[Rumour] Boeser On Block

[Warhippy]

37 minutes ago, mll said:

Sounds like they would even be willing to sign him to his QO to retain him.  Rutherford says he's young enough to take a 2-3 year deal and then sign long term but that 1 year QO is also an option.

 

He says their priority is to open up cap space but that they are not a team that made the playoffs so they can't remove too much from their roster - ie can't really take out the better players or they are going to take too much of a step back.  

 

Signing him to his QO is a non starter.

 

Longer term, lower cap.  Add a modified NTC if that's what it takes

[Gollumpus]

46 minutes ago, J-Dizzle said:

Garland has .34 career assists per game, Boeser has .41. 
 

The numbers seem to say Boeser creates chances at least as well as Garland does… And that’s not me ripping on Garland, He’s a good player and his assist numbers would likely increase if he were playing 1st unit pp and such. That being said, Boeser is not just a goal scorer (although it is something he excels at). 

Interesting thing, when I looked at this past season's stats (rather than career numbers) they show Garland as a .43 assists per game, while Boeser is at .32 apg.

 

                                                regards,  G.

[StanleyCupOneDay]

3 hours ago, J-Dizzle said:

Garland has .34 career assists per game, Boeser has .41. 
 

The numbers seem to say Boeser creates chances at least as well as Garland does… And that’s not me ripping on Garland, He’s a good player and his assist numbers would likely increase if he were playing 1st unit pp and such. That being said, Boeser is not just a goal scorer (although it is something he excels at). 

Why would we use Arizona as a valid comparison for a players capability? The stats for this year already showed Garland was a better producer then at any time with the Coyotes.

 

What does Boeser do well at other then scoring goals? Is he a set up man? Is he a sniper? Is he a PP specialist? Is he a defensively stout offensive player? Is he a skating behemoth? Is he a chance creator? I’m not trying to rip on Boeser. He’s got some good skills, but I don’t see anything else to his game other then a pure goal scorer. And when he’s not scoring what does he do well for us? Maybe I’m missing something after watching him these past seasons, but I don’t see anything else.

Edited May 17, 2022 by StanleyCupOneDay

[bishopshodan]

Can we sign him to a friendly little bridge.

He's not worth much on the market right now but if we give a year or two to showcase for his future, and ours, it couple be mutually beneficial. 

[J-Dizzle]

5 hours ago, Gollumpus said:

Interesting thing, when I looked at this past season's stats (rather than career numbers) they show Garland as a .43 assists per game, while Boeser is at .32 apg.

 

                                                regards,  G.

Certainly both are valid stat lines to look at, and by no means am I trying to dump on Garland, he’s a good player. 
 

I do think it’s fair to say Boeser’s past year is not likely a totally accurate reflection of his play overall. 
 

All of that being said, I should be clear that the poster I was responding to said that Brock was a goal scorer and Garland created chances… career numbers say Brock creates chances as well as Garland does. 
 

 

3 hours ago, StanleyCupOneDay said:

Why would we use Arizona as a valid comparison for a players capability? The stats for this year already showed Garland was a better producer then at any time with the Coyotes.

 

What does Boeser do well at other then scoring goals? Is he a set up man? Is he a sniper? Is he a PP specialist? Is he a defensively stout offensive player? Is he a skating behemoth? Is he a chance creator? I’m not trying to rip on Boeser. He’s got some good skills, but I don’t see anything else to his game other then a pure goal scorer. And when he’s not scoring what does he do well for us? Maybe I’m missing something after watching him these past seasons, but I don’t see anything else.

you’ll note I said Garland’s numbers would likely increase playing power play 1 and such. Perhaps I needed to be clearer that the ‘and such’ was increased opportunity/better line mates (I thought that was somewhat implied). 
 

As for Boeser… when he’s not scoring goals he’s putting up assists fairly consistently. He’s also had a tendency to be a board battle winner more often than not if I recall correctly. 

[canuck73_3]

16 hours ago, EddieVedder said:

You lost all credibility considering both garland and hoglander play with more aggression and use their bodies better than boeser.  Boeser is the softest and slowest player on the club.  Youre just too obsessed with his hair to notice.

Seems the only one obsessed with his hair is you. No one in this thread has brought it up as much as you. Are you experiencing male pattern baldness? Is that why you hate him so much? 
 

There are treatments available, you should consider them. 

Edited May 17, 2022 by canuck73_3

[Elias Pettersson]

8 hours ago, mll said:

Rutheford on Seravalli's podcast (daily-faceoff) was asked if there could be a scenario where Boeser just signs his 1-year QO if they can't figure out a deal.  Rutherford answered it's possible and that they have the cap space to do it and he would still be under team control in a year.

 

I think this is what he does. If he has a really good year under Boudreau he will have more leverage for a better deal. 
 

If the Canucks can’t afford him then at least we will get better trade offers next summer. So a win win for everyone. 

Edited May 17, 2022 by Elias Pettersson

[mll]

6 hours ago, Warhippy said:

Signing him to his QO is a non starter.

 

Longer term, lower cap.  Add a modified NTC if that's what it takes

Can't have trade clauses on RFA years - he has 2 left.  Rutherford doesn't think it would be the worse situation for him to sign his QO.

[Elias Pettersson]

6 hours ago, Warhippy said:

Signing him to his QO is a non starter.

 

Longer term, lower cap.  Add a modified NTC if that's what it takes

Why?  Wouldn’t it give Boeser more motivation to sign a one year deal versus locking him in for $6 million?

 

Let him bet on himself having a career year playing under Boudreau for an entire year. Yes he will demand more money but then at least we know we can trade him for a better deal than right now. 

[Gollumpus]

2 hours ago, J-Dizzle said:

Certainly both are valid stat lines to look at, and by no means am I trying to dump on Garland, he’s a good player. 
 

I do think it’s fair to say Boeser’s past year is not likely a totally accurate reflection of his play overall. 
 

All of that being said, I should be clear that the poster I was responding to said that Brock was a goal scorer and Garland created chances… career numbers say Brock creates chances as well as Garland does. 
 

 

you’ll note I said Garland’s numbers would likely increase playing power play 1 and such. Perhaps I needed to be clearer that the ‘and such’ was increased opportunity/better line mates (I thought that was somewhat implied). 
 

As for Boeser… when he’s not scoring goals he’s putting up assists fairly consistently. He’s also had a tendency to be a board battle winner more often than not if I recall correctly. 

Yup. I don't have a dog in this fight, I just noted how the numbers changed/reversed for this first year of Garland being with the Canucks. 

 

                                                  regards,  G.

[teepain]

6.25x3 years

[Coconuts]

14 hours ago, Warhippy said:

Boeser is close to a .8 ppg player.  256 points over 324 games.

 

We can say that we can replace that, and he's soft...slow....but if we lose his 50-60 points per season that's not getting replaced for free.

 

If we can retain him for $6.25 million or even $6.5 million it puts him in a comfortable place around the league average for players putting up .65 to.8 ppg numbers 

Despite any warts to his game the reality is if you look at a list of RW's who score and produce points he's been reasonably high up there most of his career. There aren't exactly a ton of RW triggermen around the league.

 

Even during a supposed down year he was still the 34th most productive RW in the league according to capfriendly.

 

Now I'm not arguing for keeping him or trading him as I see benefits to doing both, but there's no rational denying that he brings value as a player, not that you were. Scoring RW's have value, there aren't as many of em.

 

 

 

 

[DrJockitch]

17 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

Despite any warts to his game the reality is if you look at a list of RW's who score and produce points he's been reasonably high up there most of his career. There aren't exactly a ton of RW triggermen around the league.

 

Even during a supposed down year he was still the 34th most productive RW in the league according to capfriendly.

 

Now I'm not arguing for keeping him or trading him as I see benefits to doing both, but there's no rational denying that he brings value as a player, not that you were. Scoring RW's have value, there aren't as many of em.

 

 

 

 

Absolutely brings value but from a point production standpoint that makes him an elite second line right wing or a poor first line one. 
‘Something tells me he is going to get paid a lot better than that. 
‘Will be curious to see how all this shakes out. 

[Alflives]

8 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Why?  Wouldn’t it give Boeser more motivation to sign a one year deal versus locking him in for $6 million?

 

Let him bet on himself having a career year playing under Boudreau for an entire year. Yes he will demand more money but then at least we know we can trade him for a better deal than right now. 

Bess on an expiring contract would carry a great deal of value as a TDL rental.  Late first, couple seconds. 

[Coconuts]

3 hours ago, DrJockitch said:

Absolutely brings value but from a point production standpoint that makes him an elite second line right wing or a poor first line one. 
‘Something tells me he is going to get paid a lot better than that. 
‘Will be curious to see how all this shakes out. 

Def, his historical production will get him paid, it's just a matter of what that ends up looking like. I don't seen being as cheap as some are hoping but I'm just spitballing.

 

It'll be interesting, especially if he's the first domino.

[Elias Pettersson]

2 hours ago, Alflives said:

Bess on an expiring contract would carry a great deal of value as a TDL rental.  Late first, couple seconds. 

Yes. If Boeser is on pace for 40 goals next year then we can either trade him at the TDL for a way better package than we are getting right now or we can re-sign him in the summer. Or we can trade him in the summer. 

[N4ZZY]

7 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Yes. If Boeser is on pace for 40 goals next year then we can either trade him at the TDL for a way better package than we are getting right now or we can re-sign him in the summer. Or we can trade him in the summer. 

I think Brock’s going to want some security, especially what’s going on with his family with his dad, Duke, and how that would affect the rest of his family down the road. I think he’ll sign a longer ish term deal that’s fair for him and for the Canucks. I think he signs 3-4 years at 6, maybe 6.5M. 

 

[Elias Pettersson]

4 hours ago, Coconuts said:

Despite any warts to his game the reality is if you look at a list of RW's who score and produce points he's been reasonably high up there most of his career. There aren't exactly a ton of RW triggermen around the league.

 

Even during a supposed down year he was still the 34th most productive RW in the league according to capfriendly.

 

Now I'm not arguing for keeping him or trading him as I see benefits to doing both, but there's no rational denying that he brings value as a player, not that you were. Scoring RW's have value, there aren't as many of em.

 

 

 

 

Jeff Skinner got a 9x8 contract after a 40 goal season. He isn’t very big, isn’t a great skater and isn’t great defensively. But he scored 40 goals. 
 

How many wingers scored 40 goals this past year?  12, 13 in the entire league?  
 

Boeser scored 29 goals in only 62 games as a rookie. It is conceivable he can get back to that level under Boudreau and pop in 35 goals. 

[Elias Pettersson]

6 minutes ago, N4ZZY said:

I think Brock’s going to want some security, especially what’s going on with his family with his dad, Duke, and how that would affect the rest of his family down the road. I think he’ll sign a longer ish term deal that’s fair for him and for the Canucks. I think he signs 3-4 years at 6, maybe 6.5M. 

 

Not sure about that. Those last 2 years on a 4 year deal are UFA years. I think they will cost the Canucks more than $6.5 million. 
 

I could see a 3 year deal maximum. 6.5x3 he may consider it. 3 years gives him enough time to get back to where he used to be. At 28 years old as a UFA if he can become a 40 goal scorer then he’s looking at a Jeff Skinner type deal. 

[BPA]

1 hour ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Not sure about that. Those last 2 years on a 4 year deal are UFA years. I think they will cost the Canucks more than $6.5 million. 
 

I could see a 3 year deal maximum. 6.5x3 he may consider it. 3 years gives him enough time to get back to where he used to be. At 28 years old as a UFA if he can become a 40 goal scorer then he’s looking at a Jeff Skinner type deal. 

40g is a tough ask.  I would keep expectations at 30g.

 

$6M x 8yrs is very good value for a 30g scorer.  It would be a steal for a 40g scorer.

 

If Boeser is only a 20-25g / 50pt player, he’d be slightly overpaid at $6M.
 

It’s a gamble.