[Report] Canucks G Holtby To Be Bought Out

[ShawnAntoski]

59 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Well I don't think Arizona took any risk.  They traded for 3 cap dumps.  After the year is over those players are gone.  They wanted a 1st round pick back and they got it by trading 2 of their better players.  Vancouver took all the risk with OEL's contract and now Garland's contract.  The difference is Benning is actually trying to make his team competitive while Arizona is just trying to stay afloat until Bettman finds them a new location.

 

So to answer your question directly No the teams did not take on the same amount of risk.  Arizona took on zero risk while Vancouver took on all of the risk.  High risk high reward.

I agree - how the roster is looking and despite the potential cap issues in the future - this roster plus a possible FA (due to the Schmidt trade) will ensure that a good chunk of EP & QH signed years will hopefully be competitive ?

 

FA opens up tomorrow.  

 

 

[gameburn]

8 hours ago, IBatch said:

That main metric that isn't considered with this post, is how a GM isn't in a position of power with UFAs when they use the metric of trying to compete while their core develops - or in layman's terms, your team sucks and to get these guys you're going to have to overpay.   One thing that some don't understand either is when MG was here we were the 7th LEAST taxed in the league.   Now we are with MTL, OTT and TO as the MOST taxed in the league.  34.6%-53% is a massive difference in the bottom line.   That for sure also played into it.   Pearson at 3.25 ... is actually really well done.    Hopefully other players want to be here.   Can understand financially why they don't though.  

I think you are right.

I think it's now the single biggest reason it's harder for a Canadian team to win the cup...

Look at Tampa Bay: not an enormous fan base, but it has a tax friendly situation. Montreal not in the same class for attracting/keeping players.

I guess Canadian teams have to try and improve without using the UFA option, at least not very much anyway.

 

I think we'd be wise to lobby to get rid of the salary cap altogether.  You look at other sports and can see what the salary cap does. 

And then look at sports that don't have a cap -- e.g., the Bundesliga.  Bayern Munich can spend more money than most other teams in that league because their region is one of the richest in Germany.  By law, the fans own 51% of the team (it may be going up to 60%, not sure of the dates on this) which means they work like mad to keep the shareholders happy.  They are able to move good players in and out surprisingly efficiently.  And they pay their players really well.  In contrast, just this week our Canucks had to give up a first round pick because LE, Beagle and Roussel didn't have the skill we needed.  Benning's desperation, for sure, but this was made possible by the cap rules.

I think there should be a way to use our large fan bases/popular interest to change the situation.  Otherwise southern U.S. teams are going to be pretty hard to beat.  It's ridiculous. Toronto and Montreal would join us in this, as would the Alberta teams I imagine.  So would New York's teams, Boston, probably Minnesota too. Don't know about Detroit and the rest.

Bigger stadiums for Canadian teams would be wise too, as would a more concerted approach to marketing the players.

[mpt]

Terrible idea, I’m tired of cap penalties dragging on, all we had was Luongo left for 1 year now we are two more.  We need a backup anyways and we’ll be paying a decent amount so the cap penalty plus the backup would be holtby’s contract, except now we are penalized next year too

[hammertime]

Is Mikey D the guy? behind the guy?

 

If not then I don't see the point of buying out Holtby and then having to pay another guy to do a job that Holtby was doing adequately. They aren't saving money or improving the team so I  don't see the point.

 

Unless Mikey put in work last season with Clark and he's ready to backup.  

[aGENT]

20 minutes ago, hammertime said:

Is Mikey D the guy? behind the guy?

 

If not then I don't see the point of buying out Holtby and then having to pay another guy to do a job that Holtby was doing adequately. They aren't saving money or improving the team so I  don't see the point.

 

Unless Mikey put in work last season with Clark and he's ready to backup.  

Backup goalie market is CROWDED this off season. Going to be a lot of guys just happy to have a job, likely below market value. We'll be saving cap that we can re allocate elsewhere (D and F).

Edited July 28, 2021 by aGENT

[King Heffy]

28 minutes ago, gameburn said:

I think you are right.

I think it's now the single biggest reason it's harder for a Canadian team to win the cup...

Look at Tampa Bay: not an enormous fan base, but it has a tax friendly situation. Montreal not in the same class for attracting/keeping players.

I guess Canadian teams have to try and improve without using the UFA option, at least not very much anyway.

 

I think we'd be wise to lobby to get rid of the salary cap altogether.  You look at other sports and can see what the salary cap does. 

And then look at sports that don't have a cap -- e.g., the Bundesliga.  Bayern Munich can spend more money than most other teams in that league because their region is one of the richest in Germany.  By law, the fans own 51% of the team (it may be going up to 60%, not sure of the dates on this) which means they work like mad to keep the shareholders happy.  They are able to move good players in and out surprisingly efficiently.  And they pay their players really well.  In contrast, just this week our Canucks had to give up a first round pick because LE, Beagle and Roussel didn't have the skill we needed.  Benning's desperation, for sure, but this was made possible by the cap rules.

I think there should be a way to use our large fan bases/popular interest to change the situation.  Otherwise southern U.S. teams are going to be pretty hard to beat.  It's ridiculous. Toronto and Montreal would join us in this, as would the Alberta teams I imagine.  So would New York's teams, Boston, probably Minnesota too. Don't know about Detroit and the rest.

Bigger stadiums for Canadian teams would be wise too, as would a more concerted approach to marketing the players.

I guess you don't remember how things were before there was a salary cap.  The Canadian teams definitely weren't at an advantage; Detroit, Colorado were dominating the league and bringing in veteran stars, and the Rangers kept trying to buy a decent team.  Two Canadian teams did move and several others, including us, were perilously close to doing so.  Having the salary cap tied to Net rather than Gross pay would solve the issue.

[hammertime]

12 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Backup goalie market is CROWDED this off season. Going to be a lot of guys just happy to have a job, likely below market value. We'll be saving cap that we can re allocate elsewhere (D and F).

I hope you're right and I hope it's worth it. What's nice to see is there really isn't any horrible money on the cap anymore. There's some mediocre to bad stuff but nothing atrocious.   

[aGENT]

3 minutes ago, hammertime said:

I hope you're right and I hope it's worth it. What's nice to see is there really isn't any horrible money on the cap anymore. There's some mediocre to bad stuff but nothing atrocious.   

Wait until we send Ferland to Tampa!

[Jayinblack]

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

Wait until we send Ferland to Tampa!

That's what i was pushing for last week to try and pry Cernak from TB.

[aGENT]

1 minute ago, Jayinblack said:

That's what i was pushing for last week to try and pry Cernak from TB.

They're not giving us Cernak (as nice as that would be, I agree). But some other pieces? And an actual, contributing NHL player?