Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Enter Search Term. Use arrows to navigate between autocomplete results. If no results appear, use Enter to do a full site search.
Forum Closure ×
Canucks Community
Forum Closure

[GDT/PGT] Vancouver Canucks vs. Winnipeg Jets | February 19, 2021 | 7 p.m. PT | SNP NHLN

Rate this topic

-SN-

By -SN-
in Canucks Talk

 Share

Recommended Posts

Recommended

Posted by -Vintage Canuck-,

[PGT] Winnipeg Jets at Vancouver Canucks | Feb. 19, 2021   Link to Game Summary   ———   INTRO | Story of Reverse Retro  

Please tap on "Go to this post" to jump to the start of the PGT.

Recommended by -Vintage Canuck-

  • Thanks

1 reaction

Go to this post
Devron Canucks All-Star

Devron

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

Also, just to respond to the last GDT/PGT.

 

@4petesake wouldn't the easiest solution just be to extend Benn or Hamonic? Benn you could probably do sooner than later, Hamonic we likely need to see more of first. But there's still time. 

 

Benn might accept a 1-2 year deal, at going on 34 he might not be opposed to retiring a Canuck as a Victoria guy. He wouldn't be a bad depth guy going forward, and he's a known quantity. 

 

 

 

 

I had a big response typed up for your quote on the last thread then the closed it on me Lol

 

In short you nailed it. It would be in Benns interest to sign a 1 x 1.5 type deal with the Canucks or risk being without a contract next year. He’s played well enough this year and the depth wouldn’t hurt next year. He can be the one exposed, at his age it would be a good opportunity if for some reason Seattle did select him but I suspect they’ll pick a younger player 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Googlie Canucks Star

Googlie

Posted
Posted

Often overlooked is the somewhat unique role that pending UFA's can play in the expansion draft.  3 days before the draft, Seattle can talk to and offer a contract to a pending UFA.  Let's say, for example, that Jim hasn't yet extended Pearson.  Seattle entices him, and he signs with them. He then becomes the player that they have selected from Vancouver.

We have Edler, Benn, Hamonic, Sautner, Sutter, Pearson, Graovac and Baertschi in that category.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
PhillipBlunt Canucks Hall-of-Famer

PhillipBlunt

Posted
Posted
45 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Noticed a lot of noise the last few days about Horvats play before last nights game.   Then barely a whisper after.   Seems to happen often - so who should we pick on next?  I'm going with Pearson.    Time for a big game for him.   Got to up his trade value lol.   Honourable mention to Sutter - being awhile. 

Well that's because Horvat came to play yesterday, whereas before that he wasn't.

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NewbieCanuckFan Canucks All-Star

NewbieCanuckFan

Posted
Posted
43 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

Also, just to respond to the last GDT/PGT.

 

@4petesake wouldn't the easiest solution just be to extend Benn or Hamonic? Benn you could probably do sooner than later, Hamonic we likely need to see more of first. But there's still time. 

 

Benn might accept a 1-2 year deal, at going on 34 he might not be opposed to retiring a Canuck as a Victoria guy. He wouldn't be a bad depth guy going forward, and he's a known quantity. 

 

 

 

 

I don't think you give any kind of term to a depth guy at that age even if it's only two years unless it's for basically the league minimum or amount one can fully hide in the minors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Coconuts Canucks Hall-of-Famer

Coconuts

Posted
Posted
32 minutes ago, 4petesake said:

Yes that is one of the options I suggested in my first post on this. Someone mentioned that Benn/Ham probably wouldn’t agree. I think it’s a realistic option and well worth exploring.

I think it's probably the best option. Hamonic might be less inclined to sign a shorter term deal, but of the two he's also the guy I'd be more comfortable giving a little more term to because of the role he's historically filled. He'll be 31 in August, if he's paid as a #4 guy a three year term probably wouldn't hurt us too much. But we definitely need to see more of him as a Canuck before that's even considered. The fact Hamonic likely also wants to stay in the Canadian west doesn't hurt our chances.

 

Benn would be the easier of the two imo. I don't see him taking a one year deal, but I could easily see him accepting a two year deal. 2x1.5-1.7 would be easy to swallow imo. Even 2x2 wouldn't hurt us too much if that's what it took to get past the expansion draft with the team we want mostly intact, you're quibbling over a few hundred grand at that point. It'd also save him having up uproot his life later in his career, and given he'll probably live in BC anyway once he retires it makes a lot of sense for him to be inclined to stay. Deal just needs to be fair for both sides. 

32 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Think this is what will happen....no way they let Myers go without a solid contingency plan.   And that won't include rolling the dice in hopes they get an equivalent via free agency at the same or less money.   Odds are stacked against it, heavily. 

The team misses the playoffs this year imo, playing so many games so early has put us in a bit of a hole that I don't see us climbing out of. Because of this, I don't see management (JB or whoever) being risk the team taking yet another step back by losing a top 4 RHD we've already got in the fold if it can be avoided. I fully expect Benn to be extended, it'd be the easiest move. Hamonic might be the guy if he comes back and plays well over the rest of the season, but we'll see.

 

Management will not want to risk losing Myers and being left holding the bag come ufa. This team needs steps forward, not back. 

21 minutes ago, Devron44 said:

I had a big response typed up for your quote on the last thread then the closed it on me Lol

 

In short you nailed it. It would be in Benns interest to sign a 1 x 1.5 type deal with the Canucks or risk being without a contract next year. He’s played well enough this year and the depth wouldn’t hurt next year. He can be the one exposed, at his age it would be a good opportunity if for some reason Seattle did select him but I suspect they’ll pick a younger player 

Definitely, at this point in Benn's career he's a fully capable depth guy who can play a 5-7 role. Those guys have tougher times finding deals, it'd be much easier to re-sign with his hometown team. And hey, if he's selected by Seattle it's still really close to home. Don't see Seattle taking him either though. 

  • Cheers 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Coconuts Canucks Hall-of-Famer

Coconuts

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

I don't think you give any kind of term to a depth guy at that age even if it's only two years unless it's for basically the league minimum or amount one can fully hide in the minors.

One or two years ain't much of a commitment, and 1.5-2m over a couple years ain't likely to be the deal that hurts us as an organization. We're already arguably getting more out of Benn than we are Jake at this point, though I hope Jake can change that.

 

If you re-sign Benn with the intention of exposing him I don't see how you don't offer him a fair deal, particularly as a guy you already have in the fold. League minimum would be a slap in the face and I don't see it going over well with the rest of the guys. 

Edited by Coconuts
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WHL rocks Canucks All-Star

WHL rocks

Posted
Posted
59 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Noticed a lot of noise the last few days about Horvats play before last nights game.   Then barely a whisper after.   Seems to happen often - so who should we pick on next?  I'm going with Pearson.    Time for a big game for him.   Got to up his trade value lol.   Honourable mention to Sutter - being awhile. 

Pearson has been playing good though.

 

Hes got the most goals on tge Canucks since he was trades here.

 

Not Boeser Not Miller not EP.... yes Pearson is the best goal scorer on the team over the last 120 odd games.

  • Like 1
  • Cheers 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
aGENT Canucks Hall-of-Famer

aGENT

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

Two years ain't much of a commitment, and 1.5-2m over a couple years ain't likely to be the deal that hurts us as an organization. We're already arguably getting more out of Benn than we are Jake at this point, though I hope Jake can change that.

 

If you re-sign Benn with the intention of exposing him I don't see how you don't offer him a fair deal, particularly as a guy you already have in the fold. League minimum would be a slap in the face and I don't see it going over well with the rest of the guys. 

I doubt Benn is looking at $1.5-$2m given his play last year, Covid, his age etc. Guys like him are EXACTLY the guys who will be squeezed with flat cap. 

 

He might get a slight bump as thanks for agreeing to be expanding fodder but I'd be surprised if he gets more than $1-$1.5m +/-

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Coconuts Canucks Hall-of-Famer

Coconuts

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, aGENT said:

I doubt Benn is looking at $1.5-$2m given his play last year, Covid, his age etc. Guys like him are EXACTLY the guys who will be squeezed with flat cap. 

 

He might get a slight bump as thanks for agreeing to be expanding fodder but I'd be surprised if he gets more than $1-$1.5m +/-

If we can retain and expose him at that price you won't hear me complaining, but I'm sure you'll read others griping about it :P

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tas Canucks Star

tas

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, DIBdaQUIB said:

Perhaps but they certainly do a better job of presenting their case than you just did. 

there's no presentation necessary. anyone who's watched any amount of canucks hockey this season knows that gaudette isn't generating anything. it's a situation where advanced stats are telling lies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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