Tusk Posted January 1 Share Posted January 1 5 minutes ago, Tusk said: yeah qualifying offer is 8.5 for the RFA and other teams can steal him at random unless he takes it for a year. Then next year he is UFA. So by not going by a team deal he could end up in arizona or something I mean its all good for us, we need cap space. We love the Petey but Alvin would do so much with that cap space Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tusk Posted January 1 Share Posted January 1 4 hours ago, Jeremy Hronek said: To Calgary: Elias Pettersson To Vancouver: Elias Lindholm + Rasmus Andersson I would take Andersson and Hugberdough(with %50 retention) for pettersson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tusk Posted January 1 Share Posted January 1 9 hours ago, Alflives said: Actually Petey’s QO is 8.2; that’s the starting point. I guess the empties were not empty yet.... this is the most intelligent worth of Petey I have seen in months, because its almost accurate what the qualifying offer would be. And is he worth more? Nope. maybe a raise but less than your scotch value/ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tusk Posted January 1 Share Posted January 1 9 hours ago, Alflives said: Nope. The empties have already predicted what any offer sheet would be. And it’s under 10.74 mil AAV on a long term deal. or just a measly 8.5 for one year and he can be a UFA. Yeah. there it is, and Petey would be our rental Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwijjibo Posted January 1 Share Posted January 1 9 hours ago, Tusk said: JTM first year salary on his 8mil contract was over 10 mil. Its not about salary, its about controlling cap. If Petey would do a contract that pays 15mil for the first year and going down to 5 mil in last year over 8 years, the Cap would be affordable to the team. That would be an illegal contract structure under the current CBA. The annual salary can't deviate by more than 35% year to year and the lowest year can't be less than 60% of the highest year. So if one year was $15m the lowest the least expensive year could possibly be would be $9m Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tusk Posted January 1 Share Posted January 1 8 minutes ago, qwijjibo said: That would be an illegal contract structure under the current CBA. The annual salary can't deviate by more than 35% year to year and the lowest year can't be less than 60% of the highest year. So if one year was $15m the lowest the least expensive year could possibly be would be $9m Ok so what does the math look like for an AVV of 8.5 over 8 years? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tusk Posted January 1 Share Posted January 1 2 minutes ago, Tusk said: Ok so what does the math look like for an AVV of 8.5 over 8 years? and even 9.5 over 6 years, front end loaded Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Hronek Posted January 1 Share Posted January 1 3 hours ago, Tusk said: I would take Andersson and Hugberdough(with %50 retention) for pettersson My only issue is that we’d take a significant hit with our center depth if Pettersson wasn’t replaced. We’d definitely need a good center to come back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wai_lai416 Posted January 1 Share Posted January 1 8 hours ago, Jeremy Hronek said: To Calgary: Elias Pettersson To Vancouver: Elias Lindholm + Rasmus Andersson lol why would we want lindholm who's been on the decline the last season and current, going to be 30 when the contract starts looking for a retirement contract or huberdeau who's on pace for 35 points and going to be 31.. who's not a play driver nor are there play drivers on the team that he can play with.. 35 points at 5.25 mil for 7 year is a massive L.. who knows if he'll futher decline.. 2 hours ago, Tusk said: Ok so what does the math look like for an AVV of 8.5 over 8 years? as for front loading.. let say EP market is 11.. front load or not.. why would he leave behind 20mil? and take a 20% less?? name 1 player in the history of the league in their prime took a massive discount because of a front loaded contract? if everyone is about how much money they get front loaded.. then the stars in the league wouldn't be paid in the 11+mils heck name one player that signed a long term contract at a discount that was based on their current production not their future potential? ppl keep bringing up Mackinnon.. he was not a 6.5mil player when he signed.. closer to a 4.5-5mil at the time.. he took a discount on his "future potential" which is a gamble on both end.. what if he tops out as a 60 point guy?? then his contract is not exactly a steal anymore. you can't exactly take a discount when signing at something you haven't achieved yet.. that's like some store selling you something that's worth $5 bux at the time but sold it to you at $6 and claim it's discounted because in the future it may or may not be worth $7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Hronek Posted January 1 Share Posted January 1 29 minutes ago, wai_lai416 said: lol why would we want lindholm who's been on the decline the last season and current, going to be 30 when the contract starts looking for a retirement contract or huberdeau who's on pace for 35 points and going to be 31.. who's not a play driver nor are there play drivers on the team that he can play with.. 35 points at 5.25 mil for 7 year is a massive L.. who knows if he'll futher decline.. as for front loading.. let say EP market is 11.. front load or not.. why would he leave behind 20mil? and take a 20% less?? name 1 player in the history of the league in their prime took a massive discount because of a front loaded contract? if everyone is about how much money they get front loaded.. then the stars in the league wouldn't be paid in the 11+mils heck name one player that signed a long term contract at a discount that was based on their current production not their future potential? ppl keep bringing up Mackinnon.. he was not a 6.5mil player when he signed.. closer to a 4.5-5mil at the time.. he took a discount on his "future potential" which is a gamble on both end.. what if he tops out as a 60 point guy?? then his contract is not exactly a steal anymore. you can't exactly take a discount when signing at something you haven't achieved yet.. that's like some store selling you something that's worth $5 bux at the time but sold it to you at $6 and claim it's discounted because in the future it may or may not be worth $7 Fair enough. To be fair to my original proposal however, I’d only do something around Myers and Lindholm with the assumption that Lindholm would be a rental. 001_WC-EditVideo_1.mp4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wai_lai416 Posted January 1 Share Posted January 1 23 minutes ago, Jeremy Hronek said: Fair enough. To be fair to my original proposal however, I’d only do something around Myers and Lindholm with the assumption that Lindholm would be a rental. 001_WC-EditVideo_1.mp4 Still as a rental for EP it would make no sense as it’s literally be EP for andersson with both lindholm and Myers gone after the end of the season for both teams unless this is viewed as an all in move which the Canucks shouldn’t be doing. We see teams overachieve last season and came back down to earth. New Jersey and Seattle.. although New Jersey will be good I just didn’t think last season would carry over as they are still very young and really short a goalie.. if they can swing something like Nemec for a proven star goalie maybe hally or saros then they can be legit once Hamilton is back. New Jersey is held back by goaltending this season. Unlike leafs or oilers though their defence is legit 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sxqhfeh Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 Petey's show tonight. Ottawa Sens are a very soft, very weak team, Petey might even be able to register a couple of points against these poor sad sacks, but that's a good thing because PA does need to showcase him for that Tkachuk trade he wants to swing. Tkachuk is a close friend of Huggy's, Tkachuk is a good fit for the Vancouver Canucks. Meanwhile, Petey doesn't have any friends. Great. To Van: Brady Tkachuk To Sens: Eilas Pettersson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Hronek Posted January 3 Share Posted January 3 To Buffalo: Pettersson + Myers. (Petey's deal = sign and trade) + (draft pick). To Vancouver: Tage Thompson vs. Owen Power Buffalo probably says no. My logic behind this is that the Canucks bring in two players that are signed long term to a good AAV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucks curse Posted January 6 Share Posted January 6 To MIN EP 40 mcdonaugh Hirose To VAN Brock Faber Ericksson Ek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwijjibo Posted January 6 Share Posted January 6 On 1/3/2024 at 10:42 AM, Jeremy Hronek said: To Buffalo: Pettersson + Myers. (Petey's deal = sign and trade) + (draft pick). To Vancouver: Tage Thompson vs. Owen Power Buffalo probably says no. My logic behind this is that the Canucks bring in two players that are signed long term to a good AAV. Buffalo definitely says no. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeremy Hronek Posted January 6 Share Posted January 6 1 hour ago, qwijjibo said: Buffalo definitely says no. Replace Thompson with Cozens... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.