4petesake Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 19 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? This is for players having appeared in at least one game by Oct 19 2018 but I’m guessing rates would be similar for today. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Undrafted Skaters 261 107 54 44 42 36 17 1 0 82 Goalies. 11 8 9 5 6 4 3 1 2 13 Notable: After the first round (40.5 percent) and second round (16.6 percent), undrafted players account for the third-biggest segment of the NHL’s population at 12.7 percent (82 out of 644). Columbus’ Artemi Panarin likely takes the crown as the league’s most talented undrafted player, while Tampa Bay unearthed both Tyler Johnson and Yanni Gourde. Defensemen Mark Giordano, Chris Tanev, Andy Greene and Nikita Zaitsev never heard their name called at the draft, but made it to the NHL anyway. It’s also interesting when you consider that there’s 13 undrafted goalies in the NHL, which is more than the first round (11) – or any other round – has provided. Six of the 13 undrafted goalies are the starter for their team, most notably two-time Vezina Trophy winner Sergei Bobrovsky in Columbus. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KesLord Posted July 7 Author Share Posted July 7 28 minutes ago, The Duke said: 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. Completely agree 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KesLord Posted July 7 Author Share Posted July 7 19 minutes ago, Gurn said: 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. With his history of injuries, and this previous season’s production, he will surely be looking for a long term deal. All players with a similar history do. If we don’t give it to him then he goes to a team that will. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook007 Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 2 hours ago, stawns said: I don't think he'll "squeeze" them, but he'll want a fair, market value contract and if he picks up where he left off last season, it's not going to be a small number Well the fact is, that with the penalty raising to $5M next season (actual $6M with Mika) so something will have to give... They may pack up Garland next season to find the additional funds needed, but somebody will pay the prize of success... that's the name of the game. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KesLord Posted July 7 Author Share Posted July 7 2 hours ago, KesLord said: It sounds like: Win/Win/Win: Boeser signs a contract now (around 6M for 7-8 years). He performs like he did this previous season for majority of the years, and we’re all happy. Lose/Win/Win: We trade Boeser for picks and prospects. He regresses to his 2022/23 form and PA looks genius. Win/Lose/Lose 1: We trade Boeser for picks/prospects. He continues to perform like this year causing Canucks to lose a 40g scorer in a key window. Win/Lose/Lose 2: Boeser signs a contract now (around 6M for 7-8 years). He regresses to his 2022/23 form and we have an albatross contract. Everyone is sad until 2032. Win/Lose/Win: We wait on Boeser. He turns in another 40g performance and now wants 9M. We sign him and he continues to be this player for the foreseeable future. Win/Lose/Lose 3: We wait on Boeser. He turns in another 40g performance. We sign him to a long term contract for 9M… but then he regresses and we have a Jeff Skinner situation on our hands. Lose/Lose/Win 1: We wait on Boeser. He regresses, and we extend him to a cheaper contract (5M for 7-8 years). Lose/Kindve win: We wait on Boeser, he regresses. We retain some salary to get a mid-tier pick/prospect back. Lose/Lose/LOSE: We wait on Boeser. He turns in another 40g performance making his price too high to extend but the team is doing too well to trade him at the deadline. We lose him for nothing in the off-season. *From Canucks history… this is the likely scenario I spelt lose so many times I now am questioning if that’s the proper spelling. should’ve added a scenario where we gamble and trade Boeser for a similar player. With his previous season’s production I could see a Boeser for Necas + picks swap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurn Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 1 minute ago, KesLord said: With his history of injuries, and this previous season’s production, he will surely be looking for a long term deal. All players with a similar history do. If we don’t give it to him then he goes to a team that will. -weird spot isn't it? Because of his injury history-he will likely be wanting a long term deal but because of his injury history the team will be reluctant to make a long term deal. ------------------- guess this is why J.R and the rest get paid the big bucks and get their names painted on their office doors. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook007 Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 2 hours ago, Rip The Mesh said: Believe it or not, I am of the opinion that Brock Boeser would take less then he could get on the open market, to stay in Vancouver for say four years. I don't think that's unreasonable. Something along the lines of 7.5.. After that; I think he'll stay in hockey, but not as a player. Why not as a player? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook007 Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 1 minute ago, Gurn said: -weird spot isn't it? Because of his injury history-he will likely be wanting a long term deal but because of his injury history the team will be reluctant to make a long term deal. ------------------- guess this is why J.R and the rest get paid the big bucks and get their names painted on their office doors. This....^^^^^^^^^ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KesLord Posted July 7 Author Share Posted July 7 2 hours ago, stawns said: I don't think he'll "squeeze" them, but he'll want a fair, market value contract and if he picks up where he left off last season, it's not going to be a small number I agree. I think if we sign him this summer, we have some leverage. Can sign him cheap long term due to his inconsistency. If he goes back-to-back 40 goal seasons… we can’t afford him Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 8 minutes ago, spook007 said: Well the fact is, that with the penalty raising to $5M next season (actual $6M with Mika) so something will have to give... They may pack up Garland next season to find the additional funds needed, but somebody will pay the prize of success... that's the name of the game. Personally, id rather having an aging garland at $5m than an aging Boeser at $8.5-$10m. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KesLord Posted July 7 Author Share Posted July 7 (edited) 2 hours ago, Rip The Mesh said: Believe it or not, I am of the opinion that Brock Boeser would take less then he could get on the open market, to stay in Vancouver for say four years. I don't think that's unreasonable. Something along the lines of 7.5.. After that; I think he'll stay in hockey, but not as a player. Do you realize how much money he leaves on the table if he takes 4 years instead of 8? He guaranteed wants a 7 or 8 year deal. His value is at his highest and he will surely want to bank it. If he’s too injured to play in 4 years, he still gets IR money for the remainder of the contract. He will want a deal that’ll set him up for the rest of his life. His previous contract set him up for this exact scenario. Anything less than 6 years isn’t going to happen. Edited July 7 by KesLord 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 8 minutes ago, KesLord said: I agree. I think if we sign him this summer, we have some leverage. Can sign him cheap long term due to his inconsistency. If he goes back-to-back 40 goal seasons… we can’t afford him Im not sure I see an incentive for Boeser to sign this summer, though he seems like someone who values security.......which is also why I don't see him taking anything less than 7-8 years Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KesLord Posted July 7 Author Share Posted July 7 Best thing for the Canucks in the long run would be to trade Brock now to a team with something to prove and that has money to throw at him for the long term. He doesn’t have a NTC, so there are a lot of options. His current value may be the highest it’ll ever be tho. looking at other teams, here’s possibilities: Carolina - they have cap space and are still in a competitive window. Utah - they have shown that they’re willing to pay to be competitive to grow their fan base. Boeser would be a top line player for them. Detroit - They’re also looking to crack the playoffs this year. Buffalo - loss of Skinner has left a gaping hole in their top 6. Columbus - they’ll be looking for help for Goudreau. They have Monahan and could use another. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KesLord Posted July 7 Author Share Posted July 7 4 minutes ago, stawns said: Im not sure I see an incentive for Boeser to sign this summer, though he seems like someone who values security.......which is also why I don't see him taking anything less than 7-8 years I’m sure he may bet on himself and want to wait to see how he does this season Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 Just now, KesLord said: I’m sure he may bet on himself and want to wait to see how he does this season That's what I think, but I think he also might value tte security.......again, that's also why I don't see him taking anything shorter than 7 years 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ballisticsports Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 2 minutes ago, KesLord said: I’m sure he may bet on himself and want to wait to see how he does this season He may also be concerned of having a down year where no one will want to pay a high price (like he experienced before) and sign for a lesser prove me contract and what if he has another down year or injury? Tough to say what he values most and wants and same with the team. Them talking I am sure the best decision will be made best for each, even if they are different from each others wants/needs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook007 Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 1 minute ago, stawns said: Personally, id rather having an aging garland at $5m than an aging Boeser at $8.5-$10m. Well $8.5-10M is some jump... If Boeser scores 40g he will be worth $8.5M, but unlikely $10M as he is not a massive playmaker or hits etc... And the year after Garland would need a raise too? There's two ways to look at it... do they want the team to change out to maybe be competitive over a longer period, or do they want to go for it whole heartedly.... If you are going for it you don't want to give up a 40 goal scorer each year... they already gave up Kuz, which was a the right decision under the circumstances, but there's zero guarantees we'll get better by getting younger... I do understand the need to change the team out regularly to not end up with a team ageing out again, but if anything JR/PA has shown anyone can be moved if they think its needed, so I have full confidence in them coming to the right conclusion... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KesLord Posted July 7 Author Share Posted July 7 7 minutes ago, Ballisticsports said: He may also be concerned of having a down year where no one will want to pay a high price (like he experienced before) and sign for a lesser prove me contract and what if he has another down year or injury? Tough to say what he values most and wants and same with the team. Them talking I am sure the best decision will be made best for each, even if they are different from each others wants/needs I don’t think there’s such a thing as “prove me” contracts for 40 goal scorers that are also UFA’s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 4 minutes ago, spook007 said: Well $8.5-10M is some jump... If Boeser scores 40g he will be worth $8.5M, but unlikely $10M as he is not a massive playmaker or hits etc... And the year after Garland would need a raise too? There's two ways to look at it... do they want the team to change out to maybe be competitive over a longer period, or do they want to go for it whole heartedly.... If you are going for it you don't want to give up a 40 goal scorer each year... they already gave up Kuz, which was a the right decision under the circumstances, but there's zero guarantees we'll get better by getting younger... I do understand the need to change the team out regularly to not end up with a team ageing out again, but if anything JR/PA has shown anyone can be moved if they think its needed, so I have full confidence in them coming to the right conclusion... Well, 18 goals to 40 goals is also a big jump......he's currently make $6.65, so it's not that huge of a jump considering this will be the biggest contract of his career Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KesLord Posted July 7 Author Share Posted July 7 6 minutes ago, spook007 said: Well $8.5-10M is some jump... If Boeser scores 40g he will be worth $8.5M, but unlikely $10M as he is not a massive playmaker or hits etc... And the year after Garland would need a raise too? There's two ways to look at it... do they want the team to change out to maybe be competitive over a longer period, or do they want to go for it whole heartedly.... If you are going for it you don't want to give up a 40 goal scorer each year... they already gave up Kuz, which was a the right decision under the circumstances, but there's zero guarantees we'll get better by getting younger... I do understand the need to change the team out regularly to not end up with a team ageing out again, but if anything JR/PA has shown anyone can be moved if they think its needed, so I have full confidence in them coming to the right conclusion... Hughes will be after that as well… maybe they see how Lekkerimaki fits into the lineup at the start of the year? I could Lekki filling in for Brock… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 (edited) 16 hours ago, stawns said: I'd say that for the vast majority of his current deal, apart from this last season, he was most definitely overpaid He's only been on his current deal for two years, so are you referring just to that first year? What about when he scored 29 goals and 26 goals making $925k? Was he overpaid then too? For a big portion of his career, Boeser has actually been UNDERPAID if you look at his production in his first 4 years. Edited July 7 by Elias Pettersson 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KesLord Posted July 7 Author Share Posted July 7 I wonder if the best move is to see how Lekki does with Miller and Suter, then see how Pod does. If either can take that spot, then move on from Brock and get a quality dman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rip The Mesh Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 1 hour ago, Gurn said: 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. That's why suggested a raise but not 7 or 8 years. Now he may well play with the team that long or more, but he'll come up twice.. My 3 favorite players are Miller Hughes and Boeser. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stawns Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 14 minutes ago, KesLord said: Hughes will be after that as well… maybe they see how Lekkerimaki fits into the lineup at the start of the year? I could Lekki filling in for Brock… I can as well and that's kind of what I got from PA about their cap space.......not using ltir gives them flexibility to use call ups more liberally 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook007 Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 (edited) 30 minutes ago, stawns said: Well, 18 goals to 40 goals is also a big jump......he's currently make $6.65, so it's not that huge of a jump considering this will be the biggest contract of his career It is when Petey, our by far best player is paid $11.6M and Miller is paid $8M... If Brock wants $10M, there is no chance he plays in Vancouver next season... They don't have the money to pay him $10M... even if they trade Garland it would be a squeeze... If he scores 40 goals again (IF he scores 40g again), I see him signing for $8M-$8.5M long term... If he doesn't score, he struggles to find a place in the team...we all know that... Edited July 7 by spook007 numbers 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.