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

[Discussion] a way to get some cap space and draft picks


Recommended Posts

please correct me if I'm wrong about this, I'm not that versed in how the cap works or ways to rid yourself of unwanted players. I know the 'nucks need to rid themselves of some players and their contracts.

Say they wanted to trade Tanev,(just an example) there's about 4 similar to his situation. Couldn't they go to a team that has inquired about him in the recent past and take whatever they are offering in draft choices, even if its lower than they wanted, maybe a 2nd or 3rd or a 3rd and 4th without getting any players in return. That way they get rid of an oft injured player and his contract  at least they get some draft choices and clear the books which would add cap space. Then they could do the same with Sutter, some team would take him and the Canucks could clear their books of his and Tanev's salary and they're on there way to getting some wiggle room. Then they could get creative. Possibly Schaller back to Boston along with Baertschi with a couple of draft choices in return or a player of equal salary as those 2. Except that Benning doesn't know what the word creative means. Anyway you get my point.

Edited by mrreindeer
addition
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd rather keep Tanev, and see Eriksson and Schaller waived, not for cap space just so players that need some icetime get to play.

 

I imagine Eriksson will give Benning some names rather than play in Utica.

 

Someone will take Sutter at the trade deadline that needs a defensive center for the playoffs.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, mrreindeer said:

please correct me if I'm wrong about this, I'm not that versed in how the cap works or ways to rid yourself of unwanted players. I know the 'nucks need to rid themselves of some players and their contracts.

Say they wanted to trade Tanev,(just an example) there's about 4 similar to his situation. Couldn't they go to a team that has inquired about him in the recent past and take whatever they are offering in draft choices, even if its lower than they wanted, maybe a 2nd or 3rd or a 3rd and 4th without getting any players in return. That way they get rid of an oft injured player and his contract  at least they get some draft choices and clear the books which would add cap space. Then they could do the same with Sutter, some team would take him and the Canucks could clear their books of his and Tanev's salary and they're on there way to getting some wiggle room. Then they could get creative. Possibly Schaller back to Boston along with Baertschi with a couple of draft choices in return or a player of equal salary as those 2. Except that Benning doesn't know what the word creative means. Anyway you get my point.

So you want to make our team weaker?  Why would we throw away players that can help us make the playoffs?  

 

You're hoping that we start following the Buffalo and Edmonton "forever rebuilding" model...  No thanks. 

Edited by VancouverHabitant
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, VancouverHabitant said:

So you want to make our team weaker?  Why would we throw away players that can help us make the playoffs?  

 

You're hoping that we start following the Buffalo and Edmonton "forever rebuilding" model...  No thanks

 

So you're one of these guys that wants to stay competitive while rebuilding. Doesn't work that way bud.

Who cares if we make the team weaker, which we wouldn't be doing anyhow. Tanev, and Sutter are well past their best before date and Baertschi are always injured and Schaller clearly didn't want to play here. I'm quite sure canucks brass would be thrilled to get these guys to move on. I would've included Lui E in there but that one is almost impossible to move.

We want to look to the future when we can really challenge for the cup not sneak into the playoffs and draft middle of the pack every year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, mrreindeer said:

please correct me if I'm wrong about this, I'm not that versed in how the cap works or ways to rid yourself of unwanted players. I know the 'nucks need to rid themselves of some players and their contracts.

Say they wanted to trade Tanev,(just an example) there's about 4 similar to his situation. Couldn't they go to a team that has inquired about him in the recent past and take whatever they are offering in draft choices, even if its lower than they wanted, maybe a 2nd or 3rd or a 3rd and 4th without getting any players in return. That way they get rid of an oft injured player and his contract  at least they get some draft choices and clear the books which would add cap space. Then they could do the same with Sutter, some team would take him and the Canucks could clear their books of his and Tanev's salary and they're on there way to getting some wiggle room. Then they could get creative. Possibly Schaller back to Boston along with Baertschi with a couple of draft choices in return or a player of equal salary as those 2. Except that Benning doesn't know what the word creative means. Anyway you get my point.

So here's what it looks like. He act like u don't know enuff to make a proper post and then u end it with taking a small shot at Benning. I think you wanted to attack Benning from the beginning. 

 

All the trade ideas u just threw out there looked like something u personally hope for but not necessarily realistic considering each off season, teams have different needs. 

Edited by Monteeun
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, mrreindeer said:

please correct me if I'm wrong about this, I'm not that versed in how the cap works or ways to rid yourself of unwanted players. I know the 'nucks need to rid themselves of some players and their contracts.

Say they wanted to trade Tanev,(just an example) there's about 4 similar to his situation. Couldn't they go to a team that has inquired about him in the recent past and take whatever they are offering in draft choices, even if its lower than they wanted, maybe a 2nd or 3rd or a 3rd and 4th without getting any players in return. That way they get rid of an oft injured player and his contract  at least they get some draft choices and clear the books which would add cap space. Then they could do the same with Sutter, some team would take him and the Canucks could clear their books of his and Tanev's salary and they're on there way to getting some wiggle room. Then they could get creative. Possibly Schaller back to Boston along with Baertschi with a couple of draft choices in return or a player of equal salary as those 2. Except that Benning doesn't know what the word creative means. Anyway you get my point.

Thats a great idea, hopefully Benning reads this and takes your advice. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, mrreindeer said:

please correct me if I'm wrong about this, I'm not that versed in how the cap works or ways to rid yourself of unwanted players. I know the 'nucks need to rid themselves of some players and their contracts.

Say they wanted to trade Tanev,(just an example) there's about 4 similar to his situation. Couldn't they go to a team that has inquired about him in the recent past and take whatever they are offering in draft choices, even if its lower than they wanted, maybe a 2nd or 3rd or a 3rd and 4th without getting any players in return. That way they get rid of an oft injured player and his contract  at least they get some draft choices and clear the books which would add cap space. Then they could do the same with Sutter, some team would take him and the Canucks could clear their books of his and Tanev's salary and they're on there way to getting some wiggle room. Then they could get creative. Possibly Schaller back to Boston along with Baertschi with a couple of draft choices in return or a player of equal salary as those 2. Except that Benning doesn't know what the word creative means. Anyway you get my point.

FYI this belongs in the Proposals and Armchair GMing subforum and not Trades, Rumours, Signings, which is reserved for news of transactions and requires a Source. I have moved and tagged your thread for you. In the future the forum specific rules are available at the top of each subforum page. Cheers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only way I see Tanev going anywhere is if we take a player (RHD) in the earlier stages of development from a team who is a Stanley cup contender. A healthy Tanev in a lower pairing would be a great acquisition for any team. Imagine how well he would work if his Minutes were reduced and he played a supporting role. Part of our injury problems with our entire team is players playing over their heads. We can’t replace Tanev with just draft picks because we can’t replace his role with what we have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Signing Myers means that Tanev does not always have to play the hardest minutes and can ease nicely into the role of a top 4 defenseman. Maybe it will help him not get hurt either as we can probably throw Myers to matchup against bigger forwards. Can we not trade a defenseman for a song just when the defense has just become somewhat decent to look at?

Edited by Toews
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

you say you're not very well versed in how the cap works or how to rid the team of unwanted players.. then you proceed to list some very rudimentary & uncreative trade ideas.. then you throw in a jab that JB doesn't know how to be creative.. 

 

I'll reserve the sarcastic insulting meme for another thread

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know the OP is getting flamed here, and partially deserved for throwing in that unnecessary dig at JB near the end, but the main idea isn’t a bad one. 

 

I honestly believe we’d be better off, both now, and going forward, if we shipped out several of our existing contracts, like Tanev, Sutter, Schaller, and maybe Baertschi. Use the returns to help sweeten a move to get rid of Eriksson’s full cap and trade for Gusev’s rights. Use the freed cap space (we could have as much as $28 million to play with) to sign Boeser, Gusev, Goldobin, Gardiner, and Ferland.

 

Lineup might look something like this:

 

Miller Pettersson Boeser

Gusev Horvat Ferland

Pearson-Gaudette-Virtanen

Motte-Beagle-Leivo

Goldobin, Roussel (IR), MacEwen, Bailey, Perron, Graovac

 

Edler-Stecher

Hughes-Myers

Gardiner-Benn

Fantenburg-Biega

Juolevi, Rafferty, Teves, Sautner, Brisebois

 

Markstrom

Demko

DiPietro, Bachman, McIntyre, Kielly 

 

Swap around lineup (I’m not really attached to any of the currently listed lines/pairings) based on camp and preseason chemistry, and possibly with some of the prospects beating out the depth guys for final spots.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, -AJ- said:

You seem to be one of those fans who's afraid to take the leap and start putting in an effort towards actually being good. No one said becoming a good team was risk-free, and unless you want to become a perennial bottom-feeder, we'll have to take some risks to improve. Two years ago, I would've agreed in that we weren't ready to start taking drastic moves to improve; however, we've improved in both of the last two seasons, the most recent being the most significant yet. Not only that, but our best players are young, meaning it's likely that we'll naturally improve through internal growth as time goes on. I'd rather take a stab at being good while Horvat, Hughes, Boeser, Pettersson, and Demko are in their prime youth years than waste it for a few more top draft picks that I don't think we need at this point.

 

Shannon (TheHockeyGuy) put out a fantastic video on the subject. Give it a watch if you have some time:

 

 

That's an awesome synopsis of where the Canucks have been and where they are going.

 

Add to that (since the vid)  Tyler Myers, J Benn.....take away Hutton and Schenn.....and you've got a team that will challenge for the playoffs.  

 

The depth has been made over both at the NHL and AHL levels (both are important) and there is the future core and others who are only going to get better year over year.

 

 

  • Upvote 1
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...