HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Notices

Expiry Dates (AKA the Vancouver Canucks over 30 club)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-04-2013, 03:07 AM
  #1
TheDiver*
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Pacific Northwest
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,567
vCash: 500
Expiry Dates (AKA the Vancouver Canucks over 30 club)

So most NHL players typically do not get better, and actually regress around age 30.

If you search HFboards, people have discussed this topic and cited studies showing a hockey players' peak time to be around age 26-28.

Some players are exceptions, like Joe Sakic and Niklas Lidstrom, and even Steve Yzerman who benefitted from taking on a different role.


After 30, its usually downhill.

Pavel Datsyuk went from 90 points as a 30 year old town to 70 the next season and has gone down ever since.

Zetterberg had 93 points as a 27 year old, to 69 as a 30 year old.


Ryan Smyth had 66 points as a 29 year old, then went down to 53, and has regressed from then on.

Jarome Iginla's last 50 goal season was the year he turned 30. Now he's a 30 goal scorer.



So we can't expect the 30 year olds on this Canuck roster to improve beyond what we've seen from them.

So now the question is, who is over the hill and who is regressing so fast that their salary is no longer justified?:



  1. Roberto Luongo 34
  2. Manny Malhotra 33
  3. Alex Burrows 32
  4. Daniel Sedin 32
  5. Henrik Sedin 32
  6. Andrew Alberts 31
  7. Keith Ballard 31
  8. Kevin Bieksa 31
  9. Andrew Ebbett 30
  10. Dan Hamhuis 30
  11. Derek Roy 30


To me, from this group only Dan Hamhuis looks like he is still the player he was at his peak.


So how do the Canucks look to build with a core that is aging?

TheDiver* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2013, 03:08 AM
  #2
BrandonL
Registered User
 
BrandonL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,164
vCash: 500
Honestly, I would be open to trading / releasing every player listed.

BrandonL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2013, 03:09 AM
  #3
thepuckmonster
professional winner
 
thepuckmonster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Victoria, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,475
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandonlee View Post
Honestly, I would be open to trading / releasing every player listed.
It would have to be a pretty monumental offer for me to consider trading the twins/Hamhuis.

I will likely change my mind on this when I'm in a more rational mood.

thepuckmonster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2013, 03:10 AM
  #4
serge2k
Registered User
 
serge2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,378
vCash: 500
well at least 4 of those guys aren't really core players.

Get rid of Luongo in any way possible, give the Sedins another year then let them walk for all I care. Burrows new contract is a mistake. Probably have to live with that. Lesson for the cap era, don't pay a guy because he took a discount last time. Pay him because he will live up to the contract.

Bieksa... dump him to a team without a partner who can cover up for him (hamhuis/mitchell style) and laugh.

serge2k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2013, 03:12 AM
  #5
BrandonL
Registered User
 
BrandonL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,164
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thepuckmonster View Post
It would have to be a pretty monumental offer for me to consider trading the twins/Hamhuis.

I will likely change my mind on this when I'm in a more rational mood.
Agreed, it would have to be something pretty impressive. However, considering our current state of affairs, I just don't think any of those guys are untouchable.

BrandonL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2013, 03:21 AM
  #6
mossey3535
Registered User
 
mossey3535's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,332
vCash: 500
Historically it has been, but the game is changing. Nutrition and training is getting better, and you can see it with guys like Jagr still putting up 20 goals a season at 40. Or Selanne at 42.

Guys are playing for longer and longer. The problem is more of a cap space issue rather than a a production issue -

Listing defencemen who aren't really going to put up big numbers ever isn't useful. There are plenty of guys thriving on bottom 4 spots who are getting close to 40, let alone barely over 30.

Tim Thomas was 37 when he beat us.

I don't think this age thing is written in stone that there will be a sudden and catastrophic decline in their utility. And of the players you listed, it's only really applicable to the Sedins. If it happens at all. I think it's more about trying to get good value for the utility that these players still provide in that age bracket.

mossey3535 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2013, 03:30 AM
  #7
jigsaw99
Registered User
 
jigsaw99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,862
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thepuckmonster View Post
It would have to be a pretty monumental offer for me to consider trading the twins/Hamhuis.

I will likely change my mind on this when I'm in a more rational mood.
not sure about hamhuis but i don't want to end up like Calgary. Sedins are UFA's in 2 years. We might need to trade them while we still can.

jigsaw99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2013, 03:34 AM
  #8
TheDiver*
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Pacific Northwest
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,567
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mossey3535 View Post
Historically it has been, but the game is changing. Nutrition and training is getting better, and you can see it with guys like Jagr still putting up 20 goals a season at 40. Or Selanne at 42.

Guys are playing for longer and longer. The problem is more of a cap space issue rather than a a production issue -

Listing defencemen who aren't really going to put up big numbers ever isn't useful. There are plenty of guys thriving on bottom 4 spots who are getting close to 40, let alone barely over 30.

Tim Thomas was 37 when he beat us.

I don't think this age thing is written in stone that there will be a sudden and catastrophic decline in their utility. And of the players you listed, it's only really applicable to the Sedins. If it happens at all. I think it's more about trying to get good value for the utility that these players still provide in that age bracket.
Those guys are exceptions to the rule.

Jagr and Selanne are robots.

TheDiver* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2013, 03:37 AM
  #9
Mikeshane
Glass Bangers Rock
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 551
vCash: 500
That's pretty sad if it's all down hill for Bieksa, there was barely a peak.

I think when it comes to contracts guys probably tend to be more over paid when they're older so it's nice to always have a few younger bargain contracts on the team.

Mikeshane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2013, 03:42 AM
  #10
Al Swearengen
Smug Nation National
 
Al Swearengen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,228
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thepuckmonster View Post
It would have to be a pretty monumental offer for me to consider trading the twins/Hamhuis.

I will likely change my mind on this when I'm in a more rational mood.
I don't think those are the guys you consider moving. Actually...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moses View Post
  1. Roberto Luongo 34
  2. Manny Malhotra 33
  3. Alex Burrows 32
  4. Daniel Sedin 32
  5. Henrik Sedin 32
  6. Andrew Alberts 31
  7. Keith Ballard 31
  8. Kevin Bieksa 31
  9. Andrew Ebbett 30
  10. Dan Hamhuis 30
  11. Derek Roy 30
The bolded players can be moved. I think we all know that Luongo's days are numbered. I have been in the "trade Schneider if the return is silly-good" camp for a long time, because Lou is a terrific goalie, but it seems like the organization sees Schneider as the only future. Manny is gone no matter what, Ebbett is a maybe depth keeper, and Ballard just can't fit in (although if we lose to the Sharks, Viggy maybe gets fired and Ballard's future in Vancouver looks much more promising, at least for him - even then, he only stays in that case if someone else in the top-4 gets moved).

As far as the rest:
Burrows is worth more to us than he is in trade. If someone is willing to overpay for him, then so be it. He might be my favourite Canuck, but if AB14 can net us a Couturier or Johansson, then let the youth come. If not, he has to stay. Guys who can PK, score goals, draw penalties and hit bodies are worth his pay. His expiration date is when he retires.

The Sedins are, if you'll allow it, unreasonably reasonable athletes. They'll keep taking what they're worth minus the hometown discount. I'll bet they sign for 5 million each per year on the next deal (probably one-year deals). Their expiration date is whenever Sweden beckons.

Alberts will continue to come on the cheap if some GM with something to prove (like Yzerman) doesn't overpay him. Expect a similar deal for a potential journeyman with a family who doesn't want to uproot his life if he doesn't have to. His expiration date is whenever Carolina, Tampa or Dallas decides he's worth 2.25.

Bieksa is a guy who has made the same mistakes for his entire career, but has shown increases in his strengths as he's come along. He's a jack of all trades, and a master of none, but because he plays with passion and does so many things well, lots of teams will want him. We could trade him if someone wants to give Vancouver a mint, but three more years at 4.6 looks pretty reasonable to me. His expiry date is his next contract if he doesn't want to take a pay cut.

Dan Hamhuis makes a quiet, daily case for best player on the team. No sale.

Derek Roy is just what we need if we're not going to sell our skill players. He's creative, makes space and does almost everything well on offense. Defensively, he's an excellent takeaway defender, crafty and smart. But he's tiny, so there's one thing he doesn't do well. Puck protection is tough when you're 182lb. He's great at it, but he can be muscled. The key question with Roy is, what are the alternatives? If we lose in the 1st round, which is looking very likely since we're down 0-2, what is there to convince him to stay? We can't pay him the $6m he might get on the open market. I love the way he always forces the puck into shot situations in the middle of the offensive zone, as a passer and a puck-handler. I hope we can keep him, but I'm not confident we're giving him a reason to stay on for cheap. His expiration date is based on financial expectations.

Al Swearengen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2013, 03:44 AM
  #11
serge2k
Registered User
 
serge2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,378
vCash: 500
Is Daniel Sedin worth 5 million a season anymore?

serge2k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2013, 04:33 AM
  #12
Al Swearengen
Smug Nation National
 
Al Swearengen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,228
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by serge2k View Post
Is Daniel Sedin worth 5 million a season anymore?
If you could have Daniel at 5m or Thomas Vanek at 7.143, what would you choose?

Al Swearengen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2013, 04:43 AM
  #13
Orca Smash
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,130
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by jigsaw99 View Post
not sure about hamhuis but i don't want to end up like Calgary. Sedins are UFA's in 2 years. We might need to trade them while we still can.
I believe the sedins are UFA's after this upcoming 2013-2014 season.

Orca Smash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2013, 04:49 AM
  #14
MikeK
Registered User
 
MikeK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,680
vCash: 8000
Quote:
Originally Posted by thepuckmonster View Post
It would have to be a pretty monumental offer for me to consider trading the twins/Hamhuis.

I will likely change my mind on this when I'm in a more rational mood.
I think now is the time to make those tough decisions. If you wait another season they won't have the same value. Management needs to make some tough moves this offseason that will drastically alter the future of this franchise. Either for the better or detriment to the future.

MikeK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2013, 04:49 AM
  #15
MikeK
Registered User
 
MikeK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,680
vCash: 8000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Swearengen View Post
If you could have Daniel at 5m or Thomas Vanek at 7.143, what would you choose?
Neither.

MikeK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2013, 04:50 AM
  #16
Orca Smash
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,130
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moses View Post
So most NHL players typically do not get better, and actually regress around age 30.

If you search HFboards, people have discussed this topic and cited studies showing a hockey players' peak time to be around age 26-28.

Some players are exceptions, like Joe Sakic and Niklas Lidstrom, and even Steve Yzerman who benefitted from taking on a different role.


After 30, its usually downhill.

Pavel Datsyuk went from 90 points as a 30 year old town to 70 the next season and has gone down ever since.

Zetterberg had 93 points as a 27 year old, to 69 as a 30 year old.


Ryan Smyth had 66 points as a 29 year old, then went down to 53, and has regressed from then on.

Jarome Iginla's last 50 goal season was the year he turned 30. Now he's a 30 goal scorer.



So we can't expect the 30 year olds on this Canuck roster to improve beyond what we've seen from them.

So now the question is, who is over the hill and who is regressing so fast that their salary is no longer justified?:



  1. Roberto Luongo 34
  2. Manny Malhotra 33
  3. Alex Burrows 32
  4. Daniel Sedin 32
  5. Henrik Sedin 32
  6. Andrew Alberts 31
  7. Keith Ballard 31
  8. Kevin Bieksa 31
  9. Andrew Ebbett 30
  10. Dan Hamhuis 30
  11. Derek Roy 30


To me, from this group only Dan Hamhuis looks like he is still the player he was at his peak.


So how do the Canucks look to build with a core that is aging?
Only the 3 bolded are ones we are comitted to, and the only one i really want to trade right now is bieksa. I am not sure what is wrong with burrows right now though. It is strange, he suddenly cant take a pass.

Roy is likely heading to free agency, I am assuming lou gets traded, bought out, whatever, manny is not even on the team anymore, alberts contract is up this season, ebbett we can get rid of whenever, and hopefully soon, and sedins contract is done in 2013-2014 season, ballard will likely be traded or given away or bought out.

Orca Smash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2013, 05:07 AM
  #17
Fat Tony
Registered User
 
Fat Tony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,411
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Swearengen View Post
If you could have Daniel at 5m or Thomas Vanek at 7.143, what would you choose?
Why is Vanek the other alternative?

Fat Tony is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2013, 05:23 AM
  #18
Hammer79
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Kelowna
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,959
vCash: 500
Over-reaction thread? The Sharks have an older average age.

Quote:
So now the question is, who is over the hill and who is regressing so fast that their salary is no longer justified?:



Roberto Luongo 34
Manny Malhotra 33
Alex Burrows 32
Daniel Sedin 32
Henrik Sedin 32
Andrew Alberts 31
Keith Ballard 31
Kevin Bieksa 31
Andrew Ebbett 30
Dan Hamhuis 30
Derek Roy 30
Luongo's situation has been beaten to death in other threads.
Malhotra won't be back.
Burrows and the Sedins have a few good years left in them.
Ballard probably get bought out.
Bieksa isn't going anywhere, RH shot, plays with an edge, fights, can put up 30-40 points per season easy.
Ebbett, Alberts aren't core guys anyway.
Hamhuis is hardly 'old' at 30.
Roy probably won't fit into future cap space, but he wasn't brought here to score goals. He's a play-making C.

This core has a few more good seasons left in it.

Hammer79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2013, 01:08 PM
  #19
Trelane
Registered User
 
Trelane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Salusa Secundus
Posts: 546
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moses View Post
After 30, its usually downhill.

Pavel Datsyuk went from 90 points as a 30 year old town to 70 the next season and has gone down ever since.

Zetterberg had 93 points as a 27 year old, to 69 as a 30 year old.

Ryan Smyth had 66 points as a 29 year old, then went down to 53, and has regressed from then on.

Jarome Iginla's last 50 goal season was the year he turned 30. Now he's a 30 goal scorer.

So now the question is, who is over the hill and who is regressing so fast that their salary is no longer justified?:
  1. Roberto Luongo 34
  2. Manny Malhotra 33
  3. Alex Burrows 32
  4. Daniel Sedin 32
  5. Henrik Sedin 32
  6. Andrew Alberts 31
  7. Keith Ballard 31
  8. Kevin Bieksa 31
  9. Andrew Ebbett 30
  10. Dan Hamhuis 30
  11. Derek Roy 30

To me, from this group only Dan Hamhuis looks like he is still the player he was at his peak.

So how do the Canucks look to build with a core that is aging?
Half the guys on this list will not be here next season and we all have a pretty good idea of who they are. #1 issue: nobody in the system to take over Sedins' scoring duties. If we had Hodgson, Kadri and Howden/equivalent we would have had a chance at a smooth transition, much like the Sedins taking over for the West Coast Express, but, as it stands, the slide will be long and painful. Feels a lot like 1995.

Distinction must be made between D men and forwards. Though scoring production goes down for both positions D men often make up for it by being better defensively (experience helps the reactive position more). Not worried about Hamhuis at all. Wouldn't mind trading Bieaksa (reason not age related) but that ship has probably sailed with his NT.

Among forwards with long term contracts Burrows is my biggest concern. It's obvious that without Sedins he is not even a 40 point player and is not worth the 4.5 he got. Past heroics does nothing for the present. Not a moneypuck signing.

If Sedins are willing to do consecutive 1 year deals, as Hanrik has hinted, there is no issue with paying market value. Cap won't be a problem either since absent a blockbuster trade there are no forwards that warrant big money. One advantage of being a middling or a lesser rank team, you'd have to be a pretty lousy GM to spend near the cap.

I don't see the Sedins going anywhere until an Iginla type situation comes up years down to road, when they're making less and a contender seeking depth comes on calling.

Trelane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2013, 01:57 PM
  #20
TheDiver*
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Pacific Northwest
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,567
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trelane View Post
Half the guys on this list will not be here next season and we all have a pretty good idea of who they are. #1 issue: nobody in the system to take over Sedins' scoring duties. If we had Hodgson, Kadri and Howden/equivalent we would have had a chance at a smooth transition, much like the Sedins taking over for the West Coast Express, but, as it stands, the slide will be long and painful. Feels a lot like 1995.

Distinction must be made between D men and forwards. Though scoring production goes down for both positions D men often make up for it by being better defensively (experience helps the reactive position more). Not worried about Hamhuis at all. Wouldn't mind trading Bieaksa (reason not age related) but that ship has probably sailed with his NT.

Among forwards with long term contracts Burrows is my biggest concern. It's obvious that without Sedins he is not even a 40 point player and is not worth the 4.5 he got. Past heroics does nothing for the present. Not a moneypuck signing.

If Sedins are willing to do consecutive 1 year deals, as Hanrik has hinted, there is no issue with paying market value. Cap won't be a problem either since absent a blockbuster trade there are no forwards that warrant big money. One advantage of being a middling or a lesser rank team, you'd have to be a pretty lousy GM to spend near the cap.

I don't see the Sedins going anywhere until an Iginla type situation comes up years down to road, when they're making less and a contender seeking depth comes on calling.
EXACTLY!


That's the issue.

The Canucks and Sharks both have aging talent. But the Sharks have Logan Couture.

The Canucks don't really have a blue chip offensive star to build around. No first line in sight.


Jensen is a possible guy but that's about it. Cavalry ain't coming.

TheDiver* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2013, 02:11 PM
  #21
LolClarkson*
Canucks 4 the cup
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Embrace the hate
Posts: 8,102
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandonlee View Post
Honestly, I would be open to trading / releasing every player listed.
Ridicules

The Sedins make 6.1 million dollars. What do you get for that these days ??? Danny Heatly, Parise and Lecavleir make way north of 7 million.

The Sedins can play and be resigned as second line players for good value.

If Mike Gillis didn't make the mistakes of spending too much on our D core, trading Grabner for a 4 million dollar Barker , signing Booth, not trading Lou or Schnieder or trading Hodgson, we would already have a new 1st line.

Minus the mistakes mentioned above, we would have enough cap space to sign two 7 million dollar 1st line forwards and Hodgson could center them on his ELC.

With the Sedins on the SECOND line.

LolClarkson* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2013, 02:26 PM
  #22
LolClarkson*
Canucks 4 the cup
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Embrace the hate
Posts: 8,102
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jigsaw99 View Post
not sure about hamhuis but i don't want to end up like Calgary. Sedins are UFA's in 2 years. We might need to trade them while we still can.
In a years time, 6 million dollars is second line money. It almost is now.

The Sedins are not over paid even now and if Gillis can construct a new 1st line then the Sedins will be good to resign for the second line.

Constructing a new 1st line would be a hell of a lot easier if we still had Hodgson.

Why was it consensus among the Hodgson trade apologist crew that Hodgson had to be traded because the 1 and 2 center spots were nailed down when a year later, here we are talking about dumping the Sedins ?

LolClarkson* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2013, 02:32 PM
  #23
opendoor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,168
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jigsaw99 View Post
not sure about hamhuis but i don't want to end up like Calgary. Sedins are UFA's in 2 years. We might need to trade them while we still can.
Calgary ended up like Calgary because they went 20 years without drafting a top 6 forward and waited until their 9th straight year of not getting past the 1st round before making changes. Re-signing the Sedins when they're 33 (assuming they can be had on good contracts) doesn't automatically turn the team into Calgary.

opendoor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2013, 02:41 PM
  #24
LolClarkson*
Canucks 4 the cup
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Embrace the hate
Posts: 8,102
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Swearengen View Post
If you could have Daniel at 5m or Thomas Vanek at 7.143, what would you choose?
Everyone is making a big deal about the cap falling a little bit even though Luongo and Naslund had higher cap hits then the Sedins when the cap was 44 million dollars.

LolClarkson* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2013, 02:49 PM
  #25
LolClarkson*
Canucks 4 the cup
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Embrace the hate
Posts: 8,102
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fat Tony View Post
Why is Vanek the other alternative?
Maybe he thinks Yuri Hudler at 4 million or Mike Camerilli at 6 million is an alternative.

Or maybe the two 28 year old 8+ million dollar guys in Anehiem are the answer.

LolClarkson* is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 03:25 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.