Canucks Off-season Thread - Canucks re-sign Teves, Rafferty, Boucher

[MS]

Honestly, it’s because I think a debate between Strangelove and MS would effing epic. They are two of the best debators that I know and they stand at opposite ends of the spectrum with regards to this management group.

I go way back with Strange and am also a fan of MS’ postings and so I’d be highly interested in seeing what this World Heavyweight debate match-up would look like, lol.

He came here last year. You can probably find a bunch of those threads by searching. I find debating sting101 and krutovsdonut a hell of lot more rewarding and more challenging.

The guy has a talent for writing and flair but doesn't know a thing about hockey.

 

[krutovsdonut]

2 year deals... if Rafferty and/or Teves aren't pushing for a roster spot in 2021 they aren't coming back and they aren't going to have any value no matter what their AHL salary is.

This is the definition of the overthinking and overreacting.

to be fair it is an interesting and slightly odd strategy, so i think worth discussing and i can see why some folks think it is a poor move. but yes, it is nothing worth getting excited about and most of the discussion is basically "i hate benning so something benning does must be stupid". if a different team's gm did it, different reaction to the same facts depending on whether that gm is supposedly a genius or not. but the sky is always going to be presumptively falling for some folks.

 

[krutovsdonut]

He came here last year. You can probably find a bunch of those threads by searching. I find debating sting101 and krutovsdonut a hell of lot more rewarding and more challenging.

The guy has a talent for writing and flair but doesn't know a thing about hockey.

thanks. whoever runs canucks corner rejected my attempted registration there. i even sent a follow up email. should have used a different username i guess.

 

[Lindgren]

My guess is that Strangelove was banned. He quickly moves to flaming and vulgarity when someone disagrees with his "argument."

 

[MS]

to be fair it is an interesting and slightly odd strategy, so i think worth discussing and i can see why some folks think it is a poor move. but yes, it is nothing worth getting excited about and most of the discussion is basically "i hate benning so something benning does must be stupid". if a different team's gm did it, different reaction to the same facts depending on whether that gm is supposedly a genius or not. but the sky is always going to be presumptively falling for some folks.

I'm not sure if you're lumping me in there but my jaw would be on the floor no matter what team did this.

The closest comparison I can give to what this is would be giving Tyler Motte a full NMC on a 2-year deal. Like, it doesn't waste any cap space, but it's just completely idiotic and completely (and stunningly) out-of-step with what players of this level should be getting. And I'm sure if Motte got a NMC there would be people here defending it for the same reasons.

Also, I should add that Capfriendly is confirming the initial report of the 1-way on the second year, so this is now 100% confirmed. There was some question yesterday based on the Canucks' press release.

 

[TruGr1t]

I find debating sting101 and krutovsdonut a hell of lot more rewarding and more challenging.

I would just echo that I also like chatting with those posters. I'll even find myself in relative accord with Pastor of Muppets usually.

But those are all posters actually interested in discussion that can see both sides. The other group that blatantly has an agenda ends up on ignore for me very quickly.

For example, I have no idea who you're responding to or what Canucks community is being referenced. Congrats on being an apparent 15 year legend there, though.

 

[krutovsdonut]

I'm not sure if you're lumping me in there but my jaw would be on the floor no matter what team did this.

The closest comparison I can give to what this is would be giving Tyler Motte a full NMC on a 2-year deal. Like, it doesn't waste any cap space, but it's just completely idiotic and completely (and stunningly) out-of-step with what players of this level should be getting. And I'm sure if Motte got a NMC there would be people here defending it for the same reasons.

Also, I should add that Capfriendly is confirming the initial report of the 1-way on the second year, so this is now 100% confirmed. There was some question yesterday based on the Canucks' press release.

i was not. you gave reasons.

tyler motte does not earn enough that the discount he could give would make an nmc worthwhile.

 

[Horse McHindu]

I never heard of the place before now but I see they have a forty page thread dedicated to obsessing over this forum.

Geez, that seems pretty unhealthy to me.

LOL.

Yeah not sure what’s going on there.

Still feel like MS vs. Strange would be the closest thing to a Batman vs. Superman online feud that we’d ever see. .

 

[Josepho]

i'm getting a kick out of that thread

 

[MS]

i was not. you gave reasons.

tyler motte does not earn enough that the discount he could give would make an nmc worthwhile.

Well, yeah. That's the point and why it would be so stupid and weird.

Brogan Rafferty and Josh Teves are not good enough nor do they have enough leverage that giving them a 1-way deal is worthwhile or makes sense. It's freaking bizarre.

Like, these were not 'in demand' big-ticket NCAA UFAs like a Daniel Brickley was last year or Zack Aston-Reese the year before. These are old longshot guys who were depth signings out of this year's pool and are overwhelmingly likely to be nothing more than AHL depth. But based on Benning's comments and these contracts you'd think these are surefire studs.

 

[BeardyCanuck03]

I'm not sure if you're lumping me in there but my jaw would be on the floor no matter what team did this.

The closest comparison I can give to what this is would be giving Tyler Motte a full NMC on a 2-year deal. Like, it doesn't waste any cap space, but it's just completely idiotic and completely (and stunningly) out-of-step with what players of this level should be getting. And I'm sure if Motte got a NMC there would be people here defending it for the same reasons.

Also, I should add that Capfriendly is confirming the initial report of the 1-way on the second year, so this is now 100% confirmed. There was some question yesterday based on the Canucks' press release.

Paying Teves/Rafferty 700K in the AHL is not nearly in the same boat as giving Motte a NTC. There is no benefit from giving Motte that clause.

If the Canucks are willing to pay for these players and become known for paying their AHL players well, wouldn't that help them attract better players going forward and build the Comets into a Marlies style team where they can support their prospects with good AHL players and constantly adding good players from the NCAA to keep feeding the system and potentially getting 1-2 NHL players out of that every few years.

 

[absolute garbage]

So this means the Canucks will be paying 1.4 million for two likely marginal Utica defensemen in 20-21? That doesn't seem like a good way to build a competitive AHL squad? I mean, we've all seen that the Aquilinis don't give Utica an unlimited payroll. You should be using the limited one-ways you can offer to lure in top-end AHL talent, not guys who will likely be below average AHL defensemen.

Then again, I don't expect much else from the front office that has shown zero competence in building a competitive hockey team at any level. The last few seasons in Utica have been absolute clown fiestas and it looks like it's about to continue.

 

[MS]

Paying Teves/Rafferty 700K in the AHL is not nearly in the same boat as giving Motte a NTC. There is no benefit from giving Motte that clause.

If the Canucks are willing to pay for these players and become known for paying their AHL players well, wouldn't that help them attract better players going forward and build the Comets into a Marlies style team where they can support their prospects with good AHL players and constantly adding good players from the NCAA to keep feeding the system and potentially getting 1-2 NHL players out of that every few years.

And there is also no benefit to giving fringe prospects 1-way deals.

"If the Canucks are willing to give NMCs to players like Motte and become known for treating their NHL players well, wouldn't that help them attract better players going forward?" You see the problem with your argument?

Outside of this one move, there is zero evidence that the team is willing to invest in Utica. Fans there have been screaming for quality signings for years and it hasn't happened, and no real impact players were acquired again this summer. There is nothing in terms of veterans on defense. Based on that, the more likely implication is that Benning actually thinks these guys will merit those contracts and be in the NHL, which is just terrifying.

 

[krutovsdonut]

So this means the Canucks will be paying 1.4 million for two likely marginal Utica defensemen in 20-21? That doesn't seem like a good way to build a competitive AHL squad? I mean, we've all seen that the Aquilinis don't give Utica an unlimited payroll. You should be using the limited one-ways you can offer to lure in top-end AHL talent, not guys who will likely be below average AHL defensemen.

these moves were not made for utica. they are gambling on one of them being another hutton or stecher with utica depth as a consolation prize. they are paying them about $475k/per season averaged over two years to see if it happens. it does not count against any cap unless they actually make the big team, in which case they are on nhl minimum deals.

 

[BeardyCanuck03]

And there is also no benefit to giving fringe prospects 1-way deals.

"If the Canucks are willing to give NMCs to players like Motte and become known for treating their NHL players well, wouldn't that help them attract better players going forward?" You see the problem with your argument?

Outside of this one move, there is zero evidence that the team is willing to invest in Utica. Fans there have been screaming for quality signings for years and it hasn't happened, and no real impact players were acquired again this summer. There is nothing in terms of veterans on defense. Based on that, the more likely implication is that Benning actually thinks these guys will merit those contracts and be in the NHL, which is just terrifying.

I would say this whole summer has been showing the Canucks are willing to invest in Utica.

And family advisors and players from the NCAA seeing that the Canucks are willing to do this are going to be more likely to sign with the Canucks going forward. This helps the Canucks add to their prospect pool outside of the draft.

People have been crying that Benning isn't being creative enough, and now that he gets creative we still have people crying. It's a no win situation right now.

Also, I'm not saying this is the "best" way to do all this, but I'm not crying that this is horrible business.

 

[MS]

I would say this whole summer has been showing the Canucks are willing to invest in Utica.

And family advisors and players from the NCAA seeing that the Canucks are willing to do this are going to be more likely to sign with the Canucks going forward. This helps the Canucks add to their prospect pool outside of the draft.

People have been crying that Benning isn't being creative enough, and now that he gets creative we still have people crying. It's a no win situation right now.

Also, I'm not saying this is the "best" way to do all this, but I'm not crying that this is horrible business.

How has the rest of the summer shown we're willing to invest in Utica?

Yes, we signed two solid AHL players in Graovac and Bailey. We also released several excellent AHL players in Kero, Pyatt, Gaunce, McEneny. Our depth down there is actually worse right now than it was last year.

This is not 'creative'. This is stupid. If they did this to sign a Zack Aston-Reese when he was a big-time target out of the NCAA, fine. But these guys are nowhere near that level and these contracts are frankly absurd.

 

[Bettman Returnz]

 

[polarbearcub]

With what cap space? We have to be dumping sutter or Louie

 

[Josepho]

ahahahahhahahaha

 

[VC]

How?

 

[polarbearcub]

How?

Only way I see is if they have found a way to dump sutter or lazy Louie

 

[4Twenty]

Overpaying mediocre players is getting creative...

The best player in Comets history isn't even on a One way deal.

Absolutely ludicrous idea.

This is just more of the same overpaying for marginal returns we've seen on just about every contract rolled out by this regime for 5 years.

 

[Josepho]

I'm just going to spend the next 5 minutes pretending that the fact that this took a while means that it's going to be a decent deal.

 

[BeardyCanuck03]

How has the rest of the summer shown we're willing to invest in Utica?

Yes, we signed two solid AHL players in Graovac and Bailey. We also released several excellent AHL players in Kero, Pyatt, Gaunce, McEneny. Our depth down there is actually worse right now than it was last year.

This is not 'creative'. This is stupid. If they did this to sign a Zack Aston-Reese when he was a big-time target out of the NCAA, fine. But these guys are nowhere near that level and these contracts are frankly absurd.

Based on the Ferland news now, I can see a vet or two playing in Utica now as well.

 

[absolute garbage]

these moves were not made for utica. they are gambling on one of them being another hutton or stecher with utica depth as a consolation prize. they are paying them about $475k/per season averaged over two years to see if it happens. it does not count against any cap unless they actually make the big team, in which case they are on nhl minimum deals.

That's even more terrifying if they think these two guys will be NHL material in 20-21. Yikes. That's like giving the first homeless person you see 1.2 million dollars and saying "would you invest this money for me". That's quite a gamble you are making there.

And like I said, and like you would have seen if you bothered to read the posts you reply to, it's extremely foolish to think that the front office has an unlimited budget for Utica and that they can just throw one-ways left and right. If you had paid any attention to Utica in the last seasons, it would be obvious that there's in fact a cap of some sorts there, and if you end paying 1.4M for below average AHL defensemen (by far the most likely outcome here), the quality of your AHL team is going to suffer from that. Not to mention the contract slots issue - if/when these guys end up busting in Utica next season, you'd like to have open slots to bring in new free agents for the following season.