The Ferland thing I find hilarious because Jim Benning signed Sven Baertschi, who had two seasons in a row derailed by concussions, to a long-term contract, and got burned. He followed that up by going to Michael Ferland, who had two seasons in a row derailed by concussions, and signed him to an even *longer* term contract. Just dumb as rocks.
Former Canucks Thread
- Thread starter M2Beezy
- Start date
- Status
AwesomeInTheory
A Christmas miracle
- Aug 21, 2015
- 4,245
- 4,454
Ferland is a shite player who rode passenger with some very favorable linemates and Benning was suffering from PTSD from that playoff series with the Flames when he signed him to a contract.
His health issues are immaterial and I wish him nothing but a full recovery. But he doesn't score pity points with me because he's suffering from concussion issues.
The Canucks poured over the health records of Ferland, and Carolina's doctors gave him a clean bill of health. Many players come back from concussion issues to have a long career. The Stanley Cup winning Blues competed with Vancouver to sign Ferland. I guess they're idiots as well. Just keep Ferland's name out of your mouth when you're trying to score your internet points, that's all. He was a great player, and would have been great here as well.
Dude, there's a difference between criticizing a contract and a player. Dial it back.
"There's nothing wrong with this player whose contract won't be insured. Back up the Brinks truck, Francesco!"
AwesomeInTheory
A Christmas miracle
- Aug 21, 2015
- 4,245
- 4,454
That wouldn't McEnany sense.
Lol.
Micheal Ferland was a solid bottom-6 grinder who had inflated stats for a couple years dragging down elite scoring lines. In 2017 he would have been a decent 3rd line option. He was never a ‘great player’ - but then you’re someone who thinks that Travis Hamonic is better than Chris Tanev, so your evaluation skills are pretty suspect.
Ferland was finished in Carolina and all their fans told us so. He had something like 1 goal in his last 40 games before his career-ending concussion. He was uninsurable, and Aquilini must be thrilled at the wasted money.
Nobody here has ever criticized Micheal Ferland for taking the stupid contract that was offered to him. Trying to deflect criticism from your pet Benning by pretending that is the case is perhaps the most pathetic strawman in the history of this message board.
Oh, and if you’re talking about disrespecting Micheal Ferland, maybe learn to spell his name right.
Pretty sure I called the Ferland contract bad the day it was signed. Was obvious to me but I'm a semi Canes fan and got to see him in action. Just another example of Jimbo being a terrible pro scout
Making stuff up as usual. It is amusing that about the only time you're 'right' on a player evaluation is when they suffer a chronic injury preventing them from even proving themselves. There was a reason he played on skilled lines, just like there's a reason Gaunce is out of the league. One day maybe you'll begin to grasp those reasons.
Literally everything in my post is 100% correct.
The reason Ferland played on those skill lines was because coaches were stuck in the 1980s. Both the teams and the players on those lines greatly improved the instant Ferland was taken off of them.
Ferland was uninsurable for a reason and had a horrible record of recent play leading into his signing. This wasn’t some sort of great surprise.
Have you figured out how to spell his name yet?
- Aug 28, 2011
- 16,014
- 19,308
Caught a few games with Ferland back in March-April 2019. The guy would come back from injury. Take a slight routine hit and would go back to the dressing room for a period or two and sit the final period on the bench. He kept doing this for weeks and it was the most perplexing thing to watch. I don't question his desire to play. The guy loves hockey and it was evident. However any prudent GM would have stayed the hell away from signing him to a deal more than 2 years. No idea how this brass got suckered into a 4 year deal.
Ferland was a solid middle six winger with size. But he wasn’t going to give you that 2015 playoff series effort game in and game out.
The fact that insurance would not cover him should have been the red flag to limit his term to 2 years.
Most guys that are part of the bad contracts it was bad from the start.
Sven, Canucks had 2 rfa years with him. So didn’t have to commit 3 years unless they were sure in him. That cost them.
Roussel and Beagle can help in the short term but that 4th year we all expected to bite them.
Myers, that’s more the product of Tanev being hurt for 1/3 of the prior 3 seasons. Don’t think people here were eager to extend Tanev when he had 1 year left in 2019.
Sutter bad luck with injuries. Never hurt before he arrived. Overpaid yes, but didn’t expect him to be hurt so much.
Loui, short term benefit with the twins was never going to outweigh the 4 years post sedins.
Couldn’t fix the problem so have to bear it this season.
I think he had 2 RFA years left in 2018. 2011 1s round pick with late Bday. returned to JR after the draft following a 5 game NHL stint.
lockout shortened season in 12-13 where he spent 40 games in the A. 20 in the NHL. not sure if the NHL was prorating the time towards earning a UFA year that season. But, Sven like Jake spent only 26 games in the NHl and 40 in the A in 13-14. So, if he wasn't on the roster for half the season, he would not have gained a year towards UFA. I think that is the case, thus in 2018 he was 25 on July 1 and didn't have 6 NHL season under his belt to hit UFA in 2019 at 26.
If you’re right which you probably are that contract is even worse than I’ve been treating it. They could’ve QO’d him and then walked away so easily.
I remember my position at the time was if he wants term you drive down the AAV he didn’t have any leverage. If he wanted $3m plus give him one year and decide after the next season.
Absolutely dreadful contract handling. In line with just about every other contract that he’s handed out with 10-50% multipliers.
You can't walk away from an arbitration case unless it's a certain amount, like $4 mill.
And once you make a QO, you can't pull it back if Sven wants to sign it.
I can understand the Sutter/Myers deals. Both overpaid, but understand the situation and age, so ok with it. Injuries killed sutter. And in 2019, unlikely to bring Tanev back if he kept ending up on LTIR for 1/3 of the season.
Loui is by far the worst. Cost/Benefit didn't make sense.
Roussel/Beagle similar in that their best days would be behind them once the team got better which was on the horizon. The fact that they also signed Schaller that season should have made one of those 2 redundant.
Sven because they had time and didn't use it. How can you want to dump a guy that you had for 3 prior seasons before you signed him after a year on a 3 year deal?
Ferland, because of the insurance. Immediate red flag to limit term.
Now Benning has to pay the price for it.
Baertschi had 12 points in his last 31 games that year before suffering a season-ending injury, and had been a healthy scratch only a few games before that injury.
The guy had zero leverage. He was an incredibly fringe top-6 player who needed us and our situation to stay in the NHL a lot more than we needed him. He was a guy who should have been looking at $2 million on a 1-year deal, take it or leave it. His agent probably couldn't believe his luck when we offered money + term.
Obviously management is stupid with player evaluations and contracts at the best of times, but this was at a point where literally NOTHING they'd done from a pro scouting perspective had turned out, and Baertschi was the closest thing to a small glimmer of hope, and he was signed to a contract befitting the 'hit' they so desperately wanted him to be.
vadim sharifijanov
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2007
- 28,837
- 16,326
losing guys for nothing, unthinkable
hamhuis, vrbata, ryan miller, richie, matthias, hutton, stecher, tanev, marky, toffoli
Ya, they would have looked like idiots for signing Ferland, whats your point? This is also the team that in the same offseason blocked their franchise D-man being able to sign long term because they traded away a 1st and Bokk for Justin Faulk with a 7 year 6.5MM deal.
Even good teams, or teams that win the cup, make bad moves and should receive criticism for making bad moves. If the Blues also decided to trade away ROR for a 7th round pick after winning the cup, it's still an objectively bad move.
Hit the post
I have your gold medal Zippy!
Rutherford made an incredible brain dead move by acquiring NoGoodBranSon. But he's got Cups on his resume as a GM of a NHL club..
He also traded Hornqvist for Matheson 6 years 4.875MM, signed Jack Johnson to a 4 year deal, brought in Cody Ceci, and has effectively slammed the window shut on Crosby/Malkin's hands
- Status
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
OT: Raise the Jolly Roger: New season of plundering begins- Latest: sovietsanta87
-
