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

Elias Pettersson | Quinn Hughes - Contract Discussion Thread

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, MikeyD said:

It'd be a really bad move to trade Miller. Miller is on a great contract for what he brings to the team. He's multidimensional and players like that signed to great contracts are extremely rare. Chances are that he's also not going to ask for that significant a pay raise. He wants to contend and win. 

It's called asset management.  Sure if he wants to play here and re-signs to a fair deal then great.   What do you think his value is going to be, fair market value that is, in two years when his deal is up?  Why wouldn't he be asking for one too.   We could get two/three  more years of BB at least just based on age...we will see won't we.   The correct thing to do is play him as a third line C, if we do that then yes, maybe his next deal won't be much higher then this one, on a loaded first line he's going to make bank when his contract is up, and he's a UFA if he keeps up the pace he had his first season.    Easier to do that.   I'm pretty sure Miller or Horvat or BB won't be here.   Not re-upping Horvat over Miller well pretty sure know that won't happen, but never know, and BB was the better player last season, three years younger.    Better money probably spent on BB and Horvat.   EP and QHs will have two different cores to work with - think of Miller like St. Louis was like to Stamkos to EP.    Need to recycle some assets, cant just play them all just for a bump come playoff time.   Not this year obviously.  

Edited by IBatch
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, -DLC- said:

You're wanting to hit fast forward and skip over steps....."perennial winners" aren't just an "add water" and done deal.  Over time, teams learn and adjust in order to get there.  But it takes getting into the playoffs and building from each step along the way before you can think about repeating that.  Experience is important.

 

I feel most teams that sustain success didn't just get there from square one...."it's a process" for teams.

 

Sure, you have to plan for the future but you don't sacrifice the here and now and players in place as part of that....you have to get there and baby steps along the way are required before you just jump to a perennial winner.  

 

Think of a guy like Petey and how important playoffs are to him.  He's a winner and sitting out as we collect players for a future/perennial winner doesn't suit him.  He's confident and wants to prove himself...at some point, you have to let the horses run and not hold them back.  Him NOT being in the playoffs sets the tone for discontent...we have to aim to be there to keep our stars motivated, happy and confident in THEIR team.  Not a future version of a team that looks past them.

Jb didn't fix the defense. He is gambling that OEL can resurrect himself. If he can't, the contract will be an albatross.  He has almost emptied the prospect cupboard. Maybe he's a genius and all of it will lead to a cup which I will certainly cheer for as I have since they came into the league.  I just see too much  "hope" in JB's approach. 

  • Hydration 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DIBdaQUIB said:

Jb didn't fix the defense. He is gambling that OEL can resurrect himself. If he can't, the contract will be an albatross.  He has almost emptied the prospect cupboard. Maybe he's a genius and all of it will lead to a cup which I will certainly cheer for as I have since they came into the league.  I just see too much  "hope" in JB's approach. 

He hasn’t emptied the prospect cupboard, there are still some promising players coming through. If it’s less full than it was it’s not because it’s all been traded away, it’s because a significant number have hit the team, and then kept their spot. 
 

EP, QH, BB, Hoglander, Podz, Rathbone, Demko, Juolevi,

 

we also have Dipetro, Woo, Klimovich, Lockwood, Koskenvuo , Gaj which I think all will make the big show. 
 

yes our cupboard may not be say as full as the Kings but we are at different places in our builds, plus bending seems to have a better hit rate in the draft with players making it. Does it matter if say 3 prospects make the show out of a pool of 5 or 15? 

 

 

  • Hydration 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, IBatch said:

It's called asset management.  Sure if he wants to play here and re-signs to a fair deal then great.   What do you think his value is going to be, fair market value that is, in two years when his deal is up?  Why wouldn't he be asking for one too.   We could get two/three  more years of BB at least just based on age...we will see won't we.   The correct thing to do is play him as a third line C, if we do that then yes, maybe his next deal won't be much higher then this one, on a loaded first line he's going to make bank when his contract is up, and he's a UFA if he keeps up the pace he had his first season.    Easier to do that.   I'm pretty sure Miller or Horvat or BB won't be here.   Not re-upping Horvat over Miller well pretty sure know that won't happen, but never know, and BB was the better player last season, three years younger.    Better money probably spent on BB and Horvat.   EP and QHs will have two different cores to work with - think of Miller like St. Louis was like to Stamkos to EP.    Need to recycle some assets, cant just play them all just for a bump come playoff time.   Not this year obviously.  

I'd pay Miller upwards of 7. I'm not even sure he's going to ask for that because he's always been a team guy and he wants to win a cup so I'd wager he'd be willing to take a cut to do that. If there's anybody on the team that gets the highshool yearbook vote of "most likely to take a cap hit" it'd be Miller. In my opinion guys like Miller are far more valuable than a Brock Boeser. Although Boeser is more talented, he can't play up and down your lineup and when he's not producing, he's not earning his wage in other ways. I disagree with spending money on BB than Miller, but that's obviously a personal preference thing. 

  • RoughGame 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My prediction is:

-1 million for OJ (bridge)

-2.5 million for Dickinson

-7 million for Hughes (bridge)

-7 million for Pettersson (bridge)

 

That’s the only way I see things working given our cap space (14 million + 3.5 LTIR for Ferland).

 

If Pettersson requires a 9 million dollar deal of some kind, then I think we might have to consider the possibility of Hughes being traded to New Jersey.  NJ has also kinds of cap space and already has two of the Hughes brothers there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not willing to give up on Hughes quite yet. I think a lot of his defensive woes were partially in due to being a victim of our defensive system. Hughes' major mishaps would largely be covered up playing on a more dynamic offensively talented team that plays more of a possession game. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:

 

 

Considering that the Canucks have had a history of prolonged RFA negotiations with Bo and Boeser (as both extended into training camp) do you suspect that perhaps it could happen for Petey and Hughes?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, CRAZY_4_NAZZY said:

Considering that the Canucks have had a history of prolonged RFA negotiations with Bo and Boeser (as both extended into training camp) do you suspect that perhaps it could happen for Petey and Hughes?

It wouldn't surprise me if that's the case. My guess would be just before or during training camp.

  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Patel Bure said:

My prediction is:

-1 million for OJ (bridge)

-2.5 million for Dickinson

-7 million for Hughes (bridge)

-7 million for Pettersson (bridge)

 

That’s the only way I see things working given our cap space (14 million + 3.5 LTIR for Ferland).

 

If Pettersson requires a 9 million dollar deal of some kind, then I think we might have to consider the possibility of Hughes being traded to New Jersey.  NJ has also kinds of cap space and already has two of the Hughes brothers there.

Your not considering the 22 players already on the roster so you can subtract 4 of them to fit Petey, Hughes, Dickinson, Joulevi. We have lots of space to lock up Petey long term

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Devron44 said:

Your not considering the 22 players already on the roster so you can subtract 4 of them to fit Petey, Hughes, Dickinson, Joulevi. We have lots of space to lock up Petey long term

I'd be good with Petey long term but Hughes needs a show me bridge deal. 

  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems that both Petey and Hughs are asking for too much money and term.

This is a business, not a social club with cute nicknames.

Petey is an 165lb stickman that’s one bone crushing hit from retirement.

Hughs is a wonderful skater with a high hockey iq. Can he realistically play defensive with his size in the nhl? I’d like to see him as a forward.

 Sign them to a fair contract and term, or trade them.

  • Wat 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, CanucksJay said:

I'd be good with Petey long term but Hughes needs a show me bridge deal. 

I’d agree with that unless a long term deal for Hughes was somewhere around 7. Unlikely but the way defencemen seem to be getting 9-10 million it would turn into a bargain. Again, unlikely so best route for Hughes is a bridge deal 

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Devron44 said:

Your not considering the 22 players already on the roster so you can subtract 4 of them to fit Petey, Hughes, Dickinson, Joulevi. We have lots of space to lock up Petey long term

Do you mind showing me your math?   I might be a bit off here.  
 

It’s to my understanding that we have 17.5 million in cap space (14 + 3.5 Ferland LTIR).

 

After Dickinson (2.5?) and Juolevi (1?), we will have 14 million.  
 

I don’t doubt that we have tons of space to sign Petey to a long term deal and/or match any predatory offer sheets.  
 

My biggest concern is that signing Petey to a long term deal will impact the amount that we can give Quinn Hughes.  We are already seeing how much dmen are getting in this off season.  
 

There’s no way Quinn will accept anything below 7 million nor should he.  If we are LUCKY, he will accept a Zack Werenski-ish 7 million * 3....and if that were to happen, Petey would have to accept a similar AAV.

 

If we sign Petey to 8.5-9.5 million however, then we would only be able to offer QH between 5.5 and 6.5 which would be a massive slap in the face to QH.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Patel Bure said:

Do you mind showing me your math?   I might be a bit off here.  
 

It’s to my understanding that we have 17.5 million in cap space (14 + 3.5 Ferland LTIR).

 

After Dickinson (2.5?) and Juolevi (1?), we will have 14 million.  
 

I don’t doubt that we have tons of space to sign Petey to a long term deal and/or match any predatory offer sheets.  
 

My biggest concern is that signing Petey to a long term deal will impact the amount that we can give Quinn Hughes.  We are already seeing how much dmen are getting in this off season.  
 

There’s no way Quinn will accept anything below 7 million nor should he.  If we are LUCKY, he will accept a Zack Werenski-ish 7 million * 3....and if that were to happen, Petey would have to accept a similar AAV.

 

If we sign Petey to 8.5-9.5 million however, then we would only be able to offer QH between 5.5 and 6.5 which would be a massive slap in the face to QH.

 

 

https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/canucks
 

Goto this link. We currently show 22 players on the roster with approx 14 million in cap space. This does not include Petey, Hughes, Dickinson, and Joulevi. 
 

Typically you have a 23 man roster. This includes 2 goalies and 3 spares (healthy scratches)
 

Petey, Hughes and Dickinson will replace 3 players that are already on the roster. That frees up another 3 million approx. The players they will be replacing will end up in minors. I didn’t include Joulevi as we show 22 players and will need 23.

 

That gives us approx 17 million before Ferland goes on LTIR. This would in theory give us over 20 million in cap space. They trick is to utilize the LTIR after Ferland shifts over there. So technically we have 17 million to sign Petey and Hughes. So yes there is definitely an opportunity to lock up Petey long term. We will see how it goes though 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Patel Bure said:

Do you mind showing me your math?   I might be a bit off here.  
 

It’s to my understanding that we have 17.5 million in cap space (14 + 3.5 Ferland LTIR).

 

After Dickinson (2.5?) and Juolevi (1?), we will have 14 million.  
 

I don’t doubt that we have tons of space to sign Petey to a long term deal and/or match any predatory offer sheets.  
 

My biggest concern is that signing Petey to a long term deal will impact the amount that we can give Quinn Hughes.  We are already seeing how much dmen are getting in this off season.  
 

There’s no way Quinn will accept anything below 7 million nor should he.  If we are LUCKY, he will accept a Zack Werenski-ish 7 million * 3....and if that were to happen, Petey would have to accept a similar AAV.

 

If we sign Petey to 8.5-9.5 million however, then we would only be able to offer QH between 5.5 and 6.5 which would be a massive slap in the face to QH.

 

 

I think Petey gets a bridge deal.  Three years for 24 mil.  Quinn we sign to six years at 50 mil.  

  • Hydration 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...
×
×
  • Create New...