Rumor: Canucks offered 1st, 2nd, Sutter, Virtanen for OEL

[JohnHodgson]

That is not 'literally the definition of PC culture'.

It's just being called out for pointless smugness 9 months later.

9 months later

is precisely the reason why I bumped this thread. We aren't talking about something that happened 9 years ago. This was only 9 months ago, less than a full calendar year.

It's really fascinating to see how awful some of these takes aged. Most level-headed people agreed that the offer was reasonable given the circumstances. The smart people said that the Canucks/Boston dodged a bullet by not taking his contract at all.

 

[JohnHodgson]

Despite it creating issues in terms of handedness, and more problems 4 seasons down the line, I'd definitely OEL for Myers + 2nd, then deal with cap issues at the tail end of OEL's contract.

We would have one NHL level RD on the roster in Nate Schmidt, who had a terrible year for his standards.

Myers for OEL just does not make sense, unless there's an immediate backfill for Myers.

 

[bov]

Benning didn't take advantage of anything - this deal fell into his lap.

VGK needed to offload salary to get Pietrangelo. In a flat cap world, nobody could absorb Schmidt's full deal and provide assets to Vegas.

I hope you're joking when you say that OEL is going to be a team's new best defenseman. If OEL is the best defender on the team, the team is not even close to a contender. He's a #3/4.

You seem to be missing the point. No team is trading for OEL to be a 3/4.

You mention cap hell, that's why Vancouver was gifted Nate Schmidt. Arizona is in almost an opposite situation. They can take on salary in an OEL deal, thus giving their trade partner some wiggle room and get further value in assets because of their ability to take on a significant contract in return. Unless it's Seattle with a clean slate, you're likely to see a decent chunk of salary coming back to Arizona, but probably in the form of a still serviceable NHL player in addition to other pieces of value.

I've made my points clear, I'll just re-visit this thread if he ends up being traded whether I'm wrong or not. All the best to you.

 

[Boondock]

Weird thing is, if we got OEL, we'd still be able to get Schmidt too...at the expense of Hamonic.

You think we could have added $14.5 million for 2 dmen - not in any world where a salary cap uses actual numbers

 

[RandV]

You seem to be missing the point. No team is trading for OEL to be a 3/4.

You mention cap hell, that's why Vancouver was gifted Nate Schmidt. Arizona is in almost an opposite situation. They can take on salary in an OEL deal, thus giving their trade partner some wiggle room and get further value in assets because of their ability to take on a significant contract in return. Unless it's Seattle with a clean slate, you're likely to see a decent chunk of salary coming back to Arizona, but probably in the form of a still serviceable NHL player in addition to other pieces of value.

I've made my points clear, I'll just re-visit this thread if he ends up being traded whether I'm wrong or not. All the best to you.

Not really agreeing or disagreeing with you here but it's funny saying that when the only cap dump the Canucks were going to send back last summer was Brandon Sutter. Many of us Canuck fans heading into the rumours assumed it would have to be Loui Eriksson to make sense, but no Benning would have pulled the trigger just sending Sutter back.

 

[Cogburn]

You think we could have added $14.5 million for 2 dmen - not in any world where a salary cap uses actual numbers

We had Schmidt's just under 6 million added anyway, and would have just under 7 million (Sutter and Virtanen) removed from our roster compared to OEL's 8 million dollar cap hit. That's just over 1 million being added, before presumably not signing Hamonic for 1.5.

I'm not saying we should have, but we could have if Arizona didn't save us from Benning.

 

[Shocker]

EDIT: Props to this guy though ^ Completely nailed it.

This thread really showed who the dummies are.

Yeah it did, thanks for coming up as one.

 

[RemoAZ]

And the offer still sucks. Wouldn't take it today. Why is that so hard to understand? And I'm not an OEL fan.

 

[Icebreakers]

And the offer still sucks. Wouldn't take it today. Why is that so hard to understand? And I'm not an OEL fan.

You would not accept 9th overall 40 th overall and Jake Virtanen for OEL?

 

[AKL]

You would not accept 9th overall 40 th overall and Jake Virtanen for OEL?

I can't imagine Virtanen is any sorts of appealing to anyone at this point.

 

[Icebreakers]

I can't imagine Virtanen is any sorts of appealing to anyone at this point.

You can just buy him out. Hes got 1 year left at 2.5.

 

[AKL]

You can just buy him out. Hes got 1 year left at 2.5.

Yeah or he could just not be included.

For better or worse or who cares, Vancouver is stuck with him until the circumstances surrounding him off ice are settled.

 

[Pia8988]

Yeah or he could just not be included.

For better or worse or who cares, Vancouver is stuck with him until the circumstances surrounding him off ice are settled.

I mean not really.

year 1. 50k
year 2. 500k

Expect he'll be bought out. They should do it anyways and save cap

 

[AKL]

I mean not really.

year 1. 50k
year 2. 500k

Expect he'll be bought out. They should do it anyways and save cap

Sure. Vancouver can buy him out. They're not going to pawn him off as part of a deal like this thinking another team will be bought out.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

Turning OEL into a top 10 pick and an early 2nd round pick seems well worth taking on a nothing contract like Virtanen's.

 

[AKL]

Turning OEL into a top 10 pick and an early 2nd round pick seems well worth taking on a nothing contract like Virtanen's.

It's not the contract, it's the outstanding sexual assault allegation

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

It's not the contract, it's the outstanding sexual assault allegation

I think that's where the buyout comes into play. Pretty easy to be transparent about it and avoid any bad PR that might come with it.

 

[AKL]

I think that's where the buyout comes into play. Pretty easy to be transparent about it and avoid any bad PR that might come with it.

Then the Canucks buy him out. That's also pretty easy.

I mean this thread is from 9 months ago. If Vancouver is still interested, the two sides can pretty easily work out a deal without needing to include Virtanen.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

Then the Canucks buy him out. That's also pretty easy.

I mean this thread is from 9 months ago. If Vancouver is still interested, the two sides can pretty easily work out a deal without needing to include Virtanen.

It would just be an incredibly weird line for Arizona to draw, with how inconsequential it would be for them.

 

[AKL]

It would just be an incredibly weird line for Arizona to draw, with how inconsequential it would be for them.

It's even weirder for Vancouver to draw the line that he needs to be included, so guess which side is probably going to end up with Virtanen in the end?

There's just no reason for his name to even come up in discussions at this point. Especially given how inconsequential it would be for Vancouver to buy him out or have his contract terminated for something like this.

I know you say the PR impact would be minimal, but why even give it a chance to happen? Arizona has had enough bad PR lately. If they told their fans they traded their captain for a couple draft picks and a guy who was accused of sexual assault, but it's okay because they're just going to buy his contract out? Okay? So why include him? Arizona is going to want something they can market that will be wearing a Coyotes jersey next season or at least the season after when trading OEL.

 

[Lunatik]

While we’re on the subject of OEL to Vancouver, does anyone know when signing bonus day is this year? And what about buyout day?

Which this correct order of these events?

1. Entry Draft Day
2. Buy-Out Day
3. Signing Bonus Day

?????

Since no one answered.

1. Buyout period starts (48 hours after the Cup final ends)
2. Entry Draft (July 23rd)
3. Buyout period ends (July 27th)
4. Signing Bonus/Free Agency (July 28th)

Technically signing bonuses were paid July 1, but if a player with a signing bonus is traded before July 28th, the new team will have to repay the former team the signing bonus

 

[AKL]

It would just be an incredibly weird line for Arizona to draw, with how inconsequential it would be for them.

And for the record, my involvement in this discussion came after someone made a statement that implied Virtanen was an interesting or valuable (to some degree) part of the return. So if you already believe he's only included for buyout purposes, then we both agree there's no reason to keep discussing him as part of this return.

 

[elitepete]

Maybe OEL, Fischer and Capobianco for Myers, Eriksson, Motte and Juolevi (or something).

That trade is intriguing. I would do it. Is Fisher any good?

 

[AKL]

That trade is intriguing. I would do it. Is Fisher any good?

Big, physical, defensive. Not going to contribute offensively. Definitely not the guy that's going to have much value. Type of guy coaches love because he battles pretty hard. He's a fourth liner through and through.

From a somewhat outsider point of view, I don't see the appeal in that deal for Arizona. I'd guess that poster is just happy with simply being out from OEL's contract, rather than focused on actually getting much in return.

 

[rypper]

Once again another GM saves Jim Benning from himself.

The Canucks shouldn't want any part of that OEL contract.