HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

The Armchair GM Thread - Part XXXI - Nobody Loves Raymond Edition

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-06-2013, 11:56 AM
  #926
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 10,334
vCash: 833
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave babych returns View Post
I like to think this too, but a GM needs to have a backup plan.

And you usually can't sign one of those in early October when your prized young player has fallen flat on his face in training camp (or struggled out of the gate in the regular season).

I'd wager that the Canucks plan for a roster without Jensen next season, and that if he either makes the team out of camp or earns a permanent spot in a call-up then they'll address that situation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiranis View Post
I can see Jensen making the team briefly but Canucks want their players to be able to play 100% within the system and I don't see Jensen being there yet. He will need at least half a season to figure things out, pick up on his defensive responsibilities, learn to keep his feet moving (which was a problem last time he was in the AHL), etc. I hope he surprises, but I wouldn't count on it. (Look at Gustav Nyquist, you could argue he was 'ready' last year but he's still paying his dues a year later.)
I agree with both of you, but next year will be a unique situation with the cap going down by +/- 6 million dollars. I don't think Jensen, no matter how he looks, would be pencilled in for more than a 9th forward role, and the team will certainly have a contingency option behind him. I just believe Jensen is talented enough -- and physically developed enough, importantly -- to do a bit of on-the-job training. The way AV raved about him last year makes me think he's a kid that he'd like to work with.

My point wasn't necessarily that Jensen will make the team, mind you, just that it's a possibility. Heck, there's even a longshot chance Corrado makes the team (sub 600k caphit!) for a stint if he has a strong camp. The overriding point is that the Canucks cap situation is not all that dire. With Jensen/Lack on the team (if it happened), 7 million to sign a 13th forward and 2 defensemen leaves a lot of wiggle room.

I expect there to be some very good players available for lower-than-anticipated cap hits this summer -- including maybe a few that take 1-year type deals and hope teams have room the following season.

Proto is offline  
Old
02-06-2013, 12:28 PM
  #927
dave babych returns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proto View Post
I agree with both of you, but next year will be a unique situation with the cap going down by +/- 6 million dollars. I don't think Jensen, no matter how he looks, would be pencilled in for more than a 9th forward role, and the team will certainly have a contingency option behind him. I just believe Jensen is talented enough -- and physically developed enough, importantly -- to do a bit of on-the-job training. The way AV raved about him last year makes me think he's a kid that he'd like to work with.

My point wasn't necessarily that Jensen will make the team, mind you, just that it's a possibility. Heck, there's even a longshot chance Corrado makes the team (sub 600k caphit!) for a stint if he has a strong camp. The overriding point is that the Canucks cap situation is not all that dire. With Jensen/Lack on the team (if it happened), 7 million to sign a 13th forward and 2 defensemen leaves a lot of wiggle room.
I agree, and Mike Gillis has talked about the importance of having one or two players on entry level contracts contributing at the NHL level in the past.

We'll certainly have Zack Kassian doing that next year and if it's possible to have Jensen and maybe even Corrado do the same (although I think he might go to Chicago and be the first blueline call-up if he performs as we all expect he will) then that helps out even further.

Quote:
I expect there to be some very good players available for lower-than-anticipated cap hits this summer -- including maybe a few that take 1-year type deals and hope teams have room the following season.
I'm having a hard time deciding whether I think this, or whether I think that the flux of decent players is going to mean that teams like the Flyers and Blackhawks and Canadiens (and perhaps the Canucks) will exercise their amnesty buyouts on mediocre contracts in order to participate in the UFA market - which will surely drive the price of free agents right back up to where it usually is or even higher.

dave babych returns is offline  
Old
02-06-2013, 12:42 PM
  #928
Nuckles
On the IR
 
Nuckles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Burger King bathroom
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,643
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Big Foot View Post
Wilson + Josi + 1st rounder?
We aren't a rebuilding team, and that isn't enough for Kesler.

__________________

Richer's Ghost made my avatar
Nuckles is offline  
Old
02-06-2013, 12:54 PM
  #929
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 10,334
vCash: 833
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave babych returns View Post
I'm having a hard time deciding whether I think this, or whether I think that the flux of decent players is going to mean that teams like the Flyers and Blackhawks and Canadiens (and perhaps the Canucks) will exercise their amnesty buyouts on mediocre contracts in order to participate in the UFA market - which will surely drive the price of free agents right back up to where it usually is or even higher.
There will certainly be some of this, but that will also leave some valuable-but-overpaid NHLers on the market that have just been bought out, further saturating the market. It's not going to be a low-cost bonanza, but there will be some guys whose agents tell them to take a one-year deal and see what the landscape looks like next year. Alternatively, there will be some guys who opt for a longer-term at a lower rate because they want security.

No matter what happens, I think having the cap go down by 6 million will reduce prices from where they would have been (even if it just means status quo from last off-season).

Proto is offline  
Old
02-06-2013, 12:59 PM
  #930
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 50,038
vCash: 696
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
I wonder if there is any way to get Ryan Johanson out of Columbus? He's a very good prospect who they are flat out ruining. He was just sent down to the minors after toiling on their 3rd/4th lines. Maybe they would let him go for a decent roster player?

y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
02-06-2013, 01:03 PM
  #931
biturbo19
Registered User
 
biturbo19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 8,743
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proto View Post
I agree with both of you, but next year will be a unique situation with the cap going down by +/- 6 million dollars. I don't think Jensen, no matter how he looks, would be pencilled in for more than a 9th forward role, and the team will certainly have a contingency option behind him. I just believe Jensen is talented enough -- and physically developed enough, importantly -- to do a bit of on-the-job training. The way AV raved about him last year makes me think he's a kid that he'd like to work with.

My point wasn't necessarily that Jensen will make the team, mind you, just that it's a possibility. Heck, there's even a longshot chance Corrado makes the team (sub 600k caphit!) for a stint if he has a strong camp. The overriding point is that the Canucks cap situation is not all that dire. With Jensen/Lack on the team (if it happened), 7 million to sign a 13th forward and 2 defensemen leaves a lot of wiggle room.

I expect there to be some very good players available for lower-than-anticipated cap hits this summer -- including maybe a few that take 1-year type deals and hope teams have room the following season.
To me, it seems like those potentially low UFA $$$ values, would contribute to Gillis stashing Jensen in the minors. If Gillis can get a decent vet player for say $1M more than Jensen on a 1-year deal, i think he takes that and starts the season with a roster that is just that much deeper.


I am curious to see what happens to the balance in value between 2nd/3rd tier UFAs vs Arbitration elligible RFAs though. I could see some really funky stuff shaping up there. ie. Those premium sort of ~23-26 year old RFAs negotiating a big new contract are going to be using comparables from when the cap was higher...whereas the mid-tier sort of UFAs aren't going to have quite the same sort of leverage in teams wanting to hold onto their young players...and i think they'll be the segment most responsive to the dropping cap and cap space being at a premium.

I'm wondering if that sort of funny business might make some of those premium RFAs more 'tradeable' relative to recent years.

biturbo19 is offline  
Old
02-06-2013, 01:06 PM
  #932
Tiranis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 22,031
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
I wonder if there is any way to get Ryan Johanson out of Columbus? He's a very good prospect who they are flat out ruining. He was just sent down to the minors after toiling on their 3rd/4th lines. Maybe they would let him go for a decent roster player?
He was sent down because he's not ready. Maybe they will ruin him, but sending him down won't be the reason.

Tiranis is online now  
Old
02-06-2013, 01:06 PM
  #933
dave babych returns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
I wonder if there is any way to get Ryan Johanson out of Columbus? He's a very good prospect who they are flat out ruining. He was just sent down to the minors after toiling on their 3rd/4th lines. Maybe they would let him go for a decent roster player?
Maybe they sent him to the minors because they don't want him "toiling" on their third and fourth lines.

dave babych returns is offline  
Old
02-06-2013, 01:07 PM
  #934
Intoewsables
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,482
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
I wonder if there is any way to get Ryan Johanson out of Columbus? He's a very good prospect who they are flat out ruining. He was just sent down to the minors after toiling on their 3rd/4th lines. Maybe they would let him go for a decent roster player?
No.

Where do we fit him in? In all likelihood, he ends up playing for Chicago and we're giving up key parts of our roster to acquire him. As intriguing as Johansen's upside may be, it doesn't make much sense for a contending team like us to make a deal like that now.

From Columbus' POV, he's only 20 years old. The Blue Jackets aren't going to give him away for a "decent roster player". They're much better off seeing what they have in him than dealing him off now.

Intoewsables is offline  
Old
02-06-2013, 01:09 PM
  #935
dave babych returns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proto View Post
There will certainly be some of this, but that will also leave some valuable-but-overpaid NHLers on the market that have just been bought out, further saturating the market. It's not going to be a low-cost bonanza, but there will be some guys whose agents tell them to take a one-year deal and see what the landscape looks like next year. Alternatively, there will be some guys who opt for a longer-term at a lower rate because they want security.

No matter what happens, I think having the cap go down by 6 million will reduce prices from where they would have been (even if it just means status quo from last off-season).
Yeah.

I do agree that there should be some interesting deals out there.

As such I could see a reasonable argument being made for buying out a player like David Booth or Keith Ballard - even if not out of necessity - in order to take a shot at spending their $4m+ cap hit more effectively in the marketplace this summer.

dave babych returns is offline  
Old
02-06-2013, 01:18 PM
  #936
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 10,334
vCash: 833
Quote:
Originally Posted by biturbo19 View Post
To me, it seems like those potentially low UFA $$$ values, would contribute to Gillis stashing Jensen in the minors. If Gillis can get a decent vet player for say $1M more than Jensen on a 1-year deal, i think he takes that and starts the season with a roster that is just that much deeper.
I think that was kind of my point, actually. You can pencil in guys like Jensen to the line-up right now and a low-cost 13th forward and 7th d-man, and you come up with a scenario where the Canucks probably have a surplus of about 5 million dollars (if Luongo/Ballard leave) to spend "upgrading" those roster spots/to find a 6th defenseman.

If there are bargains, that allows the Canucks to sign a 2.5-ish #6 defenseman and still have money left to pick up a free agent for around 3.5 million dollars/per. I think that's why Ballard moves, because there are simply better ways to spend that money. Hopefully he continues his solid-but-unspectacular play and can be parlayed into something useful at the draft.

It's why if I'm Gillis I'm hesitant to take back any salary in the Luongo deal that isn't a good contract that is useful for the team. With the cap situation, he needs to avoid another Ballard type scenario moving forward...

Proto is offline  
Old
02-06-2013, 01:22 PM
  #937
LiquidSnake*
Agent of Chaos...
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 31,519
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Intoewsables View Post
No.

Where do we fit him in? In all likelihood, he ends up playing for Chicago and we're giving up key parts of our roster to acquire him. As intriguing as Johansen's upside may be, it doesn't make much sense for a contending team like us to make a deal like that now.

From Columbus' POV, he's only 20 years old. The Blue Jackets aren't going to give him away for a "decent roster player". They're much better off seeing what they have in him than dealing him off now.
Johansen could slot in the 3rd line C spot. His upside is higher than any of our current prospects or guys on the roster, including Kassian.

Doubtful they'd give him up and giving up non core assets (Sedins, Kes, Edler, Hamhuis, Bieksa, Kass) wouldnt impact this team great.

I have no doubt in my mind that he could bring more to that bottom 6 than anyone not named Hansen.

LiquidSnake* is offline  
Old
02-06-2013, 01:54 PM
  #938
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 22,740
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiranis View Post
He was sent down because he's not ready. Maybe they will ruin him, but sending him down won't be the reason.
Keeping him up all last season was a huge part of it, they did the same thing with Brule.

IMO keeping a player in junior longer is NEVER a bad thing, especially when they are hosting the memorial cup (Giants with Brule) and when they would be Memorial Cup favourites if they did (Portland was stacked last year without RyJo).

Another year honing skills as the go to offensive player, while improving things like skating, defensive play against his age group would have been better than playing in Columbus on a last placed team PERIOD.

I believe that is where the sentiment of 'they're ruining him' started.

arsmaster is offline  
Old
02-06-2013, 01:57 PM
  #939
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 22,740
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiquidSnake View Post
Johansen could slot in the 3rd line C spot. His upside is higher than any of our current prospects or guys on the roster, including Kassian.

Doubtful they'd give him up and giving up non core assets (Sedins, Kes, Edler, Hamhuis, Bieksa, Kass) wouldnt impact this team great.

I have no doubt in my mind that he could bring more to that bottom 6 than anyone not named Hansen.
I do.

He's just not a bottom six player at this time, if you want him to reach the level you think his upside is, you send him to Chicago and let him play top line minutes.

The demotion to Springfield isn't bad for him, it was what they did last year. He's only 20 years old, no need to rush him.

I'd love to have a prospect like him, but I don't think he improves the canucks current roster (unless you're moving him to RW in the top 6....I'd prefer to see him develop at C).

arsmaster is offline  
Old
02-06-2013, 01:59 PM
  #940
ThereGoesVirtanen
#53...the future
 
ThereGoesVirtanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,429
vCash: 500
Schneider for Brassard/Johansen/pick?

ThereGoesVirtanen is online now  
Old
02-06-2013, 02:00 PM
  #941
Tiranis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 22,031
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
I do.

He's just not a bottom six player at this time, if you want him to reach the level you think his upside is, you send him to Chicago and let him play top line minutes.

The demotion to Springfield isn't bad for him, it was what they did last year. He's only 20 years old, no need to rush him.

I'd love to have a prospect like him, but I don't think he improves the canucks current roster (unless you're moving him to RW in the top 6....I'd prefer to see him develop at C).
He's not even close to ready, I would say. He needs at least this year in the AHL and maybe even part of next year while getting short-term call-ups.

Tiranis is online now  
Old
02-06-2013, 02:06 PM
  #942
Alflives*
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,746
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proto View Post
Weber's cap hit isn't very high. The Ducks won a cup in a capped system with Neidermayer making the current equivalent of about 13 million per year. The issue is that Kesler's 5 million per year is one of the five best non-ELC contracts in the league. You don't give up that surplus value.

I would absolutely take someone like Weber or Suter at 8 million a season otherwise.
Your example of the Ducks supports my point. They also had young ELC guys like Getzlaf and Perry contributing to their success. I still like Weber, but don't see these players (like him) who are paid so high, as adding to a team's chances, unless the team has young talent that is cheap and contribute a lot. The Canucks, as I understand this more fully, are not going to be able to have such players (and be competitive) until they acquire the ELC players who are top talent.

Alflives* is offline  
Old
02-06-2013, 03:06 PM
  #943
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 10,334
vCash: 833
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alflives View Post
Your example of the Ducks supports my point. They also had young ELC guys like Getzlaf and Perry contributing to their success. I still like Weber, but don't see these players (like him) who are paid so high, as adding to a team's chances, unless the team has young talent that is cheap and contribute a lot. The Canucks, as I understand this more fully, are not going to be able to have such players (and be competitive) until they acquire the ELC players who are top talent.
Right, but Niedermayer was making significantly more money than Weber. Weber's contract is a bargain in comparison.

I agree with you otherwise, but I think you're being a bit reductionist when you say it's just ELCs. The key for any team that's successful is to have players that outperform their caphit. Period. ELCs can be the most artificial case of this, but having the Sedins at 6.1 million, Kesler at 5 million, Burrows at 2 million (even at 4.5 he should still provide some savings), Edler at 3.25 million and then 5 million... these are all players providing significantly more value than they're being paid. My quick guess would be about 12-14 million dollars in savings.

You can combine this with Gillis's ability to sign UFAs (his own pending ones and actual UFAs) for fair cap hits that don't match actual over-inflated market value... and you end up with a team with significant cap savings all over the place. That's why reasonable but slightly over-paid contracts like Ballard and Booth end up being both acceptable risks and over-exaggerated eyesores to Canucks fans.

I think a true franchise defenseman like Weber (and a small handful of others) are worth it. I think even at 8 million he provides surplus value because the amount and type of ice-time he soaks up provides added value throughout the rest of the line-up.

If Suter had been interested in Vancouver, I would have gladly paid him more than Minnesota did.

Proto is offline  
Old
02-06-2013, 03:14 PM
  #944
YogiCanucks
Registered User
 
YogiCanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Vancouver BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,623
vCash: 50
If Ballard was an upcoming UFA he could EASILY fetch ~4million on a two year deal from some team.

Not every team would do that of course but trading Ballard for a "bust prospect" is worse than the Schneider for Teddy Purcell proposals last year.

YogiCanucks is offline  
Old
02-06-2013, 03:17 PM
  #945
YogiCanucks
Registered User
 
YogiCanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Vancouver BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,623
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsAllPartOfThePlan View Post
I'd prefer to see Booth go. I'm pretty sure Jensen will be starting with the Nucks next season.
I'd rather have both. 3 great RWers in Kassian, Jensen, Booth for under 6 million ain't too shabby.

Plus, as SOON as we get rid of Booth it's going to be back to the whole "we need to add a top 6 forward". How about we have some insight this time?

YogiCanucks is offline  
Old
02-06-2013, 03:29 PM
  #946
Bleach Clean
Moderator
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 16,859
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proto View Post
Also, as I highlight last page, there is no reason to move Booth. It's unnecessary for the cap unless a dramatic improvement (Corey Perry?) is coming to the team. He's a good possession player, a hard worker, and a net plus to the team. His 4.25 is reasonable given the minutes he'll play. This is completely separate from Jensen or anyone else.

I support this, Booth goes nowhere... not yet. Not until we see more of him.



As to Jensen, I would actually leave him in the AHL for 2 years. This was actually supposed to be his 2nd year in Junior. To contrast, Schroeder got a sniff after 4 years of development. By the same comparison, I want to see Jensen spend 2 years in the AHL. Just to hone his defensive game a bit, and be the go to guy for his team there.


I think it was you who mentioned that he could be that rare steal in the late 1st of the draft. At the time, the Canucks had Saad and Jensen as the BPAs on the board. Either would have been good picks. Goes to show that you can find quality, even late.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
02-06-2013, 03:34 PM
  #947
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 22,740
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post

I think it was you who mentioned that he could be that rare steal in the late 1st of the draft. At the time, the Canucks had Saad and Jensen as the BPAs on the board. Either would have been good picks. Goes to show that you can find quality, even late.
How do we know this?

arsmaster is offline  
Old
02-06-2013, 03:47 PM
  #948
Bleach Clean
Moderator
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 16,859
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
How do we know this?
Poorly worded. I meant that the Canucks had the option of picking Saad or Jensen as the BPAs on the board (per TSN) at the time they went up to draft. Grimaldi was also there.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
02-06-2013, 03:52 PM
  #949
dave babych returns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,500
vCash: 500
I think Jensen is pretty different from Schroeder though.

He's already been an impact player at the professional level, he has NHL size and he's a winger which means he would be competing for one of 8 or 9 spots on the roster (still 6 if you assume he would be demoted rather than play on the fourth line or sit in the press box).

Contrast that with Schroeder who has had some bumps at the professional level (not to say Jensen won't) and who was pretty much guaranteed to end up in one particular spot on the depth chart when he made it to the Canucks.

dave babych returns is offline  
Old
02-06-2013, 04:14 PM
  #950
Vajakki
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Country:
Posts: 1,479
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
Another year honing skills as the go to offensive player, while improving things like skating, defensive play against his age group would have been better than playing in Columbus on a last placed team PERIOD.

I believe that is where the sentiment of 'they're ruining him' started.
Anything would be better than toiling in a horrible team when you're not ready to take that team to a next level. That's the problem that most bad organisations like Columbus and Islanders face. It's not that they do something bad individually to ruin these prospects, it's just that the environment they play in is bad for development.

Johansen for example played one season in juniors after draft and dominated the league with 92 points in 63 games. Not much else to do on that level. So I kind of understand why he was in the NHL last year even if he's not completely ready for it. He's not eligible to play in the AHL either. I'd say that even a decent team would benefit from keeping that kind of prospect in the NHL whole year, problem of course being that Columbus is far from being even decent.


Also, Booth is a LW.

Vajakki is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:41 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.