm than good because that extra 2M could be used somewhere else in the meantime. Benning has overpaid for UFAs. That is absolutely true. Beagle and Roussel reportedly could not get 4 years from any team other than the Canucks. But it is also true that players like MacEwan, Michaelis and Rafferty all chose to sign here for reasons other than money/term. Those players would have gotten

I think that you are overestimating the next contracts for most of those UFAs. Savard will probably be the most expensive one at the price/term you mentioned, but the others should get considerably less. The other three players on that list could be under 4M, which saves 2M+ against the cap with likely more flexibility in term/trade protection as well. Since the on ice change would likely be marginal, that's a pure win in my mind. The "incentive to sign here" point could be made in every single offseason with every single player, yet players still choose to sign here. Why did Holtb

UFA targets: Savard Demers Larsson Montour All should sign for less than Myers' current cap hit with varying terms. Savard will probably get a 4ish year deal while Montour could potentially be had on a 1-2 year deal. Trade targets: Miller Mayfield Both could end up as victims of the Expansion draft. If they would rather get an asset for them, then they could be moved (particularly Miller). Those lists include right handed defensemen exclusively. If we bring back Hamonic or another similar caliber of p

I understand the Expansion angle, but Myers shouldn't be protected. That's the problem. Seattle wouldn't take him with that contract and if they did then even better.

I sincerely hope that Gaudette starting the Canucks outbreak isn't the reason for this. That's terrible decision making and evaluation by management and is a fileable offense. I agree that it likely isn't the case though. I can understand why he didn't sell high. Management wanted to see if Gaudette could take the next step. If he proved that he could find a role on our team going forward, then you keep him. If he doesn't take the step, then his value is low and you have to decide if you hold him for a while longer or just cut him loose. Unfortunately player evaluation takes the i

Gaudette? Nothing makes sense unfortunately.

If this move was made primarily to protect Myers in Expansion, then I am not happy at all. If this move was made to bring in a reclamation RHD for cheap who can fill out our depleted roster for the year, then I'm content. I will choose the second option for now.

This is the exact deal I expected NOT to happen given Benning's comments. If you prioritize a 6th over "doing right by the players," then why even say that in the first place? Communication makes a sub par GM a horrible GM.

I've settled in to being content with this deal now. I would have been happy to move Gaudette last year so I'm not shaken over losing him. Watching him play, it's clear that he can finish off plays with his shot from anywhere off a broken play. But that was pretty much all he had. I wouldn't have minded keeping him for some bottom-6 offence, but not a big loss. I would not be surprised at all if Highmore turns into another Motte for us. Motte was given a clear role and opportunity to earn his spot in Vancouver and made the most of it, exceeding expectations. Highmore could turn ou

I liked Highmore for the Blackhawks against the Oilers in the bubble. With that said, the value on this deal is quite low. I don't mind the fact that he was moved, but at least he was showing that at worst he could contribute offense from the bottom 6 with his shot and finishing. He could have found a role here, even if it was lower than the 3C spot we were hoping for. As it stands right now, the Canucks lost value on this deal. This leads me to believe that it had more to do with shipping out Gaudette than it did with bringing in Highmore. Whether that's because mana

This is great news. Great contract.

Cheap depth. Who knew.

Full disclosure, I haven't really watched any of these players. Clarke would easily be the best organizational fit for us. Adding a young RHD that we should be able to build a second pairing around would be invaluable. That gives us Hughes on one pair and Clarke on the other, both playing with complimentary partners to round out to the top 4. After that it looks like Rathbone and Juolevi will be in a dogfight for the right to be the young defender on the third pairing for the near future. Hopefully one of them would be able to play more minutes effectively with Clarke down the line

How will next year be better? We'll still have a bunch of holes and no cap space to address them.

I ask each of you that have replied so far, what is your opinion on the main point I brought up? Namely, how do you think the past offseason will impact the Pettersson and Hughes negotiations this offseason? @BCNate @Toyotasfan @goalie13 @Ghostsof1915