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

theo5789

Members
  • Posts

    10,599
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Everything posted by theo5789

  1. Level of D, sure, but still a LD which we aren't in a need of, so don't see why we need to move a Jake for him for that reason. You draft the BPA regardless of position, but in trades, you're looking to bolster your roster in areas of need. Didn't consider that Urho would no longer be exempt after next season, so will be interesting to see if they protect him along with McAvoy and Carlo. I have no problem moving on from Jake sometime in the future barring an incredible uptick in performance, but right now he has value when considering his performance to cap, which is beneficial if he gives us a "hometown discount" to stay and hopefully continues to improve. I'm not all too urgent to move him.
  2. Yes I don't think Jake gets more than 2.5 either as I've projected in other threads, but that is also potential added value if he stays here in that he could potentially break out into a 2nd line RW role and 2.5 is cheap. If it's a one year deal and he does blossom, that only bumps his trade value higher if we can afford his next raise and he's still an RFA under our control. The positive things going for him in a trade are also what makes him attractive to keep for us in our cap situation as well. With that said, Vaakanainen is expansion exempt and as you've alluded to is a LD that we are privileged to have depth in already. Boston has Pastrnak, Bergeron, Marchand, Coyle, DeBrusk, Kase, and Nick Ritchie to protect on forward as is right now (assuming Krejci does the Edler UFA thing). They probably protect McAvoy, Carlo and probably Krug if they can afford to re-sign him on D and that's really all they need to concern themselves with which make Vaakanainen all that more important to them. Adding Jake puts them in trouble of a forward that needs protection. Doesn't seem like a fit here with that consideration. Carolina does have an abundance of dmen and some forwards that they need to protect. However their dmen are on the pricier end of things and would "Parayko" our cap. I suspect they will want to keep their exempt RD in Keane and Kaski should they lose a dman in expansion. When you start eliminating teams where a Virtanen for a young potential top 4 RD trade makes sense, then there aren't a whole lot of options. I trust that if there is a deal to be made that JB will indeed find it, but I'm not seeing it yet. Even Jokiharju is a left handed RD, so like I said before, we could've just bit the bullet on Tryamkin (who is a left handed RD) which would've boosted the Stecher spot and we could've opened up the options on a Jake trade if we wanted to go that route anyway. Jokiharju would be a million cheaper than a potential Tryamkin signing, but that's putting all your eggs in that one basket and who knows if we can even pull that trade off. I don't think that if we are looking to make a trade with Jake that it would be to bolster that RD spot. I could see him as the sweetener for a cap dump though, but again why not just sign Tryamkin (his cap would likely be where we would hope a player that Jake fetches would be around) then if we are making cap space (as I still don't think it would clear enough cap to sign a Toffoli as I still think Tanev needs to be locked up in this scenario)?
  3. I think the limiting factors here are "inexpensive", "young" and "potential top 4 D". Inexpensive holds value right now with the stagnant cap, everyone in the league knows this and knows which teams need cap relief. Young limits from the age group that are automatically protected as they are worth gold prior to an expansion and to an age where if they haven't started making strides in the NHL, they are projects that are higher risk at not panning out. If they have that potential top 4 D label, they are much more of a valued commodity than say a middle 6 winger. The more established they are, their value keeps going up based on position. If you take the high risk/high reward route, then you might be able to squeeze more value and hope the player pans out, but no guarantees and could also fall flat on your face. Not I get what you're saying in trying to find a situation that works for both sides and I haven't done the research thoroughly here on that, but I feel like there aren't exactly a lot of options. But like I mentioned, Jokiharju (off the top of my head) might be the best bet as he's young, on his ELC still and currently on Buffalo's bottom pairing but has that "potential". Buffalo has 4 RD and barring any changes, they will have to protect Risto, Montour, McCabe, and Dahlin, which puts them in a bind to protect Jokiharju as well whichever route they choose to protect through the expansion. There is a scenario where protect 5 dmen and leave Middlestadt, Olofsson, Vesey and Tage Thompson exposed which they might consider though. If they acquire Virtanen, I'd assume they would want to protect him, which still leaves them with the decision to expose McCabe or those same forwards. Anyway, I get and agree with your value assessment, I just don't know if there is a trade available that fits. Even if we got a "Parayko", we would have to work around his cap still which also likely means Toffoli can't stay. So we would lose both Virtanen and Toffoli in that (also unlikely) scenario.
  4. I think the concept is good, but I don't think many teams have that type of player to sell. With that said, I'd look into Jokiharju from Buffalo if we are dealing Virtanen. It wouldn't be a "sexy" trade, but it fits the criteria here. With that said, if we are to keep Tanev (and Toffoli) in the mix as well, there would still be a lot of work needed to get the team in under the cap. But honestly if we were looking at this route, I don't see why we didn't just sign Tryamkin and then just offloaded Virtanen for picks/prospects in the offseason with no pressure of filling that last RD spot and limiting what we could get in return. I imagine that if we are looking to bolster the team through trade, it would be a much bigger move, whether it's for cap relief or we do indeed add more to Virtanen to try and get immediate top 4 D help.
  5. Would that young RD step in right away? Meaning we let Tanev walk?
  6. Movin on up from the bust label at least. One step at a time.
  7. I guess Miller's commentary on Myers' defending was spot on.
  8. -He's only played one game -He's only played 10 games -He's only played 100 games -He hasn't scored 50 points for a 5th overall pick -He hasn't won a Norris Plus there's always the +/- and Tkachuk factor. This is a long ways from being over. Just look at the Virtanen commentary.
  9. Not a huge surprise. We already have too many wingers as is with potentially Eriksson, Virtanen and MacEwen sitting out game 1. Always need depth on D, so you don't want to delay their access into the bubble. Nice to see Juolevi is getting that much closer though.
  10. Benn is in Dallas for the birth of his baby. MacEwen is likely one of the odd men out. From the looks of the PP and the lines today, I'd say Virtanen and Eriksson are the others that will be sitting as well for at least game 1.
  11. Maybe so, but I put forward a lineup that doesn't involve paying the piper to get rid of him and still putting forward a decent team. So I don't feel the urgency in doing so, but if we can find a reasonable deal, then for sure. If we pay to get rid of Eriksson and still let Toffoli walk, that seems pointless. His contract will end eventually and we will be fine.
  12. Pearson may be moveable, but he's got chemistry with Bo right now. Bo's has been seeing too much change on his wing, so I'm sure he's enjoyed the consistency with him. But even with him moved, there will still be buyouts and other moves needed. So not the optimal direction I would go with. Baertschi just isn't a valued commodity at his cap hit. We would have to retain 50% regardless of the return (or take some contract back like a Gagner for Spooner type deal). Retaining 50% only saves us 500k really compared to him being on Utica so I don't see it being dire unless that amount is the difference to being cap compliant, but we could always buy him out and save that same amount without looking for a buyer (a trade is only preferable to save the 800k the following year of a buyout). I'm not banking on LE retiring, but that would be a nice gift to us. I'm also not banking on being able to make cap dump trades easily. I constantly hear, just trade this and this to make it work, but it won't be that easy. That's why I put forward what I think is the easiest way to create a lineup that's mostly under our control even if it involves buyouts. Any other trades that we can accomplish is just a bonus. At the end of the day, Toffoli seems like he isn't worth the effort involved to retain and I'm fine with that.
  13. I think we can still put out a respectable lineup with him still here. I rather keep the assets instead of doubling down on Toffoli (as that would be the main purpose of the trade) on top of eating up more cap space on wing. Benning has never seeming wanted to pay assets to move contracts, maybe unless it's necessary. I don't see it being necessary with what we have in the system. Do I want LE gone? For sure, but not if it continues to hurt us further. I think Virtanen should get a look in the top 6, MacEwen has already been given a look on Bo's wing. We have two very good prospects in Lind and Podkolzin that could jump in, maybe even Hoglander as well although I believe he's a LW. We have Ferland who could play a top 6 role and arguably why we signed him in the first place. And if we keep Roussel, he has looked good playing alongside Bo putting up some career numbers. Even Eriksson had a good run on that line. We just have so many options and our offense was flying in games even without Toffoli. Toffoli is a sure top 6 for us, but just the work involved and how his cap hampers us in other areas in keeping him outweighs that value in my view. With a rising cap, it was much more feasible, but times have changed from when we first traded for him when I thought we should retain him.
  14. When I say cap dump, it's like a JT Miller "cap dump" (Tampa only needed to make one move, not several like us). Obviously not to that extent, but we have to find a taker. The cap market has shifted. It should be easy enough to move him, but we aren't getting much value back, but the point is to rid his cap. That's the easy part and probably a necessity in any scenario. Benn isn't as desirable. If we are looking at past history on Roussel as a sell, Benn's history with us makes it a detriment. Moving a bottom pair (a 7th dman for us) isn't going to be easy. I'd say it's going to be as difficult as finding a buyer for Baertschi. Even if we could get those 2 deals done, it's another uphill battle here. I don't think there are any teams that will have troubles reaching the cap floor, so that market isn't really there. A team like Ottawa could try and penny pinch, but if they are sending back any cap to us at all, that negates the goal in creating enough space to get Toffoli signed. We would also just be spending more assets and depleting our depth (by pretty much having everyone brought up). It's a nice top heavy lineup that I think is unnecessary when considering what we have in the system. If we are looking at the strength of our prospect pool, wing (and LD) is where we should be trying to save on cap with ELCs and cheap contracts. I think it's only worth keeping Toffoli at this point is if we can maintain the lineup (luxury piece) and add him on top of it which at the end of the day, LE's full cap has got to go. The will be the largest domino that has to fall before we even start considering the rest to fit TT in.
  15. There isn't going to be much time to make these moves and if we sign Toffoli (and the others) first, then it really puts us in a cap bind and teams will play hard ball. The stars will really have to align just right. Not impossible, but is it worth the trouble when there is an alternative that isn't too different without any assets given up and doesn't make us top heavy? I agree there is youth on the cusp, but in the end, they need to earn their spots just like every prospect in Benning's regime has had to. There's a couple of players that could graduate, but the lineup to keep Toffoli has like 5 rookies jumping in all at once and depleting pretty much most of Utica. I just can't see that happening, but who knows? But it's funny that you mention this youth (aside from 24 year old Virtanen) as we have Lind, Podkolzin, MacEwen, Hoglander all with potential for a top/middle 6 role on wing which is a position that can take on more risks as you don't get as exposed. Our top 6 is certainly better with him, but that's a luxury rather than a necessity and we have the potential within the system that could take that spot and doesn't hold up more cap in a spot that we have youthful depth from within.
  16. Yes but I'd say we are a better team now with better scouting, this the quality is a bit better. We don't have a lot that we need to worry about though.
  17. I don't mind the lineup and can accept the trade, but it requires finding takers for Roussel and Benn at full cap. One cap dump is hard enough, you're looking at supposedly 3 on top of two buyouts (or more cap dumps) just to barely squeeze in that roster. It also ends up using up a lot of the depth we have, so if we run into any injury issues, it's going to be a tough ride. Plus we give up a 2nd and Jake to accomplish it. Too much going on just to fit him in IMO for an offense that looked good prior to him arriving, even if a bit inconsistent (could improve here with more experience added).
  18. If Lind is exposed, I'm not so certain Demko gets taken. Lind will be a cheap, young up and comer. If Juolevi makes decent strides next season, he might get a look as well depending on who else they're taking in the draft. Dmen are also more valuable in trades than goalies, which was the strategy that Vegas took. Although I don't think we sign Toffoli and go with Tanev. In which case, I protect 7/3/1. EP, Bo, Brock, Miller, Gaudette, Jake, Lind, with Juolevi, Tanev, Myers and Marky. Perhaps we make a trade to upgrade on defense and we could expose Tanev/Myers. If MacEwen has a good year, then that changes things like perhaps switching to the 8 spots to protect him leaving the dmen exposed. I think Seattle would take a long look at our RD available and relatively young and cheap Juolevi in this case and could spare Demko.
  19. I think it's been alluded to that Green hopes to keep the top 6 guys off the PK. Perhaps Pearson could get PK time, but it hasn't been in Green's gameplan so far.
  20. Who PKs from that lineup? Motte and Beagle for sure. Roussel hasn't seen much PK time this year, but likely he would be another option. I think one of Sutter or Eriksson will be in the lineup no matter what at this point.
  21. I don't consider the roster I put up as doom and gloom at all. I don't see us not being able to keep Toffoli as such a tragic thing as others are seeing, that's all. Have to consider that to retain Toffoli (who's career numbers are really just a good 2nd liner), we are giving up Jake + 2nd + Madden + 2nd + Eriksson. Or we can keep the productively trending up young forward in Virtanen instead and give him an opportunity at a bigger role (along with others like MacEwen, Lind who's progressing nicely, soon Podkolzin, etc) plus keep our 2nd rounder. The price we paid for a Toffoli rental, I think is fair considering the goal was to make the playoffs and hopefully we get there this year. I don't see why we should double down on it and put more cap in a position (wing) where we have an abundance of youthful depth coming up. Players like Roussel and Ferland could also play on the right side if needed. I'm fine retaining Toffoli as a luxury if Eriksson for some reason chooses to retire, but that's about the only way it's worth keeping him at this point. We have to remember our offense was fine even before acquiring Toffoli, it was inconsistent, but we were blowing teams out of the water too. For discussion sake, if we did this deal and signed Toffoli for 5 million and followed up as I wrote above, I'm not sure if we can still fit it all in. So 15 million for the 3 big UFAs, 4 million at best for Motte, Gaudette and MacEwen, plus 1.7 million overages. Add in Rafferty, Brisebois plus a couple more prospects/cheap depth for a 23 man roster for another 3 million or so. Total 23.7 million added. Need to clear about 7 million in cap. Buying out or 50% retained on Sutter saves 2.3ish of cap. Assuming we can trade Roussel at full cap is 3 million. Assuming we trade Benn at full cap is 2 million. Need to replace those two with bodies, so really only saving 3.5 of cap between them. Trading/buyout Baertschi saves 500k. Still 700k or so short, so can start with a 22 man roster instead I suppose. Still requires a lot to go right. Miller - EP - Toffoli Pearson - Bo - Boeser Ferland - Gaudette - MacEwen Motte - Beagle - Lind Edler - Myers Hughes - Tanev Juolevi - Rafferty Brisebois - Sautner/cheap vet depth like Fantenberg Markstrom Demko Utica is ravaged though. Especially if Hoglander chooses to go back to Sweden instead. I think the lineup I posted earlier is much more attainable and likely gets similar results as this lineup anyway. The measures we need to take just to retain Toffoli putting more strain on the cap at wing just doesn't appeal to me as much, but that's just my opinion.
  22. I'm going under the assumption that it's not simple to move out contracts in this current cap world. If we can move Benn, great, but we also will need to get a Fantenberg type cheap contract signed unless we are going with a whole whack of youth in the bottom pair/extra spots. Buying out/retaining on Sven really only saves us about 500k on top of what it would save to just send him down while adding 800k next season. I didn't think it was advantageous enough to bother. Best bet for us with him if he somehow agrees to mutually terminate his contract which I doubt he will. If we can find a team willing to take him on with 50% retained, then that would be a quick way to save 500k of cap next season. I have MacEwen at 1 million, Motte at 1.25 and Gaudette on a short 2 year bridge of 1.75 to total around 4 million. This is the lowest I think we can get with these guys.
×
×
  • Create New...