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

[flickyoursedin]

The only way this makes sense is if management assumed with the twins possibly leaving Sutter would have more offensive opportunities leading to more points and higher value at next years deadline.

[ilduce39]

No surprise to hear that.  JB and TL have always valued Sutter as a leader and guy who takes a lot of pressure away from Horvat.  Now that extends to players like Gaudette as well.

 

I’ve always appreciated how mindful they are to the “develop” half of draft and develop rather than grasping for every draft pick / prospect they could acquire.  

 

That means some continuity in the locker room as well.  The team was likely aware they were losing the Sedins.  Not a time to sell off one of your veteran leaders. 

[Vinny in Vancouver]

1 hour ago, Qwags said:

Shows the value that a player like Sutter has around the league. Take note, CDC.

You can't tell the value unless you know what is offered. For example, if what Anaheim offered was Bieksa and a seventh rounder, then the value clearly isn't that great.

[Gurn]

20 minutes ago, kingofsurrey said:

Some canuck fans dream of seeing the canucks compete for a playoff spot ..... other canuck fans want to see a stanley cup ..

Hard to win a cup if you can't compete for a play off spot.

[higgyfan]

2 minutes ago, jimmyking8888 said:

 Management needs to go to RBC  for investment training.  Any good GMs in the league knows how to buy low and sell high.  I don't think Sutter's value can get any higher.  There are plenty of good 3rd liner centers.  What is the point of investing, when you don't cash out. 

The smart thing to do is to wait until trade deadline; that way Sutter brings more value to our young and developing team.

 

People underestimate what Sutter brings to the team.  I can see him mentoring a young guy like Gaudette and it's pretty obvious how much weight he has taken off Bo's shoulders.  He plays far more minutes than a standard 3rd liner and can handle the oppositions top line players.  He anchors the PK and is a terrific model for any young player learning the defensive game.  As far as I'm concerned Sutter is as important as any vet on the team, other than Tanev.

 

There's a reason that team's are inquiring about Sutter; he's not flashy, but he gets the job done while handling big minutes.  He's the kind of player that young (bubble) teams like the Oilers are desperate for.

[captainhorvat]

Sutters a really good 3rd line ctr that can pop 20 goals a year, if healthy. I feel like hes the type of player that would be clutch in the playoffs with timely goals. He is overpaid but thats not his fault.

[Provost]

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.

[JM_]

2 hours ago, Cramarossa said:

If y'all thought we were garbage before, imagine us without Suttsy. Would've been absolute devastation without him for the final push and too much weight on Bo's shoulders. 

 

Sutter is no slouch. I agree he's a bit overpaid for his work but his quiet contribution is significant, especially with our other defensive forwards (Dorsett, Eriksson, Granlund) taking a step back and/or getting injured. 

honestly I don't know that he is overpaid - he's got comparable goal scoring ability to guys like Frolik but carries a big defensive load for team. If he had been able to stay healthy he could have scored 15 goals with only 22% o-zone starts, thats actually quite good. Get him closer to 50% and he likely gets 20 and is in Anisimov territory on scoring. 

 

https://www.capfriendly.com/comparables/brandon-sutter-5318

 

What I didn't see in the story is what teams were offering for him. Cleary not enough for Jim to bother, it might have been a very easy decision for him to say no. 

[JM_]

1 hour ago, jimmyking8888 said:

 Management needs to go to RBC  for investment training.  Any good GMs in the league knows how to buy low and sell high.  I don't think Sutter's value can get any higher.  There are plenty of good 3rd liner centers.  What is the point of investing, when you don't cash out. 

You don't sell your house when you've got nowhere else to live. 

[-AJ-]

Sutter is great. He can play defense at a very high level and his offense isn't half-bad either. Also a good leader in the room with some experience.

[Coconuts]

I'm happy keeping Sutts around, with the twins around we're gonna be counting on our young guys to take charge offensively and we're gonna need him more than ever to take on a lot of defensive zone responsibility. You need guys like him on the team, I understand getting assets and getting value but a guy like Sutter is a valuable guy to have around. Especially given how young our team is trending. You need guys like him to lead the way effortwise.

[TheRick]

In Anaheim's case, I wonder if the possible return involved Kesler?

[kingofsurrey]

57 minutes ago, captainhorvat said:

Sutters a really good 3rd line ctr that can pop 20 goals a year, if healthy. I feel like hes the type of player that would be clutch in the playoffs with timely goals. He is overpaid but thats not his fault.

More like 10 goals a year and declining 

[TimberWolf]

3 hours ago, Qwags said:

Shows the value that a player like Sutter has around the league. Take note, CDC.

Take note of what?

 

What were the offers? For all we know the four teams were hoping to get benning to give up a pick by shedding the Sutter contract. Maybe it was one for one garbage deals that were even worse and teams were hoping to hose us further

 

you have no idea so until we know what the offers were, there is nothing to take note of and if the offers were picks in the second round then take note, Benning is terrible (but don't worry, I doubt it was that. Was probably no name players for ours)

[TheHitman]

If we were to get a player like Henrique back this trade would be worth it. 

[coolboarder]

My take on this: if the teams were offering the Canucks in that type of price, and the Canucks see the potential to ante up the price by keeping him and cash him later with even higher and better offer than the recent offer only if Sutter is playing better than he was last few seasons.   I see the type of moves is needed and it's still a win-win situation, we get to keep Sutter while developing our kids as long as possible and if Sutter is playing better with no injury going forward and if the Canucks are having a bad season with lack of depth and Sutter is playing out of the world performance, I can only see teams offering a premium for him via the bidding war at the TDL.   I just do not see the need to trade him now if the kids aren't ready.   If Sutter is not playing well and his value plummeted, we suffer no loss anyways and gave our prospect time all they need to develop over a season or two.  This move of not trading him in recent time is still a win-win situation.

[Provost]

36 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

You don't sell your house when you've got nowhere else to live. 

That is exactly how almost everyone sells their house... almost no one buys a replacement and then sells their old one.

Terrible analogy... or a great one, but the opposite of what you are saying.

[JM_]

1 minute ago, Provost said:

That is exactly how almost everyone sells their house... almost no one buys a replacement and then sells their old one.

Terrible analogy... or a great one, but the opposite of what you are saying.

the point was we don't have any options to go to if we move Sutter. We'd have to go out and pay as much or more for the same thing. Thats hardly a good investment strategy. 

[NewbieCanuckFan]

2 hours ago, EdgarM said:

I guess your right if your NOT trying to BUILD a team that can compete and fight for each other. Like who needs an experienced center man with pedigree and can play in multiple situations who has a lot of character.

A good GM should be able to replace complementary pieces.  I certainly wouldn’t give Sutter away for free.

[Provost]

Just now, Jimmy McGill said:

the point was we don't have any options to go to if we move Sutter. We'd have to go out and pay as much or more for the same thing. Thats hardly a good investment strategy. 

Sure it is. 

You get a (presumably decent) asset for Sutter and then sign a replacement.  You then have a comparable player and an extra asset.  There are plenty of players you can sign at that price tag or less that can play a 3rd line centre role.  Presumably you can actually find a better fit who can play the 2nd line centre spot which we need to fill (which he is terrible at).

Your investment strategy is to keep him until he declines or is no longer under club control and then have nothing?  That is literally the opposite of an investment strategy.