gameburn
Members-
Posts
2,566 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by gameburn
-
[GDT] Wild @ Nucks - Feb 19 2020 - 7:30pm Pacific - SNET
gameburn replied to xereau's topic in Canucks Talk
The way the team defends against the rush (especially when Edler is out there, let's be honest) and the tendency to retreat into a 5-man pk box when they aren't short anybody is just death for this team. I don't understand why they would do this when they have such quick, intelligent forwards. Way way too passive. Terrible defensive approach. Yes, it must be coaching. It was interesting to hear the Sedins comment on Tortorella, "loved his style of play for the team." That team did not retire to a 5 man box or give up the blueline the way this team does. I wonder if the Sedins were sending a message. -
You could be right, but Crosby came back after a LOT of rest (was it a full year off including 2 summers?) He's young enough to take off all of this year and next year and still have a couple of years left to play. I think they have proper insurance for the players on this stuff... so retiring is definitely a worthy choice too.
-
Great post. Had me rethinking stuff. You are right: there is a pattern in some of Jim's contracts: risk in later years, overpaying. And you have hit on something we often look past: the details in these contracts are incredible. Front and back loaded... signing bonuses, etc. You are right: makes no sense at all and should be done away with in the next negotiations. I had a small role in a union for a number of years, BCGEU. A lot of time spent on things like "job classification" -- i.e., you get paid for what you do, if your employee is getting job A out of you and a bit of B and C, you should be paid accordingly. Which brings me to my biggest complaint about the ways seem to be working here/throughout the league: get as many players as possible on Entry level contracts, so that you can actually fit under the cap. Absolutely mad. If the league/CBA were run like a real business connected to a real union, it would be entirely different. If your job involves 1st line minutes/scoring at a certain level, then you get paid at the level described in the contract regardless of whether you are 19 years of age or fresh up from the minors replacing somebody. To see Eriksson making 6 or 7 times what Virtanen (or Pettersson! or Hughes) are making is just plain unjust. A new CBA that had to fit under a CAP situation, but that didn't have Entry level contracts would be a very different situation. Make the "minimum wage" higher for anyone who plays in the NHL (3 million per annum/pro-rated?) and work in some kind of bonus/extra money deal beyond that for the big fish. And give players proper severance deals/lay off packages. I really believe that when Ted Lindsay and the early NHL guys went for a "player's association" in place of a union, they really made a mistake. Not too late to change though. In the present environment though: you are right: if a GM is dumb enough to overpay for over-long contracts, then they get what they deserve.
-
[PGT] Nashville Predators at Vancouver Canucks | Feb. 10, 2020
gameburn replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
Bailey was good wasn't he? I was a bit surprised, we've had AHLers with good stats come here and not do too much (Boucher comes to mind). Mac looks a bit slow at times, but I wonder if that's not because of his size -- same as Myers that way. I think that between these two guys and the return of Ferland… we have seen the last of Eriksson. Also, Jake is starting to make a difference in the top lines, really adds something. I feel sorry for Schaller and even Motte, as you can sort of see what's coming. -
[GDT] Preds @ Nucks Feb 10 2020 - 7pm Pacific - SNET
gameburn replied to xereau's topic in Canucks Talk
I hope that Bailey gets a real shot at it here. It would be nice if he could play in the top 3 lines of course, as he can skate and obviously he can finish. -
That's not a bad idea, something has to be done. And a "Loui" clause -- if after 50% of a contract is up with one of these UFAs, either side can opt out. Perhaps with a buyout on management's side.
-
[GDT] Canucks @ Wild, February 6 2020 - 5:00 PM PST
gameburn replied to therodigy's topic in Canucks Talk
Last game I remember someone on the board mentioning that in spite of playing a bit better than earlier in the year, "Eriksson is still just one bad game away from Utica." Well, this is starting to look like that game. Last game wasn't exactly great either. So.... If Ferland returns, or even if MacEwen continues to play physically, is the Eriksson experiment over? -
[GDT] Nucks @ Bruins - Feb 04 2020 - 4pm Pacific - SNET
gameburn replied to xereau's topic in Canucks Talk
I think you are right. All of the older players looked exhausted, sure sign of travel/overplaying. Edler at his worst, Sutter at half speed, Eriksson looking, well, like Eriksson. Only Beagle showed a little zip among the vets. -
[GDT] Nucks @ Bruins - Feb 04 2020 - 4pm Pacific - SNET
gameburn replied to xereau's topic in Canucks Talk
I was assuming that he (and Hunter?) had a role in the drafting and developing of the Marlies stars, in particular Sandin, (Kapanen was picked by the Penguins, but obtained by the Leafs). It is true that he was only an assistant GM. He did hire Keefe and he did have a role in the 2018 Marlies that won the Calder. I would agree that if Dubas's main contribution was the big contracts, then he has to be seen as not terribly successful -- those contracts have given half their cap space to about one fiftth of the team (Nylander, Matthews, Tavares, Marner, = 39/40 million.) On the other hand, he didn't give 6 million a piece to 2 D men that aren't really top 2 D (Edler and Myers.) But your point is well taken: those 4 contracts and the inability to acquire depth on D and in goal is trouble. -
[GDT] Nucks @ Bruins - Feb 04 2020 - 4pm Pacific - SNET
gameburn replied to xereau's topic in Canucks Talk
I think that if the CAP were raised 8 million or more pretty quickly (18 mos?) those signings wouldn't look so bad. But Tavares combined with Nylander just seems to eat up so much of the money. Matthews and Marner are even more money if I remember right, but you get so much bang for the buck with those guys. More and more I wonder how it happened that neither the players nor the owners/mgt decided to do nothing about the model for paying players. I realize the CAP has been good the parity concerns, but it doesn't seem to work for a lot of the traditional teams that have the largest fan bases. Who really cares if Carolina or Nashville master the CAP and make every playoffs. -
[GDT] Nucks @ Bruins - Feb 04 2020 - 4pm Pacific - SNET
gameburn replied to xereau's topic in Canucks Talk
Nylander was odd, wasn't he just an RFA when they popped the big bucks? Never understood that one. And Tavares... I agree.... big gamble there. Makes more sense than overpaying Nylander, but what a gamble. I was looking at their Cap situation on Cap friendly, and I think that even at 2 million less for each player, he would still have cap worries, that's how tricky it is for them now. -
[GDT] Nucks @ Bruins - Feb 04 2020 - 4pm Pacific - SNET
gameburn replied to xereau's topic in Canucks Talk
Dubas's drafting has been good, contracts and trades, I'm not sure about, but probably not as good. This playoffs will be the test I think. I've always thought of Toronto as being ahead of us in the rebuild war, but if we make the playoffs and they don't... lol, I think we can conclude they are not ahead of us. I like the balance and morale of our team. Players play for each other here. Although I'd like a bit more push back here sometimes, Toronto is not even as good, and we do have Ferland in the wings. (I also like Fantenberg and Virtanen as well as Miller for a physical presence.) -
[GDT] Nucks @ Bruins - Feb 04 2020 - 4pm Pacific - SNET
gameburn replied to xereau's topic in Canucks Talk
Forgot about that... you're right; they had 2 decent extra goalies. McElhinny and Pickard. (Pickard the elder, lol.) And wasn't Sparks in there at some point? -
[GDT] Nucks @ Bruins - Feb 04 2020 - 4pm Pacific - SNET
gameburn replied to xereau's topic in Canucks Talk
The goalie situation is a killer. Overpaying Matthews is going to keep on hurting -- no way to improvise something from here on til the TDL. Although Dubas is pretty clever, we'll see I guess. Another D would be nice too... oops there is that Cap problem again. -
[GDT] Nucks @ Sharks - Jan 29 2020 - 7:30PM Pacific - SNET
gameburn replied to xereau's topic in Canucks Talk
Amazing transformation for Jake: now the key guy on the 2nd pp unit. And people still want to trade him for a pick. Wait til Montreal offers him 4.5 million RFA offer sheet and we have been trying to low ball him at 2.75. -
[GDT] Nucks @ Sharks - Jan 29 2020 - 7:30PM Pacific - SNET
gameburn replied to xereau's topic in Canucks Talk
The announcer said, "Edler lifted his foot," I'm watching two games at once (Edmonton game too.) That's what I heard. Re: other issue: The penalty was his 22nd, only Wilson who would have beaten the tar out of Karlsson for the hit on Motte has more minor penalties than Edler. I'm sorry: Edler sucks. The love for this guy just escapes me completely. We're worried about the cap and this guy is eating 6 million of it. Complete waste. -
[GDT] Nucks @ Sharks - Jan 29 2020 - 7:30PM Pacific - SNET
gameburn replied to xereau's topic in Canucks Talk
Edler: Do we need him? Imagine wasting that title on Burrows when this guy is here. A penalty and a blown 3 on 1 in the two chances he has with the puck (15 seconds real time?.) And he doesn't even look upset or disturbed. 6 million a year for this guy. -
[GDT] Nucks @ Sharks - Jan 29 2020 - 7:30PM Pacific - SNET
gameburn replied to xereau's topic in Canucks Talk
Very good question. Dirtiest hit we've seen in weeks. Suspension material. No penalty. I hate to waste Virtanen... but... somebody has to go out there and put a Kassian on him. -
[GDT] Nucks @ Sharks - Jan 29 2020 - 7:30PM Pacific - SNET
gameburn replied to xereau's topic in Canucks Talk
The technique was not good: put his hands (and face!) in the line of fire. Looks like he might use the same technique for intercepting passes as blocking shots, yikes. -
Cap Hell for Canucks!!! (GREAT NEWS from Daly re: CAP for next year!!)
gameburn replied to HKSR's topic in Canucks Talk
Well, Jake is going to be looking for a raise at the end of the season/summer. So, unless he gets injured in the next month and disappears for some months, he is going to be getting more money. I think you are right about the 2.5 to 3. I hope it's 3. But for his sake he should go for a bridge deal unless they pay him at least 4 million. If he keeps playing at this level in a year or two, he will get another raise. Re: Beagle and Sutter. You're right, their money is a different issue, but it would be bad for Jake to make less than them, because he is doing more than them now, And by the end of the year we are likely to see an even greater separation. Beagle makes 3.0, Sutter a remarkable 4.375. Only Eriksson (and of course, poor Baertschi) make more for doing less than Sutter. Jake is no longer an entry level guy, here by charity and hoping to prove himself. The guy has become a legit top6 player on a team that keeps looking for top 6 players. He deserves Baertschi money at least = 2.5 or 3.5, can't tell for CapFriendly whether the million savings is taken off his numbers. (show him at 2.39 million, which feels low.) If they don't make him a real offer, I would imagine another team (Montreal? lol) doing so. I could see them offering 4 million. We'd have to match that wouldn't we? -
Cap Hell for Canucks!!! (GREAT NEWS from Daly re: CAP for next year!!)
gameburn replied to HKSR's topic in Canucks Talk
Your point remains valid. Thanks to you, I started looking at our team, and other teams. Incredible as it may be, we have money locked into players that are never going to play a minute for this team!: 1. Recapture money for a retired goalied (!!!); 2. Baertschi's money; We also have money going into players that don't play anywhere near the level of their pay -- this is going to be particularly important next year and especially the year after -- guys like Eriksson, but others too, including Beagle. The problem obviously is that we now, finally, have elite players -- only 3 of which made it the all-star game -- this means that for every 2 to 5 million more average these guys make, you have to find some way to get everyone else to work for much less than that average. CAP is determined by the team you have on the ice, right? And a team is 2 goalies, 7 D, 13 forwards? i.e., 22? (Even though you may have 50 players with varying types of contracts?) Assuming it is 22 players does that mean the avg = 3.8 million? This isn't easy. Do we really want to let Virtanen go in free agency because we can't scrape together an "average wage" of 85 million divided by 22 ? i.e. 4 million. Is he really less valuable than Sutter, Eriksson, Beagle, Myers, Edler, Tanev? Presently, Virtanen makes LESS than Roussel, Stecher, Schaller, Leivo and Benn. (Schaller and Benn... lol) He should be paid more than Beagle or Sutter.... somewhere around Pearson money. Of course, Pearson is underpaid right now too (below 3.8 million). Another way to look at is that he is presently paid about a third of what Baertschi is paid, and 250,000 more than Goldobin, lol. Players have pride, Virtanen and his agent aren't going to take Motte/Roussel money. Not when he is playing like Pearson (let alone Ferland lol.) That means a 2 million raise. Stecher and Markstrom are going to get raises too. Half a million for Stecher? A million for Markstrom? That's 3.5 million right there, including Virtanen. I mean if Hockey had djinis we'd get LE, Baertschi and Management is handicapped because they are icing "dead" players: Spooner, Luongo, Baertschi. Spooner's thing is done quick I think, but not before Markstrom, Jake etc. get raises. It's the number of contracts, and dead Cap space, just as you say. And overpaying untradeable players -- like Eriksson for sure, but arguably Edler as well.. Everybody thinks this problem is years away, but Virtanen is going to have to be paid, as is Markstrom. -
At what point do so-called support players become more than that? I suspect in Jake's case that may have occurred in the St. Louis game or sooner. I think that if he keeps playing like this (more assists than goals, hardly ever taking penalties, playing top line minutes, quarterbacking a second powerplay unit, projecting point totals somewhere between half a point and 3/4ths of a point per game) the team will at least TRY to make him a core player. Money and the cap issues are the problem, not Jake. He has to be in that top group now, somewhere after Hughes, Boeser, Pettersson and Horvat, but way ahead of the likes of Miller, Stecher, other vets, and whoever is in Utica or Russia. He has never had a serious injury, can protect other players at times and KEEPS GETTING BETTER. He is also a home-town kid who is a fan favorite. I suspect that he is now on a "not going to be traded anytime soon" list. Imagine what Montreal would give for this guy, or a contender (Arizona? Boston!!?)
-
As long as Jake is okay with this and everyone is upfront about the money/cap issue, which I suspect they will be.