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

[Report] Booth on Waivers


Strombone1

Recommended Posts

Frankly, at the time 4.6 per year for 4 years wasn't that bad of a deal for Burr. Maybe a tad high, but not really. It looks terrible now, but at the time, most people were pleased with it.

Speak for yourself I thought it was a terrible signing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the last year that compliance buyouts can be used, so it would only be a waste if there were someone else to use it on that would be better for us.

That said, I hope Benning isn't buying Booth out just so we can say we made use of both our compliance buyouts.

That is not possible because Booth is very much buyout material, he would have been bought out last year if he wasn't injured.

I know people probably won't like me for saying it but I would have went for more whole sale changes if I were the Canucks. I would have given Burrows the compliance buyout and given the regular buyout to Booth and just tried to snag cheap players in free agency to fill the space and trade them at the deadline for additional picks. Imo if there ever was a draft to tank and load up for it is the next one. Without Burrows, Kesler, Booth I think the Canucks would have finished decently low enough to have a chance at an elite talent like McDavid/Eichel. Even Barzal who is hometown kid would be an amazing addition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speak for yourself I thought it was a terrible signing.

3.8 is about the value I'd say is fair but he's a great player that plays all out every game, if I would have to pick a player to over pay it would be bur. thanks again MG we won't be free of your screw ups for how long?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully Benning has a plan for that cap space.. Booth wasn't playing terrible at the end of the year - kind of figured we'd hang on to him.

Not like we're going to contend next year anyways.

I think the plan is to give that roster spot to one of the prospects.....i think its more about giving the younger guys a chance rather than the cap situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the plan is to give that roster spot to one of the prospects.....i think its more about giving the younger guys a chance rather than the cap situation.

Not that cap space hurts. Could mean we're able to take on another team's "bad" contract as part of the Kesler trade in return for further assets as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless the cap space is critical, I thought it would make sense to keep Booth. The Canucks aren't expected to contend and Booth may have actually garnered up a decent return at the trade dead line.

Not to mention, he can actually contribute on the ice as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...