Proposal: Unprotected Canucks 1st Round Pick Attached with Eriksson

BobClarkesfrontteeth

Registered User
Feb 6, 2020
1,361
848
Parts unknown
If the NHL does a Canadian division and three other divisions, and the Top 4 make the playoffs, are the Canucks a playoff team?

Toronto vs Edmonton vs Vancouver vs Calgary vs Montreal vs Winnipeg vs Ottawa

They top 4 for sure?

If they keep the same format for qualifying for the play offs as it is now then top 3 in the division and then the rest of the teams that didn't qualify have to qualify via the wild card system.

Top three teams I see right now would be Toronto, Edmonton and Winnipeg/Calgary/Vancouver all really close for 3rd. Adding a Hoffman might mean the difference between playoffs of not.
 

LeapOnOver

Mackenzie is a hack!
Jan 23, 2011
12,473
3,677
Iksan, S. Korea
www.leaponover.com
Nobody thinks that. Like Hall, Hoffman knows that few teams have the cap space to sign him to a big money long term deal right now. Signing a 1 year deal is not a "Show me deal" it is waiting a year to cash in when more teams have another year of expiring contracts/more cap space.

Nobody thinks that? I've read it in at least three different threads. The OP wrote it, I don't know if he's since edited as I haven't gone back and reread. I agree with your terminology. It's not a "show me deal" as some people are prone to coin it.

*went back and checked, yes OP wrote "show me deal".
 

BCNate

Registered User
Apr 3, 2016
3,108
3,006
Nobody thinks that? I've read it in at least three different threads. The OP wrote it, I don't know if he's since edited as I haven't gone back and reread. I agree with your terminology. It's not a "show me deal" as some people are prone to coin it.

*went back and checked, yes OP wrote "show me deal".
My point is that it's the wrong term that people are using. I have an awfully hard time thinking that these people feel Hoffman has to prove his value.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LeapOnOver

Therien25

Registered User
Feb 14, 2007
121
1
I think I'd accept and be okay with it.

Eriksson would be off the books this year which would leave the Canucks with around 10 million in cap space.

Then next year they sign Pettersson and Hughes to extentions, lets say 20 mil combined, give and take a couple of millions. However they lose the following contracts

Eriksson- 6 mil
Edler 6 mik
Suttern 4.3mil
Pettersson- 1 mil
Hughes- 1 mil
Pearson- 3.75 mik
Baertschi- 3.3 mil
Benn 2 mil.

That's 26 mil of cap space, plus the 10 mil cap space this year minus Virtanen's new contract and if they dont sign any other free agents.

Canucks might have the option to go big game hunting one year sooner than anticipated if they were able to make this trade with LA

plus spooners buyout of 1.033
 

ETTHAKING67

Registered User
Feb 12, 2019
454
216
I expect the Canucks to move him with a 2nd next summer, something similar to what the Rangers did with Marc Staal.
 

Peter Sidorkiewicz

Devils Army
Sponsor
Oct 22, 2002
9,429
4,036
I don’t understand why people always bring up Marleau,that was extremely on circumstances
Circumstances have got worse with flat cap.

I wouldnt want him on NJ unless it results in two premium assets being received from Vancouver for nothing. His cap hit is that bad.

Anyway its a moot point given there is zero interest around the league. Vancouver is stuck with him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Luckylarry

yvrtojfk

Registered User
Aug 13, 2016
3,213
1,279
Canada
I would rather hold onto him this year and see how the market is next year. Plus it will be just 1 year left on his contract so ideally cheaper to move.

What a shit show of dead weight signings in Rousell, Ericsson, Ferland, Beagle and Benn almost 20 million in nothing. Brutal.
 

Johnsie19

Registered User
Jun 29, 2010
2,418
304
The way things are going he might be signing a PTO. You have some arbitration awards coming up and Tampa has to dump some assets sooner or later. Everyone is locked up waiting on these two things.
We don't have any arb cases. Team is set. Need to shed 1.5 mil somehow. Could be as simple as Ferland on LTIR. Trading a first + just to get rid of a contract is silly for a team like the Canucks who really don't have a whole lot of assets and who traded their first this yr. The issue isn't super pressing so we can afford to wait and try creative options.
 

BobClarkesfrontteeth

Registered User
Feb 6, 2020
1,361
848
Parts unknown
We don't have any arb cases. Team is set. Need to shed 1.5 mil somehow. Could be as simple as Ferland on LTIR. Trading a first + just to get rid of a contract is silly for a team like the Canucks who really don't have a whole lot of assets and who traded their first this yr. The issue isn't super pressing so we can afford to wait and try creative options.

Sorry I worded that poorly. With the League wide Arb cases coming up no one is taking on salary as there could be some walk aways or trades due to Arb awards. Going to be really tough to move any cap right now without assets added
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad