Kole Lind | RW

[tas]

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

I’m hoping that the delays are being driven by the agents for Lind and Pettersson. It’s possible they’ve told Vancouver that their clients simply won’t sign deals until 2018, due to the financial benefits of avoiding ELC slide (especially when it comes to potential career earnings). This really hasn’t been a common tactic in previous years, but agents are always looking for an edge, and they read the CBA just as much as anyway does, looking for loopholes and advantages to exploit. 

 

But yeah, if this is just ignorance/negligence on management’s part, it’s definitely an area of concern and deserves criticism. I really hope that’s not the case though. Especially if it ends up costing the team millions in cap down the road. 

 

Frustratingly, the public spin has suggested that management is choosing to delay signing these contracts. Of course, you can’t always take the official line at face value. But JB has said that he’s in no rush to sign Pettersson until he’s NHL ready. That sounds good to the average fan. But it completely ignores the benefits afforded by ELC slide (as already detailed in earlier posts).

 

Similarly, the word on Lind was that the team was in contract discussions last year but was taking their time and waiting to see how well Lind performed. Why wait? Is there really any question of whether or not Lind will be signed? It’s not like they’re going to just let his rights expire. Lind is getting a contract at some point. So why not get him signed when the team gets the most advantage?

 

So basically, if the delays are from the players side, that’s fine. Part of the business and hats off the the agents for looking out for their clients. But if management is dragging their feet, it’s a problem. Because they would either be knowingly chosing to put themselves at a disadvantage (which would be pretty bad), or they aren’t even aware of the issue (which might be even worse).

 

Hopefully it’s coming from the players’ camps. But I’d sure feel a lot better if management confirmed this publicly. Because every time they say something that suggests they chose not sign Pettersson and Lind in 2017, it makes me wonder if they’re even aware of the potential consequences of this delay:

having a smaller body of work at the professional level can be advantageous for the team when it comes time to negotiate a player's second contract. 

[Warhippy]

Regarding the slides fo a few kids.

 

How much of this is predicated on the possibility of another lockout?

 

I'm sure these kids and their agents will want things in stone knowing it is coming.  And for the people who have told me it won't happen for the last 3+ years....make no mistakes, it's coming

[CanuckinEdm]

11 hours ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

I hope Lind plays NHL next year.

 

Otherwise, the Canucks kinda screwed the pooch by not signing him before the New Year.

 

At this point, any contract Lind signs is ineligible to slide. Had he been signed in 2017, he’d have two years of slide eligibility. But due to Lind’s late birthday, he falls under a CBA clause that makes him slide ineligible if signed in 2018.

 

Which means that, if Lind plays AHL next season, he’d still burn that year off his ELC.

 

Had he been signed in 2017, he could play AHL next season and have his contract slide a year.

 

Basically, it’s the difference between Lind hitting RFA status in 2021 versus 2022. 

 

And by waiting on Lind’s contract, the Canucks are risking having to carry maybe a couple million in extra cap hit for 2021-22.

 

Maybe that’s not a big deal for most people. But for me, I’m kind of expecting this team to be pretty good by 2021-22. Maybe good enough that a couple million in cap will really matter. Like the difference between picking up a decent depth player or not. Or the cap difference between extending a player or not. Little stuff like that. Those final pieces that can make a difference for a contending team.

 

I just don’t get why they let this one slip. Clearly Lind is getting a deal at some point. So why not sign him already?

 

Even if Lind plays NHL next season (which would negate the 2021-22 issue), it would still have saved the Canucks a little cap to have signed Lind in 2017, just because his signing bonus comes off the top in slide years.

 

So I ask again: why isn’t anybody signing Kole Lind?

 

Or why wasn’t anybody signing Kole Lind before the slide window closed on December 31st, 2017?

Im pretty sure like 95% that the contract slide is only for Jr. Players Lind will be in the AHL next year so there will be no slide anyways. 

 

[MattJVD]

10 minutes ago, CanuckinEdm said:

Im pretty sure like 95% that the contract slide is only for Jr. Players Lind will be in the AHL next year so there will be no slide anyways. 

 

Read a few posts up, Sid covered it in detail.

[AlwaysACanuckFan]

 

[AlwaysACanuckFan]

56 minutes ago, AlwaysACanuckFan said:

 

 

[flickyoursedin]

It’s crazy that with how great Linds been playing all year that when he only gets one point I’m surprised lol.

[Outsiders]

If I remember correctly Benning was doing an interview about our prospects I forgot on which station/media outlet but was just after they signed the man child (Gavjovich). I specifically remember him saying there were looking to sign Lind in the next couple of weeks/coming weeks. That they had been in communication with his representatives. Not sure what happened, so something tells me it was on Lind's side for not signing in 2017. Some players just don't like to sign during the seasons for whatever reasons                  (distractions etc). Maybe that was part of it? Maybe it wasn't. I don't know the advantages/disadvantages of signing in 2017 vs 2018 for Lind. Im sure it isn't an issue and he will get signed at the conclusion of Kelowna's season, possibly early and will start in the AHL next season.

 

8:05 PM - 13 Oct 2017

[AlwaysACanuckFan]

 

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

^^ That shot probably goes in regardless. Looked like it was labeled for top corner glove side (and there was quite a bit of room there) before it went down off the defender’s stick and into the opposite corner of the net.

[Gaudette Celly]

On 1/17/2018 at 9:45 AM, kacholu said:

To me this is the biggest difference between MG and his team vs JB. 

I know I get a lot of criticism for pointing out JB and his teams flaws but this kind of forward is non existent for JB. Having these two players on ELC's would make a world of difference if the team was to compete in couple of years.  

 

Let's assume an  example, EP comes in and becomes a 60-70 pts player and is a RFA one year earlier. He is resigned for $5-6M at that year instead of being on a ELC. The team could have used that kind of cap space in this hypothetical scenario. 

I know the boat has sailed for both Lind and EP but management needs to be on top of these kinds of things and get it done one way or another. 

 

Don't think it's such a big deal as some make it out to be.  A year earlier expiration on an ELC likely means they cost less to resign than a year later to a bridge or other deal, similarly once they finish the bridge and look to sign long-term.  Probably opinions on both sides, but maybe depends most on an individual player's development.  Bottom line -- you get a good player, you pay him what he's worth.

[Nuxfanabroad]

6 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said:

Don't think it's such a big deal as some make it out to be.  A year earlier expiration on an ELC likely means they cost less to resign than a year later to a bridge or other deal, similarly once they finish the bridge and look to sign long-term.  Probably opinions on both sides, but maybe depends most on an individual player's development.  Bottom line -- you get a good player, you pay him what he's worth.

I'd say it's an assertive play from the player's behalf, that he'll hit the ground runnin'..ah well, I've got about 1,000,000 other things to wring my hands about. :^/

[WeneedLumme]

4 hours ago, Hutton Wink said:

Don't think it's such a big deal as some make it out to be.  A year earlier expiration on an ELC likely means they cost less to resign than a year later to a bridge or other deal, similarly once they finish the bridge and look to sign long-term.  Probably opinions on both sides, but maybe depends most on an individual player's development.  Bottom line -- you get a good player, you pay him what he's worth.

Not a big deal at all. If his agent is not completely incompetent, he advised his client that signing earlier loses him a year of NHL $ from a short NHL career, so don't do it. Anybody complaining that JB should have somehow forced him to sign a contract early enough to allow the contract to slide, transferring millions of dollars from the player to the team, is living in a dream world.

[Qwags]

On 18/01/2018 at 9:28 AM, AlwaysACanuckFan said:

 

You just gotta laugh.

[Canuck Surfer]

On ‎19‎/‎01‎/‎2018 at 12:48 PM, WeneedLumme said:

Not a big deal at all. If his agent is not completely incompetent, he advised his client that signing earlier loses him a year of NHL $ from a short NHL career, so don't do it. Anybody complaining that JB should have somehow forced him to sign a contract early enough to allow the contract to slide, transferring millions of dollars from the player to the team, is living in a dream world.

Lots, I mean lots of 18 year old kids sign their NHL contract first chance they get.  Get a signing bonus of $60 or $90 grand.  

 

That is a lot to a junior age player. 

 

Petterson is making, I'm guessing, someone can fill us in, $150, $200K in the SHL?  Not living with a billet in the CHL, with no income. Which BTW, is why some players write clauses where they can go to Europe rather than ply their trade in the AHL? If they don't make an NHL roster after signing their ELC.  He can afford to bypass a bonus up front to maximise long term earnings.  Cal Foote or Nolan Foote for example, when they comes out come from a wealthy background. They will be able to afford to bypass a bonus earlier to do the same.

 

Maybe Lind, and his family, have the position in life where they can as well?  

 

 

Edited January 20, 2018 by Canuck Surfer

[Rob_Zepp]

All this speculation about signing ELC is clearly coming from people who have never signed one.  Coming out of the CHL, there is zero rush to sign and is more a balance of timing where the team (in this case the Canucks) feel the player development is trending and where the player/agent (and even family for ELC) see the best path in their opinion.   Most often if an ELC is not signed very early in the CHL season, they wait until the season is done as it makes NO difference to the player.  This speculation over bonus money and such is just that - until they are professionals, they are still amateur players.    

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

1 hour ago, Rob_Zepp said:

All this speculation about signing ELC is clearly coming from people who have never signed one.  Coming out of the CHL, there is zero rush to sign and is more a balance of timing where the team (in this case the Canucks) feel the player development is trending and where the player/agent (and even family for ELC) see the best path in their opinion.   Most often if an ELC is not signed very early in the CHL season, they wait until the season is done as it makes NO difference to the player.  This speculation over bonus money and such is just that - until they are professionals, they are still amateur players.    

You’re right about the timing of contracts. The vast majority either happen early in the season or they just wait until after its conclusion.

 

However, I have to disagree with you on some of your other points.

 

We know that the Canucks were in ELC discussions with Lind’s camp in October. This was reported by several sources, but I’ll quote Dhaliwal as he seems to be the most trustworthy of the bunch:

And while I can’t track down the source right now, I remember reading/hearing that Vancouver hoped to wrap things up before Christmas.

 

Then something happened. And suddenly, the line became “we’ll see how the season goes” and “there’s no rush” and the like.

 

Clearly, the Canucks were interested in getting papers done with Lind in 2017.

 

And, just as a comparison, they made sure that they got Gadjovich inked in 2017, while he was still an age 18 (ELC signing age per CBA), which allows them to maximize club benefit with regards to ELC slide considerations.

 

But Lind, the higher pick, better performer in 2017-18, and probably the better prospect (of course it’s never certain), that’s the guy they don’t sign to a contract, despite having started the process in October.

 

There’s not a tonne of work to figure out the terms on an ELC. Most of the details are already set (either by convention or hard definitions in the CBA) and most of the variables are within a rather small range. Mainly just the particulars of the bonus structure needs to be determined. And the Canucks have generally been fairly generous on bonuses, so I doubt that was much of a holdup. Of course it takes time, but once they started talks in late October, it should have been easy to finish before Christmas if both parties were truly interested in getting a deal done in 2017.

 

Given the particulars, I think it’s fair to question why the deal wasn’t done last year. And even people who haven’t ever signed an NHL ELC can probably offer intelligent observations on the reasoning.

 

Did the Canucks get cold feet? I find it extremely unlikely that anything about Lind’s 2017-18 season (which has very much exceeded expectations) would make them rethink or delay signing him.

 

If they wanted him inked to a deal in October, it’s a fair bet that they still wanted him signed in November and December.

 

Seems more likely that something happened on the player’s side. 

 

So why wouldn't Lind sign?

 

I don’t think you need to be a former NHL player to have a valid opinion on this. And I’ve already stated in several previous posts the reasons why I think Lind’s camp would choose to reject a 2017 contract (which very much appears to have been on offer from the Canucks) and push for a more a more favourable signing date (where ELC slide was eliminated).

[Ihatetomatoes]

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

You’re right about the timing of contracts. The vast majority either happen early in the season or they just wait until after its conclusion.

 

However, I have to disagree with you on some of your other points.

 

We know that the Canucks were in ELC discussions with Lind’s camp in October. This was reported by several sources, but I’ll quote Dhaliwal as he seems to be the most trustworthy of the bunch:

And while I can’t track down the source right now, I remember reading/hearing that Vancouver hoped to wrap things up before Christmas.

 

Then something happened. And suddenly, the line became “we’ll see how the season goes” and “there’s no rush” and the like.

 

Clearly, the Canucks were interested in getting papers done with Lind in 2017.

 

And, just as a comparison, they made sure that they got Gadjovich inked in 2017, while he was still an age 18 (ELC signing age per CBA), which allows them to maximize club benefit with regards to ELC slide considerations.

 

But Lind, the higher pick, better performer in 2017-18, and probably the better prospect (of course it’s never certain), that’s the guy they don’t sign to a contract, despite having started the process in October.

 

There’s not a tonne of work to figure out the terms on an ELC. Most of the details are already set (either by convention or hard definitions in the CBA) and most of the variables are within a rather small range. Mainly just the particulars of the bonus structure needs to be determined. And the Canucks have generally been fairly generous on bonuses, so I doubt that was much of a holdup. Of course it takes time, but once they started talks in late October, it should have been easy to finish before Christmas if both parties were truly interested in getting a deal done in 2017.

 

Given the particulars, I think it’s fair to question why the deal wasn’t done last year. And even people who haven’t ever signed an NHL ELC can probably offer intelligent observations on the reasoning.

 

Did the Canucks get cold feet? I find it extremely unlikely that anything about Lind’s 2017-18 season (which has very much exceeded expectations) would make them rethink or delay signing him.

 

If they wanted him inked to a deal in October, it’s a fair bet that they still wanted him signed in November and December.

 

Seems more likely that something happened on the player’s side. 

 

So why wouldn't Lind sign?

 

I don’t think you need to be a former NHL player to have a valid opinion on this. And I’ve already stated in several previous posts the reasons why I think Lind’s camp would choose to reject a 2017 contract (which very much appears to have been on offer from the Canucks) and push for a more a more favourable signing date (where ELC slide was eliminated).

Could not signing him not be an advantage to both sides?

 

  Lind gets off his ELC sooner and hits RFA status leading to a bigger money contract sooner. 

 

For the Canucks while it's one less year on a cheap contract it's one less year of experience and development for Lind making it more likely his first longer term contract will be signed at a cheaper rate. With some of these RFA's getting signed to massive contracts after one good season it could be incredibly valuable to lock a guy up before he breaks out with a big season.  

 

Of course all this ride on not having a breakout season before he hits RFA status, in that case you do loose a year of a player on a cheap contract. 

[AlwaysACanuckFan]

 

 

Edited January 21, 2018 by AlwaysACanuckFan

[MoneypuckOverlord]

1 hour ago, AlwaysACanuckFan said:

 

 

Boeser like snipe