Confirmed with Link: Canucks sign F Adam Cracknell (1-Year, 2-Way Deal - $575K)

[NoRaise4Brackett]

"Santorelli pushers" is kind of a misnomer. We had him in the lineup for half a season where he looked like a decent 2nd/3rd line tweener and was on pace for 47 points before injury. He then went to Toronto and did the same thing ending up being a deadline trade asset for them, though he didn't play particularly well in Nashville.

Santorelli isn't the only decent vet not getting the contract he wants, and it's because of the salary cap and league depth. There are always players like him that get left without a contract by training camp and have to accept low pay or a tryout. The whole point of ever bringing him up is that he was a cheap asset that was discarded while way payed to acquire other assets that either aren't much better (Bonino) or inferior (Vey).

Simple enough?

So there is enough league depth to make him one of those dime-a-dozen guys you can sign through free agency from the bargain bin. simple enough.

 

[Pip]

So there is enough league depth to make him one of those dime-a-dozen guys you can sign through free agency from the bargain bin. simple enough.

The point is that these "bargain bin" players are being undervalued league wide and that we should be taking advantage of it. Players like Santorelli provide terrific value relative to their contracts and acquisition cost.

Instead we are overpaying for role players. It's an archaic way of thinking to have two scoring lines, one shutdown line, and one energy line. The goal should be to put the best players possible on every line and to demphasize "fit" and "role" since that usually ends up with us icing worse players. Unfortunately we seem to be stuck in the past.

GMs aren't perfect people and make mistakes so I don't believe you can conclude that because the Santorellis of the world are not paid well that they are worthless or not effective players.

 

[me2]

The point is that these "bargain bin" players are being undervalued league wide and that we should be taking advantage of it. Players like Santorelli provide terrific value relative to their contracts and acquisition cost.

Instead we are overpaying for role players. It's an archaic way of thinking to have two scoring lines, one shutdown line, and one energy line. The goal should be to put the best players possible on every line and to demphasize "fit" and "role" since that usually ends up with us icing worse players. Unfortunately we seem to be stuck in the past.

GMs aren't perfect people and make mistakes so I don't believe you can conclude that because the Santorellis of the world are not paid well that they are worthless or not effective players.

Ducks added 50-55 points to this 4th line for $2.5m. Good defensive players for ZERO cost. Smart.

Nucks added 18 points in Prust for their $2.5m+Cracknell (2-way), cost Kassian+5th, and let Matthias walk.

 

[vanuck]

Cody Franson isn't a replacement level player despite still being unsigned. Likewise with a lot of other players right now. It's just the way the market is right now and doesn't reflect on their actual value - only their perceived value by GM's. We could've been in a good position to take advantage of it but instead are wasting cap and assets on acquiring role players who can be had for free.

 

[F A N]

The point is that these "bargain bin" players are being undervalued league wide and that we should be taking advantage of it. Players like Santorelli provide terrific value relative to their contracts and acquisition cost.

I do miss the days of having an annual reclamation project. The Canucks have had quite a bit of success over the years signing or acquiring these "bargain bin" guys.

But it appears to me that Benning's school of team building involves putting the expected roster as early as possible. There's no leaving room for waiver wire pickups like Gillis loved to do.

Instead we are overpaying for role players. It's an archaic way of thinking to have two scoring lines, one shutdown line, and one energy line. The goal should be to put the best players possible on every line and to demphasize "fit" and "role" since that usually ends up with us icing worse players. Unfortunately we seem to be stuck in the past.

We are overpaying for role players but I am not too sure we can conclude that Benning's thinking is "archaic" in the sense he wants two scoring lines, one shutdown line, and one energy line.

One can argue that Benning actually doesn't view Prust and Dorsett as typical 4th line forwards, but rather bottom 6 forwards who can and will play significant minutes. It is what it is now. I just hope Prust doesn't get a 3-4 year extension from Benning for $2-2.5M AAV.

 

[Nick Lang]

Cody Franson isn't a replacement level player despite still being unsigned. Likewise with a lot of other players right now. It's just the way the market is right now and doesn't reflect on their actual value - only their perceived value by GM's. We could've been in a good position to take advantage of it but instead are wasting cap and assets on acquiring role players who can be had for free.

There were no long term players available so we are spending excess cap on a different mind set. Who cares about the cap right now, it's not the main focus since we are experiencing huge turnover in the next several years? Franson is not the answer to anything right now. The real questions come in a couple of years.

 

[fancouver]

I wouldn't classify Burrows, Hansen or Horvat as guys who are "physical" and hit. Virtanen hasn't played a game in the NHL so he doesn't much count either.

So that's Prust, Dorsett, Kenins and Cracknell.

Horvat can play physical. He's limited to 1 NHL season, but there are glimpses of him throwing his weight around (ie. against Chara). As he gets more comfortable, I expect him to play heavy down low and finish more checks. Ditto Virtanen. In Utica, he was already hitting men off balance. The AHL is still a pro-league with many journeymen NHLers, and I expect him to transition into that role with Prust next season.

I'm not sure why you disagree with Burrows or Hansen. Both these players made the NHL by forechecking hard and hitting. They may not have a Lucic-level hit, but that doesn't mean they aren't physical.

 

[vanuck]

There were no long term players available so we are spending excess cap on a different mind set. Who cares about the cap right now, it's not the main focus since we are experiencing huge turnover in the next several years? Franson is not the answer to anything right now. The real questions come in a couple of years.

Franson (and Santorelli) got a 1st round pick at the deadline. That's worth something. The main focus should be on improving organizational value (as it almost always is). I mean, getting picks/prospects for guys you have the cap room to sign for free isn't a good thing?

 

[MS]

There were no long term players available so we are spending excess cap on a different mind set. Who cares about the cap right now, it's not the main focus since we are experiencing huge turnover in the next several years? Franson is not the answer to anything right now. The real questions come in a couple of years.

I can't believe that garbage like this keeps being repeated here.

Yes, everyone should care about the cap right now.

1) if we have extra cap space, we can add assets that can be flipped later to accelerate the rebuild.

2) leaving cap space gives the flexibility to take on a contract mid-season if a quality player surprisingly becomes available who can help us - like Carter with LA or even Kane last year. Good luck swinging a deal like that if you're hard against the cap.

3) cap space can be used to buy quality young players, as with Chicago and Panarin this summer.

4) you're setting a cap structure and culture for the long term. You can't just overpay everyone willy-nilly and then 3 years later if the team is turning a corner just flick a switch and say, 'OK, everyone is on good contracts now!'

The notion that management shouldn't care about getting value on contracts or spending to the cap on bad players, or that fans shouldn't be concerned about this is bizarre. It's the worst kind of terrible management and anyone claiming otherwise has their head in the sand.

 

[Bitz and Bites]

I can't believe that garbage like this keeps being repeated here.

Yes, everyone should care about the cap right now.

1) if we have extra cap space, we can add assets that can be flipped later to accelerate the rebuild.

2) leaving cap space gives the flexibility to take on a contract mid-season if a quality player surprisingly becomes available who can help us - like Carter with LA or even Kane last year. Good luck swinging a deal like that if you're hard against the cap.

100% agree.We landed a very valuable player in Erhoff from SJ,along with another cap casualty (Lukowich),for a second round pick named Patrick White and a struggling D prospect (Rahimi) because we had cap space due to shrewd cap management by Gilman.

We also acquired David Booth from FLA for a couple of washed up vets who were pretty much waiver wire material also because we had the cap room to do it.
Booth was a risk,for sure,but was still relatively young and had been an impact player in the league a couple years earlier and showed glimpses of regaining his form until more injuries did him in.It could have gone either way but his upside was well worth taking a chance on.

These are just two examples I can think of for the Canucks.There will be lots more around the league that are better,especially the Carter example floated by MS.

There's just so much wrong with the way JB is running things,it's mind boggling.To think that someone so incompetent at so many aspects of his job is running a multi-million dollar franchise is astounding.This probably belongs in another topic but pretty much every thread leads to JB messing something up.

 

[Verviticus]

I can't believe that garbage like this keeps being repeated here.

it gets repeated because people want to deflect the conversation to "years down the road" because theres nothing positive for them to focus on now

 

[vanuck]

There's just so much wrong with the way JB is running things,it's mind boggling.To think that someone so incompetent at so many aspects of his job is running a multi-million dollar franchise is astounding.This probably belongs in another topic but pretty much every thread leads to JB messing something up.

Yeah it always ends up because that incompetence permeates just about everything they've done. "Who cares" is just an excuse for what's simply bad management, but thankfully most people recognize that.

it gets repeated because people want to deflect the conversation to "years down the road" because theres nothing positive for them to focus on now

When the franchise lowered expectations for the new regime, it looks like they somehow set the bar very low for GM'ing which is never okay.

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

Looks like this thread has run its course.

We already have a Benning/Management thread. Burning desires to discuss his managerial competency (or lack thereof) can be taken there.

Closed.