[Rumour] Sam Gagner likely to sign with Vancouver

[Crabcakes]

7 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

I would think it would make the transition for whoever plays with Gagner easier for when Pettersson eventually slots in.

 

We don't want guys like Granlund, Goldobin, or Boeser to adapt their game to play with Sutter.

So what happens to Sutter?  The "foundational" one.  He would make a pricey 4C.  If they're unhappy with him, how about a hockey trade.

 

This just doesn't add up for me.  After the year he had last year, Gagne won't be attracted to 4C duties and/or money

[DeNiro]

1 minute ago, Crabcakes said:

So what happens to Sutter?  The "foundational" one.  He would make a pricey 4C.  If they're unhappy with him, how about a hockey trade.

 

This just doesn't add up for me.  After the year he had last year, Gagne won't be attracted to 4C duties and/or money

Sutter can play a 3b shutdown role. Knowing the way Green roles his lines Sutter might get the second most minutes in that role some nights.

 

Sutter is overpaid, nothings going to change that. The worst thing they can do is force him into an offensive role with offensive players where he's not a fit. His game is suited as a two way bottom 6 guy that can win faceoffs and chip in 15-20 goals.

 

If Gagner signs here it's because he sees tons of opportunity on our 1st unit powerplay, which is probably what they sold him on.

[the_impersonator13]

It's all about depth and options. Gone are the days when guys like Chaput and Megna are playing 25 mins a game...even with Willie gone. 

[48MPHSlapShot]

4 minutes ago, Crabcakes said:

This year is for development.  Think long term

That's exactly what this move would be. Currently, we have 2 legitimate playmaking centers in Henrik and Horvat on the team, and a relatively large glut of skilled wingers looking to take the next step in their games.....Too many, considering that we only have 2 solid puck distributing centers.

 

Landing another center that can actually distribute the puck, as opposed to the playmaking black hole that Sutter is, will allow our young skilled wingers more opportunity to find their offensive games.

 

As long as the deal is short term, I think it's a great move.

[shazzam]

10 minutes ago, Crabcakes said:

I just don't see what Gagne brings to this line up.  Unless Benning knows that Sedin is retiring soon and he thinks that Gagne is far better than Sutter to fill in the top 6 for a year.

 

As far as I'm concerned, pick a goalie and a bottom pair D off free agency and leave well enough alone.  This year is for development.  Think long term

Perhaps to help bring the Sedin's minutes down which will hopefully make them more effective while they are on the ice. Roll 4 lines

[Provost]

This worries me in terms of years and dollars.

 

He has all the hallmarks of falling back to his regular production after one good year.

 

Buying high on a player is bad mojo in our situation.  

[Crabcakes]

2 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

Sutter can play a 3b shutdown role. Knowing the way Green roles his lines Sutter might get the second most minutes in that role some nights.

 

Sutter is overpaid, nothings going to change that. The worst thing they can do is force him into an offensive role with offensive players where he's not a fit. His game is suited as a two way bottom 6 guy that can win faceoffs and chip in 15-20 goals.

 

If Gagner signs here it's because he sees tons of opportunity on our 1st unit powerplay, which is probably what they sold him on.

And Gagner plays on the wing and is a spare C for 5 on 5 play?  That's the thing, both Sutter and Gagner are 3C's.  Different types obviously

 

As such, he would be taking a prospects job.

 

Like I say, if Sutter doesn't fit with plans now, trade him.  It's too much salary to carry for a spare part

[48MPHSlapShot]

Just now, Provost said:

This worries me in terms of years and dollars.

 

He has all the hallmarks of falling back to his regular production after one good year.

 

Buying high on a player is bad mojo in our situation.  

That's my worry as well.

 

Actually, the dollar figure doesn't worry me so much, as long as the term is short. I'd actually be willing to overpay if it's a 1 or 2 year contract.

 

But we can't get locked into another bad 5 or 6 year deal. 

[DeNiro]

2 minutes ago, Crabcakes said:

And Gagner plays on the wing and is a spare C for 5 on 5 play?  That's the thing, both Sutter and Gagner are 3C's.  Different types obviously

 

As such, he would be taking a prospects job.

 

Like I say, if Sutter doesn't fit with plans now, trade him.  It's too much salary to carry for a spare part

No Gagner would be the third line center playing with Granlund, Goldobin, or Boeser. Offensive guys playing with an offensive center.

 

Sutter will be on the fourth line with guys like Gaunce and Dorsett who's game he matches with much better.

 

It's about not trying to fit a square peg into a round hole like we've done in the past. You want skilled players to flourish offensively, you don't do that by playing them with grinders.

[Gaudette Celly]

6 minutes ago, Crabcakes said:

And Gagner plays on the wing and is a spare C for 5 on 5 play?  That's the thing, both Sutter and Gagner are 3C's.  Different types obviously

 

As such, he would be taking a prospects job.

 

Like I say, if Sutter doesn't fit with plans now, trade him.  It's too much salary to carry for a spare part

1. Sutter is not a spare part

2. We do not have any cap issues

[Crabcakes]

2 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

No Gagner would be the third line center playing with Granlund, Goldobin, or Boeser. Offensive guys playing with an offensive center.

 

Sutter will be on the fourth line with guys like Gaunce and Dorsett who's game he matches with much better.

 

It's about not trying to fit a square peg into a round hole like we've done in the past. You want skilled players to flourish offensively, you don't do that by playing them with grinders.

Ya, that's about how it adds up.  I'm just having a big problem with $4.375 on the 4th line.

 

FWIW, I don't disagree with your point.  I just don't think there's room salary wise for both of them.  If one finds a home on the wing, then that would mean somebody like Boeser goes to Utica which is something I think nobody wants to see

[DeNiro]

5 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said:

1. Sutter is not a spare part

2. We do not have any cap issues

Yea I think some people are missing the point of these moves.

 

Short term signings that allow our young players to not get forced into roles they're not ready for, while also allowing them to play with skilled players that will help elevate their games.

 

Playing a guy like Boeser with Sutter is probably the worst thing we can do for his development. He also shouldn't think he has a free pass into the top 6 either.

[Camel Toe Drag]

25 minutes ago, Type R said:

Not sure the locker room could handle Del Zotto AND Kane lol..

*Virtanen walks into room

 

"hey guys, I'm Jake"

 

 

[DeNiro]

4 minutes ago, Crabcakes said:

Ya, that's about how it adds up.  I'm just having a big problem with $4.375 on the 4th line.

 

FWIW, I don't disagree with your point.  I just don't think there's room salary wise for both of them.  If one finds a home on the wing, then that would mean somebody like Boeser goes to Utica which is something I think nobody wants to see

Well it's only a 4th line on paper. Like I said, minutes wise Green is likely to play that line more than the third most nights.

 

Sutter still has value on defensive zone draws, the pk, and his ability to move to the wing if injuries hit.

 

We won't be the only team carrying inflated contracts. If it's for short term it doesn't really matter at this point.

[Crabcakes]

4 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said:

1. Sutter is not a spare part

2. We do not have any cap issues

No cap issues this year.  One of them will have to go next year unless the Sedins retire.

 

So it's part of a succession plan.  Next year, Sedin retires and we're looking at Horvat, Gagner, Sutter and Chaput down the middle.  Yes?

[Crabcakes]

2 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

Well it's only a 4th line on paper. Like I said, minutes wise Green is likely to play that line more than the third most nights.

 

Sutter still has value on defensive zone draws, the pk, and his ability to move to the wing if injuries hit.

 

We won't be the only team carrying inflated contracts. If it's for short term it doesn't really matter at this point.

Maybe I shouldn't get my knickers in a twist over this.  Like Hutton's Wink said, regardless of salary, they're not up against the cap this year

[DeNiro]

2 minutes ago, Crabcakes said:

No cap issues this year.  One of them will have to go next year unless the Sedins retire.

 

So it's part of a succession plan.  Next year, Sedin retires and we're looking at Horvat, Gagner, Sutter and Chaput down the middle.  Yes?

Hank and Danny likely come back on a much cheaper contracts, saving us cap space.

[48MPHSlapShot]

5 minutes ago, Crabcakes said:

unless the Sedins retire

Even if they don't retire, their contracts will be up, and assuming they do resign, it will be for a MUCH lesser price. 

 

@DeNiro Beat me to it by seconds! Gah!

[riffraff]

41 minutes ago, Chris12345 said:

I'd also argue Crosby and Malkin aren't as soft as most would think. I'd rather go in the corner with 33 than 87. I'm not saying 33 is a wimp he'd still come out with the puck but I think 87 is pretty scrappy.

 

Add in Reaves.

Crosby is an elite puck hound. Relentless.  And you're absolutely accurate in your view of malkin especially in the post season.  He turns on the heavy game.

[ReggieBush]

4 hours ago, -AJ- said:

He seems like an exciting signing, but I'm not sure if we need more forward depth. Hmm, well we'll see how long/how much the deal is for before I overreact. 

When you iced Jayson Megna for 58 games, you could use more forward depth