[Proposal] Jim Benning to sign Milan Lucic to 7 year, $49 million contract on July 1, 2016

[Alflives]

45 minutes ago, DonaldBrashear said:

"Your an idiot"

 

Hahaha. Stopped reading after that. You must be Jim Benning in disguise.

JB would have said: " you're a real good idiot". 

Lucic will sign a 4 year x 7 mil. 

[Mr.53]

In a perfect world, I woulf love to trade Miller or Burrows for cap space (maybe both?) and fit both Lucic and Ladd in. Adding Lucic, Ladd, and Gudbranson and running with Markstrom in goal, all of a sudden we have a big mean nasty team.

 

Sedin Sedin Ladd

Lucic Sutter Hansen

Baertschi Horvat Virtanen

Gaunce Granlund Etem

 

Edler Tanev

Hutton Gudbranson

Sbisa Tryamkin

 

Markstrom

(New vet backup)

 

Damn... Now that would be a heavy, mean and tough team to play against... Very big and gritty to complement skill players People would fear coming to play here. One could only dream... I do wonder though, if either Ladd or Lucic, if not both, have significant interest to come here. We have the cap space, and the team is looking for a transition star out of the Sedins while the young guys acclimatize. Maybe coming home and being the hometown star savior back into playoff contention could sway them. That along with serious money.

 

[Wrecken]

I would prefer Mikkel Boedker. He had almost exactly the same points (1 less game), 1 year younger, and his name is NOT Milan Lucic.

[cripplereh]

On 6/5/2016 at 3:08 AM, DonaldBrashear said:

Who? We need a LW. An actual LW. Not someone who just plays LW in an unnatural spot. A true top 6 LW. Here's the list of free agents that are LW: http://www.spotrac.com/nhl/free-agents/left-wing/ufa/

 

Milan Lucic leads that list in points with 54. So I don't know how you make the argument there's better free agents. Plus Lucic has the benning connection from Boston and Vancouver is his hometown

E Staal for one,Radulov who would score more goals!!!We have good forwards but need one more and Lucic is good but \i think both said and Stammy would be better.I know who the free agents are and even Eriksson would be better!Think of the team before you think of one person you would like.I would like Lucic on the team but there are 4 better players i would rather have!

[PhillipBlunt]

5 hours ago, cripplereh said:

E Staal for one,Radulov who would score more goals!!!We have good forwards but need one more and Lucic is good but \i think both said and Stammy would be better.I know who the free agents are and even Eriksson would be better!Think of the team before you think of one person you would like.I would like Lucic on the team but there are 4 better players i would rather have!

Staal: In his 30's and contributed very little to NY's playoff run. Also has been in Carolina spinning his wheels for years. Pass.

 

Radulov: At the NHL level, he's proven to be an extremely selfish player, who needs to be babysat outside of the rink. He walked from the Predators and left them high and dry. Now he's looking for $7 M a year. Pass.

 

Eriksson: Streaky, non-physical sniper who had chemistry with the Sedins...over three years ago. Is looking for $6 M a year. This team doesn't need another Vrbata. Pass.

 

Lucic: Looks pretty good compared to those three. Is younger and far more physical than Staal or Eriksson. Has actually proven to be a solid teammate and leader on both Boston and LA. Will start to (possibly) experience issues relating to his playing style within the next 6 years. Still worth it for how he will teach the intangibles to the youth. Having Lucic and Gudbranson on the ice at the same time, on the same team, is a terrifyingly great idea.

[By sea and land]

Colossal mistake.  I like the idea of a big rugged winger but I think it would be a huge mistake.  

[kloubek]

Somehow I would be surprised if JB went too hard after Lucic.  No doubt Lucic has the size, but we're trying to make this team faster, and he's certainly a step in the wrong direction in that regard.

 

Additionally, he'd be the highest paid player on the team, and while he brings a unique combination of both scoring and size, he doesn't bring anything to the table we don't already have amongst our players individually going forward.

What we really need is a dynamic and fast scorer so I see JB far preferring Okposo or Stamkos, with Eriksson being a possibility as a consolation prize... largely because of previous history and chemistry with the twins.

[DonaldBrashear]

Only a few weeks left until i think big jim breaks out the money sack

[Bob Long]

On July 2, 2015 at 0:39 PM, Joker said:

I would love to see Lucic on the Canucks but man, a 7 year $49M deal? You've got to be insane to give Lucic that.

 

Well... is it? He's going to get 6 at least from Edmonton. So is the 1 mil difference worth letting the deal go? Who else would we get?

 

If it was 9 to 10 mil per year yes thats nuts, but I could actually live with 7 if it means Edmonton or LA doesn't get him. We need to improve in the Pacific and that 1 mil difference would be absorbable given the number of kids coming up over the next 3-5 years. 

[PhillipBlunt]

On ‎6‎/‎6‎/‎2016 at 0:19 PM, kloubek said:

Somehow I would be surprised if JB went too hard after Lucic.  No doubt Lucic has the size, but we're trying to make this team faster, and he's certainly a step in the wrong direction in that regard.

Benning stated that he wanted to make the team "younger, bigger, and faster".

 

While I am no GM, I don't think he meant that each player traded for, or acquired through draft and FA have to possess all three traits.

Quote

Additionally, he'd be the highest paid player on the team, and while he brings a unique combination of both scoring and size, he doesn't bring anything to the table we don't already have amongst our players individually going forward.

Name me one other forward on the Canucks roster that brings the size, strength and intimidation factor combined with the ability to get 54-64 points as season.

Quote

What we really need is a dynamic and fast scorer so I see JB far preferring Okposo or Stamkos, with Eriksson being a possibility as a consolation prize... largely because of previous history and chemistry with the twins.

The Canucks need scoring. But they also need a greater presence in the other teams end. A net front presence is completely lacking, and you don't get that from a speedy winger.

 

Rodin and Sven will be adequate in providing speed, as will Hansen.

Stamkos is a pipedream. Forget about that noise.

 

Okposo, while very enticing, is also an unproven entity outside of the team that drafted him. And chances are that he'll re-sign with NY.

 

Sinking $6 M per year for Eriksson, to play a top 3 role, seems a bit counterintuitive.

 

Both Eriksson and Okposo would be welcome additions though, no doubt.

[Alflives]

8 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Benning stated that he wanted to make the team "younger, bigger, and faster".

 

While I am no GM, I don't think he meant that each player traded for, or acquired through draft and FA have to possess all three traits.

Name me one other forward on the Canucks roster that brings the size, strength and intimidation factor combined with the ability to get 54-64 points as season.

The Canucks need scoring. But they also need a greater presence in the other teams end. A net front presence is completely lacking, and you don't get that from a speedy winger.

 

Rodin and Sven will be adequate in providing speed, as will Hansen.

Stamkos is a pipedream. Forget about that noise.

 

Okposo, while very enticing, is also an unproven entity outside of the team that drafted him. And chances are that he'll re-sign with NY.

 

Sinking $6 M per year for Eriksson, to play a top 3 role, seems a bit counterintuitive.

 

Both Eriksson and Okposo would be welcome additions though, no doubt.

You're a wise sage  Blunt.

[PhillipBlunt]

4 minutes ago, Alflives said:

You're a wise sage  Blunt.

Thank you, Alf. And you are a fantastic alien life form with great fur.

[kloubek]

3 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Name me one other forward on the Canucks roster that brings the size, strength and intimidation factor combined with the ability to get 54-64 points as season.

Again, I believe we have that in our combined team.  Not just in one player.  Lucic is certainly unique in the fact he is big, but can still score.  Tryamkin is big.  No, he isn't going to score like a forward but why we're trying to get scorers on our team... either via the draft, or by UFA.  Scorers better than Lucic.

 

And 55-65 points?   Lucic is regressing in his scoring... not improving.  His highest total ever was 62 points, and that was when the Bruins were firing on all cylinders.  He will never achieve that again.  I think the team that Lucic goes to will be lucky to get 50 points out of him.  To me, paying him 7 million a season (or more) as he ages and gets even slower for 50 points or less isn't the best value on the dollar - even with his clear ability to punish the opposing players.

[PhillipBlunt]

13 minutes ago, kloubek said:

Again, I believe we have that in our combined team.  Not just in one player.

Who is an effective net front presence on the forward corps?

Who will put an end to the physical badgering that our forward corps has become routinely subject to, on the forward corps?

Quote

Lucic is certainly unique in the fact he is big, but can still score.

It's not just about size. He's fearless and merciless on the forecheck. He clearly enjoys when the game notches up physically. There is no one on the Canucks forward corps, who is established, that provides that. And yes, combined with his size, it's imposing.

Quote

 Tryamkin is big.  No, he isn't going to score like a forward but why we're trying to get scorers on our team... either via the draft, or by UFA.  Scorers better than Lucic.

Tryamkin isn't big, he's massive. But a rookie. Who knows if Tryamkin will find a scoring touch. He's an impressive skater for his size, and his ability to read a play, and use his size in non-confrontational ways is impressive.

 

It's also up to the roster players coming back to contribute on the scoresheet. There is no reason to let anyone off the hook, from the Sedins on down to whomever will man the fourth line. As well, contributions from the blue line wouldn't hurt. (I'm looking at you Edler!)

Quote

And 55-65 points?   Lucic is regressing in his scoring... not improving.  His highest total ever was 62 points, and that was when the Bruins were firing on all cylinders.  He will never achieve that again.

That was a ballpark figure based on his last season point total of 54. Had the Kings gone further in the playoffs, that total may have been closer to my estimate. It's inflated though, no doubt.

 

Can you prove that he'll never achieve that again? Is it really so improbable?

Quote

I think the team that Lucic goes to will be lucky to get 50 points out of him.  To me, paying him 7 million a season (or more) as he ages and gets even slower for 50 points or less isn't the best value on the dollar - even with his clear ability to punish the opposing players.

7M is too high for him. Hell it's too high for most players. That I agree with.

 

Can't argue with basing monetary compensation on production, but sometimes the intangibles provided by one player do allow other players the room to increase their production.

[kloubek]

25 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Who is an effective net front presence on the forward corps?

Who will put an end to the physical badgering that our forward corps has become routinely subject to, on the forward corps?

It's not just about size. He's fearless and merciless on the forecheck. He clearly enjoys when the game notches up physically. There is no one on the Canucks forward corps, who is established, that provides that. And yes, combined with his size, it's imposing.

Tryamkin isn't big, he's massive. But a rookie. Who knows if Tryamkin will find a scoring touch. He's an impressive skater for his size, and his ability to read a play, and use his size in non-confrontational ways is impressive.

 

It's also up to the roster players coming back to contribute on the scoresheet. There is no reason to let anyone off the hook, from the Sedins on down to whomever will man the fourth line. As well, contributions from the blue line wouldn't hurt. (I'm looking at you Edler!)

That was a ballpark figure based on his last season point total of 54. Had the Kings gone further in the playoffs, that total may have been closer to my estimate. It's inflated though, no doubt.

 

Can you prove that he'll never achieve that again? Is it really so improbable?

7M is too high for him. Hell it's too high for most players. That I agree with.

 

Can't argue with basing monetary compensation on production, but sometimes the intangibles provided by one player do allow other players the room to increase their production.

I actually agree with most of your points.  Yes, he would be an obvious net presence and yes, that gives us more options to score.  (Though at the end of the day, points are points regardless of whether they are the result of close in play, fancy passing or hard shots.) I will concede that we don't have anyone who can be so punishing with a deep forecheck and that would certainly be beneficial - especially in the playoffs.  But you just conceded he is going to be overpaid.  And that's really my point more than anything.  It isn't that I don't think he would benefit our team.  He would.  If we could get him for a couple million less, I'd be all over that.  But you know some GM, somewhere, would happily pay 7 million.  Maybe more.  (Edmonton?)

 

It is just that we could try to get Lucic and up our physical game, or we can instead try to get a true scorer for that kind of money.  I believe the latter would be more advantageous for us - especially considering we had the second most anemic offence in the league.

Tryamkin - I really don't expect him to find much of a scoring touch.  A big shot maybe, but that's about it.  My only point was that we DO have size to help defend our other players and will now have the ability to lay down some pretty crushing checks; unfortunately, it comes from our D so there will be limited opportunities.  I'm truly stoked to watch him play a full season though, and hope he ups his conditioning in the offseason.... which I saw as his biggest flaw more than anything.

I cannot say for certain that Lucic will never achieve that number again, no.  But doing so would generally defy logic, considering he was on a Stanley Cup winning team at the time, and though he isn't old, he's also not getting any younger.  Stick him on a line with Crosby, Thornton, or the Sedins and he'd probably fare quite well. 

Oh well.  We'll see.  I'm sure Benning is working hard to bolster our top 6, and although I don't think he would be the "ideal" fit due to his lack of speed, if his top potentials don't pan out I wouldn't exactly be floored to see the Canucks make an offer.

 

[PhillipBlunt]

32 minutes ago, kloubek said:

I actually agree with most of your points.  Yes, he would be an obvious net presence and yes, that gives us more options to score.  (Though at the end of the day, points are points regardless of whether they are the result of close in play, fancy passing or hard shots.) I will concede that we don't have anyone who can be so punishing with a deep forecheck and that would certainly be beneficial - especially in the playoffs.  But you just conceded he is going to be overpaid.  And that's really my point more than anything.  It isn't that I don't think he would benefit our team.  He would.  If we could get him for a couple million less, I'd be all over that.  But you know some GM, somewhere, would happily pay 7 million.  Maybe more.  (Edmonton?)

 

It is just that we could try to get Lucic and up our physical game, or we can instead try to get a true scorer for that kind of money.  I believe the latter would be more advantageous for us - especially considering we had the second most anemic offence in the league.

Tryamkin - I really don't expect him to find much of a scoring touch.  A big shot maybe, but that's about it.  My only point was that we DO have size to help defend our other players and will now have the ability to lay down some pretty crushing checks; unfortunately, it comes from our D so there will be limited opportunities.  I'm truly stoked to watch him play a full season though, and hope he ups his conditioning in the offseason.... which I saw as his biggest flaw more than anything.

I cannot say for certain that Lucic will never achieve that number again, no.  But doing so would generally defy logic, considering he was on a Stanley Cup winning team at the time, and though he isn't old, he's also not getting any younger.  Stick him on a line with Crosby, Thornton, or the Sedins and he'd probably fare quite well. 

Oh well.  We'll see.  I'm sure Benning is working hard to bolster our top 6, and although I don't think he would be the "ideal" fit due to his lack of speed, if his top potentials don't pan out I wouldn't exactly be floored to see the Canucks make an offer.

 

Good points. It will be very interesting indeed. A mere 21 days away now.