Confirmed with Link: Canucks re-sign D Alex Edler to 2-Year, $6M AAV Deal

[bandwagonesque]

Have you actually seen ANYBODY complain that the deal is two years, or are you just writing fiction?

He wasn't saying anyone complained about the terms, just that people are rushing to discredit the front office in any way remotely possible for signing Edler to a better deal than a hypothetical one they wanted but said the front office was incapable of negotiating.

 

[Blue and Green]

Cherry on the top
Now this is an absolutely tradable contract

Except for that pesky no-movement clause.

 

[ProstheticConscience]

So weird that after all that drama, Edler doesn't even go to the UFA period. Oh well, that's one less thing to do.

 

[ChilliBilly]

That's not true. They can claim UFA's just as they can claim anyone else, but they have to claim at least X players who are under contract for the following season, with some more specific requirements regarding the distribution of X.

Just as an example, Vegas claimed pending UFA Chris thorburn last time He became a UFA a week later and signed with the Blues.

ok let me rephrase. What is the point of Seattle claiming a player who is a UFA.

 

[Blue and Green]

ok let me rephrase. What is the point of Seattle claiming a player who is a UFA.

They might look at the list of available players from a team and decide that they don't want any of them.

 

[mathonwy]

Happy the deal got done and Alex remains a Canuck.

Seeing him leave would have triggered me something serious.

 

[THE Green Man]

ok let me rephrase. What is the point of Seattle claiming a player who is a UFA.

List of Jim Benning signed contracts = take the pending UFA and not hamstring your team cap wise out of the gate.

 

[opendoor]

He'll decline for sure - but "fall off"?

Yeah but in two years I will be very surprised if Edler becomes an outright liability. He may not be able to eat 25 minutes a night against tough matchup - which will screw the team (and probably lead to Benning being fired) but that's a different thing. I respect your overall point, though.

Let's also not overstate his age - he turned 33 a few months ago.

It's possible. Ohlund was a 22 minute a night 25 point defenseman at 32 and out of the league at 34.

But 2 years is an acceptable risk, since even if he does fall off it's a short enough term. And if he doesn't then he can be re-signed. Salo was playing quality hockey into his late 30s, so anything's possible.

 

[Bleach Clean]

Acceptable.

 

[The Stig]

Price is high but the term evens it out

 

[Hit the post]

Price is high but the term evens it out

Cap hit really is irrelevant since the contract is only for two years (and we have the cap space). Nothing really wrong that I can see about the deal. A real bummer about that Chiapet hiring rumor to spoil a great contract signing news.

 

[tyhee]

Where did I say anybody complained about two years? My comment is directed at the posters who either a) give Benning no credit for this deal or b) go out of their way to criticize Benning even after he made what some posters are claiming his best contract signing as a Canuck.

And this is after the general consensus yesterday that a 3 year deal was either ok or better.

It is sad that, just as there are those who will praise Benning no matter what, there are those who will criticize him no matter what. Hence my post.

That may have been your intention, but it wasn't the impression given by the post I originally replied to. You'll recall that it was:
________________
"3 years? Ok, we can live with that."

"4 years? oooo, that's not good."

"2 years? Benning sucks!"
_______________

The fact that you may have intended to only note "Benning sucks" without attaching it to the "2 years" or suggesting that anyone took the three positions you set out is inconsistent with the way it is written.

If you want to note people complaining about Benning, that's fine, but that's not the message given when the complaint is attached to the 2 year term after noting approval of 3 years. I stand by my point and, looking at the way you wrote it, would be shocked if anybody posting in this thread took the 3 positions you noted.

If your point is that this signing means Benning is a great GM, you'll still find lots of people unhappy with his overall body of work that disagree with you, including many who would applaud this signing.

 

[Hoglander]

I'm convinced that Edler wanted this deal all along. It literally took DimJim since October, to understand the contract that Edler's side drew up, and how it would benefit the team. Don't kid yourselves, zero credit should be given to this amateur GM.

 

[settinguptheplay]

I'm convinced that Edler wanted this deal all along. It literally took DimJim since October, to understand the contract that Edler's side drew up, and how it would benefit the team. Don't kid yourselves, zero credit should be given to this amateur GM.

This deal is pretty much perfect. Benning, as GM, deserves his credit. Does not make him rocket up the charts as a top GM in the league. But credit where credit is due.

The only thing amateur here is your take on it. You don't really believe this, do you? This level of faux rage is nonsensical. Screw your head back on straight. Use it for something other than a place to hold your hat.

 

[RandV]

ok let me rephrase. What is the point of Seattle claiming a player who is a UFA.

The Las Vegas expansion draft was held on June 18, so I'm guessing Seattle will be about the same. So the point would be for the expansion team to acquire the players UFA rights giving them a chance to negotiate a contract prior to July 1st, so the same thing as Philly giving up a pick for Hayes.

Of course this really doesn't effect Edler who would be just looking to resign here. And I believe when Vegas took Thorburn it was because Winnipeg paid them to do so.

 

[Snatcher Demko]

Excellent deal. Benning did well to wait Edler out.

Edler becomes a UFA and is in control of his own destiny.

 

[CanaFan]

This is, outside of drafting high in the first round, easily the best piece of work our esteemed GM has produced in his entire time here.

No ifs, buts, or coconuts.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

This is, outside of drafting high in the first round, easily the best piece of work our esteemed GM has produced in his entire time here.

No ifs, buts, or coconuts.

Honestly. Horvats deal is far bettet IMO. If you look at the deals Jim has signed every other deal is either too much money or term, Horvats is a thing if beauty.

Edler got perfect term for team but overpaid in money, that is fine.

 

[CanaFan]

Honestly. Horvats deal is far bettet IMO. If you look at the deals Jim has signed every other deal is either too much money or term, Horvats is a thing if beauty.

Edler got perfect term for team but overpaid in money, that is fine.

I mean, no doubt it’s an excellent contract for all that Bo brings but keep in mind he signed it after a career high of “just” 52 pts at 22 years of age, and a lot of second contracts were pretty reasonable even as recently as 2017. Barkov signed for 5.8 and Mackinnon for 6.3 just one year earlier as much higher profile RFAs.

Given Edler’s UFA status and Vancouvers *desperate* need for any competent defenseman to sign here, I’m stunned JB managed to avoid tripping over himself on the way to giving Edler 5 years and complete NMC.

I’m a fan ... of this.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

I mean, no doubt it’s an excellent contract for all that Bo brings but keep in mind he signed it after a career high of “just” 52 pts at 22 years of age, and a lot of second contracts were pretty reasonable even as recently as 2017. Barkov signed for 5.8 and Mackinnon for 6.3 just one year earlier as much higher profile RFAs.

Given Edler’s UFA status and Vancouvers *desperate* need for any competent defenseman to sign here, I’m stunned JB managed to avoid tripping over himself on the way to giving Edler 5 years and complete NMC.

I’m a fan ... of this.

Oh we agree. Im a fan of this as well.

I just think this deal will look the opposite when Edler comes back to earth next year, as opposed to where management seemed to have a correct read on how Bo will improve.

 

[I am toxic]

He wasn't saying anyone complained about the terms, just that people are rushing to discredit the front office in any way remotely possible for signing Edler to a better deal than a hypothetical one they wanted but said the front office was incapable of negotiating.

Thank you.

The earlier thread had a clear consensus that 3 years was an ok or better deal, while 4 was not really.

Then in this thread we have a couple people giving Benning no credit (or worse) for signing a 2 year deal, with several other posters "liking" their comments. Even though it is clearly the consensus that it is a good or better deal.

You and iceburg clearly understood what I was getting at. Again, thanks.

 

[4Twenty]

I mean, no doubt it’s an excellent contract for all that Bo brings but keep in mind he signed it after a career high of “just” 52 pts at 22 years of age, and a lot of second contracts were pretty reasonable even as recently as 2017. Barkov signed for 5.8 and Mackinnon for 6.3 just one year earlier as much higher profile RFAs.

Given Edler’s UFA status and Vancouvers *desperate* need for any competent defenseman to sign here, I’m stunned JB managed to avoid tripping over himself on the way to giving Edler 5 years and complete NMC.

I’m a fan ... of this.

Thank you for this. Horvat's contract looks good now, but it was a bit high for what he'd produced to that stage - based on the comparables you noted.

Daddyohsix mentioned that Tanev's deal and Marky's deal are also very good, and IMO, Tanev could've been had for cheaper if they didn't make him show them in year one. Markstrom extended a full year ahead of time after 33 games as a backup. It looks good now because of inflation, but I think he was overpaid originally.

At the end of the day they were reasonable bets on solid players. But none of them were "steals" the moment they were signed.

 

[mossey3535]

With all the other stuff floating around the board right now, this is surprisingly good news. Good job by Benning, again he gave out a NMC but it's Edler and the term is nice and short. I'm good with it, nice job by Benning.

 

[Blue and Green]

Edler did okay on this contract. If the 2020-21 season was entirely wiped out by a labour dispute he would still pocket $11M of the $12M. He gave up term in order to stay at home, but on money and structure he got approximately market value for two years given the uncertainty of the labour situation for 2020.

 

[VanJack]

Kudos to Benning for holding firm on a shorter term....not easy to do when your entire blueline is basically in a shambles. But anything more than two years wouldn't likely have been worth the risk.

But at 33, you have to assume that the games lost to injury will continue to be a problem. And unless they get some dramatic help via the trade or UFA front, they'll end up running Edler into the ground again.