Should we re-sign Mike Santorelli?

[Ihatetomatoes]

Lp

[poetica]

Surprised 23 people have said, "No." Obviously we don't want to sign him to a long-term deal because we need to see what he can do over a full season and with the new coach but we'd be fools to let him go after what we saw from him this year.

[Junkyard Dog]

Here is the article. Just speculation on things most people have already discussed on the forums here. Still nothing new based on his injury and healing yet

The bigger, rougher version of the Canucks that Jim Benning envisions isnt all bad for Mike Santorellis future in Vancouver.

Sure, hes undersized, and if youre making a blueprint to get through the juggernauts of the Pacific Division, its not going to start with re-signing the pending unrestricted free agent.

And when you hear Benning gush over the idea of infusing his bottom six with size, grit and physicality, to take the heat of his top six, well, you wonder how much love he has in his heart for a tenacious, blade-wearing water bug.

But if the Canucks are going to get back to their uptempo roots, they could make use of Santorellis wheels, and they know it. This remains especially true if they trade Ryan Kesler or buy out David Booth. Or both.

Re-signing Santorelli, the Vancouver native who reanimated his career in 49 games, has been one of the Canucks priorities this off-season.

By now, Santorellis story is well worn. Signed to a two-way, show-me contract, he was one of the few positive Canucks stories. On a team of underachievers, he excelled.

He created a role seemingly out of sawdust, starting his season an afterthought and ending it indispensable.

His Jan. 16 shoulder injury, the one that ended his year with surgery, was one of the grandest nails in the 2013-14 Canucks coffin.

Now what?

Well, now Santorelli would like a little comfort and security in the form of a multi-year contract, say in the $1.5-$2 million range after proving again that, yes, he is an NHL player.

It would be in line with the way he played the first 34 games, during which he had 22 points, was a team leader in even strength points, and had possession numbers, including a 53.5 per cent Corsi rating, which were rather remarkable.

His numbers backed up what you saw on the ice, which was a player who was hard to knock off pucks and one who didnt mind trying power moves to get to the net.

But, and he wasnt alone in this under John Tortorella, Santorelli hit a wall in December. His final 15 games were troubling. He was getting wrecked regularly in his matchups while his Corsi rating dipped to a bottom-feeding 44 per cent in that stretch.

That tailing off is one of the red flags the Canucks now have to deal with.

It would be wonderful and easy if the Canucks knew theyd get the Santorelli they saw in the first three months. But there is a reason he was forced to sign a two-way contract in the summer. Its because he just a few months removed from being waived by the Florida Panthers.

Santorelli was picked up by the Winnipeg Jets in April 2013, but the Jets werent keen on re-signing the centre after seeing him up close for 10 games.

So by the time Santorelli agreed to that deal with the Canucks, he was on his third team in four months.

Its going to take more than 34 solid games to wipe away the stench of getting passed over by the Panthers and the Jets.

So where does this leave the Canucks?

It leaves them ready and willing to bet on Santorelli again, but its difficult to see them willing to gamble on a deal thats longer than one year.

Maybe that changes if Kesler is traded. Its not like the organization is loaded with centres who could take his place. Come to think of it, there are none.

Such a scenario could help Santorellis leverage, though you cant view him as a Kesler replacement either.

I think the Canucks would like to get Santorelli on a one-year deal closer to $1 million.

Clearly, he was motivated last season to fight not only for a roster spot but for a longer term contract.

It worked so well last year until it was cut short by that shoulder injury.

Thanks.

[Guest Dasein]

No.

Unless it's as a depth 13th forward for cheap, then yes.

[Snake Doctor]

We should resign him for sure. I have a feeling we will have the same team as last year but be number one in the division just like the blue jays

[D-Money]

I think we should re-sign him. I also want us to trade a couple vets up front (Kesler, Hansen?), so Santo will be needed to fill a hole.

[Rush17]

He is definitely worth between 1.5-2m. If you ask me I personally would offer a fair compensation and not try to low ball him. Offering him real money will only improve his confidence and we arent exactly tight on the cap. I would give him 2 years @ 1.8m or a 1 year @ 2m deal. I think a 2 year deal is just about right. After he completes that we will have a better sense of his value and be able to pay him better accordingly. He deserves decent compensation though. 1.5m is fesible but to me seems to cheap for his services. If Kesler is dealt I hope he gets 2m a season.

[CanucksSayEh]

More skilled than Higgy and Hansen, can play all F positions too. Could be had for cheaper prob. Move the former, and keep Santa. Good in the shootouts too, something we desperately need.

[Gary l5l]

He would make a great addition to the team if he can play like he did last season

[Nuxfanabroad]

I could see some of our rivals offering 2~2.5 over a few years. People are so insistent on low-balling him; despite the excess of between 4~6.1 mill, cap-hit performers we had this year.

[aGENT]

I could see some of our rivals offering 2~2.5 over a few years. People are so insistent on low-balling him; despite the excess of between 4~6.1 mill, cap-hit performers we had this year.

We're better off spending $2m+ elsewhere IMO. If someone else wants to overpay for a good, versatile but let's face it, "tweener" who is not remotely a sure thing, that's their prerogative.

Me, I'd rather use that money to overpay on an actual legit top 6 forward or top 4 D if we're going down that road.

He's a good, middle 6, bargain forward that's earned a contract. If he's not a bargain though, he loses his allure.

[puckdontlie]

I think $500,000, NMC, a new truck and two parking spaces to park that truck is a fair offer. Upgraded to three parking spaces if he scores more than 30 goals.

[Nuxfanabroad]

I think $500,000, NMC, a new truck and two parking spaces to park that truck is a fair offer. Upgraded to three parking spaces if he scores more than 30 goals.

You wanna' throw around millions, THEN give out PARKIN' SPOTS, Willy Nilly?! There's a ceiling-limit.. a CEILING on that bldg, mister!!

[Nuxfanabroad]

We're better off spending $2m+ elsewhere IMO. If someone else wants to overpay for a good, versatile but let's face it, "tweener" who is not remotely a sure thing, that's their prerogative.

Me, I'd rather use that money to overpay on an actual legit top 6 forward or top 4 D if we're going down that road.

He's a good, middle 6, bargain forward that's earned a contract. If he's not a bargain though, he loses his allure.

In stating what he'd be offered(say the Alta teams), I wasn't necessarily endorsing the amount that we should pay him. Just as there is a higher living cost in Van(sort of a 'scenery' tax); in Alta there is an ugliness tax, where they ding yer soul, & leave you feeling empty.

[aGENT]

In stating what he'd be offered(say the Alta teams), I wasn't necessarily endorsing the amount that we should pay him. Just as there is a higher living cost in Van(sort of a 'scenery' tax); in Alta there is an ugliness tax, where they ding yer soul, & leave you feeling empty.

And all I'm saying is that he makes sense at 1-2 years at ~$1.5+/- per. More than that and I feel we can fill that spot with another guy at $500k-$1m and better use those additional funds towards a trade acquisition or UFA.

If someone else wants to overpay him, that's their prerogative. He had a good thing here in his hometown, with decent line mates and chemistry. It might behoove him to continue to take advantage of that at the risk of a few hundred K, it might not.

[Nuxfanabroad]

^Certainly reasonable. So much of this hinges on what they do with Kesler, & other possible C's. Also pertains to whether JB & TL are putting more emphasis on immediate answers or long term.

[DrChill]

Depends on contract length and money

[higgyfan]

I don't want to see Santo as a 2nd line player. He's had one good season; who knows if he can be consistently good.

If he signs for a low cap hit (1-1.5m) he might be a good fit on the 3rd, but one of Higgins or Hansen would have to be traded. Anymore than a 2yr contract will interfere with plans to bring in prospects.

[Junkyard Dog]

A couple Game Highlights. You can find good plays by Santorelli in them.

[Moonshinefe]

He's in his prime and he was on pace for 15+ goals, and has hit 20 before. Top on team +-, good two-ways and with puck battles. Our team was *winning* and on a roll when he was in the line up. I don't understand why we wouldn't want to give him another chance. He had an injury and we lacked scoring / depth last year, but unless he wants a massive contract, I don't get why we'd ditch him. What exactly did our other 3rd/2nd borderline players do last year for us? I seem to remember Hansen and Burrows sucking. The other wingers were kind of a revolving door it seemed besides Higgins.