Edler would LOVE to re-sign with the Canucks.

[-AJ-]

If he plays like last year again I'd be down for $4-5M per year for a max of three years. I've been a big Edler fan for years and having his veteran presence on the back end is nice. 

[HerrDrFunk]

11 minutes ago, aGENT said:

On Edler's back hand. You wanted to see short handed turnovers going the other way with frequency?

I see those all the time when he tries to fire through defenders and it bounces off their shins anyway. 

 

Again, I'm not opposed to him still being on the team when this contract is up, as he is still a better option than a good chunk of the Canucks' D, but I'd like better options for offense. 

[Gaudette Celly]

8 minutes ago, aGENT said:

And that will likely be Hughes starting next year. That doesn't mean you toss Edler away.

Hughes is a lefty, too -- trying to say he's got a better backhander, are ya?

[-AJ-]

1 hour ago, NUCKER67 said:

Like the Sedins, Edler is a lifer. He might prefer to retire than relocate to a new city and join a new team. Dreams of trading him for a 1st plus at the TDL, I can't see happening. Edler has been a good, loyal Damn for this team for many years, and I would be okay with them re-signing him for another year or two. Until Hughes is ready to take over the #1 spot. 

You're dman right. 

[PhillipBlunt]

The most sound reason for keeping Alexander Edler, at the present, is the effect he's had on Erik Gudbranson. They're a solid, responsible and punishing pairing. Can't really say that about any other pairing on the team. They neutralized Marchand - Bergeron - Pastrnak last year, which is no small feat.

[mikeyman109]

1 minute ago, PhillipBlunt said:

The most sound reason for keeping Edler at the present is the effect he's had on Erik Gudbranson. They're a solid, responsible and punishing pairing. Can't really say that about any other d - pairing. They neutralized Marchand - Bergeron - Pastrnak last year, which is no small feat.

This i dont disagree with. They did play much better , thats both of them together. As for resigning Edler i would not want to see more than a 2 year deal and cash doesnt really matter that much. NO NTC. If we get a good trade deadline offer he is a moveable asset. doesnt have to be a first rounder but we will take it if offered.

Again I am not saying the player is garbage, i am saying we need to throw him away, just don't sign him for longer than 2 years. That would mean three season more of Edler including this year.

[BCNate]

18 minutes ago, mikeyman109 said:

Bolded is whats wrong with Vancouver hockey fans.

Imagine all the guys mentioned playing so well we cant have them move on. That's what is more important than having players play out their careers in this city. I want them to play so well through their whole career that we just cant trade them. We talk about the younger players having to earn their spots, the veterans can not rest on their laurels based on previous years play. They must perform at the high level expected each season or they shouldnt be here either.

 

Trevor Linden was traded and at the time evryone bitched and moaned that Trevor had been moved by Evil Mike. It was the best thing that happened to the team.

Trevor got moved for Bertuzzi and Mc Cabe

Bertuzzi went on to become one of the best if not the best Power forward this team has had.

Bryan Mc Cabe was traded for the right to draft the second of the twins.

Sometimes emotion has to be left off the table when discussing players.

Making the right hockey move sometimes demands hard decisions.

 

Alex Edler started as a unknown quantity when the Canucks got him. He turned out so much better than expected and for that I applaud him. If we can get one or two more years out of him as a 3-4 d man then great. I personally do not see a long term deal, a NMC, or a need to keep him in the family should a trade make sense for the team.

Its a new day. I believe the D is still in need of another drafted player. Juolevi, Hughes, and Woo are the future. Trades, free agent pick ups, all can affect the D personell. Edler is an option for now, but long term he shouldn't be an option.

Having said all this I hope this season he goes out , scores 20 leads the team in Hits and has a great injury free year. I wish him all the best.

How is what I said wrong?  
What are you going to trade Edler for?  Maybe a 2nd and a B level prospect?  Why is moving a very servceable D who eats more minutes that anyone, that wants to be here and see the rebuild through for a couple of lottery tickets the "right" way?  In my eyes, having a Vet like Edler to lead the young guys, who is committed to the city and community holds a ton of value, much more so than a couple of fringe assets.  I think having guys like Brock, Bo, Virt watching the Sedins go out the way they did, with the reception they recieved shows them how good things can be in Vancouver, and only drives them to stay here and win.

[aGENT]

6 minutes ago, mikeyman109 said:

Yes he is slower, doesn't jump in the rush as much although it was like old times on Danny's first goal in the last home game

 

Agreed but we are talking about the future after this season. Hughes Juolevi, Woo may be ready and if Edler is signed can we move him if necessary? NO NTC, reduced role, and pay

 

I cant see putting Edler out on a power play when he cant pass on his backhand, and we ignore our best shooter on a PP. Thats ridiculous

 

Also than Edler

 

Conceded, if I said NMC i meant we should not offer it.

Edler has never been 'fast'. He looked pretty much on par last year as he always has. Though he will likely slow down with age (not to mention the game getting faster).

 

Hughes and Juolevi are going to need someone to shelter them unless you plan on throwing two rookies in to 22+ minutes against top opposition every night next year? Seems like a recipe for shattered confidence, injuries and a dismal record to me. Woo plays right side FYI (as can both Pouliot and Hughes).

 

As for his potential contract, from my first response to you in this thread:

 

57 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Re-sign him to a club friendly deal, perhaps a limited NTC and let him trend down the lineup to 2nd and eventually 3rd pair over the next few years as Juolevi, Hughes etc come on line.

That said, I think some of you are dreaming on your criteria for a club friendly deal. He'd likely get $4-$6'ish on the open market (term etc dependent) and we'd be LUCKY to sign him anything close to $4-$4.5m. And I'd gladly give him a limited NTC so he had some control on where he plays should we need to move him.

 

We'll likely have two 'best shooters' on the PP this year with Pettersson (on Edler's forehand!) on the right side. Until Hughes shows up or unless one/both of Hutton/Pouliot can forcibly take his spot there, he's still (sadly) our best option whether he feels comfortable passing to Boeser on his back hand or not.

 

No argument. Hughes is killer.

[PhillipBlunt]

5 minutes ago, mikeyman109 said:

This i dont disagree with. They did play much better , thats both of them together. As for resigning Edler i would not want to see more than a 2 year deal and cash doesnt really matter that much. NO NTC. If we get a good trade deadline offer he is a moveable asset. doesnt have to be a first rounder but we will take it if offered.

Again I am not saying the player is garbage, i am saying we need to throw him away, just don't sign him for longer than 2 years. That would mean three season more of Edler including this year.

Definitely. Give him short deals with no clauses. At this stage in the game, I'd think he'd be down with that. I'm thinking that Benning won't be making another signing like Eriksson during his time here.

[aGENT]

14 minutes ago, HerrDrFunk said:

I see those all the time when he tries to fire through defenders and it bounces off their shins anyway. 

 

Again, I'm not opposed to him still being on the team when this contract is up, as he is still a better option than a good chunk of the Canucks' D, but I'd like better options for offense. 

Wouldn't we all? Hughes is coming, Juolevi is quietly competent offensively but until then, short of one of Hutton/Pouliot grabbing the bull by the horns, he's our best option. Again, an indictment of the rest of the D, not him.

 

It's not his fault he's a 2way D and not an offensive D. It's not his fault he's a #2D and not a Norris winning #1D. It's not his fault the team has never managed to surround him with someone better.

 

A lot of nose cutting and face spiting in this thread.

 

14 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said:

Hughes is a lefty, too -- trying to say he's got a better backhander, are ya?

Yes.

 

Hughes has ELITE puck skills, vision and skating. All things that will both make a backhanded turnover there less likely and should one happen, his skating and acceleration give him FAR more opportunity to catch the opposition player.

[JM_]

If Alex is willing to waive to get us some assets for the 2019 draft then I'm just fine with him coming back on a 1 or very friendly 2 year deal.

[mikeyman109]

5 minutes ago, BCNate said:

How is what I said wrong?  
What are you going to trade Edler for?  Maybe a 2nd and a B level prospect?  Why is moving a very servceable D who eats more minutes that anyone, that wants to be here and see the rebuild through for a couple of lottery tickets the "right" way?  In my eyes, having a Vet like Edler to lead the young guys, who is committed to the city and community holds a ton of value, much more so than a couple of fringe assets.  I think having guys like Brock, Bo, Virt watching the Sedins go out the way they did, with the reception they recieved shows them how good things can be in Vancouver, and only drives them to stay here and win.

 

I know it sounds silly/sappy, but having the Sedins and Edler play their entire careers with the Canucks shows very well for the team.  Imagine guys like Bo, Brock, EP, Hughes all playing their whole careers in Van.

 

Its the sentiment that is wrong. Players playing their whole career in Vancouver is a sentimental notion that doesn't not allow for the team to do what is best for the team. I hope that players play in Vancouver because they are able to produce at a level that we cannot see our team without them. Trading players whose skill set are diminished or is likely to diminish is how teams get better.

Neely for Pederson is a perfect example. Pederson was a great center in Boston but they made the decision to trade him away for an asset that at the time was deemed unlikely to develop further. Vancouver was wrong, Boston was right.  At the time Boston fans could argue why give up a player that has been a offensive star for a plumber.

 

Even in Vancouver where Alex Burrows is considered very close to God. Have a look at which thread goes on and on here , but the value of Jonathan Dahlen is just being realized. I am not saying Edler is garbage.But he is an asset. One that may become tradeable and as such his new contract should not prevent us from doing that. As the younger players come along, Juolevi, Hughes, Woo, Edlers role should be reduced if these players are panning out. This makes trading an Edler for more assets necessary. I dont advocate throwing Edler away, i would like to see them sign him and when necessary turn him into assets for the future. I have no issue if Edler completes his career somewhere else.

[Rob_Zepp]

Edler is still an effective, physical top six Dman in the NHL and likely will be for at least a few more seasons.   He played very well last year.   On a Canuck team with more youthful options and a couple of potential elite studs, having him on short-term deals without restrictions on movement but removing him from PP and such could be a very big win/win for all involved.   

[Butters Stoch]

Not exactly surprising considering he hasn't been willing to waive his NTC for years now

[Sergei Shirokov]

If Gudbranson is getting 4 Million, it won't be cheap to re-sign Edler. I'd be in favor of re-signing him for sure. I just don't think it's possible to expect Juolevi or Hughes to step in next year a play 24 minutes a night. It's just not going to happen. We need a stable defense to help shelter a potential young goalie and young forwards. I'd say 2 or 3 years at 5 million. 

[BlastPast]

I think it will end up being contingent on how the team trends this year.  If it can pick up some steam I think he re-signs for 2 years given that it looks like Seattle are joining in 2021 so he wouldn't need protecting in an expansion draft as he would be a UFA.

[HC20.0]

I’d say re-signing Edler is gonna depend on which Edler we get this season. If we get 2017-18 Edler who looked great and played solid hockey, I’m all for it. If we get 2015-17 Edler who looked disinterested on the ice, I’ll pass. 

[Alflives]

Just now, HC20.0 said:

I’d say re-signing Edler is gonna depend on which Edler we get this season. If we get 2017-18 Edler who looked great and played solid hockey, I’m all for it. If we get 2015-17 Edler who looked disinterested on the ice, I’ll pass. 

I hope we see Guddy and Eddy paired together.  I think Guddy's physical presence gives Eddy the confidence to play more physically too.  Eddy is a much more confident player, when he's paired with Guddy.

[aGENT]

10 minutes ago, BlastPast said:

I think it will end up being contingent on how the team trends this year.  If it can pick up some steam I think he re-signs for 2 years given that it looks like Seattle are joining in 2021 so he wouldn't need protecting in an expansion draft as he would be a UFA.

Good thinking on that wrinkle  2 year term it is!

[Dekey Pete]

Why wouldn't we resign Edler?  There isn't exactly a plethora of defensive prospects pushing for spots.  This year we've got Olli, next year maybe Hughes.  Definitely a short term deal though, because we don't want him taking up a roster spot on an unmovable contract when our defensive prospect pool improves and young guys are looking to make the lineup.