Pearson is not an overpayment. Is he having a down year, yes. He would have made more or similar to his current contract in FA.
Pearson took a discount because he wanted the NTC. He clearly likes the culture in VAN, hence the reason he took less money

They gave him maybe 500k too much. I'm not sure why everyone is acting like that's the end of the world. Especially given his his presence has helped Bo out so much. This is different than the bottom six contracts of old in that Pearson is not a bottom six guy, and is not as old as the others. Its a little bit much, bot not to make such a huge stink over (not pointing it at you, but in general fans).

However, in regard to this build, I wouldn't make this much of a stink about Pearson then go out and sign Cizikas to that. Yes, Cizikas might be part of one of the best fourth lines in the league, but, just that - FOURTH line. Team needs a better 3C, not another year of 2 4th lines. I like Lowry more; he's out of cost probably, but I don't really see the fit for Cizikas on Vancouver.

Wouldn't say discount - I don't think he turned aside any money. But it certainly isn't an overpay either. I was optimistic for 3x3. I'm not losing sleep over 250k like most everyone else is overreacting to. This is a down year that is parallel to all the other struggling Vancouver players. Not a sign of things to come.

Yep these moves seem like what Jim Benning would do

I agree I don't know why people are freaking out. He's a reliable and defensively responsible player. If Hoglander stays on that line for next year, he'll learn from Bo and TP.
It could be better than potentially signing a FA for BIG money and longer term.

Cizikas is worth this money - I'd say he is the best fourth line center in the entire league. But we can't afford to have yet another high cost bottom sixer on this team.

I have nothing against Pearson but I don't think he would have gotten that in the open market (Dhaliwal today said he spoke to other agents and they agree he should have been under $3,000,000). Even if he did get that in the open market he would be a third liner on a good team and the Canucks could use the Pearson money and a bit more for a good second liner (Toffoli signed for $1,000,000 more).

I can see your point. I looked at Czikas to fill their need for a good defensive third liner to take defensive minutes away from Bo. But your right he is a very good fourth liner. Maybe Haula would be better and cheaper. I wish they thought to do that this year...

With Petey and Hughes needing to be extended, it was probably the best play for JB. Instead of having to over pay to sign a UFA to term and dollar.
Overcommitting to a UFA (in JB fashion lol) would have caused a tighter situation. He'll definitely feel the need to address our D-core
It's easy to say Toffoli worked out really well for MTL. He was coming off a mediocre season in LAK. Played pretty well for the Canucks.
Looking back at the comments made in the off-season it was sort of a mixed crowd people saying it was a bad signing/good signing by MTL
Pearson's numbers have been pretty **** this season but the entire team has been **** too. Like I mentioned he still brings a lot of intangibles to the table

I think I need to clarify... I don't think Pearson is a bad player. I just think they could definitely have gotten him for a little less than what they paid. All the pundits say the same: either should have gotten him for around $2.75 or someone similar for less with more money to put elsewhere. $500k could go a long way these days. For the record I also think they could have gotten Demko (who I'm optimistic about) for a number closer to $4.5 if they negotiated harder with him. That contract makes me nervous.