[Proposal] Sign Malkin?

[Nucker 67]

Kind of gives me Sundin or Messier vibes, old star who had success / better days with another team, but then joins the Canucks and doesn't do much. 

 

I think the Canucks need to get younger

 

 

[Hairy Kneel]

1 hour ago, BCNate said:

I'd go 3year deal for Malkin and up to $8 mill, based on a GP bonus.  He is still an oustanding player, and could fill any void left by a potential JT Miller deal.  Having an Elite Russian C between Kuz and Pods would be great mentorship.

 

I'd love it if we dealt Miller to Pitt, then Signed Malkin.  We gain a few big assets, and replace many of Milers points.

I'd rather give Miller that 8M.

 

[Provost]

1 minute ago, Hairy Kneel said:

I'd rather give Miller that 8M.

 

I would too if Miller was happy to sign for a 3 year, $8 million contract.

 

Of course that is a pretty ridiculous idea and flies in the face of what his agent is saying it would take.

 

Too bad Miller can’t be signed to a contract based on bonuses…. That would defray a lot of the risk later in the contract.  It would he nice if the league managed to negotiate a new CBA change where any years after 35 can be bonus laden… and not just ones that are signed after age 35.

[Ilya Mikheyev]

1 hour ago, NUCKER67 said:

Kind of gives me Sundin or Messier vibes, old star who had success / better days with another team, but then joins the Canucks and doesn't do much. 

 

I think the Canucks need to get younger

 

 

Messier and Sundin meant very different things to this franchise tho. Messier came in and the dressing room dynamic was destroyed to ruins based on that and the following moves; Sundin came in as a mentor, propelled the team from a non-playoff team into the 2nd round, and has been credited several times as being an important leader for Kesler and the Sedins before the 2011 run.

[-AJ-]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a 35+ bonus deal can only be a one-year deal, correct? Any longer than that and I think it's not eligible for performance bonuses, so we would have to sign him to a one-year deal. I'm not against it if it was reasonable and pretty heavy on bonuses to hedge against injuries and poor play, etc. All that said, it would be as a stop gap for missing a guy like Miller though, not any sort of long term solution.

[Ilya Mikheyev]

1 hour ago, Provost said:

Yes, the idea is based purely around us being in the conversation due to the familiarity between the player and our off ice staff.  Those relationships do mean something in the NHL.  Not that we should chase him at all costs.

 

The other guys are going to get paid a ton in terms of both dollars and term.

 

I probably don’t do a 3 year deal for him unless the terms were amazing.  1-2 years with the bulk being in 35+ bonuses (which can handily be pushed into the next year if needed.

 

Another wrinkle is that if you are having ELCs and over 35 contracts on your roster you really need to get rid of Ferland.  He doesn’t allow you to bani cap space.  Without him you can run a short roster due to Abby being to close and bank an extra couple million in cap space just for that.  At the end of the season that buffet can be used to pay the bonuses rather than push them.

I agree those relations mean something, and the Canucks, if they wanted to pursue him, would have as decent of a shot as most teams in the league.

 

A 1 or 2 year deal would be great, but after Ovie's deal, I imagine he'll want 3+. I agree Kadri and Trochek will get bigger terms - but if the Canucks are going to go for a 7.5-9.5M player, I'd rather Kadri for 7.5/6 years than Malkin at 8/3 years, but that's just me. I'm not against the signing, just think quite a few variables would have to come together.

[Provost]

Just now, Teemu Selänne said:

Messier and Sundin meant very different things to this franchise tho. Messier came in and the dressing room dynamic was destroyed to ruins based on that and the following moves; Sundin came in as a mentor, propelled the team from a non-playoff team into the 2nd round, and has been credited several times as being an important leader for Kesler and the Sedins before the 2011 run.

I was about to post this.  Kesler and the Sedins have been effusive about what Sundin meant to their development and confidence…. And directly linked his signing to our later run of success.

 

If people think our young team doesn’t have anything to learn from Malkin, who is well known to be a team guy without a big ego… and one of the best players in the league for 15 years… I think they are missing something in their thought processes. 
 

Malkin has three Stanley Cups, two Art Ross Trophies, a Hart Trophy, a Calder Trophy, a Ted Lindsay Award and also won a Conn Smythe Trophy.

 

 

[JM_]

4 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a 35+ bonus deal can only be a one-year deal, correct? Any longer than that and I think it's not eligible for performance bonuses, so we would have to sign him to a one-year deal. I'm not against it if it was reasonable and pretty heavy on bonuses to hedge against injuries and poor play, etc. All that said, it would be as a stop gap for missing a guy like Miller though, not any sort of long term solution.

someone is going to give him term tho, and that can't be us. If Miller is too risky then whats 35-38 years old? yes I know he's elite but its still 38 in the last year. 

[Hairy Kneel]

4 minutes ago, Teemu Selänne said:

I agree those relations mean something, and the Canucks, if they wanted to pursue him, would have as decent of a shot as most teams in the league.

 

A 1 or 2 year deal would be great, but after Ovie's deal, I imagine he'll want 3+. I agree Kadri and Trochek will get bigger terms - but if the Canucks are going to go for a 7.5-9.5M player, I'd rather Kadri for 7.5/6 years than Malkin at 8/3 years, but that's just me. I'm not against the signing, just think quite a few variables would have to come together.

Although I see Kadri's upside. I think he'd be perennial nightmare as far as pm's. His pm and suspensions will increase in a Canucks uni.

[BCNate]

43 minutes ago, Hairy Kneel said:

I'd rather give Miller that 8M.

 

I wouldn't.

 

Lets say we get Marino, Poulin, 1st for Miller.

 

In that case, we get A) Malkin, Marino, 1st, Poulin   Or  we keep JT Miller.  I think we are far better team with option A now and in the future.

 

An incentive laden 35+ contract for Malkin carries less risk that a 7x8 for Miller.  I think Malkin will be an elite C for at least a couple more years.  The tail end of a long term Miller has less assurances.

 

[-Vintage Canuck-]

 

[Hairy Kneel]

1 minute ago, BCNate said:

I wouldn't.

 

Lets say we get Marino, Poulin, 1st for Miller.

 

In that case, we get A) Malkin, Marino, 1st, Poulin   Or  we keep JT Miller.  I think we are far better team with option A now and in the future.

 

An incentive laden 35+ contract for Malkin carries less risk that a 7x8 for Miller.  I think Malkin will be an elite C for at least a couple more years.  The tail end of a long term Miller has less assurances.

 

Marino, Poulin, and a 1st feels like cheapening the value of Miller.

(Tofu - a forward, a prospect, a 1st and a 5th.

Copp - a 1st a 2nd and a 5th plus a forward.)

Marino is a lateral move. I think we need a bigger more physical, hitting dman like Zadarov or Manson.

I really hope we don't turn into a dumping ground for Pitts contracts.

 

[Smashian Kassian]

If we trade Miller I'd have interest, particularly on a 1 yr deal. (Maybe 2 depending cap hit)

 

He's still a PPG player and will want to win. Could be a nice stopgap replacement for Miller. 

[BCNate]

50 minutes ago, Hairy Kneel said:

Marino, Poulin, and a 1st feels like cheapening the value of Miller.

(Tofu - a forward, a prospect, a 1st and a 5th.

Copp - a 1st a 2nd and a 5th plus a forward.)

Marino is a lateral move. I think we need a bigger more physical, hitting dman like Zadarov or Manson.

I really hope we don't turn into a dumping ground for Pitts contracts.

 

I think you are grossly under rating Marino.  He is an established 20+ min a night RD on an excellent deal.  Our Defense is lightyears better with him in it.  Marino is also much better than Manson, who will cash in on his 2018 abilities.  I do like Zadorov, and could see us going after him, but getting Marion does not prevent that. 

 

Poulin is an NHL ready recent 1st, and the #20 pick has value.

 

 

Honestly, if you are hoping for a better D than Marino, higher pick than 20, and better prospect than Poulin, I think you will be very dissapointed in the return.  Those other deal you list really aren't even close to being in the same ballpark.  Aside from the Rangers #30 pick that came via conditions, the only piece worth anything there is their 2nd.

[nergish]

12 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said:

Kind of gives me Sundin or Messier vibes, old star who had success / better days with another team, but then joins the Canucks and doesn't do much. 

 

I think the Canucks need to get younger

 

 

A lot of the roster at the time spoke very highly of Sundin's impact. 

He was grossly, grossly overpaid, and it was such a short little experiment - but it was fun, and our guys were able to learn something from him.

 

I'm not totally advocating Malkin, but at the right term and number I would explore it.

Especially if it rubs off on our Russians (and opens things up for us to continue adding Russian talent in the future). I could see Geno being revitalized playing with young Podkolzin, and potentially Kuzmenko as well.

 

Of course, you're right - we do indeed need to get younger. This is all dependent on the return we get in a JT Miller trade.

 

 

1 hour ago, BCNate said:

Lets say we get Marino, Poulin, 1st for Miller.

 

In that case, we get A) Malkin, Marino, 1st, Poulin   Or  we keep JT Miller.  I think we are far better team with option A now and in the future.

Why do we have to trade Miller to Pittsburgh specifically? That package doesn't get it done for me.

We can trade him to the highest bidder and still bring in Malkin.

[BCNate]

2 minutes ago, nergish said:

A lot of the roster at the time spoke very highly of Sundin's impact. 

He was grossly, grossly overpaid, and it was such a short little experiment - but it was fun, and our guys were able to learn something from him.

 

I'm not totally advocating Malkin, but at the right term and number I would explore it.

Especially if it rubs off on our Russians (and opens things up for us to continue adding Russian talent in the future). I could see Geno being revitalized playing with young Podkolzin, and potentially Kuzmenko as well.

 

Of course, you're right - we do indeed need to get younger. This is all dependent on the return we get in a JT Miller trade.

 

 

Why do we have to trade Miller to Pittsburgh specifically? That package doesn't get it done for me.

We can trade him to the highest bidder and still bring in Malkin.

We don't have to trade him to pittsburgh, that was an example.

 

If we can get Malkin/or another high end UFA with Millers $ + the assets from a JT Miller deal, I feel we are better with that than just Miller.

 

If we are dealing Miller, I want an established NHL piece back as part of the deal, not just a bunch of shiny futures that may or may not work out.  Marino is criminally under rated around here.

[Darius]

Age//Cap probably not the right fit for where this team is going.  The positive I can think of is that it would be like when they brought in veteran Mats Sundin in 08/09 ...it had a positive influence on our top players like the Sedins.  Trying not to generalize on nationality... but imagine how Podz and Kuzmenko would react...

[Curmudgeon]

If Allvin and company are going to sign any Penguin, I'd prefer Letang over Malkin. And I'd keep Miller. But none of these things is likely to happen.

[rawkdrummer]

Ovechkin and Malkin deserve to be paid in rubles.

Edited June 29, 2022 by rawkdrummer

[boziffous]

Malkin is still a really good player when healthy, but he's missed so much time over the past 10 seasons that I'd hate to bank on him staying healthy for a full season. With Canuck luck he'd probably miss even more games due to injury. Below is the games he's missed each season over the past 10 years.

 

Season - games missed

 

2012/13 - 17 games

2013/14 - 22 games

2014/15 - 13 games

2015/16 - 25 games

2016/17 - 20 games

2017/18 - 4 games

2018/19 - 14 games

2019/20 - 14 games

2020/21 - 23 games

2021/22 - 41 games