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

[Waivers] Artem Anisimov, Scott Harrington


Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Kobayashi Maru said:

He'd be a great fill in to finish off the year if we move Sutter.  Probably best to have a few NHL fill in's if we move some vets out.

I don’t think Vancouver can fit him under the cap until they move out salary.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, qwijibo said:

I don’t think Vancouver can fit him under the cap until they move out salary.  

Oh good point.  I thought that long term contract had expired and he was on a specific 1 year with Ottawa.  It may still work as it's similar to Sutter's contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haven't looked into Harrington's game in awhile but he was considered an important part of CBJ's D core a few years ago.  Clearly he's not as important to their future now but it's odd.  His contract is quite reasonable ($1.6333M) for a veteran LD and he's under contract for another year.  Would have thought they would keep someone like that around to expose in expansion even if they don't intend to keep him long term.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, EternalCanuckFan said:

Haven't looked into Harrington's game in awhile but he was considered an important part of CBJ's D core a few years ago.  Clearly he's not as important to their future now but it's odd.  His contract is quite reasonable ($1.6333M) for a veteran LD and he's under contract for another year.  Would have thought they would keep someone like that around to expose in expansion even if they don't intend to keep him long term.

They already have Kukan that meets exposure requirements.  Harrington is 8 games short.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/29/2021 at 3:14 PM, EternalCanuckFan said:

Haven't looked into Harrington's game in awhile but he was considered an important part of CBJ's D core a few years ago.  Clearly he's not as important to their future now but it's odd.  His contract is quite reasonable ($1.6333M) for a veteran LD and he's under contract for another year.  Would have thought they would keep someone like that around to expose in expansion even if they don't intend to keep him long term.

?

I think you might mean something different by "core" than what most people mean by that term.

He's been at best a #6/7 D his entire career.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, oldnews said:

?

I think you might mean something different by "core" than what most people mean by that term.

He's been at best a #6/7 D his entire career.

Probably they meant to write “corps,” instead of “core.” It’s an easy mistake to make, and a homophone/heterograph that regularly causes some confusion.

 

(As in, Harrington played 70+ games in a season a few years back, so it’s fair to say he was “an important part of CBJ’s D [corps].” However, as a ~13 minutes TOI/GP player, he’s never been, and likely never will be, anything close to a “core” defenceman for CBJ or any NHL team.)

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

Probably they meant to write “corps,” instead of “core.” It’s an easy mistake to make, and a homophone/heterograph that regularly causes some confusion.

 

(As in, Harrington played 70+ games in a season a few years back, so it’s fair to say he was “an important part of CBJ’s D [corps].” However, as a ~13 minutes TOI/GP player, he’s never been, and likely never will be, anything close to a “core” defenceman for CBJ or any NHL team.)

I did mean core but I meant it more in an aspirational sense rather than him actually being a core player at the time.  I could have been more specific.  My thinking was that it's the same way I would say describe there being at least some faint hope that Juolevi might join the Canucks' core in the future, although that's obviously highly questionable given his usage so far.

 

My comment was based on reports I read about the CBJ roster a few years ago (I was reading up on Zach Werenski at the time as it was his breakout rookie season).  One of the underlying themes was the hope that Harrington would elevate his game and join the top-4 but obviously he never ended up attaining that level of play.  At the time, CBJ had Johnson, Murray and Nutivaara as well.  All three are no longer with the team so Harrington outlasted them (mostly due to cap constraints), but in a depth role.  Still, Harrington's a serviceable depth D at the NHL level which was ultimately my main point about it being odd that he was placed on waivers.

 

Whatever the case is, with Gostisbehere clearing waivers, it definitely seems like teams are much more leery about moves due to cap constraints so teams certainly do seem to be more willing to waive players that we wouldn't ordinarily expect to be waived (with less concern about them being picked up).

 

It does make you wonder what kind of trade market there is for guys like Sutter, Benn and Pearson.  All are on expiring contracts, so that helps, but how are teams needing to send back money in those deals?  Based on CapFriendly it looks like there are a fair number of teams that should have a decent amount of cap space to use at the deadline without having to send equivalent money back, but maybe it's not just cap but also actual cash that teams are more concerned about.

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...