[Signing] Canucks re-sign Tanner Pearson

[Devron]

People have written of Kole Lind already wow. Go Nucks lol

[Canuck Surfer]

2 minutes ago, Provost said:

That is a ridiculous argument.

 

”He isn’t quite as bad as some of our other bad signings” is no sort of reasonable logic.  

Its not a ridiculous argument.  He plays in an NHL top 6.

 

Its not even a bad signing.

[Dazzle]

16 minutes ago, Tom Sestito said:

Lind is like Reid Boucher 

 

 

Terrible take. All reports have said Lind has made huge strides in the AHL, compared to his abysmal first year. He's a VERY young player and is producing Reid Boucher like numbers. Lind has huge potential. Boucher not so much.

[kanucks25]

Just now, Silky mitts said:

Guaranteed like last year will be so many ufa value signings...

For sure.

 

There's no value here. There's no reason why Tanner Pearson at 3 x 3.25 with some sort of NTC in each year of the deal would be something we need to rush into.

 

Why this management team is so laser-focused on "getting their guy", especially if he's an intangibles-first depth player, is simply beyond me.

[canuck2288]

4 minutes ago, spur1 said:

Some day you may learn grasshopper. 

Can only dream to be as old and wise as you are 

[rekker]

1 minute ago, Devron44 said:

Sometimes players need to share some blame. Jake had looked like he was on the verge of breaking out. Then the playoff he struggled. But maybe it was his first playoff experience, gets a pass. Starts the season on the first line and here we are he has 4 goals on the season. Dude must be a cat cause he’s had about 9 lives now 

Ya. I didn't so much mean it was a mistake as I did add hindsight needs to be figured in. I agree in that it looked to me as well that Jake was ready to turn the corner. 

[spur1]

Just now, canuck2288 said:

Can only dream to be as old and wise as you are 

Lol...there is hope for you yet. 

[Dazzle]

2 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

No, because there are likely better forwards you can acquire for cheap that are more worth protecting than these guys.

Like what?

 

Lind is a B tier prospect right now - better than anyone that Gillis had, minus maybe Shinkaruk. And you're still the one to rave about Gillis being a good manager of prospects. LOL.

[Twilight Sparkle]

WHY

[Silky mitts]

1 minute ago, kanucks25 said:

For sure.

 

There's no value here. There's no reason why Tanner Pearson at 3 x 3.25 with some sort of NTC in each year of the deal would be something we need to rush into.

 

Why this management team is so laser-focused on "getting their guy", especially if he's an intangibles-first depth player, is simply beyond me.

They literally bid against themselves. Such a train wreck .

[iinatcc]

4 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

Wow, the amount of whining fans on this fanbase is embarrassing.

 

Nothing wrong with 3.25 for 3 years.

 

- Keep in mind: Good friends with Horvat. Keywords: GOOD FRIENDS

- He's not a bottom 6 figure. Not sure why people whine about 3 million when he can move up and down the lineup if need be.

- They wouldn't have done this deal if they didn't already count for Hughes and Pettersson. COME ON.

0.3 PPG is a bottom 6 player or at most a middle 9. 

 

I have no problem re-signing Pearson but why couldn't Benning have waited til the off season knowing it's not going to be favorable for mid-tier UFA's. 

 

And it's not just fans upset. I'm listening to Sportsnet 650 now and there aren't people from there that "get the deal" 

Edited April 8, 2021 by iinatcc

[Devron]

Just now, rekker said:

Ya. I didn't so much mean it was a mistake as I did add hindsight needs to be figured in. I agree in that it looked to me as well that Jake was ready to turn the corner. 

Yeah it sucks. I have finally let go. He’s just not going to be an effective player for us. He’s not bad but he’s a player that has to chip in now and then to be successful. Seattle can have him 

[RakuRaku]

4 minutes ago, Provost said:

That is a ridiculous argument.

 

”He isn’t quite as bad as some of our other bad signings” is no sort of reasonable logic.  

The comparison is how we could have used those cap dollars more wisely... not “it is OK because there are worse examples of cap allocation”

 

There ie no justification for this signing at this time t be anything but terrible.

 

It was at the most charitable, at his full market value on the UFA market... in reality probably overpaid compared with what he would have gotten in free agency.

 

Why sign him now?  Why not wait until after expansion and the draft to see what other options there could be for those cap dollars?  There is no downside to waiting.

 

Heck, if we had a creative management group we could use our extra protection slots to hide players other teams don’t want to lose.  Like trade for them before expansion for a 5th round pick, and then trade them back to the same team for a 2nd after expansion.  I haven’t seen any rules against that.

 

I had mentioned in another thread a week ago.  We could use that cap space to accrue assets.  Like could we trade Jake for Palat and a a 2nd?  That gives us a better winger than Pearson for less term and less overall cap dollars once you deduct Virtanen.

 

We closed ourselves up to all those kinds of opportunities for no reason since there wasn’t a deadline at play.

Dude.... our players are not just names on paper ok?? We don't know how well he's conducted himself with the teammates... we want committed players who want to play hard for us!

 

Sure, you will find some cheap bargains at $1-2M who have produced more PPG vs. Pearson... but it doesn't always work like a slamdunk!! you know how much luck we've had with free agents... when was the last time we got a great FA bargain that worked out great? Trent Klatt? 

 

Point is.... I really like Pearson and $3.25M isn't ridiculous money for him... at least JB isn't bringing back Sutter and Edler at their current wages... (hope not!!!).... 

 

[BPA]

We should have Podz coming in next year who will probably start on the 3rd line and hopefully move onto the 2nd like Hogs.

 

Think a 2yr contract for TP would have been better.

Edited April 8, 2021 by BPA

[NewbieCanuckFan]

8 minutes ago, spur1 said:

Some day you may learn grasshopper. 

Being puzzled is the beginning of wisdom.....

 

 

 

[Tom Sestito]

9 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said:

Disagree.

 

Boucher was more talented. Had more upside.  His shot still excites me.  

 

Lind has similar ''must develop NHL athleticism, speed'' challenges.  That is my take on how much i could agree with you? Which is common in most prospects outside the first ten or 15 picks each year. 

 

Where I disagree is Lind is developing skills that could see him being a useful bottom 6 player.  A bit bigger.  He is willing to battle on the boards, fore check, hound opposing scorers, bang. Has been taking draws, plays multiple positions. He is becoming a complete player. 

 

Boucher was only going to make it if he was so prolific a scorer? A coach would look past that he did not compete hard enough.  

I really don't agree with what you're saying about Lind. I think you could say the bolded about a same age Gaudette but being "ok" at that stuff at a lower level is not good enough to make it at an NHL level. 

 

If you can get a pick for a player like this, I'd take it and run. Everyone likes to "wait and see" with basically every prospect that hasn't made major strides in their first three post-draft seasons, but I feel like it should be pretty obvious what a player is going to be outside of the rare late development curve guys. 

 

 

[Gurn]

6 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

3 x 3.25 with some sort of NTC in each year of the deal

[NUCKFAN80]

WOW!! I dont believe this crap. Suppose to be cap dumping, not overload on crap term ,crap deals.

[Provost]

The only thing I can think is that he is trying to pressure the Petterson and Hughes camp by having less money available to sign them by the time they negotiate.

 

That is a terrible plan.

 

Otherwise we had better hear about $10 million magically coming off the cap that we don’t know about.  Nothing has shown that sort of thing is going to happen.  Alfives spent two years justifying moves because they only made sense if Eriksson was planning on retiring and there “must be a gentlemen’s agreement in place”.

[Petey Castiglione]

18 minutes ago, Devron44 said:

He doesn’t have draft protection unless they decide to protect him 

Thanks Dev, didn't have time to go through the whole thread to see if this was true or not.

 

15 minutes ago, Provost said:

He got trade protection and he is now worth less signed than he he would have as a rental.

 

That is all you need to know about the value.

Just read that it's a full NTC next year and 7 team no trade list after that.  Not worried about value as even before the new contract he wouldn't command much.  This isn't the contract to rally around to get JB fired.  To be clear, I also don't like the signing.