[Discussion] What to do with the Brock Boes Monster...

[stawns]

21 minutes ago, Dizzle said:

thats not what this is about. You’ve rarely, if ever, given Brock credit as a player. Again, not shocking you’re one of the first to pipe up on moving him. 

 

That's so lazy

[Johnny]

4 minutes ago, sbriggs said:

Well who says what our package is? Not one for one

Boeser is too old for them to trade their biggest trade chip and our 1st round picks are too high, we would have to give up a lot to get a player like that, something like Boeser first(20-32) and two seconds (50-60) this would cripple any hope of restocking the cupboards 

 

Chicago for instance could offer them a top 5 pick and a top prospect for instance and it wouldn't really set them back with prospects and they would have the cap space to sign a top FA to solidify a good core group

 

Basically the canucks buying power is weaker compared to teams closer to the bottom of the standings

[Rip The Mesh]

18 minutes ago, stawns said:

 

You think he's going to retire at 30-31?

Maybe I miss spoke; He's in his absolute prime right now. I still think a 6 or 7 year deal is not right. Got a hell of a partner though. That is the true # 1 line.

Get as much as you can out of Boeser's next 3 or 4 years.

[stawns]

12 minutes ago, Johnny said:

A decent comparable but I think Boeser comes in at 85-90% of Guentzal

It depends on how his season goes before the tdl, imo.

[Johnny]

12 minutes ago, stawns said:

It depends on how his season goes before the tdl, imo.

Even if he repeats last year he's not worth as much as Guentzal

 

Guentzal has 4 seasons at a point per game, Boeser has only sniffed being close. Guentzal has 4 seasons over 30 goals 2 of which I'm the 40s Boeser only has 1

 

It would be very disappointing if Boeser was signed to what Guentzal is signed for

[KesLord]

1 minute ago, Johnny said:

Even if he repeats last year he's not worth as much as Guentzal

 

Guentzal has 4 seasons at a point per game, Boeser has only sniffed being close. Guentzal has 4 seasons over 30 goals 2 of which I'm the 40s Boeser only has 1

 

It would be very disappointing if Boeser was signed to what Guentzal is signed for

I think Skinner is a close comparable. I think Skinner’s situation is a probably scenario for Boeser (sign for 9M long term from your 40g season, be a good player but never live up to the contract… eventually bought out).

[Gurn]

$7.5 x 4 or $8 x 3.

 

I'd guess that PA/J.R. have already asked around the league as to what his trade return value would be; so are very unlikely to over pay.

Wasn't that long ago nobody, including the Nucks really wanted him, at his current price.

$6,650,00 worth of cap space, is valuable in itself.

[Johnny]

1 minute ago, KesLord said:

I think Skinner is a close comparable. I think Skinner’s situation is a probably scenario for Boeser (sign for 9M long term from your 40g season, be a good player but never live up to the contract… eventually bought out).

I would say boeser is a bit more consistent but lower ceiling and better 2 way game 

 

But using skinners 9m a season contract as any sort of bench mark is terrible.

 

When Skinner signed that contract with Buffalo they were desperate for star power and over paid for a soft perimeter player with concussion history who had to be scoring to have value. Lots on here knew it was a terrible signing when it happened.

 

Boeser really isn't far and above Jake Debrusk, I'm really curious to see how Jake does with a top 10 center vs an average second line center. But as it is now Boeser, who has been on a line with a top 10 centerman for the last 2 years is not worth 3.5-4 million more than DeBrusk.

 

 

[EdgarM]

1 hour ago, iinatcc said:

 

I wouldn't blame the fanbase doing a "big splash" if you look at the last two cup winners. Vegas and Florida they both did some big splash moves. For the case of Vegas the acquired Eichel via trade and signed Pietrangelo via free agency and Florida acquired Tkachuk. 

 

 

Vegas and Florida added one or two pieces to already great teams who could play defense. Vegas almost won in their inaugural year with no stars. 

[EdgarM]

1 hour ago, stawns said:

 

 I want a team that has a plan for long term success and that requires some of succession plan which means you put the team over attachments to individual players.  I agree you need balance.......that's why you can't have a top heavy roster full of aging players on high salary, long term contracts.

Totally agree. A big mistake we did with the Sedins and Edler etc. We could have kept on going of we could have rolled over those aging stars and drafted some top end players.

[-dlc-]

8 minutes ago, EdgarM said:

Totally agree. A big mistake we did with the Sedins and Edler etc. We could have kept on going of we could have rolled over those aging stars and drafted some top end players.

People talk like "drafting top end players" is a given that they work out.

 

I remember this guy...Gilbert Brule. One of my favourite Giants but just didn't work out in the NHL. Happens. Sure, he's just one example but there are many who don't live up to the hype.

 

You can't pencil in "prospects" as anything but. Just as you can't predict what Brock will/won't do. Many arguing about his worth also didn't expect JT to stay OR to accept a discount to do so long term. I have a feeling Brock would follow that path more likely than any other.

[RupertKBD]

13 minutes ago, -dlc- said:

People talk like "drafting top end players" is a given that they work out.

 

I remember this guy...Gilbert Brule. One of my favourite Giants but just didn't work out in the NHL. Happens. Sure, he's just one example but there are many who don't live up to the hype.

 

You can't pencil in "prospects" as anything but. Just as you can't predict what Brock will/won't do. Many arguing about his worth also didn't expect JT to stay OR to accept a discount to do so long term. I have a feeling Brock would follow that path more likely than any other.

 

I remember being stoked when the Canucks drafted Jordan Schroeder. (I even remember Luongo mispronouncing his name at the draft) After watching him play for the Yanks at the World Juniors, I thought he was going to light it up in the NHL...

 

...not so much....

[stawns]

49 minutes ago, KesLord said:

I think Skinner is a close comparable. I think Skinner’s situation is a probably scenario for Boeser (sign for 9M long term from your 40g season, be a good player but never live up to the contract… eventually bought out).

 

I think skinner is likely the closest comparable as well, in terms of his style of play, foot speed etc

[stawns]

26 minutes ago, EdgarM said:

Totally agree. A big mistake we did with the Sedins and Edler etc. We could have kept on going of we could have rolled over those aging stars and drafted some top end players.

 

While I understand the value of picks, id rather see younger players (20-22 range) rather than picks......or at least as the main target with picks as an add on

[stawns]

49 minutes ago, Gurn said:

$7.5 x 4 or $8 x 3.

 

I'd guess that PA/J.R. have already asked around the league as to what his trade return value would be; so are very unlikely to over pay.

Wasn't that long ago nobody, including the Nucks really wanted him, at his current price.

$6,650,00 worth of cap space, is valuable in itself.

 

Do you think boeser won't be seeking a long term contract?  

[Ballisticsports]

Don't see BB interested in 3-4 yr contract when other's getting more?

Both sides make compelling reasons to sell high  and to sign him and for much different amounts and terms

 

I am glad we have competent management to make this tough call (as I'd keep changing my mind with one side saying this point and agreeing, then another saying yeah but what of this? and agreeing as well, and by then I would run out of time to make a decision)

[Gurn]

Anyone know how many undrafted players,  make the league, as compared to drafted players?

 

doesn't that difference make the point,  that drafting works?

 

 

[-dlc-]

5 minutes ago, Gurn said:

Anyone know how many undrafted players,  make the league, as compared to drafted players?

 

doesn't that difference make the point,  that drafting works?

 

 

That's a very sweeping statement. 

 

Making the league is one thing....what you do when you're there is another.

 

Of course drafting players is important but people assume that "younger is better" and that's not always the case. You take a gamble at both ends. Just because players are getting older doesn't mean that their younger replacements will slide in and be an improvement. It's very much a matter of be careful what you wish for.

 

 

[The Duke]

Boeser has been making about 6 mil for the last 6 years.  At least he hasn’t been starving his whole career and looking at this contract as his one and only chance to get paid.

 

My opinion will depend a lot on how he does this year - I see Brock as more of a 30 goal guy, smart, good two ways and on the walls.  But not a fast, gritty, “Tocchet” style player either.   A true first liner but not a driver like he appeared to be in his rookie year. A little raise to 7.5 with term can be fit into the payroll.
 

I don’t give him Guentzel money - but I also don’t know what management does if we’re in a playoff hunt at the deadline and talks look way off. 
 

It sounds crazy, but it almost fits better with the team if he doesn’t repeat as a 40 goal guy. I’m not sure we’re in a position to trade him OR retain him at that level of production. 

Edited July 7 by The Duke

[Nurange]

After his back injury he basically changed his game . took a few years and a few more really tough years for a great guy BUT he turned back into the star player we all wanted him to be . I just can't see him accepting anything less than what miller got and depending on this year maybe closer to Ep's if he goes 40plus 

[stawns]

6 minutes ago, Gurn said:

Anyone know how many undrafted players,  make the league, as compared to drafted players?

 

doesn't that difference make the point,  that drafting works?

 

 

 

But it doesn't have to be you who drafts someone to get them on your roster.  I'd much prefer already developing young players over picks personally 

[Gurn]

2 minutes ago, stawns said:

 

Do you think boeser won't be seeking a long term contract?  

I'm being optimistic, not something I often do, hockey wise. 

The Brock problem/issue is a real tough nut to crack.

Heck of a guy, and a really good player when his mind-- and body are healthy.

 

	NHL Totals		479	179	205	384	126		29	11	12	23	1
2016-17	Vancouver Canucks	NHL	9	4	1	5	0	0	--	--	--	--	--
2017-18	Vancouver Canucks	NHL	62	29	26	55	16	-5	--	--	--	--	--
2018-19	Vancouver Canucks	NHL	69	26	30	56	22	-2	--	--	--	--	--
2019-20	Vancouver Canucks	NHL	57	16	29	45	14	4	17	4	7	11	10
2020-21	Vancouver Canucks	NHL	56	23	26	49	16	-3	--	--	--	--	--
2021-22	Vancouver Canucks	NHL	71	23	23	46	20	-5	--	--	--	--	--
2022-23	Vancouver Canucks	NHL	74	18	37	55	24	-20	--	--	--	--	--
2023-24	Vancouver Canucks	NHL	81	40	33	73	14	23	12	7	5	12	8

 

7 full(ish) years-never a point a gamer.

In the first year, and a bit, he looked like a play driver, but seems to have settled into  being a very good complimentary piece, that needs a set up man.

His board play is underrated by many, he does get a decent amount of 'bump' style hits.

 

I'm very reluctant to sign him to a long term deal.

a- I don't like long term deals to begin with.

b- his injury history worries me

c- I believe it is important to sell, rather than have players  walk for free-unless there is a true shot at the cup.  With the upcoming OEL hit, next year is, imo the last chance till that $4 .7 mill hit disappears.

So is this upcoming year a true contender for the cup year?  I'm leaning to no.. but the season hasn't started, and the team may find some more defensive help. Plus they might have finally learned not to over play Demko, which will definitely help the play offs.

 

Big decision time for the Head management people.

 

 

[Johnny]

4 minutes ago, -dlc- said:

That's a very sweeping statement. 

 

Making the league is one thing....what you do when you're there is another.

 

Of course drafting players is important but people assume that "younger is better" and that's not always the case. You take a gamble at both ends. Just because players are getting older doesn't mean that their replacement will slide in and be an improvement.

To solidify your point, teams that are looking to be contenders will generally gamble on 27-29 year olds as being the difference of making the playoffs and winning a round or 4. This is evidenced recently by Calgary, Florida, Edmonton, Vegas, Vancouver, Colorado. Not always successful

 

Teams looking to build a core group to then build around will look to bring in draft picks/prospects and players 20-24. Not always successful but time is less of an issue

 

 

[EdgarM]

18 minutes ago, stawns said:

 

While I understand the value of picks, id rather see younger players (20-22 range) rather than picks......or at least as the main target with picks as an add on

I agree, my main point was that we get stuck on certain players at the expense of the "TEAM". I have had a lot of favorites on this team but sometimes at some point, its not feasable to keep them, whether they want too much money or they are not a piece of the puzzle anymore. 

Case in point, Zadorov, loved the player but it just didn't work out. We will probably never know all of the story but I trust this management group that they are looking after the best interest of the team first. 

[Gurn]

11 minutes ago, stawns said:

 

But it doesn't have to be you who drafts someone to get them on your roster.  I'd much prefer already developing young players over picks personally 

I can agree with that.

Mainly I was pointing out the huge, huge hole in the 'magic beans' commentary.