Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Millerdraft

Members
  • Posts

    2,088
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by Millerdraft

  1. So I got to page 49 and only gained two pages of pace so I figured I’d cut to the chase and just ask a trusted poster: Is Canuck fandom’s public opinion pretty much lining up as a repeat of “OMFG Benning just traded a 1st for a third line winger when he had Brisebois bent over a barrel due to the salary cap! The sky is falling!”? I guess people were cool with waiting a year and getting out from under the $12m in wasted cap space only to find out that JT Miller demanded a trade because Canucks’ brass weren’t “actively trying to compete for a Cup in our prime years” which set off a domino effect of Boeser not committing to a long term contract and Horvat informing management that he, much like JT Miller, was going to move on after his prime years were also wasted… But hey! We’ve got Hughes and Petey and some potential top-six scoring draftees that might be NHL caliber in four years when they’re looking back at how their prime years were spent building a Cup contender around!
  2. Where’s the Tampa cap dump? Even without paying Cernak’s $4m-ish they’re still up against it, no?
  3. It’s also a pretty buyout friendly contract given the fact it’s all salary and no signing bonuses Edit: Qwij beat me to the punch
  4. Hard pass at giving up the type of asset(s) that Bergevin would require to trade such a fan favourite. The optics would look terrible if he didn’t get a home run return. I think he’d be let off easier if he “did everything he could” to sign Gallagher “but at the end of the day $5.75m x 5 years” wasn’t enough to get it done. He’s essentially a playoff rental at this point (until he’s not when/if he re-signs). I like Gallagher’s game a lot, and he’d be a great fit in our top six, but I’m not sure I’d wanna lock into a five or six year term with him as a 29-year old free agent let alone give up the prime assets Montreal would require to make a deal go through.
  5. I’m not sure what people on here think a two-way D that puts up 30-40pts a season is worth but this is 2020 with an $81.5m Cap ceiling not 2005/2006 and a $39m salary cap when those type of defencemen were making $3.5m. In today’s era, that 8.9% of the Cap ceiling salary is equivalent to $7.3m and today’s $6m cap hit was equivalent to a $2.87m cap hit back in ‘05/‘06.
  6. Look, it’s not really a major add to the overall value (the difference between the rounds is self explanatory in that regard) but it is nonetheless added value. Sometimes just the threat of an offer sheet forces a trade at a more favourable cost than otherwise would be made without said leverage. Let’s just let this one lay down. It’s a little ridiculous to be splitting hairs over this in an otherwise jubilant thread, yes?
  7. Not to mention that a 3rd also has offersheet capability whereas a fifth holds no such value.
  8. Sure, I get it and understand why given the $2.3m/year difference in cap hits (not to mention the limited NTC vs NMC). Having said that, would you not agree that OEL is the better skater between the two and the more offensively gifted of the two? Arizona could also be stifling OEL’s motivation to a such a degree that it’s having a direct impact on his level of play. I mean, adding Phil Kessel & Taylor Hall into a lock it down coaching system? Talk about a completely disjointed management approach between Chayka and Tocchet. Surely that is having an impact (and it’s only gonna get worse now after this offseason’s fiasco).
  9. In general it also takes defencemen longer to learn their craft at the NHL level. Look at how old Lidstrom was when he started winning the Norris for like a decade in a row. If it took that long for a hall of famer that should say something to people.
  10. That’s true but I’m specifically talking about those that said “OEL is a declining asset at age 29 and his contract runs through until age 35!! Don’t people understand that NHL skaters fall off a cliff after 30?!” Some of those who were taking that stance have suddenly ignored that Schmidt’s contract is for the exact same age window and are openly excited about this. I find it funny because when the “defenceman decline after 30” narrative was brought up in the OEL thread, Nate Schmidt was one of the contracts I pointed out. ;)
  11. He better not be done. We aren’t even treading water yet. The holes in our lineup still have us drowning at this point (in terms of icing a mid tier playoff team).
  12. One major hole filled. That’s fantastic. I’m also kind of chuckling at those that were freaking out about OEL’s contract running through until the age of 35 but are excited about Nate Schmidt’s contract running through the age of 34. Personally, I don’t have a problem with either contract.
  13. People can just do an eye test on Weber to see the same trajectory is in the cards for AP but I do appreciate the data that backs up the theory. Cheers!
  14. And there it is. Canucks in tough to even make the playoffs at this point. Calgary, Edmonton and Vegas all improved while we have some gargantuan holes in our lineup at the moment.
  15. What does Benning (or his replacement) do if/when Seattle skips on taking him on?
  16. Benning is asking the exact same thing right about now
×
×
  • Create New...