[Discussion] Virtanen's arbitration hearings give the Canucks a 2nd buyout window

[Baer.]

Buying out Sutter actually causes harm to the team. Petey, Hughes, Demko and Edler have expiring contracts, and people want us to have less cap room next year? Think it through people!!!

[mll]

37 minutes ago, DownUndaCanuck said:

Sutter brings too much, got to keep him, we're bad enough defensively and have lost too much quality on defence and in net, we can't lose defensive ability up front as well.

 

If Virtanen asks for too much he's gone, simple as that. 

 

There's a walk-away limit in arbitration and Virtanen is likely going to fall below.  The walk away limit is just under 4.539M this year - an award below that amount and the team can't walk away.

[Where's Wellwood]

5 minutes ago, mll said:

The post got adjusted - it was a multi-choice and only Sutter had an AAV above 4M.  

Okay. That makes sense. 

[DownUndaCanuck]

7 minutes ago, mll said:

 

There's a walk-away limit in arbitration and Virtanen is likely going to fall below.  The walk away limit is just under 4.539M this year - an award below that amount and the team can't walk away.

Can he be traded away then?

[Johnny Torts]

Trade big country for a RD! 

 

Sign an offensive player for close to league min if possible 1 yr show me deal.

[mll]

Just now, DownUndaCanuck said:

Can he be traded away then?

They can trade him now or after.  Now his value might not be very high with the arbitration looming.  After it would depend on his award but probably also the Canucks' cap situation.

 

In arbitration they can't argue pandemic, flat cap, drop in revenue or cap space.  It's well possible that awards could be pretty disproportionate to the new financial reality.  Teams are going to try and get their players under contract before the arbitration hearing but that might not always be possible.  On short term deals players can likely get more through arbitration.  Fwiw Lamoriello admitted that they moved Toews because he filed for arbitration and they have cap concerns.  

 

For now the Canucks have about 2.3M in cap space with still Virtanen and Gaudette to sign and Eriksson on the roster.  Virtanen will likely get more than that - it then puts pressure on Vancouver to clear cap space.  It could be expensive to dump an unwanted contract when under cap constraint - cf the recent trade with Vegas.  That's why a Sutter buyout can't be excluded depending on where they will be cap wise.   Maybe all gets solved beforehand and he signs a reasonable deal or he even gets traded before. There were 26 players that filed and 2 have agreed on new deals.  

 

[DrJockitch]

We are worse off tying up any cap after this season. 
Getting Elias, Quinn and Thatcher under the cap is going to take a lot of finagling as it is.
Take another 1.6 away in dead space makes it almost impossible. 

Really at this point, letting all of these contracts expire probably makes the best sense compared to burning assets or future cap space to get rid of them 

[DownUndaCanuck]

19 minutes ago, DrJockitch said:

We are worse off tying up any cap after this season. 
Getting Elias, Quinn and Thatcher under the cap is going to take a lot of finagling as it is.
Take another 1.6 away in dead space makes it almost impossible. 

Really at this point, letting all of these contracts expire probably makes the best sense compared to burning assets or future cap space to get rid of them 

Agreed but we have a lot of cap come off the books next year (Pearson, Sutter, Edler) who's minutes will hopefully be replaced internally.

 

Thats around 13M off the books excluding anything else we can move so I'm sure JB can wrangle it.

[RWMc1]

If we waive Baertschi and Loui, that brings us to slightly over 4 million in cap. I believe that Virtanen will sign a deal before arbitration and the rest can hopefully be enough to sign Gaudette. Moving salary is not necessary but would be very beneficial in signing another D-man. Maybe we can move a left winger and a D prospect for a D-man.

[Chris12345]

2 hours ago, RonMexico said:

 

It's not as simple as a GM buying out a contract and that's it. Ownership has to approve to pay someone for not being there. Just think for a second every time you go ask your boss to spend $3 for a box of pens and the friction you get for that. Now pretend you are a GM and go ask the owner to pay someone 1, 2, 3M or more to go away....see how well that conversation goes.

After you signed him....

[RonMexico]

21 minutes ago, Chris12345 said:

After you signed him....

Right which also requires ownership approval

[Roger Neilsons Towel]

1 hour ago, Baer. said:

Buying out Sutter actually causes harm to the team. Petey, Hughes, Demko and Edler have expiring contracts, and people want us to have less cap room next year? Think it through people!!!

Nah bro. That’s not what we do here. 

[AK_19]

This only makes sense if we are forced to make cap room for Virtanen. I feel like our worst case scenario is he gets a 3 mil deal. There is additional cap room that could be made by simply waiving Baertschi, Eriksson (about 2+ million cap space created). I mean, it actually makes more sense to just waive Sutter as well as opposed to buying him out if we need more space. We add roughly another mill in cap space and the contract ends at the end of the season.

 

Gaudette also doesn't have any arbitration rights and can't be offersheeted, I don't expect him to get more than 1.2 mil.  

[Dr. Crossbar]

4 hours ago, stawns said:

Like it or not, Sutter is an important player on the Canucks

Some would even say ... a foundation player.

[nux_win]

I don't get why some people dislike Sutter so much.  Yes, he's been injured a lot, and that sucks, but when he's in the lineup he makes us a better team.  Sure, he's not flashy, and he doesn't put up a ton of points, but he's a quality player and a quality person.  His defensive game is solid, and that is very much an asset, but he's actually better offensively than some give him credit for as well.  He's just been out of the lineup for long stretches so he hasn't put up big numbers.  I still think he's a useful piece and like I said, when he's in the lineup he makes us a better team.  Go Canucks Go!

[stawns]

4 minutes ago, nux_win said:

I don't get why some people dislike Sutter so much.  Yes, he's been injured a lot, and that sucks, but when he's in the lineup he makes us a better team.  Sure, he's not flashy, and he doesn't put up a ton of points, but he's a quality player and a quality person.  His defensive game is solid, and that is very much an asset, but he's actually better offensively than some give him credit for as well.  He's just been out of the lineup for long stretches so he hasn't put up big numbers.  I still think he's a useful piece and like I said, when he's in the lineup he makes us a better team.  Go Canucks Go!

Because apparently, only age and contract factor into the evaluation of a player.  Old and expensive = trash, regardless of how effective they are or aren't.

[EmilyM]

3 hours ago, Baer. said:

Buying out Sutter actually causes harm to the team. Petey, Hughes, Demko and Edler have expiring contracts, and people want us to have less cap room next year? Think it through people!!!

Totally agree. Every single penny is going to count next off season. Next offseason is going to decide the franchise's future for the next decade.

Edited October 13, 2020 by EmilyM

[JM_]

4 hours ago, stawns said:

Like it or not, Sutter is an important player on the Canucks

plus we'd only save enough money to be able to bring in another veteran C. So it doesn't really make much sense unless something happens where the cap space is critical. 

 

Gaudette isn't ready to take over at 3C, so having Sutter as a mentor for one more year is a good idea. 

[Lazurus]

5 hours ago, Teemu Selänne said:

As pointed out by mll, the player must make at least a 4M cap hit next year

You sure that isn't the award has to be over 4 mil avg?

 

[Lazurus]

did jake just sign?