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

A few thoughts on the Cap, EP, Hughes and how to make the Canucks a Cup contender and not just a playoff team.

Rate this topic


Arrow 1983

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Vancan2021 said:

When the likes of Darnel Nurse sign over 9x8 how the hell can JB negotiate with Quinn's agent? One of many defenseman overpayments this year. 

Quinn will match or exceed Makars contract, don't even to try and think they will settle for less. 

That leaves how much for EP? 

Pencils need to be sharped asap. 

Samuel L Jackson Reaction GIF by Coming to America

 

Hughes isn't just a tier below makar, he's 2-3 tiers below, at least 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty hard for a team to win the cup these days without some concessions by players or players outplaying their contract.  That's the true definition of no I in team......leaving money behind.  I think Aquaman and JB have to come up with some other methods of payment to keep these guys happy and still build a contender.  That's what we saw with the Sedin era and that principle is still needed. 

 

Didn't both of these guys get to burn up their first entry-level contract year at the end of a season?  That's a gift from JB....hopefully there would be some reciprocation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, NHL97OneTimer said:

I think Aquaman and JB have to come up with some other methods of payment to keep these guys happy

Cap circumvention would result in huge fines and loss of draft picks. The team would be moronic to try to cheat as you suggest.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, gurn said:

Cap circumvention would result in huge fines and loss of draft picks. The team would be moronic to try to cheat as you suggest.

I'm not talking about cheating as you suggest, nor am I moronic thank you.  While I may not have been completely clear, my following sentence gives you a pretty good clue as to what I was referring to......unless you think the Sedins are the types of players that take money under the table. The Canucks couldn't pay the players more on the table or underneath it.  But they could spend money on the types of things that make the players feel more supported.  This includes some of the luxuries around the arena, etc.  This is what the Canucks did previously, what the San Antonio Spurs have apparently been doing all of these years and what many teams will continue to need to do to keep the top players happy at prices that support a contending team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the best shot the Canucks have with EP and QHs on their second deal is mostly based on going medium term like Horvat.  Buy a couple UFA years only.   And really comes down to how well they play over those deals.  2 million here or there helps with depth for sure.   But i doubt it will push us over the top anytime soon.   We need reps in playoffs at this point.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, aGENT said:

 

UFA years vs RFA years. The guys getting these $8m+ contracts are all including higher dollar, UFA years (or all UFA years in Nurse's case). 

 

If we're bridging Hughes and Petey through only RFA years, they're just not going to see those dollar amounts. I'm not sure why this is so confusing to so many? You simply can not equate RFA and UFA years in their cap hits.

 

On a 3 year Bridge, Petey shouldn't be making more than Barzal. Barzal has shown more, more consistently (less injuries). Aho, a better, more well rounded player, is making more money and on a 5 year term that, again, buys UFA years.

 

Mcavoy on a 3 year bridge is making $4.9m. Sergachev is $4.8x3. Werenski was $5x3. Is Hughes worth more than these guys on his comparable, second, post-ELC deal? Or drastically more, like some of you are talking about on here? Where's your comparables? Heck Provorov even had some UFA years bought on a $6.75x6 deal. If Hughes $ numbers are going to be in that territory, it's likewise going to be for more term than 3 years.

 

If we're talking moderately team-friendly deals...and using those comparables...and maybe some inspiration from their jersey numbers...

 

Petey on a 3 year bridge for $6.40m.

Hughes on a 5...maybe 6 year bridge for $6.43m

 

Now again, those are likely slightly more team friendly deals than they maybe get. Pettersson in particular likely ends up closer to $7 on a 3 year deal (though I do love the tie in with his number and how it keeps the two hits similar...maybe $6.940m instead?). Hughes likely leans closer to the 5 year term than 6 (6 would be great though as that's when OEL's deal comes off the books and I'd be willing to pay a bit more to make that line up...$6.943m instead?). But they're far more realistic than the silly numbers and term I'm seeing people throwing around.

Why did you type that? When EP and QH sign deals closer to yours, then maybe the negative fan base will be happy for a moment. Are you trying to steal that moment of happiness from them?

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, FaninMex said:

Why did you type that? When EP and QH sign deals closer to yours, then maybe the negative fan base will be happy for a moment. Are you trying to steal that moment of happiness from them?

Thought of something funny after the fact also. That $6,940,000 figure for Pettersson, would be a nice nod to his line mates as well :lol:

 

6, 9, 40

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, NHL97OneTimer said:

I'm not talking about cheating as you suggest, nor am I moronic thank you

"Some other method of payment" is cap circumvention.

Nobody suggested you were/are moronic.

Nice bath robes, and pretty shower stalls, are not "payment".

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hughes for Noah Dobson and maybe a draft pick.

 

Dobson's is $894,167 for another year then he's a 6'4" RD choked with potential.

 

NYI wants some offense and they have about 12 million cap space. Hughes is a proven commodity.

 

Problems solved for another year. Now we just have to talk the Islanders into it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/16/2021 at 12:02 AM, NHL97OneTimer said:

Pretty hard for a team to win the cup these days without some concessions by players or players outplaying their contract.  That's the true definition of no I in team......leaving money behind.  I think Aquaman and JB have to come up with some other methods of payment to keep these guys happy and still build a contender.  That's what we saw with the Sedin era and that principle is still needed. 

 

Didn't both of these guys get to burn up their first entry-level contract year at the end of a season?  That's a gift from JB....hopefully there would be some reciprocation.

Change GM so the new GM can start with a clean sheet. 
Remember that bosses don’t just loose their job if they suck at it. It can be a need for fresh blood.

There is a reason why par example a person only can be President of the USA for eight years. 
Or blind at flaws at home or some other say. 

  • RoughGame 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Timråfan said:

Change GM so the new GM can start with a clean sheet. 
Remember that bosses don’t just loose their job if they suck at it. It can be a need for fresh blood.

There is a reason why par example a person only can be President of the USA for eight years. 
Or blind at flaws at home or some other say. 

It also costs money to change GMs if they're still under contract.  Why waste money during Covid times?  Just because you don't like the GM?  If there isn't results then he will get canned for sure.  But things are definitely looking up and has been for a bit now, other than an off year last year.

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Viper007 said:

It also costs money to change GMs if they're still under contract.  Why waste money during Covid times?  Just because you don't like the GM?  If there isn't results then he will get canned for sure.  But things are definitely looking up and has been for a bit now, other than an off year last year.

And this is why I talked about change of scenery as a motivation for the players. 
You change GM due to different phases in a teams progression. 
I think Benning lacks some of the trades I want from a GM. But this isn’t about what I think if him. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Timråfan said:

And this is why I talked about change of scenery as a motivation for the players. 
You change GM due to different phases in a teams progression. 
I think Benning lacks some of the trades I want from a GM. But this isn’t about what I think if him. 
 

GMs responsibility isn't to motivate the players, that's the coaches job.

  • Vintage 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Timråfan said:

To motivate the players on ice, coaches… Beside ice, GM and others not named coaches

Why do you have to motivate players off the ice?  On ice is the only part that matters.  Even fans can have a part in "motivating" players.  Players have staff members who help them in other parts, if they need it.  Travis Green talks to Jim Benning if the team "requires" things.  The players talk to Green.  Unless they're going to ask for a trade, I don't believe they talk to the GM very often.

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Viper007 said:

Why do you have to motivate players off the ice?  On ice is the only part that matters.  Even fans can have a part in "motivating" players.  Players have staff members who help them in other parts, if they need it.  Travis Green talks to Jim Benning if the team "requires" things.  The players talk to Green.  Unless they're going to ask for a trade, I don't believe they talk to the GM very often.

The players don’t need to talk to the GM. 
On ice is definately not the only thing that matters. 
It seems you misunderstand me so I let it be. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Long term, I think the team needs to identify their core, then once they identify their core everyone can be replaced as not to over pay them to stay with the team.

So no overpayment for the Beagles, Roussels, or Sutters of the world. 

 

Chicago knew their core was Toews, Kane, Keith, Seabrook, and Hossa.

Same goes for the Pens with Crosby, Malkin, Fleury, and Letang. 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Timråfan said:

Change GM so the new GM can start with a clean sheet. 
Remember that bosses don’t just loose their job if they suck at it. It can be a need for fresh blood.

There is a reason why par example a person only can be President of the USA for eight years. 
Or blind at flaws at home or some other say. 

 

20 hours ago, Timråfan said:

And this is why I talked about change of scenery as a motivation for the players. 
You change GM due to different phases in a teams progression. 
I think Benning lacks some of the trades I want from a GM. But this isn’t about what I think if him. 
 

 

19 hours ago, Timråfan said:

To motivate the players on ice, coaches… Beside ice, GM and others not named coaches

 

16 hours ago, Timråfan said:

The players don’t need to talk to the GM. 
On ice is definately not the only thing that matters. 
It seems you misunderstand me so I let it be. 

You first say to change GM, just because.

Then you say it's to change scenery as to motivate players.

Then you say it's not to motivate the players on the ice, but everything off of the ice.

Then you say the ice is not the only thing that matters.

 

So you're going back and forth in what you're trying to say.

 

Yes the GMs responsibility is not just on the ice.  It encompasses a lot of other tasks, which he mostly delegates.  On the non ice facets of the game, I haven't heard or seen a lot of things to be complaining about, so again ... why change when you don't need to make a change.  Benning has a 2-3 years left in his deal.  If the team doesn't do well this season, most likely he will be fired.  But no need to change right now when we're still in a pandemic.

 

As far as the business aspect of the Canucks, I'm sure they're doing well compared to most NHL teams. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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