But the point is that that random 4th liner is unlikely to anchor your 4th line. Green is going to look at that random 4th liner and say screw that I'm putting Horvat out there, which is what happened when Beagle and Sutter went down. I believe in the concept that GMs manage and coaches coach but I also believe that if you're the GM, you hire a coach who is going to coach a style of play you want your team to play and at the same time you want to supply your coach with the type of players he needs/wants to play that style of hockey.
Player Discussion Jay Beagle
- Thread starter Zombotron
- Start date
But the point is that that random 4th liner is unlikely to anchor your 4th line. Green is going to look at that random 4th liner and say screw that I'm putting Horvat out there, which is what happened when Beagle and Sutter went down. I believe in the concept that GMs manage and coaches coach but I also believe that if you're the GM, you hire a coach who is going to coach a style of play you want your team to play and at the same time you want to supply your coach with the type of players he needs/wants to play that style of hockey.
Cancuks
Former Exalted Ruler
Gaunce will get picked up next season by a contender against the cap. Then go on to be their affordable reliable solid defensively faceoff winning fourth line center who goes on to win a Cup.
In any other market, six years for Eriksson and four years for Beagle, would be enough of the owner's money wasted for the GM to walk the plank.
But you can almost guarantee the current hockey ops gurus in VanCity will double down with a raft of UFA signings on July 1st. The beat-down goes on and on.
But you can almost guarantee the current hockey ops gurus in VanCity will double down with a raft of UFA signings on July 1st. The beat-down goes on and on.
Johnny Canucker
Registered User
- Jan 4, 2009
- 17,750
- 6,116
xtra
Registered User
So did Martin St. Louis, markstrom etc. waivers isn’t the be all about a player
mathonwy
Positively #toxic
- Jan 21, 2008
- 19,073
- 10,000
It’s literally impossible to talk seriously about player value on this team considering how much garbage contracts we have and how crappy the team is overall.
There just isn’t a serious conversation to be had.
So I comment on Jay Beagle’s personal effort level, his effectiveness as a player and his effect on the rest of the team when he’s in the line up; and I see all good things.
In addition, he is highly respected amongst players and fans. Stats junkies will probably scoff but respect is something that this Canuck line up hasn’t had for a very long time. Respect affects a lot of little things such as penalties being called and whether the opponent starts bullying you. Beagle has deterred a lot of rat behaviour because he doesn’t take any crap and scrums very well.
I have always been a Gaunce fan but if I’m directing the rebuild of a team and my two most senior players just retired and I was choosing between Gaunce and Beagle for my 4C position, I would choose Beagle.
Beagle knows it’s his job to eat crap when the team isn’t doing well. Not sure I’d want to impose this type of burden on Gaunce.
Tim Calhoun
#11
- May 31, 2006
- 10,457
- 1,319
Dowd just re-signed for a quarter of the price of Beagle and as seen above, is a more effective player.
Good for Dowd but he was atrocious in Vancouver
He was the exact same as Beagle objectively when you look at the numbers
geebaan
7th round busted
- Oct 27, 2012
- 10,226
- 8,795
I think Beagles mentor ship and team leader abilities more than make up for the extra 2.25 million freakin dollars, oh and NTC to boot.
mathonwy
Positively #toxic
- Jan 21, 2008
- 19,073
- 10,000
On a team that has either been:
Having a 33 year old Jay Beagle committed to the improvement and success of this team for the next three years isn't a bad thing to have.
Cap went up $4.5M this season, $2.0M the last season, Seattle is joining the league in a couple years, goal scoring is through the roof, NHL making $ hand over fist. Can easily see cap continuing to go up. Don't think Beagle's contract will be an issue. Especially when we got so much other trash contracts on this god forsaken team.
- Unintentionally butchered by catastrophic ownership incompetence; or
- Intentionally butchered by an ownership team that wants to play nice with the league again
Having a 33 year old Jay Beagle committed to the improvement and success of this team for the next three years isn't a bad thing to have.
Cap went up $4.5M this season, $2.0M the last season, Seattle is joining the league in a couple years, goal scoring is through the roof, NHL making $ hand over fist. Can easily see cap continuing to go up. Don't think Beagle's contract will be an issue. Especially when we got so much other trash contracts on this god forsaken team.
Fire Benning
diaper filled piss baby
The Dowd/Beagle thing is just phenomenal. So easy to see the difference between poorly run teams and intelligently run teams.
That’s silly, eriksson and beagles contracts costs us 10mil in cap space; that could be the difference for landing a star ufa like panarin and karlsson.
It’s not the end of the world yes but it’s still bad cap management and bad pro scouting.
mathonwy
Positively #toxic
- Jan 21, 2008
- 19,073
- 10,000
It's only silly if you want to manage the Canucks like a computer game.
In the real world, being able to convince a respected 1 team vet like Beagle to commit 4 years of his life to play hard for your embarrassing tire-fire-that's-been-burning-for-4-years bottom feeder of a team is a fairly significant thing and IMO, signifies a major shift in the right direction for this team.
In the real world, stars like panarin and karlsson don't sign with teams like ours.
Cap management is fine. Cap keeps going up.
Pro scouting is fine (so far). Beagle is an on-ice leader and he plays a hard and heavy game which gives our bottom 6 a good boost in the grit department. He also very rarely takes shifts off.
Ok but this just means there's an additional $140MM leaguewide per year to spend on players, so the cost of signing players just keeps going up. It would take the cap going up to like $120MM before Beagle/Eriksson contracts are "fine".
TruGr1t
Proper Villain
- Jun 26, 2003
- 23,136
- 6,812
I look forward to this guy getting worse every single year for the duration of his contract. Good times.
mathonwy
Positively #toxic
- Jan 21, 2008
- 19,073
- 10,000
It really depends on how one values a player contract.
Eriksson is an embarrassment of a player with an even more embarrassing contract.
Eriksson has negative on-ice value.
I'm curious why you would lump Beagle and Eriksson's into the same "type" of contract?
Are you seriously suggesting that jay beagle brings so much to the team that he deserves 4 mil? Hes about as productive as Adam gaudette, gaudette brings grit and never takes a shift off as well! And he’s like 10 years younger with more room to grow. And if you think pro scouting is fine we must be watching different teams, the late addition of leivo and Pearson might be alright but the other players brought in are complete garbage, sutter del zotto eriksson beagle gagner gudbranson to name a few. I can take a couple of bad contracts because no gm is perfect but as of right now, they are doing us more harm than good.
Hit the post
I have your gold medal Zippy!
Pro scouting is fine so far? What?
One very good signing (Rousell) doesnt make up for the Guds trade. Or any of the other pieces of trash on the Blueline (Stecher was more of a prospect when he was acquired). How about Gagner playing for our AHL rival? Etc, etc, etc
krutovsdonut
eeyore
- Sep 25, 2016
- 16,842
- 9,516
that's not being objective. objectivity must allow for things you believe to exist even if you cannot quantify them.
so in this case do you believe that they both bring the same value to the table as players or do you believe it's a question of how to value the intangible qualities that beagle brings? i mean an argument that beagle is overpaid is one thing, but an argument that beagle is objectively worth only $750k is another.
Yikes.
A computer game? How about a successful franchise. Show me the teams that were at the bottom who crawled out of it by paying a 33 year old $1m player for $12m with a no-trade clause. If that's what it took to get Beagle here, it shows he's more interested in the $$ than actually doing anything. It's a retirement deal for a player who was never really that good.
What do you mean by in the real world stars don't sign with teams like the Canucks? Show your work.
Cap management is not fine, that's ludicrous.
Pro scouting has been abysmal, you'll have to do more than just throwing out that statement to convince anyone. Hard, heavy, grit are just words people use when you can't come up with actual tangible reasons he's any good. Fact of the matter is, he gets absolutely smashed in the shots and goals rates at 5 on 5. He makes the team worse. And he's got a NTC.
2 goals on a goalie this year.
Yes it is being objective.
Objective: not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.
Numbers or statistics are facts. Intangibles are feelings.
You're definition seems more like "faith" or "blind faith" you're believing there are intangibles there with no proof that the value is there.
Jay Beagle's on ice contributions are objectively very similar to what Nic Dowd put up here last year, especially at 5 on 5.
Ad
Latest posts
-
Rumor: 2024 Trade Rumors and Free Agency Thread: Post Deadline- Latest: Colorado Avalanche
-
