The Pettersson and Hughes Contract Thread

[iceburg]

I’m sure there is some bad blood. I suggested that weeks ago and there was a poster who kept saying “it’s just business” …. Clearly there’s going to be some lasting effects here.

Just like there’s bad blood with Boeser and Horvat? New day, same old story. High end guys take time to sign because they have more leverage than other players. Any suggestion to the contrary is just meant to dredge up drama.

 

[Johnny Canucker]

Just like there’s bad blood with Boeser and Horvat? New day, same old story. High end guys take time to sign because they have more leverage than other players. Any suggestion to the contrary is just meant to dredge up drama.

They are RFAs. You cannot find a simpler deal to make. One of them has basically no rights lol. There have been comparable signings for both in the last 2 weeks.

you’re now a Benning apologist. Don’t act like it’s normal to have your 2 stars unsigned a week out from training camp.

 

[Hoglander]

They are RFAs. You cannot find a simpler deal to make. One of them has basically no rights lol. There have been comparable signings for both in the last 2 weeks.

you’re now a Benning apologist. Don’t act like it’s normal to have your 2 stars unsigned a week out from training camp.

Benning painted himself into capspace corner, so he's been lowballing them. That's all that's going on. You're just making up fake drama, cuz that's what you do. Back away from the ledge, Johnny.

 

[Johnny Canucker]

Benning painted himself into capspace corner, so he's been lowballing them. That's all that's going on. You're just making up fake drama, cuz that's what you do. Back away from the ledge, Johnny.

Lol, yup. Everything is awesome. Repeat it 10x before bed.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

Lol, yup. Everything is awesome. Repeat it 10x before bed.

No, you're just going way too melodramatic. Benning has mismanaged the cap for the majority of his time here, but the most recent moves (mainly OEL) will impact the extensions for Horvat/Miller/Boeser and not Pettersson/Hughes -- although going short-term on one of the latter will cost the team more cap space in the future when they need a new contract (similar to Boeser's current contract). I'm fairly sure one of Boeser/Miller/Horvat will be gone before their contracts end assuming the rest of the roster remains intact.

 

[Hoglander]

Lol, yup. Everything is awesome. Repeat it 10x before bed.

All I need is a Calgary flames Bed set, then I could cry myself to sleep every night, just like you do

 

[Dural]

Not that I'm advocating for it right now, but a reasonable line of thinking says that if your only goal is to win a Stanley Cup, and you can't sign your core players to favorable/fair long term contracts (either due to cap mismanagement or the player being unwilling), then they should be dealt at some point, perhaps during their bridge deal.

This league is all about benefitting from good contracts, and Benning has put himself in a situation where he can't afford term, so it's very difficult to see what window they're actually targeting for a Cup. Is it a win now team? Because they were awful last year and the defense looks shaky at best. Is it a win in 3 years team? Because key players will have moved on/degrade/be on much more expensive deals. This was the issue with the Miller deal - from a pick value and player performance perspective it was a big win for Benning, but from a team perspective, it was a premature move for a team that was still in the early stages of a rebuild.

 

[GetFocht]

This is all part of the song and dance, they will be signed by training camp.

 

[M2Beezy]

then go cheer for another team if they bother you so much. I hear there is a brand new team just a few hundred km away and you can get there quickly.

They should bother every Canucks fan who wants the Canucks to win hockey games. Horrible management with horrible results in a results based industry. Seven years of losing. Time to open up the old eyes and clean out the waxed up ears bub

 

[Hoglander]

They should bother every Canucks fan who wants the Canucks to win hockey games. Horrible management with horrible results in a results based industry. Seven years of losing. Time to open up the old eyes and clean out the waxed up ears bub

It's actually only 5 years of losing, with 2 playoff years and some rounds won. Still, 7 years of mostly crap, with a whole lot of bad contracts and mismanaged cap space.

 

[racerjoe]

It's actually only 5 years of losing, with 2 playoff years and some rounds won. Still, 7 years of mostly crap, with a whole lot of bad contracts and mismanaged cap space.

I mean technically isn’t it 6yrs of losing with 2 playoffs? I mean weren’t we 17th or 18th and got in anyway thanks to the pandemic? Or am I remembering wrong?

 

[Sneezy]

They should bother every Canucks fan who wants the Canucks to win hockey games. Horrible management with horrible results in a results based industry. Seven years of losing. Time to open up the old eyes and clean out the waxed up ears bub

snappy come back old chap, jolly good show.

Since Seattle is a new team they probably have room for you as well or you can just sit back and relax and watch this season unfold. If they are bad then everyone gets their wish and JB and TG will be gone. But I assume TG will be gone by Christmas if he coached like he has over the past 2 seasons.

 

[M2Beezy]

snappy come back old chap, jolly good show.

Since Seattle is a new team they probably have room for you as well or you can just sit back and relax and watch this season unfold. If they are bad then everyone gets their wish and JB and TG will be gone. But I assume TG will be gone by Christmas if he coached like he has over the past 2 seasons.

So if our team has been generally very lousy for the last seven years you think the best thing to do is ignore the losing and instead just be naively hopeful?

 

[Sneezy]

So if our team has been generally very lousy for the last seven years you think the best thing to do is ignore the losing and instead just be naively hopeful?

you really grasp as straws?

Did I say that?

 

[M2Beezy]

you really grasp as straws?

Did I say that?

I criticized all the losing this management group has brought to my favourite and only hockey team and you suggested i cheer for a different team. Seems you are not too happy with criticism of this lousy management group

 

[Sneezy]

I criticized all the losing this management group has brought to my favourite and only hockey team and you suggested i cheer for a different team. Seems you are not too happy with criticism of this lousy management group

Nah, just boring to see the same people post the same stuff for the past couple of years, time to move on and enjoy the new team.

 

[MarkMM]

Not that I'm advocating for it right now, but a reasonable line of thinking says that if your only goal is to win a Stanley Cup, and you can't sign your core players to favorable/fair long term contracts (either due to cap mismanagement or the player being unwilling), then they should be dealt at some point, perhaps during their bridge deal.

This league is all about benefitting from good contracts, and Benning has put himself in a situation where he can't afford term, so it's very difficult to see what window they're actually targeting for a Cup. Is it a win now team? Because they were awful last year and the defense looks shaky at best. Is it a win in 3 years team? Because key players will have moved on/degrade/be on much more expensive deals. This was the issue with the Miller deal - from a pick value and player performance perspective it was a big win for Benning, but from a team perspective, it was a premature move for a team that was still in the early stages of a rebuild.

I love Miller but at this point the way Benning hasn't timed things right we'd be wise to be clear-eyed about how to make the most of the situation. I'm imagining Podkolzin starts on the third line but I'm hopeful he plays on to the top line as soon as next year, I know he's generally a RW but if he can play on the left side (and since he's done some time at centre I'm hoping this means he's versatile) then the opportunity opens up for Podkolzin to replace Miller as the 1LW with Miller being traded for a RHD to be paired with Hughes. Pushing Hamonic to the second pairing and Poolman to the third pairing suddenly puts everyone at their appropriate level, with Myers being traded for whatever we can get for him, if for no other reason than to clear cap space. With Myers off, then our cap is almost good, with only OEL being an anchor, but having one bad deal is acceptable, it's the plethora under Benning that's been the problem. We might have light at the end of that tunnel if we play it right, and if OEL can return to at least a top four performance level for a couple more years then it's actually not too bad. Then we have the foundation of a decent team, will have cleared up some cap space to extend Petersson and Hughes after their bridges, and the sole remaining item is to start addressing the dearth of picks/prospects in the system.

 

[M2Beezy]

Nah, just boring to see the same people post the same stuff for the past couple of years, time to move on and enjoy the new team.

Have a management that wins games then. Myself and Im sure many other Canucks fans come here to talk Canucks - a team that has failed very badly with this management, so naturally we are gonna be less than accepting of such bad bad results. Not really sure why you cant understand this. Winning=good. Losing=bad

 

[Samzilla]

Not that I'm advocating for it right now, but a reasonable line of thinking says that if your only goal is to win a Stanley Cup, and you can't sign your core players to favorable/fair long term contracts (either due to cap mismanagement or the player being unwilling), then they should be dealt at some point, perhaps during their bridge deal.

This league is all about benefitting from good contracts, and Benning has put himself in a situation where he can't afford term, so it's very difficult to see what window they're actually targeting for a Cup. Is it a win now team? Because they were awful last year and the defense looks shaky at best. Is it a win in 3 years team? Because key players will have moved on/degrade/be on much more expensive deals. This was the issue with the Miller deal - from a pick value and player performance perspective it was a big win for Benning, but from a team perspective, it was a premature move for a team that was still in the early stages of a rebuild.

We've traded our first round pick 2 out of the last 3 years. If we're not in win now mode, then what are we? We've never truly rebuilt.

 

[canucksfan]

If there is nothing close to being done when training camp starts, then it's time to raise concerns.

 

[Jimnastic]

I’m sure there is some bad blood. I suggested that weeks ago and there was a poster who kept saying “it’s just business” …. Clearly there’s going to be some lasting effects here.

Well, no....you can't just extrapolate your expectations as fact. Instead of "clearly...", how about "...possibly there could be.."

 

[Petey But Really Jim]

Ahh nope

 

[MarkMM]

Nah, just boring to see the same people post the same stuff for the past couple of years, time to move on and enjoy the new team.

Boring to see the same people defending the same mistakes despite being proven repeatedly wrong in their defence of Benning.

People keep complaining about Benning because he keeps making the same mistakes, it's a sign of people caring about the good of the team and having the intelligence to see that this management group has been bad for it.

 

[Petey But Really Jim]

Boring to see the same people defending the same mistakes despite being proven repeatedly wrong in their defence of Benning.

Or to watch the same mistakes being made by the same morons being approved of and doubled down on by the same trust fund child.

 

[RandV]

Not that I'm advocating for it right now, but a reasonable line of thinking says that if your only goal is to win a Stanley Cup, and you can't sign your core players to favorable/fair long term contracts (either due to cap mismanagement or the player being unwilling), then they should be dealt at some point, perhaps during their bridge deal.

This league is all about benefitting from good contracts, and Benning has put himself in a situation where he can't afford term, so it's very difficult to see what window they're actually targeting for a Cup. Is it a win now team? Because they were awful last year and the defense looks shaky at best. Is it a win in 3 years team? Because key players will have moved on/degrade/be on much more expensive deals. This was the issue with the Miller deal - from a pick value and player performance perspective it was a big win for Benning, but from a team perspective, it was a premature move for a team that was still in the early stages of a rebuild.

I can't really agree here. There's a heavy emphasis on this now because Tampa has just won back to back Cups with the system essentially rigged in their favour with great star player deals, but the winners prior to them - STL, WAS, PIT, weren't really notable in that regard. Tampa is really just the leagues exception right now, generally a team will have some contracts they win on and some they lose on, and the cap ceiling is high enough that you can afford some excess dead cap space. With the risk you have to take to sign good players that is inevitable, and to succeed you can't get taken to far in the wrong direction.

So basically while it would certainly help the Canucks Cup aspirations shouldn't rely on whether you get Pettersson/Hughes signed at $14M instead of $18M. The real problem is they're our very last players to sign and we only have what, $16M to do so? Rather the reason we wouldn't compete for the Cup is we'll be spending close to $30M on defense, probably among the top in the league, for a group that just isn't likely to be that good or effective. Do a full sale swap with Colorado's blueline, which should cost about the same, and the Canucks could compete for the Cup.