Proposal: Canucks Buy out option vs retention Option (Discussion/Proposal requests)

[elitepete]

This will sound crazy from me but I’d trade the Avs 2023 1st for Boeser at $4.25mm AAV. That’s enough retention to part with an asset like that. Get him on the PP in the bumper spot with that shot and he’d finally score 30+ goals. Good value for 2 years at that AAV.

Wouldn’t retain that much. I would do it for Boeser @ 4.85

 

[theguardianII]

I have been saying RETENTION for months.

Retention is using cap space already used so no more needed.

Retention is an amount agreed upon for only the term of the contract.

A buy out saves some cap space but carries a cap hit for longer than the term of the contract, double the time in most cases.

A buyout there is no return, nothing coming back.

Retention has the value of the cap space added to the trade and there is a return of an asset regardless of value or of increased value.

A buyout scream incompetence if done before retention, desperation.
A buyout would make sense if the team is a contender needing to re-sign important players.
A buyout with the Canucks, a team that hasn't cracked 20th in the league for 8 years is ludicrous.

With retention they cold save over million in cap space to be used for trade or signing FA's to improve the team.

So often the media attach "buyout" and retention together as being bad.

Buying out OEL for instance is really nuts, three years of over 4 million in cap hits and another 5 around 1.5 mil.
Then the team needs to find a replacement to fill the roster spot? If any AHL dman could do what he does why aren't there more playing in the NHL?

Anyway retention is preferred and might just help the team for the future with picks and prospects as well as signing FAs.

I re-read the thread and will add this;

OEL agreed before to waive for Boston, there he would be a 3/4 dman with a GOOD partner. At 3.6 mil for a former Norris trophy candidate would be a good fit because they are really in cap trouble due to bonus overages. OEL isn't as bad as his contract. At 3.6 mil, a PK and PP dman he still has value especially at 18 minutes a night.

Savings 3.6 million for 4 years and maybe a couple of 2, 3 or 4 picks

Boeser to Minny at 3.3 million for two years. Minnesota needs cheap scoring until the Parise and Suter buyouts expire. All they have is some picks but they are hit hard by buyouts

Savings 3.3 million per year and maybe a 2023 2nd and 2024 2nd.

Garland to Columbus at 2.75 million to Washington, Pittsburgh, Islanders for 2nd and 3rd picks over the next two years depending upon which team.

Savings 2.2 mil a year for 3 years

JT Miller to Columbus with a 1 million retention for 8 years. For any number of prospects and players under 24 yrs old, they have quite a few. Maybe Jireck and Johnson.
Washington for two unprotected 1rst's 2023 and 2024 or 2025. Winnipeg for Barron, Stanley and 2nd.
NYR for Miller/Schnieder and Lafrenière.
Pittsburgh, no retention for Carter 50% retention, Hallander, 2023 & 2024 unprotected 1rst.
A multitude of teams that have assets, strike while the iron is hot.

Savings 7 million per year or ?

Might even get some teams mentioned for Miller for Garland, Boeser or OEL if he would waive. He might, he did to get away from Tocchet once already.

 

[zcaptain]

So, after reading all the posts, a question popped up for me............

If there was no Cap ceiling, what would Boeser be worth in trade?

That is what the 2.2 million per year retention is suppose to eliminate......

Again, as McJedi stated, it starts to bring in decent returns...aka Colorado's 1st

Never mind us, back seat GM's, but what does a NHL team do with a

value added player? With Boeser's age, right in his prime, it does make a heap of sense

to someone like Colorado..........and who else?

 

[Mike Jones]

Would Beauvillier's value be higher at the '24 trade deadline? All Vancouver needs to do is retain a million or so for a brief time prior to the end of the season and move on from there.

 

[McJedi]

Wouldn’t retain that much. I would do it for Boeser @ 4.85

And the Avs wouldn’t. You either win a trade to acquire Boeser or you let him stew in Vancouver on a lottery team. Not at all a player you’d stretch for. Middle six Wingers are the least valued asset in the NHL.

It’s the cap space the Avs want as much as any player. It’s that cap space they are trading for.

 

[elitepete]

And the Avs wouldn’t. You either win a trade to acquire Boeser or you let him stew in Vancouver on a lottery team. Not at all a player you’d stretch for. Middle six Wingers are the least valued asset in the NHL.

It’s the cap space the Avs want as much as any player. It’s that cap space they are trading for.

Maybe 4.5 ngl

 

[McJedi]

Maybe 4.5 ngl

If you’d come down to $4.5mm, you’d get to $4.25mm. Vancouver doesn’t need the cap space for a team that will be in the lottery again in 2024.

 

[Paulinbc]

Option 3: no buyouts this year.

 

[ChaoticOrange]

Here's what I'll suggest

Garland at 3.5 million for Yamamoto straight up.

Vancouver then buys Yamamoto out.

Yamamoto's buyout number is a miniscule 533,334 and is off the books in two years as opposed to a Garland buyout which would be on the books for six.

Edmonton gambles that Garland can fit with McD or Drai, Vancouver gets cap flexibility without having to have a six year buyout at almost 2 million.

 

[CloutierForVezina]

Here's what I'll suggest

Garland at 3.5 million for Yamamoto straight up.

Vancouver then buys Yamamoto out.

Yamamoto's buyout number is a miniscule 533,334 and is off the books in two years as opposed to a Garland buyout which would be on the books for six.

Edmonton gambles that Garland can fit with McD or Drai, Vancouver gets cap flexibility without having to have a six year buyout at almost 2 million.

there is no world where garland at 3.5m doesn't have significant positive value. we're not sending a middle 6 winger on a bargain contract to a divisional rival in exchange for a cap dump, that's insane

there is no gamble with garland. he puts up ~50p a year with limited to no PP time. he's 76th in evp over the last 2 years.

garland is the last person we should trade, the only reason we'd consider it is because he would actually net a positive return, not require us to retain a huge % and eat a cap dump

 

[Petes2424]

Beauvillier fit in nicely after the trade and is likely in their plans moving forward. Garland can change the tempo of a game and is usually productive. They’ll likely move Boeser and just get little in return. There’s teams with cap, a need for scoring, and it’s much easier to make a move around the draft than during the season.

Honestly, I don’t think they’ll have to retain. They may have to take a small piece back on a one year deal or something, but it will more than likely be easier to move him than it was during this past season.

 

[ChaoticOrange]

there is no world where garland at 3.5m doesn't have significant positive value. we're not sending a middle 6 winger on a bargain contract to a divisional rival in exchange for a cap dump, that's insane

there is no gamble with garland. he puts up ~50p a year with limited to no PP time. he's 76th in evp over the last 2 years.

OP was suggesting that the Canucks might buy him out. If they're considering a buyout, trading him instead and buying out Yamamoto, whose buyout is almost nothing, makes a lot more sense than a six year buyout.

Vancouver SHOULD be trading him instead, and IMO Garland is hardly the problem there, but, yeah. I was just playing by OP's rules.

 

[CloutierForVezina]

OP was suggesting that the Canucks might buy him out. If they're considering a buyout, trading him instead and buying out Yamamoto, whose buyout is almost nothing, makes a lot more sense than a six year buyout

we're not buying out garland, it's a dumb premise, your offer is beyond terrible

 

[ChaoticOrange]

we're not buying out garland, it's a dumb premise, your offer is beyond terrible

I don't want to, or care about, making the Canucks better. When he's talking about buying people out, I'm giving an option that makes more sense than that.

Depends on what you value more. Do you want out from under most of his contract, or do you want assets? You're not going to get both. The market for tiny sub 20 goal scorers isn't exactly booming.

 

[CloutierForVezina]

I don't want to, or care about, making the Canucks better. When he's talking about buying people out, I'm giving an option that makes more sense than that.

Depends on what you value more. Do you want out from under most of his contract, or do you want assets? You're not going to get both. The market for tiny sub 20 goal scorers isn't exactly booming.

your offer still has us under his contract and gives us negative assets. you literally offered nothing except for eating a 2M cap hit for 3 years which is beyond absurd.

there are 30 other teams in the league that would happily pay significant assets to get garland on a 3Y x 3.5M contract. that's insanely positive value that would easily get 1st++

 

[PettersonHughes]

Beauvillier has been linked to Montreal for a few years now according to the press. Now that could just be French journalists liking French players.

What about something like Anthony Beauvillier for Jake Evans?

Beauvillier is an upcoming UFA making 4.15 million. Evans is signed for two more years at 1.7 million.

Evans works IMO, good to see he's both good in face-offs and PKs. That being said, would either Kovacevic or Barron be available?

 

[Junohockeyfan]

Evans works IMO, good to see he's both good in face-offs and PKs. That being said, would either Kovacevic or Barron be available?

No to Barron. And i don't see the Habs having any interest in Beauvillier. The Habs will have to accommodate a roster spot or 2 to the young prospects / players.

 

[elitepete]

If you’d come down to $4.5mm, you’d get to $4.25mm. Vancouver doesn’t need the cap space for a team that will be in the lottery again in 2024.

If you want to do 4.25, you’d do 4.5.

Canucks are not going to be in the lottery in 2024.

 

[McJedi]

If you want to do 4.25, you’d do 4.5.

Canucks are not going to be in the lottery in 2024.

No. I wouldn’t. Boeser isn’t valuable. Cap space is. Boeser is still in Vancouver because he’s so difficult to dump. Vancouver has been trying to do just that for a long while now. And still no dice.

Prepare yourself for sub mediocre season or two with Vancouver NHL team. No farm system. Too many overpaid players. You’re a key injury to a good player away from being a team that will draft in the top 6 or so.

Without much cap space to work with. Minimal assets to trade, you’ll be running back Last years team. Picking around 11th OA sounds about right again for Vancouver at the 2024 draft.