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

[Signing] Canucks re-sign Tanner Pearson


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Thats my point though. Overpaying serviceable players consistently is a bad strategy.

Two much needed players in the depths of a rebuild isn't 'consistently' though.

 

Pearson's deal isn't an overpayment. It's simply not a (hoped for) discount.

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Two much needed players in the depths of a rebuild isn't 'consistently' though.

 

Pearson's deal isn't an overpayment. It's simply not a (hoped for) discount.

Keep telling yourself that. Its an absolute overpayment in dollars, term, trade protection, AND expansion protection.

 

Not one other GM would have signed him to that deal on UFA day.

 

Eriksson, Myers, Sutter, Beagle, Roussel, Pearson, Holtby. Hell, include Virtanen if you want. Dont forget Baertschi toiling in the minors either. 

 

Every one of those players is overpaid in at least one adpect of their contract and I would saymost ars overpaid in dollars, term, and trade protection. None are vital to the next stage of competitiveness.

 

The opportunity cost of so many bad contracts is conveniently ignored by Benning fans who simply must justify every single thing he does.

 

The Pearson signing is garbage.

 

 

Edited by wallstreetamigo
  • Cheers 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, theo5789 said:

Can still buyout Eriksson/Roussel and/or trade JV if needed. There were decent cheap options in the secondary market last year. We will address it when we can. Pearson we could address now, so we did.

there should be some workable day 2 or 3 UFA options: https://www.capfriendly.com/browse/free-agents/2022/caphit/all/center/ufa

 

I just really want Lowry. I'm a baby and want what I want. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

Team needs more depth at center rather than on wing.  Miller, imho, is far more effective as a winger.  

Not sure how that refutes a comment you quoted on Sutter and Beagle...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Keep telling yourself that. Its an absolute overpayment in dollars, term, trade protection, AND expansion protection.

 

Not one other GM would have signed him to that deal on UFA day.

Yes, they would have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To the Toffoli comparison: Toffoli took a 7.6% pay cut due to the COVID flat cap. Pearson took a 13.33% pay cut. Since many UFAs took a larger cut, I think the difference is a good reflection of comparable value. Toffoli has almost 60% O zone starts to Pearsons almost 40% so usage is different as reflected in points gazing.

 

Pearson is used to match up against the Leagues best alongside Bo. Podkolzin may be good, but can we expect him to play that role right away? If he's not ready to match up against the Leagues best, then what? If we let Pearson go, then we have to replace him. His role is very under valued and not as easy to replace as some assume.  UFAs get to pick their destination. We can't force them to sign here just because unrealistic media and their fans say we can.

 

For what he does, this is a good deal for us. Toronto and their media clowns laud them for having certainty with their over paid players. We now have certainty at that position for a reasonable cost.

  • Thanks 1
  • Cheers 2
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

Limited amount of funds available (cap).  The more you spend for wingers means less so available for centers.

Again, the comment you quoted was about Sutter and Beagle, two centers.... not sure where you're going with this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, highwayman3 said:

You are certainly in the minority in that opinion.  

Oh noes!!!!

 

:rolleyes:

 

And really, I don't think that's true. The Twitter-outrage-vocal-minority and it's click bait media circle jerk is certainly noisy but that's about it. There's plenty of perfectly rational people that are, like me, largely indifferent to the signing to downright supportive of it.

 

 

  • Cheers 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

About the only depth C UFA better than Sutter is Lowry and he's likely going to be in high demand and a lot more than $2.5. And I'd only pay him $2.5m for one year. Longer term = less cap, closer to the $1.5m I noted.

 

Nope. Like I said, we should have traded Virtanen. Eriksson was also a poor move, clearly. There's a few other small things but yes, by and large a lot of the so called 'problems' people like to whinge about, are the normal, expected hit and miss percentages you see of any management, running any team. This market simply likes to hyper-focus on and overanalyze them. Just like this Pearson deal. This is a non-story in pretty much any other market.

 

No it really isn't. It's simply not a discount. He was never making less than $2.5-$3m...even on a sweetheart deal to a closer to contending team. Such melodrama.

 

Nope, like I said, you can alternatively blame the Eriksson deal if you like. Or not moving off Virtanen. Both of which you can lay at Benning's feet/have him 'bear responsibility for'. Point is, prior to Covid though, even with those two bad moves, we could still have retained him. The rest of the whining is largely petty, myopic, hyperbolic melodrama.

 

 

Are you kidding me? The only UFA C better than Sutter is Lowry? Cizikas, Laughton, Wennberg, Coleman (not playing C now but certainly as in the past), Pacquette, Danault, Janmark are all wayyyy better bottom C options than Sutter.  Sutter isn't even an NHL player at this point.  

 

Wow - so you genuinely believe Benning bears no responsibility for any of his poor contracts.  And you think his 6 bad forward contracts (Sutter, Baertschi, Beagle, Roussel, Eriksson, Ferland) aka almost every UFA contract the guy has signed, is merely "the expected hit and miss percentages of any management running any team"? So the normal hit and miss percentage is...0%? 

 

Your argument boils down to sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting "nope, nope, nope nothing is every Benning's fault, LALALALA." Whether you acknowledge it or not the person in charge of these decisions bears some responsibility.  That shouldn't be remotely debatable.  I suspect you don't believe such a patently absurd statement and are making increasingly outlandish claims to justify what is universally acknowledged as a poor contract.  In regards to fans whining, or being hyperbolic - when we just lost 2 good players to cap mismanagement, and now we're seeing the exact same type of move that will cause further cap casualties, and we've been one of the worst teams in the league for 6 years now, real fans have a right to be upset.  Some of us want to win and not waste Petterson and Hughes' primes.  If you're happy being another Edmonton or Buffalo, and think anyone who is bothered by that is "whining" or being "melodramatic" there's not much more to say.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Oh noes!!!!

 

:rolleyes:

 

And really, I don't think that's true. The Twitter-outrage-vocal-minority and it's click bait media circle jerk is certainly noisy but that's about it. There's plenty of perfectly rational people that are, like me, largely indifferent to the signing to downright supportive of it.

 

 

Right, you've been quite clear that your response to all unpopular moves is to kick back and say "don't stress, whatever man." 

Edited by highwayman3
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...