Elias Pettersson | Quinn Hughes - Contract Discussion Thread

[EOTM]

40 minutes ago, kloubek said:

The issue here (besides the implications of free agency at 5 years) is that at 8.25, that leaves about 5.5 to sign Hughes, which simply doesn't appear to be enough.

When ferland goes to LTIR we should have about 8 mil left for Hughes.

[BertaNuck]

Hughes for B.tkchuck 

[TFerguson]

59 minutes ago, Steven Stamkos said:

The problem with 5 years is EP can waltz right into free agency 

This is such a stupid “ problem” people keep on bringing up. My understanding is anything 4 years and up walks Petey to Free Agency. So the only way to not do that is to sign him for 3 or less. 
 

Is your understanding that anything over 3 years for Pettersson is a bad deal?? 
 

We can’t control what Petey does in Free Agency but IMO the team should be trying to lock him up as long as possible. 5 is a hell of a lot better than 1,2,3, or 4. 

[CanuckFanUpNorth]

People are excited about the Toronto Maple Leafs documentary, "All or Nothing," for the same access that the 'Road to the Winter Classic' gave us. 

Honestly, I would pay to be a fly on the wall in the Jim Benning-JP Barry contract negotiations. It would be fascinating to compare and contrast their numbers, with the numbers we are speculating.

 

Regarding the supposed 5 year X 8.25 deal. Honestly, I would take it. Who was the last Canuck drafted that signed for five years? Wasn't it Henrik and Daniel? 

As another post said, you cannot force someone to want to play for you. That is true. However, you can create a winning culture that makes star players take less at a chance to win (see Taylor Hall in Boston). I believe if we have the ability to sign Pettersson for 5 years, and QH at a bridge, that is a victory. Just not the same amount of years please. 

If Vancouver is a top-flight team in 4 years time, you present that argument to EP at the time. But neither the team, the player, or the fan base can predict where Vancouver would be in that time. Thus the player wants to control his own destiny to a degree. I don't blame him. If signed a 5 year deal, that's still 8 years dedicated to Vancouver. 

For me, this is all about Pettersson. When he agrees to something, Hughes will follow. I believe in Jim Benning. 

[khay]

5 hours ago, IBatch said:

EP i'd 100% do 8 years on.    He's unique in a way that helps our team more.   QHs is unique too.   But for me at least, there is reasonable doubt he won't be much more then Barrie was/is. Sure he likely will exceed his point totals.   And maybe one day score double digit goals too on a consistent basis.   But the overall defensive play i'm not sure will improve enough to equal  the dollar amounts he will demand.    We have OEL, Rathbone, Myers and possibly even OJ who can play on the PP.    Any of those guys will add 20 points to their totals doing just that, year to year.   (First unit). 

Agree on EP. He is already a complete player, drives the play the right way and can deposit the puck in the net (or destroy posts) with efficiency.

 

But I don't know if I agree on QH. He projects to be 70-80 point scoring defenceman.

 

That unique way to generate offence is going to give us an edge. I really think of QH like Patrick Kane. That ability to carry the puck over the blue line, get the forwards crashing the net to create some space and we will get a scoring chance. Obviously, QH doesn't have a shot like Kane but imagine if he did develop an effective shot... QH is the type of player that can give you that slight edge to win playoff games, IMO. 

 

I think he is multiple tiers above Barrie too. We are looking at Karlsson-esque level of talent although the two have very different styles. Karlsson wasn't a defensive stalwart, he needed a stable partner and Hughes will be similar. But these guys can drive puck possession so that them being on the ice already limits the scoring chances. The odd counter attacks and turnovers will happen and that's why we need solid goaltending + stable partner for Hughes. We just need a system and player personnel that can help to maximize puck possession and implement defensive structure that lets Hughes focus on what he's good at.

 

 

[spook007]

3 hours ago, Alflives said:

Wouldn't term and dollars be connected though?  Every UFA year we buy will increase the yearly cap cost.

Kinda and yet... 

He only have X amount of dollars, and let's not be fooled, EP in particular is going to cost top dollars. The dollars numbers can't vary too much, how ever the term can, hence my belief that that the amount of dollars has more or less been set. Especially with the agent representing both players...

 

I think, they are fighting over how many years 8 or 9M are worth...

 

[khay]

10 hours ago, iinatcc said:

Which is why I would rather them sign 3 year deals. I think by the time the deal is up we would know what kind of players they are plus (from my understanding) it doesn't burn a UFA year 

Sure, 3 years is fine too. The cap hits going to be even lower so that's not bad.

 

But if we win a cup where EP plays a prominent role (which he must otherwise we don't win a cup) or EP wins a Selke or Hart or scores 100+ points in those 3 years,  that's going to be a 10+ mil extension and possibly closing our window unless the management makes savvy moves.

 

I'd prefer 5 year 8.5 mil for EP, maybe 3 year for QH at around 6.5 mil. At the end of QH's contract, re-assess and if QH is not the player to help us win the cup, trade him to NJD or whichever team has the players that can help us win and do a quick re-tool.

 

[RomanP]

It feels like JP Barry and Pat Brisson are playing the “bad cop/good cop” routine, with Barry being a bad cop and always stirring something in the media, while Brisson sounds like a voice of reason. It often works in business world - I’m a bad cop in my business and my partner is a good cop. We got quite a few good deals go our way approaching the negotiations this way.

[VegasCanuck]

1 hour ago, kloubek said:

The issue here (besides the implications of free agency at 5 years) is that at 8.25, that leaves about 5.5 to sign Hughes, which simply doesn't appear to be enough.

If, (BIG IF here) we were to sign Pettersson at 5 years for 8.25, you could still easily sign Hughes to a 6 million bridge deal. 

[spook007]

3 hours ago, combover said:

I don’t believe Jb has a choice he can pretend to play hardball but bottom line his job is on the line. 
 

if your job was on the line would you go into a season without your two best players and fan favourites. 
Owners want to win, jbs traded away multiple 1st rounders so what his two best young superstars sit and he can ice a sub par line up and lose another season and his job. 

That picture seemed like a set up from the agent saying show your having fun and not worried about the contracts it’s a game and jbs job depends on these guys being here. 
the agents and entire league know this is Jim’s last chance season to put up or get out. 
capped out once again he can’t afford his team to do anything but win. 
Contracts are screwy this  summer most thought contracts would go down due to last year Covid and  flat cap but it’s been the opposite especially for high end young rfa  D. 
I just hope these two are in the line up sooner than later regardless of my dislike for JB losing sucks and we’ll be in tough without them. 

And this isn’t bashing JB for those that are over sensitive. 


 

 

This part in your post is bang on... the rest smells of your dislike for Benning. 

If the line up flops, Benning may be gone, but it remains to be seen... A bit harsh as best to moan about our line up before they have even dropped a puck.

I'm still sure they will be signed, but I hope Benning plays hard ball and just sign one of them, should the price get daft... Lets see how their agent will explain that to the other player.

3 hours ago, Alflives said:

Sure appears like a JB bashing post.  Benning had the best summer of any GM, and our club has the depth now to cover when guys get injured, or they are holding out.  

I second that... Not sure, what to expect yet, but complaining about a top 4 D-man despite his age and a top six winger as well as a D-man at the 'sky high' price of 2.5M before they have played a single game is just crap...  Fun fact, people ready to pay QH 8M for 8 years and he has yet to show any ability to defend a fish supper.

Saw some posters moaning about JR not being good enough defensively, but I sure would prefer to pay 1M for 3rd pairing offensive D man, to 8M for one, who struggles in his own end. 

 

2 hours ago, gurn said:

Honestly; I don't think J.B. has or will do a single thing because he is 'trying' to keep his job.

Lots of post like this, not a single one states any examples of where this 'job saving'  actions took place.

People thought J.B. was worried about his job and needed immediate help to keep it? J.B. drafts Pods, knowing it would be a couple of years before the kid can even play in North America. Drafted him and kept him, no cares for job security.

 

J.B. worried about his job, sounds dramatic, but no one posts examples of it.

 

Bingo +10

 

2 hours ago, JM_ said:

 

meh, every GM is one bad move away from losing their job, there's nothing unique happening with the Canucks.

 

We don't know what's going on with the agents and the contract demands. We do know Jim tends to be OK with some overpayments or at least not squeezing every last penny he can. I'd be very surprised if he was playing hardball at this point, I'm more leaning toward the agent really trying to put Jim in a hard position, because he can.

 

So we'll see, maybe that fabled offer sheet for Petey shows up soon too.

Again spot on... anyone can lose their job at anytime, although some more likely than others. 

Benning actually did the right thing in signing the players he wanted (traded for), thus showing EPs and QHs age there is a loft. Had he had another 5-6M at his disposal, he would be push even more... and all the folks here prepared to give up anything to sign EP and QH would be first on the fire JB bandwagon should it not work...

[spook007]

2 hours ago, Maddogy said:

It's pretty ignorant to assume that the Canucks' ownership does not support J.B.'s negotiation approach. Does J.B. seem like a maverick to you? He is a yes-man. 

Yes it is... especially bearing in mind they have supported him with buy out etc.

[spook007]

2 hours ago, N4ZZY said:

Doesn't sound encouraging to hear. 

 

What did you expect the agent to say...? 

He is pushing for more hence the stand off... 

If it goes pear shaped deal QH and sign EP without any NTC's or NMC's, so he can be traded for a massive return, when time is right.

Already fed up with the greed.

[250Integra]

My guess is a deal will be announced tomorrow or Wednesday for both players. They probably didn't want to do it today due to the Truth and Reconciliation events.

[iinatcc]

1 hour ago, khay said:

Sure, 3 years is fine too. The cap hits going to be even lower so that's not bad.

 

But if we win a cup where EP plays a prominent role (which he must otherwise we don't win a cup) or EP wins a Selke or Hart or scores 100+ points in those 3 years,  that's going to be a 10+ mil extension and possibly closing our window unless the management makes savvy moves.

 

I'd prefer 5 year 8.5 mil for EP, maybe 3 year for QH at around 6.5 mil. At the end of QH's contract, re-assess and if QH is not the player to help us win the cup, trade him to NJD or whichever team has the players that can help us win and do a quick re-tool.

 

The belief is that with the recent signings that the price of D-men has been reset and won't be changed in the foreseeable future. EP is another story but let's say the extension of these two after the 3 year term is 9.5 Million (or a bit higher), Tampa seems to be managing 3 players at 9.5 Million pretty well (Kucherov, Vasilesky and Point) with some other players earning top dollar like Stamkos and Hedman. I don't see how this can't be replicated by the Canucks if let's say EP and Hughes both get 10 milion extensions. 

[-Vintage Canuck-]

 

[TFerguson]

17 minutes ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:

 

I never thought this date would matter to us, at least not with 40/43. 
 

Get the f*%# to camp boys. I want to be able to forgive you once you sign. 

Edited September 27, 2021 by TFerguson

[TGT68]

1 hour ago, khay said:

Agree on EP. He is already a complete player, drives the play the right way and can deposit the puck in the net (or destroy posts) with efficiency.

 

But I don't know if I agree on QH. He projects to be 70-80 point scoring defenceman.

 

That unique way to generate offence is going to give us an edge. I really think of QH like Patrick Kane. That ability to carry the puck over the blue line, get the forwards crashing the net to create some space and we will get a scoring chance. Obviously, QH doesn't have a shot like Kane but imagine if he did develop an effective shot... QH is the type of player that can give you that slight edge to win playoff games, IMO. 

 

I think he is multiple tiers above Barrie too. We are looking at Karlsson-esque level of talent although the two have very different styles. Karlsson wasn't a defensive stalwart, he needed a stable partner and Hughes will be similar. But these guys can drive puck possession so that them being on the ice already limits the scoring chances. The odd counter attacks and turnovers will happen and that's why we need solid goaltending + stable partner for Hughes. We just need a system and player personnel that can help to maximize puck possession and implement defensive structure that lets Hughes focus on what he's good at.

 

 

I see the issue with this thinking being that Rathbone seems to have all those skills and a better shot and work ethic.  What if Rathbone becomes the 1 and Hughes the number 2 d man?  Nice problem to have in some ways.  But if you pay Hughes too much and Rathbone is better then Hughes may have to go. 

[johngould21]

25 minutes ago, TFerguson said:

I never thought this date would matter to us, at least not with 40/43. 
 

Get the f*%# to camp boys. I want to be able to forgive you once you sign. 

Were you of the same opinion when Bo and Brock did the same well into training camp?

[Petey40]

5 minutes ago, johngould21 said:

Were you of the same opinion when Bo and Brock did the same well into training camp?

Horvat signed his contract on September 8th and Brock signed his on September 16th. It’s not the 27th and no word that they’re close to signing so it’s a bit different. 

[hammertime]

9 minutes ago, johngould21 said:

Were you of the same opinion when Bo and Brock did the same well into training camp?

yes