Speculation: Jeff Angus: Canucks to let Max Lapierre go to UFA. (or not, UPD: June 18, 2013)

[Alan Jackson]

A fourth line center, whether signed or not, is not going to be any signifier of a "reset".

No, but it's a piece that can be potentially replaced. The Canucks have Sedin, Sedin, Burrows, Higgins, Kesler, Booth, Kassian all locked in.

If they are going to make some changes, not re-signing fringe UFAs is a pretty easy place to start.

 

[Tiranis]

What HW has just posted on the subject:

Can we stop posting the info from her? It's pretty clear that it's complete ******** at this point. Just a week ago she was saying how Torts' interview went badly. Not to mention that the above post is something any of us could've written with the information at our disposal. Funny that she posted this info only after the major media reported about Lapierre wanting 3-4 years and didn't even credit the source.

The Higgins vs Torres thing pretty clearly exposed that she has zero clue what she's talking about.

 

[dave babych returns]

I think most would agree (and she often qualifies her posts along these lines) that what HW posts is mostly just gossip.

It's amusing to read but anyone expecting a high batting average from her is misguided.

 

[ItsAllPartOfThePlan]

No, but it's a piece that can be potentially replaced. The Canucks have Sedin, Sedin, Burrows, Higgins, Kesler, Booth, Kassian all locked in.

If they are going to make some changes, not re-signing fringe UFAs is a pretty easy place to start.

Well, I am pretty sure Raymond, Roy and Luongo will be gone. Probably one or two of Edler/Bieska/Ballard as well.

That's a decent start. We don't need to get rid of our core. We just need to supplement them well.

 

[Alflives*]

Well, I am pretty sure Raymond, Roy and Luongo will be gone. Probably one or two of Edler/Bieska/Ballard as well.

That's a decent start. We don't need to get rid of our core. We just need to supplement them well.

You don't think Edler and Bieksa are part of the core?

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

No chance.

I'm opposed to keeping Lapierre at any price, but there's no way you can give a 4th line player that much term.

Does Gillis want zero flexibility with his roster? He just handed Chris Higgings an absurd contract that he probably already regrets. All this talk about bringing younger players in - you need room for them on the roster.

Players like Lapierre need to go - this team needs a culture change, and replacing Lapierre is an easy way to start that change.

Yep. $2.5M for a guy that has been the mark of consistency during the season, hits, forechecks, grinds and occasionally steps into the top six, while maintaining a twenty goal pace and having chemistry with practically everyone. What a terrible decision. It boggles the mind how many people ascribe to "what have you done for me lately?"

If criticising that contract are in for a shock once they see what free agents are getting.

 

[PG Canuck]

I'm going to be extremely disapointed if the Canucks extend Lapierre.

So much for the "reset".

Do you expect a full roster "reset"?

 

[Alan Jackson]

Yep. $2.5M for a guy that has been the mark of consistency during the season, hits, forechecks, grinds and occasionally steps into the top six, while maintaining a twenty goal pace and having chemistry with practically everyone. What a terrible decision. It boggles the mind how many people ascribe to "what have you done for me lately?"

If criticising that contract are in for a shock once they see what free agents are getting.

I have no real problem with the money given to Higgins, but was 4 years and a limited NTC necessary?

Especially considering he's yet another player who's offence evaporates in the playoffs.

 

[y2kcanucks]

What HW has just posted on the subject:

I'd settle for 3 years at $1M per. 1.2, 1, 800k

 

[Alan Jackson]

Do you expect a full roster "reset"?

No, but I would think the guys that actually can be replaced relatively easily would be a decent place to start.

Also, I think Lapierre is part of a problem that needs to be addressed. I wouldn't have him back.

 

[PG Canuck]

No, but I would think the guys that actually can be replaced relatively easily would be a decent place to start.

Also, I think Lapierre is part of a problem that needs to be addressed. I wouldn't have him back.

They're obviously not very replaceable for us because we haven't had a good fourth line in...well I forget the last time we had a good fourth line.

 

[Alflives*]

I'd settle for 3 years at $1M per. 1.2, 1, 800k

I like his size, and he's a center, who plays with a nasty edge. He can move up the line-up for small periods of time to fill in for injury, or a spark. However, do his 'other issues' make him someone Gillis just won't have around anymore? Although Hodgson's issues were more off ice matters, Gillis tends to move (or let go) guys whose difficulties outweigh their value to the team. I think Shane O'brien was another guy and maybe Torres was too?

 

[mrmyheadhurts]

I'm surprised that people aren't getting that the "reset" was turfing the coaching staff and to a lesser degree, the upcoming Luongo trade. There are going to be moves to the supporting cast, guys like Raymond and likely Ballard will be gone, but the main core players on this team aren't going anywhere. Which I'm fine with by the way, they'll get one more crack at it with a new coach next season and with the Sedins entering the final year of their contracts. If that goes south, then you'll start to see some bigger changes.

The only guy that has a chance at moving is Edler and I highly doubt he is moved, especially on that great contract. Crazier things have happened I suppose.

 

[mrmyheadhurts]

No, but I would think the guys that actually can be replaced relatively easily would be a decent place to start.

Also, I think Lapierre is part of a problem that needs to be addressed. I wouldn't have him back.

What if there are no better options at the same price? I don't like the idea of making change just for the sake of making change. Of course, if there is something going on personality wise that has become a distraction, it would make sense to move on, but I've never seen any hint of his teammates turning on him. What do you mean by part of the problem?

Realistically, who are the better 4th line center options available to the Canucks if they let him walk? You're assuming he's easily replaceable but I'm not so sure of that, especially if he's willing to sign cheaply to stay.

 

[Hollywood Burrows]

Lappy had a bad year (battled a groin injury, I think) and his value is pretty low. He's a better player than he showed last year, and it would be smart of the Canucks to buy low on him. If they could get him under 1.5 million per it would be amazing, the problem is term. You can't be handing out 3-4 year contracts to 4th liners. Even 2 years is stretching it, but given the alternatives I'd 100% take lappy back at 2 years ~3 million.

All this "reset" BS is to entertain talk-radio listeners. You don't build a hockey team with a mindset like that.

 

[FireBenningNow]

Can we stop posting the info from her? It's pretty clear that it's complete ******** at this point. Just a week ago she was saying how Torts' interview went badly. Not to mention that the above post is something any of us could've written with the information at our disposal. Funny that she posted this info only after the major media reported about Lapierre wanting 3-4 years and didn't even credit the source.

The Higgins vs Torres thing pretty clearly exposed that she has zero clue what she's talking about.

While I understand HW has been hit and miss, he/she? was right on the Gillis hire (obviously has some inside knowledge) + I believe HW was one of the first to report the strong possibility that the Canucks are looking to hire Torts.

 

[Alan Jackson]

What if there are no better options at the same price? I don't like the idea of making change just for the sake of making change. Of course, if there is something going on personality wise that has become a distraction, it would make sense to move on, but I've never seen any hint of his teammates turning on him. What do you mean by part of the problem?

Realistically, who are the better 4th line center options available to the Canucks if they let him walk? You're assuming he's easily replaceable but I'm not so sure of that, especially if he's willing to sign cheaply to stay.

I think Lapierre represents part of a culture problem on this team that needs to be addressed.

I would not want him back under any circumstances, and would glady suffer any consequences of not being able to find a suitable replacement.

As it stands, I don't think Lapierre is anywhere as "irreplaceable" as some are suggesting.

If the Canucks can't acquire a 4th line centre through trade or free agency, I think a young player like Gaunce or Schroeder could replace Lapierre's minutes.

 

[MS]

I'm surprised that people aren't getting that the "reset" was turfing the coaching staff and to a lesser degree, the upcoming Luongo trade. There are going to be moves to the supporting cast, guys like Raymond and likely Ballard will be gone, but the main core players on this team aren't going anywhere. Which I'm fine with by the way, they'll get one more crack at it with a new coach next season and with the Sedins entering the final year of their contracts. If that goes south, then you'll start to see some bigger changes.

The only guy that has a chance at moving is Edler and I highly doubt he is moved, especially on that great contract. Crazier things have happened I suppose.

Exactly.

I don't know what people expect. This team has won 5 straight division titles and is 1 year removed from a President's Trophy and 2 years removed from being a game away from the Cup.

We aren't going to tear apart half the roster and replace them with a pile of rookies. That makes no sense at all and would do nothing but turn us into a fringe playoff team.

We've already fired our head coach, Luongo will be traded, and guys like Raymond and Ballard are almost certainly gone, as well as some other depth guys. That's a pretty substantial change.

What if there are no better options at the same price? I don't like the idea of making change just for the sake of making change. Of course, if there is something going on personality wise that has become a distraction, it would make sense to move on, but I've never seen any hint of his teammates turning on him. What do you mean by part of the problem?

Realistically, who are the better 4th line center options available to the Canucks if they let him walk? You're assuming he's easily replaceable but I'm not so sure of that, especially if he's willing to sign cheaply to stay.

People like Boyd Gordon but I'll call right now that he's getting $2 million+ from somebody.

Outside of him, there isn't much out there. Lapierre is a good player, a guy who can handle #3 center minutes quite easily who we've had on our 4th line. He's one of the best #4 centers in the NHL.

If the alternative is to give minutes to Gaunce or Lain, then sign Lapierre immediately.

I think Lapierre represents part of a culture problem on this team that needs to be addressed.

I would not want him back under any circumstances, and would glady suffer any consequences of not being able to find a suitable replacement.

As it stands, I don't think Lapierre is anywhere as "irreplaceable" as some are suggesting.

If the Canucks can't acquire a 4th line centre through trade or free agency, I think a young player like Gaunce or Schroeder could replace Lapierre's minutes.

No chance Gaunce can cover Lapierre's minutes and provide a similar contribution.

And I think that 'culture problem' is a bit of an exaggeration. You'd think we'd missed the playoffs 5 straight years instead of winning 5 straight division titles by the way people talk.

 

[Verviticus]

No chance Gaunce can cover Lapierre's minutes and provide a similar contribution.

there's absolutely a chance. i just wouldn't say its a likely thing, or bank on it

 

[Tiranis]

While I understand HW has been hit and miss, he/she? was right on the Gillis hire (obviously has some inside knowledge) + I believe HW was one of the first to report the strong possibility that the Canucks are looking to hire Torts.

And then went and reported that Torts interviewed badly and was close to being out of the running. Then she pretended like that never happened and recently bragged about calling Torts hiring in the first place...

 

[FireBenningNow]

And then went and reported that Torts interviewed badly and was close to being out of the running. Then she pretended like that never happened and recently bragged about calling Torts hiring in the first place...

HW is by far the biggest canuck "insider" there is on any board. He/she may not always get it 100 percent right but something is better than nothing imo.

Her breakdown of the luongo events were also a very interesting read.

 

[sk8er]

And then went and reported that Torts interviewed badly and was close to being out of the running. Then she pretended like that never happened and recently bragged about calling Torts hiring in the first place...

My goodness tiranis, you are usually so even keeled...whatever did HW do to get your knickers in such a twist? Sure she gets some stuff wrong, but she has gotten some good stuff too, regarding the Higgins/Torres thing, I think she was just repeating what she was told.....I think her source in the organization dried up after gillis was hired, Give her a break big guy!

 

[FireBenningNow]

HW is by far the biggest canuck "insider" there is on any board. He/she may not always get it 100 percent right but something is better than nothing imo.

Her breakdown of the luongo events were also a very interesting read.

Wow so he/she also called the torts hire...changing your tune about HW yet?

 

[Alflives*]

Wow so he/she also called the torts hire...changing your tune about HW yet?

Maybe HW is Max Lapierre?

 

[y2kcanucks]

I wonder if Tortorella would allow Lapierre to go back to being Yappiere? Or would this signify the end of Lapierre's tenure here?