Do You Want The Sedins To Return Next Season?

Do You Want The Sedins To Return Next Season?


  • Total voters
    179

racerjoe

Registered User
Jun 3, 2012
12,154
5,850
Vancouver
There remains two correct answers to this question:

1) on a well-run team that needs to get younger and faster and has young players ready to step in, having two 38 y/o dinosaurs taking all of the sheltered minutes we have because they're basically unplayable at ES, so that we can't develop kids in those minutes, is idiotic.

2) on a Jim Benning-run team, using up our cap space signing the Sedins to short term deals is vastly preferable to the ghastly, franchise-altering mistakes this moron would otherwise use this cap space for.

JB is totally going to sign them to 8 year 7 mil deals isn't he? Dammit!
 

ChilliBilly

Registered User
Aug 22, 2007
7,081
4,326
chilliwacki
If they will sign cheap, say $2.5 M, bring em back.

But the only way they are going to get paying asses in the seats is if they play the future. That is Dahlin (dreaming) Pettersson, Dahlen, Juolevi and Demko. That means they have to get rid of 8 - 10 players ... most of whom are not waiver exempt.
 

VanJack

Registered User
Jul 11, 2014
21,043
14,073
I legitimately expect him to give them $5M each next year.
Yes you're probably right and it would a complete waste of money for a team likely headed for 30th place again.....and if this was any other GM, you'd be arguing that the Sedins cap-space is better spent somewhere else.

But keep in mind this is Jimbo we're talking about here....He'd take that $14m in cap space and just blow it some ludicrous contract like the ones for Gagner, Eriksson, Sutter or Gudbranson, with crippling term on their contracts. So in light of that, spending $10m for the Sedins for just one season is lot safer than giving Benning the combo to the safe, and have him blow up the the vault somewhere else.
 

VanillaCoke

Registered User
Oct 30, 2013
24,956
11,300
If this team spends to the cap next season I dont even know what to say. Not sure I'll be able to watch a single game.
 

Pure West

Registered User
Oct 3, 2005
1,964
230
Vancouver
Ideally, we would be moving Gagner or Eriksson if we wanted to make room for young players on the team, and keep the twins. As long as they are ok with smaller roles on the team, they can continue to face the tough questions from the media and shield some of the younger guys from some of the criticism this terrible team will undoubtedly face next season. Obviously, the younger guys are going to have to start accepting some more leadership responsibilities soon, but perhaps another transition year will do them some good. We still don't really have a lot of prospects that will clearly be NHL ready next season anyways, and they were big pieces of one of the NHL's best powerplays.

Also, this takes up cap space and roster spaces to prevent this management group from doing something stupid. Its not a long term or big salary commitment and they will be off the books when Boeser is due his payday. Arguably, treating your star players and franchise icons well helps send a good message to your up and coming stars, who may be more willing to give this team a break when its their contract time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ddawg1950

StreetHawk

Registered User
Sep 30, 2017
25,600
9,431
Ericsson can’t be moved. We all need to accept that. Not until he complete year 4 and the team pays his signing bonus at the start of year 5. Gagner see if benning gets the ok from ownership to fix a mistake.

Keeping the twins around to me is more about not being able to utilize the Bo line in more offensive situations because they are the second best defensive option for green after sutter.

If they do as you want and dump gagner for kids, you are not putting the kids in the defensive zone. And the twins haven’t been tasked with draws in their own zone.

Would like to see green have a s come option besides Bo to put out for a defensive draw if the sutter line was just on the ice.

Would expect 17 year bets who play the right way to be able to take car of their own zone off a face off.
 

Verviticus

Registered User
Jul 23, 2010
12,664
592
You take 1 jab for the team. 2nd Jab to enforce the call.

But taking the 3rd and 4th jab that's on Daniel for not protecting himself and allowing someone to simply abuse him.

Score was 5-2 right? Was the PP clicking? Not really. Taking the jabs had the reverse effect if Daniel was hoping for a PP. Gave Gave the bruins more freedom to continue to abuse and take liberties on the Canucks.

nah
 

Javaman

Registered User
Jul 13, 2010
2,456
3,243
Vancouver
I disagree with the OP that this a simple question lol. Nonetheless I voted no. Lots of various facts and figures and other things to consider, but in the long run, they are best off parting ways IMO.

That being said, I freely acknowledge I could be entirely wrong on this.

Either way, Eriksson will be the biggest cap hit for the Canucks next year. Let that sink in.
 

Horse McHindu

They call me Horse.....
Jun 21, 2014
9,668
2,650
Beijing
Sedins' had a great run here but it really is time for them to bugger off in my opinion.

Use that money to bring in Evander Kane or a good Top 4 D-man. The rest of the money can be used to re-upp whatever RFA's Benning decides to qualify and re-sign (Granlund + Goldobin + Baertschi = bugger off).
 

pgj98m3

Registered User
Jan 8, 2012
1,539
1,078
Sedins' had a great run here but it really is time for them to bugger off in my opinion.

Use that money to bring in Evander Kane or a good Top 4 D-man. The rest of the money can be used to re-upp whatever RFA's Benning decides to qualify and re-sign (Granlund + Goldobin + Baertschi = bugger off).
I've been reading a lot about the surplus of top 4 D-men that are going to be available.
 

Horse McHindu

They call me Horse.....
Jun 21, 2014
9,668
2,650
Beijing
I've been reading a lot about the surplus of top 4 D-men that are going to be available.

Honestly bro, I'd do whatever I could do bring in John Carlson here (if we don't win the Dahlin sweepstakes). Realistically though, I don't see him wanting to come here. Ditto for Tavares. I think our best bet at landing a big fish is Evander Kane due to him being a home town boy and actually expressing an interest in Vancouver in the past.

Get rid of Baertschi for a pick, say bye to the twins, bring in Kane or Carlson (preferably the latter if Carlson can actually be had). Carlson being here would insulate our defense a little more, and would greatly assist Demko's transition to the NHL if he makes the team next year. Last thing you want is newcomer Demko being lit up and losing confidence behind a horrible D.
 

RebuildinVan

Registered User
Jun 25, 2017
2,245
2,064
I've been reading a lot about the surplus of top 4 D-men that are going to be available.
The RFA Dmen market looks good, UFA's not so much outside of Carlson and I doubt he would sign here. Without the twins I wonder what Jimbo would do with an extra $14mil. Targeting Kane and Carlson would eat up the twins cap space so they would be squeezed out
 

pgj98m3

Registered User
Jan 8, 2012
1,539
1,078
Honestly bro, I'd do whatever I could do bring in John Carlson here (if we don't win the Dahlin sweepstakes). Realistically though, I don't see him wanting to come here. Ditto for Tavares. I think our best bet at landing a big fish is Evander Kane due to him being a home town boy and actually expressing an interest in Vancouver in the past.

Get rid of Baertschi for a pick, say bye to the twins, bring in Kane or Carlson (preferably the latter if Carlson can actually be had). Carlson being here would insulate our defense a little more, and would greatly assist Demko's transition to the NHL if he makes the team next year. Last thing you want is newcomer Demko being lit up and losing confidence behind a horrible D.
The word you seem to be missing from your vocabulary is "rebuild". This team is way past bringing in a few players.
 

RebuildinVan

Registered User
Jun 25, 2017
2,245
2,064
Benning will have money icthing to spend. Having Peterson start off on a line with Kane isnt the worst idea.... he hits, shoots, does the dirty work and would offer up protection. Who on the Canucks does that now?

Benning is going to throw the mentorship thing tho and resign the twins is my guess
 
Last edited:

pgj98m3

Registered User
Jan 8, 2012
1,539
1,078
Benning will have money icthing to spend. Having Peterson start off on a line with Kane isnt the worst idea.... he hits, shoots, does the dirty work and would offer up protection. Who on the Canucks does that now?
Have you been on a desert island for the last three years?????
The last thing this team needs is Lindenning with money to spend.
 

RebuildinVan

Registered User
Jun 25, 2017
2,245
2,064
Have you been on a desert island for the last three years?????
The last thing this team needs is Lindenning with money to spend.
But guess what.... Lindenning has the money coming up, and willing to spend as the last 3 years show. What are they going to do with it? Besides something stupid
 

TruKnyte

On the wagon
Jan 1, 2012
5,759
3,146
Vancouver, BC
If you think the hockey this year is bad, just wait until the Sedins leave. We'd be banking a lot on rookies/sophmores to carry the scoring load without them.
 

RebuildinVan

Registered User
Jun 25, 2017
2,245
2,064
If you think the hockey this year is bad, just wait until the Sedins leave. We'd be banking a lot on rookies/sophmores to carry the scoring load without them.
That why I think Kane will be a Canuck next year

If the hockey is this bad now, watch the twins a year from now.
 

y2kcanucks

Le Sex God
Aug 3, 2006
71,229
10,319
Surrey, BC
If they will sign cheap, say $2.5 M, bring em back.

But the only way they are going to get paying asses in the seats is if they play the future. That is Dahlin (dreaming) Pettersson, Dahlen, Juolevi and Demko. That means they have to get rid of 8 - 10 players ... most of whom are not waiver exempt.

Jim Benning will never let that much youth on the team. We'll probably see Pettersson here because he will win a spot in the pre-season, and I have a feeling Juolevi will be gifted a spot no matter what. That could be it. Demko is a question mark because I can't get a read on that situation. Could easily see him as the backup, but could also easily see him back down in Utica because the Canucks won't be able to dump Nilsson and I'm not sure their feelings on waiving him and burying that contract in the minors.

I see the team next year looking a lot like this

Baertschi-Horvat-Boeser
Sedin-Sedin-Eriksson
Leipsic-Sutter-Pettersson
Archibald-Gagner-("asset" we get back for Virtanen)

Edler-Tanev
MDZ-Gudbranson
Juolevi-Stecher
Biega

Sedins will be back at $5M per.

And wow...putting this on paper you really get an idea of how much crap there is on this team.
 

pgj98m3

Registered User
Jan 8, 2012
1,539
1,078
Jim Benning will never let that much youth on the team. We'll probably see Pettersson here because he will win a spot in the pre-season, and I have a feeling Juolevi will be gifted a spot no matter what. That could be it. Demko is a question mark because I can't get a read on that situation. Could easily see him as the backup, but could also easily see him back down in Utica because the Canucks won't be able to dump Nilsson and I'm not sure their feelings on waiving him and burying that contract in the minors.

I see the team next year looking a lot like this

Baertschi-Horvat-Boeser
Sedin-Sedin-Eriksson
Leipsic-Sutter-Pettersson
Archibald-Gagner-("asset" we get back for Virtanen)

Edler-Tanev
MDZ-Gudbranson
Juolevi-Stecher
Biega

Sedins will be back at $5M per.

And wow...putting this on paper you really get an idea of how much crap there is on this team.
The first team to finish 31st two years running......
 
  • Like
Reactions: y2kcanucks

go comets

Registered User
Jul 10, 2013
3,532
1,471
If they want 5 million a piece then let them walk......5 million together is more like it.....
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->