HFBoards

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

Should the Canucks sign other teams RFA?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-25-2005, 02:20 PM
  #1
Peter Griffin
Registered User
 
Peter Griffin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,696
vCash: 500
Should the Canucks sign other teams RFA?

Just read an article on canuckscorner.com(yea I know, not the most reliable source of info), about the new compensatory picks awarded for teams losing their RFA's to other teams. Here's a breakdown of it:

Up to $660,000 - No compensation
$660,000 to $1 million - One 3rd round draft pick
$1 to $2 million - One second round pick
$2 to $3 million - One 1st and one 3rd round pick
$3 to $4 million - One 1st, one 2nd and one 3rd round pick
$4 to $5 million - Two 1sts, one 2nd and one 3rd round pick
Over $5 million - Four 1st round picks

The Canucks could probably sign a decent 2nd line RW'er from some other team close to the cap and all they'd have to pay would be a 2nd round pick! Not bad at all IMO. On the flip side, what if some team offers Matt Cooke $1.5 mil, do the Canucks match? Interesting situation nonetheless, but being a fan that likes to see teams grow together, I don't think I'm going to like this new system.

Peter Griffin is offline  
Old
07-25-2005, 03:18 PM
  #2
Hedberg
MLD Glue Guy
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BC, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,158
vCash: 500
No. That only works if the team doesn't want the player or you offer a ridiculous amount of money to the player.

Hedberg is offline  
Old
07-25-2005, 06:01 PM
  #3
Blane Youngblood
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,469
vCash: 500
I've mentioned this before, but I think we should offer Kiprusoff 3.5 million dollars. Either we get a solid goalie, or he gets a significant raise from Calgary, either way, we win. Plus, if we lose our first 3 picks next year that won't be so bad as long as we get a good young goaltender who I think is just a RFA next year as well (correct me if I'm wrong).

Blane Youngblood is offline  
Old
07-25-2005, 08:17 PM
  #4
Peter Griffin
Registered User
 
Peter Griffin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,696
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hedberg16
No. That only works if the team doesn't want the player or you offer a ridiculous amount of money to the player.

If the team has cap problems, maybe they won't be able to match the offer? In any case, the penalties have been reduced since the previous CBA, that's what I was getting at.

Peter Griffin is offline  
Old
07-26-2005, 01:10 PM
  #5
kmad
Riot Survivor
 
kmad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 31,791
vCash: 500
2006 is the year they raise the draft age
2006 = thin talent pool. Basically junk from the 2005 draft.
2006 draft picks are therefore worth less than normal. If we're gonna hunt RFAs any year, this would be the year.

kmad is online now  
Old
07-26-2005, 01:25 PM
  #6
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,854
vCash: 500
The problem I see with this is giving reason to other teams to target us.

What happens if we offer Kiprusoff a contract, which Calgary has room under the cap to match - and then we see similar moves by teams like Edmonton or Nashville going after our guys? Nashville needs a #1 center, and has more cap space than we do, to offer Morrison a $3mill deal - maybe more. It hurts our leverage with him. Edmonton could offer $2.5mill deals to each of the Sedins with the room they have.

I'm not sure how it's all going to play out in the NHL, but if it's a common thing to start seeing teams offering RFAs contracts, then the canucks should definitely consider it as an option... just not sure if the old "un-written rule" of not going after RFAs has really changed at all, with lower RFA compensations.

NFITO is offline  
Old
07-26-2005, 01:28 PM
  #7
Hedberg
MLD Glue Guy
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BC, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,158
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO
Just not sure if the old "un-written rule" of not going after RFAs has really changed at all, with lower RFA compensations.
I doubt it has changed.

Hedberg is offline  
Old
07-26-2005, 01:51 PM
  #8
Blane Youngblood
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,469
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuckfan in TO
The problem I see with this is giving reason to other teams to target us.

What happens if we offer Kiprusoff a contract, which Calgary has room under the cap to match - and then we see similar moves by teams like Edmonton or Nashville going after our guys? Nashville needs a #1 center, and has more cap space than we do, to offer Morrison a $3mill deal - maybe more. It hurts our leverage with him. Edmonton could offer $2.5mill deals to each of the Sedins with the room they have.
Well first of all, I have no problems letting the Sedins go if they get offered 2.5 million. The compensation isn't bad value wise, and Edmonton would essentially be screwing themselves next year. As far as Morisson goes, this is where he proves he wants to be in Vancouver or we take the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd for him. We could just turn around and trade the picks or keep them hoping Nashville misses the playoffs. The compensation isn't killer, but it is deffinetly still worthwhile even if you just want to trade it for replacements.

Blane Youngblood is offline  
Old
07-26-2005, 02:01 PM
  #9
Lard_Lad
Registered User
 
Lard_Lad's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Kelowna
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,678
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kmad
2006 is the year they raise the draft age
Wait, is that confirmed? I've only seen rumors. If that's the case, yeah, there should definitely be some RFA movement all the way up to the $4 million range, especially guys whose teams are in cap trouble.

Lard_Lad is offline  
Old
07-26-2005, 02:19 PM
  #10
Impossibles
Registered User
 
Impossibles's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Langley, BC
Country: British Antarctic Territory
Posts: 6,446
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jin
Well first of all, I have no problems letting the Sedins go if they get offered 2.5 million. The compensation isn't bad value wise, and Edmonton would essentially be screwing themselves next year. As far as Morisson goes, this is where he proves he wants to be in Vancouver or we take the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd for him. We could just turn around and trade the picks or keep them hoping Nashville misses the playoffs. The compensation isn't killer, but it is deffinetly still worthwhile even if you just want to trade it for replacements.
I think there will be a rule somewhere that a team can only sign one RFA, since they only have one first round pick to give up, so I don't think we have any worries about anybody signing the wonder twins.

Impossibles is offline  
Old
07-26-2005, 04:39 PM
  #11
Fedz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,617
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jin
I've mentioned this before, but I think we should offer Kiprusoff 3.5 million dollars. Either we get a solid goalie, or he gets a significant raise from Calgary, either way, we win. Plus, if we lose our first 3 picks next year that won't be so bad as long as we get a good young goaltender who I think is just a RFA next year as well (correct me if I'm wrong).
Do you honestly think Calgary won't match 3.5 million dollars for their heart and soul besides Iginla?

Fedz is offline  
Old
07-26-2005, 06:57 PM
  #12
Blane Youngblood
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,469
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fedz
Do you honestly think Calgary won't match 3.5 million dollars for their heart and soul besides Iginla?
I think I mentioned that I thought they would, but considering that his arbitration award translates into a 2.2 million dollar salary. Offering him as high as 3.95 million wouldn't be a bad move to either a) get him, or b) hurt the flames' position in relation to the cap (the reason I stop at 3.95 is because of compensation required). Also, 3.95 is pretty heft for a goalie, Brodeur only makes 5.3. I'd say goalies are the only thing it makes sense to go after as RFAs.

Blane Youngblood is offline  
Old
07-27-2005, 10:59 AM
  #13
MeatTornado
I was born ready
 
MeatTornado's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,485
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to MeatTornado
nah

MeatTornado 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 11:04 AM.

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.