SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

Mitch_in_Vic

Member Since
Mar. 3, 2017
Favourite Team
Vancouver Canucks
2nd Favourite Team
Vancouver Canucks
Forum Posts
190
Posts per Day
0.1
Forum: Armchair-GMMar. 7, 2020 at 11:51 p.m.
Thread: Weaponizing LTIR to Dump Cap hits
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>F50marco</b></div><div>Uuughh....
Players are paid as they normally would. Most* contracts are insured by the team so that if a player is injured the team doesn't have to pay the full salary whilst injured.I only say most rather than all because in cases like Nathan Horton, the player can feasibly get injured before the club has insured his contract. Otherwise I <b>think</b> it's standard practice.</div></div>
I'm not claiming insuring is or isn't standard practice. However, Insurance works on risk, so players who have been injured more are more costly to insure, their coverages are limited, or they are not insurable at all. this is standard practice for the insurance industry.


<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quote:</div> Horton's contract WAS NOT INSURED. That's why they preferred Clarkson. Because they had to actually pay the full salary of Horton and he would never play again. NOT because they prefered a healthy Clarkson over a injured Horton. Had that contract been insured, they would have never traded for Clarkson as they would have been actually paying more money FOR Clarkson.</div>
Maybe they wouldn't have traded him, but can you show me the numbers to prove they would have preferred to pay an injured Horton with insurance over a healthy Clarkson? or are you just speculating because it fits your opinion?

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quote:</div> You literally don't know how much they insure for because they don't disclose how much they are insured. One thing I do know, is that it is "standard practice" now and most contracts are insured up to 80%. Insuring for 5% isn't a thing.</div>
You don't know how much they insure them for either by your own admission. I do know how insurance works and high risk, high probability policies always cost a lot and have limited coverage. "up to 80%" does not mean every contract is insured to 80% total value, and I never claimed 5% either. you are throwing out specifics like you know something, not me.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quote:</div>On top of all this, Ericksson has an NMC making him hard to move as going to Anaheim won't mean he'll get to play more minutes, in fact, it'll be less because they are rebuilding and deep on the wings already. He's got his life in Vancouver already, he gains nothing from going to Anaheim. Its not like he's saving on taxes or anything. </div>
Eriksson actually has an NTC right now and will be a 15-team Modified-NTC this summer. He won't have that much control over where he goes. And he does not have a life in Vancouver, he spends as little time in the city as possible. The fan base does not like him and the media shreds him on a regular basis. His agent has even gone on local spots radio to say that they were working on a deal to send him anywhere last summer, but none of the teams were interested in paying his bonuses, so they were waiting for this summer to make the deal after his last bonus is paid out. But you are probably right, he gains nothing from a trade to Anaheim or anywhere else.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quote:</div>Ottawa literally got Gaborik BECAUSE they didn't have to pay much of his salary but could use his cap to reach the cap floor. Baertschi is even making the top 6 in Ottawa who are rebuilding. They want their young core to get those minutes, not a player whose being paid 3.6M to play in the AHL. Although Demko is definitely a decent consolation prize, they are giving up one of the highest 2nd rounders in the draft also.... not exactly for nothing.</div>
What young core does Ottawa have beyond Tkachuk and Chabot? Of the 3 UFA and 6 RFA forwards they have right now on expiring contracts, which ones are you building around as a real "core?"

And you must be right, a 36th overall goalie, with Demko's resume, ready to step in as a 1a/b on any rebuilding team that doesn't already have their current and long-term future in the position locked up, isn't worth an early 2nd and late 6th. Schneider returned the 9th overall (and potentially the 7th and additional pieces if they accepted Edmontns inter-division offer at the draft), and many have compared Demko to where Schneider was the year before he was dealt at the draft.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quote:</div>Either way, whether you agree with my opinion or not, you can't claim to KNOW they are saving money with these trades if we don't know the details of the insurance policy. If Kesler and Gaborik are insured, which based on their injury history makes sense, it could very well be for up to 80% and if that's the case, both trades they are actually paying more money than just keeping either player.</div>
And conversely, you cannot claim to know either.

You are just as in the dark as the rest of us.
You have no idea what their insurable status is, or if either of them has limited coverages because of their injury history. For all you know it could only be 40-60% coverage or none at all. "Pre-existing conditions" make insuring someone very costly with very limited coverage payouts and lots of red-tape. I know this because I have gone through it personally and professionally. If it weren't for pre-existing conditions my premiums would be half of, and the benefits would be double, what they are. And make no mistake, Insurance companies will make you go through all manner of physical testing before they even offer to give you a quote, let alone an actual policy.... and I'm not making $5mil/yr in a highly physical sport with extremely high probabilities of injury.
Forum: Armchair-GMMar. 7, 2020 at 8:20 p.m.
Thread: Weaponizing LTIR to Dump Cap hits
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Canucks33</b></div><div>The Gaborik contract is insured, so Melnyck doesn't pay much but the cap hit still counts. That's perfect for a cap floor type team like Ottawa and you're not going to convince Melnyck to spend MORE money.

I'm not sure exactly how LTIR works over the summer but I think that those 3 contracts would count against the cap until the first game of the season. If so, we would actually have LESS maneuvaribility to re-sign Hughes (10 million ish) and Pettersson (11 million ish).</div></div>
I didn't know Gabby's contract was that highly insured, but I guess that would make sense why his contract is in IR and not LTIR if it counts against their cap.

And I was under the impression that LTIR did not impact the roster/cap on the first day otherwise the Leafs would get boned every year with Horton and Clarkson sitting in LTIR for the past and future bunch of seasons.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>StoneFan</b></div><div>Gaudette does not get that much


He gets waaaay more</div></div>
He has no Arb rights, not offer sheet eligible and he hasn't really proved through consistency that he is worth more. I have him on a 2yr "Show-me" contract.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>csick</b></div><div>Dumbs is not a defensive defenceman. If you’re trading Boeser, it has to be one of Ekblad, Parayko, Pesce, etc coming back</div></div>
No, he is not a true defensive defenseman like an Ekblad/Parayko or Pesce, but none of those guys play in Minny, which is where Boeser is from and where his father is currently fighting cancer.

That said, Boeser on his own isn't enough to pull Ekblad.

Parayko and Pesce might be better fitted for Hughes though.
Payarko might shake loose if the Blues plan to resign Pietrangelo, sooo maybe? Although, I'm not sure how Boeser as a 2nd line RW behind Tarasenko appeals to the Blues.
Pesce is interesting, but I think loosing both hamilton AND Pesce this season would probably make the cane leary on tradings a defenseman for a winger, especially when they have a glut of young wingers in Svechnikov, Teräväinen, Necas and Foegele(?) already.

I'd be happy with any of Ekblad/Parayko/Pesce playing with Hughes but I don't see any of them getting moved, and I don't see Boeser getting moved unless it's to the Wild for family reasons.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>F50marco</b></div><div>Player who is pretty much guaranteed to be a permanent LTIR is actually a good thing to have......
Its when you have a player that sucks but doesn't get injured that is when the player is a huge burden.
Gaborik doesn't hurt Ottawa in the slightest. Kesler doesn't hurt Anaheim in the slightest. Some teams have actually paid to get players on permanent LTIR in order to surpass the salary cap. See Toronto with Horton/Clarkson.
So there is very little incentive for those teams to trade those guys away. Teams would rather have permanent LTIR's than guys like Ericksson or Baertschi precisely for the reason Vancouver doesn't want them. They take up actual cap space and they have to actually be paid by the team and not mostly by insurance (when on LTIR).</div></div>
SMH!
I am well aware of how LTIR works as cap relief. HOWEVER, for teams that are struggling financially or starting a rebuild (where revenues are going diminish), they still have to pay those players sitting on LTIR, and Insurance (If any) only covers a portion of the contract. Yes, it does not hurt the team in terms of dollars against the cap to have players on LTIR, but it is still operational money out of the owner's pocket. Rich owners/franchises, like the Leafs, are more than happy to eat LTIR money if they can unload some cap space in return. How do you think the Leafs acquired Horton's and Clarkson's LTIR contracts in the first place? The Leafs regretted signing Clarkson, so they traded him to the jackets for then LTIR Horton, because the jackets didn't want to pay Horton to sit at home or in the press box. That was a straight-up trade: LTIR player for an under-performing overpaid player. Clarkson was still a decent roster player, albeit overpaid. CBJ saw the benefit of paying a player to PLAY vs sitting at home as more valuable to their franchise. Clarkson then gets hurt and placed on LTIR, so Columbus deals him the Vegas as part of an expansion draft package for the exact same reason. Later, Vegas deals Clarkson back to the Leafs for the exact same reason. Saying teams don't have the incentive to move LTIR players is ****. It happens on a regular basis for deals exactly like I'm proposing. the finances of owning and running a team go beyond the on-ice product. It's not like players on LTIR are walking away from their contracts and not all contracts are insured for even half their value, so teams still may have to pay out huge sums of money.

Eriksson has a 6 mil cap hit for 2 more years after this one. after his bonus is paid out in July, he is only owed 5mil total salary for those final 2 years. Paying a guy effectively 2.5mil/yr but getting a 6mil cap hit is a better deal than what a lot of insured contracts payout at. Baerstchi is still a decent offensive player and for a rebuilding team, they could do a lot worse for similar money. He needs to get moved because he just doesn't fit in Vancouver's system for any of the roster spots that would be available for him (bottom 6), and isn't better than any of the players in roster spots he would fit into (top 6).

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Kotkaniemi15</b></div><div>WTF IS THAT OTTAWA TRADE?

Other than that, the Anaheim trade is definitely fair for the Ducks, as long as they have the cap space. And I know the Canucks need the cap space, but they definitely don't need to make both ANA &amp; OTT moves since Baerschi only makes just over $2 million in the minors, and you have $9.5 million in cap space, with the lowest possible salary cap for next year.</div></div>
ANA stated before the deadline they will take on bad cap money in deals and they have the cap space.

The moves facilitate freeing up enough cap space to be able to sign Hughes and Pettersson before the 21/22 season. Current projections have both players in the 9-11mil x 8yr range, so these moves give the canucks the flexibility to sign them, and still have room to make other deals to augment and fill out their lineup.

As for the Ottawa trade, it is 2 parts:
1. Gabby for Baerstchi, as paying a guy to play vs paying a guy to stay at home is beneficial for a small-market, financially struggling franchise like the Sens. Insured or not, they both have 1 year remaining (20/21) and Ottawa was rumoured to be in on Baerstchi at the deadline according to a number of insiders. Ottawa will need help to fill out their roster for next season and be above the cap floor, so they are either taking worse players with even worse contracts or making deals like this.
2. Ottawa needs an elite goaltending prospect who can come in and play now. Nilssen isn't a #1, Anderson well past his prime and isn't likely to be resigned this summer, and none of the high-end UFA/RFA goalies were going to sign in the dumpster fire that is Ottawa for the next couple seasons. Demko can play, he's still a little green but with Nilssen as his 1b/1/3 backup, and only 23y/o, he can be a cornerstone the Sens can build around. Such a goalie returning a 2nd and a late 6th is a fair deal.
Forum: Trade Machine ProposalsMar. 7, 2020 at 4:34 p.m.
Thread: A hockey trade
This trade gives the Wild a legitimate 1st line superstar winger who is very young and cost-controlled for the next few seasons, and then still retains his rights to resign or trade.
This trade gives Boeser the ability to play at home and be close to his family as his father struggles with a very hard fight with cancer.

This trade gives the Canucks a legitimate 1st pairing defensive-defenseman to play alongside Quinn Hughes. Dumba's strong two-way play and overall skill is a huge step up from Tanev, he is younger than Tanev, is still cost-controlled for the next few years, and should provide similar defensive balance with far more offensive punch to the Canucks back end.
This trade gives Dumba the chance to play with two of the premier young talents in the NHL, and play on a defensive pairing that could be the best in the NHL for years to come.
Forum: Trade Machine ProposalsMar. 6, 2020 at 3:29 p.m.
Thread: Trying to Get Better at Valuing Picks Prospects and Bad Contracts
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>wdhowell</b></div><div>Thanks for the input. I would say that Vancouver is up against cap pretty hard, so it isn't so much as real dollars and cents as it is the AAV. If the cap raises to $88M next season, this becomes far less an issue for them.</div></div>
That’s what I said, for a cap-floor team, the contract isn’t toxic at all. For a team up against the cap, it’s one of the worst in the NHL (behind every longer term deal in SJ and all the other deals handed out July 1, 2016). But that’s also the beauty of the contract at this point. There is value for a cap-floor team in that if they accepted a trade for Eriksson, they only have to pay him 5mil real dollars while getting 12mil of cap value over the remaining term. That allows those cap-floor teams to reduce operational costs during those poor years, making the team more profitable than needing to pay a 6mil/per-player, the full 6 mil to hit the cap floor. And for 2 years, that’s not a bad deal for the cap floor team.

Now, the Canucks or similar teams still need to give up something to make it happen, I’m certainly not saying they wouldn’t. BUT, they wouldn’t have to give up as much as what Calgary would to unload Lucic, or what SJ will have to give up to unload Jones, and eventually Karlsson/Burns/Vlasic/Couture/Kane when all those guys start to slide in performance-to-pay ratio ... which some of them are very close to already doing on very fresh contracts. Think of what SJ would have to give up to unload the last 4years of Karlsson’s 11.5/yr deal if his play continues to spiral down!


The cap will never go to 88mil next year, mark my words on that.
Forum: Trade Machine ProposalsMar. 5, 2020 at 11:07 p.m.
Thread: draft 2020
lol, so much wrong with this trade.

1. Eriksson is due 5mil over the next 2 seasons after his bonus pays out in July. He will be an attractive piece for cap-floor teams who can get 2 years at a 6mill hit per, for 2.5mil paid averaged over that same period. So It probably won't take a 1st to unload him.

2. Podkolzin is not going anywhere, at least not for anything less than being apart of a package that brings back a sub-23 y/o superstar like an Aho/Pettersson/Marner. However, NONE of those guys are going anywhere, which is sort of my point.

3. Vancouver is not giving up 3x 1st rounders for anything short of the scenario presented in point 2. Even then, They aren't close enough to be a true contender to leverage their future like that... Especially not for a player like Couture.

4. Couture is well past his prime, and an entirely superfluous player in Vancouver.

5. No team is going to take his 8x7yr remaining contract without something else of value coming back. That is a contract that is going to age almost as poorly as Karlsson's contract (and every other one of SJ's long-term deals) is going to age. Most teams are going to see a minimal long-term upside to a player north of 31 by the time he suits up for them next year, considering most players are on a steep decline by the time they hit 33/34 in today's NHL. Couture still has a couple valuable years left, but that contract is going to turn into a boat anchor around the neck of any team long before it is close to finishing the term. If he had 2-3years left at 8per, MAYBE the Canucks make that trade for but less return. The Canucks need a high-end young D-man like a Dumba/Trouba more than a Couture-type player.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 12, 2019 at 12:46 p.m.
Thread: HughesBro
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Hackadart</b></div><div>I’m not saying Boeser is as good as Marner but if Marner is 11 Boeser is definitely atleast 9, if Boeser is Nylander (7) then there is no way Marner is 11, and Nylander is worth every penny, and remember how I said Rosen,Sandin And Liljegren are coming up next year, that’s half of the Defense changing and the other half is Muzzin, Dermott and oh yeah Rielly even if they do cave to the Bruins atleast they are in the playoffs and it’ll be a different Defense next year without wasting $$ on UFA’s like Beagle, Roussel and Eriksson... though clearly that has worked well for the Nucks</div></div>

Again, you are focusing on the pinnacle of what i said he MAY get, I quite clearly said 9-10 for all 3 of those top RFA wingers. So with Marner at 9-10, Boeser is closer to 6-7x8yrs. on the high end right now
I would be LESS surprised if he got 1 year at like 5.5 on a bridge deal, puts up 80+ pts in a full healthy season and then commands 9.5x8yr on the following deal.


Sure, but all those guys are unproven over a full 82 game year and are young and are going to make a LOT of mistakes like every young defenseman makes in the NHL. If you are banking on a handful of players either entering their rookie seasons, or having just completed their rookie/sophomore seasons, you better be prepared for the highly probable reality that your back end is going to be WORSE.

And I am by no means defending Bennings UFA signings, I don't think there would be a Canucks fan alive that would look at anyone outside Roussel as a decent acquisition. BUT, his RFA signings have been pretty good though. We have Horvat on what could be one of the best deals in the NHL going into next season.
Forum: NHL TradesApr. 12, 2019 at 12:29 p.m.
Thread: LETS PLAY A GAME Whats that Pick Worth
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BurgerBoss</b></div><div>I'm not sure exactly what kind of trades he made then, I was like a 1-year old then, but I'm going to make a strong guess that he might've used some of the key assets of the team to do it.</div></div> This might help
<a href="http://bfy.tw/NCQj" rel="nofollow noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">http://bfy.tw/NCQj</a>

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Ajp_18</b></div><div>To VAN- 2019 1st(NJD) and Green
To NJD - 2019 1st(VAN), 2019 2nd(VAN), 2020 1st(VAN), DiPietro or Demko, Joulevi or Woo, and probably something small</div></div>
Interesting deal, I think Benning would bite on that for sure, but not sure if he has the chops to get that. I think it would be Demko and Juolevi, and probably an AHL player

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Birtle34</b></div><div>I think you pretty much nailed it there, and along with no protection on 2020 1st and a resign hall decision, which would possibly send nj into a full rebuild or a retool</div></div>
I wonder if that would be the deal-breaker point on a trade, lottery protection on the following pick or not....?

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Birtle34</b></div><div>That was a different era, where the value of a elc rookie contribution wasn’t as rated as high as now, all I remember is McCabe was part of a deal, in the prime quality dman, and then there were a few teams that just attempted to buy themselves out of there problems.</div></div>
But that's also because they rookies were still part of the old-guard of junior player development and NEEDED 2-4 YEARS of development in the minors or as 2nd/3rd/4th line players before they made the jump. Short of players like Lindros, very few top picks made instant franchise-altering impacts and often took years to develop into the elite level players they would become. Today, we have 1-2 players in almost every draft that make massive impacts right out of the draft.

McCabe was definitely part of the deal and he was a really good player, but he was at best a 2-3 d-man on any real contentdi team. He wasn't an elite level defenseman by any stretch, so it's not like they mortgaging their backend on the deal.

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Watty1</b></div><div>Would prefer to move Hutton. Heard Colorado was interested in him before. </div></div>
The ask before was Virtanen and Hutton of Barrie back at the trade deadline in Hutton's breakout season.
Forum: NHL TradesApr. 11, 2019 at 8:44 p.m.
Thread: LETS PLAY A GAME Whats that Pick Worth
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Wingert41326</b></div><div>Petterson and 2019 10th overall from Van
for
NJD 2019 1st overall.

Hefty price but I think that’s what it’d take</div></div>
didn't read the rules, huh? :squinty


<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Watty1</b></div><div>Virtanen, Juolevi/Demko &amp; 10th for Colorado's 4th or something starting with that. I really don't think any of the other teams will deal.</div></div>
That's definitely reasonable.
Edit: I think they would probably want a younger roster D-man (Hutton) in your trade scenario over Demko/Juolevi or something like maybe Markstrom and the 10th if Varlamov and Grubauer get ventilated in the playoffs

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>BurgerBoss</b></div><div>So Pettersson, Horvat, Boeser and Hughes are not available?

If we were to consider realistic trades, you pretty much just made this challenge impossible to complete. Congrats.</div></div>
It's not, it might be REALLY difficult for picks 1,2 and maybe 3, but obviously 4&amp;5 are in play from the post above yours.

I don't expect there to BE an "answer" for 1-3, but a creative person would use that standalone deal as a way of working in a better offer.
Burke had to make a number of trades to get the Sedin's at 1&amp;2, think outside the box. Geez.:-/
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 11, 2019 at 8:37 p.m.
Thread: HughesBro
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Hackadart</b></div><div>Olli has far less value than Pulijarvi, and people trade him around on here like he is a second round pick
TOR doesn’t need any signings on the Blueline let alone two, they have Rosen clawing his way into the lineup already and Sandin and Liljegren will be up for atleast parts of next season if not all of it, also lol you saying Boeser can’t make 9.5 (INSANE) because he isn’t kucherov yet in the same reply you say Marner (also not as good as Kucherov) is gonna get 11 lmfao pick and choose your logic depending on which team it is about</div></div>


We'll talk more about the Leafs defence after it crumbles again against Boston. :tearsofjoy


I said "MAYBE even 11 for Marner"
I also said Marner, Rantanen and Tkachuck are a step above Boeser at this point.
As in, Nylander was able to stroke Dubas for 45/6, while proving less than Marner.
Marner has proven that he is at the same level as Matthews and Tavares in terms of output.
Do you really think after what Nylander pulled, that Marner's value isn't drastically more Nylander? I'd put Boeser and Nylander on the same level.

Back to my original comment, 8x9.75 for Boeser is INSANE for a player who cannot stay healthy for a full season and goes on decently-long cold stretches.
He'll get a 1-3year bridge deal to prove he's worth what you are suggesting.
Forum: NHL TradesApr. 11, 2019 at 8:08 p.m.
Thread: LETS PLAY A GAME Whats that Pick Worth
So, everyone in the NHL and their Dog knows that Canucks would like to get Jack Hughes, or at least move up in the draft inside the top 5 to get their guy.

But what would it actually take to make those deals?

So the rules of the game are simple:
1. YOU decide the ask from Canucks to take your team's respective pick 1-5.
2. Trade would be assumed to include the 10th overall pick held by Vancouver
3. The following 4 players are not on the table: Horvat, Boeser, Pettersson and Huges.
4. Any and all other players, picks and prospects are on the table, BUT subsequent 1st rounders would be lottery protected and differed to the following year. Ottawa's mistake has taught every bubble-playoff GM in the NHL a lesson to not trade their 1st without lottery protection.

On a separate line, we would also be willing to accept your Cap-Hit-Trash if it included a 1st round pick sweetener *cough*Edmonton*cough* in a separate standalone deal without than Canucks' 10th going back, in order to spin up into a better package to move up.

Let the games begin!
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 11, 2019 at 12:15 p.m.
Thread: HughesBro
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Hackadart</b></div><div>The first part I think COL says no to that as I think the league has soured on Juolevi, not saying he won’t become a good d-man but he isn’t looking great atm</div></div>
Juolevi has taken a hit on his value. BUT, he still has enough value to be a valuable addition in a trade-up scenario. You are right though; I don't see Colorado making that deal for the first pick if they got it, maybe for the 4th...?

<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quote:</div>Second part is TOR easily matches 4 in the summer as they can go 10% over the cap (8mil) so they match and find a better offer or trade someone else if no one gives them full value, so to get Kap you gotta pay full price regardless of all this offer sheet talk (and btw the leafs can easily afford him at 3, not sub 2) and</div>
TO has to sign Marner, Gardiner or a replacement, as well as an additional quality D-man like a Myers that can help shore up their defence if they want to take a serious swing at a cup in the next 4years.


<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quote:</div>finally Kucherov is not a comparable, just cause one guy signed a good deal in a low tax state doesn’t mean everyone making 9.5 has to be as good as him, I do see what you mean with a bridge though and that may be the road they take but I just figured you might as well get him locked up and then they can move on to getting Pettersson and then Hughes signed long term, maybe Boeser is more like 8-9 to lock up I’m not sure, but I do think a long term deal may be smart for the future</div>

No, but he set the bar for wingers. Every GM is going to look at Kuch making 9.5 and now three consecutive seasons of playing above a PPG as the benchmark. Then look at the three other top RFA wingers right now in Marner, Rantanen and Tkachuck, all of which are arguably a step above Boeser right now, Those guys I can see in and around the 9-10 range as a full-time caphit, maybe even 11 for Marner. Boeser, as much as I like the guy, isn't at that same level. You could argue the Nylander deal is a good comparable for Boeser, but Nylander achieved more and stayed healthier more than Boeser, and Nylander is making 45/6. So 8yrs at 9.75 is INSANE for Boeser.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 8, 2019 at 6:33 p.m.
Thread: HughesBro
If Vancouver wanted Hughs bad enough, and Col got him and was shopping him, it would probably be a package of Van's 2019 1st, Tanev, Gaudette, Juolevi, probably a 2nd. No way are the Canucks giving up on Horvat and 2 consecutive 1st rounders unless the 2nd is lottery protected.

As far as Kapanen, I'd do that deal without Woo and the 2nd, but bump it up to 2x 3rds in 2019 and 2020. The Canucks (or any team) could also just offer sheet him @ 4.06 and steal him away from the Leafs for a 2nd rounder in 2020, Because there is no way the buds can afford to keep him and plug the holes they have unless he takes sub 2mil, or they can unload Nylander. I can honestly see a LOT of teams kicking the tires on Kap, scoffing at the price and then offer sheet him in the summer to force the Leafs into a no-win situation. It will probably be one of the 2nd round or later playoff teams (Boston because they love to screw the Leafs) that throws 6mil at him or whatever the max value with only a 1st as compensation is, to get him.

I also do not see Brock getting that number or term yet. I see a 1-2 year bridge deal at 5-6mil so he can knock it out of the park like what you posted after. He hasn't shown enough to get money like Kucherov yet considering he's MILES away from Kucherov still.