Canucks have more NTC and NMC than any other NHL team

[steviewonder20]

I was not aware of this. Even depth players like Beagle have some protection. This certainly limits trade options that many of us would like to see happen with our bottom six or D.
 

https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/canucks-hockey/the-canucks-have-more-no-movement-and-no-trade-clauses-than-any-other-nhl-team-3585448

 

[stawns]

2 minutes ago, steviewonder20 said:

I was not aware of this. Even depth players like Beagle have some protection. This certainly limits trade options that many of us would like to see happen with our bottom six or D.
 

https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/canucks-hockey/the-canucks-have-more-no-movement-and-no-trade-clauses-than-any-other-nhl-team-3585448

 

are you new to the Canucks?

[Nuxfanabroad]

There are teams out there with REALLL problems. 9 mill $ cap hits for schlubs getting scratched.

 

We've got temporary hiccups, mostly all off books in a yr or two.

 

All CDC posters need to distinguish between the mere daytime drama, & that which is newsworthy.

[wallstreetamigo]

19 minutes ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

There are teams out there with REALLL problems. 9 mill $ cap hits for schlubs getting scratched.

 

We've got temporary hiccups, mostly all off books in a yr or two.

 

All CDC posters need to distinguish between the mere daytime drama, & that which is newsworthy.

I disagree. I think this is actually a very important point that has contributed significantly to the teams troubles.

 

Giving depth players a premium cap hit, term, AND trade protection - even as UFA - is a very strong indication your GM is not very good at his job. Or at best that he is very myopic and looks at a depth player he must have and then not being concerned with what it takes to get him.

 

BTW, Eriksson and Baertschi say hi.

Edited March 29, 2021 by wallstreetamigo

[Aladeen]

2 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

I disagree. I think this is actually a very important point that has contributed significantly to the teams troubles.

 

Giving depth players a premium cap hit, term, AND trade protection - even as UFA - is a very strong indication your GM is not very good at his job. Or at best that he is very myopic and looks at a depth player he must have and then not being concerned with what it takes to get him.

Or... and I'm just spitballing here... maybe, because the team was not very good because of rebuilding, they needed to offer those incentives to character players, to entice them to come to Vancouver; in order to prevent a perpetual losing culture being passed to young players; that has plagued some bottom feeding teams; many that were gifted top pick after top pick and have yet to drag themselves out of the basement of the league; even after rebuilding for longer than a decade. 

[Nuxfanabroad]

1 minute ago, wallstreetamigo said:

I disagree. I think this is actually a very important point that has contributed significantly to the teams troubles.

 

Giving depth players a premium cap hit, term, AND trade protection - even as UFA - is a very strong indication your GM is not very good at his job. Or at best that he is very myopic and looks at a depth player he must have and then not being concerned with what it takes to get him.

A fair argument, & you may be right in this. Personally I accept a few JB gaffes, if he can maintain his strong level of drafting. I don't mind if they bring in more FO help, assisting him in areas required.

 

As a side-note, I like that he hasn't been signing/flipping assets at breakneck-speed. In Van's market, don't really think it'd work as well as a place like say, COTU.

It appears to me that it's not one-size-fits-all. Would say a GM must tweak the approach, depending upon the marketplace/location-desirability.

 

^So further to this, as the team advances(prospects aging) into an era of greater competitiveness, I assume vet contracts will be shorter, cheaper & cleaner(sans clauses)

[DSVII]

Here's an interesting thought experiment. If JB gets canned today, will CDC turn on him for leaving untradeable NTC/NMC assets the way the fans turned on Gillis when he was canned before fulfilling his rebuild vision with his own NTCs/NMCs

[stawns]

17 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

I disagree. I think this is actually a very important point that has contributed significantly to the teams troubles.

 

Giving depth players a premium cap hit, term, AND trade protection - even as UFA - is a very strong indication your GM is not very good at his job. Or at best that he is very myopic and looks at a depth player he must have and then not being concerned with what it takes to get him.

 

BTW, Eriksson and Baertschi say hi.

the only problem is that the young guys progressed a little faster than expected and they had some success a little earlier than expected.  Mostly, it's because covid flattened the cap and messed with their timeline.  Had the cap gone up as expected, their plan would have unfolded on the timeline they expected and there would have been no issues.

[stawns]

4 minutes ago, DSVII said:

Here's an interesting thought experiment. If JB gets canned today, will CDC turn on him for leaving untradeable NTC/NMC assets the way the fans turned on Gillis when he was canned before fulfilling his rebuild vision with his own NTCs/NMCs

not likely because it wasn't so much the un-tradeable assets as much as the fact that he left the prospect cupboard completely bare in the process.  That was the biggest issue.

[Ovi one kenobi]

5 minutes ago, Aladeen said:

Or... and I'm just spitballing here... maybe, because the team was not very good because of rebuilding, they needed to offer those incentives to character players, to entice them to come to Vancouver; in order to prevent a perpetual losing culture being passed to young players; that has plagued some bottom feeding teams; many that were gifted top pick after top pick and have yet to drag themselves out of the basement of the league; even after rebuilding for longer than a decade. 

Then let those guys go elsewhere if they want too much money/term. Vesey and Hawyrluck prove that you can pick up depth guys on the cheap. If we had signed cheaper players who are also veterans I doubt that would have had a big negative impact on the team relative to Beagle and Roussel. This is why you don't see the other rebuilding teams like Detroit signing deals like this. They actually get PAID to take on these deals and are not paying to sign them in the first place. 

[VegasCanuck]

20 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

I disagree. I think this is actually a very important point that has contributed significantly to the teams troubles.

 

Giving depth players a premium cap hit, term, AND trade protection - even as UFA - is a very strong indication your GM is not very good at his job. Or at best that he is very myopic and looks at a depth player he must have and then not being concerned with what it takes to get him.

 

BTW, Eriksson and Baertschi say hi.

Baertschi has no protection at all.

 

Normally, when you are trying to bring free agents in, or convince someone to sign long term with the team, you are usually either buying their loyalty through price, or you are offering them some control on trades to get a lower price.

 

Eriksson, is totally hindsight, but he was also coming off a strong season in Boston. I'm sure everyone would love to have had the contract at 3 to 4 years maximum, but it is what it is.

 

Looking around the team, I really don't see anyone else that I have a problem with their clauses. Its a part of the business.

 

[stawns]

Just now, Ovi one kenobi said:

Then let those guys go elsewhere if they want too much money/term. Vesey and Hawyrluck prove that you can pick up depth guys on the cheap. If we had signed cheaper players who are also veterans I doubt that would have had a big negative impact on the team relative to Beagle and Roussel. This is why you don't see the other rebuilding teams like Detroit signing deals like this. They actually get PAID to take on these deals and are not paying to sign them in the first place. 

at the time they signed those guys, they had to sign guys..........they still had to put a team on the ice and provide an example to the young guys.  I'd say that, itself, was worth it.  Guys like Beagle and Sutter have been important in the development of Horvat, Petey, Boes etc.  You can't just throw young guys to the wolves and those veteran signings sheltered them while they got their feet wet.

[khay]

5 minutes ago, DSVII said:

Here's an interesting thought experiment. If JB gets canned today, will CDC turn on him for leaving untradeable NTC/NMC assets the way the fans turned on Gillis when he was canned before fulfilling his rebuild vision with his own NTCs/NMCs

Gillis is being blamed for poor drafting.

 

Most people know why Gills handed out NTCs/NMCs: to get players signed cheap so that we can compete for the cup. 

 

Those NTCs and NMCs did handcuff us a bit but that's not the primary reason why we sucked. We sucked following Gillis era because of poor drafting.

 

Look at the Sharks who were able to compete a bit longer and including a SCF appearance because they were able to fill in the gap between Thornton/Marleau with Pavelski, Burns then Coutur, Vlasic, Hertl and etc to Canucks who literally had nobody after Kesler and maybe Edler? But Edler was never on the same level as Burns or maybe even Vlasic.

 

 

[stawns]

2 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said:

Baertschi has no protection at all.

 

Normally, when you are trying to bring free agents in, or convince someone to sign long term with the team, you are usually either buying their loyalty through price, or you are offering them some control on trades to get a lower price.

 

Eriksson, is totally hindsight, but he was also coming off a strong season in Boston. I'm sure everyone would love to have had the contract at 3 to 4 years maximum, but it is what it is.

 

Looking around the team, I really don't see anyone else that I have a problem with their clauses. Its a part of the business.

 

Especially when you're trying to get free agents to sign with a rebuilding team.  You've got to provide extra incentive

[Where's Wellwood]

17 minutes ago, khay said:

Gillis is being blamed for poor drafting.

 

Most people know why Gills handed out NTCs/NMCs: to get players signed cheap so that we can compete for the cup. 

 

Those NTCs and NMCs did handcuff us a bit but that's not the primary reason why we sucked. We sucked following Gillis era because of poor drafting.

 

Look at the Sharks who were able to compete a bit longer and including a SCF appearance because they were able to fill in the gap between Thornton/Marleau with Pavelski, Burns then Coutur, Vlasic, Hertl and etc to Canucks who literally had nobody after Kesler and maybe Edler? But Edler was never on the same level as Burns or maybe even Vlasic.

 

 

But the Sharks are super screwed now. Their cap outlook is the worst of all. And they traded away the pick that turned into Stutzle

Edited March 29, 2021 by Where's Wellwood

[Aladeen]

23 minutes ago, Ovi one kenobi said:

Then let those guys go elsewhere if they want too much money/term. Vesey and Hawyrluck prove that you can pick up depth guys on the cheap. If we had signed cheaper players who are also veterans I doubt that would have had a big negative impact on the team relative to Beagle and Roussel. This is why you don't see the other rebuilding teams like Detroit signing deals like this. They actually get PAID to take on these deals and are not paying to sign them in the first place. 

Vesey and Hawyrluk are Canucks last I checked so I don't understand what your point is? You can't field a team of tweener players that have never gone deep in the playoffs or understand how to win at the NHL level. Those two are great additions to the Canucks on very bargain contracts, but neither bring what Beagle and Roussel do and did at the time of their respective signings.

 

Beagle came off of Centering the 4th line on a great Caps team, full of character that won the cup. How many of those Caps lamented the loss of Beagle? By all accounts from them he was a huge presence in the locker room and a player that the team felt was pivotal in winning the cup. Good stuff to expose young player too. Roussel in the first year of his contract was exactly as advertised 30-40 pts for a bottom 6 winger that brought grit and antagonized opposition? His deal would be considered a steal if it continued as such and you wouldn't have even brought his name up. No doubt Roussel's career has been drastically altered by the knee injury he suffered, but how could JB foresee that? That's like saying Aron Ekblad's contract sucks if he never returns to form after his injury. 

 

Now that we get a glimpse of the finished product of players like Hughes, Boeser, Petterson and Demko panning out, it's easy to say that those other contracts suck, but what if, just what if the players with those contracts had a large hand in helping to get those young players to the level they are playing at?

Edited March 29, 2021 by Aladeen

[Ghostsof1915]

The Gillis Curse lives! 

[steviewonder20]

1 hour ago, stawns said:

are you new to the Canucks?

Lol, just since 1970. I knew we had many anchor contracts but had never seen a direct comparison of how many ntc and nmc we had compared with the rest of the NHL.  I thought since the Gillis days that was less common, especially with our bottom six players and with 5 of our 6 D.

[Dazzle]

51 minutes ago, DSVII said:

Here's an interesting thought experiment. If JB gets canned today, will CDC turn on him for leaving untradeable NTC/NMC assets the way the fans turned on Gillis when he was canned before fulfilling his rebuild vision with his own NTCs/NMCs

I think some people actually have normalized the state of the team that GIllis left behind (no prospects, no future), under the guise that the team was 'winning'.

[Canuck Surfer]

1 hour ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

There are teams out there with REALLL problems. 9 mill $ cap hits for schlubs getting scratched.

 

We've got temporary hiccups, mostly all off books in a yr or two.

 

All CDC posters need to distinguish between the mere daytime drama, & that which is newsworthy.

This is a fair outlook.

 

2 years ago, maybe a concern?  Now we have the balance of this year & next. Perhaps can (finally) buyout Eriksson. His last year is not buyout proof.  We wont be swimming in money this off season? But we will be ok, sufficient to re-sign Hughes & Petey.  

 

The year after & onwards, we are in great shape. Can expect to have Podkolzin & Hoglander still on ELC's, Lind will sign cost effectively for his 2knd contract..