J-23 Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 I would have preferred no retain and no 4th round pick, but it is what it is. Still save 4 million in cap space. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XxNaslundxX Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 Immediately my thought was that we got a good deal. I thought getting rid of mik would cost hogs or podz. good deal considering that. However when i think about it, it kinda makes sense equally for both teams. Normally i despise the hawks but il give em a friendly handshake on this one. Good hockey trade Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 2 minutes ago, Bure10Kuzmenko96 said: Just live with the contract and not improve the team? Our window is now. We wouldn't be able to sign anyone if we had kept Mikheyev. No, this is a good deal. Your hatred for management is clouding your judgement I've said this very consistently over Gillis, Benning, and now these clowns. I don't care which management group suggests dead cap; there is no situation where they should continue working in hockey ops after that suggestion. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Petey O Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 Yeah fuck that retention. But it was probably necessary. Just kind of sucks. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 4 minutes ago, Rip The Mesh said: That's prior to LTIR 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 1 minute ago, HKSR said: Why? Florida and Edmonton both had dead cap. Didn't do much harm for them did it? Did Edmonton a ton of harm without money to bring in actual NHL quality blueliners. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Jaimito Posted June 27 Popular Post Share Posted June 27 1 minute ago, HKSR said: Why? Florida and Edmonton both had dead cap. Didn't do much harm for them did it? Some people here think they know more than a HHOF and cup winning management. 4 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 1 minute ago, King Heffy said: Did Edmonton a ton of harm without money to bring in actual NHL quality blueliners. A ton of harm? 1 goal loss in game 7 of the Stanley Cup final is a ton of harm? Oh boy.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanuckDownUnder Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 The retention seems like an indication of how hard it was to move that contract. No one likes retention, but holding the contract would be worse imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post PhillipBlunt Posted June 27 Popular Post Share Posted June 27 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rip The Mesh Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 3 hours ago, Bob Long said: omg not thrilled about another 2nd, but Stevie Y set the rate this week. Atleast its a 2027 pick! lol 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coryberg Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 Awesome trade. Dumped 8 million in salary and the cost was moving down 60 spots or so in a draft 3 years from now. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post BC_Hawk Posted June 27 Popular Post Share Posted June 27 Just now, King Heffy said: I've said this very consistently over Gillis, Benning, and now these clowns. I don't care which management group suggests dead cap; there is no situation where they should continue working in hockey ops after that suggestion. Options: - 700k of dead cap for 2 years and a 2nd - costly buyout for 4 years - continuing to role stone hands out there and not have the cap to resign the D and improve our top 6. anybody that doesn’t think that trade was the best option needs to really check their comprehension skills. This is not a OEL type situation; it’s 700k over 2 years! 6 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post 48MPHSlapshot Posted June 27 Popular Post Share Posted June 27 1 minute ago, Rip The Mesh said: The Hawks going from our biggest rival to our dumping ground is character development I didn't see coming. 2 4 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lemon Face Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 17 minutes ago, Jaimito said: PA moves fast. Signs Blueger. I guess he was done for the day. I go take a dump and a trade happens. They are obviously making room to get the pieces they want. See what they are getting. My guess Myers and Z stays, and JG on July 1. Advice.Dont take dump tomorrow. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott72 Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 7 minutes ago, King Heffy said: Give up a little bit more to unload the full value or just live with the contract. There's simply no excuse for creating dead cap, and the morons we have running the team don't understand this. So if you have these two scenarios on your hands as a GM, which one would you pick? Scenario #1 : Player costing 4.75M and just floating around on the ice and not contributing much. Ends up demoralizing star player on your team and makes him go in a slump. Now you have 11.6 + 4.75M floating around. Needless to say the demoralizing effect trickles down on the team. Also the 4.75M player costs you playoff run by not scoring. Scenario #2 : You absorb retention of 712,500 (less than league minimum) gives you an opportunity to go out and get a bonafide goal scorer who can put puck in net. Plus lifts the moral of your 11.6 M player as well. So the way I look at this by retaining 712,500 Canucks don't just save 4M they also save 11.6M. Plus this gives confidence to other players in the management that they will admit their mistakes and do their best to fix it. Also an incentive for new players to sign that this management is serious about winning and wants to make smart hockey decisions. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rip The Mesh Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 2 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Heffy Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 1 minute ago, BC_Hawk said: Options: - 700k of dead cap for 2 years and a 2nd - costly buyout for 4 years - continuing to role stone hands out there and not have the cap to resign the D and improve our top 6. anybody that doesn’t think that trade was the best option needs to really check their comprehension skills. This is not a OEL type situation; it’s 700k over 2 years! Or give up more to not have the dead cap. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Jaimito Posted June 27 Popular Post Share Posted June 27 6 minutes ago, The Duke said: We can do Guentzel, Zadorov and Myers with that. But does it ever play out that predictably? Whatever the plan they have, they are confident enough to eat 15% on Ilya salary. As for which guys they will get, will wait and see. This management has been fun for fans from day 1. Major surgery successful last summer and now they are building a cup contender. No more boring Canucks. 2 2 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 I’m fine with the retention since it’s now a 2027 2nd. That means we have the next 2 years worth of 2nds for deadline deals. Those are very valuable when looking to make a move to put us over the top. 1 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Alflives Posted June 27 Popular Post Share Posted June 27 So out Mik and a 2027 2nd. In: Bleugar Big Z Geuntzel Myers 2027 4th. 1 2 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 1 minute ago, 48MPHSlapshot said: The Hawks going from our biggest rival to our dumping ground is character development I didn't see coming. This is the kind of rebuild the Canucks should do next time. When you rebuild. Bulldoze it and stockpile picks. It causes some pain, and it means some rough years. But as long as you build a championship core. It's worth it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocket-68 Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 (edited) 9 minutes ago, King Heffy said: I've said this very consistently over Gillis, Benning, and now these clowns. I don't care which management group suggests dead cap; there is no situation where they should continue working in hockey ops after that suggestion. Me thinks you protesteth too much .... must be a closet JR fan complete with a poster of him on your wall. Edited June 27 by Rocket-68 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC_Hawk Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 Just now, King Heffy said: Or give up more to not have the dead cap. I’ll take the 700k to have a 1st still personally. It’ll hopefully be at the end of 1st, but still in the range to land a good chance of someone who will contribute. The odds of a late 2nd/3rd doing anything are way lower. 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.