Horse McHindu
They call me Horse.....
I think we can get the lockout protected clause, but I doubt that the cap hit would be low if Edler accepted a 3 year.
I still think they’ll reach an agreement on 3 years with a 6.25-6.5 AAV.
Benning on Halford & Brough (02/01/19)
- Thread starter petrishriekandgo
- Start date
I think we can get the lockout protected clause, but I doubt that the cap hit would be low if Edler accepted a 3 year.
I still think they’ll reach an agreement on 3 years with a 6.25-6.5 AAV.
stampedingviking
Registered User
I would expect ANY GM to respect the wishes of a long-time servant of the team and not force him to do anything he doesn't want to do.
Maybe I'm old fashioned about respecting people's wishes, there certainly doesn't appear to be much shown on here for Edler and what he wants.
stampedingviking
Registered User
stampedingviking
Registered User
stampedingviking
Registered User
stampedingviking
Registered User
The good old whataboutism.
Just can't take any criticism of your beloved Gillis, can you?
Askel
By the way Benning should be fired.
Benning has been here long enough that we should stop discussing Gillis. Gillis was great up until 2011, after that he got fond of his team and didn't make enough changes or bold moves IMO. Everyone could se that 2012 and 2013 team wasn't the same as the 2011 team, he should have made more moves to change those teams IMO.
Then again Benning is to blame for the situation that this defense is in, he has in 5 years managed to bring in one d-man that is the top 4 (Stetcher) and he should probably be on the bottom pair. That is just not good enough. Because of this the Canucks need Edler since if he goes this defense will collapse.
Then again Benning is to blame for the situation that this defense is in, he has in 5 years managed to bring in one d-man that is the top 4 (Stetcher) and he should probably be on the bottom pair. That is just not good enough. Because of this the Canucks need Edler since if he goes this defense will collapse.
PuckMunchkin
Very Nice, Very Evil!
We've already lost 5 years of quality hockey because we "respected" the Sedin's by icing one of the worst team in the history of the league.
Im starting to see the differences in philosophy between the people who support Jim and those who want him fired.
- adversity / affinity towards statistical analysis
- facts vs feelings
- loyalty vs running a business
Etc.
A Benningster talking about whataboutism in relation to Gillis. Is this textbook irony or what.
topched88
Registered User
- Jan 21, 2007
- 1,381
- 362
I don’t see how this is even an consideration. His ELC years are wasted don’t you think? I don’t see ya being a contender in this season or the next 2
PuckMunchkin
Very Nice, Very Evil!
Those years were wasted the moment we signed Eriksson, Gudbranson, and our 4th line to those horrid contracts.
TruGr1t
Proper Villain
- Jun 26, 2003
- 23,122
- 6,779
Edler's situation will have no bearing on Pettersson's entry-level deal. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but the cheap EP years are already wasted. They're gone. This team will not be competitive during EP's current contract.
ProstheticConscience
Check dein Limit
I tend to have a more favourable view of the guy who did the better job, yeah. And I didn't bring Gillis up.
Honestly, I am just not that concerned about this. If the team was in a position to compete next year, I might have a different take, but they are so far off at this point, I don't think it matters.
This all said, the ineptitude of Jim Benning does give one pause here. He is very likely to go out and sign a guy like Matt Bartkowski or Erik Gudbranson or Derek Pouliot to replace him and I can see the argument that this could very severely negatively impact the younger players like Hughes or Woo, or whoever makes the jump.
It's all just very aggravating....that given how poor our GM is, we have to continue to hold on to players just so he does not go out and make a huge colossal mistake trying to replace them.
Hello indeed...this was not a Benning vs Gillis argument if you had paid attention.
This was a direct response to the poster who suggested that Edler’s contract would have been handled better by Gillis when it was Gillis who signed a NTC in the first place. The irrational Benning hate is obvious.
I agree, Edler has been our best D-man along with Tanev...nothing to do with quality of player, this speaks specifically to the contract itself.
OK, and which current contracts under Benning are hurting the Canucks aside from Loui Eriksson? Sutter and Edler have NTCs and Roussel and Beagle have modified-NTCs....we are in decent shape.
The quality of players under Benning...another story. The FA defence signings have been shots in the dark and 100% misses...the 3rd and 4th line guys are 50/50.
ProstheticConscience
Check dein Limit
NTCs actually aren't the be-all end-all of contract clauses. If you really think giving the team's best dman long-term contract security isn't a good thing, I can only imagine what you must think of the NTCs given to Eriksson and Sutter.
Agreed, there are usually only a handful of NTC’s on a team and usually go to the best players...Eriksson and Sutter were overvalued by Benning.
I just find it amusing the hate on for Benning hype, I am not for or against the guy personally...I actually think he has done much better with Linden gone (great player...terrible NHL exec).
My only hope over the next month heading into the TDL is that the Canucks aren't in the 'playoff twilight zone'. They're either above the playoff bar and looking to add a piece at a reasonable cost; or they've totally fallen out of it and are in 'seller' mode.
Obviously the best outcome at this point would be 'sellers'. They're still lacking on the bluelilne and by Jimbo's own admission they desperately need another top-six forward. Maybe by moving one of Tanev, Gudbranson or Sutter, they might get a good prospect forward or d-man back.
But more likely they'll need another lottery pick in the draft to make it happen.
Obviously the best outcome at this point would be 'sellers'. They're still lacking on the bluelilne and by Jimbo's own admission they desperately need another top-six forward. Maybe by moving one of Tanev, Gudbranson or Sutter, they might get a good prospect forward or d-man back.
But more likely they'll need another lottery pick in the draft to make it happen.
RandV
It's a wolf v2.0
Our top 3 young forwards if averaged to a full season are on pace to score a combined 110 goals, and with 2 on their ELC only have a combined cap hit of $7.35M. With 5 years to make trades and sign free agents the forward accumulated in this manner and in the lineup are: Baerstchi, Goldobin, Leivo, Sutter, Granlund, Beagle, Roussel, Eriksson, Motte, and Schaller. Let's not even get started on the defense.
Just look at tonight as a snapshot, with a fully healthy lineup. Our top line has a cap hit of $2.71 million. Our 4th line has a cap hit of $9.925 million, with $9M of that committed through the 21-22 season. Then in the press box we have two forwards earning $3.375 million.
Anyone who thinks we're in any kind of positive shape is distracted by the shiny new toy and not seeing or understanding the big picture.
rypper
21-12-05 it's finally over.
- Dec 22, 2006
- 16,309
- 20,130
Well we've already wasted them, unless you believe we'll be competitive in the next 2 seasons.
The only way to have prevented it would have been if they were on top of the rebuild earlier.
- Feb 24, 2017
- 5,094
- 2,865
Are you for real? You think keeping a player like Edler will mean capitalizing on EP's ELC ? How do you classify capitalizing on his ELC? Battling for the final seed in the playoffs each year for the right to lose 4 straight games to a true contender in round 1?
ProstheticConscience
Check dein Limit
Hey, give him a break. He managed to make consecutive posts without moaning about who the "real fans" are around here for once. Baby steps are better than no steps.
