Organizational depth that provides competition for spots 8-12 on the depth chart. Schenn had the advantage of being a RHS, but with Biega having the #7 spot, does make sense to want the #8 to be LH. Not sure what Fatenburg brings that Sautner, Brisebois or Juolevi can't provide, but depth is important and at least Fatenberg was a full time NHL last year, something none of our other depth guys (or Schenn) can say.
Confirmed with Link: Canucks sign defenseman Oscar Fantenberg.
- Thread starter Fire Benning
- Start date
BeardyCanuck03
@BeardyCanuck03
Honestly, with Myers being signed there wasn't much in the way of room for Schenn, I think they will want Biega to be the 7/8 dman. It also keeps the door open for Chatfield/Rafferty (homegrown depth).
I would guess that Sautner and Fantenberg are battling it out for the left shot first callup / 7-8D spot. Essentially giving the Comets much needed depth on the blueline on both sides and not relying on AHL deals.
Snatcher Demko
High-End Intangibles
- Oct 8, 2006
- 5,935
- 1,334
Really dumb not to bring Schenn back instead. When Tanev inevitably comes down with an injury Schenn would have been a solid fill-in as he showed last year, and he actually stuck up for his team mates as well.
Just a baffling move. Add it to the list I guess.
Just a baffling move. Add it to the list I guess.
Schenn was fine here, but considering Florida's lack of state income taxes, and TB being a contender--if not a favourite--I don't think Luke is someone you get into a bidding war over. How much more would it cost to choose Vancouver over TB for next year, if you were in Schenn's shoes?
biturbo19
Registered User
- Jul 13, 2010
- 25,437
- 10,395
Yeah. I think the difference in potential earnings probably means something to a guy whose career has dwindled down to sort of journeyman "near minimum" type deals. The difference in taxes isn't nothing. Florida and other no state tax teams will always have a bit of an unfair advantage when it comes to that. Throw in the fact he gets a chance to potentially get himself a ring in the process...we'd have had to be bidding a healthy bit above what he signed in Tampa for. Not really where i'd be getting hung up on spending extra money. Finding bottom-pairing depth guys isn't really our problem anyway.
BeardyCanuck03
@BeardyCanuck03
With the addition of Myers and the development of Stecher, the Canucks must feel that they don't need to rely on Tanev as much and won't be needing Schenn to be his understudy. Biega is a good 7/8 Dman and there is still Chatfield and Rafferty who "could" push their way into the 7/8 Dman role at some point this season.
Red
Registered User
VC
Registered User
My thinking that it is the fresh one-way contract gets it, right or wrong. Like you said, history dictates that. I like Sautner, I had him penciled as the #4 Ld. Would be nice to see some of the homegrown depth guys actually get to progress. Saunter went from a why sign overager to looking like he can play some minutes. Missed opportunities for cheap homegrown depth with Gaunce and Archibald. Only Biega has so far survived as that, even if he is under used. Sautner and MacEwen should soon be getting their shot as depth guys.
me2
Go ahead foot
I'm not buying that taxes argument. There is negligible deference between $850k in Vancouver (Fantenberg money) and $700k in Tampa. Fantenberg likely takes home more after taxes. If Benning wanted Schenn he'd give him Fantenberg's contract.
Occam's razor would suggest that with 4 RHD signed or about to be (Tanev Myers Stecher Biega) the Canucks just didn't want Schenn, another RHD, and wanted a LHD instead.
biturbo19
Registered User
- Jul 13, 2010
- 25,437
- 10,395
I think that's kinda missing the point of this. It's a lot easier to just go to Florida, make the same money as you'd make on a noticeably bigger contract in Vancouver, and also play for a contender in the meantime.
You're discounting the impact of taxes way too hard here too. Just on federal taxes, equal $700k contracts are theoretically gonna pay at least like $20-30k more in Canada. Add in provincial BC taxes compared to Florida no taxes, and that's a Schenn saving a significant amount of money. Just gets steeper as you bump the offer up and it's all banged at the top rates.
So if you want to keep him...you're suddenly bidding against the US/Florida Tax system. You're paying quite a bit more for the same player. Is a Luke Schenn worth that? You're bidding uphill there, once he's got that Tampa offer. He's going to want more than he'd get there to play back in Vancouver. You're not even bidding to "par"...you're having to outbid the better team in the better location offering the money. Good luck man.
Not to mention guys with money like Schenn have investment tendrils into all sorts of things in the US where he's played most of his career now. It's inconvenient for absurdly rich people to convert those assets and investments, if they can help it by just staying in America and a state with no state tax on top of it all.
I haven't actually done the maths on it, but say $850k is the break even point there. You're gonna have to pay more than that to keep the guy.
Would you praise Benning if he tried reasonably hard to bring Schenn back but he chose Tampa probably because it’s a better opportunity? It’s no secret the Canucks wanted Schenn back.
I would be surprised if Fantenberg doesn’t make the team. Seems like a guy that coaches like and trust as seen by his playoff opportunities. He’s actually a guy who looks to have some upside - the type who carves put a solid NHL career.
He spent some time playing on the right side last season so he can play that side if needed. Plus he spent some time under the tutelage of Willie D so he should be a great fit.
He spent some time playing on the right side last season so he can play that side if needed. Plus he spent some time under the tutelage of Willie D so he should be a great fit.
I was OK with your analysis until you got to the Willie D. part...was this tongue and cheek? Is the same Willie D. that basically drove Tryamkin back to the KHL and decided that Yannick Weber and Philip Larsen were legitimate offensive d=men?
A credible poster here said last week that they ran into Schenn at an event and Schenn said he was disappointed not to have received an offer from the Canucks. Take it for what it's worth.
There were also the rumours they were 'circling back to Schenn' when the Edler negotiations appeared to break down a day or two before the UFA period started. So it seems they weren't talking to Schenn for an extended period and then possibly tried right at the last minute when he was about to be able to test the market. And that probably wouldn't inspire a ton of confidence that he was guaranteed a role here.
Yes that Willie D. Willie D had Oscar play the right side and set up for one timers as part of the offensive scheme.
Ya I don't know what happened. It's weird to have so much talk and not make an offer unless they were apart in terms or role expectations.
me2
Go ahead foot
It isn't nothing but it is not much either. Schenn has no signing bonus so a lot of what he earns in Tampa will actually be taxed elsewhere (jock tax) by other states. Vice Versa. The actual tax rates aren't as significant between BC and Florida. This article is a bit old but still
U.S. Tax Changes Level the Playing Field for Canadian NHL Teams
I don't think taxes were a major reason he isn't here. We just wanted a lefty with NHL experience to cover for Benn, who has a track record of being very up and down.
Nazzlind
Registered User
PavelBure10
The Russian Rocket
Brutal...
Schenn should of had a contract right away. He did everything asked of him and more. I became a fan of his game, and wanted him resigned immediately. Schenn hit everything that moved, had a good first pass, and dropped the gloves to protect his team mates. To hear that he wasn't even approached is really disappointing. I guess I shouldn't be surprised though, Benning was seeing Tyler Myers and nothing else.
EpochLink
Canucks and Jets fan
Blue and Green
Out to lunch
- Dec 17, 2017
- 3,427
- 3,387
I agree that the LD vs RD factor is a major part of why Schenn isn't here.
Since that article was published in 2013, however... the US government cut taxes in 2017 with the highest federal personal rate now 37% instead of 39.6% and not kicking in until annual income exceeds 600k. In 2016 Canada's federal tax rate was raised to 33% from 29% on personal income over 200k. And last year BC's provincial tax rate on income above 150K was increased to 16.8% from 14.7%. Things have changed substantially with regard to taxes.
No. He's a LD who spent some time playing RD.
Luke Schenn was out of the NHL only months ago. There's no "should of had a contract right away" when it comes to depth Dmen who may or may not be in the NHL next season.
As an asset at the deadline, Fantenberg should have greater value given that he has played in the playoffs the past 2 seasons and was ok. Two seasons ago, he was actually 3rd among Kings Dmen in ice time in the playoffs as he averaged over 25 minutes. In the right pairing and playing bottom pairing minutes Fatenberg can be quite effective.
RandV
It's a wolf v2.0
Yeah that's really disappointing if that was the case. I had just assumed that if you had only been here a few months but then got to play on a Cup contender like Tampa then you can't fault the Canucks for him walking. But if he was willing to resign here before hand and they never even approached him, that's a different matter altogether.
Snatcher Demko
High-End Intangibles
- Oct 8, 2006
- 5,935
- 1,334
I'm more inclined to believe the team felt it had enough RHD. I think if a contract was offered he would have signed it. A guy like Schenn isn't likely fielding multiple offers and TB being a contender was secondary to the fact that they offered him a contract.
Everything Schenn did last year said he should have been back. Was absolutely the best defenseman that played in Utica last year. His arrival there led to the Comets going on good run that, for a while, had them in the playoff hunt. When he left the team went straight in the tank. His departure wasn't the only reason for the collapse, but Schenn greatly solidified a defense in Utica which, to that point, had been very sketchy. His leadership was very apparent and he really deserved the call up. And in Vancouver, he had an good season and appeared to be important in the development of Hughes. In all cases, his leadership and character were obvious.
At the price, he seemed an automatic to return and, I think, the general consensus was that he should be retained. To me, looking at the play of Schenn and Fantenburg last year, I definitely prefer Schenn. In California I saw a number of LA games and Fantentburg was poor. LA would be in games and then Fantenburg would come out he'd get tied up in his end and often be totally unable to get the puck out and he was prone to making critical mistakes. In in the offensive end, he never seemed to keep the puck in. One of the main reason LA stank last year was the play of the defense and Fantenburg, along with the awful Phaneuf and LaDue, contributed to that.
So, on the one hand, you had a player who contributed to a late season (and unfortunately draft hurting) surge and the other who contributed to the problems LA was having in their end. You have one player that moved the puck well out of his end and the other that had constant problems in doing this. You had one that contributed physical toughness and the other who shied away from it.
Would say Fantenburg is the better skater but positionally Schenn is much better and that more than made up for the skating difference.
So, in the end I'd choose Schenn.
In the end, I have no trust in the Canuck pro scouting and given the acquisitions and trades during the Benning era, I don't see why anyone should. I know people always want to be positive and hope maybe this one will work out, but the track record is obviously bad. On top of that, Schenn had established something here, so why not run with that rather than getting a very fringe player who's established nothing anywhere.
At the price, he seemed an automatic to return and, I think, the general consensus was that he should be retained. To me, looking at the play of Schenn and Fantenburg last year, I definitely prefer Schenn. In California I saw a number of LA games and Fantentburg was poor. LA would be in games and then Fantenburg would come out he'd get tied up in his end and often be totally unable to get the puck out and he was prone to making critical mistakes. In in the offensive end, he never seemed to keep the puck in. One of the main reason LA stank last year was the play of the defense and Fantenburg, along with the awful Phaneuf and LaDue, contributed to that.
So, on the one hand, you had a player who contributed to a late season (and unfortunately draft hurting) surge and the other who contributed to the problems LA was having in their end. You have one player that moved the puck well out of his end and the other that had constant problems in doing this. You had one that contributed physical toughness and the other who shied away from it.
Would say Fantenburg is the better skater but positionally Schenn is much better and that more than made up for the skating difference.
So, in the end I'd choose Schenn.
In the end, I have no trust in the Canuck pro scouting and given the acquisitions and trades during the Benning era, I don't see why anyone should. I know people always want to be positive and hope maybe this one will work out, but the track record is obviously bad. On top of that, Schenn had established something here, so why not run with that rather than getting a very fringe player who's established nothing anywhere.
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
2024 SoFi NBA Play-In Tournament Chicago Bulls @ Miami HeatWagers: 5Staked: $760.00Event closes- Updated:
-
2024 SoFi NBA Play-In Tournament Sacramento Kings @ New Orleans PelicansWagers: 4Staked: $195.00Event closes
- Updated:
-
Stanley Cup 2024 Stanley Cup Champion - ONLY BET ONE TEAMWagers: 8Staked: $8,175.00Event closes- Updated:
-