Canucks and the Cap Over the Next Three Years

[J.I.A.H.N]

10 minutes ago, jammin_jk said:

I'm honestly not calling you out, I'm just having a discussion.  I've been on these forums (reading) for probably 10-15 years so I'm not new, just haven't made many posts because didn't feel a desire to.

 

I don't feel like searching for your proposed lineup for next year or in two years, so can you post it here?  

 

Also, saying I need decaf?  You don't even know me and I haven't even tried to insult you or anybody.  Just trying to poke people's brains...

Joined March 11, 2003

 

You have been on here along time!

[jammin_jk]

2 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:

I guess the point is that Benning has ways out, and I would also note that, in my scenario of how he would get out, no one of value leaves including Tanev.

 

Also, Ottawa needs LTIR and  Eriksson is one of the best value players to pick p after, his cap this summer is paid......also as a player Eriksson has value

 

as a PK player, decent wing support and is a great role player for a young team...…...separately, each item does not give him great value, but collectively

 

all the above makes him desirable. Not that Ottawa will not play the game and demand some sort of payment to take him.

 

I think there are too many variables to get all worked up about the cap situation.  Hughes and Pettersson will be closer to 7/8 million than 10 million

 

that is my bet...….and they may be 4 year contracts at that, to do a long term bridge type deal, making it easier on the Canucks

 

and still getting those players a substantial raise.

I'm enjoying this and really not getting worked up.  However, I don't think "getting out" of cap hell just to keep Tanev is worth it.  He will be getting 4.5-5 million for 4-5 years on the open market and won't be worth that in two years.  In fact, this is the only healthy season he has had and actually earned his paycheque.  Too risky of a player IMO for too much money.

 

Also, Eriksson has no value, so don't go there.  We aren't parting with him unless it's with a first or a second + prospect.  That would be stupid.  I don't mind the idea of buying him out after next year so his cap hit in 2021-2022 is $4 million instead of $6 million.  That relieves a couple million.

 

Also, you just stated Hughes/Pettersson would get 7/8 million on a 4 year bridge and earlier said they would get 7/8 million on a long term contract.  Those are two different things.  I agree on the four year deal, but that's a bridge.  I would rather sign one to a long term deal (6-8 years) and the other to a 3 year bridge at less money.  It staggers their next contracts and would save money over time.  I wouldn't want to have to re up both of them in four years.  That would be far worse because it would come soon after raises to Boeser, Horvat, and Miller.

[Where's Wellwood]

9 hours ago, Phil_314 said:

Makes me wonder (if the team realizes Loui won't retire and they'll lose Demko at the Ex Draft, or that Pete/ Hughes want big money) if the team would consider packaging Demko with Loui (much like Chicago did with Teravainen and Bickell) and recoup a lesser goalie and maybe a 5th.  

 

Then if Rafferty is ready/ Stecher becomes too expensive they could possibly trade him and bundle with Sutter to get another minimal return asset-wise but great return in cap.  Baertschi could probably be flipped at the deadline for another mid to low-round pick?  Gotta hope management has addition by subtraction in mind.

And look how that turned out for them. Teravainen is great.

 

Chicago got a 2nd round draft pick in 2016 (Artur Kayumov) and 3rd round pick in 2017 (Keith Petruzzelli)

[jammin_jk]

On 2/4/2020 at 1:17 PM, Rob_Zepp said:

You put a lot of work into this but took the thinking too far when you said this.   Of course there is.   You have too many assumptions that can be addressed in a different outcome but to assume you cannot sign to cornerstones at same time when ever single other asset is movable is simply a silly premise.   Other teams have done this and Canucks will have the ability to do this as well.

I never said we can't sign two cornerstones.  I just said that both of them can't be signed long term at the same time since the awful contracts in 2021-2022 still exist.  However, I did not consider buying out Eriksson to save $2 million in cap space.  Although, it wouldn't be $2 million in saving since he would still have to be replaced by a player at least at league minimum.  Therefore the actual savings against the cap if we buyout Eriksson after next year is only $1.3 million... maximum.  It does help, but it doesn't get us Pettersson and Hughes both signed long term (unless you sacrifice futures/prospects to do so)...

[J.I.A.H.N]

1 hour ago, jammin_jk said:

I'm enjoying this and really not getting worked up.  However, I don't think "getting out" of cap hell just to keep Tanev is worth it.  He will be getting 4.5-5 million for 4-5 years on the open market and won't be worth that in two years.  In fact, this is the only healthy season he has had and actually earned his paycheque.  Too risky of a player IMO for too much money.

When ever Tanev is on the ice, he is our best RHD. I doubt very much, that in 2 years, there will be anyone better. Refer to Edler, and even at his age, he would be the best one we have, if not for Hughes. Imagine, if we had a project LHD, it would have been much longer....aka Juolevi and Rathbone are still miles away. I think Tanev's arguments are just as strong. I get your concern over injury history, and I would trade him in some circumstances, I am just not sure we are ready, to not have him here. Stecher on the other hand is gone, IMO

 

1 hour ago, jammin_jk said:

 

Also, Eriksson has no value, so don't go there.  We aren't parting with him unless it's with a first or a second + prospect.  That would be stupid.  I don't mind the idea of buying him out after next year so his cap hit in 2021-2022 is $4 million instead of $6 million.  That relieves a couple million.

maybe he gets bought out, maybe he retires, maybe Vancouver keeps him, or maybe he is traded........that is my bet. I do not think it is "stupid" to think Ottawa might be interested. Ask your self why Eriksson is out at the end of close games, before you say he has no value, he has value as a defensive forward, and his cap hit is actually more than his actual pay owed, after July 1, 2020......Ottawa may deem that as useful

 

1 hour ago, jammin_jk said:

 

Also, you just stated Hughes/Pettersson would get 7/8 million on a 4 year bridge and earlier said they would get 7/8 million on a long term contract.  Those are two different things.  I agree on the four year deal, but that's a bridge.  I would rather sign one to a long term deal (6-8 years) and the other to a 3 year bridge at less money.  It staggers their next contracts and would save money over time.  I wouldn't want to have to re up both of them in four years.  That would be far worse because it would come soon after raises to Boeser, Horvat, and Miller.

As for what I meant is this...……..salary's will always go up, so what I meant was that if Hughes and Pettersson were to get 10 Million down the road, it would be the natural attrition, and totally understandable. But to get Hughes and Pettersson there, there are several ways, and a long term bridge"type" deal, would do it with less demands on the cap, now and in the near future...…..I am thinking closer to 7 million than 8 million. (PS.I don't think 3 year pros go from 1 Million to 10 million all in one grab)

 

But again, it is all supposition, and no, I don't think any of my opinions are stupid in any way, nor do I think that your opinions are stupid...…...history will say, and will probably be something totally different than both you or I think.

[Phil_314]

2 hours ago, Where's Wellwood said:

And look how that turned out for them. Teravainen is great.

 

Chicago got a 2nd round draft pick in 2016 (Artur Kayumov) and 3rd round pick in 2017 (Keith Petruzzelli).

Not sure if you're a fan of Vancouver making a Demko and Eriksson move then, since the Canes clearly got the best player out of this so far.

[Where's Wellwood]

10 minutes ago, Phil_314 said:

Not sure if you're a fan of Vancouver making a Demko and Eriksson move then, since the Canes clearly got the best player out of this so far.

I'm definitely not a proponent for that move. I've been on the 2021 off season buyout of Eriksson train for a while

[jammin_jk]

14 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:

maybe he gets bought out, maybe he retires, maybe Vancouver keeps him, or maybe he is traded........that is my bet. I do not think it is "stupid" to think Ottawa might be interested. Ask your self why Eriksson is out at the end of close games, before you say he has no value, he has value as a defensive forward, and his cap hit is actually more than his actual pay owed, after July 1, 2020......Ottawa may deem that as useful

 

14 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:

But again, it is all supposition, and no, I don't think any of my opinions are stupid in any way, nor do I think that your opinions are stupid...…...history will say, and will probably be something totally different than both you or I think.

I actually never said your opinion was stupid if you read the context.  I actually said trading Eriksson for a first or second + prospect is stupid.  However, I would say (in my opinion) your view that someone may take on Eriksson without leveraging our terrible cap situation (ie. demanding a prospect or pick or player) may be false.  Marleau is still a serviceable player but it took a first to get him out of Toronto.  No team is going to take your problems just because the actual dollar values are low when his cap hit is so high.  Ottawa can find MANY other ways of hitting the cap floor and make their team better than picking up Eriksson (even if the owner doesn't want to spend $ to the cap floor).

[jammin_jk]

13 hours ago, Where's Wellwood said:

I'm definitely not a proponent for that move. I've been on the 2021 off season buyout of Eriksson train for a while

The only problem is if you replace him with a player that makes $2 million plus the actual gain against the cap is negative.  Can you replace Eriksson with a $700,000 player?

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, jammin_jk said:

 

I actually never said your opinion was stupid if you read the context.  I actually said trading Eriksson for a first or second + prospect is stupid.  However, I would say (in my opinion) your view that someone may take on Eriksson without leveraging our terrible cap situation (ie. demanding a prospect or pick or player) may be false.  Marleau is still a serviceable player but it took a first to get him out of Toronto.  No team is going to take your problems just because the actual dollar values are low when his cap hit is so high.  Ottawa can find MANY other ways of hitting the cap floor and make their team better than picking up Eriksson (even if the owner doesn't want to spend $ to the cap floor).

It’s clearly JB’s spending on UFAs and resigning of Baer that have us in a cap situation where we can’t improve our depth.  Is it 20 million in dead cap and players who are kind of crappy? 

[jammin_jk]

15 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:

As for what I meant is this...……..salary's will always go up, so what I meant was that if Hughes and Pettersson were to get 10 Million down the road, it would be the natural attrition, and totally understandable. But to get Hughes and Pettersson there, there are several ways, and a long term bridge"type" deal, would do it with less demands on the cap, now and in the near future...…..I am thinking closer to 7 million than 8 million. (PS.I don't think 3 year pros go from 1 Million to 10 million all in one grab)

Mitch Marner and Auston Matthews and a few other superstars say "Hi".  Pettersson has more points in his first 100 games than Marner did (I think).  The new trend is that RFAs sign their huge long term contract right away after their ELCs...

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, jammin_jk said:

The only problem is if you replace him with a player that makes $2 million plus the actual gain against the cap is negative.  Can you replace Eriksson with a $700,000 player?

It’s not Loui’s fault his cap cost is killing any chance of us improving our depth.  That’s JB’s fault for being stupid at UFA time. 

[jammin_jk]

Just now, Alflives said:

It’s not Loui’s fault his cap cost is killing any chance of us improving our depth.  That’s JB’s fault for being stupid at UFA time. 

No arguments here... he's learned along the way, but JB has signed some doozies early in his GM career.  The point of this thread is to see how we can work around it while not getting "worse" and not giving up picks or prospects to do so (like some here have suggested).

[Alflives]

Just now, jammin_jk said:

Mitch Marner and Auston Matthews and a few other superstars say "Hi".  Pettersson has more points in his first 100 games than Marner did (I think).  The new trend is that RFAs sign their huge long term contract right away after their ELCs...

Bingo.  Great players, no matter their age, get paid now once done their ELC.  Petey is getting over 11, and Hugs is getting over 9.  I can see 20 million to get both done.  

[Alflives]

Just now, jammin_jk said:

No arguments here... he's learned along the way, but JB has signed some doozies early in his GM career.  The point of this thread is to see how we can work around it while not getting "worse" and not giving up picks or prospects to do so (like some here have suggested).

Not possible.  We are going to lose any depth we do have to clear cap.  Add to that we are going to have to give up picks and prospects to dump the crap contracts we have.  That’s a team who’s window for winning is short, because we have to give up our pipeline of support ELC guys to get rid of JB’s previous signings.  

[jammin_jk]

32 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Not possible.  We are going to lose any depth we do have to clear cap.  Add to that we are going to have to give up picks and prospects to dump the crap contracts we have.  That’s a team who’s window for winning is short, because we have to give up our pipeline of support ELC guys to get rid of JB’s previous signings.  

I'm not sure it's all doom and gloom... have you read my original post (bless you if you could make it through)?  I do agree our D-depth will be impacted next year (Tanev), but our forwards won't be and I'm hoping that one of our promising D's can step up next year a bit (Rafferty, Juolevi, Brisebois).  Also, Stecher would have to play more minutes, which I think he can.  And Hughes will be better next year and I bet Myers will be better being his second year with a new team.  I'd argue he's been a little bit better recently even (5 goals in the last month).  I do not support setting draft picks or A-B+ level prospects just to dump cap.  Gillis went all in in 2011 and we all know how that went.  The team is finally recovering.  I would rather build the way Tampa has.  Give yourself a chance every year and don't sell your future to do it.  I know we aren't there yet but I'd prefer a competitive team every year in the playoffs than one who's favored to win the cup one year (like our 2011 team).

[jammin_jk]

40 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Bingo.  Great players, no matter their age, get paid now once done their ELC.  Petey is getting over 11, and Hugs is getting over 9.  I can see 20 million to get both done.  

I agree 20 to get both done long term, that's why I think Hughes is getting a bridge deal next time around.  He has no arbitration rights and we will have to play hardball with him.  Not sure Petey is getting quite 11 (I predicted 10), but we're close for sure...

[Where's Wellwood]

2 hours ago, jammin_jk said:

The only problem is if you replace him with a player that makes $2 million plus the actual gain against the cap is negative.  Can you replace Eriksson with a $700,000 player?

Adding a new player that makes 2 million plus would be a net negative.

We could just replace Eriksson with someone already on the roster, like Leivo (who already makes 1.5)

So it becomes 2019-2020: Eriksson 6 million Leivo 1.5 million = 7.5 million

In the 2021-2022 season: Eriksson 4 million (buyout) Leivo 3 million (assume his salary DOUBLES, which it might not) = 7 million. Still a savings.

Or either Hoglander, Lind, Podkolzin, etc may be a low cost borderline 2nd line option by then.

[J.I.A.H.N]

5 hours ago, jammin_jk said:

Mitch Marner and Auston Matthews and a few other superstars say "Hi".  Pettersson has more points in his first 100 games than Marner did (I think).  The new trend is that RFAs sign their huge long term contract right away after their ELCs...

Zach Werenski…………...3 years @ $5.000  per

Josh Morrisey...…………..8 years @ $6.250 per

Ivan Provorov…………….6 years @ $6.750 per

Charlie McAvoy...………..3 years @ $4.900 per

Thomas Chabot...………..8 years @ $8.000 per

 

That is all the young Dman that are peers of Hughes...………….notice the bridges are all low, and none of the 8 year contracts are any where close to 10 Million

 

Travis Konechny………...6 years @ 5.500 per 

Brock Boeser…………….3 years @ 5.875 per

Braydon Point...………….3 years @ 6.750 per

Matt Tkatuck……………...3 years @ 7.00 per

Patrick Laine...…………...2 years @ 6.750 per

Mikko Rantanen………….6 years @ 9.250 per

Kyle Connor...…………….7 years @ 7.142 per

Nico Hischier……………..7 years @ 7.250 per

 

That is since September, 2019...………….6 months ago!

 

Yes, you are right about Mariner and Mathews, but these guys are more in line with the norm. Notice when you get closer to 100 point seasons, the pay goes up.

 

As much as I love Pettersson and Hughes...……...they sit well with my quoted contracts, IMO

 

 

Edited February 7, 2020 by janisahockeynut

[J.I.A.H.N]

5 hours ago, jammin_jk said:

 

I actually never said your opinion was stupid if you read the context.  I actually said trading Eriksson for a first or second + prospect is stupid.  However, I would say (in my opinion) your view that someone may take on Eriksson without leveraging our terrible cap situation (ie. demanding a prospect or pick or player) may be false.  Marleau is still a serviceable player but it took a first to get him out of Toronto.  No team is going to take your problems just because the actual dollar values are low when his cap hit is so high.  Ottawa can find MANY other ways of hitting the cap floor and make their team better than picking up Eriksson (even if the owner doesn't want to spend $ to the cap floor).

Because of Eriksson's terrible contract and his play for the first 3 1/2 years, he was untradeable...…...no argument

 

But our team fortunes have change, as has Eriksson's play, and he has shown to be a valuable player in a restrictive way. He is a decent PKer and a very dependable defensive player, as shown by Green's use of him in the last minutes of close games.

 

Is he worth 6 Million, hell no! Is he worth 2.5 million per year, with a 6 million cap hit? Well, probably getting pretty close! Some might argue we should get something back....

 

If all it cost is a 2nd or a lesser prospect for that....my bet is he is snapped up...…………...and yes, Ottawa is a good target. as an after thought, I would not include Madden

 

maybe a lesser type......maybe a Brisebois or a Jasek and a 2nd

 

I might also add, at that point, after his bonus is paid...….he may not want to be in Utica for 2.5 million a year, and just may retire or he may dissolve his contract by mutual agreement, and go back to Europe and play

 

Don't think for a minute, he doesn't see the writing on the wall...……..it may have already been agreed  on...…..

 

He will not go to Utica...……..not for long anyways

 

 

Edited February 7, 2020 by janisahockeynut