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

[Signing] Canucks re-sign Tanner Pearson


Recommended Posts

53 minutes ago, 70seven said:

I don’t mind Pearson or anything...  just tired of watching three 3rd lines

So true. This is why I won't be pleased if Benning signs any more $3 million forecheckers. The buck stops at Pearson.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Alienhuggyflow said:

Plus it looks like Beagle is done. I have a feeling a couple more contracts that end after next season get moved or bought out.

I think they're gonna try their best to move a couple first. We might see some pretty low returns.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a move I would have made.

If at all possible I would have rented him - although I'm not sure dealing anyone is a possibility at this point. 

Failing that though, I'm still not sure I bring Pearson back.

 

But it may be worth it for the entertainment value on these boards, alone.  Ermagerd - Bennig just spent an expansion protection spot!....

Made the mistake of actually reading this thread lol - as usual - the facts have next to no place in here.   This does not commit the team to protecting Pearson - 40ish pages in and some people are still under that illusion.  A team is only obligated to protect NMCs  Period.

Pearson is not a guy I would protect - but he may actually be a good piece to dangle for Seattle.  Seems like every trade thread regarding this team on these boards turns into a competition to over-react/get triggered to the most absurd degree.   Ironic to see Paterson of all people wondering when the team will elevate it's game - priceless coming from one of the geniuses in this media market that referred to JT Miller as a cap dump.  Elevate your own game, Jeff.

 

Anyhow - if it were up to me, I'd be letting go of this team's veteran wingers.  I realize the Pearson is the best of that small group (of LE, Roussel and Pearson - of course I'd prefer to see the end of LE, or even Roussel - I consider Miller a center and not in the veteran winger group)....They'll need a veteran winger or two in the mix, particularly once the year of term Roussel has remaining expires, but still I would have moved on regardless and gone to the placeholder market instead.   Still a chance they can get the equivalent of the return they might have rented him for - or get that value in him being taken in expansion, but I probably would have taken the 'risk' of alternative comparative value in the market - and spent less in the process, unless that market provides an irresistable opportunity, in which case you've retained the flexibility.  Still have a lot of cap expiring this offseason and next, but I'd probably prefer to bank as much of that as possible.

 

Hard to argue with the value - he didn't produce well in this bizarre season - but he's also coming off a 20+/40+ season - so as a middle six, it's reasonable if not good value, assuming he 'returns to the mean' of his larger samples.  Also arguably a good fit here as a guy that can play on a matchup unit and give you secondary penalty killing duties when needed - but still I think I would have reserved the veteran forward spots for the shutdown centers.  If anything I'd look to add another (hard minutes) veteran center to the mix as opposed to retain wingers....  I'd have preferred to add a Lowry, Richardson, Thompson instead - but they can still do so.  If anything - in spite of having Sutter and Beagle as experienced veteran shutdown centers - they still wound up decimated once the injuries hit - you really can never have too many centers in your lineup.  

 

The main thing that makes me unenthused about Pearson remaining here - is how inconsistent he can be for a veteran, at least at the productive end of the ice.  Long term you pretty much know what you're getting, but shorter term, he's spotty, aside from being a good defensive forward.  I think the team needs more - and more consistency - from Horvat, and I'm not sure Pearson isn't a part of the equation that needs tweaking.  Hopefully Podkolzin will prove to be a player that brings the elevated game and consistency they need.

 

Hard to get too invested in this deal one way or the other - reasonable enough - not going to 'move the needle' - might help them sustain the needle as a good middle six forward - while the improvement will need to come from within, from emerging youth. 

For me the priority would be Hughes' partner - and shutdown/hard minutes centers - which is not to say that you neglect the rest of the roster/team needs - but it's hard to get particularly enthused about a deal like this.  Can see why they did it - makes general sense - but hope Pearson regains some of what would make him a solid signing - if the team as a whole can regain it's stride, perhaps it stands to reason that he will/could.

 

 

  • Hydration 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a sexy move but as JB said on the interview today if Pearson moved on they would  miss him.

 

I expect Pearson will have a better year next than this year.  This was a weird year.

 

He is a good player. 3.25 is ok if he gets back to 20 goals.  I think all this is,  is JB betting that Pearson will recover next year and be a 20 goal guy for them.  

 

Reality is, if that happens,  nobody is going to bitch. Pearson it's up to you. 

 

 

  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I say you spread out the lines now after this deal. Its disappointing because Pearson blocks guys like Gadjovich and Aiden Mcdonogh who aren't 3 years away from playing. 

 

Hoglander-Pettersson-Boeser

Pearson-Horvat-Lind

Virtanen-Miller-Podkolzin

Motte-Jasek-MacEwen 

 

 

Edited by Outsiders
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ilduce39 said:

One of the bigger critiques of the team this year was a lacklustre bottom 6.  
 

If management thinks Pearson, paired with Horvat, can lock down a spot in the middle 6 then it’s not a bad call.  
 

Podkolzin coming in on the cheap should add to our depth... but it’s a lateral (optimistically maybe slight step forward?) move if we let Pearson walk.
 

Having both is a lot more likely to move the needle. 
 

Paying a 2nd/3rd liner 3 mil a season doesn’t sink a team.  Assuming he’ll struggle like injury-hit Roussel/Baertschi/Sutter/Ferland is unfair and relying on a v. small sample size for pessimism. 

yeah - one of the loudest critiques - but was the bottom six really the problem?  

ironically - it's the top line and Hughes that bled 5on5 goals this season - had not particularly good possession or goal metrics.

The bottom six has been pretty stingy - which, really, is their job.  Beagle and Motte playing the hardest minutes on the team, were among the best in terms of giving up very litte 5 on 5 - and their possession metrics were also very good in context, Roussel and Virtanen = 1.1 and 1.0 on ice goals against per 60.  In the end it's a two way game = if you produce but give up more, that's not really a winnng formula, and if you produce little but give up very little, are you really 'the problem'?  For me the larger problems were early season puck movment, particulary zone exits,the goaltending wasn't particularly good early either - and the young team was just not cohesive and looked exhausted on a regular basis with the schedule out of the gate.  Any attempt to pin the season on a lacklustre bottom six is just a predetermined/prejudicial axe to grind imo.

People love to rip on the 'bottom' of the lineup - rarely want to call it like it is when it comes to 'stars' - but the reality is that the team's struggles were not reducible to 'bottom six' - if anything the fatal giveaways, the struggles to defend, came from throughout the lineup, if not the 'top of it'.   At the same time I'm not going to be cricital of the young players - I think it was pretty predictable - and to be expected - that they'd struggle, particularly early.

 

A number of the young teams in the league have 'underachieved' imo - Philly, the Rags, Chicago - flagging this year - LA, a team that some people were praising not long ago as if Blake had performed some miracle shortcut - are getting wrecked (6 wins in their last 20 games and a lineup very veteran top heavy in production).  The usual bottomfeeders - are still.   A few teams that are a bit surprising - St Louis struggling to compete, although they've been downgrading that lineup imo for a few years now.   Columbus is a roster that is better than it is performing imo - I keep expecting them to finally end the Tortorella experiment there, but go figure, he's still there....

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

anyhow - pretty easy to lose interest in the season once that outbreak was reported....looks like this is probably going to be/might be about it until the offseason...back to sleep for me lol.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Toffoli for 1M extra hurts, and now even Jared McCann has 20 points in 28 games...

 

Hindsight really doesn't help but we seem to be holding on to the wrong players right now (Pearson over Toffoli, Virtanen over McCann)...

  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/9/2021 at 7:38 AM, 24K PureCool said:

The only way this deal is salvageable is if Sutter is no re-signed (can't trade him cause of covid) and the rumor that Beagle is essentially done are true (either ltir retired or retired retired). Beagle will be our new 3C money.

Absolutely, JB must have that in mind because they can only put so much of the cap towards bottom players and PKers. We might see neither of them next season but will have big holes to fill at center then.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DownUndaCanuck said:

Toffoli for 1M extra hurts, and now even Jared McCann has 20 points in 28 games...

 

Hindsight really doesn't help but we seem to be holding on to the wrong players right now (Pearson over Toffoli, Virtanen over McCann)...

It was never Pearson over Toffoli, and reports of McCann attitude issues play in too. Even Bartkowski’s mom didn’t like the attitude of “the 19 year old” 

  • Hydration 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

It was never Pearson over Toffoli, and reports of McCann attitude issues play in too. Even Bartkowski’s mom didn’t like the attitude of “the 19 year old” 

Not entirely no but for Benning to let Toffoli walk for only a million more than Pearson looks really bad him. 

 

It's like saying no to a $400 all expense paid vacation to Hawaii but saying yes to a $300 vacation to St. Louis. 

 

As for McCann sorry I think his attitude problems are either not true or greatly exaggerated.

 

He's been with the Penguins organization for 3 seasons, and this is a team with elite character guys with Mario Lemieux as the owner. If McCann really had attitude issues then the Pens would have gotten rid of him already.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, oldnews said:

Not a move I would have made.

If at all possible I would have rented him - although I'm not sure dealing anyone is a possibility at this point. 

Failing that though, I'm still not sure I bring Pearson back.

 

But it may be worth it for the entertainment value on these boards, alone.  Ermagerd - Bennig just spent an expansion protection spot!....

Made the mistake of actually reading this thread lol - as usual - the facts have next to no place in here.   This does not commit the team to protecting Pearson - 40ish pages in and some people are still under that illusion.  A team is only obligated to protect NMCs  Period.

Pearson is not a guy I would protect - but he may actually be a good piece to dangle for Seattle.  Seems like every trade thread regarding this team on these boards turns into a competition to over-react/get triggered to the most absurd degree.   Ironic to see Paterson of all people wondering when the team will elevate it's game - priceless coming from one of the geniuses in this media market that referred to JT Miller as a cap dump.  Elevate your own game, Jeff.

 

Anyhow - if it were up to me, I'd be letting go of this team's veteran wingers.  I realize the Pearson is the best of that small group (of LE, Roussel and Pearson - of course I'd prefer to see the end of LE, or even Roussel - I consider Miller a center and not in the veteran winger group)....They'll need a veteran winger or two in the mix, particularly once the year of term Roussel has remaining expires, but still I would have moved on regardless and gone to the placeholder market instead.   Still a chance they can get the equivalent of the return they might have rented him for - or get that value in him being taken in expansion, but I probably would have taken the 'risk' of alternative comparative value in the market - and spent less in the process, unless that market provides an irresistable opportunity, in which case you've retained the flexibility.  Still have a lot of cap expiring this offseason and next, but I'd probably prefer to bank as much of that as possible.

 

Hard to argue with the value - he didn't produce well in this bizarre season - but he's also coming off a 20+/40+ season - so as a middle six, it's reasonable if not good value, assuming he 'returns to the mean' of his larger samples.  Also arguably a good fit here as a guy that can play on a matchup unit and give you secondary penalty killing duties when needed - but still I think I would have reserved the veteran forward spots for the shutdown centers.  If anything I'd look to add another (hard minutes) veteran center to the mix as opposed to retain wingers....  I'd have preferred to add a Lowry, Richardson, Thompson instead - but they can still do so.  If anything - in spite of having Sutter and Beagle as experienced veteran shutdown centers - they still wound up decimated once the injuries hit - you really can never have too many centers in your lineup.  

 

The main thing that makes me unenthused about Pearson remaining here - is how inconsistent he can be for a veteran, at least at the productive end of the ice.  Long term you pretty much know what you're getting, but shorter term, he's spotty, aside from being a good defensive forward.  I think the team needs more - and more consistency - from Horvat, and I'm not sure Pearson isn't a part of the equation that needs tweaking.  Hopefully Podkolzin will prove to be a player that brings the elevated game and consistency they need.

 

Hard to get too invested in this deal one way or the other - reasonable enough - not going to 'move the needle' - might help them sustain the needle as a good middle six forward - while the improvement will need to come from within, from emerging youth. 

For me the priority would be Hughes' partner - and shutdown/hard minutes centers - which is not to say that you neglect the rest of the roster/team needs - but it's hard to get particularly enthused about a deal like this.  Can see why they did it - makes general sense - but hope Pearson regains some of what would make him a solid signing - if the team as a whole can regain it's stride, perhaps it stands to reason that he will/could.

 

 

Its been reported that as part of the signing Benning gave verbal assurances to Pearson that he would be protected in the expansion draft though. Nothing in writing from what I have seen reported but the fact it has been out there in the public sphere certainly boxes Benning in a bit if true.

  • RoughGame 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Its been reported that as part of the signing Benning gave verbal assurances to Pearson that he would be protected in the expansion draft though. Nothing in writing from what I have seen reported but the fact it has been out there in the public sphere certainly boxes Benning in a bit if true.

Yikes ... imagine if Seattle take Kole Lind and ends up being very good for them

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, canuck2288 said:

JB may be able to draft but he can’t choose coaches or make contracts to save his life 

You don't like the Demko contract or the Horvat contract?

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, oldnews said:

Ironic to see Paterson of all people wondering when the team will elevate it's game - priceless coming from one of the geniuses in this media market that referred to JT Miller as a cap dump.  Elevate your own game, Jeff.

 

best 2 sentences of any post ive read this thread. JP's analysis and coverage of the team is often head scratching garbalyguke...(not even he knows what he's talking about)

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

JB still talking about bringing the coaching staff back next season 

 

if that is not proof of incompetence what is?

 

time to clean house and begin the rebuild because this last 7 year process was a complete disaster 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, oldnews said:

yeah - one of the loudest critiques - but was the bottom six really the problem?  

ironically - it's the top line and Hughes that bled 5on5 goals this season - had not particularly good possession or goal metrics.

The bottom six has been pretty stingy - which, really, is their job.  Beagle and Motte playing the hardest minutes on the team, were among the best in terms of giving up very litte 5 on 5 - and their possession metrics were also very good in context, Roussel and Virtanen = 1.1 and 1.0 on ice goals against per 60.  In the end it's a two way game = if you produce but give up more, that's not really a winnng formula, and if you produce little but give up very little, are you really 'the problem'?  For me the larger problems were early season puck movment, particulary zone exits,the goaltending wasn't particularly good early either - and the young team was just not cohesive and looked exhausted on a regular basis with the schedule out of the gate.  Any attempt to pin the season on a lacklustre bottom six is just a predetermined/prejudicial axe to grind imo.

People love to rip on the 'bottom' of the lineup - rarely want to call it like it is when it comes to 'stars' - but the reality is that the team's struggles were not reducible to 'bottom six' - if anything the fatal giveaways, the struggles to defend, came from throughout the lineup, if not the 'top of it'.   At the same time I'm not going to be cricital of the young players - I think it was pretty predictable - and to be expected - that they'd struggle, particularly early.

 

A number of the young teams in the league have 'underachieved' imo - Philly, the Rags, Chicago - flagging this year - LA, a team that some people were praising not long ago as if Blake had performed some miracle shortcut - are getting wrecked (6 wins in their last 20 games and a lineup very veteran top heavy in production).  The usual bottomfeeders - are still.   A few teams that are a bit surprising - St Louis struggling to compete, although they've been downgrading that lineup imo for a few years now.   Columbus is a roster that is better than it is performing imo - I keep expecting them to finally end the Tortorella experiment there, but go figure, he's still there....

where do you get your advanced stats from? beagle and motte may have played the toughest, but they were near the bottom in playing time% vs elite competition.

 

and the last 17 games i would agree our top line was not playing its best hockey, but when your top line is miller vesey virtanen that doesnt suprise me. horvat hogz and pearson have played great this year. the first twenty games with petterson in the lineup all advanced stats show we were outplaying the competition.

  • RoughGame 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...