Butlrr

Member Since
Feb 16, 2019
Favourite Team
Vancouver Canucks
Forum Posts
56
Posts per Day
0.1
Forum Threads
16
Forum: Armchair-GMApr 20 at 1:22
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb 15 at 1:05
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb 10 at 9:47
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>krms33</b></div><div>so you would rather resign a 30yo goalie and punt 24yo one for cap space and 3rd and 4th round picks no thanks. QH and EP need to be resigned next year and there is over 20m coming off the books at that point. then the following year there is another almost 15m coming off in time to resign BB. hoglander doesn't have to step in be like BB QH and EP have been the last 3 years they are deep enough that he can learn and he may play the up and down to Utica that Gaudette did as the roster isn't devoid of talent with out Leivo. there are young players on the cusp of the NHL roster and the vets give these players time to mature without ridiculous expectations put on them.
how do you figure Stetcher is going to sign for that cheap. he is probably traded at the draft to free up space on the blueline

as for watching the canucks prior to 2017 ive been watching them long enough to remember them going to the finals in 82/94 and 2011.

The Canucks are not going to make wholesale changes like this unless they are getting a major player back and none of these trades help</div></div>

Goalies are weird. I’m open to playing either but Markstrom has the team’s trust and has been more durable. Don’t get to keep both indefinitely and if you keep Demko you lose an opportunity at some assets. But fine, point taken.

The 20 million going to QH and EP is because the Canucks are losing a top 6 forward and top 4 D that will also need replacing, plus a raise to Demko if you make him the guy. The money isn’t there to add beyond the core, so expect less depth than more in 18 months unless one of Rafferty, Hoglander, Podkolzin, or other are an immediate home run.

The vets give the youth a chance to mature on a playoff bubble team.

I’m glad to be chatting with a longtime fan. In memoriam: Hunter Shinkaruk, Jordan Schroeder, Cody Hodgson, Fedor Fedorov, Anton Rodin, Sergei Shirokov, Patrick White, Niklas Jensen, I’m getting tired of typing this. The point is, the odds are against our top prospects and a survey of Canucks history should make that super apparent.
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb 10 at 5:04
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>krms33</b></div><div>why would the canucks want to trade away a top PK centre(who ranks in the top 5 in faceoff %) and our goalie of the future for a 3rd and 4th . how does the expansion draft hurt us canucks only have 2 NMC's (1 forward and 1 dman) so they will be able to protect the ones they want(ep,bo,bb,miller,jv ferland w/nmc, ) and they still have another forward spot plus 2 d spots after Myers. these trades do not help the team get better . let leivo sign elsewhere if they don't trade him. they have hoglander ready to step in after this season(and podklozin next year) resign Markstrom without a NMC and protect the one you want to move forward at the draft and we are still in good shape.</div></div>

I disagree with nearly all of this, obviously.

1. If Jay Beagle was an effective NHL player, he still makes 3 million a year to play on the fourth line (for two more seasons!), is 34 years old and is on a team with cap issues. It’s worse than that though. He is a poor even strength player. His line has been utterly destroyed since November. The biggest issue the team has right now is two defensively poor bottom six lines.

2. The Canucks can either protect Markstrom or Demko, not both. I doubt Markstrom signs without a NMC (why the heck would he?). If they sign Markstrom, it’s highly unlikely Demko isn’t claimed if he’s on the team.

3. Look at recent goalie trades for value. Demko for two picks and salary relief seems fair to me, but clearly we see Beagle differently.

4. Leivo is one of the few effective bottom six forwards the team has and got injured at the worst possible time in terms of maximizing his contract in free agency. He’s found money. In fact, I’d argue that (if he stayed healthy) he’s the sixth best forward on the roster today.

5. I’m going to assume you’ve followed the Canucks prior to 2017, but if you haven’t, having young players integrate seamlessly like Boeser, Pettersson, and Hughes is the exception. To expect Hoglander to walk onto the roster and make a positive contribution (hell, even assuming he doesn’t go to Utica!) is beyond optimistic.

6. Think about how you would make the team better while keeping space for Hughes and EP’s second contracts without removing significant salary first. Gotta walk before you can run.
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb 8 at 7:15
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb 8 at 5:02
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb 8 at 1:41
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Wqrrior</b></div><div>the fact that multiple people gave feedback and you are still this strong on your opinion....

I'm a hometown canucks fan.

Florida would be stupid to make that trade. They are tight on cap as it is, and they would much rather put their cap into resigning top 6 options. Myers was not signed to be traded. I do like Weegar though... but that's not what Florida wants to get him. If anything, Gaudette could be swapped for him.

Washington would be stupid not to take that trade lol... it's that one-sided. Jensen is a #6 guy that's given more minutes to balance the defense there. He does not cost what has long been advertised as the Canucks goalie of the future. Samsonov will be their starter next year... look at what we were all saying about CBJ before this year and where they are now.

Amadio is not a third line center. The fact that you think he is... it's just laughable. Maybe on LA because they suck?</div></div>

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: <a href="https://hockeyviz.com/fixedImg/replacements/1920/L.A/amadimi96/wrap" rel="nofollow noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">https://hockeyviz.com/fixedImg/replacements/1920/L.A/amadimi96/wrap</a>“

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.
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb 7 at 11:35
Forum: Armchair-GMJan 31 at 11:10
Thanks for your feedback, everyone. I’m going to talk about it all here:

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Tmclean64</b></div><div>The Canucks dont need Taylor Hall. He comes at the price of blowing up the team.</div></div>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>MisstheWhalers</b></div><div>If you're trying to escape cap hell maybe don't sign Hall to that ridiculous contract.. Lol</div></div>

I agree the Canucks don’t need Hall. They do need to get better and it’s tough to see how they do that. Hall is the best player in free agency and one way to do that. Id say that’s a better use of salary than Myers and Virtanen or Ferland, who seem to be in the Canucks plans for the next several years.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Canucks33</b></div><div>I'd love to get rid of Myers but I just can't see it happening. Recently signed UFA who has an anchor of a contract.</div></div>

I think Myers is slightly overpaid but probably has marginal value on the trade market. He’s an awful fit in Vancouver though (on the third pair right now and displaced by Hughes on the power play).

I actually think the trade I made is probably bad for LA though (who I bet are loving Kempe) so I’ll revise that.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>puckhead6130</b></div><div>Sabres will not let go of Pilut</div></div>

That’s fine, I could live with that, but honestly, in what world have the Sabres shown they value Pilut? Everything they’ve done to this point suggests the opposite and I’d be frustrated if I was a Sabres fan.