Alexander Edler | #23 | D

[EP Phone Home]

4 hours ago, J-P said:

I get it that we don’t want to protect him in the expansion draft and that’s a totally valid perspective from a franchise standpoint. As fans though, I think we should respect and be happy that he wants to finish his career here instead of complaining that he wants an NMC or wouldn’t waive. 

 

Personally - I think they should just do 2 years at $8 mil and everybody wins. 

I think that’s where fans are fine with the two years but from all the things we are hearing from the negations is that the Elder camp wants to be protected. Which would mean 3+ years is what they want. We all want Edler to finish his career with the team that drafted him but I find it petty that this termv(NMC) is what will make or break his stay in this city. He has gone on record many times that he likes it here but doesn’t want just a two year deal. That’s polarizing.

Hopefully both the team, Edler and his agent can meet in the middle here and he can retire a Canuck.

[I.Am.Ironman]

We all want Edler back but I don't know how he thinks any other team in the league would give him a NMC through the expansion draft. Even from Seattle's perspective, are they really going to choose a 35 year old Edler for 1 season over a younger Dman like Hutton or young forward like JV (for example)?! No absolutely not. All a NMC clause does is screw the Canucks into losing an extra player. Edler doesn't want Seattle, a fact that by now is well known to the whole hockey world - including Seattle, so why would they pick a player that doesn't want to play there? Additionally from JB's side of things he knows he can't hand out a NMC to Edler just from a pure optics perspective. Everybody knows Edler is in no position to warrant a NMC through the expansion draft so if JB caves and gives him one then it looks worse on him than if Edler walks IMO. If Edler is going to die on this hill he dug his own grave. All that being said it is likely just posturing and I doubt he makes it to UFA status because our defense is better with him in the line up and he has been nothing but a soldier for us.

[Lancaster]

How would a NTC work with the expansion?

I know it wouldn't protect him from being claimed, but if say the Canucks give him a no-trade and Seattle claims him, does it may that Seattle still has to honour the NTC?

 

If so, it might be a good half-way to let Edler and his family to remain around the Cascadia region regardless of which team he ends up on.  

[Saved_by_Jesus]

18 hours ago, aGENT said:

Basically this. Benning is just calling Edler's agents bluff and Edler's agent is just doing his job, trying to get the best deal for his client.

 

This whole situation is being overblown in the media (desperate for taking points). Both sides want him here and I fully expect he'll be here next season once there's an actual deadline/pressure point to get a deal done.

 

And if not, it's not like Benning doesn't have options (even if they're arguably lower caliber) July 1 and/or via trade.

Exactly, this deal will get done after July 1st:

 

Edler:  I'm not signing until I get a NMC.

Benning: Ok, bye.

(A couple of weeks later)

Edler: Alright, it's July 1st and I have an offer from Team X: 3 years at 6 million per with a NMC.  I am going to take it unless you can match the offer.

Benning: That's a good deal for you, congratulations.  Thanks for your service, maybe we'll see you around one day.

Edler: Wait, how about I come back for 3x6 with no NMC?

Benning: I can do 3 years at 5.5.

Edler: Deal.

[-AJ-]

11 minutes ago, Saved_by_Jesus said:

Exactly, this deal will get done after July 1st:

 

Edler:  I'm not signing until I get a NMC.

Benning: Ok, bye.

(A couple of weeks later)

Edler: Alright, it's July 1st and I have an offer from Team X: 3 years at 6 million per with a NMC.  I am going to take it unless you can match the offer.

Benning: That's a good deal for you, congratulations.  Thanks for your service, maybe we'll see you around one day.

Edler: Wait, how about I come back for 3x6 with no NMC?

Benning: I can do 3 years at 5.5.

Edler: Deal.

If Benning gets Edler for 3 years at 5.5 with no clauses, we should erect a statue of him. 

[aGENT]

15 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

If Benning gets Edler for 3 years at 5.5 with no clauses, we should erect a statue of him. 

Zero problem with an NTC. Don't even have much of a problem with an NMC other than the year of the ED. Clauses aren't the concern, an ED protection slot is.

[bree2]

Eder is a good defenseman but he is injury prone, not as bad a Tanev tho.  because of his age, I would offer him no more than 2 yrs at 4 mil at the most . 

[Kootenay Gold]

1 hour ago, bree2 said:

Eder is a good defenseman but he is injury prone, not as bad a Tanev tho.  because of his age, I would offer him no more than 2 yrs at 4 mil at the most . 

That is just a pipe dream bree2. Edler will probably sign  for 5.5 to 6.5 mil; be it in Vancouver or elsewhere. I would even be fine with a three year  contract as long as he does not have a NMC for anything other that this coming year.

 

[canuckistani]

Make him an offer he can't refuse to 'tide over' the expansion draft concerns. Ie, give him 2 years at 7.5 million. yes,its overpayment, but it gives us a good PMD to mentor QH and potentially OJ, while it puts 8 mil in edler's pocket once taxes are paid. Thats a win-win. 

[kingofsurrey]

Edler does not get to call the shots here on his next contract.

There is no way any team in the league gives him a NMC/NTC .

[-AJ-]

54 minutes ago, kingofsurrey said:

Edler does not get to call the shots here on his next contract.

There is no way any team in the league gives him a NMC/NTC .

He had one of the best years of his career last year. I'd say he has some say in the matter.

[kingofsurrey]

40 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

He had one of the best years of his career last year. I'd say he has some say in the matter.

I wonder why ?  Can you say contract up year ? 

 

Too old and not part our next core.  He is supplimentary piece moving forward.  He signs for value  with no NMC / NTC or he moves on.  Thanks for all the great years.... He did super well consider where to his draft position . 91st overall / 3rd round . Great career but his best before date has arrived.....

[Gurn]

17 minutes ago, kingofsurrey said:

He is supplimentary piece moving forward

He is currently the Canuck's best d man, and if he stays it will be at least 2021 before any of the others can match him.

That said I would not give him a NMC,  for expansion draft reasons,but a two year NTC at $5.5  is ok, imo

[Dannydog]

1 hour ago, -AJ- said:

He had one of the best years of his career last year. I'd say he has some say in the matter.

He says he wants to retire a Canuck , sounds great. Halfway through 2017/18 season  and  the majority of last year he started playing hockey again. Plays hard for his best friends and countrymen in the last 30 games of their historic careers. The sedin's deserved managements full cooperation in them retiring as Canucks. HOF ers. 2018/19 ..... Eddys playing for a contract. Plain and simple. Management owes Eddy nadda . I bet you if he walks no other team will give him NMC  or pay him more than the Canucks would be willing to pay.Its on him if he wishes to retire a Canuck not management.

[-AJ-]

1 hour ago, kingofsurrey said:

I wonder why ?  Can you say contract up year ? 

 

Too old and not part our next core.  He is supplimentary piece moving forward.  He signs for value  with no NMC / NTC or he moves on.  Thanks for all the great years.... He did super well consider where to his draft position . 91st overall / 3rd round . Great career but his best before date has arrived.....

I'd agree he's not likely part of our next core, but I still think he has plenty of game in him. It's not like he's 35 years old. Plenty of defensemen are great until 35 or 36, meaning he could have 3 or 4 more good years. He improved a lot even last year, so he's had two solid years now. If we sign him for two years, it's the same situation contract-wise as the last two years of this contract in terms of "contract year" effect.

 

I think the only way I would say goodbye to him is if he insists on a NMC in the expansion draft year and isn't willing to take a monstrous discount along with it. If we lose Edler and don't replace him this summer, you can say goodbye to any hopes of this team improving next year.

[ruilin96]

If Edler is serious about wanting to stay in Vancouver, it is best for him to just sign a contract right now. I don’t think any other team is willing to give him a NTC/NMC with the knowledge of Seattle expansion draft coming up. My guess is Edler probably wants to test the Free Agent market on July 1st and see if any other team is willing to give him this NTC/NMC, and if no body is willing to give him that, he will sign with the Canucks again. However, by then, the Canucks probably had made alternative plans and that likely will be a plan without him. We will see what he decides. I am ok with signing him for 2-year with NTC with lower cap hit (which make his contract running out right at the expansion draft and it will be pointless for Seattle to draft a Pending UFA). If we want to sign him for anything longer than that, there must be no NMC/NTC attached to him. 

[-AJ-]

46 minutes ago, ruilin96 said:

If Edler is serious about wanting to stay in Vancouver, it is best for him to just sign a contract right now. I don’t think any other team is willing to give him a NTC/NMC with the knowledge of Seattle expansion draft coming up. My guess is Edler probably wants to test the Free Agent market on July 1st and see if any other team is willing to give him this NTC/NMC, and if no body is willing to give him that, he will sign with the Canucks again. However, by then, the Canucks probably had made alternative plans and that likely will be a plan without him. We will see what he decides. I am ok with signing him for 2-year with NTC with lower cap hit (which make his contract running out right at the expansion draft and it will be pointless for Seattle to draft a Pending UFA). If we want to sign him for anything longer than that, there must be no NMC/NTC attached to him. 

Any particular reason why a NTC in his third year would be problematic?

[Gurn]

17 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

Any particular reason why a NTC in his third year would be problematic?

For me it would be that by that time I believe Ollie, Hughes and Woo will be pushing for large amounts of ice time, and will have become better than what Edler can do over the coming years.

don't want to be paying Edler over $5 mill per to be a  third pair d man.

[WeneedLumme]

4 hours ago, ruilin96 said:

If Edler is serious about wanting to stay in Vancouver, it is best for him to just sign a contract right now. I don’t think any other team is willing to give him a NTC/NMC with the knowledge of Seattle expansion draft coming up. My guess is Edler probably wants to test the Free Agent market on July 1st and see if any other team is willing to give him this NTC/NMC, and if no body is willing to give him that, he will sign with the Canucks again. However, by then, the Canucks probably had made alternative plans and that likely will be a plan without him. We will see what he decides. I am ok with signing him for 2-year with NTC with lower cap hit (which make his contract running out right at the expansion draft and it will be pointless for Seattle to draft a Pending UFA). If we want to sign him for anything longer than that, there must be no NMC/NTC attached to him. 

NTC is irrelevant to the expansion draft. And I don't see why Edler would want to test the free market if he wants to stay in Vancouver as he has repeatedly stated. And of course having some other team give him a NTC or NMC does absolutely nothing towards allowing him and his family to stay in Vancouver. Not much connection to reality in your post.

[Boudrias]

On 6/5/2019 at 8:36 PM, -AJ- said:

I'd agree he's not likely part of our next core, but I still think he has plenty of game in him. It's not like he's 35 years old. Plenty of defensemen are great until 35 or 36, meaning he could have 3 or 4 more good years. He improved a lot even last year, so he's had two solid years now. If we sign him for two years, it's the same situation contract-wise as the last two years of this contract in terms of "contract year" effect.

 

I think the only way I would say goodbye to him is if he insists on a NMC in the expansion draft year and isn't willing to take a monstrous discount along with it. If we lose Edler and don't replace him this summer, you can say goodbye to any hopes of this team improving next year.

I agree with you. Edler was the best Vancouver d-man last season. He has offence and plays a serious physical game in his d-zone. I want him back but agree with you that a NMC is out of the question during the Seattle draft year. He can have the NMC before that year but that is it. Not signing Edler means Van has to hold on to Tanev. I have wanted to move Tanev for 3 years now. One of those 2 should be going. All this said Van has to make TOI available on the d-core for the young d-men coming up.