Value of: Canucks contract(s) to NJ Devils

[Johnsie19]

Schmidt cost a 3rd, Murray cost a 5th, AJ cost Joey Anderson (so basically nothing) all of those players have WAY more value than Sutter. Teams know Vancouver has to move cap, no one is going to take Sutters cap “because he’s a good leader”. Vancouver is going to have to pony up assets to move cap

Not so sure. At some point the smart GMs will have to ask "is this improving my team" and Sutter at 2 mil probably would improve half the teams in the league. It's all well and good to wait and try to squeeze the cap teams but eventually you'll miss out if you get greedy. Schmidt being a perfect case in point.

 

[Johnsie19]

Schmidt cost a 3rd, Murray cost a 5th, AJ cost Joey Anderson (so basically nothing) all of those players have WAY more value than Sutter. Teams know Vancouver has to move cap, no one is going to take Sutters cap “because he’s a good leader”. Vancouver is going to have to pony up assets to move cap

Too much Fenwick not enough actual viewing.

 

[devils29]

Not so sure. At some point the smart GMs will have to ask "is this improving my team" and Sutter at 2 mil probably would improve half the teams in the league. It's all well and good to wait and try to squeeze the cap teams but eventually you'll miss out if you get greedy. Schmidt being a perfect case in point.

You keep comparing Schmidt to Sutter and if you don’t see how that is just nonsense then there’s no point in continuing this further

 

[Eggtimer]

Not so sure. At some point the smart GMs will have to ask "is this improving my team" and Sutter at 2 mil probably would improve half the teams in the league. It's all well and good to wait and try to squeeze the cap teams but eventually you'll miss out if you get greedy. Schmidt being a perfect case in point.

I agree with you mostly but I think GMs would ask” is this improving my team enough to warrant spending 2 mil against our cap in a flat cap world and uncertain future?”
No doubt Sutter is an upgrade on a lot of teams rosters but it isn’t as simple as asking if his salary is a good deal or not. Have to look at it in a larger picture

I do not see Sutter having positive value based off of what transactions have happened since the draft.

 

[Bizzare]

I agree with you mostly but I think GMs would ask” is this improving my team enough to warrant spending 2 mil against our cap in a flat cap world and uncertain future?”
No doubt Sutter is an upgrade on a lot of teams rosters but it isn’t as simple as asking if his salary is a good deal or not. Have to look at it in a larger picture

I do not see Sutter having positive value based off of what transactions have happened since the draft.

He only has one year left though, so the closer we get to the season if teams still have cap left he may become an option for teams.

 

[Mal Reynolds]

Not so sure. At some point the smart GMs will have to ask "is this improving my team" and Sutter at 2 mil probably would improve half the teams in the league. It's all well and good to wait and try to squeeze the cap teams but eventually you'll miss out if you get greedy. Schmidt being a perfect case in point.

Problem is, even at $2mil, most teams will realize they can pick up some bottom six help off the FA bargain bin for a fraction of the price

I don't necessarily think a retained Sutter costs assets to move, but I do think he returns minimal assets.... and if Benning keeps sitting on his hands, he'll run out of options imo. The ship will have sailed. Bottom six players just aren't in high demand, except maybe at the trade deadline

 

[Guttersniped]

Would Virtanen for Wood work, or Pearson

Wood makes 2.75m though, so would trading him for Virtanen help Van that much? Also you may be overestimating how good Wood is. (But no to Pearson.)

 

[markog]

Why don't Vancouver just buy out Sutter and save 2m, that should be enough to fill up the roster I think?

 

[Canuck86]

Why don't Vancouver just buy out Sutter and save 2m, that should be enough to fill up the roster I think?

Might happen, too me it makes no sense buying someone out with 1 yr remaining. It would just extend his cap hit on the team another year for 1m. Trading anyone we have left with a 1yr deal we either retain salary and the add on isn't as big or we trade Sutter at full value and add a pick or prospect. Staal went for a 2nd and he has a cap hit near 6m, Sutter is 4.3m so would a team take him for a 3rd round pick or a similar prospect...not sure, maybe NJ isn't the best fit and we should try Detroit before NYI dump Boychuk on them

 

[Johnsie19]

Problem is, even at $2mil, most teams will realize they can pick up some bottom six help off the FA bargain bin for a fraction of the price

I don't necessarily think a retained Sutter costs assets to move, but I do think he returns minimal assets.... and if Benning keeps sitting on his hands, he'll run out of options imo. The ship will have sailed. Bottom six players just aren't in high demand, except maybe at the trade deadline

Ya its all a game of chicken. Canucks certainly wouldn't be looking for any return just looking to not give up prospects to shed a useful player.

 

[Johnsie19]

I agree with you mostly but I think GMs would ask” is this improving my team enough to warrant spending 2 mil against our cap in a flat cap world and uncertain future?”
No doubt Sutter is an upgrade on a lot of teams rosters but it isn’t as simple as asking if his salary is a good deal or not. Have to look at it in a larger picture

I do not see Sutter having positive value based off of what transactions have happened since the draft.

I don't see it as positive trade value either. More just "future considerations". There are two types of teams that might want him a young team without many vets or a competing team with a little cap space to add a cool head in their bottom 6 for the yr.

 

[Johnsie19]

You keep comparing Schmidt to Sutter and if you don’t see how that is just nonsense then there’s no point in continuing this further

Vegas was over the cap and needed to deal a contract. The rest of the league said "no we won't take any of your contracts unless you retain", Jim Benning paid below market and gets a useful player. Point is simple that Sutter is a useful player at 2 mil. I get that the market is volatile but at some point trying to squeeze prospects out of a team will mean you miss out on a useful player (not necessarily Sutter) and that is what GMs are trying to navigate. Clearly Sutter isn't as good as Schmidt did I really have to say that?

 

[innitfam]

Jordie Benn for a low pick/future considerations?

We could use the 2M to sign Gaudette, plus we can probably sign Fantenberg for half of Benn's money or less.

 

[Mal Reynolds]

Ya its all a game of chicken. Canucks certainly wouldn't be looking for any return just looking to not give up prospects to shed a useful player.

Agreed, that would be the ideal scenario. A buyout would be absolute worst case scenario but ideally they avoid dead cap for 21-22

 

[Ciao]

Anyone thinking the Devils are remotely interested in accepting cap dumps is in for a rude awakening.

Good players are already available on the cheap without an anchor attached.

 

[SpeakingOfTheDevils]

Anyone thinking the Devils are remotely interested in accepting cap dumps is in for a rude awakening.

Good players are already available on the cheap without an anchor attached.

The unfortunate truth.

Well, unfortunate for teams like Vancouver.