Maniwaki Canuck
-
Posts
3,900 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Maniwaki Canuck
-
-
Bruce: there he goes?
Are they arranging it so that Bruce himself pulls the plug?
-
1
-
3
-
-
It was tough to watch Brock in that much distress but great to see Pettersson and Hughes by his side. Whatever else you say about Brock, his team mates love him and he's a great person. Of course there are questions about his next contract and fit on this team but as a fan, I'm keeping them separate from the sympathy I feel for him as a person.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Phil_314 said:
If Myers and/ or Boeser get moved, I think Vancouver's actually in a good spot, with some versatility for how they want to fix their top-4 D.
Moreover, on the note about top-4 defense, I wonder if (in case they can't find a trade) a switch to try would be Hughes - Myers, and then OEL - Schenn. Hear me out.
For all the bad reputation Myers has garnered as "Chaos Giraffe", he showed at times this past season that (even without OEL, e.g. in some OT games) he can make sound defensive plays. Now of course OEL changing to play more defensively did help to cover his mistakes, but if Boudreau sat him down and talked with him to focus more as a shutdown and physical partner for Hughes (who would be in charge of breakouts) I'm sure that he could take on that responsibility. In fact, Hughes' improvement defensively this season could also help to cover Myers' mistakes, and they would be two of the more capable puck-moving D that we have, plus both improved their defensive games recently. The two of them did have success two seasons ago.
Regarding swapping Schenn to partner with OEL, we saw how the former Coyotes captain could step up offensively when he wasn't burdened with covering Myers' mistakes. Schenn won't have such an issue as he's primarily a shutdown guy. Having a 35-40 point, offensively oriented OEL with a stable partner in Schenn could unlock the depth scoring that we need, plus he's still shown this year that he can carry a defensive load with Myers. With Schenn they might provide the all-around pair that the team needs.
(disclaimer, optimally Myers does get moved, but in case he doesn't, since OEL - Myers was all defense, they might as well try and unlock two offensive LHD in Hughes and OEL. They can recreate a symbiotic pair in Hughes - Myers where both can take turns roving up ice, and Myers can also be that shutdown guy who falls back).These kind of moves are what we need to be thinking about. Myers/OEL was pretty solid for large parts of the year, but was more about getting the best out of Myers than OEL. Either we get a stay at home LD to play with Myers or we move him and call up Rathbone so that all of our puck moving comes from the left side and the RD are all stay at home support. The latter might be easier to accomplish and would give us some cap flexibility. I like Myers but not at the cost of OEL's offensive game.
-
21 minutes ago, stawns said:
he might reply, but only to say "sorry _______ offered far more than that"
It won't come to that. He's not a free agent until 2023 and the club will almost certainly deal him if they can't re-sign him this summer.
-
6 minutes ago, JM_ said:
they could go 8 years, I can't see the AAV being 7.5 unless they go full 8.
For sure: that's as good as it could get for the club without being insulting to Miller. My own guess would be 7.8 to put him up with Hughes at 7 or more likely 8 years but it's quite possible that both sides could walk away from that.
-
1
-
-
Definitely a good sign that he came out and said that his friends and team-mates are here, that he wants to win here and that he feels loyal to the organization. Especially so after the disappointment of elimination. He didn't have to go public like that and it says a lot of good things about him that he did. That lays to rest one of the big questions, which was whether he even wants to be here: he does.
But it doesn't mean that he's taking a home team discount. Maybe he will, but not necessarily. It doesn't undercut his bargaining position to say he wants to be here, and quite possibly strengthens it since management now becomes a bit more responsible for any failure to re-sign. Think of how Benning wore the consequences of "running out of time" with Tanev and Toffoli.
So two very different things come together here: (1) J.T.'s genuineness and emotion that make him such a big leader on this team and (2) business. We're still a ways from reconciling them but this was a step in that direction, which is great for those of us who love this player.
-
1
-
-
14 minutes ago, Moe Knows said:
OEL was -3..Schenn and Hunt even...Dermott +2...so ???
Yeah, Dermott's been good. OEL and Myers weren't at their best but were taking the tough matchups. When we were carrying the play, the D looked fine and when we weren't, they didn't. Same as it ever was.
-
Not for lack of effort, but here we are. Not Demko's best game. Still proud of this team and don't want a tear-down.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, HKSR said:
That's what the goal song should be changed to if coach BB is extended. Would be annoying for other teams to hear 'Whoomp (Bruce) There It Is' 6 or7 times in a game lol
And the bass from that song would rock the arena all night long haha
It almost already is our goal song, at least as far as the crowd goes. I love it as something uniquely ours and the anthem of this team's resurrection and gutsy play under Bruce.
Then there's that derivative Atlanta Braves "ohhhhh-oh-oh" stuff that needed to end before it ever got started here. Such an embarrassment, especially now that we've got something so much better.
-
Hi, Dr. Recchi here.
Judging by where the puck hit Horvat, I'm gonna guess that if there's a broken bone, it's his fibula.
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, Phat Fingers said:
Everything is relative indeed.
OEL is a smart player. He is intelligent in his defence, his skating is excellent, and he can move the puck up ice, making the intelligent play to get the puck out.
He is a Tanev with way more offensive skills and a far better shot, but can fill in for Hughes, if Hughes goes down or falters.
So in that way, he fills Edlers role.
he can eat minutes and not decline rapidly, carry the play if others can’t and yes, his pay cheque is 1.2 million more than Tanev’s
I don’t see a lot of decline in his play being a risk, he is not a overly aggressive player and the long list of seasoned defenders to not decline. There are many that play better with age, or can still do things effectively without the puck that are extremely valuable, and eat minutes at crucial points in games that you want the veterans on the ice.
OEL and the entire team had a disastrous first 20 games. He had just got here. Defence always takes longer to bell than the offensive side of a team.
each pairing was new to each other.
In his pattern of play, he tends to gain momentum as the season progresses, or his fitness and skating don’t decline as fast as others when the season wears them down.
whatever reason, he is a solid player that could be a bit high on the price, but I look at the 6 m we paid edler, and to me, OEL, was is and will be a better player at the offensive side and less physical, but smarter as a defender.
Is OEL worth more than the. 6 m we paid elder last year. Yup. Is worth more than the 6 m Tanev’s getting in cow town. Yup.
caveat, Tanev is a RHD, so his value has a bump, but I see them as very smart and thinking defence men.
Umm, Tanev makes 4.5 M, not 6.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, spook007 said:
Spot on... and he bring an element we've been sorely missing for a long time... A big guy driving the net.
Seriously good playmaker and puck-hounder as well. Anticipates the play and sees the ice almost as well as Pettersson. With his shot, he's got quite the skill set: a power forward but not just that. And he's figuring it out in record time.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Our top forwards were just a little bit off offensively last night, all except for Podkolzin who is coming into his own right before our eyes. He's the play-making winger who Bo needs. The forwards did forecheck pretty well though and got in passing lanes a lot in the neutral zone, so a decent defensive performance from the group. Dermott and Burroughs were really solid.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Hey Vegas: how are those glossy piss helmets working out for ya?
-
1 hour ago, Coconuts said:
Leading up to the deadline my argument had been that his value was never going to be higher than it was prior to the deadline and I stick to that, but the caveat to that is that because his value was so high there were probably only going to be a few teams who'd consider trying to trade for him. Colorado could have, but they elected to bolster multiple areas of their roster instead. Tampa didn't have the space but made a deal for a cost controlled asset who's scoring. Florida went after Giroux, and they paid less than they would have for Miller because the only place Giroux was interested in being moved to was Florida, Florida had Philly by the balls. The Rangers didn't do anything of real significance, which is baffling given this was probably their best opportunity to go for it.
Teams who Miller could have put over the top either didn't buy our improved their roster in different ways. Does this speak to Miller's value not being high? I wouldn't say so. But it does speak to our ask being steep and other teams not feeling like paying up for whatever reasons. It could have also been a reluctance from management to make moves that tipped the scales, we haven't really seen leaks since this management group took over so for all we know they got offers but they weren't offers they couldn't refuse. We don't know, but maybe it'll come out later.
It's also trickier for teams to clear out significant cap space during the regular season as you've less flex time to work with, and you've got teams who question whether it's worth risking the chemistry of already performing rosters. I'd imagine it's easier to make significant additions or subtractions during the offseason when your current position in the standings doesn't potentially hang in the balance.
It's likely we have more potential trade partners in the summer, as you and others have said, but while I think Miller's value pre-trade deadline was higher I don't think it'll have tanked or dipped a drastic amount by the offseason. And if anything, having more potential trade partners might partially mitigate any drop in value because there'll be more teams who can bid.
Value is a funny thing, because we'll never be able to move any of our players for more than another team is prepared to pay, and in an ever shifting billion dollar NHL environment that's likely always shifting.
Yes to just about all of this, especially the Ranger's blowing a chance to contend. This summer is going to be interesting: I expect trade talks and extension negotiations with Miller to interact in unpredictable ways. Value is always complicated but particularly with a late bloomer like Miller in a trade that would fall somewhere in between a hockey deal and a rental. The acquiring team has to think about the assets its willing to give up and what an extension would cost. The balance between those two things is going to matter a lot. I don't rule out a re-signing at all and would be happy to see it at reasonable price and term, but this could go either way and be a win or a loss.
-
3 minutes ago, aGENT said:
I honestly can't believe the best offer we would get for him is a late first and throwaway prospect. He's simply got too much value.
I think management (rightly) was asking for a major overpayment if someone wanted two runs with him, and we were in the middle of a playoff fight.
Fair enough that nobody paid that. That doesn't mean there won't be real offers this summer though (and potentially with more suitors).
Zero chance he's an own rental. Management has made that a clear mandate from day one and illustrated it by moving Motte. Very little chance this gets past summer IMO.
I agree with all this, but whatever we were being offered a month before the TDL was low enough that he was publicly taken off the market. That was when his value was supposed to be the highest. Almost certainly more teams will be interested during the summer but as of now it doesn't look like his value is quite as high as we thought, whether that's in trade, his next contract, or a combination of the two.
-
3 minutes ago, aGENT said:
Those numbers are based on 8 year terms FWIW. Shorter term = higher AAV.
IMO, his agent is going to be asking for +/- $65m. Divide that by whatever term to get your AAV.
Sure, whatever, it's just their opening ask. What teams are willing to pay in a contract and trade asset cost is a separate matter.
-
2 minutes ago, JM_ said:
if a Miller trade is going to happen, it will likely include contract extension discussions with other teams, and that 8.5x8 thing will have to come down. His agent is setting a public ceiling on the next contract, thats all.
I can't see us getting anything close to value from a Miller trade without the other team having a clear idea of what the extension would be. The timing is a bit dicey though, since he can't re-sign until the summer but the teams might want to do such a deal before free agency.
It makes a lot of sense that this latest round of speculation about Miller's next contract could be driven by his agent. Basically he's putting their initial ask out in public, like you say. Teams will take it from there and the price will likely go down.
If it doesn't work out and we end up keeping him until the TDL next year and getting lesser value for him as a strict rental, so be it. If teams aren't offering more than that price I'm perfectly happy watching a great player at the top of his game on our team.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, JM_ said:
thats what I keep coming back to, why wasn't there the massive trade for him? if people really thought he was worth Laffy or Schneider, a 1st and a roster C, why didn't that happen? I don't believe Rutherford says no to that kind of deal.
I think the contract info is coming out of Millers agent, not from the Canuck side. I do think that hurts his trade value somewhat.
Absolutely. Rutherford for sure would have taken a deal like that. His line about wanting to give the current group a chance to make the playoffs plays well to the home crowd (myself included) but it's also a tactical response to lowball offers that he couldn't accept.
-
2
-
-
17 hours ago, JM_ said:
If he's worth a massive trade return then he's worth the salary.
There's a lot of truth to this. You could quibble that the trade and FA markets for him are different so his value could diverge from one to the other a bit, but it's basically right.
So what does it mean for his next contract that we apparently weren't offered a serious hockey deal for him at the trade deadline? Is this why various "insiders" are now talking 8 to 8.5M for him instead of the 9 to 9.5M we were hearing earlier (mostly on this board)?
My sense is that the rest of the league isn't quite ready to value Miller at his current level of play, probably for the same reasons that some people on this board want to trade him. So how does that not negatively affect his next contract?
We all know the stupid moves teams have made historically in free agency but with the cap being so tight and legitimately good players available at bargain prices, I have to think the top end of the FA market is in the process of correcting.
-
It wasn't our best game and I'm not saying we deserved to win, but the difference was two lucky goals and an empty-netter. A single point would have made a huge difference. Two, maybe three more losses are all we can afford.
-
12 minutes ago, The Lock said:
Yeah I agree. The media's paid to speculate but that doesn't mean they're going to know any better in the end plus there are a lot of factors in between now and July 1st even. After that, there's still an entire year even to get this deal done if it happens.
That being said, it should be interesting to see if/when the deal gets done. We've been used to seeing Benning take his time in these signings in the past. Will we see more of the same in that regard or will there be contracts signed more sooner than later? One could argue we have a lot of skill in the front office with the recent hirings, but that could mean a lot of things. We could play more hardball with the players in the negotiations to make it take longer. We could have better communication skills and quicker thinking to get things done faster. It could mean anything.
Agree that management will want to get on this and resolve it one way or the other. If they can't make an acceptable deal with Miller's camp, they have up to free agency to deal him on favourable terms. After that, teams lose roster flexibility and there will be fewer potential partners. But I still think there's a decent chance of Miller re-signing here and that some of these "insider" leaks may reflect preliminary discussions.
-
1
-
-
Let's take it easy here. He can't re-sign until the summer. Some preliminary conversations have undoubtedly happened with his agent, but real negotiations? Both sides will want to have closure on his production, state of health and market conditions current at the end of the year before they get down to brass tacks.
-
There's a reason Anaheim moved on from Manson. He's slowing down and not worth what he's making now. Would rather have Hamonic at 3M. Yes, it's that bad. Let's look for a less established player with some upside instead.
Allvin & Rutherford Press Summary
in Canucks Talk
Posted
I liked the emphasis on simply getting better, not a bunch of abstract blather about windows opening and closing.