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

(Rumour) Virtanen on the trade block


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Provost said:

Well, I think he meant we could have walked away from him for nothing before now... but that ship has sailed and we would be lucky if a team claimed him off waivers at this point.

I think most folks agree that it would be doubtful.  Who knows, it only takes on GM to be on the hot seat or think he needs to make a move to pick up a project.  I mean Gudbranson got traded for and then traded again... so anyone can.  

Yikes... next year we will have bad cap/untradeable contracts of:

$3.0 million Luongo recapture
$4.7 million pushed ELC
$6.0 million in Eriksson
$3.5 million in Ferland
$3.0 million in Beagle
$3.0 million in Roussel 
$2.55 million in Virtanen
$4.3 million in Holtby

That is $30 million of the cap that on dead cap or players with negative value that would cost us assets/money to unload since no one would take them even on waivers.

$30 MILLION


 

Although, I agree with your sentiment. 
 

Luongo recapture is a stupid rule brought in by the NHL after they got hustled by the GM’s and not bennings fault

 

ferland is on LTIR so it’s a mute point

 

eriksson will not be brought back. Gotta think he’s no. 1 priority to move once his bonus is paid 

 

virtanen can be bought out for next to nothing if need be 

 

holtby is Seattle expansion fodder

 

roussel is awful and wish they could move him

 

beagle still has value on this team being a C and the non existence C depth on this team 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, billabong said:

Although, I agree with your sentiment. 
 

Luongo recapture is a stupid rule brought in by the NHL after they got hustled by the GM’s and not bennings fault

 

ferland is on LTIR so it’s a mute point

 

eriksson will not be brought back. Gotta think he’s no. 1 priority to move once his bonus is paid 

 

virtanen can be bought out for next to nothing if need be 

 

holtby is Seattle expansion fodder

 

roussel is awful and wish they could move him

 

beagle still has value on this team being a C and the non existence C depth on this team 

These are generally good reasons, but they are definitely a drag on the competitiveness of this club.

 

Further thoughts...

 

Eriksson & Virtanen could definitely be "buy out" material. Don't want to spend anymore assets to move LE. Buy out moves $2m cap hit into the season after next, but that won't be a big deal at that point.

 

FWIW I don't think we are going to be close to $4.7m of performance bonuses this season either...

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Provost said:

$3.0 million Luongo recapture
$4.7 million pushed ELC
$6.0 million in Eriksson
$3.5 million in Ferland
$3.0 million in Beagle
$3.0 million in Roussel 
$2.55 million in Virtanen
$4.3 million in Holtby

That is $30 million of the cap that on dead cap or players with negative value

A $4 mill hit with Loui, then a  mill on the others means about $9 mill of lost cap value.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NHL97OneTimer said:

I'm not as sneaky as you may give me credit for!

When I read your post yesterday, I thought you were holding back.  Maybe you knew him personally.  Re-reading today, maybe not.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BigTramFan said:

These are generally good reasons, but they are definitely a drag on the competitiveness of this club.

 

Further thoughts...

 

Eriksson & Virtanen could definitely be "buy out" material. Don't want to spend anymore assets to move LE. Buy out moves $2m cap hit into the season after next, but that won't be a big deal at that point.

 

FWIW I don't think we are going to be close to $4.7m of performance bonuses this season either...

Depending on price, I’d rather give up assets to move the whole 6m instead of saving 2m and having 7m in buyout penalties next season 

 

that 7m should be a top 6 winger ugh :picard: 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Provost said:

Well, I think he meant we could have walked away from him for nothing before now... but that ship has sailed and we would be lucky if a team claimed him off waivers at this point.

I think most folks agree that it would be doubtful.  Who knows, it only takes on GM to be on the hot seat or think he needs to make a move to pick up a project.  I mean Gudbranson got traded for and then traded again... so anyone can.  

Yikes... next year we will have bad cap/untradeable contracts of:

$3.0 million Luongo recapture
$4.7 million pushed ELC
$6.0 million in Eriksson
$3.5 million in Ferland
$3.0 million in Beagle
$3.0 million in Roussel 
$2.55 million in Virtanen
$4.3 million in Holtby

That is $30 million of the cap that on dead cap or players with negative value that would cost us assets/money to unload since no one would take them even on waivers.

$30 MILLION


 

 

The overall bonus amount should fall somewhere between 1.2M - 1.4M rather than 4.7M.  Still would need to clear between 6.5M (today) to 9.5M (at the TDL) to completely absorb the bonuses this season and avoid a carry over.

———

This season performance bonuses are pro-rated to account for the shortened season, so the potential 4.75M, as shown on CapFriendly, automatically drops by over 1.5M to some 3.25M.  In season they operate at full amounts (for LTIR recalls, bonus cushion) but the payout will be pro-rated 56/82.  

 

Pettersson might not hit his schedule B (2M before pro-rata) - he didn’t last season either.  He would need to be top 10 in the league in either goals, assists, points or points per game or win the Conn Smythe.

 

With the pro-rata Hughes and Pettersson can combine at most for 1.16M (580K x 2) vs 1.7M last season in schedule A.  Hoglander and Juolevi might have some games played bonuses. Juolevi could hit the +/- target (145K after pro-rata) if he gets back in the lineup but the others feel out of reach.  Hoglander’s bonus target is 200K so ~135K after pro-rata and he might not achieve all the targets.

 

CapFriendly shows them nearly 4M in LTIR.  There’s about 60% of the season left.  To avoid the overage they need to get out of LTIR (4M) and clear roughly an additional 2.5M in net cap space (players leaving are replaced on the roster).  At the TDL, with a quarter of the season left, it would be closer to 9.5M (4M LTIR to clear + 5.5M to bank just under 1.4M by season’s end).

 

Teams are really tight to the cap and for a deal to work they might have to retain.   They might not be able to clear the money needed to avoid the overage  and the longer they wait the more money they need to clear, but it won’t come close to 4.7M given the pro-rata and the targets to achieve.

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, shayster007 said:

Guess that's a risk you gotta be willing to take. I would rather see Virtanen get an opportunity with a new coach here, then somewhere else and us take a bad trade back. We clearly have different opinions on the subject, nothing wrong with that.

He's had a few coaches now.

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, mll said:

 

Pettersson might not hit his schedule B (2M before pro-rata) - he didn’t last season either.  He would need to be top 10 in the league in either goals, assists, points or points per game or win the Conn Smythe

I did forget about the pro-rated bonus amount, but I certainly am not close to ready to assume Petterson won’t hit his Schedule B bonus.  He is close enough in goals, assists, and points that an even mild hot streak puts him in there.  I can’t believe the team will be as bad going forward as it has been to date (it is hard to be), so we should get a hot streak “sometime”.  Not sure when all the GP even out, our players being high in the stats could just be an illusion based on playing more games than most other teams.

 

We need to move the players fairly quickly.  Virtanen, Benn, and Pearson moved “soon” drops us well below the cap, especially if we start running at a 21 man roster instead of 23.  Right now we are just using LTIR so it doesn’t matter to be running with extra guys, once we start to be in the banking cap territory, we can run with 20 or 21 because the taxi squad can be called up immediately on game day if needed.  That is $2-3 million in savings on its own.

Edited by Provost
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, GetFocht said:

He's had a few coaches now.

He had Willy and Travis as a adult professional. And correct me if I'm wrong but he only played about 60 games under Willy. I don't concider 2 a few. By definition, that's actually only a couple.

 

Regardless I have no idea what that has anything to do with the subject at hand. I said I would like to see him with a new coach, we weren't having a debate about how many coaches he worked with.

 

Edited by shayster007
  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, shayster007 said:

He had Willy and Travis as a adult professional. And correct me if I'm wrong but he only played about 60 games under Willy. I don't concider 2 a few. By definition, that's actually only a couple.

 

Regardless I have no idea what that has anything to do with the subject at hand. I said I would like to see him with a new coach, we weren't having a debate about how many coaches he worked with.

 

If you've had a couple of coaches (it's 6 when you include the bench coaches) and things are still a problem, you look to the common denominator. That's Jake. 

  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, GetFocht said:

If you've had a couple of coaches (it's 6 when you include the bench coaches) and things are still a problem, you look to the common denominator. That's Jake. 

Yes, I'm sure Jake spends a ton of time with Nolan Baumgartner... That a pretty rediculous argument in regards to the coaching subject. But at least you got a couple right this time, because I most definitely do not include the bench coaches.

 

I saw a player who had slowly but steadily progressed every year as professional player, before this year. He obviously wasn't the player we had hoped he would be, even last year, but before this year if you deny he was making progress you are aren't watching the games.

 

So we round back to the original content on my original post on the subject. A covid hockey year where Jake isn't the only struggling player on the team could be just as much to blame for his performance as himself. I would rather hold him and see how he does next year in different conditions then dump him at a big loss.

 

We done here? 

Edited by shayster007
  • Hydration 3
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, shayster007 said:

Yes, I'm sure Jake spends a ton of time with Nolan Baumgartner... That a pretty rediculous argument in regards to the coaching subject. But at least you got a couple right this time, because I most definitely do not include the bench coaches.

 

I saw a player who had slowly but steadily progressed every year as professional player, before this year. He obviously wasn't the player we had hoped he would be, even last year, but before this year if you deny he was making progress you are aren't watching the games.

 

So we round back to the original content on my original post on the subject. A covid hockey year where Jake isn't the only struggling player on the team could be just as much to blame for his performance as himself. I would rather hold him and see how he does next year in different conditions then dump him at a big loss.

 

We done here? 

It's fine that you want to hitch your wagon to Jake. The rest of us see Brad Isbister while you hope for Brad Marchand.

 

He's done in Vancouver.

  • Haha 1
  • Burr 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

the 2014 draft is an interesting lesson. Jake is an example of picking a player and over valuing size and Ehlers is the opposite. Turns out Ehlers was the one with hockey IQ. 

 

Jake issues are between the ears, if he could process game speed faster he'd be a beast. But he can't. It is what it is. Under the right conditions we can expect 15-20 goals in a peak year. Not great for a 6th oa but also not crap. Button nailed it as a 2nd round pick. 

  • Hydration 1
  • Upvote 1
  • Vintage 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

the 2014 draft is an interesting lesson. Jake is an example of picking a player and over valuing size and Ehlers is the opposite. Turns out Ehlers was the one with hockey IQ. 

 

Jake issues are between the ears, if he could process game speed faster he'd be a beast. But he can't. It is what it is. Under the right conditions we can expect 15-20 goals in a peak year. Not great for a 6th oa but also not crap. Button nailed it as a 2nd round pick. 

At 6th overall, Jake was a poor pick when you look at the rest of the round. 

 

Nylander, Ehlers, Larkin, Pastrnak etc . 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, GetFocht said:

At 6th overall, Jake was a poor pick when you look at the rest of the round. 

 

Nylander, Ehlers, Larkin, Pastrnak etc . 

a lot of scouts had him top 10. Pastrnak wasn't on anyones radar tho, that's a lotto ticket right there. Point is the real outlier in that draft. 

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

a lot of scouts had him top 10. Pastrnak wasn't on anyones radar tho, that's a lotto ticket right there. Point is the real outlier in that draft. 

People seem to forget we snagged Demko in that draft 

 

Also Dal Colle, Bennett picked before Jake, Hayden Fleury the next pick.

 

Perspective 

Edited by Devron44
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Devron44 said:

People seem to forget we snagged Demko in that draft 

and Tryamkin. I guess McCann is now Pearson too.

 

Demko was an interesting gamble too, teams passed on him because of his hip issues. 

 

It really is an interesting draft when you look at all the stuff around it. Might be the most drama we ever got out of one when you look at the angst over Nik, McCann for Guddy and the obsession with Jake :lol:

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

and Tryamkin. I guess McCann is now Pearson too.

 

Demko was an interesting gamble too, teams passed on him because of his hip issues. 

 

It really is an interesting draft when you look at all the stuff around it. Might be the most drama we ever got out of one when you look at the angst over Nik, McCann for Guddy and the obsession with Jake :lol:

Hahaha very true. Drafts are funny especially cause it’s practically our only true miss in the first round in the last 6 years. How

many teams can say that 

Edited by Devron44
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Provost said:

I did forget about the pro-rated bonus amount, but I certainly am not close to ready to assume Petterson won’t hit his Schedule B bonus.  He is close enough in goals, assists, and points that an even mild hot streak puts him in there.  I can’t believe the team will be as bad going forward as it has been to date (it is hard to be), so we should get a hot streak “sometime”.  Not sure when all the GP even out, our players being high in the stats could just be an illusion based on playing more games than most other teams.

 

We need to move the players fairly quickly.  Virtanen, Benn, and Pearson moved “soon” drops us well below the cap, especially if we start running at a 21 man roster instead of 23.  Right now we are just using LTIR so it doesn’t matter to be running with extra guys, once we start to be in the banking cap territory, we can run with 20 or 21 because the taxi squad can be called up immediately on game day if needed.  That is $2-3 million in savings on its own.

Adjusting for games played - minimum 12 games played: 

62nd in goals per game

69th in assists per game

64th points per games

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, GetFocht said:

At 6th overall, Jake was a poor pick when you look at the rest of the round. 

 

Nylander, Ehlers, Larkin, Pastrnak etc . 

 

32 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

the 2014 draft is an interesting lesson. Jake is an example of picking a player and over valuing size and Ehlers is the opposite. Turns out Ehlers was the one with hockey IQ. 

 

Jake issues are between the ears, if he could process game speed faster he'd be a beast. But he can't. It is what it is. Under the right conditions we can expect 15-20 goals in a peak year. Not great for a 6th oa but also not crap. Button nailed it as a 2nd round pick. 

Y’all need to go have a look at that draft in it’s entirety. It was a baaaaaad year. Jake is still a first round pick in a redraft of that year (before his struggles the last couple months probably top 20). 

  • Hydration 2
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...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...