Edit Avatar
  • png, jpeg
  • Recommended minimum size 800px by 800px
  • Maximum size: 1MB
Drag image to reposition


Member Since
May 12, 2019
Favourite Team
Vancouver Canucks
Forum Posts
Posts per Day
Forum Threads
Forum: Armchair-GMApr 10 at 2:30
Thread: Realistic
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Canuckel_head</b></div><div>I like Hamonic, but too much term and money. 1.75mil for 2years. He will likely want a NMC and Benning will give it. You don't resign until after Expansion draft, wait on a hand-shake deal.
I think you have to protect Myers (NTC). If I choose, I keep Motte and Gaudette. JV has run his road. and Big Mac...Love him, but not more than Motte or Gaudette. I doubt we resign Edler, but if we do it would be for more than that. I love that you brought in Tryamkin. I think Rathbone gets a look too.

The Aqualini's are cheap and Benning is a fool, they won't buyout Hotlby. I hope I eat these words.
What about resigning Vesey?</div></div>

They need to have another dman under contract to meet the NHL exposure requirements for expansion. That means a trade or re-signing Hamonic or Benn before the Expansion.
Hamonic is better option as he works well with Hughes and is RHD, a needed position on this team. He may come cheaper then my price cause he wants to stay west coast Canada, but I doubt $1.75M cheap.

Myers doesnt need protecting. I think at $6m, he is already protected. If Seattle goes blind and angels sing and take Myers, bonus.
I am conflicted with Edler, they dont need him but if he re-signs he has to realize he isnt an everyday dman anymore and doesnt warrant everyday money.
Rathbone will get call ups, but 20 something games isnt enough experience to jump to the NHL.

I understand the love and fascination with Motte, but there is 100 Mottes in the league, 100 Zmacs. JV is still a controlled asset and if not traded before expansion should be automatically protected.
Gaudette, same boat, but I am not sold on him being the 3LC on this team.

Vesey? Meh, sure.....
Forum: Armchair-GMApr 10 at 10:47
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>TrueCanuck</b></div><div>Pettersson: 0.927 PPG - 153 points in 165 games played
Barzal: 0.884 PPG - 207 points in 234 games played
Eichel: 0.846 PPG - 177 points in 209 games played

Eichel would be used more as a comparable due to a closer amount of games played. &amp; trust me, Vancouver is gonna wanna use that comparable and sign him long term because if you sign him to a bridge deal he'll be the highest paid player in the league when that deal is up and Vancouver won't be able to afford him.

As for Hughes, McAvoy is the direct comparison and getting much more than what Boston gave him is unlikely.

Hughes: 0.763 PPG - 84 points in 110 games played
McAvoy: 0.512 - 60 points in 117 games played

An almost direct same amount of games played, but Hughes has more points. However the key similarity between the players is their style of play and their RFA status. Both were offensive defencemen with defensive lapses in their game at the same age, and both were 10.2 status RFA. This means that they both were not eligible for an offer sheet or have arbitration rights. In other words, there's no leverage because they can't negotiate or sign anywhere else other than they're own team. And due to the flat cap and shortened money because of the pandemic, a contract slightly higher than McAvoy's seems the most logically. $6M is just too high for Vancouver when they can get him lower to help their cap situation.</div></div>

the same reasons you stated here regarding flat cap, no revenue and covid is the reason Brazel signed for $7M and not $9M, Hence the $8M and not $10M for Pettersson.
Also, rest assured, Pettersson will be a bridge, without a doubt,