BlastPast
-
Posts
1,351 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by BlastPast
-
-
Fantastic!
-
Nice pick-up !
-
1
-
-
Have to credit where it is due; in the last 6 months Allvin has given the organization a much-needed infusion of young talent at the right-defense position. Hopefully the results are satisfactory.
-
For a team that struggled to kill penalties, do they really want to add a player that is going to cause them to spend more time on the PK? Soucy is an elite penalty taker. He's not that young either (29 in July). He's an option but some of these numbers being thrown around are a bit rich.
-
1
-
1
-
-
43 minutes ago, ilduce39 said:
I agree with you 100% - but as a joke (but not joking) we should ALSO try and pry Girard out of Colorado.
Push the tipping point between “big” and simply “good” defenceman. Who needs to clear the crease when we have the puck the whole time?
You’d have to think a D of
Hughes-Makar
Girard-Fox
Grzylcek-Krug
would still flat-out dominate.
No Girard; move Krug to his spot and add Spurgeon.
-
50 minutes ago, ilduce39 said:
Aside from Graves (whom I’d love as well for the right price) being 2 years older and decidedly less handsome, as a UFA he first and foremost needs to want to sign here.
I’m also not buying the low term and cap hits I’m seeing for him. Maybe to go to a contender but for us to get him? I’m skeptical.
All that said, I guess Hanifin would *also* need to be open to signing long term with us. And that’s no guarantee given his attitude towards re signing with old stink town.
Absolutely. It's very easy to throw a name around as an option but it takes two to tango. The same goes for any possible UFAs.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Hanifin no; Graves yes (depending on the price). Given Hughes/Hronek I think Hanifin would be going a little too big. I don't think they need as strong an offensive player as him behind Hughes/Hronek. He is a good player, just not sure if he's an ideal/appropriate fit as a player or contractually.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
Curious what they are going to do with the cap space. I like the move if they are now able to bring in a younger defenseman through either trade or offer sheet. I hope the plan isn't to make a big investment in an O28 player. Maybe get aggressive and try to offer sheet K'Andre Miller? A long shot, but that could be an appealing endeavor.
-
Buyout or trade Beauvillier if necessary.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, HorvatToBaertschi said:
I've made arguments defending this trade on what feels like dozens of recycledposts. If you haven't watched Hronek develop over the years (as I and many fans who are delighted with this trade have), or researched enough on him since then, then there's no reasonable argument to be had.
We spent a middle 1st and a middle 2nd round pick on the position we've been trying to bolster since Bieksa left nearly 10 years ago. We did that considering it's the most coveted position on the market, and with respect to our core's age and development.
It's a win every day of the week, and there's not much argument to be had, except if you'd be happy to move on from Petey, Miller, Hughes and Demko and start another long rebuild.
The trade is a risk but this post neatly summarizes a more optimistic, yet reasonable, take on that risk. Also worth mentioning that Vancouver gets the 106th pick from Detroit.
-
2 hours ago, Provost said:
Except the timing in the real world isn't likely to work out like that. The buyout window is right after the playoffs finish and end before free agency, this is so that players have a chance to actually find a new team. You also can't buy out an injured player.
The chances of both Pearson and Poolman being declared healthy before the end of June, or even that they will be medically ruled out for the entire next season so you can use their LTIR on replacement players.... is remote at best. Not knowing those things mean you have to make moves to be cap complaint in the event they "might" come back at the start or during the season. You can't spend the money you would need to fit them under the cap otherwise, You can't be in a position in December with Pearson being declared healthy but no way to fit him under the cap.
Teams at the end of the summer have already made their moves and won't have cap space to add significant salary.
The only realistic solution is to trade or buy out players before July 1st to become cap compliant including both Pearson and Poolman's contracts. Then do nothing in free agency as you don't have any cap space. Then "hope" that by training camp you have some certainty on their status for the season so that you could put them on LTIR and use that freed up cap space to pick up players that shake loose from other teams due to cap constraints. Inevitably every year some decent player making $3-4 million gets pushed out of the roster by a cheaper youngster.
You can also waive Myers after his bonus is paid and "hope" someone takes on that salary. Again, that doesn't help you in time to make moves in free agency.. it just might give you some space to make minor moves during the heavy waiver period and roster shuffling teams have around training camp. Myers isn't great, but you probably aren't getting a Myers level replacement back... just cap space that could come in handy at some point in the season if an opportunity arises.
Yes, I am aware of this. My comment was in the event that both were declared healthy. Pearson is assumed onto the roster, but I believe there were reports of Poolman resuming skating with the team and trending toward a return (I could be mistaken here, this was a while back). If they are stuck in limbo with regard to Poolman's health status that does make things a bit trickier but I think it can still be accomplished without moving out a 5M+ contract. Just to be clear, this is theoretical and not necessarily what I would consider the advisable route. Having a 22-man roster, moving a player like Beauvillier (likely with some incentive attached), and filling all holes with league min. players is not ideal. Very questionable whether the resulting roster would be able to get above the .500-.599 P% range so the playoffs would be no certainty.
-
They can be cap-compliant even in the event Pearson and Poolman are declared healthy. It would involve going with a 22-man roster and buying out Poolman and possibly Beauvillier -- although it would be preferable to trade Beauvillier (with up to 1.4 retained) instead. There would not be much $$$ to make significant additions so there would have to be some bargain-bin hunting. But, it is possible so technically they don't have to move a contract to another team. If Poolman is on LTIR it ups the budget by 500K. If Pearson is on LTIR or the cap moves up by more than 1 million it gets somewhat easier to make more significant upgrades. I think guys like Eller/Bonino/Kulikov/Talbot/Rittich could be suitable depth additions in that event. It remains to be seen how realistic those options are.
-
The contract extensions (with NTC/NMC) that Gillis signed circa 2012-13 are what really bound the team's hands. They were justifiable at the time because of the performance of the team in the years during and prior to this period. Unfortunately, Gillis did very little future-building between 09-14 and as a result there was a scant internal supply of players to boost/supplement the existing roster. It was clear the team was trending down but unfortunately when you have 6 or so veterans with an NTC/NMC it effectively entrenches the roster, thus making the "disassembling" part of a rebuild (stupid term) difficult to achieve.
-
-
Yzerman was looking at the prospect of having to pay both Hronek and Seider next year (as well as Raymond and Bergren). Perhaps he saw Hronek not as redundant but as someone who was somewhat dispensable (given Seider) and decided to make a move ahead of time.
-
1
-
2
-
1
-
-
Looks like the Islanders' 1st is trending towards the 17-19 range. May be a disappointing result for those hoping it would roll over and become unprotected next year.
-
1
-
-
Looks like the pick will be this year and in the 14-19 range.
-
On 3/14/2023 at 7:41 PM, aGENT said:
No, I thought of the ones I mentioned, at the time. And yes, Foote was a throw in. I'd probably agree he's slightly inferior to Bear...granted, like half of CDC was willing to pay a fair bit for him, and think he could be Hughes long term partner partner
But the discussion wasn't players IDENTICAL to Bear. It was simply bottom pair D.
Smith's "NHL resume" isn't all that great. And of course the value is higher. Marino's a legit top 4 D and one of the best defense-leaning "fancy stat" D in the league. To get him for a middling, not-a-prospect-anymore and a 3rd is CHEAP.
You could probably also include on waivers this season...Philippe Myers, Zaitsev, Mike Reilly and Mete. And traded...Klingberg, Kulikov, Gostisbehere Bear himself, and Schenn.
And that doesn't include the solid depth D's that signed for value deals in July (which no, I'm not going to go through for you, sorry) or any of our own prospects who may push for those spots on cheap ELC/bridge deals.
So again, bottom pair D are frequently, readily, available for cheap from any number of avenues. There is zero need for us to overspend for the position.
Bear's a perfectly fine bottom pair D, and at the right price we should all be happy to have him back. IMO, that right price is under $2m.
You saying it doesn't make it true. Is there a quote somewhere from someone involved with the trade confirming he had no material weight in the deal? Bear is more than a slightly more accomplished NHL player than Foote at this point. I was referring to Smith's resume in comparison to Rathbone's; it was not a small difference. Yes, the Marino deal was good value, but it was one deal. You talk as if these deals go down frequently. That list of players is irrelevant; some of them are rentals; some left-side defensemen; some 30 + years old. Not a comparable group. Mete? Zaitsev? These are your exemplars? Bear is a solid #5 and I would be shocked if he signed for less than 2 million -- especially if it is more than a one year deal. My comment is less about how fantastic Bear is and more about the scarcity of available and suitable alternatives. Trevor Van Riemsdyk just got 3.0 X 3. Do you think Washington sign that deal if there all these readily available, young right-side defensemen changing hands at low-cost? Part of Bear's appeal is his age.
-
1
-
-
On 3/8/2023 at 6:43 PM, aGENT said:
Off the top of my head, Bear is a pretty obvious example himself. Foote was literally just thrown in, with a draft worth of picks, for Jeannot. Marino (a far, FAR better D than either of these guys) was moved for the equivalent of Rathbone and a 3rd.
I'm not going to scour through all the trade and waivers for the last few years to find you examples but it's not actually hard or expensive to get decent bottom pair D these days.
So you can't think of any. Foote was literally thrown in? You know that? Also, he is an inferior player to Bear. I would consider the package that Marino went for as being higher in value than Rathbone and a third given Smith's NHL resume at the time. If anything your reply proves my point.
-
1 hour ago, MeanSeanBean said:
Yes that is their ages. But my point still stands. Bear has played very well with Hughes this year. But in his times away from Hughes, he hasn't looked nearly as good. I'd rather pay Schenn 1.5 then Bear 2.5 to play with Hughes.
17 minutes ago, RinkonRenfrew said:So? Only reason the 25 year old should fetch more is on a longer term deal if the signing team feels he has upside. On a hypothetical one year deal with both being ufa at the end, they’re worth what they can do for that year. I like Bear, but at even money it would be hard to take him over Schenn this year.
I don’t see the issue with a one year deal for bear. I just don’t see him breaking out and requiring a large salary. Wish him all the best and am rooting for him, but he’s not a solution to any competitive team’s top 4.
A 25 year-old player is a much better bet to provide persistent benefit than a 33 year-old.
-
6 hours ago, MeanSeanBean said:
They guy he replaced? Schenn was a league minimum contract who played far above his paygrade, just like Bear, for half the price.
One is 25 and the other is 33.
-
7 hours ago, aGENT said:
He's a perfectly fine 4b/5a. Happy to have him back at a reasonable rate. But as proven by the measly 5th (with retention!) that we paid for him, guys like this are readily available, sometimes even on waivers for free. With a still largely flat cap, and our bigger need to continue improving our top 4, it's simply not a place where we're in position to overpay.
Either we get him at a reasonable $1.5-$2m, or we look elsewhere.
Care to name any?
-
1
-
-
Some horrible takes in here. Didn't realize Bear was so underrated.
-
3
-
-
On 3/6/2023 at 11:06 AM, myre said:
1) I would love to know the analysis you used to come to that conclusion.
2) which fans exactly? Because on CDC that just not is the case. Over the years I have seen some absolutely crazy proposals on how players on the Canucks are worth way more than what they are in reality.
1) Call it a hunch.
2) See the Ethan Bear contract thread for anecdotal evidence of this.
But the discussion wasn't players IDENTICAL to Bear. It was simply bottom pair D.
Filip Hronek | #17 | D
in Current Roster
Posted
Forget about Hronek, how about Pearson's offseason transformation !