Olli Juolevi | #48 | D

[stawns]

6 hours ago, Provost said:

Your math just doesn’t work out... next season AND the season after are huge pinch points for cap space.

 

You can’t just take Edler and Sutter’s salary and say they add up to the raises for Hughes and Petterson.

 

First off, they don’t.  Even on bridge deals you are likely looking at $6 million for Hughes and $7.5 for Petterson.  That is $11.5 million in raises.  You can’t count their current bonuses because we don’t have room for them under the cap now and they are going to get pushed... this year’s into next year and then next year’s into 2021-22.  That reduces our 2021-22 cap probably by $3.7 million or more depending on who else earns some bonus money... in addition to paying for their raises.

 

 You also have to replace Edler.  A top 4 is going to cost the same and we just don’t have a near equivalent replacement in the system.  Edler might sign a little cheaper and still give you top 4 minutes , but you can’t use math with just uses all his salary for raises.  Maybe as much as a $2 million reduction in his current salary.

 

So your post has to alter to...

 

Replace Sutter with en entry level kid for a savings of $3.5 million.  Reduce Edler’s salary by $2 million... for a grand total savings or $5.5 million after next season.

 

Then add minimum total raises for Hughes and Petterson of $11.5 million... and you are still in the hole by $6 million in YOUR example.

 

If you model out signings between now and then, we are hurting badly cap wise for at least two years... way worse than most teams who aren’t in that kind of crunch with all their young value players to sign and a bunch of bad value contracts in the way.  

Literally everyone coming off the books this year (aside from Domingue) is someone outperforming their current contract, and every one is them is due a raise.

I'd say there is zero chance Petey comes on under $8m and Hughes under $7m

[Provost]

11 minutes ago, stawns said:

I'd say there is zero chance Petey comes on under $8m and Hughes under $7m

That was quoted as the minimum possible raises on a bridge deal to illustrate the point of how unrealistic the math was... it is likely going to be more.

Edited July 18, 2020 by Provost

[ForsbergTheGreat]

19 hours ago, aGENT said:

I think Dobson is in reach in the right package. Their window is open NOW. Especially if we took back one of Ladd/Boychuk (and sent appropriate $ back the other way to balance things out a bit).

 

Say Virtanen, Baer and Brisebois for Dobson and Ladd (+/-). Solves their lack of top/middle 6 F issue, gets Ladd of their books and replaces Dobson with a certainly lower ceiling but still capable D prospect.

 

F.A. would need to be ok having Erriksson and Ladd on the books though and that might be a hard sale  

That's a tough sell. Canucks can't really take on cap.  Between Luongo, Eriksson, Baertschi, and Spooner that's a lot of dead cap just for next year.  Not sure another 5.5 in ladd would be worth it to take on Dobson, it would really put us in a tough spot.  Maybe take a flyer on Wilde in a different type of deal.  I wonder if avs would sell on timmins?  Foote?

 

Personally though, I don't think canucks are that desperate to find someone yet.  With the way Hughes talks about Tanev's importance on him, personally I'd like to resign him 2-4 years and roll with Myers and Tanev on the right side. it's be nice to have a deeper high end prospect pool, not knocking on chatfield, eiliot, or woo. 

 

Look at the NYR  there right side already consists of a 24 year old DeAngelo, a 22 year old Fox, a 25 year old Trouba,  And in the last two drafts they still picked 9 D. And they are set to pick another 11 picks this year. (2x firsts).  I wonder if there was something we could to do snag Lundvist out of the system.  

 

Edit. I know I just said canucks couldn't take on cap but what about somethings around taking on staal, he's only got one year left,  Lundvist+Staal for a Joulevi+Sutter

Edited July 18, 2020 by ForsbergTheGreat

[aGENT]

9 hours ago, Provost said:

Your math just doesn’t work out... next season AND the season after are huge pinch points for cap space.

 

 

Yeah, it does.

 

As I said in the next post, Edler, Sutter and Pearson covers the vast majority. And I think some of you are seriously underestimating what effect covid/the flat cap is going to have on contracts here (as well as overestimating what they would have got in bridge deals before those things).

 

I also added we'll be moving out some of those kids as well who 'need raises' (Virtanen IMO, likely Stecher at some point).

 

Nevermind losing cap in the ED.

 

I've also posted that I think Roussel (numerous times and places becomes a move casualty if we want to keep Toffoli.

 

And yes, we'll likely have to pay something to move out say Eriksson at some point (or the f'er could retire  ). I'm in no way saying there's not work to do but it's far from the mission impossible it's being made out as. They'll make it work.

 

1 hour ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

That's a tough sell. Canucks can't really take on cap.  Between Luongo, Eriksson, Baertschi, and Spooner that's a lot of dead cap just for next year.  Not sure another 5.5 in ladd would be worth it to take on Dobson, it would really put us in a tough spot.  Maybe take a flyer on Wilde in a different type of deal.  I wonder if avs would sell on timmins?  Foote?

 

Personally though, I don't think canucks are that desperate to find someone yet.  With the way Hughes talks about Tanev's importance on him, personally I'd like to resign him 2-4 years and roll with Myers and Tanev on the right side. it's be nice to have a deeper high end prospect pool, not knocking on chatfield, eiliot, or woo. 

 

Look at the NYR  there right side already consists of a 24 year old DeAngelo, a 22 year old Fox, a 25 year old Trouba,  And in the last two drafts they still picked 9 D. And they are set to pick another 11 picks this year. (2x firsts).  I wonder if there was something we could to do snag Lundvist out of the system.  

 

Edit. I know I just said canucks couldn't take on cap but what about somethings around taking on staal, he's only got one year left,  Lundvist+Staal for a Joulevi+Sutter

Yes it would be a tough sell for sure. Note, I did include Baer going back as well. I'd probably prefer say Ferland and his longer contract/even iffier health, but he's more complicated to move (NTC, wants to be out West etc). Though, if healthy, he's a better, more valuable player.

 

Virtanen ($2.5m +/-?) and Baer ($3.2m) is more than Ladd at $5.5m... so it does actually save us some small bit of cap. Brisebois/Dobson are largely a wash. Ladd's extra year over Baer sucks though, I agree on that.

 

(Edit: just checked... Ladd has three years left... That's a no go lol. That's an even worse contact than Eriksson haha)

 

NYI considers because they get actual (and needed) players for their cap space vs AHL-Ladd. We consider as it gets us our future Hughes RD partner.

 

But yes, I'd be happy if Benning can find something like that or another like you posted where the contacts expire sooner. He's going to need to get creative but as I said above, this isn't mission impossible. It's his job to make this stuff work. It's literally what he gets paid for. And he's far from alone and in company with like 80% of the league in this regard.

Edited July 18, 2020 by aGENT

[RetroCanuck]

Keep in mind everyone is looking at Juolevi right now with a fine tooth comb. He's just getting off a break like everyone else, cut the kid some slack already.

 

He may not turn into the player we all hoped he would become when drafted, but he still has the potential to be a middle pairing D for us for many years.

 

Hopefully this added competition of fighting for that spot elevates his game. Hughes, Rathbone, Brisebois and Tryamkin are all fighting for those top 4 spots.

[bree2]

20 minutes ago, RetroCanuck said:

Keep in mind everyone is looking at Juolevi right now with a fine tooth comb. He's just getting off a break like everyone else, cut the kid some slack already.

 

He may not turn into the player we all hoped he would become when drafted, but he still has the potential to be a middle pairing D for us for many years.

 

Hopefully this added competition of fighting for that spot elevates his game. Hughes, Rathbone, Brisebois and Tryamkin are all fighting for those top 4 spots.

not Tram he is not coming here

[Noble 6]

12 hours ago, aGENT said:

The roster is not going to stay static the next couple years. We'll be moving out vets as kids arrive. Heck, well be moving some kids as other one's out play them. We'll be losing a player and their cap in the ED as well.

 

$10.375 plus their current cap hits is getting within a few mil (Pearson also expires, making that up).

 

Yes, Edler will likely need to re-sign (for less). We'll make room. I'm not worried.

 

You didn't bring up numbers for any players. For example, re-signing Toffoli at 5M a year, Markstrom at 5.75M per year, etc. It's easy to say things without putting some estimates down and looking at the situation thoroughly. 

 

Can you be more specific in your rough outline? If not then its just a bunch of words without anything backing it up. 

[aGENT]

5 minutes ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

 

You didn't bring up numbers for any players. For example, re-signing Toffoli at 5M a year, Markstrom at 5.75M per year, etc. It's easy to say things without putting some estimates down and looking at the situation thoroughly. 

 

Can you be more specific in your rough outline? If not then its just a bunch of words without anything backing it up. 

Yes Toffoli at around $5, Markstrom $5.5-$6, Tanev around $4.5 etc.

 

I can't tell the future, so I have no idea who we lose in the ED, if Benning pushes someone etc. Hence the 'bunch of words'.

 

It's pretty easy to get a rough outline/do some guessing of what's going to happen though. IMO Virtanen is getting traded at some point. Stecher is likely gone this year or soon. Roussel is likely moved to help afford Toffoli (should be want to return). We're likely moving Benn. Retaining or buying out Baer and yes at some point, unless he retires, we likely need to pay to move Eriksson.

[Gurn]

Hughes either signs for a reasonable amount, be it bridge deal, or long term deal, or he sits out,  as he is not eligible for an offer sheet.

I'd say he signs for no more than Brock's  money and term $5,875,000 for 3 years, but probably less given flat cap and covid.

[RetroCanuck]

1 hour ago, bree2 said:

not Tram he is not coming here

Not this year. But easily could next

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, gurn said:

Hughes either signs for a reasonable amount, be it bridge deal, or long term deal, or he sits out,  as he is not eligible for an offer sheet.

I'd say he signs for no more than Brock's  money and term $5,875,000 for 3 years, but probably less given flat cap and covid.

Like I've posted elsewhere, we have two solid, recent examples of what top D are signing on bridge deals. $6.75m for 6 years for Provorov and $4.9m for 3 years for McAvoy. Covid and flat cap are not going to improve on those numbers for Hughes.

 

He might get a slight bump from putting up more offense (if being less complete/lacking size compared to those two) but  that's the +/- framework right there. And some of that bump is going to 'catch' covid . Depending on term, I'd put him between $5. and $7m.

 

Petterson likely gets more as forwards seem to be getting more on bridge deals for whatever reason but I doubt it's over $8 (I'd in fact wager $7-$7.5 +/-). Less if it's a shorter, 3 year bridge. He doesn't yet have an 'Aho's' full aresenal/duties and again, people aren't grasping how much Covid is going to dampen prices IMO.

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

1 hour ago, gurn said:

Hughes either signs for a reasonable amount, be it bridge deal, or long term deal, or he sits out,  as he is not eligible for an offer sheet.

I'd say he signs for no more than Brock's  money and term $5,875,000 for 3 years, but probably less given flat cap and covid.

That sounds a little optimistic to me. 
 

Quinn Hughes, as a 20yo rookie defenseman, basically matched the points production of a 22yo Boeser heading into his second contract. If Hughes doesn’t improve, just simply maintains his rookie form, I’d say when he hits his second contract, even in a flat cap world, he commands more money than Boeser did. If Hughes progresses, that number only increases.

[Gurn]

7 minutes ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

That sounds a little optimistic to me. 
 

Quinn Hughes, as a 20yo rookie defenseman, basically matched the points production of a 22yo Boeser heading into his second contract. If Hughes doesn’t improve, just simply maintains his rookie form, I’d say when he hits his second contract, even in a flat cap world, he commands more money than Boeser did. If Hughes progresses, that number only increases.

In "normal" times I'd agree, however flat cap and covid will, imo, make a big difference.

[Goal:thecup]

For some Olli Juolevi content:

From The Last Word On Hockey, May 22/20:

https://lastwordonhockey.com/2020/05/22/introducing-the-vancouver-canucks-black-aces/ 

A lot of Canucks fans don’t want to hear this, but Olli Juolevi is a pretty darn good prospect. Everything the Canucks liked about him in 2016 is still there. He thinks the game well, makes smart, reliable plays. He defends well, picks his spots to attack, and will be on the ice in any situation. Assuming he’s not ‘on ice’ that is.

After a few injury-plagued seasons, Juolevi finally played a mostly healthy season, playing 45 games and getting 25 points. It didn’t match his points-per-game from 2019-20, but Rafferty seized the power-play time that was previously his. Not a great loss, as that’s not where Juolevi was going to be used in Vancouver anyhow. With all the time he has lost to injuries, there is concern he is behind his expected development curve. And he is, but he remains a 22-year old prospect, despite being in the news for what feels like decades.

 

And for something more recent:

From Canucks Army:  https://canucksarmy.com/2020/07/15/a-full-recap-of-day-three-at-canucks-training-camp/ 

Juolevi looked sharp and powerful with his skating on day two of camp. He competed in the scrimmage as a forward and a defenceman and then practiced with the second group, looking strong in many drills.

 

(Apologies for the bold type; couldn't get rid of it.)

 

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

That sounds a little optimistic to me. 
 

Quinn Hughes, as a 20yo rookie defenseman, basically matched the points production of a 22yo Boeser heading into his second contract. If Hughes doesn’t improve, just simply maintains his rookie form, I’d say when he hits his second contract, even in a flat cap world, he commands more money than Boeser did. If Hughes progresses, that number only increases.

 

56 minutes ago, gurn said:

In "normal" times I'd agree, however flat cap and covid will, imo, make a big difference.

D also, for whatever reason, seem to get less money on their second deals than forwards.

[aGENT]

29 minutes ago, Goal:thecup said:

For some Olli Juolevi content:

From The Last Word On Hockey, May 22/20:

https://lastwordonhockey.com/2020/05/22/introducing-the-vancouver-canucks-black-aces/ 

A lot of Canucks fans don’t want to hear this, but Olli Juolevi is a pretty darn good prospect. Everything the Canucks liked about him in 2016 is still there. He thinks the game well, makes smart, reliable plays. He defends well, picks his spots to attack, and will be on the ice in any situation. Assuming he’s not ‘on ice’ that is.

After a few injury-plagued seasons, Juolevi finally played a mostly healthy season, playing 45 games and getting 25 points. It didn’t match his points-per-game from 2019-20, but Rafferty seized the power-play time that was previously his. Not a great loss, as that’s not where Juolevi was going to be used in Vancouver anyhow. With all the time he has lost to injuries, there is concern he is behind his expected development curve. And he is, but he remains a 22-year old prospect, despite being in the news for what feels like decades.

 

And for something more recent:

From Canucks Army:  https://canucksarmy.com/2020/07/15/a-full-recap-of-day-three-at-canucks-training-camp/ 

Juolevi looked sharp and powerful with his skating on day two of camp. He competed in the scrimmage as a forward and a defenceman and then practiced with the second group, looking strong in many drills.

 

(Apologies for the bold type; couldn't get rid of it.)

 

But did he look as good as Virtanen? 

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

30 minutes ago, gurn said:

In "normal" times I'd agree, however flat cap and covid will, imo, make a big difference.

I agree it’ll make a difference, but how much?

 

For instance, what would you expect a three year bridge for Hughes to look like, if negotiated under the same conditions as Boeser’s $5.875M AAV?

 

For me, it’s something like 7-8M AAV for Hughes, easily.
 

That’s around what the difference tends to be in the market, when you compare a #1D to a #1RW, if they also average similar points/GP.

 

So if we say Hughes would’ve deserved 7-8M, if he was negotiating in 2019, what should he get in a flat cap world?

 

Well, in 2019, I’d say the most “pie in the sky” projections would have been a 10% increase in the cap per year. So over three years, that’s 81.5 + 89.65 + 98.615 = 269.765.

 

Under a flat cap, 81.5 x 3 = 244.5

 

So 244.5/269.765 = 90.6%
 

Give Hughes 90.6% of the AAV he could expect under the market conditions when Boeser signed.

 

So roughly 6.35M to 7.25M AAV for Hughes for a three year bridge deal under a flat cap.

 

And probably more money than that, if Q goes out and scores 70+ points as a sophomore (this past season he paced for 63).

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

I agree it’ll make a difference, but how much?

 

For instance, what would you expect a three year bridge for Hughes to look like, if negotiated under the same conditions as Boeser’s $5.875M AAV?

 

For me, it’s something like 7-8M AAV for Hughes, easily.
 

That’s around what the difference tends to be in the market, when you compare a #1D to a #1RW, if they also average similar points/GP.

 

So if we say Hughes would’ve deserved 7-8M, if he was negotiating in 2019, what should he get in a flat cap world?

 

Well, in 2019, I’d say the most “pie in the sky” projections would have been a 10% increase in the cap per year. So over three years, that’s 81.5 + 89.65 + 98.615 = 269.765.

 

Under a flat cap, 81.5 x 3 = 244.5

 

So 244.5/269.765 = 90.6%
 

Give Hughes 90.6% of the AAV he could expect under the market conditions when Boeser signed.

 

So roughly 6.35M to 7.25M AAV for Hughes for a three year bridge deal under a flat cap.

 

And probably more money than that, if Q goes out and scores 70+ points as a sophomore (this past season he paced for 63).

Boeser isn't a contract comparison though anymore than Laine etc. You need to look at D comparables.

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

3 minutes ago, aGENT said:

 

D also, for whatever reason, seem to get less money on their second deals than forwards.

Generally I’d say that’s just because forwards tend to peak a little earlier in their careers and have more “proven” value going into their second deals.

 

Also, those kinds of overall trends might not carry much weight when you’re talking about a #1D who was top-5 in NHL defenseman scoring as a rookie.

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

7 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Boeser isn't a contract comparison though anymore than Laine etc. You need to look at D comparables.

So if 40ish point Dmen like Werenski and McAvoy were worth around $5 million AAV on a three year bridge, what’s the figure for a 60-70 point guy like Hughes?

 

I think my $7-8M (before the flat cap) is actually pretty conservative.
 

And my adjustment is also quite generous, as I doubt teams were actually banking on a 10% annual increase in cap when they made those deals (more like 5% probably, if they were at all responsible).