Speculation: Hughes and Pettersson's Next Contracts

What will the next contracts be for Hughes and Pettersson?


  • Total voters
    165

Canucks LB

My Favourite, Gone too soon, RIP Luc, We miss you
Oct 12, 2008
76,143
28,218
My best guess is Hughes and Petey will get the same Bridge deal.
Looking at roughly 7.25m x 3
 
  • Like
Reactions: David71

Luck 6

\\_______
Oct 17, 2008
10,192
1,786
Vancouver
I think Hughes will be 3 years 5.875mil and Pettersson will probably be 3 years at 6.8mil.

They may end up being 2 year deals instead.
 

Luck 6

\\_______
Oct 17, 2008
10,192
1,786
Vancouver
I'm not basing this in any real fact but I could see Yzerman in Detroit offer sheeting Pettersson.

He's sitting on a mountain of cap space. They have a good young group that Pettersson would push to the next level. I don't think the stigma of an offer sheet would bother him. And Detroit has a history of great Swedish players.

Again none of this is any real proof or fact, but if anyone was going to, they're in the best position, unless they want to keep the slow build going.

The thing is we would easily match anything up to 10mil, maybe more, if we had to. He wouldn’t get Pettersson, he would just screw the Canucks over for cap space. That’s why teams don’t often throw out offer sheets, it gets you no further along and ruins your working relationship with a fellow manager.
 

Love

Registered User
Feb 29, 2012
14,999
12,231
Long term deals would be the smart move. Benning would do a bridge, but hopefully we have a new GM who’s smart.
 

arttk

Registered User
Feb 16, 2006
17,036
8,753
Los Angeles
Depends on who is negotiating, if you get Gilman to come back and he is going to get them to take less.
 

82Ninety42011

Registered User
Jul 2, 2011
7,527
5,456
Abbotsford BC
I believe both will get bridge deals and EP's agent probably prefers that. Everyone believes EP is a star but this season was a wash for him. He's probably counting on coming back strong and showing he's worth a lot more than he showed this season. As per Hughes he took a step back to but with a stronger supporting cast and a system that actually works (new coach please) he can prove he's better as well. No clue on salary but bridge makes sense for both and do we even have the cap space to sign them long term??
 
  • Like
Reactions: mossey3535

kcunac

Registered User
Aug 31, 2008
1,738
1,229
Ottawa
As we move forward in the offseason but before free agency I wanted to bump my own thread to see if get some more votes and see if sentiment remains the same. Personally, I don't see any way Hughes signs for under 6.5 on a bridge deal (note that 5-6 mill per year is currently leading the poll). Pettersson at around 7 makes sense.
 

vanarchy

May 3, 2013
9,100
8,355
I think the best case scenario is one of them on a bridge and the other long term. It's more likely that they'll both be bridged.
 

kcunac

Registered User
Aug 31, 2008
1,738
1,229
Ottawa
I think the best case scenario is one of them on a bridge and the other long term. It's more likely that they'll both be bridged.
I think I heard their agent say Petey will be bridged but they are discussing term with Hughes
 

theguardianII

Registered User
Jan 30, 2020
3,087
1,599
God don't sign Hughes to long term.

Wait a couple of years when his defensive liabilities are evident to all fans.

If you pay a DEFENCE MAN big bucks he better be able to make a difference without scoring goals, in other words PLAY DEFENCE.

All the very best defence men in history were;

- Bigger
- hi scoring
- could hit
- played on the PK
- WERE TOP PLAYERS DEFENSIVELY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The last 25 cup winners didn't have little defence men, most had the largest back end.

Ya, ya I know, give him time.
Every scouting report going back 7 years state he needs to work on his defence and wonder how he would handle larger NHL type players.
With him on the team the team has to try to conform itself to fit him, the team has to find a player to play with him.

If scoring on the PP is needed then move a forward back, with him on the ice the forward is doing the back checking or playing defence anyway most times.

Hughes is ENTERTAINMENT. A small cuddly little "bear" that can dart around the ice dazzling fans with his skating.

But if playoffs are the goal then trade Hughes. There are teams that will want entertainment or a PR factor. "The Hughes brothers" (The Blues Brothers) could sell tickets.

I doubt Hughes will ever be a plus player if he gets 50-50 zone starts. He is a big minus while already having the best defensive defence man as his partner and having 65% offensive zone starts and NO PK time. The team is already twisting themselves into knots trying to make him look good.
 

kcunac

Registered User
Aug 31, 2008
1,738
1,229
Ottawa
I'm not as negative as Highes as some others but I think bridge deals make sense for both. Petey needs to show he is not injury-prone and Hughes needs to show a willingness to work on his defensive game, hopefully with help from our new assistant coach.
 

Nucker101

Foundational Poster
Apr 2, 2013
20,579
15,832
I'm also not down on Hughes like some others seem to be, I recognize his weaknesses, but people need to consider how flawed/outdated Green's "system" is. Willingly giving up controlled zone entries to collapse to the slot/net is going to make a lot of dmen look bad, especially smaller/weaker dmen.

I'd still bridge Hughes and pray that Shaw will get Green to re-consider/adjust his strategy.

EP I'd lock up long-term before he becomes even more expensive. He and Demko are the two best players on the team right now(barring a Hughes bounce back).
 
  • Like
Reactions: AppleHoneySauce

F A N

Registered User
Aug 12, 2005
18,629
5,893
I think a Hughes bridge would come in lower ($4-$5Mish AAV) on a 2 year term. I don't think you pay Hughes top level money. Chabot is the top level comparable but I think it may be worth lowering the years to get the AAV down. Something more in line with Wennberg and Provorov. We could also wait and see whether Sakic can squeeze Makar before re-signing Hughes but we'll probably run out of cap room by then.

I like the idea of Petey on a long term contract. Basically anoint him as the franchise C. I think Petey is the type to thrive under pressure. If he's the team's go to guy and paid like one, I feel he is the type to deliver. He's also not Horvat level mature so I think a little bit of pressure can do Petey some good.

I do think you sink and swim with your core players. I've said it before, if Petey and Hughes etc. aren't good enough to deliver us a Cup, we're not winning one anyways.
 

Blue and Green

Out to lunch
Dec 17, 2017
3,411
3,360
God don't sign Hughes to long term.

Wait a couple of years when his defensive liabilities are evident to all fans.

Hughes is only 21, thus improvement is highly probable. And it depends on his demands; if he's willing to take a team-friendly AAV on a longer contract, it's worth the risk.
 
  • Like
Reactions: canuckking1

MarkMM

Registered User
Jan 30, 2010
2,948
2,290
Delta, BC


If that's what Hughes is asking for, I could see him living up to that but he hasn't proved enough for me to give him the benefit of the doubt. Bridge him and make him earn it, either we'll be happy to pay that (with the risk that it might be more, but in a post flat cap) or we could look at moving him for a good return. I like Hughes and believe in him, but no one is irreplaceable and even great players have a point where they do more harm than good.

Petersson I'd be more comfortable going the distance on a long-term deal.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->