I said that? i said I was worried that it's a possibility and that's what i would ask if I was his agent, I don't think I ever actually predicted the actual contract would be 6M+ long term but I could be wrong.


And yeah, 600K extra is pretty nice and it does show that he had more leverage. I think Wennberg signed for a bit less than most were expecting so that definitely helped out.
- Nucker101

Interesting

I kind of assumed the opposite since GM's/agents usually value RFA years less. I've heard/read when they negotiate long term deals with RFA's, they actually negotiate the RFA and UFA years separately and then just combine it into one big contract.

Buying UFA years is always more expensive for the team from what I've read/heard.

i'd assume a 2-3 year bridge deal would be at around 4.2M-4.7M and long term would be at around 6M-6.5M give or take a few hundred thousands.
- Nucker101

plenty
- VANTEL

Insightful, concise and to the point.

I like it, Vantel. I like it!

600k extra picking a lowball contract?
I thought $5.3m would be about right. 200k extra in the end.
- Nighthawk

5.5M over 6 year is solid, not amazing value, but nothing to get worried about at all.

100% lock, eh?
- Nucker101

Looking at who currently plays on Canucks 100 %

- RealityChecker

That was before the Wennberg deal, but yeah I'll admit it, you got me

5.5M over 6 year is solid, not amazing value, but nothing to get worried about at all.
- Nucker101

It's the going rate for 55 points or so...all good.

Insightful, concise and to the point.

I like it, Vantel. I like it!
- As_I_See_It

He is 21 yrs old . I would not be surprised to see him on Canucks this year but also would not be surprised if he is not. Development

The question is, how much more rope does Jake have before he's dealt for a song?
- As_I_See_It

He's 21 & now a big leap he's dealt for nothing.


One step at a time...
In tough to make this years team.
Next year gets a cheap bridge contract.
Cap control & makes his mark in 2018-19.
Probable call up this season when injuries hit.


No rush to predict beyond a year or 2 on if a bust or not

Uncalled for. At least I can acknowledge Virtanen is a bust. It's not a shot at the leafs it was a shot at one prospect
- CanuckDon

100% lock, eh?
- Nucker101

Pick 4 or 5 yourself.
In 2-4 yrs its at least 4 of those I mentioned but could be others instead.

He's 21 & now a big leap he's dealt for nothing.


One step at a time...
In tough to make this years team.
Next year gets a cheap bridge contract.
Cap control & makes his mark in 2018-19.
Probable call up this season when injuries hit.


No rush to predict beyond a year or 2 on if a bust or not
- Nighthawk

That's all I was asking.

So he basically has another two seasons from now.

Looking at who currently plays on Canucks 100 %
- VANTEL

You think people would learn from Hodgson/Schroeder/Corrado/Cassels/Etc

Unless the player is considered a top 10 prospect league-wide, calling him a 100% lock to be a future NHL'er doesn't make sense.

Some of those guys haven't even played a single North American pro game, and others haven't even had a standout AHL season yet.

To put that into perspective, there's dozens of prospects who start off as AHL all-stars and never amount to legit NHL'ers. Some even impress during their first taste of NHL hockey and then regress after(Corrado/Hodgson).


It's why the Canucks prospect pool is still not deep enough, there needs to be more quality prospects at each position so that there's less reliance on every good prospect panning out.

You think people would learn from Hodgson/Schroeder/Corrado/Cassels/Etc

Unless the player is considered a top 10 prospect league-wide, calling him a 100% lock to be a future NHL'er doesn't make sense.

Some of those guys haven't even played a single North American pro game, and others haven't even had a standout AHL season yet.

To put that into perspective, there's dozens of prospects who start off as AHL all-stars and never amount to legit NHL'ers. Some even impress during their first taste of NHL hockey and then regress after(Corrado/Hodgson).


It's why the Canucks prospect pool is still not deep enough, there needs to be more quality prospects at each position so that there's less reliance on every good prospect panning out.
- Nucker101

Yes.

Pick 4 or 5 yourself.
In 2-4 yrs its at least 4 of those I mentioned but could be others instead.
- Nighthawk

I can't pick 4 or 5 100% future NHL'ers from the Canucks prospect pool. Demko has at least played a pro season of hockey, but he was inconsistent and very streaky so he's far from a 100% lock at this point. Goldobin has played a couple of pro seasons, and offensively he's definitely NHL caliber, but again his weaknesses stop me short of calling him a 100% lock to be a legit NHL'er.

Your list has plenty of upside and potential, but no one is a 100% lock.

Boeser playing with Carcone and MacEwen tonight vs Jets

- LordHumungous

what a pair of muppets.

That's all I was asking.

So he basically has another two seasons from now.
- As_I_See_It

Basically 2 years imo & he sticks.
I'm not in the hysteria crowd who will not be satisfied no matter what JV does.
His PF abilities get underrated.

what a pair of muppets.
- Codes1087

we all know why Jake agreed to it.....

You think people would learn from Hodgson/Schroeder/Corrado/Cassels/Etc

Unless the player is considered a top 10 prospect league-wide, calling him a 100% lock to be a future NHL'er doesn't make sense.

Some of those guys haven't even played a single North American pro game, and others haven't even had a standout AHL season yet.

To put that into perspective, there's dozens of prospects who start off as AHL all-stars and never amount to legit NHL'ers. Some even impress during their first taste of NHL hockey and then regress after(Corrado/Hodgson).


It's why the Canucks prospect pool is still not deep enough, there needs to be more quality prospects at each position so that there's less reliance on every good prospect panning out.
- Nucker101

I was mostly joking but I think OJ be better than MDZ in three years same as Pettersson will be better than Chaput

I can't pick 4 or 5 100% future NHL'ers from the Canucks prospect pool. Demko has at least played a pro season of hockey, but he was inconsistent and very streaky so he's far from a 100% lock at this point. Goldobin has played a couple of pro seasons, and offensively he's definitely NHL caliber, but again his weaknesses stop me short of calling him a 100% lock to be a legit NHL'er.

Your list has plenty of upside and potential, but no one is a 100% lock.
- Nucker101

When was he streaky? He was SUPER consistent when Bachman went down to injury.

- LordHumungous

WTF is this?

- LordHumungous

I almost feel embarrassed and awkward watching this. <-----(Nervous laugh with t-shirt pulled up over my mouth)

You think people would learn from Hodgson/Schroeder/Corrado/Cassels/Etc

Unless the player is considered a top 10 prospect league-wide, calling him a 100% lock to be a future NHL'er doesn't make sense.

Some of those guys haven't even played a single North American pro game, and others haven't even had a standout AHL season yet.

To put that into perspective, there's dozens of prospects who start off as AHL all-stars and never amount to legit NHL'ers. Some even impress during their first taste of NHL hockey and then regress after(Corrado/Hodgson).


It's why the Canucks prospect pool is still not deep enough, there needs to be more quality prospects at each position so that there's less reliance on every good prospect panning out.
- Nucker101

and let's be honest, unless you have top end prospects, the point is moot.

who really cares if you have decent prospects that become decent nhl'ers unless you have the top end ones that can define a core and build a contender.

When was he streaky? He was SUPER consistent when Bachman went down to injury.
- Codes1087

That's sort of the definition of streaky, no? He had multi-week stretches last season where his sv% was below .890% and stretches where it was above .920%.

He could be one of those guys who needs to be the starter to get into a groove, but the bottom line is that a .907% save percentage in his first AHL season makes him far from a 100% lock.

That's sort of the definition of streaky, no? He had multi-week stretches last season where his sv% was below .890% and stretches where it was above .920%.

He could be one of those guys who needs to be the starter to get into a groove, but the bottom line is that a .907% save percentage in his first AHL season makes him far from a 100% lock.
- Nucker101

playing 1A/1B in your first season as a pro isn't out of the ordinary. They aren't going to just hand him the job. Him and Bachman were splitting time, Bachman went down for injury, Demko had the net for like X amount of games and had like a 10 win streak...