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

[Speculation] Could Coronavirus Lead to the Return of Compliance Buyouts?


Recommended Posts

Just now, Vanuckles said:

Completely agree on the principle - that could be the difference in retaining all our free agents or having someone walk. I disagree about the guy.

 

Sutter has only 1 year left after this year. Beagle has 2. They both provide a similar skill set and we needed a couple of matchup centers prior to Gaudette's arrival. But now that AG is here and producing (although he's not a checking center), one of them is replaceable. Beagle is the candidate for me because he has another year left on his deal (Hughes, Petey contracts...) whereas Sutter has only 1 more year left so we'll have both of them off the books by end of next year in this scenario. We can choose to re-sign Sutter to a cheaper deal because we definitely need a good faceoff RHC that can matchup against top 6 lines.

Why not roussel then? We need Beagle dominating the faceoff circle to lighten the load on BO. We have an abundance of wingers chomping to make the show. I'm a Roussel fan so I in no way want this but from a purely business standpoint Roussel is the most expendable guy with $$and term.

 

I'd be as I stated in my post keeping an eye turned towards Meyers as we have Rafferty, Woo, (Tryamkin?), Rathbone, Olli, all pushing for a spot. Where at C were pretty Focht in terms of prospect pool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, hammertime said:

Why not roussel then? We need Beagle dominating the faceoff circle to lighten the load on BO. We have an abundance of wingers chomping to make the show. I'm a Roussel fan so I in no way want this but from a purely business standpoint Roussel is the most expendable guy with $$and term.

 

I'd be as I stated in my post keeping an eye turned towards Meyers as we have Rafferty, Woo, (Tryamkin?), Rathbone, Olli, all pushing for a spot. Where at C were pretty Focht in terms of prospect pool.

We don't have someone with Roussel's skillset that can agitate and pushback like Roussel can. Sutter and Beagle can more or less have a similar skillset which we needed a couple of years ago when we didn't have center depth but now is a bit redundant.

35 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

for me, I'd keep Beagle over Sutter but thats why we have a discussion board. I just don't see Sutter ever being back to form, he hasn't been healthy for 3 years. If he is tho, he's very effective. 

 

 

He's more effective than Beagle and foot speed allows him to keep up with faster top 6 players. For argument's sake let's say they're equally effective, they can both play 4C very well, I don't think anybody can argue that. They're both really good in the dot (with Beagle having the edge there) and good PKers but the difference is Beagle has an extra year on his contract. And Sutter can still manage at 3C, while I think Beagle may struggle more there. I like all 3 players (Roussel, Beagle and Sutter) - they are all effective in their own way. But to me you have to cut ties with the player that would have the least disruptive impact on the team, and Beagle is the candidate that best fits that description imo.

Edited by Vanuckles
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jimmy McGill said:

OK so waiving someone doesn't save you 4.375 mil. 

 

There isn't a winger that makes more (other than Loui) that saves you more cap that you'd want to move over Sutter. 

 

I'm not anti-Sutter, but if you need 10+ mil there's only one way to do it via compliance buyout. 

The discussion (that you brought up) was Sutter and his $4.3 vs Baer and his $3.3 and the $1m difference.

 

Waiving someone makes up exactly the difference. Trading Roussel would clear $3 (minus his replacement, so say $2 +/-).

 

That difference between Sutter and Baer is not enough to warrant dumping a legitimate NHL centre who plays hard minutes, PK etc. There's other, less damaging methods to clear cap.

Edited by aGENT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, hammertime said:

Why not roussel then? We need Beagle dominating the faceoff circle to lighten the load on BO. We have an abundance of wingers chomping to make the show. I'm a Roussel fan so I in no way want this but from a purely business standpoint Roussel is the most expendable guy with $$and term.

Exactly. I love the guy, was thrilled when we signed him... but winger depth is where we're deepest AND it's the most replaceable player type.

 

He'd also have modest trade value rather than costing us assets to move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, aGENT said:

The discussion (that you brought up) was Sutter and his $4.3 vs Baer and his $3.3 and the $1m difference.

 

Waiving someone makes up exactly the difference. Trading Roussel would clear $3 (minus his replacement, so say $2 +/-).

 

That difference between Sutter and Baer is not enough to warrant dumping a legitimate NHL centre who plays hard minutes, PK etc. There's other, less damaging methods to clear cap.

so who's the specific someone? and who replaces that someone? 

 

I think we're also going to have a very hard time getting teams to take on any kind of significant salary next season, particularly if compliance buyouts are needed. The cost for bottom feeder teams to take on salary is going to be through the roof. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

so who's the specific someone? and who replaces that someone? 

 

I think we're also going to have a very hard time getting teams to take on any kind of significant salary next season, particularly if compliance buyouts are needed. The cost for bottom feeder teams to take on salary is going to be through the roof. 

Whoever doesn't make the cut. Same as any year. A kid on an ELC likely replaces them, or another, low dollar player who out-earns the spot.

 

A perfectly useful player like Roussel, at $3x2 more years is hardly 'significant salary'. We may not get as much in return as a normal year but he (or his contract) are hardly a burden to move.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Vanuckles said:

:huh:

 

You guys realize Sutter does everything Beagle can do but can jump up to 3rd line matchup as well if necessary right? I love beagle but his contract isn't great let's face it. I'd rather they get rid of term rather than a 1 year contract.

No he can't.

 

He's not as good defensively, on the PK, on the draws. Sutter doesn't have the veteran leadership of winning a cup either or a ton of playoff experience. Also despite Beagles injury woes they're not as nearly as bad as Sutter's. Team also seems to miss Beagle more when he's out than Sutter. Probably has to do with Beagle being able to do what he's asked better.

 

For the role on the team and on the ice Beagle fits the bill more than Sutter.

 

We shouldn't use a buyout of Sutter though. Rather Baer or Roussel who's been completely useless. You should be preaching Roussel TBH.

Edited by Junkyard Dog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

compliance buy outs could be 1 tool used to assist teams about cap issues

 

it is not enough though to solve the issue

 

increasing escrow % has to be the critical component to create balance and fairness among all the league players

i believe the nhl met (virtually) in the past couple of days to discuss this issue

i have heard no reports about any outcome from this meeting

 

Edited by coastal.view
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Junkyard Dog said:

No he can't.

 

He's not as good defensively, on the PK, on the draws. Sutter doesn't have the veteran leadership of winning a cup either or a ton of playoff experience. Also despite Beagles injury woes they're not as nearly as bad as Sutter's. Team also seems to miss Beagle more when he's out than Sutter. Probably has to do with Beagle being able to do what he's asked better.

 

For the role on the team and on the ice Beagle fits the bill more than Sutter.

 

We shouldn't use a buyout of Sutter though. Rather Baer or Roussel who's been completely useless. You should be preaching Roussel TBH.

Could not disagree more on all your points lol... just going to have to agree to disagree. Roussel is still a very useful player. Just because he's having a bit of an off year because of a late start doesn't mean he's useless for God's sake what is it with fans and memory loss. He's fine. He's on pace for a ~30 point season over 82 which is solid for a 3rd liner, and he provides lots of other intangibles. His contract is not even remotely close to being a bad contract. Don't just look at his last 20 games and say "he's completely useless" :picard:

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

2 hours ago, Vanuckles said:

We don't have someone with Roussel's skillset that can agitate and pushback like Roussel can. Sutter and Beagle can more or less have a similar skillset which we needed a couple of years ago when we didn't have center depth but now is a bit redundant.

He's more effective than Beagle and foot speed allows him to keep up with faster top 6 players. For argument's sake let's say they're equally effective, they can both play 4C very well, I don't think anybody can argue that. They're both really good in the dot (with Beagle having the edge there) and good PKers but the difference is Beagle has an extra year on his contract. And Sutter can still manage at 3C, while I think Beagle may struggle more there. I like all 3 players (Roussel, Beagle and Sutter) - they are all effective in their own way. But to me you have to cut ties with the player that would have the least disruptive impact on the team, and Beagle is the candidate that best fits that description imo.

Center depth? Ummm buy out Beagle then Sutter slips on a banana peel. who do you call up?

 

I would also argue beagle is a better skater than Sutter. And your argument with offensive production I would say its kind of a moot point as their primary job will be playing shutdown C where Beagle imo has out performed Sutter and been more durable.   

 

Like I said I'm a fan of Roussel  and I'm certainly not on a Sutter bashing tyraid. Probably the best option if it is allowed would be to dump Luongos recapture. Beyond that personally I'd rather keep Sutter and Beagle in an ideal world as their job is a tough one. They may be the 4th line but IMO they have a greater responsibility than the 3rd line. When they get injured or have an off night the canucks loose games. If Gaudette doesn't score a goal for a month it isn't really a make or break of the teams success. 

 

 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The obvious one is Eriksson, but after that it's a bit more uncertain.

 

I wouldn't buy out Sutter, if anything I'd retain on his contract and see if we could get a pick back. Sutter at 4.3 would give teams pause, but Sutter at 2.3m on an expiring contract would hold value somewhere. And we'd still be freeing up 2m in cap space.

 

I wouldn't buy out Myers, he drives me nuts sometimes but he can be an effective player and we don't have a surefire player to step in and take his minutes (I wanna see what Tram can do at the NHL level before judging him). I wanna see what a healthy Rouss can do, coming back from injury can be tough for any player. Beagle may be a tad overpaid but at least he earns his money. 

 

If the NHL wouldn't let us buy out Luongo's recapture and I'd take a long look at Baer. 

Edited by Coconuts
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Coconuts said:

I wouldn't buy out Sutter, if anything I'd retain on his contract and see if we could get a pick back. Sutter at 4.3 would give teams pause, but Sutter at 2.3m on an expiring contract would hold value somewhere. And we'd still be freeing up 2m in cap space.

Rather potentially make that move at the TDL personally. Prorated, $2.15m Sutter would be a nice piece for a contender (or as our 'own rental').

Edited by aGENT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Coconuts said:

The obvious one is Eriksson, but after that it's a bit more uncertain.

Is it though? It's pretty much Eriksson and then Luongo if we're able, Baer if we're not.

 

Maybe an argument for Ferland but if he's healthy, he's a useful and valuable. If he's not, I don't think we can buy him out (IIRC).

 

Anybody suggesting anyone else has been spending too much time smoking herb in their self isolation :lol: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, hammertime said:

Center depth? Ummm buy out Beagle then Sutter slips on a banana peel. who do you call up?

 

I would also argue beagle is a better skater than Sutter. And your argument with offensive production I would say its kind of a moot point as their primary job will be playing shutdown C where Beagle imo has out performed Sutter and been more durable.   

 

Like I said I'm a fan of Roussel  and I'm certainly not on a Sutter bashing tyraid. Probably the best option if it is allowed would be to dump Luongos recapture. Beyond that personally I'd rather keep Sutter and Beagle in an ideal world as their job is a tough one. They may be the 4th line but IMO they have a greater responsibility than the 3rd line. When they get injured or have an off night the canucks loose games. If Gaudette doesn't score a goal for a month it isn't really a make or break of the teams success. 

 

 

Quote

Center depth? Ummm buy out Beagle then Sutter slips on a banana peel. who do you call up?

Motte and MacEwen can both play C. Although Motte would not be ideal because he hasn't played C in a while and he's a pretty small guy to put up the middle. MacEwen would fill in that role pretty well. I'm hearing Jasek is also doing very well in the AHL as a shutdown guy and he's earned a shot. So they also have that option for 4C. Off season is another option. Don't get me wrong, I really like Beagle and I definitely agree that he's useful and good to have in the locker room. But if it comes between him and re-signing one of the Hughes/Pettersson to a long term deal, then I'll take the latter any day. Sutter's contract will not impact those guys. It's just for cap flexibility more than anything.

 

I definitely agree with the bolded statement above regarding Lu's recapture penalty. If we can get rid of that then definitely go that route.

 

Quote

I would also argue beagle is a better skater than Sutter. And your argument with offensive production I would say its kind of a moot point as their primary job will be playing shutdown C where Beagle imo has out performed Sutter and been more durable.   

I definitely don't agree with this statement though, especially the bolded part. Beagle is the worst skater on the team imo. Sutter has pretty good foot speed north/south and really that's the most important part in a checking center. The reason I brought up offense (with Sutter being slightly better) is just in case one of our top 6 centers goes down, then you can slide Sutter in 3C and he'd be ok.

 

If you want to talk about moot points I'd say teams are most likely not getting 2 compliance buyouts :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Vanuckles said:

Motte and MacEwen can both play C. Although Motte would not be ideal because he hasn't played C in a while and he's a pretty small guy to put up the middle. MacEwen would fill in that role pretty well. I'm hearing Jasek is also doing very well in the AHL as a shutdown guy and he's earned a shot. So they also have that option for 4C. Off season is another option. Don't get me wrong, I really like Beagle and I definitely agree that he's useful and good to have in the locker room. But if it comes between him and re-signing one of the Hughes/Pettersson to a long term deal, then I'll take the latter any day. Sutter's contract will not impact those guys. It's just for cap flexibility more than anything.

 

I definitely agree with the bolded statement above regarding Lu's recapture penalty. If we can get rid of that then definitely go that route.

 

I definitely don't agree with this statement though, especially the bolded part. Beagle is the worst skater on the team imo. Sutter has pretty good foot speed north/south and really that's the most important part in a checking center. The reason I brought up offense (with Sutter being slightly better) is just in case one of our top 6 centers goes down, then you can slide Sutter in 3C and he'd be ok.

 

If you want to talk about moot points I'd say teams are most likely not getting 2 compliance buyouts :lol:

 

Worst skater on the team.  Ya that's just not true. Also he crushes the teams fitness testing.  

https://nationalpost.com/sports/hockey/nhl/vancouver-canucks/ben-kuzma-beagle-shares-canucks-camp-spotlight-with-fab-fitness-stunning-speed/wcm/a73c8005-ed07-469c-866c-537013558537

 

I dont know why we would consider buying out one of our centers when wing is the position we have a log jam. 

Neither here not there the last phrase of your post is at least bang on!

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/24/2020 at 1:19 PM, SILLY GOOSE said:

Another interesting issue is compensation for the TDL moves- teams like the Canucks who gave up assets to get into/play in the playoffs have a fair argument as far as they got robbed of the time/opportunity they paid for.  

Buyer beware.  There’s always an inherent risk with trading futures for unsigned players.  Injury to the player, falling out of the playoffs race, no chemistry on the new team. You make the trade, you take your chances.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Junkyard Dog said:

No he can't.

 

He's not as good defensively, on the PK, on the draws. Sutter doesn't have the veteran leadership of winning a cup either or a ton of playoff experience. Also despite Beagles injury woes they're not as nearly as bad as Sutter's. Team also seems to miss Beagle more when he's out than Sutter. Probably has to do with Beagle being able to do what he's asked better.

 

For the role on the team and on the ice Beagle fits the bill more than Sutter.

 

We shouldn't use a buyout of Sutter though. Rather Baer or Roussel who's been completely useless. You should be preaching Roussel TBH.

Reason why I don't buy out Roussel is because I think he has trade value, even if it's a low pick. Baertschi has no value at this point and may be at negative value. Teams may be more interested with one year left, but we may still have to retain to get a minimal return and this defeats the purpose. Roussel was just starting to gel with Gaudette before the season was cut short.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, aGENT said:

Rather potentially make that move at the TDL personally. Prorated, $2.15m Sutter would be a nice piece for a contender (or as our 'own rental').

There's always that too, that's when the return would be higher. I'm not for buying him out though, he can still play. 

3 hours ago, aGENT said:

Is it though? It's pretty much Eriksson and then Luongo if we're able, Baer if we're not.

 

Maybe an argument for Ferland but if he's healthy, he's a useful and valuable. If he's not, I don't think we can buy him out (IIRC).

 

Anybody suggesting anyone else has been spending too much time smoking herb in their self isolation :lol: 

I agree, but what makes sense to me may not be what makes sense for others. I'm really curious about the Luongo bit, but I could see the league being like nope. 

 

I don't think you can buy out injured players can you? Getting over concussions symptoms would probs count as injured I'd imagine? 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, qwijibo said:

Buyer beware.  There’s always an inherent risk with trading futures for unsigned players.  Injury to the player, falling out of the playoffs race, no chemistry on the new team. You make the trade, you take your chances.  

I'd say suspension/cancellation of the season is categorically different tho, depending on how things play out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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