Got the Babych

Great players, and the ultra-rare players that don't slow down in their 30's, don't enter their primes at age 29.

I just said there's no guarantee he will explode in the post you are quoting, but at least he has potential. What is guaranteed is that when Miller starts his next contract he won't be 90+ player. It's more about keeping our top scorers. Our 3 centers happen to be our best scorers, and 2 of them often play on the wing. Bo, playing with other goal scorers would automatically get him more assists, and that looks like it will happen this year as we role the "top 9". But, goals of course are much more valuable than points as that's what ultimately wins games. Points are a thing, but goal scorers are more recognized and rightly so. We don't have elite players, which might be doable if we can score by committee and have a number of good players on rich but not outrageous contracts.

That sounds like every game...ugh

Yeah, maybe. JT was a 3rd line winger at roughly Bo's age, and you weren't predicting 99 points from him then. We (potentially) will have Bo for all his prime years, so that makes a difference. No guarantee that he will explode, but at least there is the potential. What we do know, and what is guaranteed, is that once JT starts his new contract he will decline (hopefully slowly) and never eclipse his contract year points.

Canucks technically stole that 8th overall later for like a 3rd round pick. Huge W.

I guess he was 26 at the start of his first big season, but was 27 at the end of it. So split the difference there, the point was you hadn't heard of him until he was roughly the age Bo is now, whereas Bo has been a much more consistent scorer through his career by age.

Except he has been through his NHL career by age. The 2 years makes a difference. JT was a 3rd line winger that you hadn't heard about until he was Bo's age now.

That's not what he's saying though. He is saying...well you quoted what Irf said in your post, which isn't that. Which is a fair point on the priorities thing from Bo's perspective. It was definitely a miscalculation on mgmt's part. They assumed, like most on here, that the rest of the league would be throwing assets at a 29 year player after a career year. JT was for sure being shopped, and if a decent return was offered then the Bo extension would have been pretty quick and easy and he probably would have taken less. When it became apparent other GMs were not going to sell their future for an aging/ breaking-out vet, priorities shifted and the focus was to sign JT instead of losing him for nothing. Signing JT to 8m and BB to 6.7 ups the ante, as Bo has been a better player than both at each stage of his NHL career.

Is that true? How often has a Canuck that was "out for 3-4 weeks" returned in 3-4 weeks?

He's 23 so not sure how much more he will get out of the AHL. Boner's been able to impose his will offensively in lesser leagues, but not in the NHL and he's not about to give up that identity. I really doubt he will accept that he's not a Hughes/ Makar/ Karlsson type player at the NHL level and be able to reinvent himself as a do whatever it takes D-Man.

That is a weird argument to make. JT is the better player because he had his breakout year at 29?

It's more about keeping your best players. Bo is not a 3C, he's arguably our best center (so far) who has been playing on a shutdown line with our lesser talented wingers. So, I guess you can say sure, he's been playing as a 3C, but has also managed to consistently be among the top scorers on the team while being utilized in a shutdown role against other teams top lines. He's also been a MUCH better producer than JTM at each year (by age) so far, and even tied JT for goals (essentially) last year which was JTs career year at age 29. Biggest complication though, is BB's contract. It would 100% be a huge insult to offer Bo less than BB is being paid as our top winger/ sniper. Bo plays a premium position, scores as many goals, and is an all around much better player than Brock (I love them both, though) If there is a huge trade windfall for Bo that includes a top 4 RD I would be sad, but OK if it went that route. But there was no one offering said windfall for JTM who we apparently value more, so how does that work? Bo is worth less to us, but more in trade value?

Pretty sure it's the Pet Mi Kuz line.

I get what you're saying, but they definitely weren't free. The dollars aren't ridiculous, but the price paid was blowing our small cap space wad on a position of (relative) strength, which prevented us from improving on our main need. RHD Marino was bandied about as a trade piece for some of our most valuable assets, and ended up as a cap dump. Those are the freebies in the NHL now.

What's this guaranteed top dollar 8 year contract you're speaking of?

The lack of success was a group effort, but yeah Greener (and his assistants) were glaringly bad at coaching and it was apparent pretty quickly. It is sad that we will never know what those teams could have accomplished, or what players would have been developed.

Because he is not going to sign for the reported "Kadri" of 7x7. He might get the "Huberdeau" elsewhere, but I don't think so, as it is a horrible contract offered from a uniquely unbalanced bargaining position.

Not always. Sometimes they actually change the rules retroactively to penalize teams. OK, one team.

Will more bananas be lost over a less than stellar return at the TDL, or JT going to another team in FA? Honest question, I think that is where we are at now.

But being injury prone or not is not about luck. There is a reason Lost Man Games is one of the few stats we've dominated in over the last decade, and it's not "Canuck Luck". Having a non NHL coaching crew, who's only desperate goal is to battle for a wildcard spot NOW and keep their jobs is a recipe for injuries. Selected players were worked like rented mules until injuries inevitably ensued. Sure, there is some luck involved and having a more talented team to spread out the workload helps. But, I would say that our collective team for the past 6 years or so was better than the horrible on ice results. Sadly we'll never know how they would have done with NHL coaching. Not bitter though!

That's fine, I hope JT does want to be here. The point is, though, that his agent's comments to the media during negotiations give absolutely no reason to believe that's true. Proof will be in the pudding, we will know eventually!

Haha, wow. I don't know what dots you're connecting upstairs, but I am not your stepdad.

Uh, yeah actually. Your dog shampooer's speculation on this subject has exactly the same weight as an agent's statements to the media during contract negotiations. They both have zero effect on the reality of the situation.

I could see it happening. I actually think the Canucks will do well, but...I think that every August/September so tempering expectations.