SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Armchair-GM

Deadline

Created by: Danny_MrGM_Briere
Team: 2023-24 Vancouver Canucks
Initial Creation Date: Jan. 29, 2024
Published: Jan. 29, 2024
Salary Cap Mode: Basic
Trades
1.
OTT
  1. Podkolzin, Vasily
  2. Räty, Aatu
  3. 2025 2nd round pick (VAN)
2.
VAN
  1. 2024 3rd round pick (OTT)
3.
VAN
  1. Hathaway, Garnet ($1,187,500 retained)
  2. Seeler, Nick
PHI
  1. Åman, Nils
  2. 2024 3rd round pick (OTT)
  3. 2026 2nd round pick (VAN)
Buyouts
DraftRound 1Round 2Round 3Round 4Round 5Round 6Round 7
2024
Logo of the VAN
Logo of the VAN
Logo of the VAN
Logo of the NJD
Logo of the VAN
Logo of the SJS
Logo of the VAN
2025
Logo of the VAN
Logo of the VAN
Logo of the VAN
Logo of the VAN
Logo of the VAN
2026
Logo of the VAN
Logo of the VAN
Logo of the VAN
Logo of the VAN
ROSTER SIZESALARY CAPCAP HITOVERAGES TooltipBONUSESCAP SPACE
21$83,500,000$82,784,167$850,000$0$715,833
Left WingCentreRight Wing
Logo of the Vancouver Canucks
$1,600,000$1,600,000
C, LW
UFA - 2
Logo of the Vancouver Canucks
$8,000,000$8,000,000
C, LW, RW
NMC
UFA - 7
Logo of the Vancouver Canucks
$6,650,000$6,650,000
RW
UFA - 2
Logo of the Vancouver Canucks
$1,100,000$1,100,000
LW, RW
RFA - 2
Logo of the Vancouver Canucks
$7,350,000$7,350,000
C, LW
UFA - 1
Logo of the Ottawa Senators
$6,500,000$6,500,000
RW, C
NMC
UFA - 2
Logo of the Vancouver Canucks
$4,750,000$4,750,000
LW, RW
M-NTC
UFA - 3
Logo of the Vancouver Canucks
$1,900,000$1,900,000
C, LW
UFA - 1
Logo of the Vancouver Canucks
$4,950,000$4,950,000
RW, LW
UFA - 3
Logo of the Vancouver Canucks
$825,000$825,000
LW
UFA - 1
Logo of the Vancouver Canucks
$1,150,000$1,150,000
RW, C, LW
UFA - 1
Logo of the Philadelphia Flyers
$1,187,500$1,187,500
RW, LW
UFA - 2
Left DefenseRight DefenseGoaltender
Logo of the Vancouver Canucks
$7,850,000$7,850,000
LD
UFA - 4
Logo of the Vancouver Canucks
$6,000,000$6,000,000
RD
M-NTC
UFA - 1
Logo of the Vancouver Canucks
$5,000,000$5,000,000
G
UFA - 3
Logo of the Vancouver Canucks
$3,750,000$3,750,000
LD/RD
UFA - 1
Logo of the Vancouver Canucks
$4,400,000$4,400,000
RD
RFA - 1
Logo of the Vancouver Canucks
$1,800,000$1,800,000
G
UFA - 1
Logo of the Philadelphia Flyers
$775,000$775,000
LD/RD
UFA - 1
Logo of the Vancouver Canucks
$3,250,000$3,250,000
LD/RD
NTC
UFA - 3
Logo of the Vancouver Canucks
$3,000,000$3,000,000
LD/RD
UFA - 1
ScratchesInjured Reserve (IR)Long Term IR (LTIR)
Logo of the Vancouver Canucks
$2,500,000$2,500,000
RD
UFA - 2
Logo of the Vancouver Canucks
$775,000$775,000
LD
UFA - 2
Logo of the Vancouver Canucks
$775,000$775,000
LW
UFA - 2

Embed Code

  • To display this team on another website or blog, add this iFrame to the appropriate page
  • Customize the height attribute in the iFrame code below to fit your website appropriately. Minimum recommended: 400px.

Text-Embed

Click to Highlight
Jan. 29 at 5:52 p.m.
#1
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2019
Posts: 10,699
Likes: 10,374
That is the absolute max I could see CHI paying for Kuzmenko, and even that is probably a stretch.
LivingAnew and Hawksguy81 liked this.
Jan. 29 at 5:54 p.m.
#2
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2022
Posts: 3,789
Likes: 1,208
Quoting: Garak
That is the absolute max I could see CHI paying for Kuzmenko, and even that is probably a stretch.


I don't see this trade happening.
No thanks.
Sorry.
If Canucks trade Hoglander to the Hawks for a draft pick, it could work in their favour.
Garak liked this.
Jan. 29 at 6:01 p.m.
#3
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jan. 2018
Posts: 16,970
Likes: 11,963
Sens aren't moving G
Jan. 29 at 6:03 p.m.
#4
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2019
Posts: 10,699
Likes: 10,374
Quoting: Vancity2196
I don't see this trade happening.
No thanks.
Sorry.
If Canucks trade Hoglander to the Hawks for a draft pick, it could work in their favour.


Sure. I also have doubts about whether VAN would do this. But from Hawks perspective, the only reason to acquire him is to attempt to make a profit. A guy who will be 29 years old in the first year of his next contract has no place in CHI's rebuild, long term. So, unless VAN is desperate for cap space, there is no point in CHI being part of Kuzmenko discussions. I guess we could also accept something in return for 3rd party retention. But, that'd likely be more than anyone is willing to pay.
LivingAnew liked this.
Jan. 29 at 6:05 p.m.
#5
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2022
Posts: 3,789
Likes: 1,208
Quoting: Garak
Sure. I also have doubts about whether VAN would do this. But from Hawks perspective, the only reason to acquire him is to attempt to make a profit. A guy who will be 29 years old in the first year of his next contract has no place in CHI's rebuild, long term. So, unless VAN is desperate for cap space, there is no point in CHI being part of Kuzmenko discussions. I guess we could also accept something in return for 3rd party retention. But, that'd likely be more than anyone is willing to pay.


I just hope this trade rumour doesn't happen grimace
Garak liked this.
Jan. 29 at 6:09 p.m.
#6
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2019
Posts: 10,699
Likes: 10,374
Quoting: Vancity2196
I just hope this trade rumour doesn't happen grimace


Well... think about it this way, moving him opens up 6 million in cap space to improve VAN's roster for a deep playoff run. He is currently playing like a waste of cap space for VAN. So, if this helps add a piece that puts VAN over the top while also trimming the fat, it's a win win. Contending teams need to do things like this and rebuilding teams need to take advantage of it. That's just how it works. If you want to win, you make small sacrifices. For all we know, Kuzmenko could continue being really bad and then end up back in the KHL when his contract is up after next season. In which case, it's a free pick for VAN and a ton of cap space.
Hawksguy81 liked this.
Jan. 29 at 6:12 p.m.
#7
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2022
Posts: 3,789
Likes: 1,208
Quoting: Garak
Well... think about it this way, moving him opens up 6 million in cap space to improve VAN's roster for a deep playoff run. He is currently playing like a waste of cap space for VAN. So, if this helps add a piece that puts VAN over the top while also trimming the fat, it's a win win. Contending teams need to do things like this and rebuilding teams need to take advantage of it. That's just how it works. If you want to win, you make small sacrifices. For all we know, Kuzmenko could continue being really bad and then end up back in the KHL when his contract is up after next season. In which case, it's a free pick for VAN and a ton of cap space.


I'm not feeling it TBH.
Since it's just a rumour, we'll just have to see what happens on Trade Deadline unsure
Garak liked this.
Jan. 29 at 6:15 p.m.
#8
Avatar of the user
Joined: Feb. 2022
Posts: 1,796
Likes: 830
I mean, obviously the Sens don't do that. I assume you already knew that, but still
Jan. 29 at 6:17 p.m.
#9
Big Shoots
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 3,570
Likes: 1,087
Quoting: Garak
That is the absolute max I could see CHI paying for Kuzmenko, and even that is probably a stretch.


That is basically nothing to give up to give Bedard someone to play with. Kuz represents a great reclamation project. Could easily mine a 1st plus out of him but next tdl if he returned to last season's form.
Garak liked this.
Jan. 29 at 6:29 p.m.
#10
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2019
Posts: 10,699
Likes: 10,374
Quoting: BigShoots
That is basically nothing to give up to give Bedard someone to play with. Kuz represents a great reclamation project. Could easily mine a 1st plus out of him but next tdl if he returned to last season's form.


"IF" he returns to form, it is certainly possible, but I would not describe that valuation as "easy" and it is definitely on the VERY high side considering he will be a 29yo pending UFA with a $6M cap hit. Also, we would more than likely have to retain in order to get anything remotely close to that, which has value that shouldn't be ignored and is not something VAN would be able to do this year or next year.

So, once again, in order for CHI to have interest, I think they would need a clear path to making a profit. Honestly, at this point, I have half a mind to say VAN needs to pay us to take his cap hit with how bad he has been.
LivingAnew liked this.
Jan. 29 at 9:05 p.m.
#11
AusCanuck
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2017
Posts: 227
Likes: 97
Quoting: Vancity2196
I don't see this trade happening.
No thanks.
Sorry.
If Canucks trade Hoglander to the Hawks for a draft pick, it could work in their favour.


Why would you want the Canucks to trade Hoglander? 😂 And he only makes $1.1M so that doesn't even free up any cap space. Kuzmenko is the #1 most obvious cap casualty
Jan. 29 at 9:05 p.m.
#12
Avatar of the user
Joined: Mar. 2022
Posts: 3,789
Likes: 1,208
Quoting: AusCanuck
Why would you want the Canucks to trade Hoglander? 😂 And he only makes $1.1M so that doesn't even free up any cap space. Kuzmenko is the #1 most obvious cap casualty


Well TBH it's a rumor and I don't see it happening at all.
Jan. 29 at 10:06 p.m.
#13
Big Shoots
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 3,570
Likes: 1,087
Quoting: Garak
"IF" he returns to form, it is certainly possible, but I would not describe that valuation as "easy" and it is definitely on the VERY high side considering he will be a 29yo pending UFA with a $6M cap hit. Also, we would more than likely have to retain in order to get anything remotely close to that, which has value that shouldn't be ignored and is not something VAN would be able to do this year or next year.

So, once again, in order for CHI to have interest, I think they would need a clear path to making a profit. Honestly, at this point, I have half a mind to say VAN needs to pay us to take his cap hit with how bad he has been.


It is an "IF" but it's just the easiest project ever. Your team isn't near the cap, doesn't have many offensive players and can acquire one for next to nothing. Why wouldn't you want to do that? The downside of such a gamble is so minimal. And if you have to retain at the deadline that only helps the trade value and again doesn't hurt the team at all.

The guy was probably worth a 1st plus in the summer. He's clearly a capable player. While scoring 39 goals is probably not realistic again I don't see why he can't be a 25-30 goal guy.
Danny_MrGM_Briere liked this.
Jan. 29 at 11:09 p.m.
#14
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2019
Posts: 10,699
Likes: 10,374
Quoting: BigShoots
It is an "IF" but it's just the easiest project ever. Your team isn't near the cap, doesn't have many offensive players and can acquire one for next to nothing. Why wouldn't you want to do that? The downside of such a gamble is so minimal. And if you have to retain at the deadline that only helps the trade value and again doesn't hurt the team at all.

The guy was probably worth a 1st plus in the summer. He's clearly a capable player. While scoring 39 goals is probably not realistic again I don't see why he can't be a 25-30 goal guy.


Sure. That's why I say a 3rd is the max I would find to be acceptable to spend on a player right now. But we don't need to add right now. If he sucks we lose a 3rd round pick for the privilege of helping VAN out with their cap troubles. If he is fine, we maybe break even on a trade if we retain. If he scores 39 goals again, we MAYBE get a late 1st at the deadline if we retain, but we also arbitrarily move our own 2025 1st round pick later in the draft. When we don't need more depth, we need top of the lineup players. The only thing we need for depth is RD.

All 1st round picks are not created equal. A late 1st round pick still has a slim chance of becoming an NHLer. And the difference between a top 3 pick and a 4-15 pick is a pretty drastic drop off in them becoming a real difference maker or high end player. So, we don't need to artificially improve our team in the short term for more "maybes". We need the best possible shot at drafting more top of the lineup players. Where is the line where it becomes worth it? I don't know. But, personally, I'm not interested in Kuzmenko for any reason, really. So the deal is gonna have to be pretty sweet.

P.S. WE DON'T NEED TO "GO GET GUYS TO PLAY WITH BEDARD." That whole narrative makes no sense. We are rebuilding. We don't need to compete or anything "while he is on his ELC", like so many people say. He has people to play with. He was playing at almost a point per game pace with what we have on the roster, and we have more young and exciting players on the way very soon. Next year is almost as unimportant as last year was and this year is. Bedard is a smart kid, he understands what CHI is doing, and he is completely team first. He will get his "help" in due time.
Jan. 29 at 11:55 p.m.
#15
Big Shoots
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 3,570
Likes: 1,087
Quoting: Garak
Sure. That's why I say a 3rd is the max I would find to be acceptable to spend on a player right now. But we don't need to add right now. If he sucks we lose a 3rd round pick for the privilege of helping VAN out with their cap troubles. If he is fine, we maybe break even on a trade if we retain. If he scores 39 goals again, we MAYBE get a late 1st at the deadline if we retain, but we also arbitrarily move our own 2025 1st round pick later in the draft. When we don't need more depth, we need top of the lineup players. The only thing we need for depth is RD.

All 1st round picks are not created equal. A late 1st round pick still has a slim chance of becoming an NHLer. And the difference between a top 3 pick and a 4-15 pick is a pretty drastic drop off in them becoming a real difference maker or high end player. So, we don't need to artificially improve our team in the short term for more "maybes". We need the best possible shot at drafting more top of the lineup players. Where is the line where it becomes worth it? I don't know. But, personally, I'm not interested in Kuzmenko for any reason, really. So the deal is gonna have to be pretty sweet.

P.S. WE DON'T NEED TO "GO GET GUYS TO PLAY WITH BEDARD." That whole narrative makes no sense. We are rebuilding. We don't need to compete or anything "while he is on his ELC", like so many people say. He has people to play with. He was playing at almost a point per game pace with what we have on the roster, and we have more young and exciting players on the way very soon. Next year is almost as unimportant as last year was and this year is. Bedard is a smart kid, he understands what CHI is doing, and he is completely team first. He will get his "help" in due time.


You need to create some kind of environment of winning or at least attempting to win. I agree you want high picks. That part is not in danger. And with Kuz isn't really either as he's just a guy to score when Bedard passes. You upgrade from a 3rd to maybe a 1st and the cost is having Bedard play with a skilled player.
Jan. 30 at 7:51 a.m.
#16
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2019
Posts: 10,699
Likes: 10,374
Quoting: BigShoots
You need to create some kind of environment of winning or at least attempting to win. I agree you want high picks. That part is not in danger. And with Kuz isn't really either as he's just a guy to score when Bedard passes. You upgrade from a 3rd to maybe a 1st and the cost is having Bedard play with a skilled player.


Nope.
Jan. 30 at 1:13 p.m.
#17
Thread Starter
Also a Canucks fan
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 244
Likes: 88
Quoting: Garak
Nope.


You don't get it?

Kuzmenko is having a wildly different season from last season, but this can be partially explained by his shooting percentage and some luck metrics. If he finds a middle ground, which is likely, and you give up a 3rd for him, you're laughing. Now you have a guy who's got 25 goals and 25 assists on a 5.5m AAV, which you can reduce to 2.75 for a contending team which absolutely warrants a first.
Jan. 30 at 1:53 p.m.
#18
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2019
Posts: 10,699
Likes: 10,374
Quoting: Danny_MrGM_Briere
You don't get it?

Kuzmenko is having a wildly different season from last season, but this can be partially explained by his shooting percentage and some luck metrics. If he finds a middle ground, which is likely, and you give up a 3rd for him, you're laughing. Now you have a guy who's got 25 goals and 25 assists on a 5.5m AAV, which you can reduce to 2.75 for a contending team which absolutely warrants a first.


No. I get it. But none of you get CHI's situation or the risk they are taking. Go sell him to some other team.
Jan. 30 at 4:53 p.m.
#19
Thread Starter
Also a Canucks fan
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 244
Likes: 88
Quoting: Garak
No. I get it. But none of you get CHI's situation or the risk they are taking. Go sell him to some other team.


Seems pretty inconsequential to me but fair enough
Garak liked this.
Jan. 30 at 5:47 p.m.
#20
Big Shoots
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 3,570
Likes: 1,087
Quoting: Garak
Nope.


yup
Jan. 30 at 6:14 p.m.
#21
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2019
Posts: 10,699
Likes: 10,374
Quoting: BigShoots
yup


Dude, no, we don't. We have created a competitive environment that will get better over time as more talent is added to CHI's roster through development and free agency, and MAYBE trades years down the road for players that actually project as long term pieces.

The goal is always to win. Adding a floundering player with a large cap hit that would not be part of CHI's future plans does nothing to help create a "winning environment". We aren't buying your guy. But if you are ready to move on from him, I'm sure we could work something out. Beauvillier and Dickinson are the kind of comps you should be considering for a Kumenko deal. You aren't going to get what you could've gotten for him last year, and if he were still playing that way VAN wouldn't even consider selling him in the first place.
Jan. 30 at 7:34 p.m.
#22
Big Shoots
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 3,570
Likes: 1,087
Quoting: Garak
Dude, no, we don't. We have created a competitive environment that will get better over time as more talent is added to CHI's roster through development and free agency, and MAYBE trades years down the road for players that actually project as long term pieces.

The goal is always to win. Adding a floundering player with a large cap hit that would not be part of CHI's future plans does nothing to help create a "winning environment". We aren't buying your guy. But if you are ready to move on from him, I'm sure we could work something out. Beauvillier and Dickinson are the kind of comps you should be considering for a Kumenko deal. You aren't going to get what you could've gotten for him last year, and if he were still playing that way VAN wouldn't even consider selling him in the first place.


Literally said he isn't worth much. We'd probably take a 3rd. You acted like you'd be hard done by to do that type of a deal when it is a deal that has the potential to net you a 1st line winger and maybe a 1st round pick down the road. There is literally no reason to scrimp here. He doesn't even get paid much it the contract ends next season. Just weird you wouldn't want that potential talent. And your reasoning is youre afraid to win (because you want higher picks understandably) but also he sucks and likely wouldnt be a buy low candidate.
Jan. 30 at 8:19 p.m.
#23
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jun. 2019
Posts: 10,699
Likes: 10,374
Quoting: BigShoots
Literally said he isn't worth much. We'd probably take a 3rd. You acted like you'd be hard done by to do that type of a deal when it is a deal that has the potential to net you a 1st line winger and maybe a 1st round pick down the road. There is literally no reason to scrimp here. He doesn't even get paid much it the contract ends next season. Just weird you wouldn't want that potential talent. And your reasoning is youre afraid to win (because you want higher picks understandably) but also he sucks and likely wouldnt be a buy low candidate.


It's your reasoning that is weird. Where CHI is concerned, there is no middle ground here. Either VAN needs to move him to open up some cap, in which case he is a dump and CHI could be interested, or he is a valuable long term asset, which CHI isn't buying on. And I said a 3rd is the max CHI should spend, meaning it is still too much but possibly doable. Personally, I wouldn't do it, though. Either way, it seems like VAN is the one who needs to move his cap hit, and he is not playing well, and CHI are not buyers. So, if CHI is involved, he is a cap dump.

If you want to sell him, sell him to another team. If you want to dump him, we can probably work something out.
Jan. 30 at 9:51 p.m.
#24
Big Shoots
Avatar of the user
Joined: Sep. 2020
Posts: 3,570
Likes: 1,087
Quoting: Garak
It's your reasoning that is weird. Where CHI is concerned, there is no middle ground here. Either VAN needs to move him to open up some cap, in which case he is a dump and CHI could be interested, or he is a valuable long term asset, which CHI isn't buying on. And I said a 3rd is the max CHI should spend, meaning it is still too much but possibly doable. Personally, I wouldn't do it, though. Either way, it seems like VAN is the one who needs to move his cap hit, and he is not playing well, and CHI are not buyers. So, if CHI is involved, he is a cap dump.

If you want to sell him, sell him to another team. If you want to dump him, we can probably work something out.


You created a false choice. What I'm saying is Chicago should be looking to weaponize their cap space. Not just willy nilly to help teams but to gain assets. In this case the player is coming off of a very productive season. His only season in the league and is struggling. The idea he could get back to a 1st line winger level doesn't seem far fetched. And if he does do well you can turn him into more assets. The cost of doing so is very minimal. And in the mean time the team gets a player who will finish off some of Bedard's outrageous plays and potentially keep his confidence high. I don't see the downside.
Danny_MrGM_Briere liked this.
 
Reply
To create a post please Login or Register
Question:
Options:
Add Option
Submit Poll