oldnews Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 1 hour ago, Alflives said: I hope JB and the team stick to rebuilding fully before trading young assets and picks for veteran guys to support the current youthful core group. That’s why I’m fine with signing EK, Stone, or Ferland as UFAs. We don’t give up any assets. Still, EK would be my first choice. Then Stone, and lastly Ferland. Read between the lines Alfie - this is just a message to Ferland and agent - "we'll talk to you July 1st" ( if you don't re-sign with that Dundun in Carolina).... I'm not really in the EK hype crowd - don't want to commit to that kind of albatross, particuarly when he'd essentially step in front of Hughes. I'll be surprised if this team went that all-in in free agency for a guy that would command maximum term and cap. It will mean signing a 29 yr old to a 70ish million deal. Not sure what that deal looks like a few years from now, but someone will take that plunge. I'd rather have a Thomas Chabot tbh. Stone or Ferland would still be expensive, but if they actually wanted to be here on reasonable (ie not frenzy terms)...maybe. I'm doubtful any of them will be Canucks but you never know.....perhaps Ferland would like the idea of sticking it to Calgary on Pettersson's wing....but I imagine Calgary is already soothed by the epic production of Lindholm lol. Love that deal for Calgary = looks good on Carolina and will look even better if Ferland walks. I'm gonna make popcorn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 2 minutes ago, oldnews said: Read between the lines Alfie - this is just a message to Ferland and agent - "we'll talk to you July 1st" ( if you don't re-sign with that Dundun in Carolina).... I'm not really in the EK hype crowd - don't want to commit to that kind of albatross, particuarly when he'd essentially step in front of Hughes. I'll be surprised if this team went that all-in in free agency for a guy that would command maximum term and cap. Stone or Ferland would still be expensive, but if they actually wanted to be here on reasonable (ie not frenzy terms)...maybe. I'm doubtful any of them will be Canucks but you never know.....perhaps Ferland would like the idea of sticking it to Calgary on Pettersson's wing....but I imagine Calgary is already soothed by the epic production of Lindholm lol. Love that deal for Calgary = looks good on Carolina and will look even better if Ferland walks. I'm gonna make popcorn. Of those three EK for 11 mil, Stone for 7.5 mil, and Ferland for 5.5, (terms not considered) which one do you think helps us the best? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
86Viking Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 2 minutes ago, Alflives said: Of those three EK for 11 mil, Stone for 7.5 mil, and Ferland for 5.5, (terms not considered) which one do you think helps us the best? Stone likely gets 9ish Million on the open market Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 4 minutes ago, Canuckster86 said: Stone likely gets 9ish Million on the open market Wow! Then cross him off the list. I’d rather have EK for 11. I really like Stone, but I think EK impacts a game more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 1 hour ago, oldnews said: Read between the lines Alfie - this is just a message to Ferland and agent - "we'll talk to you July 1st" ( if you don't re-sign with that Dundun in Carolina).... I'm not really in the EK hype crowd - don't want to commit to that kind of albatross, particuarly when he'd essentially step in front of Hughes. I'll be surprised if this team went that all-in in free agency for a guy that would command maximum term and cap. It will mean signing a 29 yr old to a 70ish million deal. Not sure what that deal looks like a few years from now, but someone will take that plunge. I'd rather have a Thomas Chabot tbh. Stone or Ferland would still be expensive, but if they actually wanted to be here on reasonable (ie not frenzy terms)...maybe. I'm doubtful any of them will be Canucks but you never know.....perhaps Ferland would like the idea of sticking it to Calgary on Pettersson's wing....but I imagine Calgary is already soothed by the epic production of Lindholm lol. Love that deal for Calgary = looks good on Carolina and will look even better if Ferland walks. I'm gonna make popcorn. I dare say if Benning signs EK for anything, SHOULD he sign him; over $9 million he will have blown and lost any and all good will he's bought the last 3 ish years Insanity to sign him to the contract he's gonna command with where this club is. That's a move in 2 years from now, not now. Hell, rather try to pry Keith out of Chicago or something first before committing the 6+ year double digit contract that EK will be getting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theo5789 Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 3 hours ago, Sweathog said: Fair enough. I'm concerned that if Ferland is not very engaged physically in a contract year, I'm not all that confident that he'll be the player we need him to be once he signs his big money deal. Imo with the Canucks still rebuilding, it's better to sign a legitimate enforcer to a short-term, cheaper deal, put him on a bottom 6 role, and move him up to Petey's line if they feel it's necessary. And in the meantime see if MacEwan or Gadjovich pans out. If we have to spend serious UFA money this summer, I'd rather the priority be to improve our defense. (Someone like Karlsson if that's possible) 2.9 hits per game this season which leads his team and is top 15 in the league amongst regulars (my criteria is at least 35 games played so far) compared to his 2.2 hits per game last year. He had 2 majors all last year and has 3 already this year, and to put it into perspective, the leader in majors has 6. I understand that fear of anyone once they get the big contract, but he looks quite engaged physically this year while putting up career offensive numbers. Ferland is capable enough to be on the ice with Petey to enforce on every shift unlike a low budget enforcer although I'm not against that idea either. I agree that the defense could use some improvement, but unfortunately I don't see Karlsson wanting to sign here and there aren't many other great options. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 4 hours ago, Sweathog said: Fair enough. I'm concerned that if Ferland is not very engaged physically in a contract year, I'm not all that confident that he'll be the player we need him to be once he signs his big money deal. Imo with the Canucks still rebuilding, it's better to sign a legitimate enforcer to a short-term, cheaper deal, put him on a bottom 6 role, and move him up to Petey's line if they feel it's necessary. And in the meantime see if MacEwan or Gadjovich pans out. If we have to spend serious UFA money this summer, I'd rather the priority be to improve our defense. (Someone like Karlsson if that's possible) He tried to engage with Mark Borowiecki tonight in an attempt to rally the team. Didn't work, but he was the only player worth a damn tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alfstonker Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 Never happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbyg43 Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 16 hours ago, Alflives said: I hope JB and the team stick to rebuilding fully before trading young assets and picks for veteran guys to support the current youthful core group. That’s why I’m fine with signing EK, Stone, or Ferland as UFAs. We don’t give up any assets. Still, EK would be my first choice. Then Stone, and lastly Ferland. I don’t see any of those two comming over to our great city in my crystal ball nor do I have interest in overpaying either. Ferland May have already been concusses 2 or 3 times already ,(I would looks little more in depth an detail) as for other guy some one else will over pay him an get him. There would be no logic to satrap our cap before you g journey men in squad get their raise $$$. Best bets keep eyes open on prize an hidden gems an try get them at premium values. i like both players but cons in my world out way the pro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 16 hours ago, Alflives said: Of those three EK for 11 mil, Stone for 7.5 mil, and Ferland for 5.5, (terms not considered) which one do you think helps us the best? I don't know. But from my perspective, I don't want to sign a guy who's going to be making 11 million at age 37....and in the process, park Hughes behind him. If the team is going to win, imo it's going to be with guys like Hughes leading it. I don't think I'd be getting in the EK frenzy. Stone is a RW - probably not the team's greatest need, but unquestionably a great player that would fit well and give the team (at least) two top flight RW. However, again at the terms he'd command, you then have EP, Boeser to re-sign (Horvat at reasonable terms) but nevertheless you're committing a great deal to forwards and lose some of your flexibility early in the process. Again, I'd be inclined to build from within - and feel that the more cost-effective way of improving a team is to depend on your drafting and development - or pro-scouting with trades of guys who have not yet broken out - and use free agency to improve your 'bottom six' - which can actually uptick your team significantly at signifiicantly lesser risk/cost. Ferland does fit a principal need, that isn't necessarily in the system at this point - a heavy pwf LW - has some skill, skates well, physical - but with him as well, despite not commanding anywhere in the range of those other two, there has to be a clear tap-out point at which you're simply not going to take the risk of overpaying him = I think it would come down to whether he'd want to be in a city/franchise like Vancouver and is willing to take market value as opposed to free agent value. For me it's hard to say who'd help the most because they come with various implications - and in the cases of EK and Stone, that would cost ice-time for players like Hughes, possibly Boeser, and trickle down. I'd probably pass on EK out of hand, and if I'm looking for a Stone type player, might look instead to acquire a guy in his early career, draft plus years before breaking out and pay an asset price instead of the huge contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VIC_CITY Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 16 hours ago, Sweathog said: Fair enough. I'm concerned that if Ferland is not very engaged physically in a contract year, I'm not all that confident that he'll be the player we need him to be once he signs his big money deal. Imo with the Canucks still rebuilding, it's better to sign a legitimate enforcer to a short-term, cheaper deal, put him on a bottom 6 role, and move him up to Petey's line if they feel it's necessary. And in the meantime see if MacEwan or Gadjovich pans out. If we have to spend serious UFA money this summer, I'd rather the priority be to improve our defense. (Someone like Karlsson if that's possible) I agree with your point, I'm just not sure that we have a ton of options out there in terms enforcer type players that can actually play. There isn't many of them and the teams that do have them aren't in a rush to trade them (besides Lucic). Regarding Ferland's alleged lack of physical play in a contract year, he's going to get paid based on points and he's being utilized in a way that he's expected to produce. That's his role. But you can damn well bet that his role as a Canuck would in part be EPs bodyguard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweathog Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 20 minutes ago, VIC_CITY said: I agree with your point, I'm just not sure that we have a ton of options out there in terms enforcer type players that can actually play. There isn't many of them and the teams that do have them aren't in a rush to trade them (besides Lucic). Regarding Ferland's alleged lack of physical play in a contract year, he's going to get paid based on points and he's being utilized in a way that he's expected to produce. That's his role. But you can damn well bet that his role as a Canuck would in part be EPs bodyguard. Those are good points you've made. I'm certainly in favour of adding toughness to the roster, especially in the top 6. And I don't disagree that adding Ferland would make us a better team. But I do have some misgivings about the cost of acquiring someone like Ferland, considering where the Canucks are in their development as a team. I don't at all like the idea of taking a risk of giving up a 1st + a prospect with no guarantee that he'll sign beyond this season, and even if he did sign I don't think the Canucks are in a position where they can afford to be sacrificing young assets quite yet. As far as signing him as a UFA, I think the priority should be shoring up the defense and ensuring enough money to re-sign Brock and EP. If we're able to squeeze in Ferland without compromising the first two priorities, then I can't see any problems with bringing in Ferland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 34 minutes ago, Sweathog said: Those are good points you've made. I'm certainly in favour of adding toughness to the roster, especially in the top 6. And I don't disagree that adding Ferland would make us a better team. But I do have some misgivings about the cost of acquiring someone like Ferland, considering where the Canucks are in their development as a team. I don't at all like the idea of taking a risk of giving up a 1st + a prospect with no guarantee that he'll sign beyond this season, and even if he did sign I don't think the Canucks are in a position where they can afford to be sacrificing young assets quite yet. As far as signing him as a UFA, I think the priority should be shoring up the defense and ensuring enough money to re-sign Brock and EP. If we're able to squeeze in Ferland without compromising the first two priorities, then I can't see any problems with bringing in Ferland. I think you nailed the priorities, shoring up the defense and enough CAP to resign the stars. Both require money. I am not a big fan of signing E. Karlsson to a big $ and term. He doesn't fit the timeline. I liked Ferland ever since the playoffs a few years back. It only works by signing him as a UFA. By all reports that is where he is going. The Canucks do not have enough depth to be sending players off to get him. I am sure any team that wants him enough to give up players will get a deal signed as part of the deal. I would prefer that the Canucks bring McKewen up for a look after the TDL. IMHO there is no reason to pay a lot for protection for EP40. There is enough toughness on this roster now. What the players have to understand is that Petey is a meal ticket for each one of them. Benning can look for players who can play on Petey's line to give him extra space but that can happen over the summer. UFA's are going to want to play in Vancouver because of EP40, plain and simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyCuddles Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 Ferland's lack of physical play, if that's even true, could very likely be due to his concussion worries. Didn't he come out publicly about how worried he is about his future health and concussions? You gotta think it's constantly in his head. Players play differently when they are worried about re-occurring injuries. Especially when he says outright he is very concerned about it. It might just be him being worried about coming back too soon, given the timing of the article and such. Or maybe it's a bigger picture thing and he knows his style of play has a higher risk of concussions and may have decided it's best to cut down on that stuff. 13 goals in 40 games, even without the physical side he could still carve out a decent career as a secondary goal scorer. 14 hits in the last 5 games, 117 hits in 40 games. Still a physical presence. His career high in hits over a season was the 15/16 season where he had 207 hits, if you do his current average of 2.9 hits per game over 71 games that'd have him on pace for 205. Obviously those are just raw stats, I don't watch many Canes games so I can't tell if his style of play is vastly different and he is still getting his hits in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildcam Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 17 hours ago, Alflives said: Of those three EK for 11 mil, Stone for 7.5 mil, and Ferland for 5.5, (terms not considered) which one do you think helps us the best? I think all these guys will be signed and not hit free agency as teams need return for these valuable guys... Ferland would be very good gritty guy in top 6 role for 3-4years...Ferland would also cost much less then other two guys.. We don't want to be a team over signing players to crazy salaries.. Keep on rebuild and make trade that will give you a extra push.. Want to keep rebuild like Jets and Nashville lots of prospects around and there still top 5 teams in NHL... Nashville did a great job signing players to great contracts.. Really hope Vancouver don't make crazy trade at trade deadline to make playoffs..Keep on rebuild plan if we make playoffs its a bonus... Goldy to Ottawa --- Ceci 25, 6'2 RD -- good trade for both teams.. Edler to Tampa---- Foote 20 6'4 D ----- good trade.. Sutter --- Playoff team 2nd rounder and prospect return. Schaler - trade for 5th round pick ---- ** MacEwen 22, 6'3, 210 lbs can fill his spot... We have Gaudette ready for 3rd line centre next year.. MacEwen 6'4 big power forward ready for bottom 6 role -- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancaster Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 It would be nice to have Ferland to light a match under Virtanen's rear. A more experienced player to show him how it's really done. It will show Virtanen that he's either expendable and thus need to kick it up a notch... or they have been some physical duo where teams will worry about having 2 nearly identical players on the Canucks that paste you along the boards or pot a couple of goals in. That being said.... I'm not sure about paying him what he really wants on the open market. Maybe if there's some secret pictures out there of him wearing a Bertuzzi jersey or something as a kid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VIC_CITY Posted January 19, 2019 Share Posted January 19, 2019 2 hours ago, Sweathog said: Those are good points you've made. I'm certainly in favour of adding toughness to the roster, especially in the top 6. And I don't disagree that adding Ferland would make us a better team. But I do have some misgivings about the cost of acquiring someone like Ferland, considering where the Canucks are in their development as a team. I don't at all like the idea of taking a risk of giving up a 1st + a prospect with no guarantee that he'll sign beyond this season, and even if he did sign I don't think the Canucks are in a position where they can afford to be sacrificing young assets quite yet. As far as signing him as a UFA, I think the priority should be shoring up the defense and ensuring enough money to re-sign Brock and EP. If we're able to squeeze in Ferland without compromising the first two priorities, then I can't see any problems with bringing in Ferland. I don't think anyone is suggesting trading a 1st round pick for Ferland. I don't even think I'd be willing to move our 2nd rounder this year. But we have some seconday assets that could be of interest: Dipietro, Lind, Dahlen, Jasek, Brisbois, Gadjovich, MacEwen, Brassard, Madden, Rathbone. All of these guys aren't going to be players for us down the road. We can afford to give up a couple of them. Then there's our current roster, where Hutton and (to a lesser degree) Granlund may interest Carolina. I'd be ok with giving up a 3rd or 4th round pick as well. So that's quite a lot of options without even mentioning our top 2 draft picks or any of our top prospects like Demko, Hughes, Juolevi, Woo. I agree that our defense needs work too. But we have Hughes, Juolevi and Woo coming. Maybe we take another D with our top pick this year. All of a sudden we're not so short on D. Even less so if you believe there's a chance Tryamkin comes back. So I don't think I'd want to pony up $9M x 7 years for Karlsson. I'd much rather do $5.5M x 5 years for Ferland. Edit: speaking of Tryamkin, I just read on Twitter that his parents have purchased a home in Vancouver and are moving here in the summer. Take that for what it's worth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
86Viking Posted January 20, 2019 Share Posted January 20, 2019 2 hours ago, VIC_CITY said: Edit: speaking of Tryamkin, I just read on Twitter that his parents have purchased a home in Vancouver and are moving here in the summer. Take that for what it's worth? Do you have a link in regards to that? Seems quite odd, but would be very happy for us to have Tryamkin back in a Canucks uniform! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME Posted January 20, 2019 Share Posted January 20, 2019 2 hours ago, VIC_CITY said: Edit: speaking of Tryamkin, I just read on Twitter that his parents have purchased a home in Vancouver and are moving here in the summer. Take that for what it's worth? Edited 2 hours ago by VIC_CITY Yes, but have they bought a new BBQ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted January 20, 2019 Share Posted January 20, 2019 1 hour ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said: Yes, but have they bought a new BBQ? Here it is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.