EternalCanuckFan

If the Canucks are successful re-signing Hutton, then I'm wondering if that means that he'll stay with the team at least until the TDL. They'll presumably try and sign him to a much more reasonable deal than what he may have received in arbitration but since I expect he has no leverage for trade protection, such a deal may actually make him attractive to another team. I'm thinking things go down like this over the next week: I'm assuming since Hutton is now a UFA that other teams can talk to him. Hutton may receive calls so it will give him a chance to see what his market value is. IMHO, it's not great timing for him. Sure the UFA market for D isn't great, but there are a bunch of other young LHD who are comparables. If Vancouver's offer is the best, then he'll stick. There may be other reasons why Hutton would go to another city so there's always that possibility, but at least he knows Canucks management and coaching staff. My guess is the Canucks will offer Hutton a 1-year show me deal at a more reasonable salary (~$1.5M to $2.5M). I have a hard time seeing Hutton getting a much better offer than that but maybe he prefers to go back to Ontario in which case Ottawa might be a fit. For all of the doom and gloom about losing Hutton for nothing, it's interesting to see other teams choose to qualify RFAs, some of whom they traded picks or other assets for. Would still suck to see Hutton leave for nothing but that was always a possibility. Suppose the Canucks went to arbitration with Hutton, paid him a $4.4M award for 1-year, and end up having him struggle through the season. He would be a UFA after that and the Canucks would presumably not be able to trade him. Considering how tight cap space is for so many teams this summer, keeping that cap space free at the cost of possibly losing Hutton doesn't seem so unreasonable.

So I'm guessing as per speculation Hutton and Granlund are UFAs now (I believe Gaunce and Pouliot were already confirmed to not be receiving QOs after the end of the season?) but Boeser, Leivo, Goldobin, Teves, Rafferty, Motte and Boucher were all qualified? I think Perron and Kero were also RFAs right?

Agree. Podkolzin is pretty much what the Canucks were trying to get Goldobin to aspire to. I'm sure it's already been said but Podkolzin will hopefully be Pots-Goals-In when he makes the jump to the Canucks!

Beaulieu might be a decent add as a depth D. Younger than Benn.

I would say GMJB is an average GM in terms of signings and trades but he has helped turn around the Canucks' drafting together with the Canucks scouting department. All GMs make deals that they regret whether those are signings or trades. It's disappointing that he wasn't able to turn some of the assets the Canucks had when he took over into more assets and I think the misjudgment of how competitive the team would be in the final years of the Sedin's careers will lay partly with him. However, if GMJB is not extended as GM, then the brightest spot regarding his legacy will be the fact that the Canucks prospect pipeline is vastly improved from where it was when he took over, and I think that's a big win for the organization.

With Soderberg out, they'll need a 3C. I'm not familiar enough with the Av's depth players but I'm guessing Compher or Kerfoot might step in if they don't sign anyone to do that? I thought both of those guys generally play wing however, even if they might have played C before. They're also still thin at 2C. Jost is presumably 2C but he had an underwhelming year last year (closed out 2017-2018 really well but didn't translate into momentum last season). If the Av's do add Panarin though, they are going to be even more dangerous than they were this year. Might even help them spread out the big line so that they're a bit more balanced. They'll have Makar for the whole season and presumably Timmins will make the jump too. They can decide what to do with Barrie at the TDL and may just keep him unless they're confident they can be as successful by trading him for future assets.

If the Canucks don't qualify Hutton, then as much as it sucks to face the possibility of losing an asset, all the power to him to test other teams to see if he can get a more lucrative deal than what the Canucks would be willing to give him. Losing players by not qualifying them happens from time to time and is one of the risks GMs take when rewarding a player with a contract early. It doesn't help that arbitration can inflate the dollars even more (though it is otherwise intended to protect players as well). If the Canucks lose Hutton in FA and gain Burakovsky as a FA (just as an example), then I don't see the whole situation working out too bad. As for the Canucks' D, while it remains to be seen what management does with existing roster players not named Edler and Hughes (I'm assuming Stecher might actually be considered expendable as much as it would suck to see him moved), replacing Hutton with a less expensive, veteran depth D might actually work out better for the team. They can insulate their younger D in the NHL and let Juolevi break down the door to the NHL while playing big minutes in Utica.

I'm sure Hutton will find work in the NHL whether or not it's with the Canucks. The only issue is what Hutton is entitled to be qualified at and what he might get in arbitration. He is otherwise a legitimate NHL depth D who should still have some upside even though he's no longer a prospect.

With all the talk about Vegas, Colin Miller and that team being up against the cap, I'm wondering if the Canucks might be able to swing a deal with Vegas revolving around Sutter and a D for Miller and someone like Eakin. I don't think Miller is going to be cheap to acquire as his cap hit is very good and he's under contract for 3 more years. Eakin is likewise valuable to Vegas but he is a UFA next summer and they need to get cap compliant while filling out their roster. I don't think Sutter and Tanev with salary retained would be enough to pry both of those players out. Both those players may help Vegas though - Sutter is under contract for another 2-years and his cap hit isn't that bad, particularly if the Canucks retain a good chunk of his salary. Tanev is a UFA next summer but, if healthy, should be a good (but older and less offensively inclined) replacement for Miller. Tanev could pair well with either Schmidt or Theodore. I'd be curious if Stecher might intrigue Vegas more than Tanev both for $ and for player control (he's still a RFA next summer). Miller is an upgrade to the Canucks D. Eakin is a solid 3C and would help give the Canucks more depth in the top 9. Not sure what else might need to be involved to make a deal work. I'm sure Vegas would want to include Clarkson's contract as well which the Canucks may be able to do provided they can move out Eriksson's contract and, perhaps, one or two others.

Interesting. I'm not aware enough of how much Seabrook declined, but I can understand why the deal died. If the Canucks had been able to draft Byram though... that would have been amazing. I like the Podkolzin pick but Byram would solidify the future of the Canucks D significantly.

In the William Karlsson re-signing thread, the effect of differences in the taxes that players would pay in various jurisdictions was brought up. There can be significant differences in take-home pay once taxes are factored in. I believe the point made in Karlsson's case was that in Vegas, Karlsson's take home pay is the same at a $6M salary as it would be if he was making $8M in Toronto (or something like that). I suspect that taxes are one of the reasons why the Canucks (and presumably other Canadian teams) tend to sign more expensive contracts. They might have to do it so that they can compete with teams in jurisdictions with more favorable tax situations. Of course, each player will have a different set of priorities and some might be willing to have lesser after-tax income to go to a more competitive team, closer to family, etc., but this is likely a factor. If the Canucks are successful in signing Myers, then I think fans will need to be prepared for the dollars to be a bit on the high side. I think Myers will have a lot of suitors which will help to drive up the price.

I like Nyquist but no idea how management would make this work with all their contracts.

Definitely is. The cost of the Miller trade overshadows the optimism of adding him to the mix but it also places a lot more focus on what the Canucks are going to do with all their forwards. Unless there is a shocking trade involving Boeser, the top-6 seems like it will definitely consist of Pettersson, Boeser, Horvat and Miller. The bottom-6 should definitely have Beagle and Roussel. Beyond that, it's a complete mystery. Are Pearson and Leivo expendable in any way? Of the forwards the Canucks have, their play last season and style of play seems to fit where the Canucks would like to go (including now with the acquisition of Miller). I think it's highly likely they come back. Will Eriksson be traded within the next couple of weeks? Will Granlund and Goldobin be qualified? Goldobin I can see but maybe not Granlund. It would suck to lose Granlund without getting at least a mid-to-late pick for him. He's a NHL player. What in the world will the Canucks do with Baertschi? How does Baertschi fit into this group? Do the Canucks find Virtanen expendable now? Or could we seem a top-6 of Miller-Pettersson-Boeser and Pearson-Horvat-Virtanen if the Canucks believe that Jake can make the next step? Is Sutter going to be kept for another season? I could definitely see them doing this since Gaudette is still waiver exempt and while he has played well, may benefit from playing a significant role in Utica. Gaudette gives the Canucks a strong call-up option. What will happen to Motte and Schaller? Motte played well last season but is it a foregone conclusion that he will be kept? All of this is not even considering what the Canucks will do on D.

I like the acquisition but the expense of the deal in terms of the 1st is painful. Still, if Hayes can get $7M per year then $5.25M for Miller over the next 4-years might very good value especially if he can gel in the top-6 and increase his production.

Miller's contract runs through the period that you would expect Podkolzin to join the Canucks which would significantly improve the winger group of the team with the additional versatility of Miler being able to play C. I'm wondering if the delay right now has to do with Miller's modified NTC. Curious if the Canucks were on the 8-team no trade list.

A Landeskog or Meier type player would be amazing if Podkolzin pans out and makes his way across the Pacific. I like the pick.

It's still a fairly steep price since those are two young players that the Canucks have been developing but it wouldn't hurt as much as giving up the 2020 1st since there would be no 1st coming back to the Canucks.

I wonder if part of Tanev's injury proneness is due to him coming back too early from injuries. It's possible that Tanev often came back before being fully healed. It's not to say that Tanev isn't actually injury prone, but he seems like on of those guys who is willing to pay through pain which might seem good in terms of toughness but isn't really great for the longevity of his career. Hard to comment on the Canucks medical staff on this since I'm sure they do their best to ensure that players are 100% healthy before returning after an injury, but I expect that it's possible for a player to be cleared too early if the player is denying feeling pain. In terms of Tanev's trade value, I don't think there's any doubt that he has been one of the better defensive RHD over the course of his career but he needs to get healthy. If the Canucks are really shopping him, then I can see him still garnering decent value but probably not as high as his value would have been a few years ago.

Would you be game for the Canucks to trade for Burakovsky's rights and then qualify him? Personally, I think that would be too much of an investment of assets and $ for Burakovsky. He would probably be an upgrade on Goldobin (as others have said) but I think it makes more sense for the Canucks to pursue this if Burakovsky hits free agency. Sure they'll be competing with other teams but it won't cost them an asset and even if they end up at or close to the $ he needs to be qualified for, again, they wouldn't have lost an asset. They could still try and trade Goldobin for another asset as well.

Good catch, forgot about Leivo! Regarding LE, I don't mean retention of salary. The Canucks can retain salary without LE being their property anymore. I mean the nightmare situation where they try to bury LE in the minors which would presumably be bad for all parties.

I'm seeing the most likely base line-up as: Baertschi-Pettersson-Boeser Pearson-Horvat-2RW Roussel-3C-Leivo Motte-Beagle-Virtanen C: The Canucks currently have Sutter as the most likely 3C. If Sutter is moved (which I think there's a strong possibility will not happen), then Gaudette would presumably take over. Spooner is also a possibility and I always forget that he's still Canucks property. Schaller could play C as well but he would not be an option to replace Sutter. W: Eriksson is likely gone but there's still a possibility that he will remain Canucks property. Goldobin is a wild card right now. Spooner can also play wing but I have hard time seeing a place on this team for him. The Canucks need to shore up their top-6 this summer too and with various pieces in play, it will be interesting to see what happens.

If Burakovsky is not qualified, then the Canucks might as well wait to free agency instead of giving up assets to acquire him AND having to qualify him at a higher salary. Management seems to be kicking the tires on a number of different options so if they were really that high on Burakovsky, I presume we would have seen a deal by now. His QO is quite high for his production level so far so it makes sense to let him hit FA and see what the market is like for him.

Benn played 81 games last season and 77 games the year before. He was in and out of the Stars line-up before joining the Habs but he seemed to get a decent amount of playing time in. From what I have seen of Benn, he's a reasonable defensive D. I'm not sure what the Canucks are after now that they have locked up Edler though. They still have Hutton to consider and, if anything, they need to improve the right side which adding Benn would not help with. I'm not against the Canucks signing Benn for depth but that depends entirely on what happens to the existing players they have control over.

With the NMC, I'm assuming no one should be expecting any "trade Edler at the TDL" rumors over the next 2-years unless Edler himself asks for the opportunity to be dealt to a contender.

Canucks could still be chasing at least one of those two players and could also be active in the trade market. At the very least, Edler is a veteran D who can eat him up hard minutes when he's healthy and contribute on offense as well. He shouldn't be relied on as the #1D anymore which is what I think the Canucks will try to address this summer. While the Canucks need to give Hughes and Juolevi solid PT this coming season, they also need more solid options to surround them. Re-signing Edler at a reasonable rate helps immensely with that.