Former Canucks Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

MarkMM

Registered User
Jan 30, 2010
2,949
2,292
Delta, BC
Ask yourself whether you would take a paycut to remain in your company?

Stecher down 25%, Toffoli from $4.6 to $4.25, so like 8%, Leivo, is he going to get $1.5 mill in Calgary?

One thing to do that if your production is expected to drop, ala Marleau/Thornton, but not when you are in your mid/late 20's still.

In the NFL guys get cut and sign with other teams. It's a pride thing as well. If I was at $100K and I was asked to drop 15% down to $85K and I knew I could get that or more elsewhere, I would probably take the other job.

Yes, and it happens all the time for the right circumstances.

I run a tech start-up and in the early years when times got lean we'd have to cut pay (not an uncommon thing in our industry) and software engineers who could already make 4x or 5x their pay at a bigger company would willingly take the cut to give the company more time to develop and ship product. They do it because:

A.) They like the work they're doing
B.) They like the team they're doing it with and want to stay with this team
C.) They believe that in the long-term it'll be worth it.

It seems the Canucks get along as a group so B would seem to apply, and if they believed that their odds of having a chance at the Cup in the coming years with the Canucks were good then C should apply, too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vanuck

F A N

Registered User
Aug 12, 2005
18,679
5,920
I agree here 100%.

Chasing OEL was a big mistake.

If Jim had prioritised signing Toffoli and Troy we would be in a much better spot today.

I suspect that part of the OEL deal (which was reported upon but not confirmed) was that the Canucks would try to move some money as part of the deal. Failing that, if we were to prioritize Markstrom/Markstrom's replacement and Tanev/Tanev's replacement in that order, there really wasn't room to re-sign Toffoli.
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,561
83,926
Vancouver, BC
I hear what you are saying but we had Toffoli for 10 games and he was only brought into replace boeser. Our forwards look the same

Leivo-Toffoli was a roster spot for most of the season, and a very effective one at that.

I wouldn't say that claiming we 'lost both guys' is accurate either, but combined we're definitely down a quality winger from last year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DonnyNucker

StreetHawk

Registered User
Sep 30, 2017
25,960
9,603
Yes, and it happens all the time for the right circumstances.

I run a tech start-up and in the early years when times got lean we'd have to cut pay (not an uncommon thing in our industry) and software engineers who could already make 4x or 5x their pay at a bigger company would willingly take the cut to give the company more time to develop and ship product. They do it because:

A.) They like the work they're doing
B.) They like the team they're doing it with and want to stay with this team
C.) They believe that in the long-term it'll be worth it.

It seems the Canucks get along as a group so B would seem to apply, and if they believed that their odds of having a chance at the Cup in the coming years with the Canucks were good then C should apply, too.
I also consider this point: Is there upside for Stecher with the Canucks? If he signed with Van, would in 2022 would he be in a better position to get a raise? Hughes, Schmidt, Myers will be ahead of him. I think the team will give Juolevi every chance to play. So, he is not likely to rise above what he is on the roster. So, his chances of increasing his stock remaining in Vancouver don't look that good. Maybe a chance to another organzation will be better. It may not. Look at Hutton. Still unsigned after a year in LA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MarkMM

MarkMM

Registered User
Jan 30, 2010
2,949
2,292
Delta, BC
I also consider this point: Is there upside for Stecher with the Canucks? If he signed with Van, would in 2022 would he be in a better position to get a raise? Hughes, Schmidt, Myers will be ahead of him. I think the team will give Juolevi every chance to play. So, he is not likely to rise above what he is on the roster. So, his chances of increasing his stock remaining in Vancouver don't look that good. Maybe a chance to another organzation will be better. It may not. Look at Hutton. Still unsigned after a year in LA.

Yeah good point, with Hughes, Myers and Schmidt that's 3/4 top four spots taken.

Add to that the projected coming of Rathbone and plans for Juolevi, and the fact that Hughes, Rathbone and Stecher are not big guys, it's a fair question as to whether the team sees room for Stecher to move up in the line-up AND whether they'd want to have three smaller guys in their top four.
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,561
83,926
Vancouver, BC
Yeah good point, with Hughes, Myers and Schmidt that's 3/4 top four spots taken.

Add to that the projected coming of Rathbone and plans for Juolevi, and the fact that Hughes, Rathbone and Stecher are not big guys, it's a fair question as to whether the team sees room for Stecher to move up in the line-up AND whether they'd want to have three smaller guys in their top four.

The problem is that Stecher is a defensive/PK, even if they don't realize that. He's filling a Spurgeon/Grzelcyk role.

Having multiple small guys is not a problem if they fill different roles and are all good. Having multiple pure skill guys who can't PK and need soft minutes is a massive problem. Especially if they're clustered on the same side.
 

Hit the post

I have your gold medal Zippy!
Oct 1, 2015
22,308
14,071
Hiding under WTG's bed...
The problem is that Stecher is a defensive/PK, even if they don't realize that. He's filling a Spurgeon/Grzelcyk role.

Having multiple small guys is not a problem if they fill different roles and are all good. Having multiple pure skill guys who can't PK and need soft minutes is a massive problem. Especially if they're clustered on the same side.
Having multiple big guys like No-Good-Bran-Son *IS* a problem.:laugh:

Seriously, sure we'd all like Chris Pronger's on the blueline but we're easy to make happy. We'd like if there were no Luca Sbisa types behind the blueline.
 
  • Like
Reactions: I am toxic

F A N

Registered User
Aug 12, 2005
18,679
5,920
Yes, and it happens all the time for the right circumstances.

I run a tech start-up and in the early years when times got lean we'd have to cut pay (not an uncommon thing in our industry) and software engineers who could already make 4x or 5x their pay at a bigger company would willingly take the cut to give the company more time to develop and ship product.

But do these employees lock themselves into a 2 year contract where they could not go somewhere else if they choose to?

Under the right circumstances ya. You expect people to return your loyalty with loyalty. I'm sure if Aquilini promised Stecher that he will not be traded as long as he is the owner and be paid for his UFA years then I'm sure he'll wait and take that paycut. Lebanc signed a 1 year $1M contract and he DID get paid. There has to be promises and there has to be trust. If I worked for you and I think you're going to show me the door as soon as I help get your start up up and running there's no way I'm taking that paycut. But if I know that the company is struggling and I will be rewarded if we succeeded in getting the startup up and running then I would consider taking that paycut.

Plenty of people took a paycut during the financial crisis with the belief that they would be returned to their previous income levels when the company was in better shape. It didn't happen for many employees.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MarkMM

PuckMunchkin

Very Nice, Very Evil!
Dec 13, 2006
12,310
9,982
Lapland
I suspect that part of the OEL deal (which was reported upon but not confirmed) was that the Canucks would try to move some money as part of the deal. Failing that, if we were to prioritize Markstrom/Markstrom's replacement and Tanev/Tanev's replacement in that order, there really wasn't room to re-sign Toffoli.

You think the OEL talks didnt happen?
 

krutovsdonut

eeyore
Sep 25, 2016
16,825
9,486
Yes, and it happens all the time for the right circumstances.

I run a tech start-up and in the early years when times got lean we'd have to cut pay (not an uncommon thing in our industry) and software engineers who could already make 4x or 5x their pay at a bigger company would willingly take the cut to give the company more time to develop and ship product. They do it because:

A.) They like the work they're doing
B.) They like the team they're doing it with and want to stay with this team
C.) They believe that in the long-term it'll be worth it.

It seems the Canucks get along as a group so B would seem to apply, and if they believed that their odds of having a chance at the Cup in the coming years with the Canucks were good then C should apply, too.

sorry but the "a" of tech startup talent retention is, "because you give them stock options that they believe have the potential to be worth many times their salary if the company hits" and this makes them feel like owners and investors as well as employees. canucks cannot do that.

the other comment is that the canucks quite obviously let some of their people leave here because they thought they needed better software engineers. they could have signed tanev and stecher for what they are paying schmidt if they had thought they were the right guys to take the company public.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MarkMM

I am toxic

. . . even in small doses
Oct 24, 2014
9,379
14,712
Vancouver
Having multiple big guys like No-Good-Bran-Son *IS* a problem.:laugh:

Seriously, sure we'd all like Chris Pronger's on the blueline but we're easy to make happy. We'd like if there were no Luca Sbisa types behind the blueline.

We're allowed to have a good blue line?

Who knew?
 

F A N

Registered User
Aug 12, 2005
18,679
5,920
You think the OEL talks didnt happen?

I think the OEL talks happened. What I meant was that it's not confirmed whether the deal involved the Canucks moving salary (as in that was not the main sticking point for the Coyotes). The two sides obviously couldn't come to an agreement at the end.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PuckMunchkin

supercanuck

Registered User
Mar 2, 2016
2,669
3,162
Yes, and it happens all the time for the right circumstances.

I run a tech start-up and in the early years when times got lean we'd have to cut pay (not an uncommon thing in our industry) and software engineers who could already make 4x or 5x their pay at a bigger company would willingly take the cut to give the company more time to develop and ship product. They do it because:

A.) They like the work they're doing
B.) They like the team they're doing it with and want to stay with this team
C.) They believe that in the long-term it'll be worth it.

It seems the Canucks get along as a group so B would seem to apply, and if they believed that their odds of having a chance at the Cup in the coming years with the Canucks were good then C should apply, too.

Just curious...were there stocks involved? 4x/5x over the course of a year is a huge chunk of money for a regular Joe. Like $30k vs 120k/150k. That's a whole different level.
 

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
28,736
16,127
so apparently, we had an earlier neely trade on the table for mike mcphee, but serge savard nixed it.

What if Cam Neely had been dealt to Montreal instead of Boston?

In his recently released authorized biography, Serge Savard – Forever Canadien, the Habs legend detailed how he had a deal in ’85-86 with the Canucks that would have had the future Hall of Famer in a Canadiens uniform in exchange for the very workmanlike and unspectacular Mike McPhee. Savard balked on the deal and Neely was dealt to the Bruins that summer for Barry Pederson in one of the most lopsided trades in NHL history. (It turns out the McPhee traded probably would have worked out better for Vancouver, but would have been larceny nonetheless.)

“I was scared to death because I was a young manager,” Savard told TheHockeyNews.com. “I went to Vancouver and Tom Watt was the coach and he was my coach in Winnipeg so I knew him very well. And (Watt) was in love with McPhee. (Neely) was a young player and he wasn’t playing well and I knew McPhee was a pretty good player who would give me character. Not a lot of goals, but I kept him because I didn’t have the guts to make that trade.”

although if i'm nitpicking it's not really true that mike mcphee would have been better for vancouver than barry pederson. mcphee lasted longer and was a good role player, but pederson strung together two pretty decent offensive seasons, then after falling off was traded with tony tanti and rod buskas for andrew mcbain, dave capuano, and dan quinn. mcbain was over and capuano only gave us one season before joining mcbain in expansion/IHL oblivion, but dan quinn (aka gigantic pile of human garbage) was packaged with garth butcher to get us robert dirk, geoff courtnall, cliff ronning, and sergio momesso. even though the boston trade also meant losing the #3 pick, in the long run we did better.


71z-w-pbo6L._AC_SL1017_.jpg


0000288612.jpg


0c4763f19cdf4b96b61ac91ac7517667_front.jpg
 

StreetHawk

Registered User
Sep 30, 2017
25,960
9,603
so apparently, we had an earlier neely trade on the table for mike mcphee, but serge savard nixed it.

What if Cam Neely had been dealt to Montreal instead of Boston?



although if i'm nitpicking it's not really true that mike mcphee would have been better for vancouver than barry pederson. mcphee lasted longer and was a good role player, but pederson strung together two pretty decent offensive seasons, then after falling off was traded with tony tanti and rod buskas for andrew mcbain, dave capuano, and dan quinn. mcbain was over and capuano only gave us one season before joining mcbain in expansion/IHL oblivion, but dan quinn (aka gigantic pile of human garbage) was packaged with garth butcher to get us robert dirk, geoff courtnall, cliff ronning, and sergio momesso. even though the boston trade also meant losing the #3 pick, in the long run we did better.


71z-w-pbo6L._AC_SL1017_.jpg


0000288612.jpg


0c4763f19cdf4b96b61ac91ac7517667_front.jpg
If it was a one for one then the Canucks keep their first round pick which ended up being Glen Wesley. Very solid Dman through this career in Boston and Hartford.
But if you follow the link between Pedwrson to the guys he was involved in trades with then maybe you don’t do the deal with Montreal still.
Plus Neely was well suited to play half his games in the old gardens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vadim sharifijanov

MarkMM

Registered User
Jan 30, 2010
2,949
2,292
Delta, BC
Just curious...were there stocks involved? 4x/5x over the course of a year is a huge chunk of money for a regular Joe. Like $30k vs 120k/150k. That's a whole different level.

Yes, everyone gets options! And the salaries (both then received and outside offers) were higher, as in more than $30k being paid and much more than $150k being offered, but that's just the nature of the field (machine/deep learning analytics). Partly also a regional disparity, as in Google trying to poach, and in one case, a guy left Apple down in Silicon Valley and moved his family to Vancouver to join us.

So there's just no way we'd be competing with SV pay packages and people know that coming in, so we have to compete in other ways, partly the potential of upside (though we always remind people not to get too obsessed with stock options as objectively speaking there's a greater chance a start-up will be a smoking crater than the next unicorn), partly the industry we're in is one that people like to be a part of, partly working on some exciting projects/technology, and partly (as much as it sounds corny) it's a tight-knit team (we take the team on vacation together, last year was Hawaii, the year before Barcelona).

So yes, some key differences as others have pointed out with the Canucks (as in future pay upside if this works out), but aside from pay, I think there is some overlap that whether it be cash or the Stanley Cup, if you think your future will be better with a team and you enjoy what that team offers aside from cash, you can make a compelling offer.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: supercanuck

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
28,736
16,127
If it was a one for one then the Canucks keep their first round pick which ended up being Glen Wesley. Very solid Dman through this career in Boston and Hartford.
But if you follow the link between Pedwrson to the guys he was involved in trades with then maybe you don’t do the deal with Montreal still.
Plus Neely was well suited to play half his games in the old gardens.

sadly, and knowing canuck luck, i think history has shown us that pat quinn probably wouldn't have drafted glen wesley, a fairly average-sized and defenceman with a very steady and polished but unspectacular skillset. now big toolsy burnaby-born chris joseph (drafted 5th overall by the penguins, soon traded to edmonton in the paul coffey package)? that sounds more quinn's speed.

hell, nine years later quinn picked up joseph and he played for us in that first tom renney year before... well, you know.

but man yeah that crazy string to get a decade of wesley, then a decade of sergei samsonov, some years of kyle mclaren, then brad boyes, then nathan horton and lucic, well that would have been nice.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad