Extend Edler or Trade Him?

[FAN]

Edler is entering the final year of his deal and will most likely (barring new CBA rules) become a UFA next summer. The Canucks have Bieksa and Hamhuis locked up for 4 more years and Garrison for 6 more years. All of them have NTCs so they're likely going no where. Ballard's contract has 3 more years but he doesn't have an NTC so he can go somewhere. Given Edler's skillset and offensive production, it's safe to assume that he'll get at least Bieksa and Garrison money with full NTC and likely to become the team's highest paid defenseman if he is to be extended. But should he be extended or be used as trade bait?

The Skinny
Edler is arguably the most talented defenseman on the Vancouver Canucks. He has shown that when he hits everything that moves, he can be a dominating defenseman on both ends of the ice. But lacking consistency and perhaps a quality stable partner, Edler has, thus far, failed to establish himself as a #1 defenseman in the NHL and can't even be considered the team's best defender. On this team, Edler is more of a #3 second pairing defenseman, but Edler's offensive game has grown and is likely a quality partner away from establishing himself as the team's undisputed #1 defenseman, albeit more of a smooth puck-moving defenseman than a physical beast who dominates on both ends of the ice.

Extending Edler
Looking at things from a vacuum, extending Edler is a no brainer. There are few defenseman who combines Edler's age, size, skillset, and offensive production. But looking at the big picture, I have some concerns. Extending Edler means that the top 4 will likely stay the same for years to come. Acquiring Weber or another #1 defenseman will almost certainly be an impossibility. Will Edler continue to improve? Will the top 4 be good enough to win the Cup? There seems to be room for Edler to grow offensively, but Edler has not shown an ability to anchor a defensive pairing. Without a quality defensive partner, Edler can look utterly lost out there. But the Canucks just signed Garrison so Edler is expected to have a quality defensive partner to pair up with.

Will you trade Edler?
Obviously, Edler in a package for Weber would be something many Canucks fans can support, but what if the Canucks can't land a defenseman like Weber? Would you trade Edler for help up front or possibly trade Edler for prospects and draft picks and move Ballard up to pair with Garrison? Or do you extend Edler and hope that he and Garrison form a solid pairing for years to come? It's likely a safe bet that Gillis will try to extend Edler, but Edler likely has the highest trade value of all Canucks players and given Edler's contract status, there's a chance for Gillis to make a bold move here.

[RoyalDude]

Extend Edler. It would be the dumbest thing this organization did since the Cam Neely trade, if we traded a 26 year old Edler.

No offense FAN, but Poile is not interested in Edler unless Edler is Extended and why the fuck would Gillis trade Edler if he was Extended?

I don't know, I guess I'm the only around here that heard Gillis mumble, "we need to get Bigger, Younger, Faster" Why is Gillis trading someone who fits that criteria?

It was not too long ago when this city was calling Edler one of the best defenseman in the NHL, he has a bad stretch of hockey and was not the only one on the team that did and now everyone wants to trade him???? Don't get it.

Personally, I like a top 4 of Edler, Weber, Hamhius and Garrison much more than Bieksa, Weber, Hamhius and Garrison.

If Gillis sticks to his mantra, Bigger, Younger, Faster with Bieksa's smallish size for a defenseman, since the league is going back to being big again and his age 31, Bieksa seems to be the odd man out here.

[Hockey Widow]

If I'm not mistaken we cannot extend him until January. By then there could be a new CBA. If the NHL gets its 5 year limit we could see a much higher cap hit for Edler at that time. For Weber too for that matter, no throw away years. Weber however can re-sign now before the new CBA and whatever it contains comes into effect.

Point is without that 6th or 7th year on an Edler contract we could be paying him north of 6 million per year. Is he still worth it at 6+ per year?

As for trading him, without a new contract is value is much lower on the trade market, unless it is deadline day and then maybe we hit a home run.

[RoyalDude]

If I'm not mistaken we cannot extend him until January. By then there could be a new CBA. If the NHL gets its 5 year limit we could see a much higher cap hit for Edler at that time. For Weber too for that matter, no throw away years. Weber however can re-sign now before the new CBA and whatever it contains comes into effect.

Point is without that 6th or 7th year on an Edler contract we could be paying him north of 6 million per year. Is he still worth it at 6+ per year?

As for trading him, without a new contract is value is much lower on the trade market, unless it is deadline day and then maybe we hit a home run.

I guess my thinking is HW, we saw how much our Defense was weakened with the loss of Erhoff, probably the most significant reason why our offense dried up. I just see it being a matter of top priority in the mind of Gillis to do whatever it takes to retain the services of Edler. I don't know, I guess I'm the only that sees it as being real stupid not retaining his services.

Anyhow, like you said, Edler's situation is somewhat handcuffed and tough to judge by what and when the new CBA will be.

[Boston Canucker]

Extend, easy. As much as I love the idea of us getting Weber, we all know it's likely a pipe dream. Edler had a tough playoff but an otherwise strong year. Can't lose him, and I don't sense he'll look to break that bank, although he's certainly worthy of a raise.

[Hockey Widow]

If I'm not mistaken we cannot extend him until January. By then there could be a new CBA. If the NHL gets its 5 year limit we could see a much higher cap hit for Edler at that time. For Weber too for that matter, no throw away years. Weber however can re-sign now before the new CBA and whatever it contains comes into effect.

Point is without that 6th or 7th year on an Edler contract we could be paying him north of 6 million per year. Is he still worth it at 6+ per year?

As for trading him, without a new contract is value is much lower on the trade market, unless it is deadline day and then maybe we hit a home run.

I guess my thinking is HW, we saw how much our Defense was weakened with the loss of Erhoff, probably the most significant reason why our offense dried up. I just see it being a matter of top priority in the mind of Gillis to do whatever it takes to retain the services of Edler. I don't know, I guess I'm the only that sees it as being real stupid not retaining his services.

Anyhow, like you said, Edler's situation is somewhat handcuffed and tough to judge by what and when the new CBA will be.

I'm all for keeping Edler. And I also agree Weber is a pipe dream. If he wants the money and security he needs to sign a new deal now.

[Jovorock]

Extend Edler for the same money as Bieksa and GArrison, Alex still has a lot of upside.

Weber isn't going any where. Inside word he has agreed dollars they are working on term.

[coco_canuck]

This whole to trade Edler or not to trade him is a bit of an odd debate really.

If anyone is suggesting we should trade Edler for the sake of it, then they're obviously out to lunch.

But the reality is, any player can be traded in the right situation/deal.

Now, when it comes to Edler, the only way I, and most other reasonable posters, would trade him is if a better defenceman is coming the other way.

Since there aren't that many d-men who are significantly better than Edler, the list of players you'd take in return should be fairly self evident if you follow the league closely.

I wouldn't be actively shopping Edler, and I'd definitely be looking at extending him with a 6-7 year deal at anywhere between $4.6M-5M if possible. But, if a great deal came along that would improve the team, then obviously you look at it.

Btw, I'm pretty sure Edler and Burrows can work out extension's this summer. I think Edler and Burrows have been eligible to sign extensions since this past January. If I'm not mistaken, the extension eligibility kicks in when there's less than 1.5 year's left on a player's given contract.

For example, Luongo signed his extension in the summer of 2009, when he still had 1 year left on his contract, and the new deal kicked in the next summer.

[Potatoe1]

I wouldn't be actively shopping Edler, and I'd definitely be looking at extending him with a 6-7 year deal at anywhere between $4.6M-5M if possible. But, if a great deal came along that would improve the team, then obviously you look at it.

I would have thought a deal with Edler based around the above numbers was a pipe dream a week ago, but if the Owners are pushing for later free agency and a cap on term then there is massive pressure for Edler to sign this summer.

He could end up being a RFA not an URFA next summer and capped at 5 or 6 years.

Burrows is in a different situation. He will be an URFA no matter what and was never looking at a deal over 5-6 years.

If the owners get what they want, Burrow will be even more difficult to retain.

[coco_canuck]

He could end up being a RFA not an URFA next summer and capped at 5 or 6 years.

Burrows is in a different situation. He will be an URFA no matter what and was never looking at a deal over 5-6 years.

If the owners get what they want, Burrow will be even more difficult to retain.

Yup, and as I said in the CBA thread, if there is a 5-6 year contract limit that doesn't allow any front-loading or bonus money, then you're looking at star players maxing out, and the rest trying to get as close to the max as possible.

For Burrows, that means he's looking for big money in a 4-5 year deal that Vancouver can't offer, but a team like say Florida could easily give him $5.5-6M per year.

You're right about Edler. He could probably get a 5 year max deal on the open market, but that might be a year or two later than he anticipated.

I'd be fine with keeping Burrows at the $4M range for 4 years, but if he's looking for much more, we might be better off trading him and his desirable contract for a significant asset. IMO, Burrows is too valuable a chip to let walk for nothing next summer.

[Hockey Widow]

Hey CoCo if you are right then I think MG should be trying to get both locked up ASAP. I assume he is waiting to get this FA period over with and deal with the Luongo situation but if he is in a position to begin negotiations then I'd hope he would deal with it sooner rather than later.

Burrows has already said he will go for fair market value, not that he will test FA. IF he gets fair market value from MG I can see him wanting to stay a Canuck until he retires. If not we had better be thinking of trading him while there is a market.

Maybe if we get Doan and a good return for Luongo, Burrows becomes someone we can put on the trade block and see what stirs. No, I'm not advocating we trade Burrows just speculating that if he doesn't fit into our long term plans then now is the time we think of moving him.

[Fred]

Trading Burrows to me is like trading Smyl. Rather than a part of the team he's viewed as a piece of meat to be moved. I'm not sure a lot of teams might like him, although I suppose in maybe lesser markets he'd be welcomed. Edler's frailties came at a good time for Vcr and a bad time for Edler. while he may be paid more than Hamhuis/Bieska I can't see it being a lot more, so sign him and stick to the plan. I'm thinking a lot will depend on how Connauton/Tanev show this next season .... when ever that might be

[coco_canuck]

Hey CoCo if you are right then I think MG should be trying to get both locked up ASAP. I assume he is waiting to get this FA period over with and deal with the Luongo situation but if he is in a position to begin negotiations then I'd hope he would deal with it sooner rather than later.

I'm too lazy to look it up and provide links, but I'm certain they can sign extensions, just like Jordan Staal did with Carolina despite having a year left on his deal.

I also remember hearing/reading Gillis say he's planning on talking extension with Edler and Burrows later this off-season, adding he'd like to keep them yada yada yada...

Burrows has already said he will go for fair market value, not that he will test FA. IF he gets fair market value from MG I can see him wanting to stay a Canuck until he retires. If not we had better be thinking of trading him while there is a market.

Maybe if we get Doan and a good return for Luongo, Burrows becomes someone we can put on the trade block and see what stirs. No, I'm not advocating we trade Burrows just speculating that if he doesn't fit into our long term plans then now is the time we think of moving him.

I remember you saying Burrows wants fair market value, and why shouldn't he?

Not that it's anything to scoff at, but over 7 seasons in the NHL, almost 140 goals in a little over 500 games over that span, 4 consecutive +26 goal seasons, Burrows has made $8 Million total, being slated to make $2M next year to make it an even $10M over 8 years.

I think he wants at least a 4 year deal, maybe even 5, with the discussion starting at $4.25-$4.5M per year.

Burrows can probably get $5.5-6M on the open market, so it's really up to him to figure out what is fair in his books.

And there is absolutely a market for Burrows, and when MG talks to his agent, Gillis will know what it'll cost.

If MG thinks the price is prohibitive, then do you move him before the season, or by the deadline?

Because MG surely cannot let him walk for nothing.

[Potatoe1]

I'd be fine with keeping Burrows at the $4M range for 4 years, but if he's looking for much more, we might be better off trading him and his desirable contract for a significant asset. IMO, Burrows is too valuable a chip to let walk for nothing next summer.

Unfortunately he's also too valuable to us in the here and now to trade for what is likely to be a player who makes less of an impact on our playoff run next year.

I would sooner let burrows walk for nothing then down grade the current roster.

[coco_canuck]

I would sooner let burrows walk for nothing then down grade the current roster.

I think that depends on the return.

If they can get a blue-chip prospect from a desperate team, someone like Hubredeau, Couturier etc., or package Burrows for an improvement, then it's a no brainer.

And I think they can get good value for Burrows if they move him, maybe not a Hubdredeau or Couturier, but they can get a significant asset in some sort of a deal.

Obviously, if the return is a B prospect and a late 1st, or a solid 3rd liner etc., then I'd hold off too.