[Speculation] Canucks clearing Cap for Hamonic

[canuck73_3]

12 minutes ago, Ray_Cathode said:

He might be an upgrade on Benn, but we still have Benn filling up cap space - why double up on something that is already a mistake. It’s just sending good money after bad - one of the worst bad habits in business, and the Vancouver Canucks are a business.

A 1 year >2.5mil deal with Hamonic isn't bad no matter how you slice it. 

[RWMc1]

2 hours ago, Chris12345 said:

Minors...press box...waivers. Still adding payroll in a tough business environment.

All the players are under contract. The only payroll added would be the increase from minors salary for a fill in and that would be temporary. Everyone else gets paid the same as they would have anyway.

 

If we do it that way, we can call up a D man or Graovac without waiving another player. Also, if we intend to LTIR Ferland, this gets us to within $1,000.00 of the cap allowing us to maximize the LTIR usage. The bonuses may have to be deferred if he stays on too long though.

[Chris12345]

58 minutes ago, RWMc1 said:

All the players are under contract. The only payroll added would be the increase from minors salary for a fill in and that would be temporary. Everyone else gets paid the same as they would have anyway.

 

If we do it that way, we can call up a D man or Graovac without waiving another player. Also, if we intend to LTIR Ferland, this gets us to within $1,000.00 of the cap allowing us to maximize the LTIR usage. The bonuses may have to be deferred if he stays on too long though.

Hamonic is the add. 

 

By moving players around you aren't decreasing payroll. I don't know if there is appetite to increase payroll.  That's my question.

 

Do Canucks simply manage the team to fit the cap or do they want to shed actual dollars?

 

 

[Me_]

42 minutes ago, Chris12345 said:

Hamonic is the add. 

 

By moving players around you aren't decreasing payroll. I don't know if there is appetite to increase payroll.  That's my question.

 

Do Canucks simply manage the team to fit the cap or do they want to shed actual dollars?

 

 

Since the Canucks are at $0.00 cap space... I’d say they’re not trying to shed salary to shed salary.
 

I’d say they’re going full Cap and trying to make it work best with what they can do.

[RWMc1]

4 hours ago, Chris12345 said:

Although waivers could help with an operational issue I question the cash flow impact.

 

AKA cutting cheques for $10M for players to go to the minors while the business struggles.

 

4 hours ago, Chris12345 said:

Minors...press box...waivers. Still adding payroll in a tough business environment.

I won't pretend to know what ownership wants to do. Time will tell. The fact remains that we are over the cap and have to be under before the season starts. I just responded with what I see as the most likely scenario barring a trade. Hamonic wasn't mentioned in your initial posts quoting me. That's why I didn't address that. In reality, I'm sure the Canucks are looking at many options and have a fall back similar to what I posted. Hamonic may or may not be one of them considering the initial tweet was deleted indicating that 1040 may have been talking out of their butts again.

 

.

[ilduce39]

3 hours ago, Sean Monahan said:

Schmidt isn’t purely a defensive defence man but he’s known to be very reliable defensively. He played harder minutes than Tanev last year with better outcomes. 

I’m remembering kind of mixed reviews in his own end (not negative but not a highlight) but I agree he’s a stud.  
 

Still think a solid, veteran, defensive-minded RHD does a lot to round out the roster. 

Edited December 18, 2020 by ilduce39

[Sean Monahan]

21 minutes ago, ilduce39 said:

I’m remembering kind of mixed reviews in his own end (not negative but not a highlight) but I agree he’s a stud.  
 

Still think a solid, veteran, defensive-minded RHD does a lot to round out the roster. 

I agree with the second bit there, I just don’t want to discount what Schmidt can bring. He’s a massive upgrade on Tanev and I think he alone made our D group better even with the departures. 

[ilduce39]

13 minutes ago, Sean Monahan said:

I agree with the second bit there, I just don’t want to discount what Schmidt can bring. He’s a massive upgrade on Tanev and I think he alone made our D group better even with the departures. 

Yeah, for what it’s worth I think even without a guy like Hamonic we’re going to be better. Older Hughes + Schmidt give us 2 legit top pairing guys.  Should be fun to watch!

[J.I.A.H.N]

To those confused about the Cap

 

We are 1.5 million over the cap, with the ability to put Ericksson, Baertschi, and Benn in the minors, so they would approx 1.5 Under the cap, if they did that.

 

That is not counting LTIR "IF" Ferland goes on it. Which would then mean we "could" be approx. 5 million under the cap.

 

Now, IMO, Benning is waiting to see if Ferland goes on LTIR (I actually am not sure he can be on it, in the off season?)

 

So, I don't see us having a cap issue, and we actually have enough to sign a player.......

 

I think there is still too many questions to be answered......is there going to be a taxi squad? Is Ferland LTIR, would Hamonic sign a 1 Million X1?

Does Hoffman want to sign here?

 

I think Bettman will answer some of the CBA questions in the 1st weeks of January..........time will tell!, but he better hurry!

[BigTramFan]

2 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:

To those confused about the Cap

 

We are 1.5 million over the cap, with the ability to put Ericksson, Baertschi, and Benn in the minors, so they would approx 1.5 Under the cap, if they did that.

 

That is not counting LTIR "IF" Ferland goes on it. Which would then mean we "could" be approx. 5 million under the cap.

 

Now, IMO, Benning is waiting to see if Ferland goes on LTIR (I actually am not sure he can be on it, in the off season?)

 

So, I don't see us having a cap issue, and we actually have enough to sign a player.......

 

I think there is still too many questions to be answered......is there going to be a taxi squad? Is Ferland LTIR, would Hamonic sign a 1 Million X1?

Does Hoffman want to sign here?

 

I think Bettman will answer some of the CBA questions in the 1st weeks of January..........time will tell!, but he better hurry!

Very good description of where things are at Jan. Many questions right now.

 

A lot hinges on Ferland, but even if he goes on LTIR, what guarantee is there that he stays on LTIR? So JB likely has to keep that cap space available.

 

So waiving LE, Baer & Benn means the Canucks create about $1.78m in cap space (a bit more than your $1.5m because each player waived clears $1.075m), but this is only with a roster of 13F, 5D, 2G.

 

Next question is how will the taxi squads will work...can the Canucks spend that whole $1.78m on a 6th Dman and run with a 21-man roster, or even waive someone else and run with 20 players? Perhaps.

 

I dare say that JB will want to keep any additional Dman to about $1m. This allows him to add that new player ($1m) plus Rafferty ($700k) to the squad and still be below the cap limit. This gives a 22-man roster and allows for injury cover to an F or D or G even if the injured player doesn't go onto LTIR.

 

My sense is that Hamonic won't sign for $1m, so I don't think he is that guy. I like him and he'd be a good fit, but I don't think he accepts $1m x 1 year.

 

I think a good secondary target in that $700k - $1m range would be Jan Rutta. He would pair nicely with Juolevi. Good on the PK.

Edited December 18, 2020 by BigTramFan

[iinatcc]

12 hours ago, Sean Monahan said:

I agree with the second bit there, I just don’t want to discount what Schmidt can bring. He’s a massive upgrade on Tanev and I think he alone made our D group better even with the departures. 

Err I don't know 

Schmidt > Tanev 

But Schmidt + Young unproven guy < Tanev + Stecher 

Though adding Harmonic would tilt things back on the other side 

Edited December 18, 2020 by iinatcc

[Provost]

2 hours ago, iinatcc said:

Err I don't know 

Schmidt > Tanev 

But Schmidt + Young unproven guy < Tanev + Stecher 

Though adding Harmonic would tilt things back on the other side 

This.

It is totally fair to say our Top 4 has been improved but our overall defence has (likely) gotten worse.  None of our prospects vying for a spot are real locks for being capable top 4D in the league since none of them have played anything more than token minutes in the league.  To ask one of them to play 30 minutes a night like Stecher had to do on occasion would be courting disaster.

That is not saying that it would be a terrible decision to just play kids and see where the chips land... but that is absolutely taking a huge risk for the season that can have a long impact.  If we plan on playing Demko half the games, we don't want to destroy his confidence by doing it behind a terrible leaky defence.  I would say that Demko is more important to our future than any of our D prospects who would be getting a shot so I don't feel like risking his development may be the wisest course.

On the other side of the argument, we have three "maybe" NHL ready prospects and need to see if they can play.  Juolevi, Rafferty, and Rathbone.

[J.I.A.H.N]

8 hours ago, BigTramFan said:

Very good description of where things are at Jan. Many questions right now.

 

A lot hinges on Ferland, but even if he goes on LTIR, what guarantee is there that he stays on LTIR? So JB likely has to keep that cap space available.

 

So waiving LE, Baer & Benn means the Canucks create about $1.78m in cap space (a bit more than your $1.5m because each player waived clears $1.075m), but this is only with a roster of 13F, 5D, 2G.

 

Next question is how will the taxi squads will work...can the Canucks spend that whole $1.78m on a 6th Dman and run with a 21-man roster, or even waive someone else and run with 20 players? Perhaps.

 

I dare say that JB will want to keep any additional Dman to about $1m. This allows him to add that new player ($1m) plus Rafferty ($700k) to the squad and still be below the cap limit. This gives a 22-man roster and allows for injury cover to an F or D or G even if the injured player doesn't go onto LTIR.

 

My sense is that Hamonic won't sign for $1m, so I don't think he is that guy. I like him and he'd be a good fit, but I don't think he accepts $1m x 1 year.

 

I think a good secondary target in that $700k - $1m range would be Jan Rutta. He would pair nicely with Juolevi. Good on the PK.

Yes, thanks!

 

And here are a few other little things to think about.......Hogs, Pods and Tryamkin.....

I kind of think Tryamkin is a next year thing now, if ever

But they will need a little left over to bring in the 2 youngsters

 

On the amount that Hamonic or anyone else will sign up for

IMO, I think Duclairs contract shows exactly where the remaining GMs are looking in terms of cost

and with Hamonic, someone did bring up an interesting point of him not playing the playoffs last year

Is his heart in it? Well, I am sure he is being shocked by the contract offers being so low, maybe his hart would grow is the offers were bigger?

 

I just really think the league has to make its final decisions before the GMs can make their final decisions.....

 

I am really interested to see how Tampa handles their problems

 

 

[UKNuck96]

16 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

Yes, thanks!

 

And here are a few other little things to think about.......Hogs, Pods and Tryamkin.....

I kind of think Tryamkin is a next year thing now, if ever

But they will need a little left over to bring in the 2 youngsters

 

On the amount that Hamonic or anyone else will sign up for

IMO, I think Duclairs contract shows exactly where the remaining GMs are looking in terms of cost

and with Hamonic, someone did bring up an interesting point of him not playing the playoffs last year

Is his heart in it? Well, I am sure he is being shocked by the contract offers being so low, maybe his hart would grow is the offers were bigger?

 

I just really think the league has to make its final decisions before the GMs can make their final decisions.....

 

I am really interested to see how Tampa handles their problems

 

 

The reason he didn’t is because his daughter has respiratory issues and as such he opted out to protect his family 

[kenhodgejr]

2 hours ago, Provost said:

This.

It is totally fair to say our Top 4 has been improved but our overall defence has (likely) gotten worse.  None of our prospects vying for a spot are real locks for being capable top 4D in the league since none of them have played anything more than token minutes in the league.  To ask one of them to play 30 minutes a night like Stecher had to do on occasion would be courting disaster.

That is not saying that it would be a terrible decision to just play kids and see where the chips land... but that is absolutely taking a huge risk for the season that can have a long impact.  If we plan on playing Demko half the games, we don't want to destroy his confidence by doing it behind a terrible leaky defence.  I would say that Demko is more important to our future than any of our D prospects who would be getting a shot so I don't feel like risking his development may be the wisest course.

On the other side of the argument, we have three "maybe" NHL ready prospects and need to see if they can play.  Juolevi, Rafferty, and Rathbone.

Personally I see Juolevi having a breakout season and proving a lot of doubters wrong

[Provost]

3 minutes ago, kenhodgejr said:

Personally I see Juolevi having a breakout season and proving a lot of doubters wrong

Maybe he will be OK... he has had a grand total of 6 minutes of real NHL action under his belt so playing in the top 4 would be a huge ask.  I think Petterson and Hughes have made people forget that being a rookie is hard for pretty much everyone.  

[theo5789]

2 minutes ago, Provost said:

Maybe he will be OK... he has had a grand total of 6 minutes of real NHL action under his belt so playing in the top 4 would be a huge ask.  I think Petterson and Hughes have made people forget that being a rookie is hard for pretty much everyone.  

I'm sure OJ will get plenty more minutes by the time he would be pressured into a top 4 role. We could slot in Benn ahead of him as a vet or even shift over Schmidt if needed. The right side is trickier, but Hughes could be bumped to the right, as could Benn. For most teams, an injury in the top 4 will force unwanted situations.

 

With that said, I do hope we add one more dman to the mix, whether it's Hamonic, Hainsey, Koekkoek, etc. We could use a solid PK option on the right side at the moment.

[kenhodgejr]

11 minutes ago, Provost said:

Maybe he will be OK... he has had a grand total of 6 minutes of real NHL action under his belt so playing in the top 4 would be a huge ask.  I think Petterson and Hughes have made people forget that being a rookie is hard for pretty much everyone.  

Juolevi will still have to work hard on improving his footwork and positioning. But his offence with the puck is on point.

[ruilin96]

5 hours ago, iinatcc said:

Err I don't know 

Schmidt > Tanev 

But Schmidt + Young unproven guy < Tanev + Stecher 

Though adding Harmonic would tilt things back on the other side 

Plus Hamonic at 1 year low cap hit contract is better than what the Flames give Tanev imo. Tanev and Markstrom's contract isn't going to age well after the first couple of years.

[J.I.A.H.N]

22 minutes ago, kenhodgejr said:

Juolevi will still have to work hard on improving his footwork and positioning. But his offence with the puck is on point.

I find this an interesting issue........Juolevi (22) vs Rathbone (21)

 

So, if I have this right.......Juolevi's strengths are his size, first pass and his over all offense

If I have Rathbone right.....it is his elite skating and overall play (2 way player)

 

IMO, I would be putting money down on Rathbone, but because of waivers, it may put Juolevi first, if they are close

 

Juolevi's big Achilles heals are skating and defensive play, if he has cured his defensive play, then he makes it

Rathbones problem is size, and if he has learned to play against big men, then maybe not so much