My point was that we shouldn't trade Luongo for crap, we should hold out for good young assets to move at the deadline for real help which should definitely include a first.
For the record, McKeens rates Kadri as a solid player (predicting 31 points in 58 games), Colborne close to Jensen (6 spots behind, 21 spots ahead of Gaunce), and Ashton close to Gaunce (8 spots behind at 79, no other Canucks within the top 120 skaters). This is probably a good indication of the general consensus and thus a good indication of trade value.
Mckeens is not a consensus. It's a publication that has its own ratings system.
Further, if we get good futures for Lu, I do not want them traded. This organization needs that boost in its pipeline, more so than recycling pro assets, which it would be doing in your plan.
There's definitely a point where the roster additions are unsustainable. Getzlaf would be that as a pure rental. If he's leaving ANA, it's for the dough. Something this team isn't in the habit of shelling out to individual players.
Perry too, would be nice, but again unsustainable. This team needs a regular top6 on a median contract, ala Booth. Not superstars they can't keep long-term anyways. If that type of trade comes along, great. If not, it's not a huge loss because that is what they hope Kassian/Jensen progress to anyways.
Perry too, would be nice, but again unsustainable. This team needs a regular top6 on a median contract, ala Booth. Not superstars they can't keep long-term anyways. If that type of trade comes along, great. If not, it's not a huge loss because that is what they hope Kassian/Jensen progress to anyways.
Perry fills a huge organizational need and retaining him shouldn't be an issue cap wise. If that means David Booth gets dealt or waived in the process, so be it. IMO you just can't pass up on top tier talent if it comes your way - move lesser players and their contracts if need be...
Perry fills a huge organizational need and retaining him shouldn't be an issue cap wise. If that means David Booth gets dealt or waived in the process, so be it. IMO you just can't pass up on top tier talent if it comes your way - move lesser players and their contracts if need be...
It shouldn't be too hard to make room. Raymond and Ballard for 2nds, minus Luongo, and that's more than enough room.
Wow...some of ours fans are now referring to Booth as a 2nd line tweener.
I think these fans are completely blind.
David Booth is a poor defensive forward with no vision, creativity or playmaking ability to speak of and a decent shot and nose for the net. 2nd line tweener is a good description...
An injured Mikael Samuelsson and awful Marco Sturm was the best offer the Panthers received in a league with 29 other teams. If people thought of him as a bonafide top 6 forward don't you think somebody would have trumped that paltry offer? What are you seeing from this 40 point forward that I'm not?
David Booth is a poor defensive forward with no vision, creativity or playmaking ability to speak of and a decent shot and nose for the net. 2nd line tweener is a good description...
An injured Mikael Samuelsson and awful Marco Sturm was the best offer the Panthers received in a league with 29 other teams. If people thought of him as a bonafide top 6 forward don't you think somebody would have trumped that paltry offer? What are you seeing from this 40 point forward that I'm not?
David Booth is a poor defensive forward with no vision, creativity or playmaking ability to speak of and a decent shot and nose for the net. 2nd line tweener is a good description...
An injured Mikael Samuelsson and awful Marco Sturm was the best offer the Panthers received in a league with 29 other teams. If people thought of him as a bonafide top 6 forward don't you think somebody would have trumped that paltry offer? What are you seeing from this 40 point forward that I'm not?
I would consider Mason Raymond or Chris Higgins to be a 2nd line tweener. Players that can slot in to the top 6 but also play a bottom 6 role. I think David Booth is a top 6 player on any team in the league, thus taking away the 'tweener' label, which I believe is too loosely used around here.
I saw a lot of great things from Booth last year despite the injuries and transition he had to deal with. I get the feeling he will surprise a lot of people next season. If you didn't see those same qualities, this conversation is a lost cause.
And also, when Booth was traded the writing was on the wall that he wasn't going to re-sign in Florida. It was the last year of his contract so naturally his value went down. The only thing Florida needed out of the deal was 2 players that might equal or better the production of Booth. In the long run, Mike Gillis absolutely stole Booth in this deal.
And also, when Booth was traded the writing was on the wall that he wasn't going to re-sign in Florida. It was the last year of his contract so naturally his value went down.
What? That's not true at all. He had/has three years left on his contract.
I don't think he requested a trade. It was even reported that he cried when he learned about the trade.
Booth had little value because he is on a very bad contract. Some people are really overrated Booth here, he's just not that good.
4.25M/yr for a 20-25 goal scorer really isn't that bad. It's not as if it's long-term either.
I think Booth is really under-rated. I don't think we have a forward better off the rush and near the front of the net. Our fans should give him more time to adjust to our system, especially considering he had to also deal with an injury last year.
Booth had no value because he was coming off a 40 point season where he got first line ice time - almost 19 minutes per game, all of it at EV/PP. 20-25 goal, 40-50 point Booth with that ice time is awful and nowhere near worth his salary. As a 20-25 goal, 40-50 point forward in second line minutes, as he was with the Canucks, he's clearly worth his contract.
Unless you think Florida got a better offer but decided to take the lower of two (or more) offers, I don't understand what you are questioning...
They also traded him at the beginning of the season when many teams had spent their cap/budget space, and they weren't willing to take on long term salary commitments in return. The absence of offers makes it so that the Panthers' eventual return for Booth means about as much for Booth's value as the Sharks' return for Ehrhoff meant for him.
Perry fills a huge organizational need and retaining him shouldn't be an issue cap wise. If that means David Booth gets dealt or waived in the process, so be it. IMO you just can't pass up on top tier talent if it comes your way - move lesser players and their contracts if need be...
David Booth waived? Lol. You must not have caught the Canucksarmy analysis of G/60 rank and surprisingly good defensive play per advanced stats.
On Perry: I understand your point and normally I would agree, but the team's internal cap won't allow for it. There's little reason to think that if money eventually forces Perry out of ANA that he is going to put a 6m cap on his contract for VAN. He's going to get paid. Hence, won't be retained.
David Booth waived? Lol. You must not have caught the Canucksarmy analysis of G/60 rank and surprisingly good defensive play per advanced stats.
On Perry: I understand your point and normally I would agree, but the team's internal cap won't allow for it. There's little reason to think that if money eventually forces Perry out of ANA that he is going to put a 6m cap on his contract for VAN. He's going to get paid. Hence, won't be retained.
Umm, if we have a chance to get Corey Perry we need to take it. **** a $6M internal cap, the guy is a first line forward in his prime who can flat out score goals. If Perry is available, you make room for him without question.
On Perry: I understand your point and normally I would agree, but the team's internal cap won't allow for it. There's little reason to think that if money eventually forces Perry out of ANA that he is going to put a 6m cap on his contract for VAN. He's going to get paid. Hence, won't be retained.
At this point though, the Canucks need to start succession planning for the Sedins. There's a good chance that their reign as above average first liners is going to come to an end by the end of their contracts, and if the Canucks have an opportunity to lockup a top-end player, I think they will do it. I think Gillis realizes the team is coming to a point where by next season they need at least one other player they can rely on in a first line role.
Unless you think Florida got a better offer but decided to take the lower of two (or more) offers, I don't understand what you are questioning...
I think Florida could have probably got a better deal for Booth like a 1 for 1 deal but liked the fact that Sammuelson & Sturm were UFAs at season's end so they could shed a lot of cap space for the future for contracts (Versteeg). A lot of people forget that us taking Reinprecht in that deal too.
David Booth waived? Lol. You must not have caught the Canucksarmy analysis of G/60 rank and surprisingly good defensive play per advanced stats.
On Perry: I understand your point and normally I would agree, but the team's internal cap won't allow for it. There's little reason to think that if money eventually forces Perry out of ANA that he is going to put a 6m cap on his contract for VAN. He's going to get paid. Hence, won't be retained.
Florida essentially got no value for Booth when they traded him. I would peg his value as very low, not far from waiver territorry...
If you can lock up Perry for anything up to $7mil you do it IMO. The Canucks could move bad money off the books if they need cap space and Perry is an ideal fit on the 1st or 2nd line RW longterm.
[QUOTE=CanuckLuck;54606655]I would consider Mason Raymond or Chris Higgins to be a 2nd line tweener. Players that can slot in to the top 6 but also play a bottom 6 role. I think David Booth is a top 6 player on any team in the league, thus taking away the 'tweener' label, which I believe is too loosely used around here.
I saw a lot of great things from Booth last year despite the injuries and transition he had to deal with. I get the feeling he will surprise a lot of people next season. If you didn't see those same qualities, this conversation is a lost cause.
[QUOTE]
IMO Booth is the Canucks 5th best winger behind Daniel, Burrows, Higgins and Hansen. So if Higgins is a tweener, Booth would be as well.
Which top 6 forwards do you think have worse vision and playmaking ability than Booth? Which top 6 forwards are worse defensively?
The guy is a nothing asset at his contract IMO. Would dump him in a heartbeat to bring in an impact forward.
Florida essentially got no value for Booth when they traded him. I would peg his value as very low, not far from waiver territorry...
If you can lock up Perry for anything up to $7mil you do it IMO. The Canucks could move bad money off the books if they need cap space and Perry is an ideal fit on the 1st or 2nd line RW longterm.
I would offer anything up to 7.5 mil. Perry would leave us with no holes in our roster(assuming Schroeder can take over 3C)
Florida essentially got no value for Booth when they traded him. I would peg his value as very low, not far from waiver territorry...
If you can lock up Perry for anything up to $7mil you do it IMO. The Canucks could move bad money off the books if they need cap space and Perry is an ideal fit on the 1st or 2nd line RW longterm.
We will continue to disagree on Booth. Quite ridiculous to refer to him as a shade above waiver territory as well. There are contracts around the league that compare well to his. I'm guessing they should be viewed as poor also? (Wasn't there a list posted about this during the season in order to justify Booth's contract?) I don't think you are in touch with the type of money similar level players are getting around the league.
As to locking up any player above Sedin money: I'll believe it when I see it. It hasn't happened yet. Gillis even let Ehrhoff walk due to the internal cap. Gillis stated that he would break it for the right player, but I think finding that player and convincing him to stay is an issue. With Weber, he's got that hometown connection. With Perry, there's nothing.
Further, no point in throwing around the 7m number, or if Perry would even sign for that. If he's leaving ANA for money, then it would be in his best interests to wait until UFA. So even if Gillis entertained breaking his cap covenant, the player himself has to buy in. No sense for Perry to do that before UFA.
