[Speculation] Canucks exploring Tyler Myers trade

[Lionized27]

3 hours ago, aGENT said:

It's honestly another solid check mark for new management.

 

They brought in Tochett, Foote and Gonchar to improve defensive play, structure etc. They've been bringing in solid 2 way/defensive F's, they brought in two solid 2 way/defensive D this summer to play with Hughes/Hronek (in front of Myers). They added/have 3 potential defensive D to play with/cover for Myers in Irwin/Wolanin/Hirose. All on top of a contract year.

 

Talk about maximizing a trade asset 

 

 

Maximizing a trade asset, at this juncture, is the belief that Myers will play out his final contract year betting on a windfall in FA.

 

This, of course, assumes, the Canucks are out of the play-off picture this coming spring and teams looking for solid depth on RD are willing to pay.

 

Time will tell. 

[aGENT]

22 minutes ago, Lionized27 said:

Maximizing a trade asset, at this juncture, is the belief that Myers will play out his final contract year betting on a windfall in FA.

 

This, of course, assumes, the Canucks are out of the play-off picture this coming spring and teams looking for solid depth on RD are willing to pay.

 

Time will tell. 

I think we move him regardless. We're in no position still to let tradeable assets walk for free.

[Rick_theRyper]

9 hours ago, DrJockitch said:

 

	Corsi without Bear	Corsi with Bear	Expected Goals without Bear	Expected Goals with Bear	Scoring Chances without Bear	Scoring Chances with Bear
Hughes	52.46%	55.82%	47.10%	52.10%	52.40%	55.88%
Ekman-Larsson	46.22%	49.37%	46.10%	49.82%	46.10%	46.92%
Myers	44.50%	49.21%	45.56%	64.46%	43.69%	48.53%

Uh huh. 

 

Bear was also a guy who was a 7/8th guy on another team... Keep digging up stats bud. He still isn't our "answer" to the RSD 

[Rick_theRyper]

28 minutes ago, aGENT said:

I think we move him regardless. We're in no position still to let tradeable assets walk for free.

That's the key getting something for everything here.. while we're are completing 

[Elias Pettersson]

1 hour ago, grandmaster said:

Apparently it can be paid early. I just read it from another article at Canucks Daily (sorry can’t post the source, it’s off Facebook):

 

The ongoing belief was that the Canucks were waiting on the bonus to be paid up before they moved the defenseman (the due date was supposedly September 15th). However, recent information revealed that the Canucks could choose to pay that bonus before its due date.

This actually makes sense.  I mean what could possibly be in his contract that would prevent the Canucks from paying his bonus earlier than the due date?  Would a player refuse to be paid $5 million 2 months earlier than expected?  Would anyone refuse that?  Based on all of the legal contracts I have seen and having drafted up many myself, the wording in a contract would normally be "by September 15" or "on or before September 15".  I've never seen a contract that stipulates a payment needs to be made on a specific date but can't be paid earlier...

[cripplereh]

Well if we can pay the bonus now and retain part of the cap only then Myers should be really easy move.

 

Or pay it then trade him to a team that needs cap space add say Hogs and get their best RHD.

[RinkonRenfrew]

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

I think we move him regardless. We're in no position still to let tradeable assets walk for free.

if we’re looking like we’re in the playoffs (i’d assume on the bubble) near tdl, and myers is playing the solid hockey i would expect of him given: contract year; reduced role; and coaching/structure changes, i would bet against him being moved. we’re clearly not trying to build assets. we’re trying to win playoff revenues. i don’t disagree with your reasoning though.

[aGENT]

7 minutes ago, RinkonRenfrew said:

if we’re looking like we’re in the playoffs (i’d assume on the bubble) near tdl, and myers is playing the solid hockey i would expect of him given: contract year; reduced role; and coaching/structure changes, i would bet against him being moved. we’re clearly not trying to build assets. we’re trying to win playoff revenues. i don’t disagree with your reasoning though.

This management has a solid track record of moving assets we don't plan to retain. I hope and expect that to continue.

[eeeeergh]

1 hour ago, Rick_theRyper said:

Uh huh. 

 

Bear was also a guy who was a 7/8th guy on another team... Keep digging up stats bud. He still isn't our "answer" to the RSD 

Bear also played like a top-4 defenseman when he was in Edmonton 

 

I really liked his play this year, I thought he was better with Hughes than Schenn was.

[RinkonRenfrew]

2 minutes ago, aGENT said:

This management has a solid track record of moving assets we don't plan to retain. I hope and expect that to continue.

when we’re well out of the playoff picture. or did you mean hamonic and motte? i hope they balance playoff aspirations with a slow build too, but it’s pretty clear what they’re trying to do. if we’re in a good spot and myers is fulfilling a meaningful top 6 role then i don’t see them trading him. 

[Devron]

16 minutes ago, eeeeergh said:

Bear also played like a top-4 defenseman when he was in Edmonton 

 

I really liked his play this year, I thought he was better with Hughes than Schenn was.

Bear was really good initially I thought. His play slipped as the season went on I thought. Maybe that due to a lot of sitting and not rolling from the start of camp. Not sure.

 

However I think it’s unfair for people here to call him a 7th or 8th Dman. I think he’s a solid second pairing. Third pairing guy on a strong team. I think the situation in Carolina was unique and not necessarily a representative of how good Bear can be 

[JeremyCuddles]

I am just here to see how many people are buying what renowned insider Rachel "Assistant to the video guy" Doerrie is saying. She might know, but until someone with actual inside knowledge says something, her word means less than what I left in the toilet after work.

Edited July 8, 2023 by JeremyCuddles

[canucklehead44]

4 hours ago, eeeeergh said:

Bear also played like a top-4 defenseman when he was in Edmonton 

 

I really liked his play this year, I thought he was better with Hughes than Schenn was.

He was 7th amongst right handed defensemen in even strength ice time in 19-20. Not sure where “7th/8th” defenseman comes from other than his start in Carolina last season where he was coming off of being quite sick, Carolina was stacked on the right side, and they needed a pure DFD. Also felt he was paid too much for the 3rd pairing and should be in the 2nd pairing which is what he is.

[mll]

8 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

This actually makes sense.  I mean what could possibly be in his contract that would prevent the Canucks from paying his bonus earlier than the due date?  Would a player refuse to be paid $5 million 2 months earlier than expected?  Would anyone refuse that?  Based on all of the legal contracts I have seen and having drafted up many myself, the wording in a contract would normally be "by September 15" or "on or before September 15".  I've never seen a contract that stipulates a payment needs to be made on a specific date but can't be paid earlier...

 

Surprised that it's possible and that the NHLPA would allow it unless the wording gives that flexibility.

 

LA and Kovalchuk decided to part ways but he had a bonus payment in December so they waited till it got paid to mutually terminate the contract.  If it was possible to change the payment date they would have likely paid it out earlier.

 

By putting a 15 September payment date it limits trade possibility.  An earlier payment gives more latitude for the Canucks to trade him already this off-season.  Every indication is that Myers wants to stay put though.  

 

Also why then wait till now when there's less cap space available then at the start of free agency.

 

[DrJockitch]

9 hours ago, Rick_theRyper said:

Uh huh. 

 

Bear was also a guy who was a 7/8th guy on another team... Keep digging up stats bud. He still isn't our "answer" to the RSD 

Who said he was an answer to anything. I said it was the right thing to do walking on his contract. 
The argument was that Myers was better and he demonstrably is not whether it is the eye test or stats. He may be able to put together a better looking highlight package of hits sure,but that doesn’t win anything. 
Like it or not Bear was one of our better D last year. 7th D-man on a good team yeah, we weren’t a good team in large part because of Myers and OEL. 

[aGENT]

9 hours ago, RinkonRenfrew said:

when we’re well out of the playoff picture. or did you mean hamonic and motte? i hope they balance playoff aspirations with a slow build too, but it’s pretty clear what they’re trying to do. if we’re in a good spot and myers is fulfilling a meaningful top 6 role then i don’t see them trading him. 

I agree, it is clear what they're trying to do, and I i don't think Myers is a long term piece in that. If they can get assets for him at some point this season, they will IMO.

[EdgarM]

16 hours ago, EdgarM said:

Very well said, If Hronek and Hughes both went down, then I could see Bear as an interim replacement, but he is not an answer to our top 4 and he would only be a bottom pairing if we had no one else. He would be expensive for that bottom pairing so in no way is he a good fit here.

He became redundant when we acquired Hronek.

 

9 hours ago, Devron said:

Bear was really good initially I thought. His play slipped as the season went on I thought. Maybe that due to a lot of sitting and not rolling from the start of camp. Not sure.

 

However I think it’s unfair for people here to call him a 7th or 8th Dman. I think he’s a solid second pairing. Third pairing guy on a strong team. I think the situation in Carolina was unique and not necessarily a representative of how good Bear can be 

 

5 hours ago, canucklehead44 said:

He was 7th amongst right handed defensemen in even strength ice time in 19-20. Not sure where “7th/8th” defenseman comes from other than his start in Carolina last season where he was coming off of being quite sick, Carolina was stacked on the right side, and they needed a pure DFD. Also felt he was paid too much for the 3rd pairing and should be in the 2nd pairing which is what he is.

 

[Elias Pettersson]

1 hour ago, mll said:

 

Surprised that it's possible and that the NHLPA would allow it unless the wording gives that flexibility.

 

LA and Kovalchuk decided to part ways but he had a bonus payment in December so they waited till it got paid to mutually terminate the contract.  If it was possible to change the payment date they would have likely paid it out earlier.

 

By putting a 15 September payment date it limits trade possibility.  An earlier payment gives more latitude for the Canucks to trade him already this off-season.  Every indication is that Myers wants to stay put though.  

 

Also why then wait till now when there's less cap space available then at the start of free agency.

 

The NHLPA doesn’t have authority over the wording of a standard contract. Doesn’t seem logical that a bonus payment couldn’t be paid earlier if the party that is paying it is in agreement to this. Most standard contracts are written this way. 
 

Why would Kovalchuk agree to terminate his contract earlier than expected?  That would mean he would have given up salary that was due prior to the bonus payment being paid. In Myers case we aren’t terminating his contract, so there is no reason the Canucks couldn’t simply write him a bonus cheque two months earlier. 
 

In terms of forcing a team to pay a bonus on a particular date in order to have some sort of legal protection from being traded, logically speaking that makes no sense and not sure why any team would agree to that. Not sure that would ever hold up in court either. If a player wants protection from being traded then that’s why they have a NTC put into the contract.  That’s the legal way to get protected from being traded, not forcing a team to pay a bonus on a certain day of the year so the player can’t get traded. 
 

Why have the Canucks waited until now and not paid out Myers bonus earlier so they can trade him?  Well Aquilini isn’t going to write a cheque for $5 million two months earlier then he needs to unless there is a trade already agreed upon. Logically this makes the most sense. So maybe the Canucks don’t have a trade partner yet. It’s not like they have a ready made replacement for Myers at the moment. And he does have a NTC which is the legal avenue he is using to keep himself from getting traded. The 10 teams he has on his no trade list might be the only ones interested in trading for him. 

Edited July 8, 2023 by Elias Pettersson

[mll]

33 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

The NHLPA doesn’t have authority over the wording of a standard contract. Doesn’t seem logical that a bonus payment couldn’t be paid earlier if the party that is paying it is in agreement to this. Most standard contracts are written this way. 
 

Why would Kovalchuk agree to terminate his contract earlier than expected?  That would mean he would have given up salary that was due prior to the bonus payment being paid. In Myers case we aren’t terminating his contract, so there is no reason the Canucks couldn’t simply write him a bonus cheque two months earlier. 
 

In terms of forcing a team to pay a bonus on a particular date in order to have some sort of legal protection from being traded, logically speaking that makes no sense and not sure why any team would agree to that. Not sure that would ever hold up in court either. If a player wants protection from being traded then that’s why they have a NTC put into the contract.  That’s the legal way to get protected from being traded, not forcing a team to pay a bonus on a certain day of the year so the player can’t get traded. 
 

Why have the Canucks waited until now and not paid out Myers bonus earlier so they can trade him?  Well Aquilini isn’t going to write a cheque for $5 million two months earlier then he needs to unless there is a trade already agreed upon. Logically this makes the most sense. So maybe the Canucks don’t have a trade partner yet. It’s not like they have a ready made replacement for Myers at the moment. And he does have a NTC which is the legal avenue he is using to keep himself from getting traded. The 10 teams he has on his no trade list might be the only ones interested in trading for him. 

The wording of a standard contract is in the CBA which is approved by both the owners and the NHLPA.  It's not random wording and created new for each contract.  There's a framework that was agreed upon by both parties.  

 

Kovalchuk was the one that wanted out but he wanted his bonus payment 1st.  So they had to wait till it got paid.  He actually put himself in breach of contract once the bonus was paid so that the Kings could terminate him.   LA had his cap hit on their books for the remaining length of his contract as it was an age 35+ deal.  

 

The bonus payment date is normally set contractually.  There's a reasoning behind Myers' agent setting it for 15 September and not 1 July.  Vancouver might have not wanted to give him a full NTC and the compromise is to set a later bonus payment to reduce the likelihood of a trade.  This late payment is an advantage for Myers re trade possibility.  

 

Edited July 8, 2023 by mll

[Elias Pettersson]

5 minutes ago, mll said:

The wording of a standard contract is in the CBA which is approved by both the owners and the NHLPA.  It's not random wording and created new for each contract.  There's a framework that was agreed upon by both parties.  

 

Kovalchuk was the one that wanted out but he wanted his bonus payment 1st.  So they had to wait till it got paid.  LA had his cap hit on their books for the remaining length of his contract as it was an age 35+ deal.  

 

The bonus payment date is normally set contractually.  There's a reasoning behind Myers' agent setting it for 15 September and not 1 July.  Vancouver might have not wanted to give him a full NTC and the compromise is to set a later bonus payment to reduce the likelihood of a trade.  This late payment is an advantage for Myers re trade possibility.  

 

Yes the wording of the standard contract is agreed to by both parties. Which is why I am saying they can’t just add some type of new clause that states a bonus payment has to be paid on a certain date and not one day sooner. Legally that is not a part of a standard contract. So both parties have to agree to it. Sounds like the Canucks can pay the bonus early so obviously the way the bonus payment is worded allows them to do this. 
 

I highly doubt the late bonus payment was a negotiation to get around a limited NTC. That makes no sense. The contract was signed 4 years ago. Was Myers looking into the future for additional trade protection 4 years ago?  Also, he was a UFA. The Canucks really wanted him. Jim Benning was the GM. I am sure Myers could have gotten a full NTC for the full 5 years if he wanted to. Benning literally gave him a NMC in his first year.