The Canucks have $26.7mill and Change in cap space to work with. With 13 players signed so lets start there. Lets play a game

[Arrow 1983]

Just now, vinny_in_vancouver said:

Maybe his name - "Lock"-wood. 

I know the words I used

[aGENT]

2 minutes ago, Arrow 1983 said:

Gaborik and Nilsson is off their books after this season. 

Appologies, I thought Ferland only had one year left for some reason. Ferland for Killorn (both 2 years remaining) would also work. Or if it's a one year deal for Palat, then Beagle on LTIR (perhaps also Roussel if he too is on LTIR after what appeared to be a 2nd consecutive knee injury) would also work.

 

1 minute ago, Arrow 1983 said:

now you are betting on injuries to TBL players????? your line-up rests on IF TBL players get injured

I'm not betting on anything. Whether they have injuries or not is irrelevant. I was just countering your statement. You (or I) have zero idea how many guys they have playing injured or who might become injured, the rest of the playoffs.

 

Still has nothing to do with a cap clearing trade where we send them LTIR money back, just like OTT did last year for Coburn and Paquette. It's a cheap way for them to 'artificially' use LTIR to clear cap they will otherwise have to pay more to clear.

[Arrow 1983]

8 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Appologies, I thought Ferland only had one year left for some reason. Ferland for Killorn (both 2 years remaining) would also work. Or if it's a one year deal for Palat, then Beagle on LTIR (perhaps also Roussel if he too is on LTIR after what appeared to be a 2nd consecutive knee injury) would also work.

 

I'm not betting on anything. Whether they have injuries or not is irrelevant. I was just countering your statement. You (or I) have zero idea how many guys they have playing injured or who might become injured, the rest of the playoffs.

 

Still has nothing to do with a cap clearing trade where we send them LTIR money back, just like OTT did last year for Coburn and Paquette. It's a cheap way for them to 'artificially' use LTIR to clear cap they will otherwise have to pay more to clear.

They don't need LTIR contracts I don't know how many times I have to say this they have no injuries. You clearly are not understanding why they had to do it last year

 

They don't need Ferland

Edited May 30, 2021 by Arrow 1983

[aGENT]

2 minutes ago, Arrow 1983 said:

They don't need LTIR contracts I don't know how many times I have to say this they have no injuries. You clearly are not understanding why they had to do it last year

Nobody 'needs' (or wants) LTIR contracts. That was part of the cost of 'cheaply' clearing Coburn and Paquette. 

 

It's not me not understanding.

Edited May 30, 2021 by aGENT

[Arrow 1983]

@Provost 

@mll

 

Where are you guys please explain to @aGENT why TBL doesn't need to acquire Ferland.

[Arrow 1983]

1 minute ago, aGENT said:

Nobody 'needs' (or wants) LTIR contracts. That was part of the cost of 'cheaply' clearing Coburn and Paquette. 

 

It's not me not understanding.

Not true in this case it benefited TBL to take on LTIR contracts when they acquired Gaborik and Nilsson.   

[Provost]

17 minutes ago, Arrow 1983 said:

@Provost 

@mll

 

Where are you guys please explain to @aGENT why TBL doesn't need to acquire Ferland.

You are wrong... they can “buy” LTIR space by taking on a permanent LTIR contract to help exceed the cap and retain players they may otherwise need to buy out or dump.

 

They pick up Ferland (if he was determined to be permanently on LTIR) and then use a guy like Cernak as his “replacement” above the cap.

 

I am not saying they would, but that is how it works and what the benefit is.

 

Ferland for Killorn effectively gains them $8 million in cap space... not just Killorn’s $4.5

Edited May 30, 2021 by Provost

[aGENT]

6 minutes ago, Arrow 1983 said:

@Provost 

@mll

 

Where are you guys please explain to @aGENT why TBL doesn't need to acquire Ferland.

Again, they don't 'need' (or 'want') to acquire Ferland. They do it as part of the cost they pay, for clearing Killorn.

[Ghostsof1915]

3 hours ago, vinny_in_vancouver said:

Last I read is that Jay Beagle unfortunately may be on LTIR all of next season. So there will be even more cap space and a need for a 4C.

Source? 

[Arrow 1983]

8 minutes ago, Provost said:

You are wrong... they can “buy” LTIR space by taking on a permanent LTIR contract to help exceed the cap and retain players they may otherwise need to buy out or dump.

 

They pick up Ferland (if he was determined to be permanently on LTIR) and then use a guy like Cernak as his “replacement” above the cap.

 

I am not saying they would, but that is how it works and what the benefit is.

This is only beneficial to them if they have current LTIR contracts. other wise wouldn't a team be causing other issues like carryover bonuses.

 

I understand yes a team would take a player on LTIR possible to trade a player that they don't want anymore but it causes new issues down the road. It is easier to function without LTIR then it is to function with LTIR 

[Arrow 1983]

14 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Again, they don't 'need' (or 'want') to acquire Ferland. They do it as part of the cost they pay, for clearing Killorn.

 

4 minutes ago, Arrow 1983 said:

This is only beneficial to them if they have current LTIR contracts. other wise wouldn't a team be causing other issues like carryover bonuses.

 

I understand yes a team would take a player on LTIR possible to trade a player that they don't want anymore but it causes new issues down the road. It is easier to function without LTIR then it is to function with LTIR 

 

[Provost]

3 minutes ago, Arrow 1983 said:

This is only beneficial to them if they have current LTIR contracts. other wise wouldn't a team be causing other issues like carryover bonuses.

 

I understand yes a team would take a player on LTIR possible to trade a player that they don't want anymore but it causes new issues down the road. It is easier to function without LTIR then it is to function with LTIR 

It doesn’t matter if they currently have LTIR players of their own... once they got Ferland they would have one.  This only works in the offseason as they can use one of their existing contracts as the LTIR replacement.

 

During the season it wouldn’t work because they would have to be cap compliant already... now they don’t have to be until the end of training camp.

[Arrow 1983]

15 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Again, they don't 'need' (or 'want') to acquire Ferland. They do it as part of the cost they pay, for clearing Killorn.

 

18 minutes ago, Provost said:

You are wrong... they can “buy” LTIR space by taking on a permanent LTIR contract to help exceed the cap and retain players they may otherwise need to buy out or dump.

 

They pick up Ferland (if he was determined to be permanently on LTIR) and then use a guy like Cernak as his “replacement” above the cap.

 

I am not saying they would, but that is how it works and what the benefit is.

would it not be better to try and do the reverse and trade Eriksson for a LTIR contract as the Canucks already have to function under LTIR 

[Arrow 1983]

2 minutes ago, Provost said:

It doesn’t matter if they currently have LTIR players of their own... once they got Ferland they would have one.  This only works in the offseason as they can use one of their existing contracts as the LTIR replacement.

 

During the season it wouldn’t work because they would have to be cap compliant already... now they don’t have to be until the end of training camp.

But functioning under LTIR does cause problems like carryover bonuses. 

 

something TBL GM would have to consider.  

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, Arrow 1983 said:

 

would it not be better to try and do the reverse and trade Eriksson for a LTIR contract as the Canucks already have to function under LTIR 

Perhaps. It's certainly something to consider/spit ball.

 

But perhaps if we were to do one or two of these deals, we wouldn't need to function under LTIR... 

[Provost]

2 minutes ago, Arrow 1983 said:

But functioning under LTIR does cause problems like carryover bonuses. 

 

something TBL GM would have to consider.  

Sure... not sure what bonuses Tampa would have to be particularly worrier about though.

 

Also a small worry if they found a way to cheaply get out from under an existing $8 million dollar cap overage.

[aGENT]

13 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

Source? 

There's been more than this (and lots of radio etc discussion around it) but this was the quickest one I found:

 

 

[Arrow 1983]

9 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Perhaps. It's certainly something to consider/spit ball.

 

But perhaps if we were to do one or two of these deals, we wouldn't need to function under LTIR... 

Now that is some serious maneuvering

 

Lets play that one out

 

The Canucks first have to find a team that has a LTIR player who will take Eriksson

 

Then the Canucks would have to trade Ferland and LTIR player just acquired to Tampa for enough contract amount to make it worth both Canucks and TBL  wild 

Edited May 30, 2021 by Arrow 1983

[Arrow 1983]

1 minute ago, aGENT said:

There's been more than this (and lots of radio etc discussion around it) but this was the quickest one I found:

 

 

The problem with this is Beagle could return half way into the season. What this doesn't say is he will be out all season.

[Arrow 1983]

3 minutes ago, Provost said:

Sure... not sure what bonuses Tampa would have to be particularly worrier about though.

 

Also a small worry if they found a way to cheaply get out from under an existing $8 million dollar cap overage.

I just know they did have some younger guys play for them this season with ELC contracts. If they remove players they would have to insert some of those ECL players into the line-up.