Decision Time Coming for Erik Gudbranson

[y2kcanucks]

Why? This isn't a good team, free agents aren't worth it at this stage of development, and re-signings shouldn't be an issue for bringing everyone back. What else are they going to use it on that's worth taking any deal now as opposed to trying to get his value back up after surgery?

Because it's an asset. The salary cap always matters. Look at a team like Arizona who were able to pick up some great prospects by leveraging their cap space. Or Carolina who picked up Teravainen because they had the cap space to take on a cap dump from Chicago. Instead, you're advocating being a bottom feeder without cap space anyway? That makes zero sense.

 

[krutovsdonut]

Salary Cap matter, it's that same stupid thinking that has us stuck with Eriksson for 5 more years.

If Gudbranson is signed for around $4M for 5 years, which wouldn't surprise me, the Canucks will have Gudbranson, Sutter and Eriksson taking up $14.375M in 2020-21.

Do people not think cap space in 2020-21 matters? Is that not when this team is supposed to be good?

Absolutely garbage to think cap space doesn't matter. Carolina and Arizona are good examples a rebuilding teams taking advantage of cap space.

Also the Canucks aren't in a great cap situation going into next season, signing Gudbranson for any amount of years is gonna be bad.

regal was specifically talking about signing him for 1-2 years.

 

[y2kcanucks]

regal was specifically talking about signing him for 1-2 years.

I'll laugh if we can't afford to re-sign Horvat because Benning gives $5M to Gudbranson and re-signs Miller for $6M. Salary cap don't matter right?

 

[Black Noise]

regal was specifically talking about signing him for 1-2 years.

Even then the Canucks cap situation isn't great. They have to sign Horvat, Tryamkin, Gudbranson and it looks like they're gonna resign Miller.

They have $17.9M in cap space going into next season with 7 forwards, 6 defenceman and 1 goalie signed. They need 2 goalies, 13 forwards and 7 defenceman.

Horvat = $5M
Tryamkin = $2.5M
Gudbranson = $3.5M
Miller = $3M
= $14M

So $3.9M left to sign 5 more forwards. Great. Fantastic work for a **** team.

 

[Bad News Benning]

Even then the Canucks cap situation isn't great. They have to sign Horvat, Tryamkin, Gudbranson and it looks like they're gonna resign Miller.

They have $17.9M in cap space going into next season with 7 forwards, 6 defenceman and 1 goalie signed. They need 2 goalies, 13 forwards and 7 defenceman.

Horvat = $5M
Tryamkin = $2.5M
Gudbranson = $3.5M
Miller = $3M
= $14M

So $3.9M left to sign 5 more forwards. Great. Fantastic work for a **** team.

Pretty sad that a cap team would have such a crappy roster. Other than horvat/tanev I'm guessing Vegas will have a similar roster talent wise and for 20 million less.

 

[krutovsdonut]

I'll laugh if we can't afford to re-sign Horvat because Benning gives $5M to Gudbranson and re-signs Miller for $6M. Salary cap don't matter right?

miller is obviously not getting $6 million if he re-signs. that would be a $1.8 million raise for gudbranson.

the canucks will have $18 million in cap space next year without making any moves at all. they currently do not have enough players they wish to resign seeking raises big enough approach the cap. the biggest problem i can see is the canucks signing another $6 million free agent, because they can afford it short term.

 

[krutovsdonut]

Even then the Canucks cap situation isn't great. They have to sign Horvat, Tryamkin, Gudbranson and it looks like they're gonna resign Miller.

They have $17.9M in cap space going into next season with 7 forwards, 6 defenceman and 1 goalie signed. They need 2 goalies, 13 forwards and 7 defenceman.

Horvat = $5M
Tryamkin = $2.5M
Gudbranson = $3.5M
Miller = $3M
= $14M

So $3.9M left to sign 5 more forwards. Great. Fantastic work for a **** team.

leaving aside edler and the sedins at $19 million signed years ago, who exactly is overpaid and by how much?

and how does tryamkin get $2.5m after one promising season?

gaunce, megna, chaput, boucher and skille, or their equivalents, can be had for $4.5 million altogether.

and then there is a decent chance sbisa is claimed, plus the chance either or both hansen and hutton get traded.

 

[Kryten]

miller is obviously not getting $6 million if he re-signs. that would be a $1.8 million raise for gudbranson.

the canucks will have $18 million in cap space next year without making any moves at all. they currently do not have enough players they wish to resign seeking raises big enough approach the cap. the biggest problem i can see is the canucks signing another $6 million free agent, because they can afford it short term.

Horvat 5.5, Gudbranson 4.5, Tryamkin 2, theres 12 million gone instantly and maybe more. Now add 4 depth forwards and a goalie. This team is already in cap hell

 

[krutovsdonut]

the biggest problem i can see is the canucks signing another $6 million free agent, because they can afford it short term.

looking at it again, this is not correct. they do not have that much cap space unless they delete some players.

 

[Black Noise]

leaving aside edler and the sedins at $19 million signed years ago, who exactly is overpaid and by how much?

and how does tryamkin get $2.5m after one promising season?

gaunce, megna, chaput, boucher and skille, or their equivalents, can be had for $4.5 million altogether.

and then there is a decent chance sbisa is claimed, plus the chance either or both hansen and hutton get traded.

Sbisa, Dorsett, Sutter, Eriksson, and soon to be Gudbranson are all overpaid.

Tryamkin gets $2.5M because Hutton got pretty much the same.

Those 5 guys are worth $4.5M and we would only have $3.9M, see the problem?

 

[sting101]

because you can leverage salary cap room in trades by retaining or taking a cap dump.

but i still agree with you. at certain times it does not matter. the canucks are not a tank team so they do not have room to take on a cap dump.

The overall cap mat not be critical but players values are attached to their cap hits.

Signing bad deals not only negates ability to acquire certain players it devalues and sticks your team with poor assets.

 

[sting101]

Not a chance I would move Hutton before Gudbranson

 

[krutovsdonut]

Sbisa, Dorsett, Sutter, Eriksson, and soon to be Gudbranson are all overpaid.

Tryamkin gets $2.5M because Hutton got pretty much the same.

Those 5 guys are worth $4.5M and we would only have $3.9M, see the problem?

erickkson is getting exactly what the market predicted for him. that's what ufas get. you can reasonably disagree with the idea of signing someone that age for that much dough but that is what it costs if you want to do it.

assuming the other 3 actually signed are overpaid, how much in total are they overpaid by? my sense is that those who are realistic here claim the overpayment is about $500k per player, so $1.5 m total. i don't agree with this, but i think that is what we are arguing about.

and i just do not see tryamkin getting $2.5m. hutton played half of last year and nearly all of this year as a top 4 dman averaging over 20 minutes. the team went after him to sign him early. tryamkin is coming on but remains a 16 minute 3rd pairing player, in spite of his huge potential.

 

[krutovsdonut]

The overall cap mat not be critical but players values are attached to their cap hits.

Signing bad deals not only negates ability to acquire certain players it devalues and sticks your team with poor assets.

which is ok in the short term for a bad team with limited options and aspirations. in other words, it is ok provided you are not prevented from making moves because of the cap.

 

[Black Noise]

erickkson is getting exactly what the market predicted for him. that's what ufas get. you can reasonably disagree with the idea of signing someone that age for that much dough but that is what it costs if you want to do it.

assuming the other 3 actually signed are overpaid, how much in total are they overpaid by? my sense is that those who are realistic here claim the overpayment is about $500k per player, so $1.5 m total. i don't agree with this, but i think that is what we are arguing about.

and i just do not see tryamkin getting $2.5m. hutton played half of last year and nearly all of this year as a top 4 dman averaging over 20 minutes. the team went after him to sign him early. tryamkin is coming on but remains a 16 minute 3rd pairing player, in spite of his huge potential.

Sbisa - $3.6M - should be $1.5M - $2.1M
Dorsett - $2.6M - should be $1M - $1.6M
Sutter - $4.4M - should be $3M - $1.4M

Theres $5.1M right there.

Plus, they shouldn't have signed Eriksson, because you know they should be rebuilding. Who knows what Gudbranson gets but I wouldn't pay him more than $2.5M. If he doesn't take that let him sit since he's a RFA and go sign Cody Franson for cheap.

 

[Kryten]

Sbisa - $3.6M - should be $1.5M - $2.1M
Dorsett - $2.6M - should be $1M - $1.6M
Sutter - $4.4M - should be $3M - $1.4M

Theres $4.1M right there.

Plus, they shouldn't have signed Eriksson, because you know they should be rebuilding. Who knows what Gudbranson gets but I wouldn't pay him more than $2.5M. If he doesn't take that let him sit since he's a RFA and go sign Cody Franson for cheap.

Hutton 2.8 should be 2-2.5
Markstrom 3.667 should be 3

Tanev, Baertschi, were two signings that are showing great.

 

[Regal]

Because it's an asset. The salary cap always matters. Look at a team like Arizona who were able to pick up some great prospects by leveraging their cap space. Or Carolina who picked up Teravainen because they had the cap space to take on a cap dump from Chicago. Instead, you're advocating being a bottom feeder without cap space anyway? That makes zero sense.

How often do these deals actually happen? Read my post before this. It's not that the space can't be useful it's that freaking out over space to the point you would rather sell an asset for cheap than slightly overpay on a short deal to get a better look at them is overreacting

 

[y2kcanucks]

How often do these deals actually happen? Read my post before this. It's not that the space can't be useful it's that freaking out over space to the point you would rather sell an asset for cheap than slightly overpay on a short deal to get a better look at them is overreacting

There were 3 trades like this last June alone. And with the cap being fairly stagnant it's likely you'll see more deals like this as more and more ELC's come up and players continue to get paid substantial raises on their second contracts.

People are right to freak out over Benning's misuse of cap space. He's proven to have **** poor asset management skills, and this is just yet another example of that.

 

[krutovsdonut]

Sbisa - $3.6M - should be $1.5M - $2.1M
Dorsett - $2.6M - should be $1M - $1.6M
Sutter - $4.4M - should be $3M - $1.4M

Theres $5.1M right there.

Plus, they shouldn't have signed Eriksson, because you know they should be rebuilding. Who knows what Gudbranson gets but I wouldn't pay him more than $2.5M. If he doesn't take that let him sit since he's a RFA and go sign Cody Franson for cheap.

so you would offer gudbranson a $1 million pay cut from what he was paid last year by florida? good luck with that.

and that $3.5 m one year deal was widely commented on as a cheap deal when it was signed by another gm who people here actually like.

so i choose to "appeal to authority" here. dale tallon, the owner and organization who signed off on the deal and all the media folks who commented about that deal after it was signed all know more about the market value for hockey players than you do.

in my opinion you are in a fantasy land / echo chamber here where people believe they can bend reality to their will. the realistic arguments are more in the order of $500k for each of those players. those are certainly debatable.

 

[y2kcanucks]

so you would offer gudbranson a $1 million pay cut from what he was paid last year by florida? good luck with that.

and that $3.5 m one year deal was widely commented on as a cheap deal when it was signed by another gm who people here actually like.

so i choose to "appeal to authority" here. dale tallon, the owner and organization who signed off on the deal and all the media folks who commented about that deal after it was signed all know more about the market value for hockey players than you do.

in my opinion you are in a fantasy land / echo chamber here where people believe they can bend reality to their will. the realistic arguments are more in the order of $500k for each of those players. those are certainly debatable.

Yes, he should get a $1M pay cut from his current salary. Pay for performance, and he hasn't performed beyond a bottom pairing defenseman. $2.5M is actually at the upper end of what a bottom pairing defenseman makes too.

Just because some idiots may perceive $3.5m to be a cheap deal doesn't mean it's a good contract. When his production is that of a bottom pairing defenseman, and the team is actually better without him in the lineup than with him, it doesn't make sense to retain this player. It makes even less sense to lock that player up with a substantial salary.

In my opinion, if you think Gudbranson is worth his current contract or worth a raise then you are the one in fantasy land. And that includes all the "experts" who think he is because of "intangiblez"

 

[Black Noise]

so you would offer gudbranson a $1 million pay cut from what he was paid last year by florida? good luck with that.

and that $3.5 m one year deal was widely commented on as a cheap deal when it was signed by another gm who people here actually like.

so i choose to "appeal to authority" here. dale tallon, the owner and organization who signed off on the deal and all the media folks who commented about that deal after it was signed all know more about the market value for hockey players than you do.

in my opinion you are in a fantasy land / echo chamber here where people believe they can bend reality to their will. the realistic arguments are more in the order of $500k for each of those players. those are certainly debatable.

Dorsett is a replacement level player, he can easily be replaced by someone making $1M, Sbisa is a replacement level player he can easily be replaced by someone making $1.5M.

**** maybe I have no ****ing clue what I'm doing, but if Sbisa and Dorsett didn't want to sign $1M and $1.5M contracts I'd tell them to **** off and sign some replacement level player for the bare minimum.

If Gudbranson asks for more than $2.5M I wouldn't sign him. He's a RFA on a team with 5 better defenceman, he has zero leverage. He can sit for the season or be traded if he doesn't take $2.5M.

Once again, maybe I don't know what I'm doing, but signing replacement level players to bad contracts kills teams. If the replacement level player wants a big contract he can go somewhere else and I'll sign a replacement level guy for cheap because free agency is full of replacement level players.

 

[krutovsdonut]

Yes, he should get a $1M pay cut from his current salary. Pay for performance, and he hasn't performed beyond a bottom pairing defenseman. $2.5M is actually at the upper end of what a bottom pairing defenseman makes too.

Just because some idiots may perceive $3.5m to be a cheap deal doesn't mean it's a good contract. When his production is that of a bottom pairing defenseman, and the team is actually better without him in the lineup than with him, it doesn't make sense to retain this player. It makes even less sense to lock that player up with a substantial salary.

In my opinion, if you think Gudbranson is worth his current contract or worth a raise then you are the one in fantasy land. And that includes all the "experts" who think he is because of "intangiblez"

i didn't say i thought he was worth it. i said that was his market value.

and we are talking about reality here, not your wishes and aspirations.

he is restricted free agent. as such he is entitled to a "market" salary and he can seek arbitration if he needs to so he can ensure he gets paid..

you don't seem to understand what a market salary is or how arbitration works.

a market salary is what comparable players are paid in the market, by idiots and all. in an arbitration, you collect comparable player salaries and other data to compare and contrast, attempting to show why a player should be paid more or less than roughly comparable players.

if a gm overpays an nhl player, that becomes part of the market and all other teams are stuck with it. it is nearly impossible in an arbitration to argue a player who negotiated a contract that a team agreed to is "overpaid". you can politely suggest a salary is an outlier, or distinguish it some other way, but it all goes into the hopper.

the correct response if you don't like the market price and think a player is over rated, is to sign him at market, and then trade him for what you can get for him.

there is just no air of reality to you bleating about paying him $1 million less. that is never going to happen. if you try it, you will lose the arbitration and look ridiculous. it will also undermine your credibility in every other negotiation you attempt and in future arbitrations.

 

[krutovsdonut]

Dorsett is a replacement level player, he can easily be replaced by someone making $1M, Sbisa is a replacement level player he can easily be replaced by someone making $1.5M.

**** maybe I have no ****ing clue what I'm doing, but if Sbisa and Dorsett didn't want to sign $1M and $1.5M contracts I'd tell them to **** off and sign some replacement level player for the bare minimum.

If Gudbranson asks for more than $2.5M I wouldn't sign him. He's a RFA on a team with 5 better defenceman, he has zero leverage. He can sit for the season or be traded if he doesn't take $2.5M.

he has plenty of leverage. he can go to arbitration and he will almost certainly get more than his previous contract and then the team will have to decide whether to allow him to become a ufa or pay it.

which is what any player being lowballed in such a ridiculous manner would do.

 

[y2kcanucks]

i didn't say i thought he was worth it. i said that was his market value.

and we are talking about reality here, not your wishes and aspirations.

he is restricted free agent. as such he is entitled to a "market" salary and he can seek arbitration if he needs to so he can ensure he gets paid..

you don't seem to understand what a market salary is or how arbitration works.

a market salary is what comparable players are paid in the market, by idiots and all. in an arbitration, you collect comparable player salaries and other data to compare and contrast, attempting to show why a player should be paid more or less than roughly comparable players.

if a gm overpays an nhl player, that becomes part of the market and all other teams are stuck with it. it is nearly impossible in an arbitration to argue a player who negotiated a contract that a team agreed to is "overpaid". you can politely suggest a salary is an outlier, or distinguish it some other way, but it all goes into the hopper.

the correct response if you don't like the market price and think a player is over rated, is to sign him at market, and then trade him for what you can get for him.

there is just no air of reality to you bleating about paying him $1 million less. that is never going to happen. if you try it, you will lose the arbitration and look ridiculous. it will also undermine your credibility in every other negotiation you attempt and in future arbitrations.

I'm not sure arbitration is a good path for Gudbranson to go down given his production.

I'm also talking about reality. The reality that Gudbranson is not a good defenseman. The reality that based on his production Gudbranson isn't even worth his current contract. The reality that overpaying bad hockey players will cripple a hockey team. That's reality.

Gudbranson is a RFA. He can remain unsigned and hopefully we can find some sucker team to trade for him and hopefully give us at least 50% of what Benning wasted when he acquired him. OR, better yet, hopefully a team will sign him to that "market value" via offer sheet and we end up with a 1st and 3rd round pick.

 

[y2kcanucks]

he has plenty of leverage. he can go to arbitration and he will almost certainly get more than his previous contract and then the team will have to decide whether to allow him to become a ufa or pay it.

which is what any player being lowballed in such a ridiculous manner would do.

Based on what?