Sign in to follow this  
Borvat

(Potential Lineup) CapFriendly Roster Cap Hit

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Brocklovich said:

Id have to check but the only teams i can think of that have a bunch of cap space are the Senators & Blue Jackets

 

Maybe Ottawa makes the trade after the bonus is paid to Eriksson?

 

Eriksson (retained) + Goldy +?

 

For

 

Ottawas 7th round pick in 2022

image.thumb.png.754cb654d32d9011c0a30880d1a30e74.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

The problem is there shouldn't be problems when we have two significant ELCs (Pettersson and Hughes) and we've been a bad team for the last 5-ish years. 

 

Boeser will likely get between 6-7 on a bridge deal and over 7 long term. I also had Goldobin around 2, so only less than a million in cap space. Something will be done before Roussell is healthy. 

Over 7? Boeser's camp already said they would be happy with $7M, any term so that won't happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, 'NucK™ said:

Over 7? Boeser's camp already said they would be happy with $7M, any term so that won't happen.

 

Really? That's great news if true. Do you have a link?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

 

Really? That's great news if true. Do you have a link?

Don't remember where I saw it but it was reporting that his agent said they are looking for a $7M contract and don't care much about term. 

 

It seemed pretty legit, but at the same time, if true I'm surprised they haven't just signed him $7*8.. perhaps Canucks have some doubts and prefer a bridge deal but that would be surprising too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Texx said:

That is the exact roster I am hoping for, for this season. Loui , Sutter and tanev are high cap hits and disappointments largely due to injuries but they are still 3 players who if included on the opening night roster give the Canucks the best roster in my opinion. They are also all effective defensively. Of course loui, if they can find a taker can go but if they can't he could be quite effective on the 4th line. I think the talk about his comments while In Sweden are blown a bit out of proportion in both the media and from the fans. Benning said he will talk to him but does that mean hes 100% being traded ? I dont know. Seems more likely to happen with 2 years left on his contract. 

Sutter playing well and being healthy will allow him to be moved - maybe even for a pick, if he’s hurt again he’ll be on LTIR - that will also help clear the logjam. If he’s healthy and plays badly we are no worse off than we are now. Same thing with Baertchi.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

The problem is there shouldn't be problems when we have two significant ELCs (Pettersson and Hughes) and we've been a bad team for the last 5-ish years. 

 

Boeser will likely get between 6-7 on a bridge deal and over 7 long term. I also had Goldobin around 2, so only less than a million in cap space. Something will be done before Roussell is healthy. 

Goldobin does not get more than Labanc...

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Borvat said:

I keep hearing and reading about how the Canucks need to do something to make the cap work / the sky is falling / which sweeteners will we lose / blah blah blah   - ad nauseum.  Here is a sample of the current roster with Boeser at 3 years $5.5MM - to match Bo's hit as a prove yourself deal.  It may take more but the reason is to show it fits even a bit higher.  They may need to "paper" down some players to UTICA to make it work.  Anyhoo it's just to prove that it works. 

 

I know this isn't how everyone would have the lineups constructed (me included depending on training camp and exhibition games) and it's not a "line up" thread.  It is meant to show it works.  

 

image.thumb.png.f38c492d519bed3749698003a5445126.png

image.thumb.png.647497401da31859e8e04d92d37df39d.png

I noticed this last week.  Cap Friendly had not updated their site for a while and the media is too dim to notice that it was showing 27 signed players and 4 unsigned.  Obviously the cap space shown would be less than with a 23 man roster.  This really shouldn't be an issue but they just wouldn't shut up about it.  Now, since Cap Friendly has updated, some of the media have figured it out.  :picard:

  • Hydration 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably being ignorant but why should Brock get 7 mill/ year. I'm not on his back or anything like that before I get ripped a new one, but he's had 2 20 goal/ 50 point seasons with a couple of injuries. Perhaps Karlsson isn't the best comparison but he's on less than 6. Is there someone better to compare him to maybe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

 

Nobody is really saying we can't sign Boeser, it's just disappointing that we're tight to the cap despite being a bad team for the last period of time. We probably will finish higher than we did last year, but it's still not a great team for the dollars being spent. 

Your kidding right ,this will be a very good team. the Canucks will be 10 wins better than last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

 

Not everything is finalized yet as teams still have RFA's to sign and rosters to sort, but there will be teams that are better than us with more cap space. It's not a rule that you have to be out of cap space to push for the Playoffs. 

Of course there will be teams better than us with more cap space. Thats how this works, how players perform is not always indicative of how much they are being paid (erikson for negative example. Bo for positive, heck Petey on entry level). But if you look at the history of our signings, both contracts and UFA's, there are very few that were bad AT THE TIME of signing. Even Sutters was a good signing at the time. He was never injured and a great defensive forward. Your comment is irrelevant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, JayDangles said:

Of course there will be teams better than us with more cap space. Thats how this works, how players perform is not always indicative of how much they are being paid (erikson for negative example. Bo for positive, heck Petey on entry level). But if you look at the history of our signings, both contracts and UFA's, there are very few that were bad AT THE TIME of signing. Even Sutters was a good signing at the time. He was never injured and a great defensive forward. Your comment is irrelevant.

 

That's more subjective. I didn't like either of Eriksson or Sutter's contract at the time of signing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, JayDangles said:

Of course there will be teams better than us with more cap space. Thats how this works, how players perform is not always indicative of how much they are being paid (erikson for negative example. Bo for positive, heck Petey on entry level). But if you look at the history of our signings, both contracts and UFA's, there are very few that were bad AT THE TIME of signing. Even Sutters was a good signing at the time. He was never injured and a great defensive forward. Your comment is irrelevant.

 

Double post, sorry. 

Edited by Horvat is a Boss

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, canuck_in_england said:

Probably being ignorant but why should Brock get 7 mill/ year. I'm not on his back or anything like that before I get ripped a new one, but he's had 2 20 goal/ 50 point seasons with a couple of injuries. Perhaps Karlsson isn't the best comparison but he's on less than 6. Is there someone better to compare him to maybe?

Mostly because of projections. (FYI I'm not arguing FOR 7 mil, just answering your question) He was projected to be close to 40 goals, 60+ points before being injured in freak accident. Second season similar situation, plus slow start due to recovery. Keep in mind, 7 million today is not 7 million 4 years ago. BB is a good talent and he is young, but has yet to show elite talent.

Good talent + young + trending upward =7 mill = no risk 

Good talent + young + no trend = 7 mill = risk

 

Personally I hope we land at 6-6.5 long term and this could be a steal or a tradeable contract

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Horvat is a Boss said:

 

That's more subjective. I didn't like either of Eriksson or Sutter's contract at the time of signing. 

I get it, the Erikson signing should always go without saying. But Sutter was a 35 pt guy, in a shutdown role, play 80+ games in previous 4/5 seasons, projected to be a character/leader. We might have overpaid slightly at 4.3mil, but only very slightly.

Compare to Bo - 50 pts and at the time he got 5.5mil, 

 

Hindisght is 20/20, but really Sutter got paid what he should have at the time, Bo is a steal. 2 people just trending in opposite directions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, JayDangles said:

I get it, the Erikson signing should always go without saying. But Sutter was a 35 pt guy, in a shutdown role, play 80+ games in previous 4/5 seasons, projected to be a character/leader. We might have overpaid slightly at 4.3mil, but only very slightly.

Compare to Bo - 50 pts and at the time he got 5.5mil, 

 

Hindisght is 20/20, but really Sutter got paid what he should have at the time, Bo is a steal. 2 people just trending in opposite directions

 

Comparing UFA contracts (Sutter) to RFA contracts (Horvat) is comparing apples to oranges. 

 

Benning signed that contract before Sutter had played a game for us. There was really no need for that. There were people that would have rather not had Sutter at the time if that was his price. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/11/2019 at 11:22 AM, Horvat is a Boss said:

The problem is there shouldn't be problems when we have two significant ELCs (Pettersson and Hughes) and we've been a bad team for the last 5-ish years. 

 

Boeser will likely get between 6-7 on a bridge deal and over 7 long term. I also had Goldobin around 2, so only less than a million in cap space. Something will be done before Roussell is healthy. 

There isn't a problem

 

In two years Sutter baertschi Pearson Benn and Edler will be off the books

 

That's 19.5 million in cap space

 

Assuming the cap goes up at least a million it's at 20.5

 

Baertschi has become tradeable with no roster player needed In return. Traded for picks prospects or let walk

 

Sutter is the same as Baertschi with Gaudette taking his roll 

 

Pearson is likely a TDL move with podkolzin sliding in

 

Benn and Edler both likely walk with hopefully Juolevi being a top 4 regular

 

So we have Gaudette making 2 Juolevi due for a raise, likely a bridge at 2-3 or longer term at around 5 and podkolzin at 900,000 leaving roughly 10 million with Eriksson on the books and not accounting for the player lost to expansion or markstroms contract

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boeser at 5.5 million is very unrealistic in my opinion.

 

Even on a 4-5 year bridge, you’d be looking at around 7 million.   8 year term would likely be around 7.5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/14/2019 at 2:00 AM, Wanless said:

There isn't a problem

 

In two years Sutter baertschi Pearson Benn and Edler will be off the books

 

That's 19.5 million in cap space

 

Assuming the cap goes up at least a million it's at 20.5

 

Baertschi has become tradeable with no roster player needed In return. Traded for picks prospects or let walk

 

Sutter is the same as Baertschi with Gaudette taking his roll 

 

Pearson is likely a TDL move with podkolzin sliding in

 

Benn and Edler both likely walk with hopefully Juolevi being a top 4 regular

 

So we have Gaudette making 2 Juolevi due for a raise, likely a bridge at 2-3 or longer term at around 5 and podkolzin at 900,000 leaving roughly 10 million with Eriksson on the books and not accounting for the player lost to expansion or markstroms contract

Edler will be off the books, but are you sure that the Canucks will have someone in the system that can adequately replace Edler?  

 

Even if it’s Hughes per se, then who steps into that 2nd pairing LD role?   Hutton is already gone.   Benn’s contract will expire and he’s not a worthy 2nd pairing dman anyways.   

 

Will Juolevi be ready to assume that role?  Seems like we might be expecting too much here.

 

In other words - I believe that 6 million will either have to be re-invested into Edler (another one year deal), OR that 6 million will need to be re-invested into another top 4 LD.  

 

If we don’t re-Sign Edler or re-invest that 6 million into another LD, AND a guy like Juolevi isn’t ready to be our 2nd pairing LD (that’s even assuming that Hughes becomes a worthy top pairing LD at the time), then the Canucks’ defense as a whole will be very weak and as a result, we wouldn’t be able to push forward in the playoffs.

 

The Canucks need to have approximately the following amount of money available over these next two years:

 

-Boeser (7 million)

-Markstrom (5 million)

-Pettersson (9 million)

-Hughes (5.5 milllion)

-Edler + Tanev, or adequate Edler and Tanev replacements (10.5 million).

 

That’s 37 million.

 

Assuming that the Edler and Tanev money cancel each other out (ie we either re-up those guys, or find their “equivalents” via UFA),  we would have approximately 26.5 million to sign those other 4 players.

 

I’m not in front of a computer and so I can’t do math, but basically, the following would have to surpass 26.5 million.

-Eriksson

-Schaller

-Sutter

-Baertschi

-Leivo

-Biega

-Pearson

-Benn

-Fantenberg

-Tryamkin (move for pick or flat out replaces Tanev)

-Stecher (move for pick)

-Virtanen (move for pick or added in as a sweetener with Eriksson)

-Gaudette (see above)

-Demko (see above - replaced with cheap vet back-up)

-Spooner buyout

 

Take all of the above, and then add in the extra cap space derived from the following (2021 cap ceiling - 2019 cap ceiling).   

 

IF all of the above exceeds 26.5 million, then the Canucks would not only be in the clear in terms of re-upping their “Big 5,” but will also be in an excellent cap situation moving forward post July 1st 2021.

 

Edited by Hindustan Smyl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/12/2019 at 2:38 PM, JayDangles said:

Mostly because of projections. (FYI I'm not arguing FOR 7 mil, just answering your question) He was projected to be close to 40 goals, 60+ points before being injured in freak accident. Second season similar situation, plus slow start due to recovery. Keep in mind, 7 million today is not 7 million 4 years ago. BB is a good talent and he is young, but has yet to show elite talent.

Good talent + young + trending upward =7 mill = no risk 

Good talent + young + no trend = 7 mill = risk

 

Personally I hope we land at 6-6.5 long term and this could be a steal or a tradeable contract

 

^^^THIS^^^^

 

Though IMHO, the trend line is a short one. As good a talent as BB is, his 56 points last year put him in with W. Karrlson or T.J. Oshie. Both those players have a much longer trend/track record and both are making just over 5.5M or so.

 

A *prove it to me* deal would be ideal. A 3 years @ 5.75m wouldn't be too bad, but with Petterson and Hughs payday coming, JB may be considering locking BB in for the long term. Cap heavy up front, but a little easier on the back end of the contract so 6 x 6m per *may* suffice. It's a bit of a gamble though....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Hindustan Smyl said:

Edler will be off the books, but are you sure that the Canucks will have someone in the system that can adequately replace Edler?  

 

Even if it’s Hughes per se, then who steps into that 2nd pairing LD role?   Hutton is already gone.   Benn’s contract will expire and he’s not a worthy 2nd pairing dman anyways.   

 

Will Juolevi be ready to assume that role?  Seems like we might be expecting too much here.

 

In other words - I believe that 6 million will either have to be re-invested into Edler (another one year deal), OR that 6 million will need to be re-invested into another top 4 LD.  

 

If we don’t re-Sign Edler or re-invest that 6 million into another LD, AND a guy like Juolevi isn’t ready to be our 2nd pairing LD (that’s even assuming that Hughes becomes a worthy top pairing LD at the time), then the Canucks’ defense as a whole will be very weak and as a result, we wouldn’t be able to push forward in the playoffs.

 

The Canucks need to have approximately the following amount of money available over these next two years:

 

-Boeser (7 million)

-Markstrom (5 million)

-Pettersson (9 million)

-Hughes (5.5 milllion)

-Edler + Tanev, or adequate Edler and Tanev replacements (10.5 million).

 

That’s 37 million.

 

Assuming that the Edler and Tanev money cancel each other out (ie we either re-up those guys, or find their “equivalents” via UFA),  we would have approximately 26.5 million to sign those other 4 players.

 

I’m not in front of a computer and so I can’t do math, but basically, the following would have to surpass 26.5 million.

-Eriksson

-Schaller

-Sutter

-Baertschi

-Biega

-Pearson

-Benn

-Fantenberg

-Tryamkin (move for pick or flat out replaces Tanev)

-Stecher (move for pick)

-Virtanen (move for pick or added in as a sweetener with Eriksson)

-Gaudette (see above)

-Demko (see above - replaced with cheap vet back-up)

-Spooner buyout

 

Take all of the above, and then add in the extra cap space derived from the following (2021 cap ceiling - 2019 cap ceiling).   

 

IF all of the above exceeds 26.5 million, then the Canucks would not only be in the clear in terms of re-upping their “Big 5,” but will also be in an excellent cap situation moving forward post July 1st 2021.

 

There's so much that can be done. I just posted things that will happen if it all just runs its course

 

I bet we'll have no problems moving a miller or Ferland for picks or prospects if need be to clear up space.

 

Share this post


Link to post
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...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.