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

(Speculation) Canucks interested with 2-3 year deal with Pearson


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Elias Pettersson said:

He’ll be 29 soon and yes his best days are behind him. He’s not the Pearson that played in LA anymore. 
 

We can get an equal or better player on the UFA market if need be. Save the cap dollars and try and go after a legit 3C in the summer. 

He was better last season then any year he played on LA. I’m just going to disagree.

 

We’ll see what happens. We do need a 3C for sure. But definitely not against the idea of re-signing Pearson for a couple years 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good lord. The guy is a decent nhl middle six winger. 

 

A team that has no championship aspirations for at least two years (according to the gm) should be selling Pearson for whatever assets they can get for him. 

 

If they bring him back at anything over $2.5 it will be a travesty. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Petey_BOI said:

its actually a tough spot. if they don't sign him now, Seattle could outbid us during thier 48 hour window to sign ufa's before the draft.

i think signing Pearson only means we have to give up protection to virtanen, might be a win if virtanen gets selected.

Fair enough.  I'm personally not keen on Virtanen being exposed irrespective of how poorly he has performed this season.  I can understand why others would be fine with Virtanen being exposed however.

 

How would you feel about Gaudette being exposed also though?  I assume the Canucks will opt for the "7 F, 3 D, 1 G" protection option instead of the "8 skaters, 1 G" one but in either case I think Gaudette will be on the bubble.  I am assuming that Motte will be protected so if he isn't, then that should help.  The Canucks would also need to consider whether to expose Lind.  I understand if they're fine exposing Lind since he hasn't done anything at the NHL level yet, but he seems to still be an important component for the team's future so allowing him to be exposed seems like an odd move.

 

7 F:  Pettersson, Horvat, Boeser, Miller, Motte, ?, ?

3 D:  Schmidt, Juolevi, ?

1 G:  Demko

 

8 Skaters:  Pettersson, Horvat, Boeser, Motte, Miller, Schmidt, Juolevi, ?

1 G:  Demko

 

I can understand exposing Virtanen (potential $2.55M in cap savings) but Gaudette and possibly Lind as well?

 

At the end of the day, I think the term and cap hit are the most concerning elements of a new deal for Pearson.  Assuming management is able to come to a fair deal with Pearson, then I wouldn't mind seeing him back in the fold.  We'll see whether any deals happen in the next week which change the landscape.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, lethunder said:

 

If they bring him back at anything over $2.5 it will be a travesty. 

I think 2.5 million or less can be done for a 2 year contract is possible. Carl Soederberg is a good comparible seeing he's a top 9 forward and got 1 million for 1 year. So I can imagine 2 years for 2 million is a possibility to extend Pearson? 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

He put up points last year but his underlying numbers were abysmal. This year he has 11 points in 33 games. I don't mind him but he is a dime a dozen player. 3 Years @1.5 or 2 years @1.75 I am fine anything more in terms of price or term is an overpayment

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, lethunder said:

Good lord. The guy is a decent nhl middle six winger. 

 

A team that has no championship aspirations for at least two years (according to the gm) should be selling Pearson for whatever assets they can get for him. 

 

If they bring him back at anything over $2.5 it will be a travesty. 

Which GM wants to trade assets for a player with an ankle injury?

  • Thanks 1
  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Devron44 said:

He was better last season then any year he played on LA. I’m just going to disagree.

 

We’ll see what happens. We do need a 3C for sure. But definitely not against the idea of re-signing Pearson for a couple years 

Last year he played with his BFF.  He doesn't look the same without him really...

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Devron44 said:

Which GM wants to trade assets for a player with an ankle injury?

If nobody wants him by the deadline and he doesn't want to re-sign for much less than he currently makes you let him walk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He's a solid middle six winger with size who plays a defensively responsible game. Not a bad thing to have if the value is good. 2-3 years at 2.5-3M wouldn't be bad, he brings more value than Roussel. 

 

Just gotta wonder where the cap comes from and how they're planning on managing it. 

  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Elias Pettersson said:

Last year he played with his BFF.  He doesn't look the same without him really...

For like what 8 games lol

  • Hydration 2
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, canucklehead44 said:

He put up points last year but his underlying numbers were abysmal. This year he has 11 points in 33 games. I don't mind him but he is a dime a dozen player. 3 Years @1.5 or 2 years @1.75 I am fine anything more in terms of price or term is an overpayment

Ya, there are always decent veteran wingers left without a job in August and signing cheap 1 year, $1 million deals.  
 

Pearson doesn’t really move the needle that much to warrant re-signing for anything other than low dollars.

 

If we weren’t in such a bad position with our cap it might be worth spending a little on the stability... but he is a 3rd liner on a good team and we have enough guys in the organization to fill out those spots on the roster.

 

I wish I could believe this is all a master plan to spend al our money so that Petterson and (especially) Hughes have to settle for whatever is left.... but nothing in our recent history would suggest that.  It is more likely we are just getting ourselves into offer sheet panic territory giving their agents a ton of leverage in negotiations.

 

Edited by Provost
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, lethunder said:

If nobody wants him by the deadline and he doesn't want to re-sign for much less than he currently makes you let him walk.

I agree and I don’t expect him to sign for more then that. It’s gonna be somewhere in the 2.8 - 3 mill range. Even one of the bigger free agents Toffoli signed for less then he made before. Flat cap. Everything has changed at least for the next year or so 

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

He’ll be 29 soon and yes his best days are behind him. He’s not the Pearson that played in LA anymore. 
 

We can get an equal or better player on the UFA market if need be. Save the cap dollars and try and go after a legit 3C in the summer. 

Bo is just 2-3 years younger than Pearson.  If Pearson is over the hill, then Horvat isn't that far behind him.  

  • Thanks 1
  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Lancaster said:

Bo is just 2-3 years younger than Pearson.  If Pearson is over the hill, then Horvat isn't that far behind him.  

Bo doesn’t know old age. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Strange, but I have neither an affinity for nor a strong dislike against this particular player. He's never moved the needle for me in the sense that I would, with all other options open, make him a sighing priority. On the other hand, if I was a GM looking to round out a top 9 forward group and had in mind a responsible playoff proven winger with the ability to get hot and pop some goals, Pearson would be somewhere near the top of my list. 

  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don’t know if it’s the best option. You have to remember a lot of teams are going to be squeezed and there will be a lot of 2nd and 3rd line players available with talent. Agreeing to this contract before seeing what could be potentially available would be counterintuitive IMO. 

  • Upvote 2
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, iinatcc said:

If Benning can use his magic to get rid of Roussel, Eriksson, and Beagle next season  it should be fine. 

Only way we're getting rid of any of these is if they are bought out.

 

Or we make a trade in which we take back less money than we would pay for a buyout, but for any other team to accept that we'd probably have to add a pick.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see a 2-3 year deal as the perfect stop-gap for our young forwards progression(Pod/Lind/Lockwood/etc). By the time the deals done most of these guys will be coming off ELCs too so it makes sense from a cap and progression standpoint. 
 

What matters is how much we need to pay him. Petey/Hughes aren’t done yet. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

3 hours ago, flickyoursedin said:

Sometimes it feels like we’re the only team that re-signs our expiring vets instead of trading them for the inflated TDL prices. I do like Pearson and I guess trading and bringing him back as a UFA is a little too unrealistic.

That's not true... most of the time we let them walk for nothing.

 

:bigblush:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...