2019 Roster and Fantasy GM Thread IV

Status
Not open for further replies.

vancityluongo

curse of the strombino
Sponsor
Jul 8, 2006
18,561
6,216
Edmonton
And that's a HUGE problem. If the Canucks are moving Markstrom it's because they're handing the reigns to Demko and don't want to offer Markstrom a big contract. I bet they could get a 2nd+ from a team such as Carolina and avoid having to take on a boat anchor contract.

I'm not so sure. Not sure Demko is such a sure thing that we shouldn't take back another goalie when moving Markstrom as a contingency. Also don't think Carolina is an option with Mrazek playing the way he has been for the last half of the season - he ended with a better sv% than Markstrom.

Jones is from Vancouver so that probably alleviates the NTC situation, and there's enough there to suggest he can be a reasonable starter - he just can't be relied on to lead an elite team deep. That's not really a problem for us anytime soon.
 

Peter Griffin

Registered User
Feb 13, 2003
34,783
7,030
Visit site
I'm not so sure. Not sure Demko is such a sure thing that we shouldn't take back another goalie when moving Markstrom as a contingency. Also don't think Carolina is an option with Mrazek playing the way he has been for the last half of the season - he ended with a better sv% than Markstrom.

Jones is from Vancouver so that probably alleviates the NTC situation, and there's enough there to suggest he can be a reasonable starter - he just can't be relied on to lead an elite team deep. That's not really a problem for us anytime soon.

If Jones had a couple years left on his deal, then sure. But he doesn't, he has 5 more years at nearly $6M. If that's not committing to him as your #1 goaltender, I don't know what is.

And if not Carolina, maybe Buffalo? Hutton was disappointing for them this season and a Markstrom/Ullmark tandem would likely fare a lot better.
 

VanillaCoke

Registered User
Oct 30, 2013
24,976
11,313
Should be able to easily get a mid to late 1st for markstrom.

Whether or not there is a team with one that also needs and wants him is another story.
 

TruGr1t

Proper Villain
Jun 26, 2003
22,906
6,497
Love the idea of moving Markstrom at the draft to a "competitive" team that has perceived "goaltending issues." It's likely a pipe dream, however, since Benning basically must make the playoffs next year to keep his job. That makes trading Markstrom akin to firing himself.

Of course, you could bring in another veteran to play alongside Demko, but that's way too many intricate moves for this management team. Look what happened when they briefly tried to juggle our back-up goalie position.
 

GetFocht

Indestructible
Jun 11, 2013
9,077
4,373
Markstrom won't be traded considering Aquilini singled him out as one of the players that succeeded in his letter.

Also, it seems like this year, goaltending is more important than ever.
 

vancityluongo

curse of the strombino
Sponsor
Jul 8, 2006
18,561
6,216
Edmonton
If Jones had a couple years left on his deal, then sure. But he doesn't, he has 5 more years at nearly $6M. If that's not committing to him as your #1 goaltender, I don't know what is.

And if not Carolina, maybe Buffalo? Hutton was disappointing for them this season and a Markstrom/Ullmark tandem would likely fare a lot better.

It's really only that 5th year in 2024 that I'd be worried about because you don't want a 35 year old Martin Jones putting the Canucks in the same position as the Sharks now, only with an even worse starter.

But I can't see us being at the Sharks level until 2022 at the earliest, at which point hopefully you have a bonafide starter (Demko on the tail end of his next deal, DiPietro post-ELC or another goalie that ends up as the starter), with Jones as a current-Luongo like backup. The cap will go up enough that his cap hit will be less detrimental than Ryan Miller was in his third season here. If that buys us a first round pick and more now, figure out a way to deal with that problem down the road.

The biggest deterrent IMO would be the risk of not having a coach in place that would actually let a 24 year old DiPietro or 28 year old fully take over the net, unlike Willie and Green. Of course, we're never moving Markstrom with the current group, so that's maybe a moot point.

Otherwise, yeah, Buffalo is definitely an option. Calgary too. Depending on what happens with Bobrovsky given Columbus' series win, Colorado and Florida could be too. Maybe Lu and a first for Markstrom... how ironic would that be...
 

Fire Benning

diaper filled piss baby
Oct 2, 2016
6,970
8,252
Hell
Benning isn't trading Markstrom, he needs to the ice the most competitive possible next season to keep his job.
 

timw33

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Nov 18, 2007
25,709
19,426
Victoria
Benning isn't trading Markstrom, he needs to the ice the most competitive possible next season to keep his job.

Yep. Incentives are a complete 180 of what we need to actually build a good team for the long team.

We should absolutely be looking at moving Markstrom if someone is willing to pay a premium price. Sign a short term veteran goalie to split starts with Demko/expose in expansion draft.
 
  • Like
Reactions: travis scott

CloutierForVezina

Registered User
May 13, 2009
5,352
1,246
Edmonton, Alberta
If this management team has any balls they tell Loui he's riding the bus in the AHL for a $1M this season. See if he decides to just pack up and head back to Sweden when faced with that reality.

Putting him in the AHL still costs us a 5M cap hit, and we have to bring up someone to replace him. Eriksson is bad, but I'd rather pay Eriksson 6M to be on the roster than just throw away 5M in cap space for literally nothing.

Eriksson will be getting 5M, 4M, 4M in the next 3 years. There's absolutely no chance he walks away from 13M guaranteed because he has to ride the bus in the AHL.

These pipe dreams where Eriksson just gives up and walks away are absurd.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tyhee

Peter Griffin

Registered User
Feb 13, 2003
34,783
7,030
Visit site
Putting him in the AHL still costs us a 5M cap hit, and we have to bring up someone to replace him. Eriksson is bad, but I'd rather pay Eriksson 6M to be on the roster than just throw away 5M in cap space for literally nothing.

I'd rather have pretty much anyone else on the roster at $1M cap hit then Loui floating around. He hasn't lived up to his contact since day 1, let him earn it in Utica.

Eriksson will be getting 5M, 4M, 4M in the next 3 years. There's absolutely no chance he walks away from 13M guaranteed because he has to ride the bus in the AHL.

These pipe dreams where Eriksson just gives up and walks away are absurd.

After his July 1st bonus payment that number goes down to $9m over the 3 years. Yes it probably wishful thinking that he just walks away, maybe more realistic is to find a cap floor team that will find his contract beneficial(higher cap hit to actual salary ratio).
 

bandwagonesque

I eat Kraft Dinner and I vote
Mar 5, 2014
7,108
5,416
I'd rather have pretty much anyone else on the roster at $1M cap hit then Loui floating around. He hasn't lived up to his contact since day 1, let him earn it in Utica.



After his July 1st bonus payment that number goes down to $9m over the 3 years. Yes it probably wishful thinking that he just walks away, maybe more realistic is to find a cap floor team that will find his contract beneficial(higher cap hit to actual salary ratio).
With the possible exception of Ottawa there aren't any teams in danger of failing to reach the cap floor. However, I don't think the Canucks would have to retain much to move him. Loui at 1.8m real salary is a fine bottom 6 player.
 

BerSTUzzi

Registered User
Jan 24, 2006
3,224
568
Kamloops
Oh, I was just using your post as a discussion starter not as you having issues with Tampa.

I don't think they're worried at all about the space they'll need in two seasons.

They've also got a loaded system and their NHL players are value chips, not some bad contract throwaway type players. It'll be tight and obviously it won't be easy, but I just can't see these pennies on the dollar type deals. The players they'd be selling would be sought after players.

It's going to be tricky and interesting to observe, I just don't expect it to be giving away talented players.


All fair points and maybe I came off as expecting a 100 dollar asset for 2 dollars, when I was trying to get at is I think you can get 100 dollar asset for 50 - 70 dollars.

I just want us to use our cap space in an effective way and one team will deal with a Tampa Bay.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 420Canuck

me2

Go ahead foot
Jun 28, 2002
37,903
5,595
Make my day.
If this management team has any balls they tell Loui he's riding the bus in the AHL for a $1M this season. See if he decides to just pack up and head back to Sweden when faced with that reality.

He might only get $1m during the season but he gets a $3m signing bonus on july 1 2020. So $4m for riding the bus for one year.
 

CloutierForVezina

Registered User
May 13, 2009
5,352
1,246
Edmonton, Alberta
I'd rather have pretty much anyone else on the roster at $1M cap hit then Loui floating around. He hasn't lived up to his contact since day 1, let him earn it in Utica.



After his July 1st bonus payment that number goes down to $9m over the 3 years. Yes it probably wishful thinking that he just walks away, maybe more realistic is to find a cap floor team that will find his contract beneficial(higher cap hit to actual salary ratio).

Eriksson is awful, but I find it hard to believe we'll replace him with a better player for $1M, which is what we'd have to do to make sending him down the right decision.

He's probably worth around 1.5M-2M.
 

dbaz

Registered User
Jan 29, 2010
1,142
480
I'd rather have pretty much anyone else on the roster at $1M cap hit then Loui floating around. He hasn't lived up to his contact since day 1, let him earn it in Utica.
.

most players that come in at 900k(the amount that will be freed cap wise with erikssons demotion)do not come close to what eriksson provides .

you need to compare eriksson and the replacement both at a 900k cap hit because the other 5.1mil of erikssons cap hit is stuck with the canucks
 

Hockeyphysio

Registered User
Jul 2, 2018
603
519
At the same time there is all this talk about " team culture". If you believe someone like Ericksson is not giving you his best effort then you have to consider getting rid of him
 

Soups On

Registered User
Apr 27, 2012
3,747
1,912
I wonder if Florida is willing to trade their 1st round draft pick. Looks like they need a top 4 RH defensemen. Tanev would be a good fit if this team desperately didnt have only one other quality right side defensemen in Stecher...

Would be nice if a trade around Tanev + for 13th overall + cap absorption occurred and the Canucks followed up by signing Stralman and Heed to 3 and 2 year deals respectively.
 
Last edited:

elitepete

Registered User
Jan 30, 2017
8,127
5,438
Vancouver
I'd rather have pretty much anyone else on the roster at $1M cap hit then Loui floating around. He hasn't lived up to his contact since day 1, let him earn it in Utica.



After his July 1st bonus payment that number goes down to $9m over the 3 years. Yes it probably wishful thinking that he just walks away, maybe more realistic is to find a cap floor team that will find his contract beneficial(higher cap hit to actual salary ratio).
Eriksson is badly overpaid but he’s still better than an AHL player. There isn’t anyone we could call up that would be better than him unless Lind and Gadjovich take massive steps forward next season.
 

DomY

Registered User
Aug 11, 2008
1,256
141
The only way the Canucks get to J. Hughes is via Chicago. And that would mean taking on Seabrook. They could also opt for the half-measure and just draft Byram at #3 as well.

To Van:
Seabrook (5yrs x 6.875M with NMC)
3 OA

To Chicago
Virtanen
10 OA
2nd 2020

Chicago moves from 12th to 10th in the draft, pockets a good 3rd liner, a high 2nd, and also gets out from Seabrook's contract and NMC.

To NJD
3 OA
1st 2020 (unprotected)
2nd 2019
Markstrom
Gaudette

To VAN
1 OA
Schneider

Canucks give up a first and a second and their #1 goalie and 3rd line center, and have to take on Schneider. Devils free up money to re-sign Hall. 2020's first rounder is probably going to be high.

Overall:

Out
Markstrom
Virtanen
Gautette
10 OA
1st 2020 unprotected
2nd 2019
2nd 2020

In:
Seabrook
Schneider
1 OA

Honestly it's more than I'm comfortable to give up and it feels kind of light still.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Poacher

DomY

Registered User
Aug 11, 2008
1,256
141
Thats too much to take on Seabrook

I agree with you actually. But if we can move up from 10 to 3 and all it costs is to take on Seabrook I'd be OK with that. Seabrook (today) is still a good player, it's just his contract situation that could be trouble down the road. In this situation I would draft Byram and stash him in WHL for another year.

Basically taking on Seabrook to upgrade on Soderstrom to Byram.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->