JeremyCuddles Posted June 8, 2018 Share Posted June 8, 2018 Just now, theo5789 said: I am suggesting we take all of the cap if we can get a 1st or more. But if/when we move him at the trade deadline, we retain 50% to make it enticing for a team to offer up a nice package for us. You can undersell him as a 15 goal scorer, but he has scored 15 or less twice (sub 20 4 times including those two years) and that was his rookie season (where he didn't play the full year) and a shortened season. Rick Nash has a less storied career and at 50% retained fetched a pretty big return at the deadline. For us he is scoring 15-20, at best. He's 33 and trending downward on a playoff team. It's not an undersell. It's the way it is. We don't have a Getzlaf here for him. Unless you suggest we move Boeser off Bo's line. If you think Dahlen and Pettersson, who is very likely not playing center next year anyway, will make a 20-30 goal scorer out of him. Sure, we also hoped that with Eriksson and the Sedins too. Taking on 9mil dollars of Perry is flat out not worth it, especially if we just plan on eating 4 mil of it down the road. There are far cheaper, better vet options than Perry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theo5789 Posted June 8, 2018 Share Posted June 8, 2018 2 minutes ago, N7Nucks said: For us he is scoring 15-20, at best. He's 33 and trending downward on a playoff team. It's not an undersell. It's the way it is. We don't have a Getzlaf here for him. Unless you suggest we move Boeser off Bo's line. If you think Dahlen and Pettersson, who is very likely not playing center next year anyway, will make a 20-30 goal scorer out of him. Sure, we also hoped that with Eriksson and the Sedins too. Taking on 9mil dollars of Perry is flat out not worth it, especially if we just plan on eating 4 mil of it down the road. There are far cheaper, better vet options than Perry. There's no crystal ball that will predict that he will continue to trend down with us. Did anyone predict Vanek would put up 17 goals and 41 points in 67 games (he only played a handful of games with Boeser)? Perry is not a coattail rider. Getzlaf only played 56 games last season and Perry still produced. He's not the player he once was and I've said he's not worth 9 million, but that's the whole point in why we take him on since we have the cap space and can try to gain some assets for him. And we can gain even more assets while only taking up some cap room that we currently have to work with. There may be better options out there, but I am not writing off the possibility of acquiring Perry because there are some positives in doing so. Of course there are several factors that have to play out like Perry has to waive to come here and Anahiem needs to offer us a good deal to take him on. So this could all be moot anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Great Canucks Posted June 8, 2018 Share Posted June 8, 2018 I'd do Eriksson for Perry straight up. That's pretty much it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rekker Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 26 minutes ago, theo5789 said: There's no crystal ball that will predict that he will continue to trend down with us. Did anyone predict Vanek would put up 17 goals and 41 points in 67 games (he only played a handful of games with Boeser)? Perry is not a coattail rider. Getzlaf only played 56 games last season and Perry still produced. He's not the player he once was and I've said he's not worth 9 million, but that's the whole point in why we take him on since we have the cap space and can try to gain some assets for him. And we can gain even more assets while only taking up some cap room that we currently have to work with. There may be better options out there, but I am not writing off the possibility of acquiring Perry because there are some positives in doing so. Of course there are several factors that have to play out like Perry has to waive to come here and Anahiem needs to offer us a good deal to take him on. So this could all be moot anyway. Sorry man. I see nothing good in acquiring Perry. Dude has really regressed. He was never quick and is getting even slower. The Ducks are trying to unload him now because they know after next year he will look even worse. He is useful on the PP only. And at 9 million per his contract far outweighs his usefulness. Big time pass for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Jay 22 Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 40 minutes ago, theo5789 said: There's no crystal ball that will predict that he will continue to trend down with us. Did anyone predict Vanek would put up 17 goals and 41 points in 67 games (he only played a handful of games with Boeser)? Perry is not a coattail rider. Getzlaf only played 56 games last season and Perry still produced. He's not the player he once was and I've said he's not worth 9 million, but that's the whole point in why we take him on since we have the cap space and can try to gain some assets for him. And we can gain even more assets while only taking up some cap room that we currently have to work with. There may be better options out there, but I am not writing off the possibility of acquiring Perry because there are some positives in doing so. Of course there are several factors that have to play out like Perry has to waive to come here and Anahiem needs to offer us a good deal to take him on. So this could all be moot anyway. I agree with mostly everything you are saying, but I think the bottom line in this situation is that a acquiring a 33 year old with a giant contract doesn't seem in line with the direction we are going. He only has 3 years left...I'm not sure we are going to be a serious contender by then. Even if we gain a draft pick or prospect out of this, the team that would benefit the most would be the Ducks for shedding his salary (They aren't taking LE back because the whole point of moving him is shedding salary). I also doubt he would waive to leave SoCal and come to Vancouver...not sure what personal benefit would be in it for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theo5789 Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 14 minutes ago, rekker said: Sorry man. I see nothing good in acquiring Perry. Dude has really regressed. He was never quick and is getting even slower. The Ducks are trying to unload him now because they know after next year he will look even worse. He is useful on the PP only. And at 9 million per his contract far outweighs his usefulness. Big time pass for me. Fair enough. I'm sure most teams know his deficiencies, which is why it would take something for them to move him. The speed was my only question about his effectiveness, but he could still put up decent numbers. The good ones know how to play the game well enough still to be effective in some aspect. We just lost the Sedins so Perry would have a role here. He won't improve our team and I don't expect him alone to do so, but he would still be effective on the PP and provide some grit to the top 6 while providing that top 6 leadership. Anaheim can't afford to retain 50% but we can absorb that which makes him more attractive. 4.5-5 million for a 50 point player isn't too out of the ordinary. I'm not pushing for the move to happen, but there is a way to make it work IMO, so I'm not as quick to pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theo5789 Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 4 minutes ago, Blue Jay 22 said: I agree with mostly everything you are saying, but I think the bottom line in this situation is that a acquiring a 33 year old with a giant contract doesn't seem in line with the direction we are going. He only has 3 years left...I'm not sure we are going to be a serious contender by then. Even if we gain a draft pick or prospect out of this, the team that would benefit the most would be the Ducks for shedding his salary (They aren't taking LE back because the whole point of moving him is shedding salary). I also doubt he would waive to leave SoCal and come to Vancouver...not sure what personal benefit would be in it for him. Acquiring Perry isn't to boost our team into a contender necessarily. It's to pry another 1st and possibly unloading him at a retained salary which could fetch a decent return. We would love to have another 1st rounder in this draft. Anahiem benefits in the cap savings and we benefit in the picks and maximizing our cap space. You're right that it's unlikely he would waive to come here mostly because of the media IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancaster Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 The perfect winger for the Sedins..... oh, right.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rekker Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 25 minutes ago, theo5789 said: Fair enough. I'm sure most teams know his deficiencies, which is why it would take something for them to move him. The speed was my only question about his effectiveness, but he could still put up decent numbers. The good ones know how to play the game well enough still to be effective in some aspect. We just lost the Sedins so Perry would have a role here. He won't improve our team and I don't expect him alone to do so, but he would still be effective on the PP and provide some grit to the top 6 while providing that top 6 leadership. Anaheim can't afford to retain 50% but we can absorb that which makes him more attractive. 4.5-5 million for a 50 point player isn't too out of the ordinary. I'm not pushing for the move to happen, but there is a way to make it work IMO, so I'm not as quick to pass. The Sedins are gone and will be missed. I'm hoping we turn a chapter with this team and go speed and up-tempo hockey. Coach Green wants a fast, up-tempo team as well. Watching the playoffs it is where hockey is and going. Vegas made Perry look like an absolute pylon. Let's get quicker. I say no to Perry or Lucic or any past their prime old pro. NHL is all speed now baby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theo5789 Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 15 minutes ago, rekker said: The Sedins are gone and will be missed. I'm hoping we turn a chapter with this team and go speed and up-tempo hockey. Coach Green wants a fast, up-tempo team as well. Watching the playoffs it is where hockey is and going. Vegas made Perry look like an absolute pylon. Let's get quicker. I say no to Perry or Lucic or any past their prime old pro. NHL is all speed now baby. I agree with the transition of the game, but we also are not ready yet. We need to posture ourselves in a position when we are ready to have bolstered the team enough to make a run. If a team is willing to pay what they did for a 50% retained Nash, someone will pay for a 50% retained Perry. The advantage we gain isn't Perry himself but what we can get for Perry. From what I remember, we heard chants of one more year for the Sedins. So clearly we could live at least another year of slower players that could generate some offense. Vanek fit that mold as well (slow but good offense) and he didn't look out of place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rekker Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 38 minutes ago, theo5789 said: I agree with the transition of the game, but we also are not ready yet. We need to posture ourselves in a position when we are ready to have bolstered the team enough to make a run. If a team is willing to pay what they did for a 50% retained Nash, someone will pay for a 50% retained Perry. The advantage we gain isn't Perry himself but what we can get for Perry. From what I remember, we heard chants of one more year for the Sedins. So clearly we could live at least another year of slower players that could generate some offense. Vanek fit that mold as well (slow but good offense) and he didn't look out of place. But Nash had one year left. Perry has three. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush17 Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 his cap hit is bananas. 8.625 million per. that makes erikssons deal look nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theo5789 Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 27 minutes ago, rekker said: But Nash had one year left. Perry has three. Which made the price of Nash even crazier considering he's likely just a rental. 4.5 million for a guy that puts up 50 points is not unreasonable in today's market. There's the risk that he does regress even further for sure, but he is only 33 and putting up at least 50 point seasons until he's 36 doesn't seem out of reach. He's been a healthy player throughout his career. Nash wasn't healthy, putting up worse numbers and doesn't have the resume that Perry has, but he got what he was traded for because of the brand name which Perry is as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mugiwara Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 Steel and a 2nd. Or jacob larrson and a 1st. Perry is a 50 point guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rekker Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 8 minutes ago, theo5789 said: Which made the price of Nash even crazier considering he's likely just a rental. 4.5 million for a guy that puts up 50 points is not unreasonable in today's market. There's the risk that he does regress even further for sure, but he is only 33 and putting up at least 50 point seasons until he's 36 doesn't seem out of reach. He's been a healthy player throughout his career. Nash wasn't healthy, putting up worse numbers and doesn't have the resume that Perry has, but he got what he was traded for because of the brand name which Perry is as well. Boston paid too much for Nash I agree. Nash has always been overrated in my opinion. I am not convinced that the extra years on a contract make the player more valuable. I think teams going for it want the rental to fit under the cap post trade deadline and that's it. Perry will have some value his last year. But untill then he has negative value at 9 million per. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonny_Bohonos_14 Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 Steel is likely untouchable, but Id start by asking for Perry + Steel for Eriksson - no retention. Other than Boeser, we don't really have any big contacts coming up in the next 3 years. And if we do its because someone surprised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theo5789 Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 15 minutes ago, rekker said: Boston paid too much for Nash I agree. Nash has always been overrated in my opinion. I am not convinced that the extra years on a contract make the player more valuable. I think teams going for it want the rental to fit under the cap post trade deadline and that's it. Perry will have some value his last year. But untill then he has negative value at 9 million per. He's 33, not 37. He's not the player he once was, but he isn't a terrible player at this point. I agree he has negative value at 8.625 million which is why we gain an asset or two to acquire him. We retain cap and a 4.5 million dollar player even with two more years that can put up 50-60 points still and he certainly still has value. A team that has the cap space to take on his two more years at 4.5 million will pay up for him. I would say he would have more value at that price than an extended Burrows did and we got a pretty decent prospect for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazycry Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 1 hour ago, Lonny_Bohonos_14 said: Steel is likely untouchable, but Id start by asking for Perry + Steel for Eriksson - no retention. Other than Boeser, we don't really have any big contacts coming up in the next 3 years. And if we do its because someone surprised. Like Pettersson? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Jay 22 Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 1 hour ago, Lonny_Bohonos_14 said: Steel is likely untouchable, but Id start by asking for Perry + Steel for Eriksson - no retention. Other than Boeser, we don't really have any big contacts coming up in the next 3 years. And if we do its because someone surprised. That is comically bad. They aren't trading their best prospect for a worse player that only gives 2.7 more in cap hit savings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted June 9, 2018 Share Posted June 9, 2018 I'd take him if the Ducks gave up some good picks/prospects. I don't imagine we'll be contenders within the next three years anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.