Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Discussion] PK Subban to Vancouver might make sense


Recommended Posts

PK Subban to Vancouver might make sense

 

Obviously, this would be dependent on what Nashville’s asking price would be, but I’m starting to come around to this idea.  Originally, I thought PK’s cap hit was north of 10 million, but I learn the other day that it’s “only” 9 million.

 

Here are some reasons why I’m now on board with Subbann coming here (again, dependent on the actual asking price).

 

1) In today’s NHL, 9 million isn’t too outrageous of a cap hit for a top player.   I’m of the opinion that teams are hardpressed to win Stanley cups if they have players that have cap hits above a certain point (ie higher than Ovechkin’s cap hit).  That’s one reason why I’m not a fan of the “Toronto model,” and am also not a fan of getting Karlsson or Panarin.

 

2) Subbann fills a huge need on our weakest position and side.

 

3). Subbann will be off the books in a few short years.   I think this is he most important point right here.  IF you bring in a guy like Karlsson or some other superstar in his late 20’s, you’re looking at a long term deal.....and would likely be paying for a majority of those years when said player is past his prime.  

 

Conversely, Subbann would be off the books in a few short years, and the Canucks would NOT become Toronto part II where they would have so much money tied long term to a handful of players.

 

4) Subbann’s presence would allow the Canucks to take advantage of Pettersson and Hughes’ ELC’s.   Get the Canucks into the playoffs, and get the team some valuable playoff experience.

 

5) Benning subscribes to the mentorship model, and who better to show Hughes the ropes than a superstar like PK?   In a few years, the Canucks can move on from PK as Hughes would likely be ready to lead our defense.

 

For all of these reasons, I would be onboard with a PK Subbann trade, but it would be dependent on the price.

 

To Nashville:  10th + Hutton + (one of Madden or Gaudette)

To Vancouver: Subbann

 

I don’t know how realistic the above proposal would be, but I think it would revolve around something like that.  I would say no if Nashville asked for Virtanen+ 

Edited by Hindustan Smyl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No way, Jose!

 

High maintenance personality..did you see how the media contrasted the team feelings(upon returning) between SW & Subban? Did you miss that?

 

Then watch the league screw us on the Lu-contract, when it gets tight.

Another body to protect, at ED.

No 1st for a home draft?! That's nuts.

 

Would only consider if a lame pkg went to Nash, including Loui the spaceman. No more picks squandered! WE should get the extra picks, cos' we have the cap to play hardball.

  • Cheers 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see us being willing to move the assets we would have to in order to land him. We're still at a point where gathering young, high end assets to the top priority, so the idea of moving our 10th overall + for a player on the wrong side of 30 doesn't make any sense. Also, we're not far enough along in our rebuild to be considered anything close to a cup contender. We'd need a lot more than an over-the-hill Subban to get us to that point, so unless we load up on free agents as well, it would probably take us a few years to gather the assets we need to become contenders, at which point Subban will be even older and Petey and Hughes will be off of their entry level deals anyways. 

 

So yeah, it's a big nope from me. A big one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Read a great article recently comparing Weber to Subban.   He basically trashed Subban in virtually every important defensive category (one sees top competition and shuts them out on nightly basis, the other doesn’t see top competition and does an ok job but not great on who he does play against), the only thing that Subban was a wash was skating with the puck and it’s how he produces his offense (rover that often gets burned for it too).  

 

The evaluation was done based on since the trade play only.  They both have offense one roves more to get his, the other uses his teammates and an elite point shot to get his.  One is a bruiser one is ok at hitting but not a bruiser.  I’d say Subban isn’t even a top fifteen defenseman anymore, so hard pass.  Both of them have suffered to stay healthy that’s one thing they’ve done equally well at ha ha.  At that cap hit and at the cost it’s just not worth it.  Rather we spend a little extra for EK and get him for free.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, IBatch said:

SubbaNNNNNN is not coming here....that said Benning did almost go after him once before, maybe he still likes the idea.   One thing is for sure the OP at least tries and there is nothing else to do on this site ATM.   

 

At least two of his threads were good ones and most of them have legs...wonder what your best proposal would be?  One thing is at least this has nothing to do with EDM, we won’t ever make a meaningful trade with them.  It hasn’t happened yet and don’t see it happening in the future. 

Is his spelling of Subbann intentional? Is Subbann going to be making a rival sunglasses company called Sub-Bann?

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IBatch said:

Read a great article recently comparing Weber to Subban.   He basically trashed Subban in virtually every important defensive category (one sees top competition and shuts them out on nightly basis, the other doesn’t see top competition and does an ok job but not great on who he does play against), the only thing that Subban was a wash was skating with the puck and it’s how he produces his offense (rover that often gets burned for it too).  

 

The evaluation was done based on since the trade play only.  They both have offense one roves more to get his, the other uses his teammates and an elite point shot to get his.  One is a bruiser one is ok at hitting but not a bruiser.  I’d say Subban isn’t even a top fifteen defenseman anymore, so hard pass.  Both of them have suffered to stay healthy that’s one thing they’ve done equally well at ha ha.  At that cap hit and at the cost it’s just not worth it.  Rather we spend a little extra for EK and get him for free.

I really don't think EK is going to be a UFA. He's going to stay with the Sharks unless they can't afford him for family reasons. Moreover, EK doesn't have a history of moving around.

Edited by Dazzle
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Zhukini said:

Makes more sense than the people who think he wouldn’t fit in because of his personality 

Yeah why have guys with personality and just have bland guys that just talk from a script.  That said, big pass on Subban as his cost (not just his contract but what’ll it cost to acquire him) will be too high.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He just turned 30 five days ago. 

The Canucks are 1-2 years from playoff contention. 

And probably 3+ years from Cup contention. (If everything falls into place). 

I don't think he fits just based on his age. The bulk of our core is in their early to mid 20's. 

I think his personality actually fits here. He's well known to love kids, so he'd be a great ambassador for Canucks Place and BC Children's Hospital. 

Unless Nashville wants Hutton and Eriksson in exchange, I don't see it. 

 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dazzle said:

None of your trade proposals make sense...

Lol.

 

Fair enough.  I’ll be happy to try and explain my (misguided?) thought process to each and every one of my proposals if I get a bit more free time.   Tell me which ones don’t make sense to you and I’ll try and explain as best as possible.

 

As far as Subban goes, there are a few things that I like about him more than Erik Karlsson:

 

1) Lower cap hit.  Subban’s cap hit is 9 million while Karlsson would likely get 10.5-11 million if he signed with us.....and as we are about to see in Toronto, if you sign one guy at a premium (Tavares), you’d better damn sure believe that everyone else will want to sign at a premium as well (Nylander, Matthews, Marner, etc.).

 

2) Subban will come off the books just as he will likely start his age decline.  3 years of Subban and then we can walk away from him......which conveniently will be around the time that Hughes will need to be re-upped.  

 

Two things can can be achieved here (in comparison to if we got a guy like Karlsson or Panarin).

 

A) A much lower risk of future cap complications.   Since Subban’s contract would be off our books just around the time that Hughes would be extended, our cap structure would have a much greater chance of remaining intact.

 

B-).  Still a chance at a possible “buy in” from the rest of our young RFA core.   If we get Subban and he becomes our highest paid player at 9 million, perhaps the team can create an internal cap limit where everyone on the team “buys in” to the idea of taking slightly less money in order to build a winner (ie for example, perhaps a guy like Pettersson signing for 9 million when he becomes an RFA......along with our other RFA’s “buying in.”).   By contrast, if you bring in a guy like Erik Karlsson and sign him for 10.5-11 million (likely closer to 11), then you can forget about the rest of the team “buying in” and taking less money.  You now have a Toronto type situation (ie  all guys being paid at a premium, future cap complications, not having enough cap space to build true depth since an inappropriately high percentage of the cap will be tied into the top talents).

 

So - long story short, a guy like Subban make more sentence from the perspective of....

 

1) Shorter term contract (3 years left as opposed to what would be 7).

2) Significantly greater chance of having less future cap complications.

3) Significantly greater chance of our young core “buying in” and accepting cap friendlier deals when their contracts expire. 

4) The addition of Subban to the team allowing the Canucks to make a push for the playoffs while Pettersson and Hughes are still on ELC’s.   An often overlooked fact is the importance of playoff experience for young kids in the system.   Getting Pettersson, Hughes, Horvat, and Boeser some playoff experience (along with our other young players) is crucial to their development.

 

Now obviously - the big advantage of going after someone like Karlsson, Panarin, or Duchene is that it’s a completely FREE asset (ie only give up money), but again.......if you want to sign one of those guys, it’s going to cost TERM (7 years) and PREMIUM $$$......(which would then put us in the same boat as Toronto as I explained above).

 

Other UFA’s (Dzingel, Ferland, Myers, etc.) arguably wont move the needle much.

 

Hence, my suggestion of Subban, depending on what the acquisition cost would be.

 

I realize that one of the biggest arguments that people have on here (against the idea of trading for Subban) is that Subban wouldn’t make us a cup contender (something that I completely agree with by the way) , but here’s why we should still strongly consider the idea:

 

1) Getting Pettersson, Hughes, and other young core members to “believe” and “buy in.”  If an addition of Subban can make us atleast a 1st or 2nd round caliber team, the young players on the team will not only get playoff experience, but will also come to realize that this management group has their backs and is serious about building a winner.  These factors will be important when it comes time to re-upping RFA’s and getting them to “buy in.”

 

By contrast, if guys like Pettersson, Boeser, Hughes, and Horvat continue to miss the playoffs year in year out, what do you think will happen to their motivation levels?  Or their faith in management?   IF these continue to miss the playoffs year in year out, do you think they will be likely to “buy in” to the idea of taking less money to build a winner here?  I don’t think so.

 

By bringing in Subban, you demonstrate to the team that you are serious about winning, and that you are simply giving them a taste of what’s about to come.

 

edit - one more thing that I forgot to mention:   Mentorship for Hughes.  Yes, we have Tanev for that but let’s face it......Tanev has never been a true superstar in the league whereas PK has.   Hughes is an offensive-minded dman like Subban.  Think Hughes can learn a thing or two from PK?

Edited by Hindustan Smyl
  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

there's +'s and -'s for sure, but focusing on the +'s the contract is 3 more years, he doesn't need expansion protection, he'd be as good a producer as any of the current free agents in all likelihood. 

 

-'s: 9 mil... but we can afford it and it disappears when we're looking at cap issues down the road. 

 

On the personality thing, I'd leave that to Benning and Green, they know what they want and what the fit would be. 

 

Edler-PK

Hughes-Tanev 

 

^ thats certainly better than what we've seen for a while now. 

 

But we don't have the pieces to make it happen - this article covers the best trade partners and we don't have the assets:https://thehockeywriters.com/pk-subban-trade-destinations/

 

Nylander for Subban might be a thing. 

 

 

Edited by Jimmy McGill
  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Hindustan Smyl said:

Lol.

 

Fair enough.  I’ll be happy to try and explain my (misguided?) thought process to each and every one of my proposals if I get a bit more free time.   Tell me which ones don’t make sense to you and I’ll try and explain as best as possible.

 

As far as Subban goes, there are a few things that I like about him more than Erik Karlsson:

 

1) Lower cap hit.  Subban’s cap hit is 9 million while Karlsson would likely get 10.5-11 million if he signed with us.....and as we are about to see in Toronto, if you sign one guy at a premium (Tavares), you’d better damn sure believe that everyone else will want to sign at a premium as well (Nylander, Matthews, Marner, etc.).

 

2) Subban will come off the books just as he will likely start his age decline.  3 years of Subban and then we can walk away from him......which conveniently will be around the time that Hughes will need to be re-upped.  

 

Two things can can be achieved here (in comparison to if we got a guy like Karlsson or Panarin).

 

A) A much lower risk of future cap complications.   Since Subban’s contract would be off our books just around the time that Hughes would be extended, our cap structure would have a much greater chance of remaining intact.

 

B-).  Still a chance at a possible “buy in” from the rest of our young RFA core.   If we get Subban and he becomes our highest paid player at 9 million, perhaps the team can create an internal cap limit where everyone on the team “buys in” to the idea of taking slightly less money in order to build a winner (ie for example, perhaps a guy like Pettersson signing for 9 million when he becomes an RFA......along with our other RFA’s “buying in.”).   By contrast, if you bring in a guy like Erik Karlsson and sign him for 10.5-11 million (likely closer to 11), then you can forget about the rest of the team “buying in” and taking less money.  You now have a Toronto type situation (ie  all guys being paid at a premium, future cap complications, not having enough cap space to build true depth since an inappropriately high percentage of the cap will be tied into the top talents).

 

So - long story short, a guy like Subban make more sentence from the perspective of....

 

1) Shorter term contract (3 years left as opposed to what would be 7).

2) Significantly greater chance of having less future cap complications.

3) Significantly greater chance of our young core “buying in” and accepting cap friendlier deals when their contracts expire. 

4) The addition of Subban to the team allowing the Canucks to make a push for the playoffs while Pettersson and Hughes are still on ELC’s.   An often overlooked fact is the importance of playoff experience for young kids in the system.   Getting Pettersson, Hughes, Horvat, and Boeser some playoff experience (along with our other young players) is crucial to their development.

 

Now obviously - the big advantage of going after someone like Karlsson, Panarin, or Duchene is that it’s a completely FREE asset (ie only give up money), but again.......if you want to sign one of those guys, it’s going to cost TERM (7 years) and PREMIUM $$$......(which would then put us in the same boat as Toronto as I explained above).

 

Other UFA’s (Dzingel, Ferland, Myers, etc.) arguably wont move the needle much.

 

Hence, my suggestion of Subban, depending on what the acquisition cost would be.

 

I realize that one of the biggest arguments that people have on here (against the idea of trading for Subban) is that Subban wouldn’t make us a cup contender (something that I completely agree with by the way) , but here’s why we should still strongly consider the idea:

 

1) Getting Pettersson, Hughes, and other young core members to “believe” and “buy in.”  If an addition of Subban can make us atleast a 1st or 2nd round caliber team, the young players on the team will not only get playoff experience, but will also come to realize that this management group has their backs and is serious about building a winner.  These factors will be important when it comes time to re-upping RFA’s and getting them to “buy in.”

 

By contrast, if guys like Pettersson, Boeser, Hughes, and Horvat continue to miss the playoffs year in year out, what do you think will happen to their motivation levels?  Or their faith in management?   IF these continue to miss the playoffs year in year out, do you think they will be likely to “buy in” to the idea of taking less money to build a winner here?  I don’t think so.

 

By bringing in Subban, you demonstrate to the team that you are serious about winning, and that you are simply giving them a taste of what’s about to come.

 

edit - one more thing that I forgot to mention:   Mentorship for Hughes.  Yes, we have Tanev for that but let’s face it......Tanev has never been a true superstar in the league whereas PK has.   Hughes is an offensive-minded dman like Subban.  Think Hughes can learn a thing or two from PK?

Re: The "Buying In"

 

I think the buy in is already happening. Petterson, Horvat, Boeser core with Hughes and a few others coming up on D is very sellable. I don't think PK will have a "buy-in effect" on the team, rather we would need him to buy-in to what we already have going on and I don't think that is very likely due to PK being PK. Loud noises and tonnes of flair are good at birthday parties, not sure if Canucks are ready for that in the locker room.

 

PK would make more sense to acquire at Trade Deadline if Canucks are looking like contender material in any way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...