[Signing] Canucks re-sign Tanner Pearson

[Dazzle]

1 minute ago, highwayman3 said:

But that's sort of the point - he will be soon.  And therefore we are just replacing the ones coming off the books with new ones.  That's why I'm frustrated.  How do you expected our good young players to take the next step if they continue to be surrounded by overpaid, declining vets with NTC's who were signed because they are "good in the room"?

They have to earn their spot, not be gifted spots. That being said, you have to have a coach willing to play young players too. It's a delicate balance.

[zimmy]

19 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

I didnt look to see if Smith has similar no trade protection and guarantee of expansion protection. I know that Pearson's contract is terrible. Dollars, term, ntc, and expansion protection for an 11 point forward who is pretty slow, scores a lot of his goals on empty nets, and is gifted top 6 and pp time that by itself should increase expectations to actually produce relatively consistently.

 

There is a reason this deal has pretty universally been panned by most in the media.

 

The TV deal is already baked in money there bud. It is not new money to prop league finances up. Its essentially replacing their previous tv money.

 

Seattle isnt going to take a bunch of $&!#ty contracts. The players they take also need to be replaced on the roster. In most cases the cap savings will likely be pretty negligible.

JT Miller says hello, and thanks, to mostly all media members, for universally panning me! It felt great!

[wallstreetamigo]

1 hour ago, Dazzle said:

It's worth noting that Pearson is good friends with Horvat. People seem to think this is NHL 2021. There are real human connections. It's no surprise that the dissonant noise about Benning's performance doesn't take into account these factors, which really reflects how little experience they have dealing with people.

 

3.25 isn't even a bad number, but people are just finding things to nitpick about. If Yzerman signed this contract, you can bet people will think this is a smart signing.

Horvat is probably good friends with countless other players that play for other teams. Professional athletes understand it is a business not an atom rep team where your dad is the coach and you make him take all your friends no matter how much they suck.

 

This signing wouod be terrible no matter which GM signed it, at least for me.

Edited April 11, 2021 by wallstreetamigo

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, highwayman3 said:

You've already stated that Benning bears no responsibility for any of his decisions that turn out poorly, that everything that doesn't work out is due to luck or circumstance,

No, that's not what I've actually said. I in fact have widely panned both the Eriksson signing and not trading Virtanen last year. I believe Benning does bear responsibility for those things.

 

Roussel having a massive knee injury and not as yet fully recovering from it? Baer having concussion issues from a blindside hit? Nope and nope.

 

Beagle and Sutter were different situations entirely. They were slight overpays for critical, sheltering, hard minute C's. Neither are remotely crippling and I don't have a problem with either contract.

 

Quote

 

that Pearson would've gotten this contract on the open market, that we should bring Sutter back for 2.5M and that there are really no other options apart from Sutter...mental gymnastics was the politest term on I could think of.  

Pearson would have got this on the open market. Maybe even a few hundred k more from a desperate team. And no, I didn't say we had no other option other than Sutter, I in fact noted I'm hopeful we can find a younger, longer term replacement via trade to upgrade on him. But realistically, if that's not a viable option, Sutter may very well be our cheapest and shortest term solution to fill a depth C role.

 

And I actually said between $1.5 and $2.5m. You sure like to misrepresent a lot of things trying to debate people.

 

Quote

 

Dude for once look at the &^@#ing context.  It's a flat cap where middle of the pack players are getting huge pay decreases. 

He did get a pay decrease genius.

 

Quote

We have repeatedly been recently burned by these late 20's contracts given out for being "good in the room." We need to re-sign Petterson and Hughes and are already in a cap crunch.  FFS.

Cap is tight. there's work to be done. It's hardly dire. Yet more hyperbolic melodrama.

 

Quote

I call it like I see it - you are clearly smarter than most of your arguments and I don't think you actually believe any of the aforementioned nonsense.

You might want to get your eyes checked. Along with all your myopic, short sighted pals.

 

Quote

 

If that suspicion bothers you (it's by the far the most likely explanation at this point) I suggest you take your own advice and take a big rip off your bong...duuuude...it's just a website....whateva brahhhhh.

It doesn't 'bother' me, it's an embarrassingly weak-ass retort from someone who clearly lacks both the skills and supporting information to actually debate their (ignorant) view point. As is your bong one.

 

Weak.

 

1 hour ago, highwayman3 said:

First of all he still got less than Pearson and that deal was also universally panned when it came out.  Just because another team are signed a crappy contract doesn't mean we have to follow suit.  

Yes, a TWENTY'ish point F got a hair less than FORTY'ish point Pearson. People have posted a crap tonne of comparables for you guys, most of whom are making in the range of $3-$3.5m +/-. IE: not 'overpaid'. If you want to continue your willful ignorance of reality as a means to continue to set your hair on fire... fill your boots. It's a pretty sad look though.

Edited April 11, 2021 by aGENT

[wallstreetamigo]

54 minutes ago, zimmy said:

JT Miller says hello, and thanks, to mostly all media members, for universally panning me! It felt great!

JT Miller was a cap dump for TB bud. Same as Schmidt was for Vegas. I am glad both have worked out. But Benning did not fleece anyone. TB and Vegas went into both of those deals eyes wide open. And essentially got the cap space for Pietrangelo, etc. 

 

[canuck2288]

1 hour ago, 4petesake said:

Also Dhaliwal.

 

Pearson would have had a rude awakening in free agency 

 

mark my words, in 2 years he will be the new Loui 

[Junkyard Dog]

Just now, canuck2288 said:

Pearson would have had a rude awakening in free agency 

 

mark my words, in 2 years he will be the new Loui 

I am not a fan of the deal but. 
 

We had to deal with Loui for 6 years though at almost twice the cap hit. 
 

In 2 years Pearson will be an upcoming UFA at almost half his cap and is actually capable of playing.

[Chris12345]

1 hour ago, Dazzle said:

It's worth noting that Pearson is good friends with Horvat. People seem to think this is NHL 2021. There are real human connections. It's no surprise that the dissonant noise about Benning's performance doesn't take into account these factors, which really reflects how little experience they have dealing with people.

 

3.25 isn't even a bad number, but people are just finding things to nitpick about. If Yzerman signed this contract, you can bet people will think this is a smart signing.

Remember who was at Bo's wedding? Baer.

 

 

[RWMc1]

1 hour ago, Dazzle said:

They have to earn their spot, not be gifted spots. That being said, you have to have a coach willing to play young players too. It's a delicate balance.

You can tell that many of the snivelling whiners are eastern and alberta media clowns who get most of their opinions from replays and stat lines.

 

Actual Canucks fans know that if we didn't get Sutter and Beagle we would have had to "gift" a spot to Gaunce and someone else. We have trouble drawing UFAs as it is so we had to overpay.

 

Now to fit their argument they have to assume that Pearson is a 3rd 4th liner when we use him to match against top players regularly.

 

Oh, and to get 6 empty netters means that he was trusted to shut down the other teams best when the game was on the line. They also have to ignore things like that for their whining viewpoints to make any sense.

 

The snivellers have to make assumptions and ignore all other contributing factors when spewing their narratives. Then they say "we" and "us" while always taking the negative view. How pathetic are they? They spend a ridiculous amount of time on a forum of a team that they are not even fans of.

 

I know a portion of the negative posters are actually fans who don't like the direction. To them I say " We have a solid young core so why whine about support pieces that will be off the books shortly and complementary players who play a needed role?"

 

 

[zimmy]

31 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

JT Miller was a cap dump for TB bud. Same as Schmidt was for Vegas. I am glad both have worked out. But Benning did not fleece anyone. TB and Vegas went into both of those deals eyes wide open. And essentially got the cap space for Pietrangelo, etc. 

 

Not concerned about fleecing or not fleecing. It was the assertion (a correct one) that “most” of the media panned the deal, and how universal “pannings” do not always stand up to the passage of time. 

Edited April 11, 2021 by zimmy

[smithers joe]

i like the signing.it allows us to ice 3 scoring lines next season. the fact that he was able to have chemistry with horvat is huge. it also allows bo to breakin a new player, pods or lind next year. 3 lines with offense and solid defense is what we've all been looking for. cudo's jimbo.

[theo5789]

1 hour ago, highwayman3 said:

But that's sort of the point - he will be soon.  And therefore we are just replacing the ones coming off the books with new ones.  That's why I'm frustrated.  How do you expected our good young players to take the next step if they continue to be surrounded by overpaid, declining vets with NTC's who were signed because they are "good in the room"?

How can you be so sure? And if he is, it's because a young player has pushed him down, which is only a positive and the cost of the young player will offset his price tag anyway. But if a young player isn't ready to, then we have him ready to go. 

 

The NTC is meaningless. It's really just so he can have stability next year with the pandemic going on. He will have trade flexibility afterwards and likely when say a Podkolzin is ready to potentially take on the spot.

 

Not having a season where's he's been a regular 35-40 point player is hardly "declining". Pearson was "declining" when we acquired him and he had a career season with us. Miller was said to be "declining" when we acquired him and we know how that turned out. One season is hardly telling enough of declining.

[wallstreetamigo]

9 minutes ago, zimmy said:

Not concerned about fleecing or not fleecing. It was the assertion (a correct one) that “most” of the media panned the deal, and how universal “pannings” do not always stand up to the passage of time. 

Paying as much as he did for a clear cap dump was worthy of being questioned at the time though. Miller responded well to the increased opportunity.

 

The Pearson signing is apples to oranges. Its not a trade with an asset going back being questioned. Its signing a guy we already had and know what he is and is not in our lineup.

 

The Pearson signing is being panned rightly so because he is not worthy of premium covid-era/flat cap dollars, a mid term contract length, ntc in2 years of his deal, AND a promise of expansion protection. 

 

He has 11 points in 33 games playing on the 2nd line with significant PP time. But that should not have been a factor in his contract because he had a career year last year (including a ton of empty net goals)?

 

Its funny how the people excited about this signing are the same ones saying Petterssen and Hughes now need to sign bridge deals for way less than last years numbers would suggest because they havent done the same this year and need to take less so the team can continue to surround them with overpriced vets like Pearson, Beagle, Roussel, Eriksson, etc that will refuse to sign in Van unless they significantly overpay.

 

One more signing like this (Sutter anyone?) and it puts EP or QH in long term jeopardy of staying.

[Dazzle]

13 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

How can you be so sure? And if he is, it's because a young player has pushed him down, which is only a positive and the cost of the young player will offset his price tag anyway. But if a young player isn't ready to, then we have him ready to go. 

 

The NTC is meaningless. It's really just so he can have stability next year with the pandemic going on. He will have trade flexibility afterwards and likely when say a Podkolzin is ready to potentially take on the spot.

 

Not having a season where's he's been a regular 35-40 point player is hardly "declining". Pearson was "declining" when we acquired him and he had a career season with us. Miller was said to be "declining" when we acquired him and we know how that turned out. One season is hardly telling enough of declining.

Yes, you are right. One cannot say definitively that someone is declining ahead of time. That is only a judgement made in hindsight. Pearson and Benning both believe that this year is an off year. Pearson is signing for less than his original contract. I think that shows they have a good relationship and they understand what is going on. Pearson obviously wants to stay. So does Benning. Therefore 3.25 is a fair deal for both sides. If Pearson has a career year next year, will they say he just got 'lucky'? Seems like posters have a confirmation bias.

[canuck73_3]

1 hour ago, canuck2288 said:

Pearson would have had a rude awakening in free agency 

 

mark my words, in 2 years he will be the new Loui 

And you say you educate people here about the game. This is a truly awful and false take. Pearson is a perfectly fine middle six winger and this isn’t even remotely the same universe as the Loui deal. 

[J-Dizzle]

A few more comparables

 

Joel Armia: two year 2.6 signed in 2019. Current age 27 (.38 ppg career)

 

Andrew Shaw: six year 3.9 signed 2016. Current age 29 (.45 ppg career)

 

Brett Connolly: four year 3.5 signed in 2019. Current age 28 (.37 ppg career)

 

Tom Wilson: six year 5.1 signed 2018. Current age 27 (.38 ppg career)

 

Joonas Donskoi: 4 year 3.9 signed 2019. Current age 28 (.47 ppg career)

[J-Dizzle]

3 hours ago, J-Dizzle said:

Some Pearson comparables:

 

Dzingel: two years at 3.25 signed in 2019. 29 years old (.49 ppg career.. earlier seasons definitely exceeded recent ones)

 

maroon: two year 900,000 signed 2020. 32 years old (.44 ppg career)

 

Zucker: five year 5.5 signed 2018.  29 years old (.53 ppg career)

Nick Foligno: six year 5.5 signed in 2015. 33 years old (.51 ppg career)

Conor sheary: 1 year 735,000 signed 2020. 28 years old (.45 ppg career)

 

Brock Mcginn:  two year 2.1 signed 2019. 27 years old (.31 ppg career) 

 

Paul Byron: Four year 3.4 signed 2018.  31 years old. (.41 ppg career). 

 

 

 

 

 

 

14 minutes ago, J-Dizzle said:

A few more comparables

 

Joel Armia: two year 2.6 signed in 2019. Current age 27 (.38 ppg career)

 

Andrew Shaw: six year 3.9 signed 2016. Current age 29 (.45 ppg career)

 

Brett Connolly: four year 3.5 signed in 2019. Current age 28 (.37 ppg career)

 

Tom Wilson: six year 5.1 signed 2018. Current age 27 (.38 ppg career)

 

Joonas Donskoi: 4 year 3.9 signed 2019. Current age 28 (.47 ppg career)

I think Dzingel, Sheary (although his contract looks like a bit of an outlier), Byron, Shaw, Connolly and Donskoi are all very fair comparables. 
 

An average of those six salaries is a 3.1 mil cap hit. 
 

take out Sheary and the average is 3.59.

 

Looks like unless I’m missing any real good comparables Pearson is getting paid right about what he should be. 
 

Edit:  I should say... it looks like unless I’m missing a number of good comparables rather than any. 

Edited April 12, 2021 by J-Dizzle

[babalu]

I like Pearson and think he's been a good fit with Bo.

I don't mind keeping him around but I think this is far more than he would have got as a UFA.

His contract immediately becomes yet another undesirable contract trade wise.

If he can get back to the production he had last year than it's not terrible.

At least he doesn't have any trade protection in the final year of the contract.

[aGENT]

30 minutes ago, J-Dizzle said:

 

I think Dzingel, Sheary (although his contract looks like a bit of an outlier), Byron, Shaw, Connolly and Donskoi are all very fair comparables. 
 

An average of those six salaries is a 3.1 mil cap hit. 
 

take out Sheary and the average is 3.59.

 

Looks like unless I’m missing any real good comparables Pearson is getting paid right about what he should be. 
 

Edit:  I should say... it looks like unless I’m missing a number of good comparables rather than any. 

You can probably add:

 

Kassian - $3.2 x 4

 

Grabner - $3.35 X 3

 

Craig Smith - $3.1 X 3

 

Calvert - $2.85 X 3 

 

 

[JM_]

2 hours ago, canuck2288 said:

Pearson would have had a rude awakening in free agency 

 

mark my words, in 2 years he will be the new Loui 

to be the new Loui, Persons extension would have to time travel back to 2 years ago