SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/NHL Signings

Vancouver Canucks signed Andrei Kuzmenko (2 Years / $5,500,000 AAV)

Was this a good signing?
The chart has been hidden

Poll Options


Jan. 26, 2023 at 2:46 p.m.
#26
ZootHornRollo
Fast n Bulbous
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jan. 2021
Posts: 100
Likes: 12
Quoting: MatthewsFan




I look forward to seeing him continue his 24% shooting percentage


Quoting: MatthewsFan




Weak argument. If they traded him at the deadline for a second or a very late first, they'd wait 3-5 years for a player they could only hope was as good as him. They used a 6th overall on Virtanen, Boeser was 23rd, they can't even trade him. They're still waiting on Podkolzin and Hoglander, why would you trade one of your best wingers for basically nothing? You guys seem to think they can just ice a lineup of 4rth liners every year, hell why even try. Just trade everyone and ice AHLers, Finish last every year, draft players and wait 5 years to see if you have a team. Absolutely moronic.
Jan. 26, 2023 at 2:48 p.m.
#27
ZootHornRollo
Fast n Bulbous
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jan. 2021
Posts: 100
Likes: 12
Quoting: Leafsfan98
Good contract, confusing time... Why aren't you trying to sign your captain instead of Kuzmenko? I voted yes because good contract and easily movable if needed


Because the Captain is asking for not a penny less than 9.5 a year, that's why.
OldNYIfan and Knuckl3s liked this.
Jan. 26, 2023 at 2:51 p.m.
#28
ZootHornRollo
Fast n Bulbous
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jan. 2021
Posts: 100
Likes: 12
Quoting: mk458
Not saying I disagree with you, but he would've went for a lot more than a 2nd round pick at the deadline. Because of the flat cap the last couple years teams have less cap space at the deadline than ever before. A guy like Kuzmenko who already has 20 goals, is close to a point per game, and makes less than 1 million would have been pure gold to a contending team this season. I would think a first round pick would have been the minimum they got back for him


You're wrong, he would have been a rental, he wasn't set to become a restricted free agent, he was set to become an unrestricted free agent. That matters, now they'd get more at the deadline, it was actually good asset management for a change.
OldNYIfan and Knuckl3s liked this.
Jan. 26, 2023 at 2:52 p.m.
#29
NorthernLeafsFan05
Amirov Forever
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2022
Posts: 6,521
Likes: 6,016
Great deal for a not so great team
Knuckl3s liked this.
Jan. 26, 2023 at 2:53 p.m.
#30
ZootHornRollo
Fast n Bulbous
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jan. 2021
Posts: 100
Likes: 12
Quoting: DarcyTucker
Why trade your UFAs futures when you can re-sign them and stay mediocre forever?


Because UFAs are only rentals, meathead.
OldNYIfan liked this.
Jan. 26, 2023 at 2:53 p.m.
#31
python3504
Avatar of the user
Joined: Apr. 2019
Posts: 1,483
Likes: 453
Quoting: AK50
He earned the money. He's becoming a core piece for us that we need to keep long-term though. I would've preferred 5.5 5 years though.


a core piece of a rotten apple.
Jan. 26, 2023 at 2:55 p.m.
#32
Doshee
Im just kinda here
Avatar of the user
Joined: Apr. 2022
Posts: 103
Likes: 97
Quoting: MatthewsFan




I look forward to seeing him continue his 24% shooting percentage


Y'know I never understood the games played argument. Teams sign based on what the player will do during the contract, not what he has done, plus he was a star player in the KHL for years. It was the same argument with Kirill Kaprizov, and he's already destroyed the Wild's single season records and will eventually break more

Maybe there's some truth to this, but I don't see it
Jan. 26, 2023 at 3:08 p.m.
#33
mk458
MK458
Avatar of the user
Joined: Dec. 2017
Posts: 2,109
Likes: 929
Edited Jan. 26, 2023 at 3:17 p.m.
Quoting: ZootHornRollo
You're wrong, he would have been a rental, he wasn't set to become a restricted free agent, he was set to become an unrestricted free agent. That matters, now they'd get more at the deadline, it was actually good asset management for a change.


Never said he was an rfa or anything more than a rental... Just that his cap hit is low and 20+ teams are currently up against the cap. Did you even read my comment???
CD282 liked this.
Jan. 26, 2023 at 3:11 p.m.
#34
HBK2016
Avatar of the user
Joined: Nov. 2018
Posts: 14
Likes: 8
Quoting: ZootHornRollo
You're wrong, he would have been a rental, he wasn't set to become a restricted free agent, he was set to become an unrestricted free agent. That matters, now they'd get more at the deadline, it was actually good asset management for a change.


I don't think he said anything about being an rfa dude. Fact is he has a low cap hit and teams could easily fit him in their lineup without having to move out a contract. Simple as that, low cap hit this season makes you extremely valuable
Jan. 26, 2023 at 3:21 p.m.
#35
aadoyle
Hakuna Matata
Avatar of the user
Joined: Feb. 2020
Posts: 33,723
Likes: 20,883
Imagine the return he would have got especially at 50% retained

Teams right up against the cap like Tampa would have paid a premium for that contract

But nope instead of gaining assets just extend the guy and stay meh

Watch they gonna buy out Garland rather than trade him next
mk458 and majormoose007 liked this.
Jan. 26, 2023 at 3:21 p.m.
#36
Leafsfan98
Leafs going to Leafs
Avatar of the user
Joined: Dec. 2022
Posts: 9,612
Likes: 2,909
Quoting: ZootHornRollo
Because the Captain is asking for not a penny less than 9.5 a year, that's why.


And yet, you signed Miller to 9/8 years... He's your captain, sign him to that contract
Jan. 26, 2023 at 3:24 p.m.
#37
BotTurdoozi
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jan. 2023
Posts: 1
Likes: 1
A few reason I like this signing.
1. Lottery protected 1st rounders are probably not easy to come by this draft (I'm sure they inquired)
2. Canucks drafting history is generally abysmal that's probably why they trade their picks so often - can't mess it up if you don't have it to begin with!
3. Best return likely a prospect and a 2nd
4. Incentive for Petey to stay
5. Still a tradeable contract I guess if they ever decide to pull the pin the rebuild
AK50 liked this.
Jan. 26, 2023 at 3:37 p.m.
#38
nintendofan721
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2021
Posts: 945
Likes: 475
Good contract but why would he have wanted to extend with this organization?
AK50 liked this.
Jan. 26, 2023 at 3:41 p.m.
#39
Moose_on_the_Loose
Moose
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 57
Likes: 8
Quoting: mondo
Would've made more sense to trade him for at very least a first round pick. Canucks aren't going anywhere this year and are likely going to be treading water for the next two seasons.

Apparently him and Pettersson get along well so I've been under the impression that keeping him is apart of keeping Pettersson next season.


Who is offering a first round pick on a UFA that's played 47 career NHL games? I'm certain that Alvin would have accepted such an offer if it existed.
Knuckl3s liked this.
Jan. 26, 2023 at 3:42 p.m.
#40
SaviorX
Avatar of the user
Joined: Aug. 2021
Posts: 13
Likes: 12
ummmm... they can still trade him to 19 teams (31 if they trade him now), and he has term now for a team which might want him...
rollie1967 liked this.
Jan. 26, 2023 at 3:43 p.m.
#41
mondo
torontos finest
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2019
Posts: 9,560
Likes: 11,191
Quoting: kjw_gm
Who is offering a first round pick on a UFA that's played 47 career NHL games? I'm certain that Alvin would have accepted such an offer if it existed.


47 games, but has 20 goals, shooting at 25% and making less than a million. Ideal rental for any team that needs a scoring winger.
mk458, CD282 and OldNYIfan liked this.
Jan. 26, 2023 at 3:44 p.m.
#42
Moose_on_the_Loose
Moose
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 57
Likes: 8
Quoting: mondo
47 games, but has 20 goals, shooting at 25% and making less than a million. Ideal rental for any team that needs a scoring winger.


Great rental player, for sure. Just not a 1st rounder, IMO.
Jan. 26, 2023 at 3:51 p.m.
#43
Tintin
do not Devil my ass
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 4,872
Likes: 4,248
I vote no.
In a vacuum this is likely a very good signing.
In the context of the 2023 Canucks it's a very bad one.

This decision (along with extending JT) will lock this core into yet another decade of perpetual mediocrity when what they really needed was to trade Kuzmenko for futures.

Underwhelming prospect pool, horribly flawed roster construction, no cap flexibility long-term or short-term.
If they don't luck into Bedard this summer I cannot see this core ever making a finals appearance, let alone winning the cup.
CD282 liked this.
Jan. 26, 2023 at 4:17 p.m.
#44
dopplsan
Nah.
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 4,428
Likes: 4,296
Edited Jan. 27, 2023 at 3:28 p.m.
This is the epitome of “tradable.”

Good for VAN.
rollie1967, OldNYIfan and AK50 liked this.
Jan. 26, 2023 at 4:27 p.m.
#45
majormoose007
MajorMoose
Avatar of the user
Joined: Feb. 2019
Posts: 3,425
Likes: 2,602
Great contract but it's the wrong team who's signing it
Jan. 26, 2023 at 5:04 p.m.
#46
CoraStorm
Majors and minors
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2017
Posts: 225
Likes: 44
Apparently the Krejci and the Bergeron and all the other players who took smaller cheques and paired it with awesome point totals didn't serve as an example?? More points, less dollars. Greater taste, fewer calories - Eat it with a fork, not a spoon. Without signing any other forwards, Canucks have already outspent their current years forwards' salaries. Shopping time for other clubs.
Jan. 26, 2023 at 6:25 p.m.
#47
SevenLeg
Hop on the Slaftrain
Avatar of the user
Joined: Feb. 2019
Posts: 16,165
Likes: 20,487
Quoting: SaviorX
ummmm... they can still trade him to 19 teams (31 if they trade him now), and he has term now for a team which might want him...


Pretty much all trade protection clauses are negotiated to be retroactive, so the 19 teams apply today.
Jan. 26, 2023 at 6:46 p.m.
#48
rollie1967
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2016
Posts: 683
Likes: 272
Quoting: SevenLeg
Pretty much all trade protection clauses are negotiated to be retroactive, so the 19 teams apply today.


there are no retroactive components to any NHL deal- youre talking out your ass. He can be traded to anyone under his current deal - the only one enforceable. Now they could have an agreement/handshake deal- but thats not legally binding.

This is a good deal for the Canucks- buying 2 of his best years agewise, for a guy who should get 30-40 goals /year. Doesnt make signing Horvat any easier- but if theyre going to move out anyone its more likely- Boeser and/or Garland.
Knuckl3s and Hurricanes_WPG liked this.
Jan. 26, 2023 at 7:02 p.m.
#49
Leafs_and_Sens_Fan
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jan. 2020
Posts: 8,370
Likes: 2,275
Nice signing! I feel like he's worth even more now if they decide to trade him.
AK50 liked this.
Jan. 26, 2023 at 8:08 p.m.
#50
SevenLeg
Hop on the Slaftrain
Avatar of the user
Joined: Feb. 2019
Posts: 16,165
Likes: 20,487
Quoting: rollie1967
there are no retroactive components to any NHL deal- youre talking out your ass. He can be traded to anyone under his current deal - the only one enforceable. Now they could have an agreement/handshake deal- but thats not legally binding.


You're mistaken. This retroactive trade protection rule was introduced in the 2013 CBA, and it has to be negotiated.

But after further review, I was also wrong. Since Kuzmenko would not be eligible for trade protection on his current contract (Entry-level deal), this can't apply to him.

An example is Carey Price - it was negotiated in his extension that his current (at the time) M-NTC would convert into an NMC, making it retroactive. (see at the bottom)

fCyNXhB.jpg
 
Reply
To create a post please Login or Register
Question:
Options:
Loading animation
Submit Poll Edit