HFBoards

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

Post-Trade Deadline Talk

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-28-2011, 11:23 PM
  #101
Outside99*
Sedins off Kas
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,347
vCash: 796
Quote:
Originally Posted by eklunds source View Post
In fairness, the Canucks are microscopically close to the cap. Under $1,000 per day close. A MINIMUM wage, $500,000 player costs 2.6x that.

Yes, there's always a way to create cap space, and most GMs are doing it without losing assets or taking a loss on them.. But you can't pull rabbits out of a hat forever. It's been said already, but it's a very real possibility that the Canucks could ice a 17 or less man roster shortly.
Last year when Hordichuk was on the team, didn't we go with a 17 player roster most games?

Outside99* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2011, 11:54 PM
  #102
The Big Foot
Registered User
 
The Big Foot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Bhutan
Posts: 2,596
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outside99 View Post
Last year when Hordichuk was on the team, didn't we go with a 17 player roster most games?
Exactly why would we keep Tambellini on the roster if we were desperate to bring up a d? I'd guess at this point we could bring up Nathan Paetsch in a pinsch?

Is Baumer still hurt? Those two look like our emergency guys.

And Tyler Weiman is on a minimum contract.

Worst case scenario as far as I can see (might be missing a rule regarding callups after the deadline) is we need to demote Tambi and bring up Paetsch or Weiman.

The Big Foot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 12:09 AM
  #103
alternate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: victoria
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,827
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Big Foot View Post
Exactly why would we keep Tambellini on the roster if we were desperate to bring up a d? I'd guess at this point we could bring up Nathan Paetsch in a pinsch?

Is Baumer still hurt? Those two look like our emergency guys.

And Tyler Weiman is on a minimum contract.

Worst case scenario as far as I can see (might be missing a rule regarding callups after the deadline) is we need to demote Tambi and bring up Paetsch or Weiman.
worst case scenario, as I understand it reading through the threads, is Bieksa gets put retro-actively on LTIR and we have all the cap space we need.

alternate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 12:12 AM
  #104
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 The Big Foot View Post
Exactly why would we keep Tambellini on the roster if we were desperate to bring up a d?
Because he can't be sent down since he's on the roster after the trade deadline. At most, we could unconditionally waive him and hope someone picks him up to clear space. And even then, if it was to replace a defenceman, his tiny salary would only give us enough room to bring up Paetsch; every other D in the system makes too much. And Paetsch is subject to re-entry waivers, so if someone claimed him then we'd be completely screwed.

Lard_Lad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 12:12 AM
  #105
opendoor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,748
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Big Foot View Post
Exactly why would we keep Tambellini on the roster if we were desperate to bring up a d? I'd guess at this point we could bring up Nathan Paetsch in a pinsch?

Is Baumer still hurt? Those two look like our emergency guys.

And Tyler Weiman is on a minimum contract.

Worst case scenario as far as I can see (might be missing a rule regarding callups after the deadline) is we need to demote Tambi and bring up Paetsch or Weiman.
Players who are on the roster before, during, and after the trade deadline can't be loaned to the AHL for the rest of the regular season. So if two defensemen go down with non-LTIR injuries, they can't just send down the 13th forward and call up a defensemen for the #6 spot. That's the danger of not having space for extra call ups.

opendoor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 12:16 AM
  #106
alternate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: victoria
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,827
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor View Post
Players who are on the roster before, during, and after the trade deadline can't be loaned to the AHL for the rest of the regular season. So if two defensemen go down with non-LTIR injuries, they can't just send down the 13th forward and call up a defensemen for the #6 spot. That's the danger of not having space for extra call ups.
so does this mean Tanev is up to stay, no matter what?

alternate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 12:22 AM
  #107
opendoor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,748
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by alternate View Post
so does this mean Tanev is up to stay, no matter what?
With Tanev, since he's not waiver eligible, there may have been a "paper transaction" kind of move where he was sent down and recalled immediately to maintain his loan eligibility, though I'm not sure. He'd also have to be put on the Moose's 22 man clear day roster to stay eligible.

That kind of move obviously wouldn't be possible for a waiver eligible player like Tambellini because he'd have to clear waivers to be loaned, even temporarily.

opendoor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 12:26 AM
  #108
Agent007
Registered User
 
Agent007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,580
vCash: 500
Here's how we sit in terms of our cap:

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Raymond-Kesler-Samuelsson
Torres-Malhotra-Tambo
Glass-Lapierre-Hansen

Edler-Salo
Hamhuis-Tanev
Ballard-Rome

Luongo
Schneider

IR:
Bieksa
Higgins

LTIR:
Edler
Alberts
L.Sweatt

That roster right there (with 12 healthy forwards, 6 healthy defencemen and 2 healthy goalies) leaves us with approximately $0.167m in LTIR cap exemption remaining (full year cap hits).

If a situation occurs where we need to call someone up then I imagine this is how we would likely go about it.

We would send down Tanev (cap hit=$0.9m) which gives us $1.067m in LTIR cap excemption (let's call it cap space).

We would then call up Baumgartner ($0.55m cap hit) and Bolduc for example ($0.5m cap hit) which just barely fits under the cap ($0.55+$0.50=$1.05).

The important thing to note is that we currently have a few forwards that make real close to the league minimum (ie Bolduc at $0.5m, Desbeins at $0.55m, Bliznak at $0.55m, and Oreskovich at $0.575m).

On defence however it's a problem because only Baumgartner falls into the affordable catagory while Sauve is pretty close but likely makes too much and Paetsch is an option but requires re-entry waivers and there could be some jackass team out there that screws us over by picking him up at half price despite the fact that he can't play during the playoffs (and a team like Florida might just do it just because they got very little on defence there).

The other option available to us is to just put Bieksa on LTIR and activate him around March 10th (or whatever date is 4 weeks and 10 games later from when he was injured).

Basically from now until game 72 we should be okay because worst case scenario you just throw a guy on LTIR. However from game 73 onwards we better hope that we don't have any more injuries because there's no LTIR from that point onwards. It's at that point where we better hope that our 22 man roster doesn't have more then 2 injuries otherwise we might be in trouble.

There's no doubt the Canucks are playing with fire but they are not the only team in the league that is going to be doing so.

Agent007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 12:50 AM
  #109
Vancouver_2010
Go Canucks & Oilers
 
Vancouver_2010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 4,123
vCash: 500
What do you guys think about Calgary's move, seems to be a solid move getting a player (Modin) with stanley cup final experience, and the price is very low @ 7th round pick too

Vancouver_2010 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 12:53 AM
  #110
VanEric
Registered User
 
VanEric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,344
vCash: 500
Old, slow, has a bad back. I'm not sure if he has anything left but its worth a shot, I guess.

VanEric is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 12:58 AM
  #111
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 VanEric View Post
Old, slow, has a bad back. I'm not sure if he has anything left but its worth a shot, I guess.
More importantly, Calgary didn't do anything to address their long-term issues. Just having them pick up Modin isn't quite as good as them moving more of their scarce prospects would've been, but it still beats them doing the logical thing and starting the rebuild now.

Lard_Lad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 12:58 AM
  #112
Meganuck*
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Vancouver,BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,036
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vancouver_2010 View Post
What do you guys think about Calgary's move, seems to be a solid move getting a player (Modin) with stanley cup final experience, and the price is very low @ 7th round pick too
I think it books their ticket to the WCF

Meganuck* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 01:01 AM
  #113
Vancouver_2010
Go Canucks & Oilers
 
Vancouver_2010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 4,123
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lard_Lad View Post
More importantly, Calgary didn't do anything to address their long-term issues. Just having them pick up Modin isn't quite as good as them moving more of their scarce prospects would've been, but it still beats them doing the logical thing and starting the rebuild now.
i dont undestand the logic, why rebuild when the team is doing so good?

Vancouver_2010 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 01:05 AM
  #114
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 opendoor View Post
With Tanev, since he's not waiver eligible, there may have been a "paper transaction" kind of move where he was sent down and recalled immediately to maintain his loan eligibility, though I'm not sure. He'd also have to be put on the Moose's 22 man clear day roster to stay eligible.
A possibility, but you'd think we'd have heard something about it if there was a paper move. Capgeek usually catches that sort of thing.

Lard_Lad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 02:02 AM
  #115
opendoor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,748
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agent007 View Post
Here's how we sit in terms of our cap:

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Raymond-Kesler-Samuelsson
Torres-Malhotra-Tambo
Glass-Lapierre-Hansen

Edler-Salo
Hamhuis-Tanev
Ballard-Rome

Luongo
Schneider

IR:
Bieksa
Higgins

LTIR:
Edler
Alberts
L.Sweatt

That roster right there (with 12 healthy forwards, 6 healthy defencemen and 2 healthy goalies) leaves us with approximately $0.167m in LTIR cap exemption remaining (full year cap hits).

If a situation occurs where we need to call someone up then I imagine this is how we would likely go about it.

We would send down Tanev (cap hit=$0.9m) which gives us $1.067m in LTIR cap excemption (let's call it cap space).

We would then call up Baumgartner ($0.55m cap hit) and Bolduc for example ($0.5m cap hit) which just barely fits under the cap ($0.55+$0.50=$1.05).

The important thing to note is that we currently have a few forwards that make real close to the league minimum (ie Bolduc at $0.5m, Desbeins at $0.55m, Bliznak at $0.55m, and Oreskovich at $0.575m).

On defence however it's a problem because only Baumgartner falls into the affordable catagory while Sauve is pretty close but likely makes too much and Paetsch is an option but requires re-entry waivers and there could be some jackass team out there that screws us over by picking him up at half price despite the fact that he can't play during the playoffs (and a team like Florida might just do it just because they got very little on defence there).

The other option available to us is to just put Bieksa on LTIR and activate him around March 10th (or whatever date is 4 weeks and 10 games later from when he was injured).

Basically from now until game 72 we should be okay because worst case scenario you just throw a guy on LTIR. However from game 73 onwards we better hope that we don't have any more injuries because there's no LTIR from that point onwards. It's at that point where we better hope that our 22 man roster doesn't have more then 2 injuries otherwise we might be in trouble.

There's no doubt the Canucks are playing with fire but they are not the only team in the league that is going to be doing so.
That's a good summary of the Canucks' current situation.

Like Paetsch, Baumgartner's also eligible for re-entry waivers but the possibility of either of them getting picked up post trade deadline is basically nil. Since they're not eligible to play for whoever picked them up, that team would have to pay half their salary for the rest of the year just to sit at home. Not only would it be a waste of time and money, it'd probably also be frowned upon to deliberately prevent a player from playing hockey for the rest of the season.


I agree that the biggest risk is in the final 10 games. I can only imagine what'll happen if one of the goalies goes down in that period. The other guy would have to play every game down the stretch and the injured guy would have to suit up and sit on the bench every night because there'd be no space for a call up. Or if they run into an injury situation like a few weeks ago (with Hamhuis, Ballard, Bieksa, and Alberts all injured within a 6 game stretch) or like they had in December (Samuelsson, Ehrhoff, and Raymond injured in 3 consecutive games) they're going to be playing shorthanded.

I also wouldn't say the Canucks are out of the woods until that period simply because Bieksa could be put on LTIR to make space. If another defenseman gets a short term injury before Bieksa's able to return, then the team could be in some trouble. Bieksa would have to go to LTIR to allow the replacement into the lineup, but there wouldn't be cap space to activate him until the injured player was ready to return since Bieksa's exemption would be needed to cover the replacement's cap hit. So the Canucks could be in a scenario where a perfectly healthy Bieksa is sitting on the sidelines while Baumgartner or Sauve fills in for the injured player.

The possibility of that is admittedly remote, and I assume management has worked out all of the scenarios and time-lines a million different ways, but there's still an inherent risk in operating like this. Evidently Gillis feels the risk is remote enough (or that the reward is worth enough) to take the gamble. Still, we all had a good laugh at Sutter's cap mismanagement, so I don't think it's out of line to be wary of the Canucks' current situation which is very analogous.

opendoor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 09:57 AM
  #116
The Big Foot
Registered User
 
The Big Foot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Bhutan
Posts: 2,596
vCash: 500
^The key difference is that we are not fighting for a playoff spot like CGY was that year.

Say we have to dress a shorthanded roster for three or four games...and that costs us two points. Is that really a big deal? When it means we're going to be the opposite of shorthanded once the playoffs start? I think that's worth it. It's very low risk, high reward IMO. The luxury of having a superb regular season to date.

The Big Foot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 10:17 AM
  #117
Barney Gumble
Registered User
 
Barney Gumble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 18,655
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Big Foot View Post
^The key difference is that we are not fighting for a playoff spot like CGY was that year.

Say we have to dress a shorthanded roster for three or four games...and that costs us two points. Is that really a big deal? When it means we're going to be the opposite of shorthanded once the playoffs start? I think that's worth it. It's very low risk, high reward IMO. The luxury of having a superb regular season to date.
What's the key difference between a situation like that happening here and what happened in Calgary? Keenan was coach for the Flames at the time. AV has shown in the past that he CAN coach a "defense first" type of team (and the same core is here) - which can help cover the flaws due to injuries or short-handed bench. Keenan? Since when has he implemented *any* kind of system other than "go for goals"?

Barney Gumble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 10:21 AM
  #118
Mr. Canucklehead
Mod Supervisor
Kitimat Canuck
 
Mr. Canucklehead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Kitimat, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,030
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vancouver_2010 View Post
i dont undestand the logic, why rebuild when the team is doing so good?
Look at where they were to start the season; which streak do you believe more? This recent hot streak, which has kind of come out of nowhere, or a team that flubbed the start of the year, missed the playoffs last year, and bowed out in the first round in the years previous to that?

That said--I like the addition of Modin. I would have liked to have seen him in a Canuck uniform. He has injury problems, to be sure, but he also adds big game experience in the form of a Cup ring and an Olympic Gold. And for the cost of a 7th round pick, that experience is a nice addition.

Mr. Canucklehead is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 10:47 AM
  #119
Uhmkay
Weber2Canucks2013
 
Uhmkay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,214
vCash: 500
I don't know that Gillis could have done a much better job in terms of not only Cap Space available, but also holding on to QUALITY assets (IE: Hodgson, Schroeder, Schneider, Tanev, etc). He gave up a free agent signing that was never going to be a regular on the Canucks and a free agent dman who MAY one day play in the NHL but had already been passed on the depth chart by Tanev and Sweatt, plus a couple of 3rd round picks which usually amounts to about a 10% chance of finding a player who makes the NHL.

I have faith that Gillis is very quickly turning us into an organization that is going to contend for many many years in a row.

Uhmkay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 10:50 AM
  #120
Mr. Canucklehead
Mod Supervisor
Kitimat Canuck
 
Mr. Canucklehead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Kitimat, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,030
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uhmkay View Post
I don't know that Gillis could have done a much better job in terms of not only Cap Space available, but also holding on to QUALITY assets (IE: Hodgson, Schroeder, Schneider, Tanev, etc). He gave up a free agent signing that was never going to be a regular on the Canucks and a free agent dman who MAY one day play in the NHL but had already been passed on the depth chart by Tanev and Sweatt, plus a couple of 3rd round picks which usually amounts to about a 10% chance of finding a player who makes the NHL.

I have faith that Gillis is very quickly turning us into an organization that is going to contend for many many years in a row.
It also bears mentioning that Lapierre--much like Alberts last year--does not seem to be a rental in the traditional sense, in that he is an RFA at season's end so we can retain him if we like what we see. Higgins is more of a rental, but for the price tag, I really like the move. I don't anticipate a 20-30 goal scorer, but a guy who can pot somewhere between 15-20 like he is on pace too from the bottom six is invaluable for a stretch run and hopefully a long playoff run.

Mr. Canucklehead is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 11:02 AM
  #121
LeftCoast
Registered User
 
LeftCoast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,115
vCash: 500
Joel Perrault is still listed on the Moose roster. The Syracuse Crunch news section says Sean Zimmerman was acquired and assigned to the Crunch yesterday, but no news on Perrault. Does this mean the Ducks are going to leave Perrault in Manitoba? I'm sure the Moose would appreciate if Gillis negotiated that. I think Perrault was acquired with the intent of helping the Moose win.

The Ducks must be familiar with Perrault as they originally drafted him and he bumped arround their various AHL and ECHL affiliates for several years.

LeftCoast is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 11:11 AM
  #122
Potatoe1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 750
vCash: 500
I don`t really get the anxiety over playing short handed for a couple of games.

Hodgson and VO have had games recently where they have only played around 4-min, that amount of ice time can easily be made up by top9ers double shifting with the 4th line.

I guess if you go down by 2 or more it`s a much larger problem but any hand wringing over playing with only 11 forwards seems a bit misguided.

Potatoe1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 11:21 AM
  #123
LostMyGlasses*
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Simon Fraser
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lard_Lad View Post
Because he can't be sent down since he's on the roster after the trade deadline. At most, we could unconditionally waive him and hope someone picks him up to clear space. And even then, if it was to replace a defenceman, his tiny salary would only give us enough room to bring up Paetsch; every other D in the system makes too much. And Paetsch is subject to re-entry waivers, so if someone claimed him then we'd be completely screwed.
Aw, and we wouldn't want to do that to poor Tambi, everyone's pick for the 30 goal club in November! We'll always have room in this franchise for a weak, soft perimeter player, don't worry too hard!

LostMyGlasses* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 11:32 AM
  #124
Potatoe1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 750
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Canucklehead View Post
It also bears mentioning that Lapierre--much like Alberts last year--does not seem to be a rental in the traditional sense, in that he is an RFA at season's end so we can retain him if we like what we see. Higgins is more of a rental, but for the price tag, I really like the move. I don't anticipate a 20-30 goal scorer, but a guy who can pot somewhere between 15-20 like he is on pace too from the bottom six is invaluable for a stretch run and hopefully a long playoff run.

He may not be a rental when all is said and done.

Higgens more then anything needs a chance to get his career back on track. He has moved around constantly, he hasn`t had any consistent line mates and he`s basically floundered for the past 2 years.

If he fits in well with this team down the stretch I could very easily see him taking a Torres type 1 year deal next season. That would be an excellent career move for him and at 28 he still has time to earn a long term contract in 2012.

Getting a "value" contract to replace Torres next year should be a priority as it allows us to spend the rest of our money on the blue line (which is where we should be spending it regardless).

As for Lapierre being a RFA, to be honest I'm not sure it matters that much. 900K is a bit steep for a 4th line center so there is a decent chance they don't qualify him at all.
If he ends up being a good fit here I could see a situation where the Canucks offer him a 2-year deal at a lower cap hit which is what they did with Steve Bernier when it became obvious that 2.5 was to much.

Potatoe1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2011, 11:35 AM
  #125
Potatoe1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 750
vCash: 500
Delete please


Last edited by Potatoe1: 03-01-2011 at 11:54 AM.
Potatoe1 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 07:56 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.