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

aGENT

Members
  • Posts

    52,033
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    68

Everything posted by aGENT

  1. One of Paul/Tierney/Sturm should absolutely be our main UFA target this summer. Lyubushkin too, if we can manage to move Myers and make some trades for younger RHD like Marino, Lundqvist etc. Beyond that, keep that cap space for finding the next low acquisition cost "Miller". Pounce on teams like Vegas who will need to shed cap. I doubt we do any other "big game" UFA hunting this summer.
  2. Yeah, I'd probably put him in the 5+ range. Give or take. Though it does get difficult to truly judge that. A lot of those "better" goalies are doing it behind better teams. Good goalies make good teams and vice versa. Chicken, meet egg. Either way, the dog's breakfast side of our D needs an overhaul if we want to become the "contender" of the thread title. It will move us up both those ranks. I think we can all agree Demko is the furthest thing from an issue
  3. I think with an average goalie, we'd be a lot closer to 15th (maybe even worse ) "defensively". He masks a lot of issues.
  4. Unfortunately/fortunately, a lot of the reason we're at 10th "defensively", is our goalie though. Our (right side) defense needs a major overhaul. Hughes, _____ OEL, _____ Dermott, _____ Burroughs, Schenn Improving that would also go a long way to improving our GF.
  5. Trade for Marino, and Lundqvist add cheaper Lyubushkin. Stop trying to spend all of our cap space on old, expensive UFA's
  6. We should be able to afford Paul without moving Pearson. They'd probably make 2/3 of a good 3rd line actually
  7. I'm with SK. Pearson isn't a guy I'm itching to get rid of and I don't think we're big players in free agency anyway. Bottom 6 C's and depth D (if we can move either/both of Poolman/Myers). We won't be big game hunting this summer.
  8. Some folks hooked their wagon to that train years ago and refuse to disengage. It's like it's a "foundational" part of their narrative
  9. I'd be fine with him as an inexpensive backup next year. Here's hoping!
  10. Personally, I've never bought in to TOR's "top" status. Maybe it's my Gordie-given hatred of everything Leaf as a Canuck fan but they've always struck me as an above average, "regular season" team. They lack the grit and defense to be a good playoff team and their salary structure is completely out of whack. They actually have a lot of the same problems we have, but with a much better forward group So if you don't think the better version of us is a good team...
  11. If you believe you see a top 10 team, it absolutely is a mirage. We're spotty defensively, overly reliant on Demko, lack consistency, lack speed, lack grit... Never mind the cap issues, looming succession/youth issues and the poorly constructed (particularly right side) D. Their play has been at times admirable post-Bruce but this team isn't close as presently constructed. Expecting Demko to bail us out all of next season and the majority of the team to play at "eleven" the whole year isn't a realistic plan for improving. Tweaks or not. Better fringe, but absolutely. This team badly needs to be built out, streamlined and the right side of the D in particular, completely revamped. Focus on the window of Petey/Hughes/Demko and build everything around and focused on that. This team isn't a legit contender (again, that doesn't mean we don't see playoffs, before you "Bo won't stick around" again...) for another couple'ish years no matter what we do, that's likely just as Miller starts to regress. That's bad math.
  12. Yup, basically this. Either sign Miller to team friendly extension or move him for younger pieces. Figure out what's happening with Boeser/Garland. Clear some salary. Money-puck the hell out of younger, cheaper, faster, better fitting complimentary pieces. Start sorting out our RD both quality and succession issues.
  13. Yup, let Mr. 4 points last night run with 1C and upgrade 3C with one of Paul/Tierney/Sturm. Heck I wouldn't even hate bringing a guy like Richardson (or similar) back on 1 year deals near league min. Pettersson, Horvat, Paul, Richardson, Lammiko...that's just fine C depth IMO, all while we re-jig our D to not be such a dog's breakfast/get younger/get faster/get less cap heavy.
  14. Who knows, maybe it would be better? Your crystal ball's just as fuzzy as mine Alf But IMO, we have a good young nucleus to build around. They will be in their primes in ~2-7 years. Everything we should be doing IMO, should be geared towards making the team as deep and good as possible in the +/- 5 year window. So if players take a few years to get ready, that fits in that window just fine. And we need to continue to build not just from the draft anyway. If you take a middling team and continue to improve it year over year. Refine it, add depth, streamline it's cap competitiveness etc, It's bound to get better IMO. But like I said in that post, at some point we need to draft/develop/sign/trade for a top 6 W'er in there if we were to make similar moves. But we need to start building towards that, this summer IMO.
  15. Yeah, it's not supposed to be a contender NEXT YEAR. There's a lot more work to do than one off season of moves. Least of which is actually getting Petey, Hughes, Podkolzin etc actually in their primes and continuing to add depth and quality around them. You'll note there were numerous comments in that post in the work that would have to continue on AFTER those moves, right?
  16. Exactly! If moving one player equates to a rebuild, we're in far more need of a step back than even I think we need! The idea we couldn't still be competitive next year is silly IMO. Do something like: -Trade Miller for Lundqvist, Chytil and 1st (maybe try and squeeze one of Kravtsov/Othmann/Barron/Robertson as well, perhaps with retention etc). Or a similar package from another team. -Trade one of Boeser/Garland + Poolman for Marino and Kapanen. -Sign one of Paul/Tierney/Sturm for replacement C depth. -Bonus points if we can move Myers and replace him with the cheaper, defensively superior (if less well rounded) Lyubushkin this summer. Yes, we'll likely need to find/draft/develop/sign a legit 1st line W'er at some point in the next couple years as we'd be down a couple top 6 F's (and both Kapanen and Chytil are likely more mid-6 than top 6) but we'd be a TONNE younger/faster/cheaper so we're in a position to acquire the younger "next Miller", when this team is closer to contending. Kapanen, Pettersson, Boeser/Garland Chytil, Horvat, Hoglander/Podkolzin Pearson, Paul, Hoglander/Podkolzin Dickinson, Lammiko, Highmore Lockwood (Hell, I wouldn't even be opposed to bringing back Richardson, or similar player, as 13th F rather than having Lockwood sit in the press box half the year). Hughes, Marino OEL, Lundqvist Dermott, Lyubushkin Burroughs, Schenn That's a FARRRR better defense that should both help reduce GA, and get the puck forward, to help our lesser top end but younger, faster and deeper F group. Hopefully that, and natural progression of guys like Petey/Hogs/Podz and that added speed can recoup some of the scoring losses you'd expect from losing a guy like Miller and one of Boeser/Garland. No reason, that roster can't still be a bubble playoff team next year. Then new management, needs to money-puck that hell out of finding college/euro/under utilized FA's, make some good draft picks, develop those (and the guys we already have) and look like hell for "next Miller" when the opportunity arises so that we have the chance to push guys like Kapanen, Chytil etc down the lineup as guys like Pearson, Dickinson etc expire.
  17. 8 years is too damn long. If we could manage to get him to sign at a ~$15m discount, I'd prefer $10m x 5 or even $8.33 x 6 personally. And even 6 is too damn long for my liking.
  18. Unfortunately, that's not really how this works. Zib got $68m, Miller is going to want closer to that, regardless of how many years you want to spread it over. Yeah he's probably not going to get Zib's $68m given he's a year older and doesn't have the same, long term, high level track record but I think you're being extremely optimistic that he'll settle for less than $62-65m. At BEST, maybe you convince him at $60 to sign now for the guaranteed, risk free pay day. Any less than that and he takes his chances IMO . And $60m / 7 years is still an $8.57m AAV and probably 2 years longer than we should be signing him for. Barring a career ending injury, even with injuries, he's looking at a $60m+ pay day if he goes to free agency. Bad case and his value does take a sizeable hit and, he can still get the $50m we're offering AND pick his team and pay less taxes/play for contender. He has almost zero reason to take a $10m+ bath (plus higher taxes and cost of living) here. Other than a career ending injury. I doubt he'll be making his decision based on that.
  19. Yes, and put out the comparison to Zib's $68m deal. Normally I'd say yes if the two sides were remotely close. $65m ($3m less than Zib's deal) divided by 7 years is an AAV of $9.29m. Does that sound close to "something that starts with $7"? Do you see Miller or his agent taking the proposed $15m discount? Or even a $10m one?
  20. Yes, but I believe most (all?) of those expire before a Miller extension kicks in and we have other raises due that will eat up those dollars anyway. Nevermind that we actually want the team to both get better, and not be terminally at the cap/in LTIR, right...?
  21. Not going to cut it. That basically spells trade and is largely a PR/hail Mary move. "We made an attempt to extend him." His agent has already made it pretty clear he'll be looking for +/- $65m.
  22. D tend to play at a relatively high level until about 34 and with a less sharp decline after. I doubt his contract ends up being much of an issue other than maybe a moderately inefficient year or two at the end. Meh. Hardly some albatross. As for his production this year, IMO that has more to do with our (poor) D unit construction, playing behind Hughes (not getting the PP reps he used to) and apparently, playing injured. Paying behind Hughes, he's unlikely to ever see his peak numbers again, but surround him with a better D core (and get him healthy) and he'll be fine. Neither OEL or Hughes (or to a lesser extent Schenn, Dermott, Burroughs etc) are the problem with our D.
  23. As could keeping him. Can afford and should afford are not the same thing. And yes a long term is a concern issue. However, the shorter the term, the higher the AAV. They are linked. That $8.5 is over 7-8 years. Reduce the years and the AAV rises. There's no escaping it. His next deal will likely be +/-$65m divided my how ever many years, gives you your AAV. Either the deal is too long or the deal is too high of an AAV (or both lol). What's certain is that his agent will be asking for +/-$65m (he's already tweeted Zib's $68m contract as a comparable as well as the "show me the money" tweet). Again, you can divide that amount by however many years you like. None are something the Canucks should be signing. I never suggested there aren't other possibilities. But I'm not particularly interested in unrealistic or ethereal ones.
  24. Yet neither is a rebuild. And I HIGHLY doubt we'd be getting only picks back, or even years away players back. Still not really complicated. Moving Miller =/= a rebuild. Short of him signing a far more team friendly deal than is realistically reasonable, the other options are a bad contract, or walking for free. Neither are options IMO.
×
×
  • Create New...