jammin_jk
-
Posts
38 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by jammin_jk
-
-
54 minutes ago, Alflives said:
If we start having to trade away young assets (picks, prospects, players) just to dump these horrible contracts won’t that narrow our window for winning? Those young assets are supposed to be taking the place of guys who are too expensive, right? God, this is such a friggin’ mess!
Yes, it would shorten our window... that's why we shouldn't do it... we would be the Canucks circa 2011 with a younger small core, but our window would shrink...
That was the purpose of this thread. To see if we can remain competitive over the next few years (not our cup window anyways) while retaining our assets. I think my answer is "yes", we can do it. If you will read my original post you will see this. The only thing I am hopeful for is that somehow someone takes on Baertschi, even if we have to give up a fourth round(-ish) pick.
-
8 minutes ago, Where's Wellwood said:
Baer is off the books when Pettersson needs his new contract
Yes, but it would be good to get him off now... need to resign Jake and Markstrom among others. When you look at the numbers, we need him gone ASAP...
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, Alflives said:
The more I think on this cap issue, the more I get confused.
Beagle takes a huge load off Bo. Myers takes a huge load of Edler and Tanev. But resigning Baer and signing LE is 10 million in cap we could use elsewhere. It’s like JB’s mistakes are EXTREMELY costly.
Other teams have similar mistakes, but their GMs dump those mistakes, or send them to LTIR.
BINGO! I even forgot about Baertschi... I guess you could defend JB here because when he was signed it looked like Sven could be a top six winger so we gave him a bridge. But Beagle and Eriksson I never understood...
Hence the reason I created this post... better times are coming, but not before these mostly "useless" players are gone.
I also don't mind the Myers contract. He will be better next year. He's overpaid by about $1 million but the term is palatable. You only need to look at Winnipeg to see that he has value (I know they're missing Byfuglien and Trouba too).
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Alflives said:
This current cap problem is the direct result of JB’s philosophical approach to the rebuild. He signed expensive UFAs to long term contacts. Are we as good as we are now though if JB didn’t follow this philosophy? Maybe this cap trouble is just a function of us becoming a very good team, because JB drafted really top end players?
Signing Eriksson (and Beagle for that matter) to crap contracts isn't a function of becoming a good team... it's just overpriced contracts. I'm not blaming JB for these contracts, but there's no way to defend them and "better" GMs just don't have these contracts on their teams. I haven't looked, but do Tampa or Washington have any terrible contracts?
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, Where's Wellwood said:
We're already carrying too many forwards
It's not like removing Eriksson puts us at a deficit of forwards already on the books
It does if we manage to move Baertschi and don't resign some of our free agents. I feel like we're speaking two different languages so probably not worth arguing
I'd love to see your forward list (14 forwards with contracts amounts) with and without Eriksson just to prove my point...
-
8 hours ago, BigTramFan said:
Which salary estimates do you think are extremely optimistic? And what do you think would be a more realistic amount for that player?
Your roster should also include a 14th forward, the Luongo recapture penalty, the Spooner buyout hit...
-
8 hours ago, BigTramFan said:
Realistically Juolevi may not make the team. Or maybe he could beat out Fantenberg next training camp. Or perhaps he may be back in Utica and be recalled as depth in 2020/21. Either way makes no difference to the point I was making, which was that the Canucks will be able to ice a competitive roster with cap hit of less than $80m with relative ease.
Your roster from page 2 has a few contracts that may be underestimated and I'd love to see the cap hits beside all of your players because I don't think they have the bonuses included (which Pettersson and Hughes will both hit for sure). There is no "relative ease" about the cap next year and we can't carry over bonuses because 2021-2022 is even worse. I'd love to see your rosters with actual numbers. I've also never heard any professional recently guess that Markstrom would sign for $5 million. If he does, that would be incredible but he's closer to 5.5-6...
-
8 hours ago, BigTramFan said:
I believe JB will trade Eriksson prior to the last season of his contract. It will cost VAN some picks or prospects but this will clear $6m.
Edler and Pearson will also not be resigned when their contracts end. Clearing another $9.75m.
These will be the main moves to provide the cap space to sign Pettersson to a long term deal of about $10m AAV, and to sign Hughes to a bridge deal worth around $6m AAV.
There are also a bunch of ELC's coming through that will be used to reduce the overall cap of the roster, such as Hoglander, Podkolzin, Juolevi, Rathbone, Rafferty, etc.
Exactly what I wrote in my original post except I'm hopeful they can sign Edler to a one year deal after this one expires. Feel like he will take the hometown discount to be on a team that is getting close to contention...
-
15 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:
BUFFALO -- The Detroit Red Wings cleared the salary-cap charge of Pavel Datsyuk by trading him and the 16th pick in the 2016 NHL Draft to the Arizona Coyotes on Friday.
The trade was announced during the first round of the draft at First Niagara Center.
"It's huge," Holland told The Detroit News. "It's $7.5 million; every day we were looking. There were a lot of different teams, more than I expected, with a lot of different scenarios. But in some cases, obviously, they wanted to move bad contracts.
"I was OK waiting until July 1 (the start of free agency), but we were going to have to play a steeper price. But I didn't want to pay a lot of assets.
"A deal has to be a win-win. It was a deal both sides are happy with."
Detroit received the 20th pick and 53rd pick in the draft, and forward Joe Vitale.
------------------------------------------------
Note that Datsyuk never played a game for Arizona
So it was Datsyuk cap hit + Detroits 16th for Arizona's 20th + 53rd, plus Joe Vitale (throw in)…..that is a wash!
So, don't say it doesn't happen...…………..
I pray something like this happens but it isn't likely given JBs track record with trades like this... just don't bet on it... but nice find!
-
1
-
-
15 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:
Because of Eriksson's terrible contract and his play for the first 3 1/2 years, he was untradeable...…...no argument
But our team fortunes have change, as has Eriksson's play, and he has shown to be a valuable player in a restrictive way. He is a decent PKer and a very dependable defensive player, as shown by Green's use of him in the last minutes of close games.
Is he worth 6 Million, hell no! Is he worth 2.5 million per year, with a 6 million cap hit? Well, probably getting pretty close! Some might argue we should get something back....
If all it cost is a 2nd or a lesser prospect for that....my bet is he is snapped up...…………...and yes, Ottawa is a good target. as an after thought, I would not include Madden
maybe a lesser type......maybe a Brisebois or a Jasek and a 2nd
I might also add, at that point, after his bonus is paid...….he may not want to be in Utica for 2.5 million a year, and just may retire or he may dissolve his contract by mutual agreement, and go back to Europe and play
Don't think for a minute, he doesn't see the writing on the wall...……..it may have already been agreed on...…..
He will not go to Utica...……..not for long anyways
Hey... I'd love for this guy to retire but you can't depend on it. Everyone loves them some money! I promise there's no agreement between him and the team that he's retiring early. This is a professional athlete with pride...
If we had to give up a second, it's not worth it. Not with our drafting... Demko and Hoglander (and later picks like Madden and Gaudette) say "Hi".
I feel like you have a tendency to overvalue or undervalue our players to your benefit (overvalue Eriksson so he can be tradeable and undervalue Pettersson and Hughes to fit them under the cap).
-
15 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:
Zach Werenski…………...3 years @ $5.000 per
Josh Morrisey...…………..8 years @ $6.250 per
Ivan Provorov…………….6 years @ $6.750 per
Charlie McAvoy...………..3 years @ $4.900 per
Thomas Chabot...………..8 years @ $8.000 per
That is all the young Dman that are peers of Hughes...………….notice the bridges are all low, and none of the 8 year contracts are any where close to 10 Million
Travis Konechny………...6 years @ 5.500 per
Brock Boeser…………….3 years @ 5.875 per
Braydon Point...………….3 years @ 6.750 per
Matt Tkatuck……………...3 years @ 7.00 per
Patrick Laine...…………...2 years @ 6.750 per
Mikko Rantanen………….6 years @ 9.250 per
Kyle Connor...…………….7 years @ 7.142 per
Nico Hischier……………..7 years @ 7.250 per
That is since September, 2019...………….6 months ago!
Yes, you are right about Mariner and Mathews, but these guys are more in line with the norm. Notice when you get closer to 100 point seasons, the pay goes up.
As much as I love Pettersson and Hughes...……...they sit well with my quoted contracts, IMO
Tell me a single D-man on that list you'd trade for Hughes and a single forward you'd trade for Pettersson and I'd love to be the GM to take Pettersson and Hughes off your hands. They are better than any of those you listed already... and younger. Brayden Point and Rantanen are the closest but they are on elite teams and their linemates are inflating their stats...
-
17 hours ago, Where's Wellwood said:
Adding a new player that makes 2 million plus would be a net negative.
We could just replace Eriksson with someone already on the roster, like Leivo (who already makes 1.5)
So it becomes 2019-2020: Eriksson 6 million Leivo 1.5 million = 7.5 million
In the 2021-2022 season: Eriksson 4 million (buyout) Leivo 3 million (assume his salary DOUBLES, which it might not) = 7 million. Still a savings.
Or either Hoglander, Lind, Podkolzin, etc may be a low cost borderline 2nd line option by then.
Not sure you're understanding... if we buyout Eriksson he is no longer on our roster so he needs to be replaced by another player...
Here's the example:
Don't buy him out = $6 million against the cap
Buy him out = $4 million against the cap but need to fill the roster spot he leaves (so add Leivo at $2 million for example)... that also equals $6 million (basically replacing Eriksson with Leivo)
What you're not understanding is that buying him out creates an extra "one player hole" on our roster that must be filled (replacing him is the cost of the buyout + the player you replace him with)
-
40 minutes ago, Alflives said:
Bingo. Great players, no matter their age, get paid now once done their ELC. Petey is getting over 11, and Hugs is getting over 9. I can see 20 million to get both done.
I agree 20 to get both done long term, that's why I think Hughes is getting a bridge deal next time around. He has no arbitration rights and we will have to play hardball with him. Not sure Petey is getting quite 11 (I predicted 10), but we're close for sure...
-
1
-
-
32 minutes ago, Alflives said:
Not possible. We are going to lose any depth we do have to clear cap. Add to that we are going to have to give up picks and prospects to dump the crap contracts we have. That’s a team who’s window for winning is short, because we have to give up our pipeline of support ELC guys to get rid of JB’s previous signings.
I'm not sure it's all doom and gloom... have you read my original post (bless you if you could make it through)? I do agree our D-depth will be impacted next year (Tanev), but our forwards won't be and I'm hoping that one of our promising D's can step up next year a bit (Rafferty, Juolevi, Brisebois). Also, Stecher would have to play more minutes, which I think he can. And Hughes will be better next year and I bet Myers will be better being his second year with a new team. I'd argue he's been a little bit better recently even (5 goals in the last month). I do not support setting draft picks or A-B+ level prospects just to dump cap. Gillis went all in in 2011 and we all know how that went. The team is finally recovering. I would rather build the way Tampa has. Give yourself a chance every year and don't sell your future to do it. I know we aren't there yet but I'd prefer a competitive team every year in the playoffs than one who's favored to win the cup one year (like our 2011 team).
-
1
-
-
Just now, Alflives said:
It’s not Loui’s fault his cap cost is killing any chance of us improving our depth. That’s JB’s fault for being stupid at UFA time.
No arguments here... he's learned along the way, but JB has signed some doozies early in his GM career. The point of this thread is to see how we can work around it while not getting "worse" and not giving up picks or prospects to do so (like some here have suggested).
-
1
-
-
15 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:
As for what I meant is this...……..salary's will always go up, so what I meant was that if Hughes and Pettersson were to get 10 Million down the road, it would be the natural attrition, and totally understandable. But to get Hughes and Pettersson there, there are several ways, and a long term bridge"type" deal, would do it with less demands on the cap, now and in the near future...…..I am thinking closer to 7 million than 8 million. (PS.I don't think 3 year pros go from 1 Million to 10 million all in one grab)
Mitch Marner and Auston Matthews and a few other superstars say "Hi". Pettersson has more points in his first 100 games than Marner did (I think). The new trend is that RFAs sign their huge long term contract right away after their ELCs...
-
1
-
-
13 hours ago, Where's Wellwood said:
I'm definitely not a proponent for that move. I've been on the 2021 off season buyout of Eriksson train for a while
The only problem is if you replace him with a player that makes $2 million plus the actual gain against the cap is negative. Can you replace Eriksson with a $700,000 player?
-
1
-
-
14 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:
maybe he gets bought out, maybe he retires, maybe Vancouver keeps him, or maybe he is traded........that is my bet. I do not think it is "stupid" to think Ottawa might be interested. Ask your self why Eriksson is out at the end of close games, before you say he has no value, he has value as a defensive forward, and his cap hit is actually more than his actual pay owed, after July 1, 2020......Ottawa may deem that as useful
14 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:But again, it is all supposition, and no, I don't think any of my opinions are stupid in any way, nor do I think that your opinions are stupid...…...history will say, and will probably be something totally different than both you or I think.
I actually never said your opinion was stupid if you read the context. I actually said trading Eriksson for a first or second + prospect is stupid. However, I would say (in my opinion) your view that someone may take on Eriksson without leveraging our terrible cap situation (ie. demanding a prospect or pick or player) may be false. Marleau is still a serviceable player but it took a first to get him out of Toronto. No team is going to take your problems just because the actual dollar values are low when his cap hit is so high. Ottawa can find MANY other ways of hitting the cap floor and make their team better than picking up Eriksson (even if the owner doesn't want to spend $ to the cap floor).
-
On 2/4/2020 at 1:17 PM, Rob_Zepp said:
You put a lot of work into this but took the thinking too far when you said this. Of course there is. You have too many assumptions that can be addressed in a different outcome but to assume you cannot sign to cornerstones at same time when ever single other asset is movable is simply a silly premise. Other teams have done this and Canucks will have the ability to do this as well.
I never said we can't sign two cornerstones. I just said that both of them can't be signed long term at the same time since the awful contracts in 2021-2022 still exist. However, I did not consider buying out Eriksson to save $2 million in cap space. Although, it wouldn't be $2 million in saving since he would still have to be replaced by a player at least at league minimum. Therefore the actual savings against the cap if we buyout Eriksson after next year is only $1.3 million... maximum. It does help, but it doesn't get us Pettersson and Hughes both signed long term (unless you sacrifice futures/prospects to do so)...
-
2 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:
I guess the point is that Benning has ways out, and I would also note that, in my scenario of how he would get out, no one of value leaves including Tanev.
Also, Ottawa needs LTIR and Eriksson is one of the best value players to pick p after, his cap this summer is paid......also as a player Eriksson has value
as a PK player, decent wing support and is a great role player for a young team...…...separately, each item does not give him great value, but collectively
all the above makes him desirable. Not that Ottawa will not play the game and demand some sort of payment to take him.
I think there are too many variables to get all worked up about the cap situation. Hughes and Pettersson will be closer to 7/8 million than 10 million
that is my bet...….and they may be 4 year contracts at that, to do a long term bridge type deal, making it easier on the Canucks
and still getting those players a substantial raise.
I'm enjoying this and really not getting worked up. However, I don't think "getting out" of cap hell just to keep Tanev is worth it. He will be getting 4.5-5 million for 4-5 years on the open market and won't be worth that in two years. In fact, this is the only healthy season he has had and actually earned his paycheque. Too risky of a player IMO for too much money.
Also, Eriksson has no value, so don't go there. We aren't parting with him unless it's with a first or a second + prospect. That would be stupid. I don't mind the idea of buying him out after next year so his cap hit in 2021-2022 is $4 million instead of $6 million. That relieves a couple million.
Also, you just stated Hughes/Pettersson would get 7/8 million on a 4 year bridge and earlier said they would get 7/8 million on a long term contract. Those are two different things. I agree on the four year deal, but that's a bridge. I would rather sign one to a long term deal (6-8 years) and the other to a 3 year bridge at less money. It staggers their next contracts and would save money over time. I wouldn't want to have to re up both of them in four years. That would be far worse because it would come soon after raises to Boeser, Horvat, and Miller.
-
3 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said:
Done a number of realistic scenarios Sparky. They all work just fine.
Try the decaf....the one with the orange top.
I'm honestly not calling you out, I'm just having a discussion. I've been on these forums (reading) for probably 10-15 years so I'm not new, just haven't made many posts because didn't feel a desire to.
I don't feel like searching for your proposed lineup for next year or in two years, so can you post it here?
Also, saying I need decaf? You don't even know me and I haven't even tried to insult you or anybody. Just trying to poke people's brains...
-
2 hours ago, Provost said:
Except it is your Proposal that is creating a future cap crunch....
Signing Hughes or Petterson to a bridge deal is going to cost much more against the cap going forward. The new TV deal will increase the cap, and the player will have more of a resume after a bridge deal. The way teams have been successful is to have their stars locked up long term, and then winning when those players become great bargains in the last half of those contracts.
Your plans also mean we are significantly worse over the next two years, on paper at least. Players sign for less if they see a chance to win, just like our 2011 run. If we make the playoffs and even win a round or two this year, and then miss the playoffs for the next two seasons because our defence is worse than Toronto’s... then that costs us cap going forward.
Not all prospects pan out or have a spot on the roster. We have a solid enough pipeline that moving out one guy and a high pick doesn’t bankrupt our future. If doing that means we can keep our current depth, that is a better return than those futures are ever likely to bring.
Agreed that moving a guy and a draft pick doesn't bankrupt our future but I truly believe that it doesn't even help our cap situation moving forward that much. Would you rather have Madden (let's say he hits the middle of his ceiling... Gaudette style) in your lineup in 3 years or a replacement player like Beagle or Sutter or (enter name here) for significantly more money? That's just an example but I really don't think our cup window is the next two seasons.
Also, to say that we may not get much worse on the back end because of our internal depth is THAT far fetched. I would expect Tryamkin and Juolevi (and Rafferty?) to get time next year.
-
8 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:
I think getting rid of Baertschi, Sutter and Eriksson, costs us 2 M + Madden + a 2nd = about 12 Million in cap space, and the cost is what I believe to be a Maximum hit,
It could be less...……..I also feel somewhat questionable about Madden long term, as a prospect, but I could be wrong. Maybe it is Woo we move? but it will not be
Juolevi, Rathbone, Podkolzin, Rafferty, Tryamkin or Hoglander, all who I believe will be pushing for spots on the Canucks as soon as next year, with the exception of
Podkolzin.
I also think that your costing of Pettersson and Hughes are off, and will not cost that much long term...…..
I am thinking in the 7 to 8 Million dollar cost each, when the time comes. I also think the cap goes up 4 to 7 Million over the next 2 years
Then the TV deal.
IMO, the league is not trying to penalize the franchises, which is what will happen, if they are too tight.
Love your optimism and wish I was of the same ilk. There's literally no way Pettersson or Hughes come in at 7-8 million long term (6-8 years). Unless they become worse players than they are now. Compared to their draft classes Pettersson goes #1 in a redraft (unanimous) and Hughes goes anywhere #1-3 depending on who you ask. Hughes and Makar are literally putting up points in their rookie seasons that hasn't been seen for years. Also no chance the cap goes up 7 million over the next two years... 4 million maybe...
Also, no sure anyone wants Woo. It looks like he was drafted right about where he should have been (his points have regressed since last year).
I get the hesitation on Madden though... now THAT is a small body!
-
15 hours ago, Provost said:
Thoughtful OP, any way you slice it, it adds up to us being worse (on paper) for the next two years.
The OP also needs to consider the pushed ELC from this year which we basically have no way to avoid at this point... but it is a very good idea to assume the bonuses next year into the calculation because he is right that we can’t afford to push those into 2021-22.
I honestly say bite the bullet on Eriksson and Baertschi, and do it at the deadline this year. It basically solves most of the problems going forward. A premium in futures to give us two extra seasons of playoff contention and not regressing? Worth it to me.
I have a significant worry that the cap isn’t going to go up at all, or just by a nominal amount. If you look at the League payrolls, basically everyone is at or
over the cap. That means a huge escrow hit for players, as the cap is based on a midpoint average assuming half the team will be under the average.
With a basically flat cap, we are in trouble and so are a lot of teams... and the price to shed cap will increase.
Not worth it to me. Sacrificing current cap crunches for future ones... to trade away futures ruins us in the future because those futures (draft picks or prospects... say Madden) come in on ELCs. This is exactly what I hope Benning avoids. There are too many factors when you make the playoffs to go "all in" or sacrifice for the future. Too many examples to list, but Arizona is worse right now with Hall (at least their record is). I say Benning keeps doing what he's doing.
[Trade] Kings trade Tyler Toffoli to Canucks for Tim Schaller, Tyler Madden, 2020 2nd-round pick, conditional 2022 4th-round pick
in Trades, Rumours, Signings
Posted
I understand the sentiment Deb and could agree... except Petey and Hughes aren't at the end of their careers (ala Sedins). They're professional hockey players and another year without the playoffs won't actually hurt them that much. I'd rather look three years down the road when they are in their prime. We longer have the option of Madden or a second round pick anymore in their futures. Would you rather have Toffoli for 24 games plus a few in the playoffs (I don't think he'll impact our playoff chances one way or the other very much) or a Gaudette (Madden isn't Gaudette... he's lighter (con) and more skilled (pro) at the same PPG as Gaudette) and a Hoglander (if we draft well... this is a deep draft) in our prospect pool.
As a Canucks fan for about 35 years, I take the long sustainable view and choose Madden and a second everytime over a rental who really is a fringe second liner (doesn't drive play) for 24 plus a few... unfortunately our management agrees with your point of view and wants things now. That is not a rebuild! Man... I hate this trade...
I get the sentiment and the meaning behind it, but it is so short sighted (focus on this year) and short term... in other words, we would be better overall and in the future without this trade.
But, I respect your opinion...