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

danaimo

Members
  • Posts

    1,064
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by danaimo

  1. It only becomes relevant if the Canucks intend to spend within $3m on the cap. If they don't intend to then disputing it is pointless. This team are not going to be cup contenders in next 2 possibly 3 years, so why sweat it. According to Capfriendly they have $15m in cap space for next year with 22 roster players on the roster. Sure they have to sign Boeser but that still leaves plenty to go after a big free agent if they want to, without coming within $3m of the league wide cap. Can they, perhaps, will they, probably not.
  2. The salary cap is only a problem if you want spend up to it. If you have 6m cap space or 10m cap space is of no consequence, if you don't want to use it. I think it unlikely that he Canucks will be anywhere close to the salary cap this year or next, so it shouldn't be a problem. 2021 is a different matter because by then they will have to pony up for Petey. However a new US TV deal might give the league a cash windfall which might boost the salary cap. The penalty is a nuisance but not a disaster. Congratulations Lu for your great career. Best Canuck goalie ever.
  3. Doesn't cast Calgary player development in a positive light with Rychel and Lazar both 1st round picks and MacDonlad early 2nd round pick.
  4. Maybe we could have a 130 page thread on the subject
  5. The Canucks did not qualify him because if he went to arbitration he could be awarded a salary $3m+ based upon comparables given his points and ice time. This would have been a huge overpayment. Better to let him go to UFA and try to resign him for $1.5m or if not, there are plenty of 3rd pairing dmen that will cost you less than $1.5m.
  6. Might be an interesting problem.. I guess it depends which team signs him. If its a cup competitor then the firsts will be late round picks. If its Edmonton, then take the picks and run, you know they have a few more first overalls in them.
  7. Burns, Yandle, Trouba, Jones, Karlsson, Subban, Weber, Hamilton, Montour, Byfuglien and others. All top line defencemen that have been traded in recent years. No all RH, not necessarily as good as Jones, but it is myth that top line Dmen do not get traded. Not often, but it does happen. I agree EP would probably get you Jones but that would be too higher price for Van.
  8. Rumour had it that a trade for Tyson Barrie was quashed because COL wanted Brock Boeser. Perhaps a better RHD might wet his appetite. To Van: Seth Jones ($5.4m x 3) To Columbus: Brock Boeser RFA Obviously Brock would have to be prepared to sign on a new contract with CBJ. What Van gets - A bona fide elite right hand defenseman for 3 more years. There are no flaws in his game and has already put up a 57 pt season and every reason to think that he has more to give. What CBJ gets - A young pure goal scorer. With the possible departure of Panarin, Duchene and Dzingel its hard to see where the scoring is going to come from. They have the cap space to offer Brock a long term deal with good money if he wants. This would be a ballsy trade by both teams, but CBJ and VAN are teams that seem to be ready to change things up to get to the next level (VAN with the Miller trade, CBJ with their deadline trades). I like Boeser here in Van but bold moves are what is needed. Please feel free to vent your anger and disgust.
  9. Gonna take a lot more than our spare pieces to get Severson. I like the idea but I don't think we have the assets to swing the deal. I do think the Canucks need to focus on a top pairing Dmen and not just 3 rd line RHD who are cheap and available. Avoid Myers, Zaitsev, Benn and Nemeth and go after higher quality like Severson or Barrie
  10. Hey that's not fair. Your using sound logic and facts to make a point. That kind of behaviour will not be tolerated around here. Be hysterical and emotional instead.
  11. Most GMs only manage to draft and develop players to become NHL regulars with a less than 20 % success rate. Any GM that can draft and develop 25% of picks to become NHL regulars is a draft genius. Nonis and Gillis were terrible, but their failure is mitigated by the fact that they were often drafting late. Jim Benning, in 5 drafts has selected 8 players that are now regulars (Vitanen, McCann, Demko, Forsling, Boeser, Gaudette, Petey and Hughes) and there are another 6 or 7 (Tryamkin, Brisebois, Juolevi, Lind, DiPietro and Woo) that could go either way. This puts him as one of the best drafting GMs out there. Criticize him as much as you like, sure he gets things wrong. But his drafting record would be the envy of most teams.
  12. I'm pretty sure the current management were not in the slightest bit influenced to make the Miller trade based upon the drafting record of Dave Nonis and Mike Gillis. Let me summarize the piece: Dave Nonis sucked when drafting for the Canucks Mike Gillis sucked while drafting for the Canucks Jim Benning has drafted quite well therefore the Jim Benning traded for Miller because of the failures of people a long time ago. The author is making connections that don't exist. He does draw pretty graphs though.
  13. Partially true. The lack of leverage is only relevant if the team your trading with wants a 1st round pick, ie possibly COL with Tyson Barrie. But the lack of leverage argument for a free agent is a complete myth and I suspect people use it without fully understanding what it means. Like that ever happens!!
  14. Let me allay your concerns We receive a veteran player with years of NHL experience, a proven track record of success. TAM get a pick. No one knows who they pick, whether that pick turns out to be an NHLer or a complete bust. Who is carrying the risk? Certainly not Vancouver. Your second paragraph goes on to describe various scenarios whereby the Canucks acquire free agents. What has this got to do with the trade for Miller? You observations may or may not be valid, but they have no relevance to the Miller trade. This trade has no relevance to JB leverage to acquire Myers. Myers will be a free agent so there is no opportunity cost by trading away the 1st round pick Your worst case scenario being that the Canucks gave up a lottery pick. That hasn't happened and probably won't happen. Even if TAM get a lottery pick, they are still carrying the risk and we may still end up with the better player. Rental value? Miller has 4 years remaining on his deal. Teams pay less for rentals because they don't have the burden of term. I think you, like many others have over stated the value of a first round draft pick and have undervalued a known quantity. The average point total for a player drafted in the first round is 18pt per year. 18. People remember the elite players but conveniently forget the kids that don't establish themselves in the NHL. It is Tampa that are carrying all the risk.
  15. Okay, Quantify it. What price do you think Horvat is worth ? How much would you like to see coming back the other way. What's the bare minimum? 2 firsts? 2 firsts and a 2nd? 3 firsts? The comparison between Miller and Horvat is a pretty good one. I think you are undervaluing Miller.
  16. I agree with most of the comments on this subject. Generally speaking, players are better off to develop for a couple of years before jumping into the big time, especially players from Europe who are better off coming to N America at 20 years old rather than 17 or 18 years old. I do however have a slight concern with Pods. Last year he bounced around on three different teams in 3 different leagues. Many experts attributed his lower stats on the fact that he had no stability. If he can have some stability next year, keep him in Russia, if he's getting bounced around, try and get him out of there because it can only retard his development and that's not fair on the kid
  17. Are you kidding me. There will always be negativity in this market. We won't be happy until this team wins the Presidents trophy, Stanley Cup, Grey Cup, Superbowl and US presidential election. So there!
  18. Thanks for the input. I accept that my analysis has flaws but any analysis of this type will. It would be wrong to exclude Dmen all together because there are some that offer real offence and put up big numbers. Perhaps a better analysis would be to weigh their pts more. I did not use PPG because that puts weight on players that enter the NHL later in their career and value must be given to youngsters who come straight in at 18 or 19. Also, players that spend time in the treatment room do not help their team win games but they may have a better PPG. The article drives home the put that every draft has a drop off in talent from top picks to later picks and this is the fact that I'm trying make, although not as well as you.
  19. I can't argue with that, you make some valid points. My contention is that picks are made based on projection of what a team hopes will be, whereas veteran players can be assessed based upon actual performance at the NHL level. We don't know if Byram goes on to be the next Hedman or the next Gudbranson.
  20. And this is the root of the problem. Ott gave up a 1st get Duchene . They flipped him to CBJ a year later and got the first round pick back (along with spare pieces). While at OTT he was a point per game player. How was this bad for OTT? The player that COL got with that pick has done nothing yet and unless he plays 700+ games and puts up 500+ pts, COL lose that trade. People are seduced by picks and over value them, especially first round picks.
×
×
  • Create New...