SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Armchair-GM

Trust The Process

Créé par: Skytown
Équipe: 2021-22 Canucks de Vancouver
Date de création initiale: 12 mai 2021
Publié: 13 mai 2021
Mode - plafond salarial: Basique
Description
Just hear me out...

I want Vancouver to win, just as much as any Canucks fans, and although it’s taking close to a decade for Jim to not turn us around, let’s just give it one more year.

Some experts say EP and QH will come in at $15 million combined, but I believe it was Friedman who said it could be as low as $13 million. I’ve split the difference and am paying them a combined $14,250,000.

Instead of moving out picks and prospects to dump contracts (Eriksson, Beagle, Roussel) just hold onto them. It’s 1 year. Be bad for 1 more year, and then use the $12+ million coming off the books to build the team.

*Exception*
I doubt Seattle takes Holtby for nothing. Use a 3rd preferably, but most likely a 2nd to have Seattle take him.

As they say in Philly “Trust the process”

We can all agree that we’re nowhere near where we should be, but just wait the year and then we’ll have some cap flexibility.

With 25 players on this roster, they’re $1,163,546 over the cap, but than can be dealt with by easily by burying someone in the minors/having a 23 man roster.

I’ve left Beagle in the lineup because I’m not really sure what’s up with his future. I’ve heard that his career might be done, but I’ve also seen that he’s been skating, so I don’t really know. Like I said, just send someone to Abbotsford, and the cap fixes itself. It will be much easier to call up/send down players next year to Abbotsford than it has been with Utica.
Signatures de joueurs autonomes
LISTE DE RÉSERVEANSCAP HIT
3925 000 $
RFAANSCAP HIT
36 750 000 $
37 500 000 $
2975 000 $
2975 000 $
UFAANSCAP HIT
44 000 000 $
11 500 000 $
22 000 000 $
Transactions
VAN
    Expansion Pick
    Rachats de contrats
    Frais appliqués
    Repêchage1e ronde2e ronde3e ronde4e ronde5e ronde6e ronde7e ronde
    2021
    Logo de VAN
    Logo de VAN
    Logo de VAN
    Logo de VAN
    Logo de CHI
    Logo de VAN
    Logo de WPG
    Logo de VAN
    2022
    Logo de VAN
    Logo de VAN
    Logo de VAN
    Logo de VAN
    Logo de VAN
    Logo de VAN
    2023
    Logo de VAN
    Logo de VAN
    Logo de VAN
    Logo de VAN
    Logo de VAN
    Logo de VAN
    Logo de VAN
    TAILLE DE LA FORMATIONPLAFOND SALARIALCAP HITEXCÉDENTS Info-bulleBONISESPACE SOUS LE PLAFOND SALARIAL
    2581 500 000 $81 937 326 $648 780 $1 082 500 $-437 326 $
    Ailier gaucheCentreAilier droit
    Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
    5 250 000 $5 250 000 $
    C, AG, AD
    UFA - 2
    Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
    7 500 000 $7 500 000 $
    C, AG
    UFA - 3
    Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
    5 875 000 $5 875 000 $
    AD
    UFA - 1
    Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
    891 667 $891 667 $ (Bonis de performance200 000 $$200K)
    AG, AD
    RFA - 2
    Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
    4 125 000 $4 125 000 $
    C
    UFA - 2
    4 000 000 $4 000 000 $
    C, AD
    UFA - 4
    Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
    3 250 000 $3 250 000 $
    AG
    NTC
    UFA - 3
    Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
    925 000 $925 000 $
    AD, AG
    RFA - 3
    Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
    1 225 000 $1 225 000 $
    AG, AD
    UFA - 1
    Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
    725 000 $725 000 $
    AG, AD
    UFA - 1
    Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
    825 000 $825 000 $
    AD, C
    UFA - 1
    Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
    975 000 $975 000 $
    AD
    RFA - 1
    Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
    3 000 000 $3 000 000 $
    AG
    M-NTC
    UFA - 1
    Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
    3 000 000 $3 000 000 $
    C
    M-NTC
    UFA - 1
    Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
    6 000 000 $6 000 000 $
    AG, AD
    M-NTC
    UFA - 1
    Défenseur gaucherDéfenseur droitierGardien de but
    Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
    6 750 000 $6 750 000 $
    DG
    UFA - 6
    Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
    5 950 000 $5 950 000 $
    DG/DD
    M-NTC
    UFA - 4
    Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
    5 000 000 $5 000 000 $
    G
    UFA - 5
    Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
    2 000 000 $2 000 000 $
    DD
    UFA - 2
    Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
    811 667 $811 667 $ (Bonis de performance32 500 $$32K)
    G
    RFA - 1
    Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
    925 000 $925 000 $ (Bonis de performance850 000 $$850K)
    DG
    RFA - 1
    Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
    6 000 000 $6 000 000 $
    DD
    NTC
    UFA - 3
    Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
    975 000 $975 000 $
    DG
    UFA - 1
    Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
    725 000 $725 000 $
    DD
    UFA - 1
    Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
    1 500 000 $1 500 000 $
    DG
    UFA - 1
    Laissés de côtéListe des blessés (IR)Liste des blessés à long terme (LTIR)
    Logo de Canucks de Vancouver
    3 500 000 $3 500 000 $
    AG, AD
    M-NTC
    UFA - 2

    Code d'intégration

    • Pour afficher cette équipe sur un autre site Web ou blog, ajoutez ce iFrame à la page appropriée
    • Personnalisez les dimensions dans le code IFrame ci-dessous pour adapter votre site de manière appropriée. Minimum recommandé: 400px.

    Texte intégré

    Cliquer pour surligner
    13 mai 2021 à 16 h 33
    #1
    Avatar de l'utilisateur
    Rejoint: avr. 2019
    Messages: 7,870
    Mentions "j'aime": 6,382
    I'm with you kinda but there's no way Benning should be given another chance he should've been fired months ago. The guy is an egotistical **** hiding behind a bumbling idiot
    Skytown a aimé ceci.
    13 mai 2021 à 16 h 38
    #2
    Big Shoots
    Avatar de l'utilisateur
    Rejoint: sept. 2020
    Messages: 3,570
    Mentions "j'aime": 1,087
    Why would we give up a pick to dump Holtby but not the others?
    13 mai 2021 à 16 h 49
    #3
    Good Opinion Haver
    Avatar de l'utilisateur
    Rejoint: juin 2018
    Messages: 1,825
    Mentions "j'aime": 927
    Staying the course and being bad is pretty much all you can do, Vancouver doesn't have the cap space to make any meaningful upgrades to get the team into playoff contention after Hughes and Pettersson are signed, unless you do what you did and move Holtby (which, with the number of goalies who had better seasons available for cheaper, I wouldn't count on Seattle taking him) and even then like Granlund is a good player but he's probably not getting you there by himself.

    What Vancouver can do to make some changes though is really commit that one year. Moving on from Benning would be great. In lieu of that, the Canucks really need to weaponize that one year of cap space. Instead of spending your remaining cap space signing Hamonic, Edler, and Granlund- all fine-ish players who will only hurt you from being bad- instead open up that space as much as possible with the intention of taking contracts from other teams that need the cap space for their own problems instead. Try to move Holtby at half retained to someone (the Sharks are looking for goaltending) and buyout Eriksson along with Virtanen. I know Eriksson only has one year left, but buying him out gets you an extra two million this year that you can weaponize, even if it's at the cost of an extra one million the following year.

    Then Vancouver has an extra fifteen million ish in cap space to fill six-ish roster spots- two defensemen and four forwards (maybe three forwards if you sign Podkolzin). Now you can go to Tampa, Vegas, Washington, St. Louis, NYI, etc with the intention of taking the Kilorns, Smiths, Hickeys, Clutterbucks, etc. Will that team be worse with those guys as opposed to Granlund/Edler/Hamonic? Maybe, depending on who you walk away with. But those teams are going to have to pay you assets to take that money, and that's a smarter use of your cap space when you're staying the course (ie, being bad) regardless.
    13 mai 2021 à 16 h 55
    #4
    Démarrer sujet
    Canucks Fan
    Avatar de l'utilisateur
    Rejoint: déc. 2018
    Messages: 742
    Mentions "j'aime": 147
    Quoting: BigShoots
    Why would we give up a pick to dump Holtby but not the others?


    1. Clears the space to sign my boy Granlund
    2. I think although his cap is larger than Beagle and Roussel, it would be easier to move. Plenty of goalies will be available, and Holtby isn’t what he once was, but he would be a good locker room presence for a new team.
    3. If you could retain 1/2 of both Beagle and Roussel and move them each for a 4th I’d be all over that too.
    OldNYIfan a aimé ceci.
    13 mai 2021 à 17 h 12
    #5
    Avatar de l'utilisateur
    Rejoint: nov. 2020
    Messages: 1,406
    Mentions "j'aime": 961
    Quoting: TheEarthmaster
    Staying the course and being bad is pretty much all you can do, Vancouver doesn't have the cap space to make any meaningful upgrades to get the team into playoff contention after Hughes and Pettersson are signed, unless you do what you did and move Holtby (which, with the number of goalies who had better seasons available for cheaper, I wouldn't count on Seattle taking him) and even then like Granlund is a good player but he's probably not getting you there by himself.

    What Vancouver can do to make some changes though is really commit that one year. Moving on from Benning would be great. In lieu of that, the Canucks really need to weaponize that one year of cap space. Instead of spending your remaining cap space signing Hamonic, Edler, and Granlund- all fine-ish players who will only hurt you from being bad- instead open up that space as much as possible with the intention of taking contracts from other teams that need the cap space for their own problems instead. Try to move Holtby at half retained to someone (the Sharks are looking for goaltending) and buyout Eriksson along with Virtanen. I know Eriksson only has one year left, but buying him out gets you an extra two million this year that you can weaponize, even if it's at the cost of an extra one million the following year.



    Then Vancouver has an extra fifteen million ish in cap space to fill six-ish roster spots- two defensemen and four forwards (maybe three forwards if you sign Podkolzin). Now you can go to Tampa, Vegas, Washington, St. Louis, NYI, etc with the intention of taking the Kilorns, Smiths, Hickeys, Clutterbucks, etc. Will that team be worse with those guys as opposed to Granlund/Edler/Hamonic? Maybe, depending on who you walk away with. But those teams are going to have to pay you assets to take that money, and that's a smarter use of your cap space when you're staying the course (ie, being bad) regardless.


    So If I am reading this right you are complaining about Benning not having cap space to sign UFAs because he used cap space previously to sign UFAs
    13 mai 2021 à 17 h 12
    #6
    Once a Kings Fan Too
    Avatar de l'utilisateur
    Rejoint: juin 2018
    Messages: 39,695
    Mentions "j'aime": 24,612
    As an outsider with no real ax to grind (other than hope you get 7 points out of your last 5 games), I think that neither Granlund nor Podkolzin (if he comes over) are a good #3 C for you. I'd like to see Miller-Pettersson-Podkolzin and Hoglander-Horvat-Boeser so that the rookies each have two veteran partners. Your draft pick will be in the 7th overall to 11th overall range, so that will be another reason for future optimism.

    Staying the course is a good strategy, especially with Jim "Do-Little" Benning in charge.
    Skytown a aimé ceci.
    13 mai 2021 à 17 h 30
    #7
    Big Shoots
    Avatar de l'utilisateur
    Rejoint: sept. 2020
    Messages: 3,570
    Mentions "j'aime": 1,087
    Quoting: Skytown
    1. Clears the space to sign my boy Granlund
    2. I think although his cap is larger than Beagle and Roussel, it would be easier to move. Plenty of goalies will be available, and Holtby isn’t what he once was, but he would be a good locker room presence for a new team.
    3. If you could retain 1/2 of both Beagle and Roussel and move them each for a 4th I’d be all over that too.


    I'm not opposed to shedding Holtby but your theory was just wait the yr out as a bad team and let all the contracts expire. Seems should just do the same with Holtby. How does Granlund help this team anyway?
    13 mai 2021 à 19 h 17
    #8
    Good Opinion Haver
    Avatar de l'utilisateur
    Rejoint: juin 2018
    Messages: 1,825
    Mentions "j'aime": 927
    Modifié 13 mai 2021 à 19 h 28
    Quoting: BubbleDemko
    So If I am reading this right you are complaining about Benning not having cap space to sign UFAs because he used cap space previously to sign UFAs


    No you are not reading that right. I am telling them NOT to sign the UFAs OP is signing like Edler, Granlund, and Hamonic and instead use that cap space to take on short term contracts from cap strapped team to fill those roster spots instead so that you get assets in return for taking the contract. The reasoning being that adding Granlund and keeping Hamonic/Edler is probably not going to make this team a playoff team next year, so why not fill those spots with other guys that teams will pay you to take

    ie, if NYI are going to pay you a couple extra picks to take Thomas Hickey and Cal Clutterbuck so that they can re-sign Beauvillier and Pelech, then it would be smarter to do that than to sign Granlund and Hamonic. Even though Granlund and Hamonic are obviously better than Hickey and Clutterbuck, you're not making the playoffs with Granlund and Hamonic anyway, while Hickey and Clutterbuck fall off the books next year (along with a bunch of the other UFAs) and then you have that cap space back when you're ready to really make a push next year, and you have the extra picks to either draft or use on reinforcements.

    That is what a rebuilding team that's serious about rebuilding would do (see- Detroit with taking on Panik, Chicago with taking on Connolly). The Beagle, Roussell, Eriksson contracts have been signed. I can tell you how much they suck all day but that's not going to change. But signing a bunch of UFAs for a couple years isn't going to change things either, they've been doing that for years. I'm advising a different approach for Vancouver's remaining cap space that will allow them to stockpile assets and speed up the the time they aren't in the playoffs.
    13 mai 2021 à 19 h 30
    #9
    Good Opinion Haver
    Avatar de l'utilisateur
    Rejoint: juin 2018
    Messages: 1,825
    Mentions "j'aime": 927
    Quoting: BubbleDemko
    So If I am reading this right you are complaining about Benning not having cap space to sign UFAs because he used cap space previously to sign UFAs



    Unless you're talking about the one line I say where I say "Vancouver doesn't have the cap space to make any meaningful upgrades to get the team into playoff contention", which, there's more than one way to make upgrades other than signing UFAs* but you need to have cap space to do them. I'm not entirely opposed to Vancouver signing UFAs, but you need to sign good ones which are expensive and even then I'm not entirely sure how it makes sense for Vancouver to do that right now versus trading for bad contracts to fill out the roster instead, if they can open some space up at all.

    *are you Jim Benning? Because the fact that it seems like your mind heard "upgrades" and immediately said "UFAs" is a very Benning thing to do
     
    Répondre
    To create a post please Login or S'inscrire
    Question:
    Options:
    Ajouter une option
    Soumettre le sondage