You’re a hometown Canucks fan arguing that popular opinion makes your arguments correct. I’m a hometown Canucks fan that remembers popular opinion when Cory Schneider was traded, a trade that has turned out to be so one-sided that it helped rewrite the trade value of young goaltenders.
The internet- it’s powered by arguments!
Of course Myers didn’t sign a contract to be traded. No NHL player signs a contract to be traded, with the possible exception of one year deals. Also, he has limited no trade protection not a NMC on a team with multiple toxic negative value contracts. Welcome to the NHL.
It would probably be dumb for Florida to trade for Myers. Does Florida have a track record of dumb decisions? Let’s get Yandle, Ekblad, and Marchessaults agents on a conference call and ask.
Would you trade a 2nd for Jensen? Do you think Demko returns more than a 2nd? Would you like to lose Demko in the expansion draft? The Canucks either sign Markstrom and trade Demko prior to expansion or go with Demko. This scenario explores keeping Markstrom, but I have a lot of time for the other option also.
“Hi, I’m Michael Amadio! As a hometown Canuck fan, you may have never thought about me for more than five minutes: https://hockeyviz.com/fixedImg/replacements/1920/L.A/amadimi96/wrap
In all seriousness, there’s a lot to be desired about this proposed team, I get that. There are a few basic arguments worth considering however:
1. The Canucks need cap space
2. Myers is probably the biggest contract that is moveable without adding prospects and picks
3. I’d rather spend 6 million on good goaltending than a D that’s getting average results on the third pairing.
4. Eriksson is not going anywhere
5. Moving a decent player is probably the only way to get rid of a contract like Beagle’s which is terrible (the term, the age, the “he’s on the fourth line”) but not Eriksson terrible.
6. The Canucks could use an effective, cost-controlled bottom six centre. Gaudette (who in terms of development is almost as old as Horvat) doesn’t look to be that guy defensively.
Cory was traded for a 9th overall pick, not a #5 defenseman. And I'm on the board of "sign markstrom and let seattle claim him". I want demko here as he is best for our long term team. Markstrom is better now, but he is older and won't be the guy that gets us a cup. Give demko a year more of growth next year and either trade Markstrom then or allow seattle to take him. Markstrom could walk now and we get nothing... not much difference if we get a year free and a better goalie situation long term. I don't have faith in DiPietro as our starter of the future.
Myers simply isn't waiving his contract. We are holding onto him. Florida has cheaper options out there. That's the trade that makes the least overall sense.
Malgin is essentially a downgraded version of Gaudette. Speaking of Gaudette, he might not be strong defensively yet, but his game has improved so drastically from last year and continues to improve that he can easily fill out more. I don't think he becomes much more than a 3rd liner, but he is proving to be a pretty good one and is only improving. Canucks have had faith in his development - we value him more than other teams.
One thing I do agree with is your assessment of Beagle. It wasn't a good signing and that last year was dreadful from the start. That contract needs to be moved and I don't know how it will be. Then again the team is strong on their view of him and probably won't. It's probably better overall to move Sutter. Either that or buy him out. He's a shell of what he was expected to be, but still carries enough value that a desperate team might buy on him for cheap.
So you're fixated on Amadio, eh?
I get that, but if he costs Gaudette, we gotta walk. He would make for a great fourth liner on our team... his upside isn't strong enough for a contending team at 3C though. I'd pay a third for him at most. Anything beyond that is a drastic and necessary overpay. Essentially gifting Gaudette. Fixating on a player and giving max value for to get it almost always goes south.
``1. The Canucks need cap space``
Yes. Get rid of Sutter. Also Virtanen will be making about 750k less on a 2 year deal. He makes what you gave him on a four year.
Also, I think we have to let Leivo go. The selection of right handed wingers is very slim this year. Teams will be paying a bonus to get that - even overpaying. Anything more than 1.75M (which i know he's getting more) and we should walk.... so, he should walk.
``2. Myers is probably the biggest contract that is moveable without adding prospects and picks``
I'm assuming this happens after the NMC is up and it's a NTC.
Still, it remains tight to trade him. Very few teams will have interest in that contract. He hasn't necessarily been brutal for us either - not worth 6M, but not bad enough to view as a bad contract. Even if we do move him, we won't be getting a good return back. It's a cap league, cap costs value. Realistically speaking, this man isn't going anywhere.
``3. I’d rather spend 6 million on good goaltending than a D that’s getting average results on the third pairing.``
Keep benning away from july 1st.
I'd actually rather trade stecher - i think he will demand more than his worth. Team would buy on him too.
``4. Eriksson is not going anywhere``
i agree. maybe utica if the management is less stubborn.
``5. Moving a decent player is probably the only way to get rid of a contract like Beagle’s which is terrible (the term, the age, the “he’s on the fourth line”) but not Eriksson terrible.``
Probably gotta wait a year more to do this. It'd be a pick or prospect that goes with him. Seattle... Detroit, want a dog?
``6. The Canucks could use an effective, cost-controlled bottom six centre. Gaudette (who in terms of development is almost as old as Horvat) doesn’t look to be that guy defensively.``
Still better than Malgin or Amadio at that role as I already said. He should fill that gap a bit more as he continues to improve. I'd be interested in Carl Soderberg on a cheap one year deal if we need a center temporarily though. Gaudette does look better on the wing.