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

[Signing] Canucks sign Tucker Poolman


Recommended Posts

ive always questioned the contract of poolman since way back in the beginning of the thread. everyone is trying to tell me it's a great signing 2.5x4 years.. if it's like 1.5 for 4 years i could stomach that or even 2.5 for 2 years i can prolly live with as he can be moved easily at the next tdl as a rental.. but 4 years at 2.5? i dunno what he have done in his career to earn a 4 year contract. 

 

if 2.5mil is the norm for a bottom pairing defenseman? then it's the norm to spend close to 30mil and up on the defense core each year?? 2x top 2 defenseman will cost anywhere from 7.5-9+ 2x 2nd pairing will should run around 4-5.. and bottom pairing 2x 2-2.5??? thats hella expensive defense core.. for 6 players.. teams that spend so much on the defense core top 2 to bottom 2 generally have great defense and offense capability to compensate for spending less on the forwards.. we certainly dont have that.. and i questioned why we even bother signing poolman after getting OEL and planned to re-sign hamonic (not knowing his status) hughes myer oel hamonic on paper is already good enough for the top 4.. so what was the reasoning for signing poolman? to play on the bottom 2? theoretically on paper between the top 4 we had if they didn't have the covid drama with hamonic and such.. they coulda eaten up enough mins per night to have a schenn/burrough/hunt/whomever bottom pairing. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, wai_lai416 said:

ive always questioned the contract of poolman since way back in the beginning of the thread. everyone is trying to tell me it's a great signing 2.5x4 years.. if it's like 1.5 for 4 years i could stomach that or even 2.5 for 2 years i can prolly live with as he can be moved easily at the next tdl as a rental.. but 4 years at 2.5? i dunno what he have done in his career to earn a 4 year contract. 

 

if 2.5mil is the norm for a bottom pairing defenseman? then it's the norm to spend close to 30mil and up on the defense core each year?? 2x top 2 defenseman will cost anywhere from 7.5-9+ 2x 2nd pairing will should run around 4-5.. and bottom pairing 2x 2-2.5??? thats hella expensive defense core.. for 6 players.. teams that spend so much on the defense core top 2 to bottom 2 generally have great defense and offense capability to compensate for spending less on the forwards.. we certainly dont have that.. and i questioned why we even bother signing poolman after getting OEL and planned to re-sign hamonic (not knowing his status) hughes myer oel hamonic on paper is already good enough for the top 4.. so what was the reasoning for signing poolman? to play on the bottom 2? theoretically on paper between the top 4 we had if they didn't have the covid drama with hamonic and such.. they coulda eaten up enough mins per night to have a schenn/burrough/hunt/whomever bottom pairing. 

I think I heard the Canucks have the most expensive d in the league. If true, it sure ain't the best so the question to everyone arguing is which player is overpaid vs the league?

 

The Poolman contract is way too long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Chris12345 said:

I think I heard the Canucks have the most expensive d in the league. If true, it sure ain't the best so the question to everyone arguing is which player is overpaid vs the league?

 

The Poolman contract is way too long.

We don't.

 

It's up there but it's not the highest.

 

I'm wondering if previous management were (rightly it turns out) concerned about Hamonic's availability? A better built D wouldn't have required signing Poolman in the first place. They basically band-aided a poorly built right side, with depth over quality, of middle-bottom pair tweeners.

 

Meh. Clean up on aisle, right side D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Chris12345 said:

I think I heard the Canucks have the most expensive d in the league. If true, it sure ain't the best so the question to everyone arguing is which player is overpaid vs the league?

 

The Poolman contract is way too long.

That would be SJS but Vancouver is right up there.

 

Vancouver is 4th - by ranking the 2 highest cap hits on Ds for each team.  SJS, NJD (2x 9M), LAK (11M + 4.08M)

3rd  - by ranking the 3 highest cap hits with SJS and NJD ahead of them.

5th - by ranking the 4 highest cap hits.  50K less than Colorado.  SJS, NJD and MIN are the top-3.   

3rd - by ranking the 5 highest cap hits

Also 3rd by ranking the 6 highest cap hits

 

There are only 3 teams that have 2x Ds at 7M or more.  SJS, NJD and Vancouver.   The vast majority of teams have only 1 D making at least 6M and some teams don't even have any.  

 

There are only 33 Ds that have a cap hit of 6M or more this season.  Vancouver has 3 of them with MIN and SJS.  5 other teams have 2 Ds at 6M or more, 14 teams with only 1 and 10 teams with none.  BOS, CBJ, CHI, EDM, TOR will go from none to 1 next season with extensions already signed.

 

The 20th highest cap hit on D this season is 6.75M.  The 30th highest cap hit is 6M.  The 60th highest is 4.875M.  The 120th is at 2.5M - which is where Poolman falls.  

 

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Honky Cat said:

Pearson plays 17-18 minutes a night, plays all situations (PP,PK,OT),wins puck battles, defensively responsible.

One guy that Boudreau leans on.

All for just over $3M.

What are you complaining about?

Agreed. He's a bit of a Swiss Army knife, a leader, cup pedigree, plays the right way. His salary is fine, and the least of this teams issues. 

  • Cheers 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, mll said:

That would be SJS but Vancouver is right up there.

 

Vancouver is 4th - by ranking the 2 highest cap hits on Ds for each team.  SJS, NJD (2x 9M), LAK (11M + 4.08M)

3rd  - by ranking the 3 highest cap hits with SJS and NJD ahead of them.

5th - by ranking the 4 highest cap hits.  50K less than Colorado.  SJS, NJD and MIN are the top-3.   

3rd - by ranking the 5 highest cap hits

Also 3rd by ranking the 6 highest cap hits

 

There are only 3 teams that have 2x Ds at 7M or more.  SJS, NJD and Vancouver.   The vast majority of teams have only 1 D making at least 6M and some teams don't even have any.  

 

There are only 33 Ds that have a cap hit of 6M or more this season.  Vancouver has 3 of them with MIN and SJS.  5 other teams have 2 Ds at 6M or more, 14 teams with only 1 and 10 teams with none.  BOS, CBJ, CHI, EDM, TOR will go from none to 1 next season with extensions already signed.

 

The 20th highest cap hit on D this season is 6.75M.  The 30th highest cap hit is 6M.  The 60th highest is 4.875M.  The 120th is at 2.5M - which is where Poolman falls.  

 

So what does that tell us?

 

Lots of the teams listed don't really scream contenders.

 

Stay away from the boat anchor contracts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Chris12345 said:

So what does that tell us?

 

Lots of the teams listed don't really scream contenders.

 

Stay away from the boat anchor contracts?

It tells us a lot of teams have some combination of:

 

Guys on cheaper ELC/bridge deals, older contracts signed at lower cap ceilings, guys who signed lesser deals who have out played them and guys taking discounts due to a team being a contender, in a lower tax location etc.

 

It tells us we need to get some of those ^^^ guys on our roster in the next couple years, so we can contend.

  • Cheers 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Chris12345 said:

I think I heard the Canucks have the most expensive d in the league. If true, it sure ain't the best so the question to everyone arguing is which player is overpaid vs the league?

 

The Poolman contract is way too long.

Oel is overpaid Myers is overpaid poolman is overpaid those 3 alone should combine for at least 4-5mil less than what they make now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, wai_lai416 said:

Oel is overpaid Myers is overpaid poolman is overpaid those 3 alone should combine for at least 4-5mil less than what they make now

Poolman is not overpaid.  He’s paid pretty much exactly what he should be.  The guy has played well for us, when considering his contract.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Poolman is not overpaid.  He’s paid pretty much exactly what he should be.  The guy has played well for us, when considering his contract.  

Let's be honest if the Leafs or the Oilers signed Poolman the same deal we would all be laughing here. 

 

It's a contract that is difficult to trade which means it was not a good deal on the Canucks side. 

 

Benning did say there were about 14 teams that wanted Poolman. I don't doubt that but I would wager Benning gave Poolman the best offer by a country mile  compared to other teams. Not that it matters for Benning since either the deal works out and he says as GM or gets fired anyways in which case that's someone else's problem

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, iinatcc said:

Let's be honest if the Leafs or the Oilers signed Poolman the same deal we would all be laughing here. 

 

It's a contract that is difficult to trade which means it was not a good deal on the Canucks side. 

 

Benning did say there were about 14 teams that wanted Poolman. I don't doubt that but I would wager Benning gave Poolman the best offer by a country mile  compared to other teams. Not that it matters for Benning since either the deal works out and he says as GM or gets fired anyways in which case that's someone else's problem

 

If the Leafs or Oilers signed Poolman he'd be playing in their top 4.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wai_lai416 said:

Oel is overpaid Myers is overpaid poolman is overpaid those 3 alone should combine for at least 4-5mil less than what they make now

Still making the wrong argument I see...

Edited by aGENT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, wai_lai416 said:

Still holding on to thinking our defense is paid what they are worth and justifying having one of the most overpaid defense with average defensive and 0 offensive ability 

Yes, because they're not overpaid, our defense is simply poorly constructed (right side especially). Two completely different things, and why you're still arguing the wrong thing.

 

You can have a Poolman or a Hamonic. A guy that's a good third pair/occasionally mid pair fill in making $2.5-$3m. That's fine.

 

Having two though, and no actual mid pair guy...:wacko: Particularly when one has basically been MIA and is just sunk cap, is just... :sick:

 

Still doesn't make either guy overpaid. 

 

If previous management had managed to find just one, young RHD to play in our top 4 on an ELC, then bridge, things would look a LOT rosier. We'd only need one Hamonic/Poolman and our D would be SO much more well rounded, lower cost etc. Hopefully new management can correct that with a Miller trade now and get us a Schneider, Barron or even Carlo.

 

We still need to get rid of one of Poolman/Hamonic though in that case. At least Hamonic may have some value as a rental next TDL, and if not, expires soon after.

 

Don't get me started on our 3LD either.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

someone explain to me why anyone ever thought 4 years here was a good idea?

 

someone explain to me why people ever supported the GM that did this?

 

someone explain to me how it's possible people argued that "Benning is learning" when he did this even after similar things with Sbisa and Gudbranson?

 

someone explain to me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wouldn't have hear me arguing if this was a 2 year deal... 4 years for an unproven defenseman is a poor signing no matter how u look at it... high risk low reward signing...

 

high risk in not living up to the 4 years.. low rewards he does well as a bottom pairing defenseman but paid as one of the highest bottom 6 in the league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

someone explain to me why anyone ever thought 4 years here was a good idea?

 

someone explain to me why people ever supported the GM that did this?

 

someone explain to me how it's possible people argued that "Benning is learning" when he did this even after similar things with Sbisa and Gudbranson?

 

someone explain to me

While there was at least a valid reason behind most of his moves good and bad, this was a panic move. 
 

I don’t mind Poolman as a player but 4 years is 2 years too much for him at that stage of his career. The dollar amount is fine for a bottom pair guy but the term was easily a bad gamble at best. 

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

59 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

While there was at least a valid reason behind most of his moves good and bad, this was a panic move. 
 

I don’t mind Poolman as a player but 4 years is 2 years too much for him at that stage of his career. The dollar amount is fine for a bottom pair guy but the term was easily a bad gamble at best. 

terrible gamble like i said.. 2.5mil is fine for a year or 2 for a bottom pair but the fact he's unproven.. he barely have 100 games in the nhl.. not sure what warranted the 4 years.. if he lives up to expectation?? he's a bottom 2 pairing that can occasionally play in the 2nd pairing.. if he doesn't live up to expectation? he's a bottom pairing while good in the defensive zone.. not great at moving the puck out of the zone... which i'm sure u can find 1 or 2 to play that role in the league making 700k.. too high risk way not much reward... benning have a bad habit of giving out 3-4 years contract.. he doesn't necessary offer more money per year than other teams.. but he definitely out bids them in number of years.. like ferland back then.. it was rumored canucks were the only team offering multi year offer to ferland.. every other team refuse to go multi due to concussion uncertainty.. 

 

i personally don't like any of the 3+ years contract for anyone that haven't shown consistency for 2-3 years in a row and definitely don't like giving out 3+ years to players that have less than 2 season worth of games played 164 unless you are a rfa signing bridges.

  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
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...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...