Our bottom 6 is one of/if not the highest paid in the league..not contesting that..Beagle probably is the highest paid 4th liner,and there's no problem with that (if you can afford it)...We have a solid NHL player in Beagle...Check out our record with/without him in the lineup.
Benning and Green identified the bottom 6 as a weak link..and the Beagle and Roussel signings have been good...$3M a year is not a backbreaker.
Our top players are on ELC's,Horvat is signed (to a great contract)....Would you have preferred Benning to blow his brains out on signing top 6 UFA's like JVR or Tyler Bozak on $ and term?....Those are the type of deals that would have hamstrung the Canucks for years..As it turns out, not signing any top 6 forwards by Benning was the smart move (we have the 8th most goals for in the Western Conference),it was not necessary..
We are not the Capitals..they have the forward depth to absorb the loss of Beagle..They could probably put a plug like Gaunce or Archibald on their 4th line and still be fine...At the end of the day, they couldn't afford the luxury of keeping Beagle.
This conversation came up because that poster was saying Beagle was making market value. He is not. And I have a problem with that. I'd rather spend that $2m overpay upgrading top 6 forwards or finally acquiring an additional top 4 defensman.
I don't think its reasonable to attribute the Canucks record in games Jay Beagle has played to Jay Beagle. If you give that thought credence, then look at Washington last year vs this year, they score more, allow less and have more points.
$3m alone isn't a back breaker, does anything actually break backs...Eriksson is dreadful but he doesn't break backs either, what these constant overpays does is keep you out of the market for better players, ones that actually push the needle and drives teams from mediocrity to good.
I would've preferred Benning to target better players, yes. More skilled players who can play all over the lineup. I don't really believe in top 6/bottom 6. Good teams have good players throughout. I also wouldn't have gone over 2 years for any UFA....if you lose out on Beagle oh well....the guy doesn't move the needle. A player I mentioned on other forums was Val Filppula, can play all the forward positions and can play with talent and produce. He only required a one year deal.
I think you're making a really stupid statement calling Benning targeting bottom 6 players a smart move. Do you not understand how silly it sounds that you're promoting signing bottom 6ers who are meant to I guess in your world be "defensive players" yet they've given up the 14th most goals in the conference (of 15 teams) and the 6th most goals in the entire league. Basically the gist of your argument is that signing bad offensive players and still being able to score while being the worst defensive team in the conference is a plus....that is ridiculous.
Brad Richardson is the same age, a better more productive player and only required 2 years at a 1/3 the cost of Beagle. They didn't HAVE TO HAVE Beagle.