Page 2 of 2

Re: Boothy-the last straw

Posted: Sat Oct 26, 2013 4:52 pm
by Vader
How about this hypothetical scenario:

The Canucks trade Booth to a cap floor team like FLA for a decent draft pick (2nd rounder?) or a prospect.

Canucks take the cap savings and spend on a team looking to flush a salary, or an unsigned UFA

Then in the off season FLA sends a high priced guy with a couple years left on his deal to Vancouver for a low draft pick

Vancouver then compliance's the high priced guys ass out of town

Vancouver gets instant cap relief, plus pick or a prospect and in essence uses it's buy out now instead of the summer

Florida gets to use Vancouver's cash to buy out several years of a bad deal in exchange for 1 year left on Booth's bad deal

Too bad I can't think of who FLA would move in that scenario...Campbell?

Or am I thinking too hard??

Re: Boothy-the last straw

Posted: Sat Oct 26, 2013 6:35 pm
by Hockey Widow
Strangelove wrote:
Hockey Widow wrote: especially if you are the water boy and don't really want to buy anyone else out.
There is no doubt in my mind that water boy will use the other compliance buyout.

Compliance buyouts are gold for rich teams wanting a better team long term.
I agree he will use it on Booth if Booth is still here and healthy. I am saying he doesn't want to. If there is a reasonable opportunity to trade Booth and avoid using it that will be the way MG goes. I also have no doubt that if healthy Booth would have been bought out already.

Re: Boothy-the last straw

Posted: Sat Oct 26, 2013 6:44 pm
by Hockey Widow
Vader wrote:How about this hypothetical scenario:

The Canucks trade Booth to a cap floor team like FLA for a decent draft pick (2nd rounder?) or a prospect.

Canucks take the cap savings and spend on a team looking to flush a salary, or an unsigned UFA

Then in the off season FLA sends a high priced guy with a couple years left on his deal to Vancouver for a low draft pick

Vancouver then compliance's the high priced guys ass out of town

Vancouver gets instant cap relief, plus pick or a prospect and in essence uses it's buy out now instead of the summer

Florida gets to use Vancouver's cash to buy out several years of a bad deal in exchange for 1 year left on Booth's bad deal

Too bad I can't think of who FLA would move in that scenario...Campbell?

Or am I thinking too hard??
I don't think you are thinking too hard. It may sound like a crazy scenario but it is very workable. You do however need another team, like Florida, to want to go along. It might also work for a team that had already used both compliance buy outs, as long as they have cap space to absorb Booth. So any player the Canucks take next year has to have a cap hit and or term greater than that of Booths or it is not worth it for the other team. Someone like a JML off the Leaves hands but they don't have the cap to absorb Booth, although they could waive him for one year.

We could of course just buy Booth out now and get it over with. I think if he is still here next year he gets bought out. Done and done. So we just have to get him through this year and who knows, maybe he plays like it is a contract year :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Re: Boothy-the last straw

Posted: Sun Oct 27, 2013 10:44 am
by RoyalDude
herb wrote:Can I just point out that for all the shit Booth gets from this market, he has helped set up two pretty important goals this seasons (go back and check the highlights from the first Devils GWG and the third goal in the Penguins game).

People don't like fancy stats, but Booth has excellent possession and shot differential numbers.

Continue on with the Booth narrative though. It wouldn't be a Vancouver Canucks season without some sort of controversy.
Herb. Your stubbornness regarding Weird Dude is admirable, but you need to cut your losses and come join the winning side. No shame in that

Re: Boothy-the last straw

Posted: Sun Oct 27, 2013 12:23 pm
by herb
RoyalDude wrote:Herb. Your stubbornness regarding Weird Dude is admirable, but you need to cut your losses and come join the winning side. No shame in that
I don't have any losses to cut.

We got Booth for next to nothing. There are no losses to cut. If he doesn't work out, we're out two injury prone vets from two years ago...boo freaking hoo.

Has he been everything we all hoped he would be? No, but it's still way too early in the season to give up any hope and we have nothing to gain from waiving Booth other than maybe the average overweight, balding, middle aged Canucks fan can move on to another stupid narrative.

Re: Boothy-the last straw

Posted: Sun Oct 27, 2013 12:37 pm
by RoyalDude
herb wrote:
RoyalDude wrote:Herb. Your stubbornness regarding Weird Dude is admirable, but you need to cut your losses and come join the winning side. No shame in that
I don't have any losses to cut.

We got Booth for next to nothing. There are no losses to cut. If he doesn't work out, we're out two injury prone vets from two years ago...boo freaking hoo.

Has he been everything we all hoped he would be? No, but it's still way too early in the season to give up any hope and we have nothing to gain from waiving Booth other than maybe the average overweight, balding, middle aged Canucks fan can move on to another stupid narrative.

Got Booth for nothing? Once weird dude has flown the cukoo's nest away from this market he will have robbed close to $18 million that he outright stoled out of this market and what did he give us for $18 million. Sweet FA. Those are serious losses my friend.

Re: Boothy-the last straw

Posted: Sun Oct 27, 2013 12:46 pm
by herb
^ Stole form this market? What Aquilini pays him is none of my concern, and I am at a loss to explain why you would care how the Canucks spend their operating budget.

Re: Boothy-the last straw

Posted: Sun Oct 27, 2013 2:06 pm
by Uncle dans leg
herb wrote:
RoyalDude wrote:Herb. Your stubbornness regarding Weird Dude is admirable, but you need to cut your losses and come join the winning side. No shame in that
I don't have any losses to cut.

We got Booth for next to nothing. There are no losses to cut. If he doesn't work out, we're out two injury prone vets from two years ago...boo freaking hoo.

Has he been everything we all hoped he would be? No, but it's still way too early in the season to give up any hope and we have nothing to gain from waiving Booth other than maybe the average overweight, balding, middle aged Canucks fan can move on to another stupid narrative.
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Re: Boothy-the last straw

Posted: Sun Oct 27, 2013 2:08 pm
by Vader
herb wrote:^ Stole form this market? What Aquilini pays him is none of my concern, and I am at a loss to explain why you would care how the Canucks spend their operating budget.
How about their cap budget, are we allowed to question that? Booth absorbed quite a bit of that for not a whole lot in return

Re: Boothy-the last straw

Posted: Sun Oct 27, 2013 2:17 pm
by Uncle dans leg
Nobody will take Boothy off our hands so we might as well give up on this debate.

Topper said it best a page or so ago...better to have him in/out of our line up trying to rediscover his game than waive him and save only 900K+/- off our cap

The off season will be when to decide what to do with him

Re: Boothy-the last straw

Posted: Mon Oct 28, 2013 12:17 am
by ClamRussel
Assuming Booth isn't so much of a head case that he's faking this injury (to either get back at Torts or because he can't take the heat in the kitchen) ...then, aside from being made of cheap glass, he represents our best bet at having a weapon we desperately need to round out our top 9 (when Burrows returns as well). If he becomes a distraction then perhaps its best to just cut bait but until then we'll certainly not get any kind of return for him....unlikely even w/ freed up cap space. Next year is another matter entirely.

Re: Boothy-the last straw

Posted: Mon Oct 28, 2013 5:33 am
by dbr
I will say this, right now Booth has compliance buy out written all over him.

I still believe he's capable of showing more than he has so far and it's a looong season but the odds of him living up to his cap hit are slim, the team by and large does not have a bigger cap problem on the books and even if he can kinda/sorta deliver as a top nine forward when he's healthy that's a 50/50 proposition right now.

My question at this point is (and it's early for this, but) if the team determines later this season that they want to move on from Booth and he hasn't shown significantly more than he has to this point, do you tempt fate in allowing him to play out the string? Or do you pull him out of the lineup to ensure that he's healthy during the buy out window?

Seems a bit bush league to sit on a player and hurt his career when he could be proving his worth to the other 29 NHL GMs, but $4m and change on the cap - and probably at least $3m of pure cap space if you're going to replace this player with a Jensen or a Shinkaruk next season - is such a commodity, and the Canucks are no longer one of those franchises that can afford to carry a boat anchor contract on the books.

It's premature at this point but if(/when :scowl: ) it comes time to consider this it will be interesting to see what the team elects to do. I doubt there's a trade out there, frankly, unless the Sabres need to make a deal because Matt Moulson won't watch the Lion King on DVD with Cody on road trips.

Re: Boothy-the last straw

Posted: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:31 am
by herb
Vader wrote:How about their cap budget, are we allowed to question that? Booth absorbed quite a bit of that for not a whole lot in return
Sure. There's always an opportunity cost with every decision. Theoretically, Booth's contract could have made the Canucks unable to sign somebody else. $4M doesn't get you that much on the UFA market these days.

I agree with dbr that Booth will likely be a compliance buy-out. My fingers are still crossed that he can be a productive player this season, but I'm less hopeful than I was at the start of the season.

Re: Boothy-the last straw

Posted: Mon Oct 28, 2013 10:13 am
by Hockey Widow
I still think MG made the right move. Booth playing his game was an upgrade over the two we sent packing. The cap trade off was negligible, 2 out Booth in. At the time of his first injury he was performing extremely well and was showing why he was exactly what we needed up front. That guy with wheels who could drive to the new. He has never regained that form and has had a string of injuries since then.

I am still hoping he will get back into the line up and reagin that early promise. He would be a welcomed addition if he could do that. But if he stays inconsistent, injury prone this year then you have to consider a buy out next season. If he stills seems injury prone and he still does not provide us with what we need then that does indeed pose an interesting question,do you park his ass or keep him for a playoff run? It would be tempting to park his ass but if he can at all help during the playoffs I just can't see doing that. The relationship will have to deteriorate to the point where the benefit of doing so far far out weighs any potential contribution he can make.

We stuck it out with Ballard even though he too became injury prone was he got here.