Fantasy GM Thread | Part XII: Free Agency Looms

Status
Not open for further replies.

Reverend Mayhem

Lowly Serf/Reluctant Cuckold
Feb 15, 2009
28,096
5,224
Port Coquitlam, BC
If we are trading Boeser or Miller it needs to be for a young D who’s nhl ready. With that said, I agree move Miller well before Boeser. Have a hard time envisioning him resigning.

With a bullet. We trade away Boeser and we are immediately looking for another guy like that. If Miller would re-sign, I'd keep him. No other forward we have does what he does.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FOurteenS inCisOr

StickShift

In a pickle 🥒
Feb 29, 2004
6,573
4,610
New York
Elliotte Friedman's podcast today mentioned that the spate of other defenseman contracts this off-season (Heiskanen, Makar, Werenski, etc) has "changed the equation" for the Quinn Hughes contract and that this is one of the reasons why it hasn't been easy to wrap up. He speculated that he is curious what further salary cap machinations that Canucks might do (or not do) to get both Pettersson and Hughes signed to the contracts they want to sign.

I wonder if they are looking to extend them both on long-term deals and may be considering further moves to dump salary. That speculation would triangulate with what JP Barry suggested the other day that the Canucks may not be done with trades
 
  • Like
Reactions: CanuckCity

Diamonddog01

Diamond in the rough
Jul 18, 2007
11,014
3,834
Vancouver
All of those defenceman are better than Hughes so this shouldn’t change things very much. Also I don’t think any of those players were 10.2c restricted free agents.
 

Gstank

Registered User
Apr 27, 2015
5,318
2,962
Honestly if Hughes is looking for 8x9 or even 8x8 you have to seriously consider trading him and improving our depth on the backend. He isnt worth that much nor has he proven he can be that guy in the future. Plus the return would be able to fill a lot of our issues on the back end by bring back good cost effective pieces on the backend and building depth. OEL, Rathbone, Hughes are all the same style of Dman and it wouldnt hurt us at all if we could change that up with a huge return from a Hughes trade.
 

canuckking1

Registered User
Feb 8, 2015
12,641
13,569
Said the last off-season that the trade Boeser takes would age like Milk. The same thing is gonna happen with the trade Hughes takes. One covid shortened weird season shouldn't erase how amazing he was as a rookie.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MarkusNaslund19

Gstank

Registered User
Apr 27, 2015
5,318
2,962
Said the last off-season that the trade Boeser takes would age like Milk. The same thing is gonna happen with the trade Hughes takes. One covid shortened weird season shouldn't erase how amazing he was as a rookie.

Its not his one bad season. its his lack of progression that is concerning. He want getting leaned on by bigger players and bullied in the corners that combined with the dumb brain farts that he had through out the season leads me to believe he will never become a true #1 dman. He will be a good #2 but he will never be the man fixture on the PK or that 30 min a night guy and therefore shouldnt be paid like one
 

Gstank

Registered User
Apr 27, 2015
5,318
2,962
I wonder if they are looking to extend them both on long-term deals and may be considering further moves to dump salary. That speculation would triangulate with what JP Barry suggested the other day that the Canucks may not be done with trades

We really dont have much salary to dump. The only player that makes a ton of sense is JT Miller and if you trade him you need another top 9 forward plus a good young top 4 D coming back which would most likely only save a couple of mill
 

AppleHoneySauce

Registered User
Apr 26, 2021
2,429
1,948
Fox has to be worth 9 mil at the very least. He was stellar defensively and pretty good offensively. His biggest problem is being 5'11, but i doubt that saves the Rangers much. Gunna have to hope he takes a HomeTown discount.
 

kcunac

Registered User
Aug 31, 2008
1,738
1,229
Ottawa


This is what good teams do. Even though they have Bowen Byram as their 3rd LD they go out and get another solid defender. We could have used Ryan Murray or another responsible LD to babysit Myers. even if it pushed Rathbone out of the top 6, he'd still get plenty of games due to injuries.

carolina also has 6 solid NHL D and just signed Tony D
 

StickShift

In a pickle 🥒
Feb 29, 2004
6,573
4,610
New York
We really dont have much salary to dump. The only player that makes a ton of sense is JT Miller and if you trade him you need another top 9 forward plus a good young top 4 D coming back which would most likely only save a couple of mill

The player that stands out to me as a potential opportunity to dump salary is Tyler Myers.
  • Despite being paid $6.0mm—he's pencilled in to the third pairing. That's an inefficient use of cap space.
  • The team has shown a strong motivation to move out inefficient contracts this off-season.
  • The team signed several depth RD capable of playing third pairing minutes.
  • Tyler Myers has moved on to a ten-team "No" NTC clause this season.
  • Despite the defensive warts he has and the contract he has—Myers is a big, tall RH defenseman.
  • NHL GMs love big, tall, RH defensemen. There is always a market for players like that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HockeyWooot

AppleHoneySauce

Registered User
Apr 26, 2021
2,429
1,948
The player that stands out to me as a potential opportunity to dump salary is Tyler Myers.
  • Despite being paid $6.0mm—he's pencilled in to the third pairing. That's an inefficient use of cap space.
  • The team has shown a strong motivation to move out inefficient contracts this off-season.
  • The team signed several depth RD capable of playing third pairing minutes.
  • Tyler Myers has moved on to a ten-team "No" NTC clause this season.
  • Despite the defensive warts he has and the contract he has—Myers is a big, tall RH defenseman.
  • NHL GMs love big, tall, RH defensemen. There is always a market for players like that.
Tyler Myers and Quinn Hughes for Ty Smith and Nico Hishier who says no?:laugh:
 

Gstank

Registered User
Apr 27, 2015
5,318
2,962


This is what good teams do. Even though they have Bowen Byram as their 3rd LD they go out and get another solid defender. We could have used Ryan Murray or another responsible LD to babysit Myers. even if it pushed Rathbone out of the top 6, he'd still get plenty of games due to injuries.

carolina also has 6 solid NHL D and just signed Tony D


Murray can play the right side and this signing completes there top 6

Toews Makar
Girade Johnson
Murray Byram
 

m9

m9
Sponsor
Jan 23, 2010
25,107
15,229
Trading Hughes for appropriate value makes sense given Rathbone/OEL's PP ability but there's zero chance they'll have the balls to do that trade as it would be a PR disaster.

It's really hard to see what other salary they would move. Pearson is who obviously should be moved, but they just signed him to placate the team chemistry so they can't do that.

The Myers suggestion fits too with who they've signed this off-season.
 

Melvin

21/12/05
Sep 29, 2017
15,198
28,055
Montreal, QC
The player that stands out to me as a potential opportunity to dump salary is Tyler Myers.
  • Despite being paid $6.0mm—he's pencilled in to the third pairing. That's an inefficient use of cap space.
  • The team has shown a strong motivation to move out inefficient contracts this off-season.
  • The team signed several depth RD capable of playing third pairing minutes.
  • Tyler Myers has moved on to a ten-team "No" NTC clause this season.
  • Despite the defensive warts he has and the contract he has—Myers is a big, tall RH defenseman.
  • NHL GMs love big, tall, RH defensemen. There is always a market for players like that.

penciled into the third pairing? What makes you say that?
 

StickShift

In a pickle 🥒
Feb 29, 2004
6,573
4,610
New York
penciled into the third pairing? What makes you say that?

I say that because he has been the third pairing primarily since last season. Look at which defensemen he spent the most time playing with at 5v5 last year:

Screen Shot 2021-08-02 at 6.48.41 PM.png


or as summarized by pairing:

PairingPlayerTeammateTOI Myers TOI TTOI tog TOI % w
1st PairMyersHughes 938.95989.03 170.9018.2%
2nd PairMyersEdler/Schmidt 938.95 1766.72 293.35 31.2%
3rd PairMyersBenn/Juolevi/Rathbone 938.95 794.66 461.21 49.1%
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Looking ahead at this next season—it sure looks like he is destined to play on the third pairing again.

He won't play on the first pairing. Consider that Hughes rarely ever played away from Hamonic last season. 80% of Hamonic's 5v5 ice time was alongside Hughes. And in those instances when Hughes did player with Myers—their corsi was a whole 9 points lower than (46%) than when Hughes played with Hamonic (53%).

It's unlikely that he'll play on the second pairing either. As Thomas Drance already dived into this off-season—Tucker Poolman is the front runner to play alongside OEL next year—and Myers is not a great stylistic match for the match-up role that will probably be given to the OEL pairing.

Poolman’s speed is likely to be important because it seems pretty obvious that Poolman will be the front-runner to play in a matchup role for Vancouver on Oliver Ekman-Larsson’s right side.

Here’s the way to think about it. Obviously, you start with Hughes and Hamonic, because it’s clear the Canucks like that pair. Hamonic logged roughly 80 percent of his five-on-five ice time with Hughes last season and there’s no reason to think that’ll change.

Whether it’s Olli Juolevi or Jack Rathbone at left defence, both of them played most frequently with Tyler Myers last season. Lots of folks expect Myers to be the guy to play with Ekman-Larsson, but typically he hasn’t been Vancouver’s first-choice matchup defender. Myers tends to play a lot at five-on-five, but last season he actually played against the oppositions top lines at a rate below league average and dealt with the softest overall competition among all regular Canucks defenders (minimum 437 minutes at five-on-five):

Screen Shot 2021-08-02 at 7.05.39 PM.png


You have to think of this as sort of like a logic games puzzle. If the Canucks are going to prefer Ekman-Larsson in toughs than Hughes and Rathbone (or Juolevi or Brad Hunt), and they will, then they’re obviously not going to match Ekman-Larsson with the right-handed defender that they’ve avoided playing in a shutdown role scrupulously.

That leaves Poolman, the right-handed defender with the sort of wheels to help offset Ekman-Larsson, and his declining mobility, who also played toughs for the Jets regularly last season:

Screen Shot 2021-08-02 at 7.06.16 PM.png


Honestly, this one isn’t just obvious, it seems relatively clear to me that these particular features of Poolman’s game — his size, his right-handed shot, his mobility, his experience in a matchup role — were major reasons the club targeted him. And made sure it won the bidding for his services.

Fundamentally, it comes down to calibration. I might not rate Poolman at the rate the Canucks signed him, but they’re betting that he can pair with Ekman-Larsson on a pair that can be more than the sum of its parts. It’s the same bet, really, that the club is placing on Hughes and Hamonic.

If the right side of the Canucks’ defence is the team’s obvious weakness on paper, fit and calibration are what the club is betting can offset that.

That leaves Myers to the third pairing again with either Rathbone, Hunt, or Juolevi. Which as I alluded to in my original post, is not role where a team ought to most efficiently spend $6.0m under the salary cap.

And given the Canucks new motivation this off-season to trade away inefficient contracts—Tyler Myers ought to be the player that we consider most likely to be on the trade block.
 

Melvin

21/12/05
Sep 29, 2017
15,198
28,055
Montreal, QC
I say that because he has been the third pairing primarily since last season. Look at which defensemen he spent the most time playing with at 5v5 last year:

View attachment 458914

or as summarized by pairing:

PairingPlayerTeammateTOI Myers TOI TTOI tog TOI % w
1st PairMyersHughes 938.95989.03 170.9018.2%
2nd PairMyersEdler/Schmidt 938.95 1766.72 293.35 31.2%
3rd PairMyersBenn/Juolevi/Rathbone 938.95 794.66 461.21 49.1%
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Looking ahead at this next season—it sure looks like he is destined to play on the third pairing again.

He won't play on the first pairing. Consider that Hughes rarely ever played away from Hamonic last season. 80% of Hamonic's 5v5 ice time was alongside Hughes. And in those instances when Hughes did player with Myers—their corsi was a whole 9 points lower than (46%) than when Hughes played with Hamonic (53%).

It's unlikely that he'll play on the second pairing either. As Thomas Drance already dived into this off-season—Tucker Poolman is the front runner to play alongside OEL next year—and Myers is not a great stylistic match for the match-up role that will probably be given to the OEL pairing.

Poolman’s speed is likely to be important because it seems pretty obvious that Poolman will be the front-runner to play in a matchup role for Vancouver on Oliver Ekman-Larsson’s right side.

Here’s the way to think about it. Obviously, you start with Hughes and Hamonic, because it’s clear the Canucks like that pair. Hamonic logged roughly 80 percent of his five-on-five ice time with Hughes last season and there’s no reason to think that’ll change.

Whether it’s Olli Juolevi or Jack Rathbone at left defence, both of them played most frequently with Tyler Myers last season. Lots of folks expect Myers to be the guy to play with Ekman-Larsson, but typically he hasn’t been Vancouver’s first-choice matchup defender. Myers tends to play a lot at five-on-five, but last season he actually played against the oppositions top lines at a rate below league average and dealt with the softest overall competition among all regular Canucks defenders (minimum 437 minutes at five-on-five):

View attachment 458921

You have to think of this as sort of like a logic games puzzle. If the Canucks are going to prefer Ekman-Larsson in toughs than Hughes and Rathbone (or Juolevi or Brad Hunt), and they will, then they’re obviously not going to match Ekman-Larsson with the right-handed defender that they’ve avoided playing in a shutdown role scrupulously.

That leaves Poolman, the right-handed defender with the sort of wheels to help offset Ekman-Larsson, and his declining mobility, who also played toughs for the Jets regularly last season:

View attachment 458922

Honestly, this one isn’t just obvious, it seems relatively clear to me that these particular features of Poolman’s game — his size, his right-handed shot, his mobility, his experience in a matchup role — were major reasons the club targeted him. And made sure it won the bidding for his services.

Fundamentally, it comes down to calibration. I might not rate Poolman at the rate the Canucks signed him, but they’re betting that he can pair with Ekman-Larsson on a pair that can be more than the sum of its parts. It’s the same bet, really, that the club is placing on Hughes and Hamonic.

If the right side of the Canucks’ defence is the team’s obvious weakness on paper, fit and calibration are what the club is betting can offset that.

That leaves Myers to the third pairing again with either Rathbone, Hunt, or Juolevi. Which as I alluded to in my original post, is not role where a team ought to most efficiently spend $6.0m under the salary cap.

And given the Canucks new motivation this off-season to trade away inefficient contracts—Tyler Myers ought to be the player that we consider most likely to be on the trade block.

That's for the thoughtful response.

I am not sure I buy it. Any way you slice it, Myers was #2 in ice time last season at ES, and often #1 in games. I don't know to what extent I believe that Green is going to bump him down the lineup. I think by the time we get underway with things we will see him on the "top" pairing with OEL, Hughes/Hamonic and then Poolman with whoever makes it between Rathbone/Schenn/etc.
 

mriswith

Registered User
Oct 12, 2011
4,139
7,282
I would much rather trade for a #2/3 RHD to stabilize Hughes than trade Hughes. Trading Hughes now is just doubling down management's failure last season. A few years of things the way they're currently going and we might look back and wish we traded him but that doesn't mean the outcome we're heading towards right now is the outcome that had to happen.

What we're watching in his "regression on d" is your standard developmental hellhole. He is an offensive #3 dman who needs to learn the defensive side of the game and needs to take some time to develop into someone who can take the heaviest minutes. Instead he gets leaned on like a top pairing dman and asked to carry a bottom pairing partner in those minutes.

Instead of having a stable, strong defensive presence to stabilize him while he learns that side of the game, he overextends and reinforces bad habits to overcompensate for his partner and ends up a worse player for it.

Again a problem solved if Benning had never "focused on the defense" in the first place, if Benning had napped through free agency the last couple years we could have been running with Tanev/Schmidt/Stecher on RHD which is respectable if not ideal, unlike the current state and solves the issue of Hughes' partner.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CanuckCity
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->