2Fingers wrote: ↑Tue Oct 13, 2020 8:12 am
Next season with Sutter, Pearson, Edler, Benn and Baertschi coming off that is roughly $19.5M (if my math is right) - QH and EP will go from $2M combined to $16M+ combined. They still have to replace the 5 that are leaving.
I know JB can do it but we should expect to see a cheap 4th line consisting of players make league minimum.
First, you don't need to replace Baertschi. He's not in the lineup now.
Second, not overspending on a fourth line would be an improvement, wouldn't it?
Third, the next couple of seasons will see a flood of RFAs who don't get QOs because of the flat cap. These players are going to be going for $1M or less. Guys like Wallmark will be available and be as valuable as Sutter; there are lots of bottom pair/7 defensmen who will be avalable who will be as good as Benn. And for those two spots, you will be using the ELC money to pay for them.
That leaves two spots -- a top 6 wing and a top 4 or top 6 D (depending on whether a youngster exceeds expectations). The estimate of $8 million per Pettersson and Hughes would leave $4.5 million. Of course, that is an estimate -- the AAV can be lower (if the Canucks want to focus on the next 5 seasons and pay less now and risk a huge contract or leaving as UFAs) or higher (if the Canucks want to lock up and focus on years 4-8). It also depends on the ability to move another salary or have a retirement.
I think that it is pretty clear that the Canucks would benefit enormously from an ELC contract to take one of these spots, whether its defense or forward. The Canucks will have plenty of candidates that could step up; its possible that none will. But this isn't a problem with the current plan (which only can improve when bad contracts are eliminated). It is a reality for nearly every NHL team unless their construction is otherwise flawless and aided by "discounts". If you can't get contributions from controlled market salaries or great no-one-saw-that-coming signings, you don't have a marginal edge on anyone. For example, this season, Tampa's defense relied on Sergachev and Cernak, Cirelli was a real regular season contributor, and the Bolts were helped significantly by Coleman who was on a ridiculously good contract compared to his on ice value. Dallas needed Hintz and Gurianov to round out their forward corps, and got surprising productivity in the playoffs from Kiviranta. The Knights might be the exception, and outside of a redundant goalie situation, they've been constructed without fat in contracts and without significant underperformers. (That's good for them because until now, they really haven't had a realistic chance to improve through their picks because they still don't have a full contingency of mature drafted prospects -- that will take another year or two).
The Canucks aren't an exception to the rule -- they have plenty of fat in terms of bad contracts, buyouts, and the recapture penalty. The good news is that goes away more or less as these high value ELC's go away. But going forward, if the Canucks don't get something really good from one or two of Juolevi, Woo, Rathbone, Lind, Rafferty, Hoglander, Pod, etc., then it is quite likely that they won't make it to the highest level of Cup contention. But this is a reality for all teams is that you can only have so many salaries that are part of a core, and that if those salaries cover UFA periods or poorly negotiated, then they are going to need controlled market salaries or below market signings to provide value-plus.