CanucksCorner.com Forums

Island Nucklehead wrote:

Tciso wrote:

Blob Mckenzie wrote:They are both terrible contracts . Sbisa is a Chinese fire drill every second shift

Is that Sbisa, or BXA? Juice has been terrible the last 2 seasons, and Sbisa is not the right partner for him. Bisa just replaced Ballard on the "killer B" defense.

At least Bieksa has provided something in the past, still provides leadership and some grit, is a great interview and only has a year left.

Sbisa provides nothing but sunburn to the back of our goalies necks. SPF 3.6 Million.

I don't disagree, but I think Sbisa and BXA are better than they played together this year. They have no chemistry, and their mental confusion was contagious. I think Sbisa with a calmer partner would thrive. Same way BXA needs a steady partner, and not a Sbisa/Ballard type partner.

If we trade Bieksa for picks or prospects they can no longer play together!

Which means Sbisa improves immediately.

Trading Bieksa: people shouldn't be so quick to assume he's tradeable.

I could be wrong, but something about this guy tells me he will not waive his NTC, if he's asked. He stated in the past that "he's going down with the ship" and I can easily see him playing out his contract and signing elsewhere as a UFA.

If the ship sails without him, he won't be going down with it.

Topper wrote:If the ship sails without him, he won't be going down with it.

If he believes he still has game, and aims to earn one last contract with term, he'll want to play for a team that will allow him to succeed.

If Benning feels the team is better off parting ways this summer, it'd best for both parties to have Bieksa provide a list.

If Bieksa agrees, there will be a number of teams interested in his services.

BladesofSteel wrote:

Topper wrote:If the ship sails without him, he won't be going down with it.

If he believes he still has game, and aims to earn one last contract with term, he'll want to play for a team that will allow him to succeed.

If Benning feels the team is better off parting ways this summer, it'd best for both parties to have Bieksa provide a list.

If Bieksa agrees, there will be a number of teams interested in his services.

I don't disagree, but people better be prepared to get back a 4th round pick when Bieksa pulls a Kesler and gives us a 1-team list. Might as well keep him and let him walk as a UFA.

Aaronp18 wrote:If we trade Bieksa for picks or prospects they can no longer play together!

Which means Sbisa improves immediately.

Sbisa was shit pre-Bieksa, and he'll be shit post-Bieksa.

How does Petry go from everybody's favourite goat and whipping boy in Edmonton to that MASSIVE Mike Gillis handout contract in Montreal????

RoyalDude wrote:How does Petry go from everybody's favourite goat and whipping boy in Edmonton to that MASSIVE Mike Gillis handout contract in Montreal????

The same way Devan Dubnyk goes from career AHL'er playing for the Oilers and can't get a job on 3 NHL teams in one season to a Vezina finalist.

Edmonton is really bad and when you find a good fit, it can make you a tidy sum in a contract. Right Anson Carter??? errr I mean Alexandre Burrows.

Petry wasn't as bad as Edmonton made him look and it's the market for defensemen. It's why Sbisa got $3.6 and it's why we won't be able to afford Franson.

Elliotte Friedman
Elliotte Friedman – Verified account ‏@FriedgeHNIC

NHLPA met this week, and it sounds like the players, after crunching the numbers, will consider using their full 5% growth factor.


Can someone explain the growth factor and how that would impact the cap this year?

Peter_Puck wrote:

RoyalDude wrote:How does Petry go from everybody's favourite goat and whipping boy in Edmonton to that MASSIVE Mike Gillis handout contract in Montreal????

The same way Devan Dubnyk goes from career AHL'er playing for the Oilers and can't get a job on 3 NHL teams in one season to a Vezina finalist.

Edmonton is really bad and when you find a good fit, it can make you a tidy sum in a contract. Right Anson Carter??? errr I mean Alexandre Burrows.

Petry wasn't as bad as Edmonton made him look and it's the market for defensemen. It's why Sbisa got $3.6 and it's why we won't be able to afford Franson.

Good call

I'm liking how the coaches challenge is finally going to be implemented.

SKYO wrote:I'm liking how the coaches challenge is finally going to be implemented.

I like the idea of it. Dont like that it will slow the game down even more. Even after the hurry up faceoffs have really lapsed..

Hockey Widow wrote:Elliotte Friedman
Elliotte Friedman – Verified account ‏@FriedgeHNIC

NHLPA met this week, and it sounds like the players, after crunching the numbers, will consider using their full 5% growth factor.

Can someone explain the growth factor and how that would impact the cap this year?

It's complicated.

The union has some say in the level the cap is set at for the upcoming season.

At the end of the day the players en masse will receive exactly 50% of total revenues

.... but individual players are affected differently by the guestimated revenues one year hence.

More specifically: players with existing contracts vs players with new contracts.

Ideologically it's always better for the Union to inflate the cap as much possible.

But players on existing contracts (most players in the now are on existing contracts) tend to get greedy?

Or maybe they're just tired of not receiving the face value of their contracts?

See they never get back that all of that 10-15% they put in escrow

(well not since the new CBA cut their share down to 50% at least).

Yeah, I'm not doing a great job of explaining this...

Like I said, it's complicated.

To answer the last part of your question, if the players vote to use the 5% inflator

... the cap will probably be about $71.5M for 2015-16.

(yes I know that's not a 5% cap increase from the previous season, it's complicated)

My old (as the hills) pal Topper has always warned the cap could come down one day.

Well if the Canadian dollar stays as low as it is right now for another year...

I have heard the 2016-17 cap could be lower than the 2015-16 cap (by a million or two).

Which would probably lead to Jimbo getting fired for the Sbisa/Dorsett/Miller deals.

You're right Doc. You did a bad job in explaining it

If the cap goes down doesn't it make sense to lower salaries/player cap by the same percentage. The NHL could be in a real mess if teams can only afford to ice 19-20 players a game. I guess that's the next step, get rid of guaranteed contacts to some extent.

Hockey Widow wrote: You're right Doc. You did a bad job in explaining it

Too much sun and not enough wine.

Hockey Widow wrote: If the cap goes down doesn't it make sense to lower salaries/player cap by the same percentage. The NHL could be in a real mess if teams can only afford to ice 19-20 players a game. I guess that's the next step, get rid of guaranteed contacts to some extent.

Well the cap would have to drop a lot first so let's jump off that bridge when we get to it!