Waived: Booth Compliance Buyout (per Bob Mckenzie)

putridgasbag

Grand Poohba
Oct 18, 2006
1,234
0
Comox Valley
I understand that there was no need for Booth. I don't understand the need to buy him out when we could've used that remaining buyout as a bargaining chip. There is simply no way this team, once they trade Kesler, signs enough free agents to make Booth's cap hit matter. Especially if they move one of the defensemen.

As for roster space, that could've been solved by waiving Booth. Either he gets picked up or you free up $900k while he's playing in Utica.

(Situation would be different if this were a player with 2+ years on his contract.)

My guess is Benning and Linden really do not want him on the team, period. I doubt it really has much to do with the salary cap and more to do with what personnel that the new management want around the club or sucking up ice time in Utica. It does open up a spot that can be filled either through FA (hello Shawn Thornton) or one of the kids.

I would imagine that before a player hits waivers the GM will have offered him around the league for a bag of pucks and had zero interest. It will be interesting to see which team signs him and how much.
 

Barney Gumble

Registered User
Jan 2, 2007
22,711
1
This god damn honesty is starting 2 creep me out.

free up some $$ going into FA...

What scares me is that this could tell me Benning has gotten crap offers for either Edler or Garrison (one of them will be needed to be moved in order to make room for that offensive right side defenseman if Booth isn't bought out).

Could end up with the SAME blueline as last season pretty much. That creeps me out...
 

Reign Nateo

Registered User
Apr 28, 2003
13,561
59
Canada
Visit site
Let's see him break 20 points and go from there.

Ya I keep reading that Booth could 'bounce back' and score 20 goals, as if he did it last year or something. He hasn't scored 20 goals in 4/5 seasons and looked useless most of the year last year. He'll have a tough time cracking an NHL lineup next year in my opinion, never mind flirting with 20 goals.
 

Barney Gumble

Registered User
Jan 2, 2007
22,711
1
Ya I keep reading that Booth could 'bounce back' and score 20 goals, as if he did it last year or something. He hasn't scored 20 goals in 4/5 seasons and looked useless most of the year last year. He'll have a tough time cracking an NHL lineup next year in my opinion, never mind flirting with 20 goals.

The later is likely true (not scoring 20 goals ever again); but I doubt the former. One, having being bought out - he'll probably be looking for far less money than he would otherwise expect (as he'll have "cash in hands already"). Just like Mason Raymond did last year in the off-season (and he had a better numbers than Booth so expect Booth to get even lower offers). At under a million, some team will take chance on him (bottom feeder team) or a team looking to fill-out their roster with *somebody*.

Yeah he could then still be shoved into the minors at a later point even with a contract; but when you make Sestito type money - the expectations (from management POV) is alot less.
 

Proto

Registered User
Jan 30, 2010
11,523
1
Look at the Sharks for example. They wiped their ass with the Canucks for the last couple years and their GM says they're re-building because they're not close to competing with the best in the West. They finished with a +76 goal differential over the lowly Canucks, yet still believe a re-build is the best course of action to reach the ultimate goal, the Stanley cup.

And this is one of the big reasons why we could see a 30 year gap between Canadian teams winning the Stanley cup. Winning the cup is a secondary goal in Canadian markets.

I was with you until you used the Sharks as a positive example. They're now the poster childs for hilarious, embarrassing, idiotic overreaction from management. I feel bad that their fans have to put up with Doug Wilson's hilariously inept trip down $*&#-up lane. Really, really dumb.

Edit: also, I agree with everything opendoor said earlier, but I don't have the energy to go back and quote it.
 
Last edited:

Iridescent*

Guest
I was with you until you used the Sharks as a positive example. They're now the poster childs for hilarious, embarrassing, idiotic overreaction from management. I feel bad that their fans have to put up with Doug Wilson's hilariously inept trip down $*&#-up lane. Really, really dumb.

Edit: also, I agree with everything opendoor said earlier, but I don't have the energy to go back and quote it.

I don't think Wilson is talking about a complete Edmonton style rebuild. Just burning some of the chaff, and dealing their over 30 vets that have had their chance to win a cup and failed. Thonton and Marleau primarily.

Philly did the same thing with Carter and Richards, and I think they're better off for it. Dealing away Thornton and Marleau, and building around Couture, Hertl, and Vlasic is the smartest move he could make.
 

ChilliBilly

Registered User
Aug 22, 2007
7,134
4,393
chilliwacki
The main issue is that he didn't bring near his cost in value .... would have been great if he had come close to earning his $4.25M cap hit (and he was going to make $4.75 this next season).
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Proto

Registered User
Jan 30, 2010
11,523
1
I don't think Wilson is talking about a complete Edmonton style rebuild. Just burning some of the chaff, and dealing their over 30 vets that have had their chance to win a cup and failed. Thonton and Marleau primarily.

Philly did the same thing with Carter and Richards, and I think they're better off for it. Dealing away Thornton and Marleau, and building around Couture, Hertl, and Vlasic is the smartest move he could make.

Disagree completely. They were probably the 2nd best or best team in the west last year, and almost took out the Kings with their best defenseman injured. They're potentially trading away their two best forwards in order to be less competitive while the window is still wide open. It's crazy.
 

Iridescent*

Guest
Disagree completely. They were probably the 2nd best or best team in the west last year, and almost took out the Kings with their best defenseman injured. They're potentially trading away their two best forwards in order to be less competitive while the window is still wide open. It's crazy.

It isn't just this year, they've had countless opportunities and failed at every turn. He is basically saying that he doesn't have faith in Thornton and Marleau to lead the team to the promised land.

They had their chance, and dealing them now will return very solid assets to help the team going forward. The alternative is to keep pressing on, keep picking over 20th, keep failing, and then end up with two late 30's players who aren't worth their contract who won't net any real return. And since they've been picking so high all these years, their only future is what they already have.

That is what you do in the new NHL. You trade your players before they lose all value. You're a little worse off in the short term for it (a 2-3 year period), but long term it's a wise decision.

What he's doing is the smartest move he could make. But who knows what he's really thinking. Maybe he's just trying to light a fire under their *****.
 

Just A Bit Outside

Playoffs??!
Mar 6, 2010
16,617
15,620
Think the Sharks trade Jumbo "Fail" Joe and acquire another centre.

Be interesting if they go after Spezza.

That or hard after Stastny in FA.

As far as places Jumbo may get traded to, my darkhorse is the Islanders. With the #5 in hand plus pressure on Snow, I can see a deal at the Draft.

Either way this offseason is really starting to heat-up.

Edit: David Booth thread so maybe Booth can join the Isles as well:sarcasm:
 

Reign Nateo

Registered User
Apr 28, 2003
13,561
59
Canada
Visit site
The later is likely true (not scoring 20 goals ever again); but I doubt the former. One, having being bought out - he'll probably be looking for far less money than he would otherwise expect (as he'll have "cash in hands already"). Just like Mason Raymond did last year in the off-season (and he had a better numbers than Booth so expect Booth to get even lower offers). At under a million, some team will take chance on him (bottom feeder team) or a team looking to fill-out their roster with *somebody*.

Yeah he could then still be shoved into the minors at a later point even with a contract; but when you make Sestito type money - the expectations (from management POV) is alot less.

Oh I agree, hell likely catch on somewhere on a cheap contract, I just think there's a better chance he doesn't last through training camp with that team than there his scoring 20 goals in the NHL again.

Problem is he's not really a bottom line player and doesn't look like he belongs in anyone's top 6. He's not good defensively and not really physical. I could see a team taking a chance on him, but I don't see where he fits in an NHL lineup anymore. The speed and strength that made him useful at one time isn't there anymore. I don't think it's a secret around the league either. There's a chance he gets healthy and finds the perfect situation however, just doesn't seem all that likely from what I saw of him the last few years.
 

hockeywoot

Registered User
Oct 29, 2010
1,153
0
China
I see this happening.

He's not a useless player. He can be effective. He's good at zone entries and possessing the puck in the offensive zone. He can make some big hits and he'll drive to the net. Those are some good qualities to have in a bottom-six player. He sucks at shooting or passing, but he's not useless. He looked good with Kassian.

Some team will sign him for a million and Booth will give them a 15/15 season.


Agreed. He's not as useless as people here seem to indicate. (just not worth his salary)

His IQ is relatively low, but he gets by on his athleticism. Strong, fast, and actually cuts to the net.

Not the same after his concussion. Saddled with poor injury luck in his time here.


With a full off-season to train, I think he'll find a home elsewhere. (eg NYI, Carolina)
 

Taelin

Resident Hipster
Jan 17, 2012
9,173
1
Vancouver
Comment on Booth the player, not the person. Any further attempts to derail the thread will be met with consequences.
 

Hammer79

Registered User
Jan 9, 2009
7,379
1,234
Kelowna
He'll probably get a Santorelli type offer, 550K two-way somewhere and try to plod away on someone's 4th line. It might just be the kick in the pants he needs.
 

Finkle is Einhorn

Registered User
Oct 13, 2003
11,748
0
Visit site
One thing I'll miss about Booth - he cut to the net with remarkable effectiveness, unlike his teammates. What he did once he was actually there is another matter, but hey, A for effort.
 

damack

Registered User
Jan 3, 2014
402
12
One thing I'll miss about Booth - he cut to the net with remarkable effectiveness, unlike his teammates. What he did once he was actually there is another matter, but hey, A for effort.

and he finished his checks clean and hard, again unlike most of his teammates
 

tradervik

Hear no evil, see no evil, complain about it
Sponsor
Jun 25, 2007
2,370
2,491
Booth seems to have been a "positive possession player". I'm sure some advanced stats loving GM will give him a chance similar to the one Mason Raymond got with the Leafs.
 

Bad Goalie

Registered User
Jan 2, 2014
20,094
8,817
yeah i dont think people appreciate just how bad buffalo really is
Yup they are really bad and will make sure they stay there next season. Then they get McDavid and God knows who else's #1s and bring in the stockpile they are already grooming and BOOM! The Sabres will shock the unaware who have been laughing while they put together a very strong roster poised to contend for years.

That's their plan anyways and their talent crop does look really good. Only time will tell, but they bought into this plan hook, line, and stinker. They believe!
 

bo2shink*

Guest
You'd bet money that a guy who's had 5 consecutive ineffective seasons will suddenly again become an effective player?

I am sure they "would" bet. The thing is, they aren't.
 

Aphid Attraction

Registered User
Jan 17, 2013
5,066
1,702
I understand that there was no need for Booth. I don't understand the need to buy him out when we could've used that remaining buyout as a bargaining chip. There is simply no way this team, once they trade Kesler, signs enough free agents to make Booth's cap hit matter. Especially if they move one of the defensemen.

As for roster space, that could've been solved by waiving Booth. Either he gets picked up or you free up $900k while he's playing in Utica.

(Situation would be different if this were a player with 2+ years on his contract.)

I see it the same as you... but this buyout also has other benefits...

Such as deferring the actual salary needed for the owners to pay...
It is a very popular move to make...
It makes it look like the team is willing to make moves...(even though it could be the opposite)
It gives the team a slightly different look... (Lindens team)
It ends the social media attacks that make the canucks look bad

I just wish now in hindsight, If players need to earn what they make, then Lou should have been brought out and we moved forward with all that cap space, and Schneider
 

BobbyJazzLegs

Sorry 4 Acting Werd
Oct 15, 2013
3,393
4
I see it the same as you... but this buyout also has other benefits...

Such as deferring the actual salary needed for the owners to pay...
It is a very popular move to make...
It makes it look like the team is willing to make moves...(even though it could be the opposite)
It gives the team a slightly different look... (Lindens team)
It ends the social media attacks that make the canucks look bad

I just wish now in hindsight, If players need to earn what they make, then Lou should have been brought out and we moved forward with all that cap space, and Schneider

Yeah that's finally starting to sting for me.
 

VanillaCoke

Registered User
Oct 30, 2013
25,412
11,861
I understand that there was no need for Booth. I don't understand the need to buy him out when we could've used that remaining buyout as a bargaining chip. There is simply no way this team, once they trade Kesler, signs enough free agents to make Booth's cap hit matter. Especially if they move one of the defensemen.

As for roster space, that could've been solved by waiving Booth. Either he gets picked up or you free up $900k while he's playing in Utica.

(Situation would be different if this were a player with 2+ years on his contract.)
So much this, I'm getting worried the Canucks are going to **** this up.
 

Bleach Clean

Registered User
Aug 9, 2006
27,056
6,631
I was with you until you used the Sharks as a positive example. They're now the poster childs for hilarious, embarrassing, idiotic overreaction from management. I feel bad that their fans have to put up with Doug Wilson's hilariously inept trip down $*&#-up lane. Really, really dumb.


Yeah. I came away from reading that blurb by Wilson and thinking he had lost it. He's overemphasizing the history of the team. Not putting enough stock into what they actually were this past year (a very good team).

I'm really curious what he does with Thornton and Marleau. He could take his team out of contention and never get them back there. (Assuming his tenure is not indefinite)
 

bo2shink*

Guest
I understand that there was no need for Booth. I don't understand the need to buy him out when we could've used that remaining buyout as a bargaining chip. There is simply no way this team, once they trade Kesler, signs enough free agents to make Booth's cap hit matter. Especially if they move one of the defensemen.

A couple of things.

First, you can't possibly understand because you aren't privy to what their planned moves are.

Second, forget about signing UFAs, think "trading" for players how may be effective but overpaid. Or something else, because I, like you, do am not in the Canucks mgmt circle.
 

Tiranis

Registered User
Jun 10, 2009
23,097
28
Toronto, ON
A couple of things.

First, you can't possibly understand because you aren't privy to what their planned moves are.

Second, forget about signing UFAs, think "trading" for players how may be effective but overpaid. Or something else, because I, like you, do am not in the Canucks mgmt circle.

They had weeks to make the decision, if that's the case. This is a PR and money move — nothing more.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad