Canucks News N Notes 24-25

[Strangelove]

Doc Strangelove (virtuitis signalatitis)

LOL

[UWSaint]

Why the Hogs Hate? He had 24 goals playing either bad minutes, or winging it with an injured EP40 and a near useless Mikheyhev. Kid deserves a chance. Anyone who blindly ignores his 24 goals does so at their own risk. Yes his defense can improve. But he is vastly outplaying his contract.

If we trade him, I can't see us getting a return that makes sense. Using him as a sweetener for poolman is a red herring, as it gains us very little, and we can already accrue cap space while keeping both.

Wait 20 or 30 games, when teams get desperate for offense, and then, if it makes sense, trade him.

Outperforming contracts are the key to long runs. Why people are wanting to be moving a 24 goal scorer for a 20 goal scorer is questionable. Hoglander is young and can develop into a top 6 winger. He has made massive strides towards this last year. Sprong is a solid bottom 6 guy for his entire career. Both have the potential to outperform their contracts, and both could carve out a space on the team. Why people want to trade Hoglander before the season starts in puzzling at best...

(1) if Hoglander develops further, he will get paid like it starting next year. Cap increase is going largely to OEL’s buyout, but also getting a center (Suter) and defenseman (Forbert). If Raty and EP2 aren’t ready Canucks will be in FA market. If Hoglander’s pegged as replacing Boeser, fine. But do you see that? I don’t. So then to keep him, likely you’ll be moving Garland to make numbers work. Would you (Tciso) “hate” Garland in such a circumstance?

(2) There is a roster pressure now. It isn’t bursting, but as it stands, the Canucks are likely waiving Aman and Karlsson out of camp. While Aman isn’t much and probably gets through waivers (Karlsson may have a better chance of getting taken), losing Aman is a problem because the Canucks organizational center depth isn’t much. Trading Hog for pick, prospect, or both means another player doesn’t have to get waived.

(3) The alternatives to relieving that pressure are trading Podkolzin or waiving Sprong and pretending the whole thing didn’t happen. The whole point of my original post on Sprong’s signing is that it puts pressure on other roster decisions; Sprong allows Canucks to trade Hoglander without a significant hit to the lineup; the things that make Hoglander attractive to his defenders (and I don’t hate him, I just think he’s complementary not critical, flawed not complete, capped upside but is fine for what he is), means he should bring a return. But if Pod is moved now? Don’t you think the return is less that if Hoglander’s traded?

(4) So the point is trading Hog might be the best asset management. It isn’t more complicated than that.

(5) Trevor Letowski scored 19 goals in the season in which he turned 23.

[Picker of Cherries]

Hog or Pod are likely gone unless Karlsson lights it up offensively then both may be gone. Based on their previous play, I’d guess Hog stays over Pod because when he is on his game, he is better at scoring from a bottom six role without a good centre. And he is more likely to fill in or win a top six role than Pod. Management wants to give Tocchet more roster options. Hog gives more options than Pod.

I don’t think they’ll waive Aman over waiving PDG, Karlsson or Podkolzin. I think management values him more than the public. As a depth centre who can also fill in on the wing, he has more positional value than a checking winger. Tocchet also uses him a lot as one of his penalty killers. He is lanky and skates pretty well, so he can reach a lot of pucks defensively. He has Blueger-like offensive ability (basically none), but he has Tocchet’s trust defensively, so I think they will keep Aman at least as a spare 13th forward.

Management has brought in a lot of wingers this off-season, but their centre depth is still only Miller, Pettersson, Suter, Blueger, and then Aman and not much at centre in Abbotsford (maybe Sasson since they moved Raty to the wing). I’m pretty sure management will waive or trade the wingers that don’t win a top twelve job before they waive Aman from the 13th forward slot. The wingers are in tough competing for a job this fall, but I think the current five centres are relatively safe.

[Lancer]

Sprong's signing does give management options if they want to trade for a better fit in the lineup. I don't think Butthead and Old Fart are done pursuing Necas, and if Hoglander and Podkolzin are part of the price, then Sprong serves as a temporary stop-gap down the lineup. Even so, I wager they'll want to see what happens in training camp first.

[Tciso]

So, what I am piecing together from the Hogs/Poolman banter is :

Trade Poolman's contract, and a sweetener for deadline cap space.
Trade Hogs now for cap space, and re-coup the sweetener.
At the tdd, trade an ass load of picks and prospects for the next rental, crippling us in the future. Or, no tdd trade, and we waste the Hogs trade. Both suck donkey balls


That would be 2 years in a row. Do it a 3rd time, and we get a leaf iron on patch for the jerseys.

We have a solid core. But we are still not in our prime, and it is was tooo sooooon to blow cap and picks/prospects for a chance.

[Topper]

At the tdd, trade an ass load of picks and prospects for the next rental, crippling us in the future. Or, no tdd trade, and we waste the Hogs trade. Both suck donkey balls


That would be 2 years in a row. Do it a 3rd time, and we get a leaf iron on patch for the jerseys.

We have a solid core. But we are still not in our prime, and it is was tooo sooooon to blow cap and picks/prospects for a chance.

Isn't that what this management group routinely did in Pittsburgh?

[UWSaint]

I don’t think they’ll waive Aman over waiving PDG, Karlsson or Podkolzin. I think management values him more than the public. As a depth centre who can also fill in on the wing, he has more positional value than a checking winger.

While I agree management values Aman, they likely value starting the season without using lite more. From puckpedia:

If a team is cap compliant on opening day without using LTIR, or uses LTIR at any point during the season, the LTIR Pool is the Cap Hit of the LTIR player less the team’s cap space when the player goes on LTIR. For example, if a player with a $4M Cap Hit goes on LTIR when the team has $100K of Cap Space, the LTIR pool is $3.9M ($4M-$0.1M). Because of this, team’s often make several roster moves right before a player goes on LTIR in order to be as close to the cap as possible, in order to maximize the LTIR Pool

That means get under the cap before placing a guy on ltir. And if Aman isn’t waived and PDG is, the canucks are not under the cap. As I understand this quote, you increase flexibility considerably if you can be under at the start of the year. Of course, that changes if anyone other than Juulsen is moved and not replaced with a roster spot. Then you don’t have to send Aman through waivers.

Tciso this is part of the reason you aren’t piecing together anything. The cap factors into the analysis, both this year and next. Hoglander succeeds this year and there’s terrible cap pressure caused by a non core middle six winger who doesn’t play special teams. Hoglander fails, and why would you want him?

Again, I don’t mind the player, but he’s not mission critical, and he’s not he future of the Canucks.

Moving Hoglander now that Sprong is there to come close to his goal output (and at a slightly lower AAV) is also the best way to give Pod a final shot with the club. And if Pod hits, he’s dirt cheap next year and his contract will expire after 25-26 when the Canucks are not having an increase in the dead cap (if nothing else changes, it will go down because IM65 retention comes off). Also, if Pod hits (not likely but not inconceivable), he’ll be a better player than Hoglander, imo. He’s got more if it is all put together.

[Topper]

UW,, exactly and why teams will often make space for their LTIR player on the opening day roster by papering others to the AHL and the next day it is back to regular scheduled programming.

Vancouver's issue is the dearth of waiver exempt players or those who would usually go unclaimed.

[Tciso]

UW, that doesn't compute. Trade him now, before his value goes up???? If he was a UFA after this year, then I see your point. But he is still an RFA. Plus, if he is that valuable, trade off Heinan, or another spare part next year to keep him.

IMO, we send down Friedman, pizza and the 3rd goalie. We are cap compliant and we maintain depth. And those 3 are way easier to replace than a cheap winger who can score, if we lose one on waivers.

[UWSaint]

UW, that doesn't compute. Trade him now, before his value goes up???? If he was a UFA after this year, then I see your point. But he is still an RFA. Plus, if he is that valuable, trade off Heinan, or another spare part next year to keep him.

IMO, we send down Friedman, pizza and the 3rd goalie. We are cap compliant and we maintain depth. And those 3 are way easier to replace than a cheap winger who can score, if we lose one on waivers.

The Canucks current just-under-the-cap footing already assumes the 3d goalie is waived and depends on PDG or Friedman not being waived (because they are at league minimum). They can't do what you want and maximize the flexibility that comes from not having Poolman on LTIR when the season starts.

You could certainly trade Hoglander after this season, and his value might go up, but that doesn't mean the trade value changes all that much (and doesn't get three punctuation marks !!! indicating feigned bepuzzlement. Based on last season, Hoglander brings about $3.5M-4M in value and is paid $1.1M. After the season, he's an RFA with arbitration rights. If he plays well, the gap between "value" and salary should still narrow even if his play is better. It was part of the first post -- he becomes priced like a Conor Garland. Lots of teams now would like a 1.1M player who is a middle six winger coming off a 24 goal season. Fewer will want/have room for his best case scenario -- a never-going-to-be-core second line wing.

If he doesn't play that well, the market for him will decline for other reasons. The salary will still go up, the perception of expected future value will not.

Of course, there's an argument that he's part of the best team the Canucks could ice next year -- and presuming no other additions, it is better to have him than not. But it will mean moving someone else, reducing chances for prospects to get call ups, etc. Asset management.

[Hockey Widow]

Ya I don't read that anyone, well maybe one, hates Hoglander. It is all about moving the pieces around to get the most cap and roster flexibility. You have to think that if they chased Sprong they saw warts elsewhere.

We dont know Boeser will have a repeat year. We don't know if they will come to terms in the New Year. So we don't know what the landscape will like like next season. We may or may not have his caplet available. If Hoglander produces another 25 goal season he will look for something in the 3 range. Do we want to pay that?

I don't really care who gets trade tbh. I just think if they can move at least one roster player and attach the Poolman contract we will create so much more room and flexibility for ourselves. None of Aman, PDG, Hoglander or Podkolzin are critical to the team's success. They just aren't.

Allvin has done a good job 2 years in a row working with little cap and being able to fill out the roster. Imagine what he can do if he gets a little breathing room. Also, what if a player or two from Abbey are ready for the show. Lets create space for that.

[Tciso]

It's not hate, but Hogs has clearly been singled out as expendable for cap reasons. I disagree. Cap problems are better solved with value contracts, and Hogs as an RFA is good value.

I know the benefits of accruing cap space by trading him and Poolman. I just have a way lower value on that Cap space. I see this playing out as an overpayment to dump Poolman and another overpayment in the spring on a rental. And odds are the rental is a Hogs replacement.

[Strangelove]

(2) There is a roster pressure now. It isn’t bursting, but as it stands, the Canucks are likely waiving Aman and Karlsson out of camp. While Aman isn’t much and probably gets through waivers (Karlson may have a better chance of getting taken), losing Aman is a problem because the Canucks organizational center depth isn’t much. Trading Hog for pick, prospect, or both means another player doesn’t have to get waived.

Actually, Karlsson is waiver exempt for one more year.

[UWSaint]

(2) There is a roster pressure now. It isn’t bursting, but as it stands, the Canucks are likely waiving Aman and Karlsson out of camp. While Aman isn’t much and probably gets through waivers (Karlson may have a better chance of getting taken), losing Aman is a problem because the Canucks organizational center depth isn’t much. Trading Hog for pick, prospect, or both means another player doesn’t have to get waived.

Actually, Karlsson is waiver exempt for one more year.

That's good. Nice to have a tweener that can be moved up and down without exposure.

Where are you finding waiver eligibility now that cap friendly is gone? Is it on Puckpedia? I couldn't find it.

[Megaterio Llamas]

(2) There is a roster pressure now. It isn’t bursting, but as it stands, the Canucks are likely waiving Aman and Karlsson out of camp. While Aman isn’t much and probably gets through waivers (Karlson may have a better chance of getting taken), losing Aman is a problem because the Canucks organizational center depth isn’t much. Trading Hog for pick, prospect, or both means another player doesn’t have to get waived.

Actually, Karlsson is waiver exempt for one more year.

That's good. Nice to have a tweener that can be moved up and down without exposure.

Where are you finding waiver eligibility now that cap friendly is gone? Is it on Puckpedia? I couldn't find it.

I had assumed Karlsson needed waivers this year but I don't think he's a risk anyway.

No idea where to look for this information now that the Caps have snatched up Capfriendly.