[Discussion] Canucks turned down offers on Sutter (Sticking with the plan)

[ForsbergTheGreat]

2 hours ago, Kragar said:

If I take a more pessimistic view, I agree with you more, so that's fair.  I had concerns at the start of last year about goaltending, and the meltdown during Bo's absence didn't help.  Bouncing back later in the season was nice to see, so perhaps the experience/maturity will help them going forward.  The team was hit overly hard with injuries, but IIRC, that has been fairly normal so some consideration should remain for that to continue.  Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.

 

Maybe we can get Sutter back in a few years, when Elias is a PPG player, takes over the 1C, leaving Bo as 2C where he is better suited  

I like that thinking. Perhaps. By the time canucks are really contenders. Sutter hits ufa and reups with us. Win win

[Noseforthenet]

I noticed how no one mentioned or even thought about the offers given for Sutter, just about how valuable he is. We don't know how valuable he is to other teams. We know how valuable he is to US, but it doesn't mean teams saw how low we were getting, saw a 3rd/4th line center making a somewhat high salary for his position, and wanted to jump on something they thought they could get for cheap.

Make no mistake; if the Canucks brass were offered anything really worth it for losing Sutter, they would have taken it. The offers were likely crap. Maybe a mid round pick and we retain salary. Not even slightly worth it in our position, IMO.

[EdgarM]

6 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

It’s simple. Time and patience’s. We have a lot of good young potential we just need to work on developing those players and adding to them. Let the cream rise to the top and build from it. It’s not going to happen over night. 

So players such as Bo, Boeser, Stetch etc. need 5 more years to be ready? It seems you are grouping them all together and thinking they are all going to need the same amount of time to mature. What?

 

It’s hard to regress when you ARE the worst team in the league that last 3 years. At this point it’s only going up. But we need to let our players develop and not go full Toronto/Calgary and start trading away picks for pieces to fill holes. (Kessel/hamonic). Worst team in the league, really? I agree not trading away picks that is obvious. However, we have a large amount of cap space in which we can "fill holes" why would we not want to do that? Especially in a Cap Era. 

 

 

Injuries wasn’t the only thing that kept us out of playoffs. A fully Healthy roster we are a fingers crossed bubble team. But expecting the key pieces to remain healthy with our travel is just unrealistic. 

We always had injures. Be it luongo/cloutier/Miller/edler/tanev/burrows/gudbranson/sutter/hamuis. 

We were not a very good team before Dors was injured? Were we watching different games? WE had KEY injuries throughout the ENTIRE YEAR its not like it was a few weeks or something.

 

Yeah and that’s called hopes and dreams. Or letting bias cloud your judgment. I do it all the time when the draft roles around. Instead of thinking with my head I think with the heart. It rarely works out. 

 

What about them. A team exceed expectations means we raise the bar for our own?  You don’t plan based on crossing your fingers. You plan based on percentages smart and decisions.  Vegas IS a good team there is no fluke about them. You don't ACCIDENTLY get to the finals, you get there with a good team from the goalie on out. Did they fluke out the entire regular season too? You crack me up.

 

[canucksnihilist]

Sutter is a valuable player.   But is no foundation piece.  29 year old player on the worst team in the league.... we need a player like him in 5 years, not now.  In 5 years he is retired.

 

So....  why exactly would the team not give him up?   Standard “bull$&!# mentor argument”?

[Baggins]

26 minutes ago, canucksnihilist said:

Sutter is a valuable player.   But is no foundation piece.  29 year old player on the worst team in the league.... we need a player like him in 5 years, not now.  In 5 years he is retired.

 

So....  why exactly would the team not give him up?   Standard “bull$&!# mentor argument”?

Perhaps because they're not looking to make the team worse......

[EdgarM]

1 hour ago, canucksnihilist said:

Sutter is a valuable player.   But is no foundation piece.  29 year old player on the worst team in the league.... we need a player like him in 5 years, not now.  In 5 years he is retired.

 

So....  why exactly would the team not give him up?   Standard “bull$&!# mentor argument”?

Because I would much rather watch a player with some skill then some plug such as a Vey or a Magma night in night out. Aren't we here to be entertained?

[canucksnihilist]

8 hours ago, Baggins said:

Perhaps because they're not looking to make the team worse......

Ah... he is helping us hold our place at the bottom of the league.... got it.  Wouldn’t want to go from 28th to 30th or something like that.    Do you understand  what you are actually saying there?

 

he is valuable right now to a contender.   Way more than his value to us.   That’s the point.  This isn’t about his worth as a player.  And unfortunately he will be on the verge of retirement when we start to compete.   Same with elder and tanev of course.   I understand it is unwise to just dump everyone... as we dont have a full team of young stars ready to play... especially on defense.   But at forward?   We kind of do....  maybe the plan is to trade him next year?  Once someone is there to take his place?  Just because offers weren’t listened to this year doesn’t mean there isn’t a plan to trade him 

 

[canucksnihilist]

8 hours ago, EdgarM said:

Because I would much rather watch a player with some skill then some plug such as a Vey or a Magma night in night out. Aren't we here to be entertained?

Well sutter isn’t flashy.   He is a defensive forward.  If you have an appreciation of the finer parts of hockey you might enjoy watching him.   However for most he is invisible....

[aGENT]

9 hours ago, canucksnihilist said:

Sutter is a valuable player.   But is no foundation piece.  29 year old player on the worst team in the league.... we need a player like him in 5 years, not now.  In 5 years he is retired.

 

So....  why exactly would the team not give him up?   Standard “bull$&!# mentor argument”?

So that the lion's share of heavy lifting in game and angst and vitriol this market produces is foisted on his shoulders instead of one of those kids were hoping is going to lead us in 5 years. 

[canucksnihilist]

17 minutes ago, aGENT said:

So that the lion's share of heavy lifting in game and angst and vitriol this market produces is foisted on his shoulders instead of one of those kids were hoping is going to lead us in 5 years. 

Well taken as a whole, my points this morning - assuming you are in PST - led towards trading the player once someone is ready to take his place.   Probably next year sometime.    Maybe this year if the deal is right.  Maybe it’s a waiting game and maybe the trade deadline this year is the target trade time.

 

But don’t underestimate the young kids - often they can do way more but aren’t given a chance to fail!  So they can learn and mature of course.... I don’t think they need coddling.   

 

How do you ruin a player?   By letting them play against top opponents?  No.   By expecting too much and overplaying them against top players?   Yes.   And I don’t think anyone would expect too much of a player replacing Sutter as it is a role that isn’t that high profile.   With a good transition period Gaudette might be the player to do it this year... we’ll see...

 

Sutter is here to transition someone like Gaudette into his role.  Then he should be competing for a cup on another team.   Hopefully this coming trade deadline

[stawns]

On 21/05/2018 at 12:14 PM, Provost said:

If the offer was reasonable they should have done it, and should do it now if there are still offers.

 

There is nothing stopping you from signing other value veterans in the offseason for short term 1-3 year deals to replace anyone traded out.   You bet out by adding assets.

 

He isn’t a 2nd line centre, so is really just in the way of prospects working their way up from the bottom half of the roster.  We would be better off trading him and signing Bozak for the 2nd line.  Some combination of Gagner, Granlund, Gaunce, Gaudette, another veteran can fill the 3rd and 4th line spots.

if you just have to go out and find a replacement, then why bother trading him?  They would likely have to pay a replacement similar money anyway and there's no way of knowing if he fits in with the team the way Sutter does.  It's robbing Peter to pay Paul

[TheGuardian_]

Sutter's very short list of teams. Full NTC, last year, next year a 16 team list starting July 1, 2019, so he might willing to provide that list at the TDL or another very short list.

[189lb enforcers?]

The Canucks can’t trade a ‘Foundational’ 3rd line C, on a team in the doldrums of rebuilding?

 

 

[Provost]

30 minutes ago, stawns said:

if you just have to go out and find a replacement, then why bother trading him?  They would likely have to pay a replacement similar money anyway and there's no way of knowing if he fits in with the team the way Sutter does.  It's robbing Peter to pay Paul

.... umm because you have added another asset into the organization.

Another team beat writer suggested that Sutter could be worth as much as a late 1st round pick.

Having the spot filled by a UFA replacement plus getting another prospect that maybe lands somewhere between Boeser and McCann in ability level makes us better.

Heck, getting another Goldobin/Dahlen level guy makes us better... and that is what we got for over the hill players who didn’t have game anymore.

[stawns]

1 minute ago, Provost said:

.... umm because you have added another asset into the organization.

Another team beat writer suggested that Sutter could be worth as much as a late 1st round pick.

Having the spot filled by a UFA replacement plus getting another prospect that maybe lands somewhere between Boeser and McCann in ability level makes us better.

Heck, getting another Goldobin/Dahlen level guy makes us better... and that is what we got for over the hill players who didn’t have game anymore.

I'd rather keep Sutter, a guy they know can log hard minutes against the top cmen in the league and is a leader on and off the ice.  That's far more valuable than a pick who may very well never see the NHL

[Baggins]

1 hour ago, canucksnihilist said:

Ah... he is helping us hold our place at the bottom of the league.... got it.  Wouldn’t want to go from 28th to 30th or something like that.    Do you understand  what you are actually saying there?

 

he is valuable right now to a contender.   Way more than his value to us.   That’s the point.  This isn’t about his worth as a player.  And unfortunately he will be on the verge of retirement when we start to compete.   Same with elder and tanev of course.   I understand it is unwise to just dump everyone... as we dont have a full team of young stars ready to play... especially on defense.   But at forward?   We kind of do....  maybe the plan is to trade him next year?  Once someone is there to take his place?  Just because offers weren’t listened to this year doesn’t mean there isn’t a plan to trade him 

 

You don't move up the standings by dropping your better players for picks. You move up by replacing the weak links an improving the team.

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, canucksnihilist said:

Well taken as a whole, my points this morning - assuming you are in PST - led towards trading the player once someone is ready to take his place.   Probably next year sometime.    Maybe this year if the deal is right.  Maybe it’s a waiting game and maybe the trade deadline this year is the target trade time.

 

But don’t underestimate the young kids - often they can do way more but aren’t given a chance to fail!  So they can learn and mature of course.... I don’t think they need coddling.   

 

How do you ruin a player?   By letting them play against top opponents?  No.   By expecting too much and overplaying them against top players?   Yes.   And I don’t think anyone would expect too much of a player replacing Sutter as it is a role that isn’t that high profile.   With a good transition period Gaudette might be the player to do it this year... we’ll see...

 

Sutter is here to transition someone like Gaudette into his role.  Then he should be competing for a cup on another team.   Hopefully this coming trade deadline

That is laughable. Majority key Dzone draws, match up role, sheltering role, top PK role, 2nd line equivelant (basically all hard) minutes etc, etc...yeah, not at all high profile or important to a team full of kids 

 

The only player remotely ready to take on Sutter's very key/important/high profile role is Horvat. And frankly, I'd far prefer he continue to focus on being a 200' top 6 player vs a middle 6 match up/sheltering one.

 

As I said earlier in the thread, if we manage to trade for Jenner or similar and sign a Richardson, Beagle etc...by all means we could certainly look at moving Sutter. Until that point he has an EXCEEDINGLY important role on this young team.

[higgyfan]

2 minutes ago, aGENT said:

That is laughable. Majority key Dzone draws, match up role, sheltering role, top PK role, 2nd line equivelant (basically all hard) minutes etc, etc...yeah, not at all high profile or important to a team full of kids 

 

The only player remotely ready to take on Sutter's very key/important/high profile role is Horvat. And frankly, I'd far prefer he continue to focus on being a 200' top 6 player vs a middle 6 one.

 

As I said earlier in the thread, if we manage to trade for Jenner or similar and sign a Richardson, Beagle etc...by all means we could certainly look at moving Sutter. Until that point he has an EXCEEDINGLY important role on this young team.

I don't understand why peeps aren't getting this.  A very clear and concise post, btw.  Hopefully this will help.

 

I agree about Jenner.  He seems like the ideal fit for our team. Gaudette has similar potential, but it is far to early to expect him to take on that role.

[oldnews]

12 hours ago, canucksnihilist said:

Sutter is a valuable player.   But is no foundation piece.  29 year old player on the worst team in the league.... we need a player like him in 5 years, not now.  In 5 years he is retired.

 

So....  why exactly would the team not give him up?   Standard “bull$&!# mentor argument”?

This is a myopic perspective wadr.

"Mentor" has literally nothing to do with why you need Sutter.

 

 

 

[oldnews]

Some liteally awful "team building" concepts expressed by folks in here who are obsessed with flipping everyone over 25 for futures.

 

You take Sutter out of this lineup and think about how that translates into the kind of minutes the young forwards in this group plays.

 

We all want to see them thrive, play signiificant minutes - but what I specifically don't want to watch is them playing endless uphill hard minutes against tilted ice.  This team needs to generate realistic opportunities for their youth.  That is why Sutter - and his linemates - and a few other guys on the 'fourth' line - are critically important support for the skilled young forwards on this team - and it's blueline.

 

Horvat becomes your best and most experienced defensive center in the absence of Sutter. 

Two horrible implications with that reality - he's tied to hard minutes - and who are your top 6 centers in his absence?  Who centers your scoring lines?

Where do the ozone starts for what will be a very young top 6 come from?

Do you really want the likes of Boeser et al playing without a solid two way center like Horvat?  They're already facing the opposition's best - the last thing you want is less ability to end opposition possession - more time spent defending in their zone (let alone fewer ozone starts).

Gagner is not a bottom six center - he's a winger - a weak faceoff guy - and not really solid enough to handle the hard, down low minutes that an actual shutdown center plays.

 

This team not only needs Sutter, but they ideally need to add another solid faceoff guy and veteran, hard minutes shutdown center to the mix.  There are no guarantees that players like Gaudette et al will be ready for hard minutes at the NHL level.  It is possible, but at the same time, you don't enter a season relying on inexperienced youth to play your principal shutdown roles.  People that don't understand this literally don't understand the most elementary aspects of team building.  Realistically, if you move Sutter you need to bring in a pair of centers via the trade market or free agency.  Possible, but how likely is it that you get the targets you want at reasonable terms?  I'd prefer to be shopping for just one asset in free agency - an affordable, relatively short term deal for a Richardson, Beagle, type - someone you don't have to commit future spots and cap too once your prospect pool further graduates.

 

Bring in a veteran to compete for the 4C spot.  If one of your young players owns that spot in that context. then you have something to work with - and realistic veteran depth when you run into injuries.

 

The idea that they should clear out the likes of Sutter and go with what remains (or just replace his scoring in FA) is pure noob.