[Discussion] If exposed would Seattle take Myers

[Miss Korea Bob.Loblaw]

5 hours ago, DontMessMe said:

He doesn't have a NMC so we don't have to protect him. He only has a NTC which means we can't trade him. U only need to protect someone if they have a NMC

 

https://www.capfriendly.com/players/tanner-pearson

Yeah it's supposedly part of his contract that he will be protected.  Probably one of the conditions to his re-signing (weird that they didn't just give him the NMC).

[Coconuts]

5 hours ago, Top Sven Baercheese said:

Does it rub anyone else the wrong way that we're going to likely lose a quality prospect in Gadjovich just because JB told Pearson he would protect him?

Doubtful we would've lost Pearson in the first place

I don't see it that way, management hasn't been afraid to move guys. We saw Dahlen move, we saw the Toffoli trade happen, we traded Gaudette. If Lind or Gadjovich don't make the protection cut I could easily see one of them being moved prior to, or at the draft. Or I could see a player being included with a current roster player to try and make a play for an upgrade. Maybe as a sweetener to dump cap on a team with more flexible protection slots. Maybe for a pick, or a prospect who's ineligible to be drafted. 

 

Simply sitting and losing Gadjovich isn't the only available move. 

Edited June 6, 2021 by Coconuts

[mll]

1 hour ago, Bob.Loblaw said:

Yeah it's supposedly part of his contract that he will be protected.  Probably one of the conditions to his re-signing (weird that they didn't just give him the NMC).

They would have had to add an NMC to his existing contract too.  For the NMC to be enforced for expansion it has to cover both this season and next.  Simply easier to agree verbally.  The more NMC/NTC handed out and the more likely others will ask for them too.

 

Edited June 6, 2021 by mll

[Gollumpus]

10 hours ago, goblix said:

Expansion protected list:

Forwards: Boeser / Horvat / Miller / Pettersson / Motte / Pearson / ???

Defensemen: Schmidt / Juolevi / ???

Goalie: Demko

 

So this leaves us with exposed players of:

1. Myers
2. Roussel
3. Virtanen
4. MacEwen
5. Lind
6. Gadjovich
7. Holtby

 

That's pretty much it really.. I'm not listing Beagle or Ferland because of medical reasons and I doubt they claim Virtanen given his legal issues at the moment but I still put him up there...

 

Given this list would there really be any choice for Seattle other than Myers here? I guess I could see them pick a prospect like Lind or Gadjovich but they are unknown quantities that really didn't take advantage of the chance they had this year.

Lots of folks scream Lind for that last forward spot. I guess I'd be okay with that.

 

Were the Canucks to trade their 8th OA pick to another team for a return which included a young, right handed d-man, then that would fill your empty spot for d-men and leave Myers on the outside looking in.

 

                                                               regards,  G.

[Gollumpus]

3 hours ago, Bob.Loblaw said:

Yeah it's supposedly part of his contract that he will be protected.  Probably one of the conditions to his re-signing (weird that they didn't just give him the NMC).

What puzzles me is, if he wanted to stay here, why not sign him after the expansion and amateur drafts? He must have been giving a pretty good "hometown discount" in exchange for signing sooner.

 

                                                             regards,  G.

[JM_]

13 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

How exactly are we going to pick up another young right handed D?  There are none in free agency as they are all old. It would have to be via a trade.  Our only trade chips are the 9OA pick, Juolevi and Motte. If Benning moves the first round draft pick then that would change the parameters. That’s the only way I can see Myers being exposed. 

that way is the most likely, but there might be someone available due to expansion as well. 

[NewbieCanuckFan]

7 hours ago, Gollumpus said:

Lots of folks scream Lind for that last forward spot. I guess I'd be okay with that.

 

Were the Canucks to trade their 8th OA pick to another team for a return which included a young, right handed d-man, then that would fill your empty spot for d-men and leave Myers on the outside looking in.

 

                                                               regards,  G.

No team is going to trade a young right side D man for a non top 1st round pick unless that team has serious questions about that player (which would you make you wonder why we would want such a player).

[86Viking]

16 hours ago, goblix said:

Yeah Bowey meets the exposure requirements. But there may be an ability to acquire an ED-eligible player from a team that can't protect them all. Thus the discussion on Myers, Bowey gives us the option if we want to or not which is a great option to have anyways.

 

I mean the whole team struggled soooooo.... The year previous Pearson had 45 points...

Like I'm not like a super fan of Pearson but people  always seem to harp on a single bad season and fail to recognize the previous history like a singular snapshot is a clear indication of the future. I think he is and will be a consistent top 9 forward for us with the ability to play the PK and second PP and can step up to top 6 when injuries occurs... That has value to me and a 3.25m contract over 3 years does not break the bank for a player like that.

I remember a former Canuck who was a solid 3rd liner for us, then 1 ankle injury literally shut down his career Chris Higgins. Higgins was a great player for us, versatile and reliable much like Pearson. The way I see it with Pearson is, yes this was a down year but he also had every opportunity to play a ton and still put up subpar numbers, he is also nearing 30 and with his foot speed not being the best to begin with I could see him falling of quite quickly as father time catches up with everyone.

 

I was just wishing we would actually trade him,, get a prospect or a pick or pair of mid round picks and see what the so called draft wizard could find. We need to be turning out cheap ELC players to be able to afford the pay raises while still adding younger, ELC players who can help contribute in a variety of roles on the team. We know what happens if you want depth via July 1st...we get stuck overpaying players on or near the down side of their careers, all while giving them large contracts with term and sometimes even NMC/NTC protection. See LE, Beagle, Roussel, Sutter, Gagner, Del Zotto, R. Miller etc

[86Viking]

11 hours ago, Bob.Loblaw said:

Yeah it's supposedly part of his contract that he will be protected.  Probably one of the conditions to his re-signing (weird that they didn't just give him the NMC).

What a stupid move by the GM to do that for a player who had a poor season...reward him with a contract with term, which is 1 thing but to automatically dedicate a protection spot for him over a young prospect like say Lind/Gadj etc is just a poor management decision. We need the cheap contracts of our youth to help this team, not keep the aging vets and dangle young former 2nd round picks in the expansion draft or a player like Mac who I thought had promising upside but Green seems to not like when a player fights and protects his teammates so i dunno.

 

Looking forward to 1 or 2 years from now, hoping we have a new coach and a GM with a CLEAR PATH going forward not a steaming hot piles of bear crap spread around and he is jumping around trying to avoid stepping in any of it while he tries to improve this team

[86Viking]

If we are losing Lind let's say, it better be because we used him as a piece to entice a team to take on a player with an expiring deal. Not just cause we chose not to protect him, that shows you how shallow of a team we have currently when you can't even fill the expansion list with players deserving of being protected!

[IBatch]

18 hours ago, Bertuzzipunch said:

JB has a lot of work to do this offseason to fill those protected spots with real NHL players.
 

Motte, Pearson, Schmidt and Jouveli shouldnt be protected.

Motte is found money - if we want cap relief not the guy to expose, same with OJ.   Showed promise he could have a long career yet.    Pearson is fine where he is but would be a good guy to expose too.   Schmidt.   Who exactly are we going to get to replace him?   For sure Seattle would take him.  

[IBatch]

51 minutes ago, Canuckster86 said:

If we are losing Lind let's say, it better be because we used him as a piece to entice a team to take on a player with an expiring deal. Not just cause we chose not to protect him, that shows you how shallow of a team we have currently when you can't even fill the expansion list with players deserving of being protected!

Losing Lind is ok.   But if the team wants cap relief it's not happening from the ED in a decent way unless they take Holtby. Curiously THN mock draft went from JV to Holtby.   Why?  Because they said Seattle could likely flip him at next years TDL.   Imagine that...a group of experts seeing the same value JB saw in Holtby when we acquired him.    Best case scenario for us at this point too. 

[goblix]

1 hour ago, Canuckster86 said:

I remember a former Canuck who was a solid 3rd liner for us, then 1 ankle injury literally shut down his career Chris Higgins. Higgins was a great player for us, versatile and reliable much like Pearson. The way I see it with Pearson is, yes this was a down year but he also had every opportunity to play a ton and still put up subpar numbers, he is also nearing 30 and with his foot speed not being the best to begin with I could see him falling of quite quickly as father time catches up with everyone.

 

I was just wishing we would actually trade him,, get a prospect or a pick or pair of mid round picks and see what the so called draft wizard could find. We need to be turning out cheap ELC players to be able to afford the pay raises while still adding younger, ELC players who can help contribute in a variety of roles on the team. We know what happens if you want depth via July 1st...we get stuck overpaying players on or near the down side of their careers, all while giving them large contracts with term and sometimes even NMC/NTC protection. See LE, Beagle, Roussel, Sutter, Gagner, Del Zotto, R. Miller etc

I get ya there. Would be nice if we saw some actual picks be acquired lol

 

This year with the covid crisis hit it. It's understandable that Jim choose not to uproot the players that didn't want to be moved. It was a humane decision rather than a hockey one.

 

The problem with all of those contracts you mentioned isn't the cap value but the length. If they were a year shorter we'd have no issues but yeah they are a problem typically. Even Myers is a useful player but if his contact would've ran out a year earlier than it's line up with Horvat Miller and Hogs contracts renewals.

 

The coming years the cap value of the players we acquire is going to matter though. But specifically with Pearson you can typically stomach a disappointing top 9 slotted player at the 3m range.

[goblix]

56 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Losing Lind is ok.   But if the team wants cap relief it's not happening from the ED in a decent way unless they take Holtby. Curiously THN mock draft went from JV to Holtby.   Why?  Because they said Seattle could likely flip him at next years TDL.   Imagine that...a group of experts seeing the same value JB saw in Holtby when we acquired him.    Best case scenario for us at this point too. 

Well to be fair THN probably had Myers protected by the Canucks. I would think that a Myers at 50% retention would have some value.

[IBatch]

18 hours ago, BPA said:

If Meyers is exposed, SEA will definitely take him.  He has 3yrs left at $6M.  A big RHD to stabilize the D on their noob franchise.  Then next year they can trade him with 50% retention and snag a 1st in 2023.

If that's the case we could do the same thing.   But don't want to.   I like Myers.  One of the few D's we have that plays with some vengeance.  Was sold with Brian Burkes assessment of him when we signed him.   And hasn't disappointed.   People forget quickly how good things were when Guddy and Del Zotto were patrolling the blue line.  All Myers does is take one tough assignments 5 x 5,  PK and does his best with 20-30 seconds of second unit time...

[Master Mind]

Very unlikely Seattle would take Myers.

 

They'll be targetting cheaper players, while saving a good portion of their cap for trades. Gaining extra assets from cap strapped teams.

[Chris12345]

No they would not.

[goblix]

53 minutes ago, IBatch said:

If that's the case we could do the same thing.   But don't want to.   I like Myers.  One of the few D's we have that plays with some vengeance.  Was sold with Brian Burkes assessment of him when we signed him.   And hasn't disappointed.   People forget quickly how good things were when Guddy and Del Zotto were patrolling the blue line.  All Myers does is take one tough assignments 5 x 5,  PK and does his best with 20-30 seconds of second unit time...

well retaining 3m is dead space on the cap.. See how luongo cap is biting us in the butt, it would be the same thing there.. For Seattle they are dealing with a blank book and this is less obstructive for them.

I like Myers too but in the third year that 6m is probably better suited to be used on contracts like Miller, Horvat, and Hogslander.

[IBatch]

1 hour ago, goblix said:

Well to be fair THN probably had Myers protected by the Canucks. I would think that a Myers at 50% retention would have some value.

Nope.  Not even close.  Maybe 1 would work out.  I don't think for a minute Myers is a 3 million dollar defenseman.   And no way holding 3 million for three more years helps us.   Who exactly, is coming up this year or next, that provides more value as a RHD that we can pay the most to get?   We aren't a contender.   And i don't have  any issue with Myers contract as it is.   Hes a UFA that had 7 x 7 floated around when we signed him.   Even with flat cap i don't mind having him around.  Personally i'm getting tired of Del Zotto's.   Aren't you?  

[BPA]

8 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Nope.  Not even close.  Maybe 1 would work out.  I don't think for a minute Myers is a 3 million dollar defenseman.   And no way holding 3 million for three more years helps us.   Who exactly, is coming up this year or next, that provides more value as a RHD that we can pay the most to get?   We aren't a contender.   And i don't have  any issue with Myers contract as it is.   Hes a UFA that had 7 x 7 floated around when we signed him.   Even with flat cap i don't mind having him around.  Personally i'm getting tired of Del Zotto's.   Aren't you?  

Yep.

 

Getting rid of Meyers is like 2 steps back.  Who's gonna replace him?  Myers will be protected from the expansion draft by JB.