Tower102

Ya, I played around with capfriendly for next year. I put the cap at 84 million so the bottom of the projection. It obviously depends what our UFA and RFA's sign for. Here is what I did: Toffoli at 5.5m (I think this is fair, but he could get up to 6-6.5 on the high end) Markstrom at 5.5m (could leverage our poor performance without him and get 6m, but he hasn't been super consistent over his career) Tanev at 5m (maybe he argues to get the Myers 6m, but with his injury past I think we could argue him at 5) Virtanen at 3.4m (used Kapanen as a comparable but slightly lower) Gaudette at 1.25m (used Virtanen's last contract as a comparable) Stetcher at 2.3m (same as this year, if its higher we drop him) I traded Baer and Sutter for no roster pieces and we have 2.35 m in cap space. If the top 3 go for higher, we could look at trading Benn to get rid of his 2m or we drop stetcher and bring in rafferty. So... it is not a given we can fit them all but it certainly is possible if we negotiate well and get rid of a couple contracts. It would become easy if Eriksson retires or mutually terminates his contract and or the cap is nearer the high end of the projection. Ferland and his health also will make a difference, my projected roster had him slot into the 4th line for Sutter. If he is unhealthy and remains on LTIR or retires than that is an additional 3.5m off the books.

That is such a huge difference, I would definitely count on it being 84-85. If the Canucks get good value out of resigning their UFA's and RFA's, and can get rid of 1 contract (Baer, Benn, Sutter, Beagle, Rousell, Eriksson) then they will be able to bring back everyone (Tanev, Markstrom, Taffoli, Stetcher, Fantenberg?). I could see Stetcher and/or Fantenberg being allowed to walk if we feel Rafferty and Juolevi will be ready next year. Right now it seems like Markstrom is required with our record without him, Taffoli has been playing great with the team, and Tanev has been so good with Hughes. I think Benn would be relatively easy to get rid of, don't think we need both Beagle and Sutter and while they don't offer great value, I also don't see them as overly difficult to trade.

I am loving this trade. In fairness it is hard not to with the hot start Toffoli has had. When Boeser is back at the playoffs the Canucks have 6 top 6 forwards for the first time in a long time. Solid 3rd line, and checking 4th line. They have their puck moving difference making defender in Hughes, and while they could definitely improve their overall D, they don't really have a super weak player back their as Fantenberg has been playing well. With Markstrom playing at an elite level (hopefully he returns in form) and a solid backup in Demko, our G is set. Will they be favorites in the playoffs? No. Can they get hot and take out some teams and get us hopeful? Absolutely. Hopefully they can ship out some bad contracts in the offseason and re-sign Tanev, Markstrom and Taffoli to bring back this team for next year.

I pencilled him down in Utica at the beginning of the season too, but if keeping him up this year leads to him agreeing to terminate his contract this off season, it is definitely worth while. He has also brought us more value playing on Horvats wing than either Baer or Goldobin would have most likely.

I wouldn't be surprised either way, but I think after the bonus is paid out on July 1st he would rather have his contract terminated then play in the minors. I think by keeping him up in the big leagues all year JB has helped LE out and maybe he will return the favour. He would only make 5 million for 2 years stuck in the minors or he could terminate the contract and sign elsewhere for 1-2 million a year being a defensively responsible winger on a 3rd or 4th line.

It's a second and a 3rd, the condition on the 3rd is just whether it is their 3rd or the other 3rd they own that will be higher in the draft. Still a good pick up though.

Is Gal just a cap dump or does Minny plan on resigning him? If they don't plan on resigning him what could they get retaining half his salary and trading him to a contender at the deadline?

Spooner is off that year, Luongo is an extra year. God it is annoying that we wouldn't be in any kind of cap crunch right now if the NHL didn't back screw us on the Luongo recapture.

Very optimistic. More like Baer gone with a pick or us retaining. Eriksson gone with a HIGH pick of prospect for a low pick and likely salary retained. Even if we did decimate our picks to make this happen: Baer, Eriksson, Schaller, Benn, Leivo, Stetcher, and Sutter all off the books leaves us with 20.4 million To resign our guys you want it will cost around: (don't bother arguing the exact numbers as know one knows what someone will sign for but this is a general ballpark for the total) Tanev - 5m (.5m increase) Markstrom - 5m (1.4m increase) Virtanen - 3m (2.75m increase) Gaudette - 2m (1m increase) Total: 5.65m increase Add: Anderson - 2m Reaves - 2.5m Pietrangelo - 8m Total 12.5m This gets us just under the cap, but puts us in cap hell the next year with the only contracts off the books the next year are Edler at 6m and Pearson and 3.75m in order to resign Petterson, Hughes and Demko which combined will likely cost us around 20m. The canucks will do minor moves like shopping a Benn and Baer, letting Schaller and Lievo walk and hopefully that is enough to resign Tanev, Markstrom, Virtanen and Gaudette to we can ice the same team next year we have right now.

A 3rd rounder for Campbell would have been fine. But it was 2 3rds with a chance of one becoming a 2nd. If you want to look at the trade as Campbell = a 3rd thats fine but then they lose the Moore+ 3rd/2nd for Clifford. For me Moore=Clifford. Clifford has the experience, Moore has the PK time and better contract.

I don't realistically think these will happen but would like to see the Canucks trade Benn to help free up some cap space for the off season to try to keep everyone else. I honestly wouldn't expect much back... maybe a 3rd or 4th? Carolina might be interested in taking him to help their D depth with Hamilton out and have the cap space. Maybe Toronto trades Kapanen to Philly for Ghost. Toronto gets defense help, philly gets rid of a guy rumoured to be on the way out. Philly then deals a pick to Van for Benn to replace the lost LHD depth from losing Ghost.

Clifford is hardly an upgrade on Moore when considering Moore is signed to another year and Clifford is a rental. To me that is basically a wash, meaning the Leafs gave up a 3rd and either a 2nd/3rd for a back up goalie. Campbell may not have had goal support in LA, but now he doesn't have any defence support in Toronto which will affect his overall numbers more. I will concede that I think he has better upside than his numbers show this year, but that is too high a price for a back up goalie. They were more or less forced into this trade as they are in such a bad cap position for next year that they need to go all in to get in the playoffs this year so its not a terrible trade for them, I just think the Kings got better value out of it.

They got what they were looking for... but it does not make it a good trade. They gave up too much value.

Clifford and Moore are close to being a wash... Clifford slight upgrade in player but is ufa compared to Moore being signed one more year at $775K. That leaves 2 X 3rd picks (with one possibly becoming a 2nd) for a back up goalie... I mean they needed one but that is a steep price. Good thing they have so many 6th and 7th rounders this year haha.

It is nearly impossible to compare the NBA to NHL as the rules are quite different. In the NBA its a soft cap where you can be over it, and if you are, your trades have to nearly match in salaries which eliminates the draft pick for player on the deadline type deal, which more or less removes the value for a trade. Whereas those teams can sign guys to certain contracts that are considered exceptions where it allows the team to add guys despite being over the cap. The NHL system makes WAY more sense, the only way I say the NBA system working better is it is designed to allow teams to sign all their home grown talent to keep teams together that they drafted (as long as they are willing to pay luxury taxes).

I guess we just have to disagree then. I can't fathom that you would change out a lineup that is winning so much but I guess I can be happy Green is coach not you. I also trust Horvat and Pearson and what they say about playing with Eriksson rather then just go with stats or fans observations. On another note, I want to thank you for the civil discourse on this matter. I enjoy hashing out thoughts and like when we can come to a point where we both just have to say we disagree and it has not become personal at any point. Whatever happens with the lineup, Go Canucks!

Ok so it sounds like we are done hashing out Boeser. I am not concerned with him in real life, just had the issue with him at Center on a fourth line. For Eriksson, can you clarify that for next game you would like him removed from the lineup in favour of an AHL callup? If so, why would you change a winning formula? I understand that if we cool off then feel free to pull him and try other things. My main issue is that this is the best hockey the team has been playing in a VERY long time. 13 wins in 16 games is unreal. Lets run this winning streak as long as we can with what we are doing then when we inevitably cool off start talking about making changes. PS. I assume the callups are for Motte...looked like a bad hit. Probably will see one on the fourth line.

I am not trying to argue with you, but you can't spew nonsense and not have it disputed. Boeser is not a center. He is a winger. He is not under performing, I never said he was. It would be stupid to trade him as well. Also, he isn't currently in the top 6 so your wrong their too. I have not freaked out at all, just continue to calmly point out where you are wrong or have a nonsense idea (the whole point of these boards). You are waivering a lot on your timeline as well. Why bring up future contracts... has nothing to do with this year in terms of lines. There are really 2 points I am trying to lay out against what you said and you have yet to say a single thing that remotely makes me reconsider. 1. Boeser is not a center, and playing him on the fourth line is stupid. We have plenty of other centers so no need to force a winger in to center (Petterson, Miller, Horvat, Gaudette, Sutter, Beagle are all centers). 2. Why shake up the lineup when it has won 13 of the last 16 games. Eriksson included. I understand a desire to trade him although we have to understand how unlikely that is. But wanting to send him to the minors solely because he is overpaid is bad logic. If he was making 2 mil a year or less, we would be happy with him in our lineup making that much and people would not ask for him to be sent down. Since he is making 6 mil a year, we can understandably want to get rid of his overpaid contract... but it does not change the fact the team is better with him in the lineup. If you choose to respond to this again. please address one of those with facts about how your opinion of what the Canucks should do will make us better and why we should do that despite winning 13 of our last 16.

He is not living up to his role we brought him in for and paid him $6 mill for. If a trade is open without giving up too much we take it. Other than that, we have to ignore what he was paid for and what he was brought in for and look at who does what for our team. We are better with him on Horvat and Pearson's line right now than not. We are winning games. Horvat and Pearson are producing, and are speaking highly of Loui. It is TERRIBLE logic to put him in the minors just because his contract is too high or he is not living up to what we hoped even though he is a better option than anyone else for that spot on the roster. Now... if we start losing, things start to change and Horvat and Pearson start to lose their ability to produce with Loui, then Loui is on the shortest rope and gets bumped. But why fix what is not broken. I don't give a flying hoot what people think of individual players stats, if we are on a run of 13-3-0 in our last 16, status quo is the BEST option.

Obviously lines will shift throughout the whole year as you deal with injuries, hot and cold players, trying to figure out where new players fit in best. There has been very little lineup change on this 15 game run. In the future when we start to struggle again, sure we can try and shift things around, but when you find a lineup that is succeeding and running as a well oiled machine together, you play it out and take it as far as you can. Small in game moments are different. There are always different lines post special teams, or if you are down you might stack a line, but we are talking about what lineup should we go with to start a game as our default for the next few games. Boeser on the 3rd line is already a possible waste of his talent, and the only reason he is there is because Virtanen is performing well currently and so it allows them to balance out scoring with him on Gaudette's wing. Give it a rest if you are going to drop him further down to the 4th line and he is a winger so don't put him at center when we have an abundance of centers already.

What do you disagree with? You still think Boeser (a skilled winger) should play 4th line C? Do you disagree and think we should shake up our winning roster so that we can put a guy in there that will have a couple extra goals on his total but limits the totals Horvat and Pearson can put up...while allowing more goals against. Should we put out a roster that will win less just so our overpaid player doesn't play in favour of someone who puts up marginally better stats. I for one would prefer we win...

You are high if you think Boeser is every going to play 4C. Also, your second line you have him double shifting while Gaudette gets no line. Canucks have won 13 of their last 16, don't think the lineup will change much. Ferland can either come in for Loui but more likely will start on the 4th with Beagle and Sutter. When Leivo is back maybe he comes in for Loui, but I would rather keep Loui in there. Leivo's last game was 15 games ago, since we have had Loui with Horvat and Pearson we have gone 12-3-0. Why on earth do we shuffle things while on a run like this. If we start losing, maybe we then look at a shuffle of the lineup. Winning and your impact is not just about stats on the board. Loui provides great defensive stability that allows Horvat and Pearson to take more offensive risk allowing them to put up better offensive numbers. I feel more comfortable with Loui on the ice closing out a win that any of the guys you listed.

Or do we resign Marky and trade Demko for another Horvat...? Heck it worked out well for us in such a weird way lets just repeat, Demko for 9th overall this draft, Marky for a young high potential G not really living up to expectations yet and a bottom 9 forward. Then we ride Di Pietro and that new G till he becomes an Allstar and start the cycle all over again.

You are just wrong. A first rounder is absolutely fair for a top 6 winger in his prime signed for multiple years. At the time Miller's contract looked fair and we had control. It now looks like a steal of a contract. Teams trade 1st rounders all the time for rentals. In fact a lot of people on the boards have at one point felt Sutter was worth a 1st. The team is not far exceeding expectations either. Are they exceeding them, ya a bit as we wouldn't have picked them to be first in the division, but Calgary, San Jose and Vegas under performing has played just as big a role in that. Going into the year I expected Calgary and Vegas to take the top 2 spots, San Jose to have the edge on the 3rd, with Vancouver, Arizona and maybe Edmonton fighting San Jose for the 3rd spot and a wild card spot. Nashville has under performed massively and the Jets with their bad luck with D has made the wildcard much more attainable as well. I certainly expected Vancouver to fight for a playoff spot and felt they would make or miss it dependent on their health. The so called experts have way too many teams to watch to realise how good/bad the Canucks have been the past couple years when healthy or injured. The last 2 years the Canucks would have been in the playoff race (not realistically making it though) if they didn't have long term injuries to Edler, Tanev and Sutter. We simply weren't deep enough to deal with losing our full first pairing defence and our defensive center. With the added depth from the off season, the added skill and toughness we were always going to be FAR from a bottom feeder. Add in a dynamic Hughes, Miller being better than expected, and solid goaltending we have found ourselves performing a bit better than expectations. Either way, the 1st was always going to be a mid round pick at the highest, especially considering we had 2 years to make the playoffs (or even come close). It would have been VERY unlikely for that pick to end up being in the top 10. I have a question for you, if you had to trade Horvat for a 1st rounder at the draft, what is the lowest pick you would trade him for?

Ya I just read through the first 15 or so. People seem to think that just because Tampa needed to clear cap space that it didn't matter the quality of player they were trading. I wonder if we had traded for Matthews because Toronto needed to clear cap space would fans still expect us to not give up anything more than a 3rd. People also saw that a 5 mil contract was tough for TB but was actually fair value for what he was producing, and now with his role on our team it seems like a bargain compared to contracts being signed. There were some people that were trying to point that out but they were definitely in the minority.