Barry_Wilkins

Benning and Green say that every off season. And by December, they realize they're in a dogfight to make the playoffs, and Green leans on Markstrom the rest of the way.

My understanding is that he's never fully recovered from hip problems/injuries.

And your reply is a classic case of tone policing. i.e. a red herring angle to deflect from the issue at hand. In this case, the poster is not to be taken seriously because he's a big meanie.

The gif is hyperbole, sure, but the point remains. Many people, even in the current environment, still maintain that cap issues weren't, and even aren't, a problem.

Classic fallacy of the appeal to popularity or 'expertise'. Popular, well-connected insiders -- or 'insiders' if you take the negative opinion on them -- can be dead wrong on a lot of hockey-related news, speculation, and opinion, as well. I don't care how many followers someone has. If they're on the mark (IMO of course), that stuff doesn't matter. And of course he has a point. Only a blinders-on extreme Benning biased fan would say, especially at this point in the last week's proceedings, that cap issues aren't currently taking a bite out of the Canucks options for next season's roster construction. It should be no surprise that without being able able to unload Loui et al, useful players are going to have to be pitched overboard. Hopefully, we can dump LE in a potential OEL trade. I don't know many other avenues where getting rid of any dead cap will be available. As for Stecher, great guy, plays his heart out. But ... bottom pairing guy who Canucks management are rightfully concerned about overpaying, probably even if it was during a better environment (pre-Covid, flat cap, few cap issues).

We're getting him too! Yes! OEL's dyslexic twin.

Everyone here will now be following Tyler Madden's career with renewed interest.

Markstrom almost signed, and they're confident on OEL, which they relayed to Toffoli's agent? (Meaning they can't afford him.)

And there's the very real possibility that Joulevi could remain a "project" for quite a while, even if he makes it full-time as Vancouver's #5, #6 or #7 Dman. If that's the case, then OJ wouldn't be as tempting for Seattle to snag when unprotected in the draft. I'd also keep Joulevi because I've always been higher on him than some others, even at his lowest. I'm just crossing my fingers that his injury problems are behind him. Still time for him to develop, even if not to what he coulda woulda shoulda been.

At first glance, I'd be hesitant to put Rathbone in a trade, as well. But with OEL and Hughes manning the left side's top 2 spots, Rathbone automatically becomes a 3rd pairing D, as a ceiling, for the next 5-7 years, with the same offensive profile which would be redundant (no PP opportunities, etc). I'd pull the trigger on the trade if that's the only other sticking point.

To be fair to JB on this one, I'd be surprised if there's any negotiating to be done on Toffoli. I'm hoping both sides have already agreed to a contract, but it's all contingent on the other major pieces (Markstrom & OEL) falling into place first, or not. As for Tanev, though, last I heard there haven't even been any offers of a re-signing.

I call OEL a number #1 Dman on offense because that's what he is. #1 means top 31 in the league. If you want to argue he's not Roman Josi or John Carlson, fine. But the definition is not for super elite #1 overall, but a true #1 as stacks up with the league . To quibble about his placement within it is a logical fallacy called moving the goalposts. As for what he's worth, in your "truly elite" #1 category, Josi makes $9 mil per for another 7 years, Hedman makes $8 mil per, Pieterangelo just came off $6.5 mil, and is seeking over $9 mil long term, John Carlson is at $8 mil, Brent Burns is at $8 mil. Hedman signed his contract 3 years ago (OEL's was just last year), before the flat cap arrived, so in today's terms, it'd be just shy of $9 mil. Pieterangelo's was signed about 7 years ago, Carlson is the true bargain as contrasted with OEL, and Burns was signed 3 years ago. OEL, in comparison with those, is slightly overpaid, but it's not an onerous contract for what he brings to your team. And again, just going by raw numbers, put, say, Victor Hedman on the Coyotes and OEL on Tampa Bay, manning that PP, and then let's compare point totals after a season.

I can't even begin to sort out that wall of wandering off-topic text, almost none of it countering anything I've said. The level of assumptions you're assigning to me is staggering. It's reminiscent of the old joke by the deceptive lawyer who's grilling the defendent: "When did you stop beating your wife?" To answer in the negative is to admit that the premise is accurate. I can't pass up this one gem, though: "He [Louie] aged, and youth pushed him down the line-up." So you thought that we'd only get two years out of him? Of course he aged, as do all humans. Not much of a surprise. But he wasn't even "good" for those first two years. A couple of 11 goal seasons, and while playing high up in the line-up. "Youth" didn't push him down the line-up. His own lack of production did. On the contrary, the coach and management had a great deal of incentive to keep Louie with the best players for far longer than would otherwise be the case since they had so much invested in him, and for such a long time. The equivalent situation would be for OEL to immediately become a third-pairing D, and for management to finally admit their mistake, and the coach then puts OEL out with another #5 or #6 Dman to play 14 minutes a night and kill the odd penalty. Do you think that's likely? Even remotely? Also, you need to get up to speed on Louie's financials. Vancouver is (potentially) lucky in that Loui's contract is heavily front-loaded. His cap hit is $6 mil, but whatever owner is signing his checks in a few months is paying him less than half that, which is a major attraction for Arizona, who are trying to cut cash, not just cap. Needless to say, it's not all about this year, either. What with Covid and their aborted window to compete, they're on yet another building mode, and $57.75 million off the books over 7 years is very attractive as compared with the cash outlay to Loui at around $5 mil over two years.

You've thrown a lot on the wall in the hopes that some of it will stick. First off, I don't "hate on" players, unless they're total dirtbags off the ice. I hate bad contracts, and Louie's contract is the second worst in the league (after Lucic's, who, if rumor has it, was Benning's first choice.) You've put six pounds of Leipsic on this pig, but there's no getting around it. Louie's contract (not the player, he serves a function) is horrid. Players who make $6 million a year should not be dependent on generational talents to make them succeed. They have to drive play themselves. Loui not only hasn't driven play here even in his "best" and "youngest" years, he's been a black hole -- offensively -- with any linemates he's found himself playing with. He's a defense-only forward. Until this past year, when he was rightfully benched -- in the regular season and in the playoffs, and even with many other forwards injured -- he was perfectly serviceable as a bottom 6 forward who you could rely on to prevent scoring chances. But, again, it's all about the contract. As for the "the contract hasn't hurt us" comment, come on. Seriously? If you mean we weren't going to win the Cup anyway in his first 4 years, so what? it's about building a team, with all parts functioning, or as many as possible. Loui's cap hit meant that Benning couldn't sign other players during those years because the cap ceiling was tight. Other bad contracts just upped the original $6 mil per year mistake. We had no wiggle room, no way to improve the team at the trade deadline, no way to take on someone else's bad contract in exchange for young players or much needed draft picks, which we're now bleeding. and, of course, one of the chief benefits of trading for OEL is to get rid of Loui's contract. a pretty damning comment on it when it's so bad that it's a major incentive from Vancouver's perspective. I won't even comment on all the other players we won't be able to resign or add, if we can't nix Loui's remaining two years. I stated on this forum two years ago that they should've parked Loui in Utica, told him he was to play on the checking line with no PP time, wish him good luck, and hope that he'd mentor some of the younger prospects before getting fed up and retiring, thereby cancelling the back half contractual commitments. Others are finally coming around to that idea. edit: Ha ha. Autocorrect originally had "six pounds of Leipsic" instead of "Leipsic". double edit: apparently l-i-p-s-t-i-c-k is a banned word?

Your reading comprehension needs to improve. I was talking specifically about Loui, whose numbers tanked immediately upon arriving in Vancouver. So you're making my point. Top cap hits, for forwards OR Dmen, should only go to high point producers. My contrast between differences in OEL and Loui's game, and their differing positions, talents, and team situations, remain, and are pertinent. I notice you didn't address those arguments. The cap hit is 8.25 mil. "These numbers are reserved for top defensemen who contribute offensively". Are you arguing that OEL is not a top offensive Dman? Here are his numbers from the last 6 full seasons, newest to oldest (not including the abbreviated past season). T21 place with 49pts T23 42 pts T24 39 pts 7 55 pts 22 43 pts T15 50 pts By definition, OEL has consistently been a #1 Dman (always better than 31st place) on offense. As for your quibble about "should", only a fool would guarantee and pencil in point production for a player in the future. It's about probabilities. OEL's as sure as you can get to projecting, with pretty good confidence, that he'll replicate, slightly reduce, or even INcrease his average production from his last six full seasons. If you want a guarantee, buy a dishwasher from a reputable company, and get the manufacturer's insistence on it.

Loui, at $6 million per, isn't paid for his D. That's what the third and fourth lines are for. And you can get interchangeable parts that play good D on the bottom six for $1 mil - $2.5 mil. (Well, at least if you're not Santa Claus JB on July 1st.) Speaking of the PK, I wouldn't crow about Loui. Motte does a better job at near league minimum. The positions and responsibilities aren't the same. When slow-skating forwards hit 30 years old, their offense frequently craters. And that's a top 6 forward's prime calling card -- offensive production. OEL is a smooth skater who will continue to generate chances. He also has an excellent shot, something the Canucks lack on the back end. And he's going from a defensively compromised team to an offensively dynamic one, with a similar offensive contrastst in their respective coaches' systems play. If anything, OEL's numbers should increase if he lands here.

OEL is not Louie Erikkson. OEL is an excellent offensive Dman. If his offense dries up to some extent (though i can't see that happening), his main value is, as a Dman, to prevent goals and chances. He's smart, consistent, and his skating will continue to be excellent even 4-5 years from now. Loui, OTOH, was slower than a glacial shelf in super slo-mo video from the time he arrived here. Loui was brought in to play with the Sedins. When that didn't work, his offense was even more suspect further down the line-up since he's never been a play generator. OEL, OTOH, creates offense on his own and drives play. OEL is a premier Dman at a premium position. Loui is a winger that needs the perfect, narrow fit, whether 5 on 5 or on the PP.

There's no way any decent GM is going to blurt out the specifics or even the status of ongoing back-and-forth trade offers on what would be Benning's biggest and most important trade in the six years he's been here. The "no comment" is standard even under much less sensitive conditions. And, to your latter paragraph, I wouldn't be so sanguine. The OEL situation is a rare and advantageous opportunity for us in many ways. No way are we gonna get rid of the dead cap we desperately need to offload in a deal (or UFA pick-up) with the Dmen you mention.

Another reason the OEL deal may be on hold, even from JB's side, is that Van might be willing to trade Virtanen or Stecher on draft day if they don't plan on qualifying them. It'd be stupid to lose them for nothing. Then they'd have to potentially come back to Arizona with altered trade pieces on an OEL deal. So much going on. Tomorrow should be a fascinating day.

Bill Armstrong is like that faithful employee who everyone notices, but his career path up that particular company's ladder is blocked by all the established personnel in place. So he gets a higher position with a, er .... "challenging" upstart company, and as soon as he enters his spacious new office with all his assistants hovering nearby, various multi-layer poo-storms explode all around him. He's probably overwhelmed with how to work this all out. It's his first gig as head honcho. Imagine the knock to his pride to have to start out with a stinker of a trade. My guess? He'll wait to the last minute, hold his nose, and take the best offer from whatever's been on the table for a while. Oh, and don't fall for any marketing -type lies, JB. Here's Armstrong's high-powered BS from his job acceptance release: "We have great ownership that is committed to winning, a very good core group of young, talented players, and a passionate fan base. I'm excited about our future and the opportunity to build this team into a perennial playoff contender."

Sekera sucked in the playoffs, especially the finals. Declined big time since his best days in Edm. Dallas probably counting on a bounce back.

Ha ha! Loui, Sutter and a 4th should be the new Ballard, Raymond and a 2nd. I get a sense that Arizona really wants to unload OEL. If so, Vancouver's probably 50/50 to get him, depending on Boston's competing offer. Only negative is that I heard a report stating that Krug wants out. Could be him just posturing for more $$, though.

Yeah, I always find it interesting when people say the team has to build "depth". But what does depth really mean? Often, it's just interchangeable pieces. Some players are a little better, some a little worse. And obviously, cap management matters a great deal. But all the "depth" in the world means nothing if you don't have the crucial signature players to spearhead a title run. Elite players don't come around all that often. As mentioned in my first post, we've waited 50 years for a true #1 Dman. We didn't or couldn't draft one, didn't or couldn't trade for one, and couldn't or didn't get one as a UFA. Now, when we finally have one, and can add another, some or many fans are afraid of what we'll give up. A 1st round pick next year, if we give it up, will probably come in at around the pick 13-18 area. The "bird in the hand" maxim comes into play. And, if or as we acquire an extra high-end player (OEL), it'll attract more true depth through preferred destinations of other players, whether through trade or UFA.

Fleury out. Now Murray. Goalie position is scary. If speculation is true that a no-trade clause is what's holding up Markstrom signing here, it's for the good.

Just a stray thought. It seems obvious, but the more I think of it, the more astounding it becomes in the course of Vancouver Canucks history: In our 50 years, Hughes will quickly prove to be our best-ever defenseman. If we get OEL, even 3-4 years from now, he'll still be our 2nd best-ever Dman. I'm not saying it's quite like Niedermeyer-Pronger on Cup-winning Anaheim, but when you've got two elite blue-liners playing 48-50 minutes a game combined, on 2 different pairings, it vaults your team into contender status, as long as goaltending is good and top two centres are good (and we check those two boxes big time). Git 'er done, Jimbo!!!