Canucks News N Notes 24-25

[Hockey Widow]

I'm fine with re-signing Lankinen on a medium term, 3 or 4 year deal. If nothing else it's insurance given Demko's deal is up next year, and I'm not sure how Demko can justify a raise or long-term given he's injured all the time. If they re-sign Lankinen then they can make a decision on Demko in the summer once he's eligible for an extension. Either extend him to a reasonable deal or you can trade him then and get another 1B to pair with Lankinen moving forward.

For forwards, if it were me I'd be after Sissons for a 3C and Kyrou as a top 6 winger. Sissons as he's right handed, good on face-offs, good defensively, decent sized, signed for another year relatively cheaply and a local guy to boot. He's been a +/- 30 point player most of his career and he's off that pace this year so hopefully that brings the cost down a bit. Kyrou is one of the fastest players in the league and we know this management team loves speed. He's a 1st/2nd line winger on almost every team in the league, only 26 years old and signed for 8 more years at just north of $8 million per season. He's a better scorer than Boeser and fits more of what this team wants so I can see Allvin being all over him.

I'd trade Boeser for futures and use those plus something else to go get these guys. Yep it would be expensive, especially for Kyrou, but they'd get 6 full seasons out of him plus this year's playoffs and he's back to FA at age 33. I like him to age better than Brock especially if Brock actually insists on the 8 year deal he supposedly wants.

The team still might need another center in a year or two, but there would still be about $10 million in cap space this offseason to go get somebody else after signing Lankinen and trading for Kyrou/Sissons - wouldn't be too many expendable assets left but that's a concern for later on. Kyrou is rumoured to be on the block, not sure about Sissons but I'd assume Nashville will make some changes after their god awful season, and a 3rd line center who is 31 years old probably isn't completely off limits.

Nashville is in full sellers mode. A lot of their players will be made available with few untouchables.

[Topper]

There is a Lankinen nearly every season.

[Meds]

I'd trade Boeser for futures and use those plus something else to go get these guys. Yep it would be expensive, especially for Kyrou, but they'd get 6 full seasons out of him plus this year's playoffs and he's back to FA at age 33. I like him to age better than Brock especially if Brock actually insists on the 8 year deal he supposedly wants.

Boeser will only be traded before the TDL if the Canucks are flushing the season.

Two reasons…..

1. Brock is a top-6 winger, you might replace him in a “hockey trade”, but you will be adding outgoing futures if the incoming player is younger or has term beyond this season. The incoming player would have to be a near franchise level talent in order to make that an addition to this roster that is seen as help for this year.

2. Trading the longest tenured player out, when the playoffs are still the goal, sends a piss poor message to other players in the room.

[UWSaint]

There is a Lankinen nearly every season.

And there is a guy who was last year's Lankinen every season who is no longer a Lankinen.

[Hockey Widow]

I'd trade Boeser for futures and use those plus something else to go get these guys. Yep it would be expensive, especially for Kyrou, but they'd get 6 full seasons out of him plus this year's playoffs and he's back to FA at age 33. I like him to age better than Brock especially if Brock actually insists on the 8 year deal he supposedly wants.

Boeser will only be traded before the TDL if the Canucks are flushing the season.

Two reasons…..

1. Brock is a top-6 winger, you might replace him in a “hockey trade”, but you will be adding outgoing futures if the incoming player is younger or has term beyond this season. The incoming player would have to be a near franchise level talent in order to make that an addition to this roster that is seen as help for this year.

2. Trading the longest tenured player out, when the playoffs are still the goal, sends a piss poor message to other players in the room.

It is a dilemma. The Canucks need him, or someone like him, for the playoff push and into the playoffs. But if you know you will not meet his contract demands you risk losing him for nothing thus robbing you of assets you may need to replace him with someone else. I like Boeser. But I have always seen his warts. And lets face it he has only ever had one 40 goal season. I am still in the camp, that unless you get a team favourable contract, both in cap and term, you must trade him. I do not want be the team that signs him north of 8 million for 6-8 years. I'd rather pay the price to get a younger player into the organization.

But if you do trade him this year you had better have a replacement lined up. Common sense should tell us we are not a Cup contender, yes anything is possible. That being the case we should be looking to capitalize on his value if we have no plans to keep him. It is the reverse of last year when we blew the wad to get Lindholm. That is a deal that should not have been made. Boeser is the one that should be made.

One of the criticisms under Gillis, whether owner driven or not, was that we did not blow up the old core soon enough and got little in return when we did. Why keep repeating that mistake?

[Lancer]

Even $3 million a year is not too bad a hit. It all depends on whether he wants to be a starter or not.

[Meds]

One of the criticisms under Gillis, whether owner driven or not, was that we did not blow up the old core soon enough and got little in return when we did. Why keep repeating that mistake?

I was certainly one of the people who criticized that. However, much of the problem there was too many NTC’s.

My question is, how old do you let them get? Boeser is only going to be 28 this month. I don’t see his skating dropping off until he’s 33-34. Elite skaters you sometimes see a drop in speed that effects their game earlier, but he’s average and his game has never been built on his wheels.

I definitely don’t want him for 8 years unless the AAV is $6M. With cap increases, by the time he’s in year 4 or 5, that will be equivalent to probably $4M in space now.

I agree. Ideally 6 years max.

[Diehard1]

I'd trade Boeser for futures and use those plus something else to go get these guys. Yep it would be expensive, especially for Kyrou, but they'd get 6 full seasons out of him plus this year's playoffs and he's back to FA at age 33. I like him to age better than Brock especially if Brock actually insists on the 8 year deal he supposedly wants.

Boeser will only be traded before the TDL if the Canucks are flushing the season.

Two reasons…..

1. Brock is a top-6 winger, you might replace him in a “hockey trade”, but you will be adding outgoing futures if the incoming player is younger or has term beyond this season. The incoming player would have to be a near franchise level talent in order to make that an addition to this roster that is seen as help for this year.

2. Trading the longest tenured player out, when the playoffs are still the goal, sends a piss poor message to other players in the room.

It is a dilemma. The Canucks need him, or someone like him, for the playoff push and into the playoffs. But if you know you will not meet his contract demands you risk losing him for nothing thus robbing you of assets you may need to replace him with someone else. I like Boeser. But I have always seen his warts. And lets face it he has only ever had one 40 goal season. I am still in the camp, that unless you get a team favourable contract, both in cap and term, you must trade him. I do not want be the team that signs him north of 8 million for 6-8 years. I'd rather pay the price to get a younger player into the organization.

But if you do trade him this year you had better have a replacement lined up. Common sense should tell us we are not a Cup contender, yes anything is possible. That being the case we should be looking to capitalize on his value if we have no plans to keep him. It is the reverse of last year when we blew the wad to get Lindholm. That is a deal that should not have been made. Boeser is the one that should be made.

One of the criticisms under Gillis, whether owner driven or not, was that we did not blow up the old core soon enough and got little in return when we did. Why keep repeating that mistake?

I think that's exactly the issue here - this management team can't lose Boeser for nothing if he's not going to sign for a reasonable deal. I like him and his game a lot and would be happy to re-sign him, assuming it's 6 years or less. I'd even be willing to go longer term on a team friendly AAV, likely $7 million or less, but if he wants a market deal of $8 million x 8 years you can't do that. I'm pretty sure Allvin knows this and we'll find out in the next few weeks if Boeser will play ball or not.

I think if Allvin does trade him it will be a JT situation where it's an immediate flip for another player. The team might even get better if they can do this correctly as Boeser hasn't exactly been lighting the world on fire this season.

I don't think the core of this team - which is now Hughes, Hronek, MP, Petey (assuming he's back), maybe DeBrusk - cares as much as we might think about who is in the dressing room, barring another JT-like a-hole joining of course. They want to win and win consistently, so however that can happen is what they're looking for.

[Diehard1]

I'm fine with re-signing Lankinen on a medium term, 3 or 4 year deal. If nothing else it's insurance given Demko's deal is up next year, and I'm not sure how Demko can justify a raise or long-term given he's injured all the time. If they re-sign Lankinen then they can make a decision on Demko in the summer once he's eligible for an extension. Either extend him to a reasonable deal or you can trade him then and get another 1B to pair with Lankinen moving forward.

For forwards, if it were me I'd be after Sissons for a 3C and Kyrou as a top 6 winger. Sissons as he's right handed, good on face-offs, good defensively, decent sized, signed for another year relatively cheaply and a local guy to boot. He's been a +/- 30 point player most of his career and he's off that pace this year so hopefully that brings the cost down a bit. Kyrou is one of the fastest players in the league and we know this management team loves speed. He's a 1st/2nd line winger on almost every team in the league, only 26 years old and signed for 8 more years at just north of $8 million per season. He's a better scorer than Boeser and fits more of what this team wants so I can see Allvin being all over him.

I'd trade Boeser for futures and use those plus something else to go get these guys. Yep it would be expensive, especially for Kyrou, but they'd get 6 full seasons out of him plus this year's playoffs and he's back to FA at age 33. I like him to age better than Brock especially if Brock actually insists on the 8 year deal he supposedly wants.

The team still might need another center in a year or two, but there would still be about $10 million in cap space this offseason to go get somebody else after signing Lankinen and trading for Kyrou/Sissons - wouldn't be too many expendable assets left but that's a concern for later on. Kyrou is rumoured to be on the block, not sure about Sissons but I'd assume Nashville will make some changes after their god awful season, and a 3rd line center who is 31 years old probably isn't completely off limits.

Nashville is in full sellers mode. A lot of their players will be made available with few untouchables.

Yep I think so too. Sissons would be a good add and wouldn't cost nearly as much as Norris, Schenn or some of the other names being thrown around.

[Blob Mckenzie]

Sign Lanky at $2.5x4. That is a tradeable contract of we outgrow him. And it sets him up for life financially too.

Why would he sign that deal?? Would you choose to extract bull semen from a brahma bull lit up on meth?

Sharp as a beach ball

[Madcombinepilot]

There is a Lankinen nearly every season.

Agree with this.Lankinen has outperformed expectations this year, but give him a 4 year contract, and he will rapidly and happily settle back into obscurity of a permanent back up goalie.

The best backups live on 1 or 2 year contracts.

No need for a long term contract here.

[Madcombinepilot]

I'd trade Boeser for futures and use those plus something else to go get these guys. Yep it would be expensive, especially for Kyrou, but they'd get 6 full seasons out of him plus this year's playoffs and he's back to FA at age 33. I like him to age better than Brock especially if Brock actually insists on the 8 year deal he supposedly wants.

Boeser will only be traded before the TDL if the Canucks are flushing the season.

Two reasons…..

1. Brock is a top-6 winger, you might replace him in a “hockey trade”, but you will be adding outgoing futures if the incoming player is younger or has term beyond this season. The incoming player would have to be a near franchise level talent in order to make that an addition to this roster that is seen as help for this year.

2. Trading the longest tenured player out, when the playoffs are still the goal, sends a piss poor message to other players in the room.

And 3. If he is as bad as everyone who wants to trade him says, why do they think he is going to get such a rich contract??

[Tciso]

Sign Lanky at $2.5x4. That is a tradeable contract of we outgrow him. And it sets him up for life financially too.

Why would he sign that deal??

What contract should he be signing?

[Meds]

I'd trade Boeser for futures and use those plus something else to go get these guys. Yep it would be expensive, especially for Kyrou, but they'd get 6 full seasons out of him plus this year's playoffs and he's back to FA at age 33. I like him to age better than Brock especially if Brock actually insists on the 8 year deal he supposedly wants.

Boeser will only be traded before the TDL if the Canucks are flushing the season.

Two reasons…..

1. Brock is a top-6 winger, you might replace him in a “hockey trade”, but you will be adding outgoing futures if the incoming player is younger or has term beyond this season. The incoming player would have to be a near franchise level talent in order to make that an addition to this roster that is seen as help for this year.

2. Trading the longest tenured player out, when the playoffs are still the goal, sends a piss poor message to other players in the room.

And 3. If he is as bad as everyone who wants to trade him says, why do they think he is going to get such a rich contract??

Who is saying that he’s a bad player?

[theman]

Doing a quick look over, and keeping it realistic in a Boeser to Chicago trade, the most valuable piece coming back in a possible trade would be their 1st, if it was unprotected.