Canucks Offseason Thread || Sekeres: Canucks shopping Tanev, Sutter

[rypper]

We could have ****ing moved Sutter two deadlines ago if we weren't sold on him being an important part of the team.



Argh. Head. Face. Wall. Smash.

I think it was Botch who reported that one season Sutter was Vancouver player most inquired about by other teams with 4-5 having strong interest.

 

[me2]

What prime assets do they even have? They've already lost a 1st. Their prospect pool stinks. Juolevi? Gaudette? Are either of them good enough for a team to absorb Eriksson? Who else is there? Woo?

It would cost our other 1st IMHO. Marleau like payment, maybe a touch more.

 

[member 290103]

I agree with him in regards to Tanev and Edler. Sutter? Not so much. Also keep in mind this tweet is over a year old.

Oh...missed that. Was gonna call Sekeres outs for bad info

 

[canucksfan]

The problem is though, that Benning wants the cap space to sign guys he believes will help the team get into the playoffs. Lucic I could see him wanting a swap for... but any bad contract just to get rid of Loui I don't think is a possibility. I also think the only reason why Tanev/Sutter are on the market is because he wants cap space to sign Ferland+, and, unexpected to him, moving Loui comes with a high price tag. One way or another, I do think he's hellbent to get Ferland.

Yup. It's not as bad as Loui but Sutter won't have much value if any. Most teams won't take on bad contracts because they are close to the cap. Tanev will have value but if he trades him it leave a huge hole on the backend.

At least his stupid signings are starting to bite him in the ass.

 

[Bad Goalie]

I think Eriksson will be sent down. The team has the right and at this point a clear prerogative to do it, and there enough forwards better than him at this point to absorb all his ice time.

I fear Vancouver fan base and media won't like the results of that move even though they advocate it without thinking of the consequences. One of Lind or Gadjovich is going to absorb the cost of demoting Loui.

#1 Boucher/C/MacEwen
#2 Perron/C/Jasek
#3 Loui-Gadjovich/C/Loui-Lind
#4 Bancks/c/Arsenau

Even if you move Loui anywhere up the ladder that person instantly results in someone from the top 6 displacing one of L&G.

Motte, Goldobin, Schaller are still on the bubble. Goldobin, Leivo and Boeser are not yet signed. If and when they all do, the Canucks roster will number 26. It would have to be reduced by 3. When Rousell returns another has to go.

None of them sits for Lind or Gadjovich. I agree on Bancks and Arseneau sitting, but GM Johnson loves Bancks and Hamilton and expects them to be in the lineup. This, and Benning isn't finished for the summer. The more Benning tinkers with his lineup, the greater the chance of more Canucks coming to Utica and Lind and Gadjovich pushed to the back burner. I mean it's not like they have "earned the right to a spot", but many think they automatically get one no matter what. Coaches don't work like that.

Utica training camp could become very interesting after Vancouver makes their final cut. Of course trades can lessen all of this likelihood. Then again, there is just as much chance trades increase the likelihood of making things even worse.

Oh, by the way, there are also still UFAs out there.

This is why thinking one can spell out rosters at this stage is folly.

 

[Bad Goalie]

Yeah, the bonus has been paid as of now, I believe, so the hard financial part is done. If I were GM I’d just make this as “professionally unpleasant” as possible for a Eriksson. To wit - you’re going to Utica no questions asked, and if your intent is to play out your contract, that is where you will be doing it, because we won’t be paying a premium to another team to take you off our hands. So enjoy riding the bus.

And then sit back and wait to see if Eriksson reports.

There is precedent to the “stay away from our team” treatment in this regime, too - they inexplicably pulled it with Chris Higgins when they told him to stay home, don’t practice and they’d try to find a trading partner for him. And when they couldn’t, they sent him to Utica. Difference between Higgins and Eriksson is Higgins was a hard working pro who gave a ****.

And his quote in Utica was priceless. He said he was actually having fun playing hockey again and he did very well for the Comets. The fans loved the guy. Too bad Jim ****ed up royally and had to eat **** and re-call him. LOL

 

[Melvin]

I think it was Botch who reported that one season Sutter was Vancouver player most inquired about by other teams with 4-5 having strong interest.

Yes it was 2017-2018. All three California teams were interested as I recall.

But Sutter is foundational.

 

[bandwagonesque]

I fear Vancouver fan base and media won't like the results of that move even though they advocate it without thinking of the consequences. One of Lind or Gadjovich is going to absorb the cost of demoting Loui.

#1 Boucher/C/MacEwen
#2 Perron/C/Jasek
#3 Loui-Gadjovich/C/Loui-Lind
#4 Bancks/c/Arsenau

Even if you move Loui anywhere up the ladder that person instantly results in someone from the top 6 displacing one of L&G.

Motte, Goldobin, Schaller are still on the bubble. Goldobin, Leivo and Boeser are not yet signed. If and when they all do, the Canucks roster will number 26. It would have to be reduced by 3. When Rousell returns another has to go.

None of them sits for Lind or Gadjovich. I agree on Bancks and Arseneau sitting, but GM Johnson loves Bancks and Hamilton and expects them to be in the lineup. This, and Benning isn't finished for the summer. The more Benning tinkers with his lineup, the greater the chance of more Canucks coming to Utica and Lind and Gadjovich pushed to the back burner. I mean it's not like they have "earned the right to a spot", but many think they automatically get one no matter what. Coaches don't work like that.

Utica training camp could become very interesting after Vancouver makes their final cut. Of course trades can lessen all of this likelihood. Then again, there is just as much chance trades increase the likelihood of making things even worse.

Oh, by the way, there are also still UFAs out there.

This is why thinking one can spell out rosters at this stage is folly.

Roussel isn't returning for months and I think Schaller probably gets moved. If Loui reports, you'd think Perron could easily be moved elsewhere in the AHL.

 

[Bad Goalie]

1 step forward, 2 steps back... the new normal around here! Nothing phases me anymore.

Cannot get too excited about anything to do with this team now. I am always waiting for the other shoe to drop.

And the way it does there must be a centipede in charge.

 

[DonnyNucker]

I don’t think there was just one. I just kept reading the posts here, and tried to defend his actions. Then I couldn’t think of things to write that were positive. It’s like I got overwhelmed (awoken) by the sheer volume of his terrible choices. I really want us to be a winning team, and it’s looking really bad fir that to happen.

Nice, I was just curious. It’s good to have an open mind and not be stuck to your opinions. Can’t say I’m good at that lol

 

[Bad Goalie]

Roussel isn't returning for months and I think Schaller probably gets moved. If Loui reports, you'd think Perron could easily be moved elsewhere in the AHL.

And why the **** would they want to do that? Move an AHL All Star to make Loui the troll happy? Most ludicrous move I have read suggested on this site in the 6 years I have been here.

 

[Melvin]

Yeah I hate to say it but Eriksson is being somewhat underrated. He is a very boring defensively responsible winger. He's better than Schaller or Motte.

 

[me2]

Roussel isn't returning for months and I think Schaller probably gets moved.

I imagine some team would take Schaller if we added a 3rd.

 

[Nazzlind]

Eriksson sucks for cap hit but he's still better than cheap plugs replacing him. Sending him down to punish him makes us worse.

skill wise, for sure, but I don't think his on-ice demeanor and effort level sets a good example for the rest of our team, especially the young guys. Like I really don't think the difference in impact between an Eriksson or a Motte in the line-up is that significant over a full season anyways. Rather sacrifice the extra 20 points or whatever for a 4th liner with heart and hustle.

 

[BROCK HUGHES]

Yeah I hate to say it but Eriksson is being somewhat underrated. He is a very boring defensively responsible winger. He's better than Schaller or Motte.

wow I'd take Moote over Eriksson a thousand times.Moote shows he wants to play and will do what he has to do to stay in the line up..Hustle Hustle Hustle..
Eriksson plays with no heart or lack of effort at all or emotion,looks disinterested majority of the time ,biggest worst contract in Canucks history.

 

[Melvin]

wow I'd take Moote over Eriksson a thousand times.Moote shows he wants to play and will do what he has to do to stay in the line up..Hustle Hustle Hustle..
Eriksson plays with no heart or lack of effort at all or emotion,looks disinterested majority of the time ,biggest worst contract in Canucks history.

Puts a feather in his cap and calls it macaroni.

 

[Lindgren]

I wouldn't mind seeing Eriksson with the Canucks again in the coming season. He's emblematic of Benning's failures, and keeping him on the squad will be a constant reminder of where Benning's management has taken the franchise.

If the cap recapture penalty was a kick in the shins, what kind of blow does Eriksson's contract deliver?

 

[Nazzlind]

I wouldn't mind seeing Eriksson with the Canucks again in the coming season. He's emblematic of Benning's failures, and keeping him on the squad will be a constant reminder of where Benning's management has taken the franchise.

If the cap recapture penalty was a kick in the shins, what kind of blow does Eriksson's contract deliver?

I once saw a video of a chick using a guys balls as a speedbag

That's what Eriksson's contract is doing to us smh

 

[HankNDank]

I think it was Botch who reported that one season Sutter was Vancouver player most inquired about by other teams with 4-5 having strong interest.

So then does that mean the price we paid to acquire Sutter was fair market value for him and not an overpayment? If there was demand, supply had to match.

 

[rypper]

So then does that mean the price we paid to acquire Sutter was fair market value for him and not an overpayment? If there was demand, supply had to match.

Teams were interested but there wasn't information about what they were willing to pay.

 

[Oleksiak]

wow I'd take Moote over Eriksson a thousand times.Moote shows he wants to play and will do what he has to do to stay in the line up..Hustle Hustle Hustle..
Eriksson plays with no heart or lack of effort at all or emotion,looks disinterested majority of the time ,biggest worst contract in Canucks history.

Messier.