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

[Trade] Canucks trade Adam Gaudette to Blackhawks for Matthew Highmore


Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, NaveJoseph said:

I get the same feeling. It seems as though the team was upset with Gaudette and his girlfriend not following Covid-19 regulations.

I think we should have got at least a 4th for him, as he was a 5th rounder that outperformed his draft slot and is further along in development.

Yeah, however, I suspect that the Chicago GM felt otherwise, and he probably realised that he had the Canucks over a barrel.

 

Mostly Chicago was willing to do the Canucks a favour by taking Gaudette in exchange for just a bottom-6 guy (a contract for a contract) who plays well (for a bottom-6). It's not like they were going to do the Canucks any significant favours beyond agreeing to take Gaudette off of the Canucks' hands. If the Canucks did press for a pick, the Hawks could have made an offer that would actually cost the Canucks (so one or more guys who are less than Highmore, with more term and cap, and a 7th). I'm fine with what the got.

 

                                               regards,  G.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

When did I say any of them would get a return of high draft picks, injured or not? The cap space and spot for a younger player alone would have been a huge win.

Not saying you did, I'm just going by the usual refrain that can be heard around here.  :)

 

The only one of these "untradeable" contracts is Eriksson's deal (IMO). And even if the Canucks were to attach a 1st round pick to the deal, how many teams could add a $6 million cap hit to their team? And with Eriksson having a (modified) NTC with which he could exclude pretty well any of the bottom feeder teams with cap space, where was he going to go? 

 

                                                      regards,  G.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Gollumpus said:

Not saying you did, I'm just going by the usual refrain that can be heard around here.  :)

 

The only one of these "untradeable" contracts is Eriksson's deal (IMO). And even if the Canucks were to attach a 1st round pick to the deal, how many teams could add a $6 million cap hit to their team? And with Eriksson having a (modified) NTC with which he could exclude pretty well any of the bottom feeder teams with cap space, where was he going to go? 

 

                                                      regards,  G.

Therein lies my complaint about why giving out so many limited ntc is a bad strategy by Benning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Therein lies my complaint about why giving out so many limited ntc is a bad strategy by Benning.

This is a valid point. Another thing to consider is this, what do you give a player who is willing to sign here but wants more money than you are willing (or able) to pay?

 

                                                    regards,  G.

 

PS - interesting reading regarding Columbus: https://theathletic.com/2546910/2021/05/03/former-blue-jackets-on-whats-wrong-with-columbus-if-youre-going-to-try-to-sign-free-agents-you-need-to-overpay/

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Gollumpus said:

This is a valid point. Another thing to consider is this, what do you give a player who is willing to sign here but wants more money than you are willing (or able) to pay?

 

                                                    regards,  G.

 

PS - interesting reading regarding Columbus: https://theathletic.com/2546910/2021/05/03/former-blue-jackets-on-whats-wrong-with-columbus-if-youre-going-to-try-to-sign-free-agents-you-need-to-overpay/

Depends on how replaceable the players skill set is by someone else.

 

For bottom 6 "glue guys" or "foundational players", you dont break the bank for them when you are a bottom feeding team.

 

Imagine if instead of acquiring and then extending some of those players, Benning had instead kept the assets he traded (or traded them for picks and prospects) and simultaneously used the cap space to take on a comparable player from a cap strapped team by getting them to throw in a high pick or top prospect?

 

The end result, a bottom of the league team with some overpriced veterans to fill spots through the lean years. But with a bunch of added picks and prospects instead of giving them away to acquire those players.

 

Cap space is the most valuable trade piece in the nhl. And its not even close.

Edited by wallstreetamigo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Thats one contract though. And as far as I know I never mentioned Myers.

I was just comparing. Our cap troubles are mostly gone after next season(we’ll have around 30M in cap after 2021-22). Will have to only re-sign Boeser.  Still probably in for another down year next season since are gonna be younger. Whoever’s the GM just needs to be better with the cap. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Junkyard Dog said:

I was just comparing. Our cap troubles are mostly gone after next season(we’ll have around 30M in cap after 2021-22). Will have to only re-sign Boeser.  Still probably in for another down year next season since are gonna be younger. Whoever’s the GM just needs to be better with the cap. 

This is my concern though. 

 

Cap is coming available, just like it has several times during Bennings tenure. He genuinely believed the players he signed previously were keys to a competitive team. So what is he going to waste that cap space on?

 

If Benning does the same type of signings it means there will need to be another rebuild and no window for this core. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

This is the difference between "hating" Benning (which i get accused of daily) and genuinely and objectively assessing him as poor at his job with reasons why I come to that conclusion.

 

No one has to agree with my perspective but dismissing it as haterzzzzz etc is not realistic. 

absoloutly it's your opinion and we can and should all respect that.

 

But continuously assessing him as poor at his job, over and over and over again, is where your perspective starts to lean towards Obsession.

 

Change is in the winds, change can be good, change will be exciting.

 

Go Canucks Go

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, AbrasiveAjax said:

absoloutly it's your opinion and we can and should all respect that.

 

But continuously assessing him as poor at his job, over and over and over again, is where your perspective starts to lean towards Obsession.

 

Change is in the winds, change can be good, change will be exciting.

 

Go Canucks Go

I have been obsessed with this team for over 40 years. Seen a lot of terrible management in that time. Can anyone blame me for wanting to see my team actually do the right things to win a cup before I die?

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

1 minute ago, wallstreetamigo said:

I have been obsessed with this team for over 40 years. Seen a lot of terrible management in that time. Can anyone blame me for wanting to see my team actually do the right things to win a cup before I die?

same here, since 1970, ditto on some bad management.

 

IMHO, JB has been adequate, propped up by some decent scouting and drafting. Yes you can point to some bad signings, but every GM can be picked apart.

 

Now that our CORE is supposedly set, IMHO, i think we need change to take the next step.

 

I've just spent my life not obsessively complaining as it's not healthy, not productive and in the end, no one really gives a $&!# about my opinion anyways

 

Cheers 

 

Go Canucks Go

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, AbrasiveAjax said:

same here, since 1970, ditto on some bad management.

 

IMHO, JB has been adequate, propped up by some decent scouting and drafting. Yes you can point to some bad signings, but every GM can be picked apart.

 

Now that our CORE is supposedly set, IMHO, i think we need change to take the next step.

 

I've just spent my life not obsessively complaining as it's not healthy, not productive and in the end, no one really gives a $&!# about my opinion anyways

 

Cheers 

 

Go Canucks Go

 

 

 

I guess I dont really care if anyone agrees with me or not so I just speak my mind.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/5/2021 at 3:08 AM, wallstreetamigo said:

At least Calgary paid top dollar for actual top players not bottom 6 aging scrubs like Benning. Neither Markstrom nor Tanev have been the Flames problem this year. 

 

get real  re: Calgary.  you've conveniently cherry picked here.

crap goggles for your team - rose goggles for rivals.

 

they're still paying for the Brouwer buyout (4.5 million per deal still costing them 1.5 for another year).

and Stone buyouts (3.5 million costing them 1.16 this year).

they're still eating the cap they spent on James Neal in the form of eating Lucic - who has 2 more years beyond this - at 5.25 million.

Derek Ryan's 3.125 million has hit waivers repeatedly.

 

All those deals signed by the present GM - Treliving - who makes 'mistakes' - like every other GM in the business.

Fluffing the Flames as if they have no dead cap is just plain delusional (over 16 million per worth of contracts - as you "at least" the Flames...)

 

you're the guy that wants to call out GMs like Benning - at the same time as you still refer to a player like JT Miller as a cap dump.

 

fyi -  those are actual "cap dumps" - contracts with relative negative value.   once you grasp something as simple as what constitutes a cap dump, then perhaps your endless callouts of management can be taken seriously.


 

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

1 minute ago, oldnews said:

 

get real  re: Calgary.  you've conveniently cherry picked here.

crap goggles for your team - rose goggles for rivals.

 

they're still paying for the Brouwer buyout (4.5 million per deal still costing them 1.5 for another year).

and Stone buyouts (3.5 million costing them 1.16 this year).

they're still eating the cap they spent on James Neal in the form of eating Lucic - who has 2 more years beyond this - at 5.25 million.

Derek Ryan's 3.125 million has hit waivers repeatedly.

 

All those deals signed by the present GM - Treliving - who makes 'mistakes' - like every other GM in the business.

Fluffing the Flames as if they have no dead cap is just plain delusional (over 16 million per worth of contracts - as you "at least" the Flames...)

 

you're the guy that wants to call out GMs like Benning - at the same time as you still refer to a player like JT Miller as a cap dump.

 

fyi -  those are actual "cap dumps" - contracts with relative negative value.   once you grasp something as simple as what constitutes a cap dump, then perhaps your endless callouts of management can be taken seriously.


 

what are the odds on Treliving still being the GM after this year? I'd say 50-50. The F'Lames had no excuses to miss the playoffs this year. 

  • Like 1
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does any realize that to build a cup winning team, its to be done through drafting. Not trading or signing. Those are the final pieces you add.

Since Benning has joined Vancouver in 2014 lets compare drafting with some of the teams who have drafted the highest since 2014 and we will put the 2 top scorers from each teams draft.

 

Vancouver: 1,747GP 831pts (Boeser and EP combined for 353pts) Outside of those 2 players our drafting has produced 478pts.


Toronto: 1,537GP 1,085pts (Matthews and Marner combined for 703pts)  382pts outside of Matthews and Marner

 

Edmonton: 1,548GP 1,268pts (Draisaitl and McDavid combined for 1059pts) 209pts outside of McDavid and Draisaitl

 

Colorado: 888GP 505pts (Makar and Rantanen combined for 398pts) 107pts outside of Rantanen and Makar

 

Bennings drafting has produced more NHL bodies than 3 teams that have drafted in the top 10 atleast 3 times and 2 of those teams have had first overalls. Outside of their top 2 players their NHL production drops significantly, Vancouver still has nearly 500pts produced outside of our top 2 scorers. We have also produced 200more NHL games than the next closest team. We may not have as lethal of players compared to generational players like McDavid and Matthews, but we make up for that with the rest of our drafting

 

Edited by knucklehead91
  • Cheers 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, oldnews said:

 

get real  re: Calgary.  you've conveniently cherry picked here.

crap goggles for your team - rose goggles for rivals.

 

they're still paying for the Brouwer buyout (4.5 million per deal still costing them 1.5 for another year).

and Stone buyouts (3.5 million costing them 1.16 this year).

they're still eating the cap they spent on James Neal in the form of eating Lucic - who has 2 more years beyond this - at 5.25 million.

Derek Ryan's 3.125 million has hit waivers repeatedly.

 

All those deals signed by the present GM - Treliving - who makes 'mistakes' - like every other GM in the business.

Fluffing the Flames as if they have no dead cap is just plain delusional (over 16 million per worth of contracts - as you "at least" the Flames...)

 

you're the guy that wants to call out GMs like Benning - at the same time as you still refer to a player like JT Miller as a cap dump.

 

fyi -  those are actual "cap dumps" - contracts with relative negative value.   once you grasp something as simple as what constitutes a cap dump, then perhaps your endless callouts of management can be taken seriously.


 

When did I say any of that?

 

You're the guy who is extrapolating your hyperbole from a single comment. Markstrom is a top goalie. Tanev is a top dman. Those are just facts. 

 

Miller was a cap dump for Tampa. Doesnt mean he isnt a good player. They needed the cap space to sign Point. Its a pretty simple concept. If they could have kept him and signed Point they probably would have.

Link to comment
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...