Four more years: Twins re-upped for $7M per

Image via @VanCanucks

After weeks of speculation, on Friday morning the Vancouver Canucks locked up Daniel and Henrik Sedin to twin four-year contracts. The pair were scheduled to become unrestricted free agents in July, but the latest deal will keep the Canucks’ top two scorers in franchise history through their 37-year-old seasons.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

Terms of the deal were came out almost immediately after the deal itself. The twins will again make identical dollar amounts: $28-million over the four years for a $7-million average annual salary cap hit. While the contracts aren’t of the length that make you think this is the last NHL contract the two will ever sign, it will probably be a cap-friendly deal, owing to the fact it’s relatively short compared to other UFA deals for high-priced talent, and the salary cap is expected to increase.

It could be a whilte for the actual breakdown to come out, and that may affect the Canucks’ flexibility as far as buyouts go this summer, but since I think it’s highly improbable that the Sedins get traded or retire over the course of this deal, it doesn’t matter too much when evaluating the deal. The term and the AAV does. The $7-million price tag will put the twins, for now, in the top 20 highest cap hits in the NHL, but keep in mind that many of those deals were signed under the previous collective bargaining agreement.

Of the top 25 cap hits in the NHL, only two deals, those given to Joe Thornton and Patrick Marleau, are four or fewer seasons. It used to be that you could offset a high salary cap hit by tagging on more years at the end of the contract, but thanks to the cap recapture system and term limits, the effect is that superstars will likely be signing shorter deals for higher salary cap hits. Comparing the Henrik and Daniel extensions to contracts signed by players prior to the lockout is a fool’s errand.

The immediate effect is that the deals take away from the Canucks ability to really go after somebody in the offseason, and it’s not like the team are locking up young superstars for four seasons. 34 is pretty old for a hockey player, and while scorers tend to decline at 26 or so, the twins have had longer peaks. I’ve been a little bearish about the twins’ production for a year or so now, but so far this season Daniel and Henrik have showed that they can continue to be point-a-game players in this league. The Canucks have a lot of weight in the middle of their order with Ryan Kesler, Alex Burrows, Chris Higgins, Jannik Hansen, Alex Edler, Kevin Bieksa, Jason Garrison, Dan Hamhuis and Roberto Luongo all locked up for at least two years after this one. Those contracts are all priced between $2.5-million and $5.3-million, and haven’t exactly provided the Canucks with a whole lot of depth on offence, something the team has been struggling to find for the last couple of years.

Advertisement - Continue Reading Below

That said, it’s not explicitly a bad thing to have your hands tied going into free agency, since a lot of bad deals get made there. The way the Canucks are going to improve their offence is to hit on one of their draft picks. Regardless of how these contracts look in 2017 and 2018, had the two left in the offseason, there’s nobody that you can immediately say that can slot onto the team’s first line. 

Henrik’s 18 points in 15 games is a 1.20 point-a-game rate, his highest since 2010, when he was the Art Ross and Hart Trophy winner. Daniel’s 15 points in 15 games is a 1.00 point-a-game rate (#math) which is his highest since 2011, when he won the Art Ross Trophy. Those rates may not be sustainable, but the twins have been very fun to watch so far this season. In an age where other Canadian teams are seeing their team’s longtime stars head for greener pastures, it’s nice to know we’ll get the twins in Vancouver for four more years. They really do belong here, and there’s a good chance that Henrik will be able to crack the 1000-point mark with this franchise between now and the end of the deal. He’s currently at 810, so essentially has four and 7/8ths seasons to do it.

  • Mantastic

    These are reasonable contracts in light of the Datsyuk extension.

    However, in the bigger picture, the Canucks have already spent $2.95 million of the projected cap increase for 2014-2015 on raises to Sedin, Sedin & Hansen.

    And there’s still Tanev, probably Santorelli and role players like Kassian, Lack, Weise & Schroeder that will either need raises or will need to be replaced.

    Locking up all the members of a mediocre team is poor cap management…

      • asdf

        Can Booth stay healthy enough to be bought out?

        It hasn’t happened yet…

        As I’ve noted previously, Booth may need to be bought out just to keep this team together.

        It’s going to be just as difficult to improve this team next offseason as it was this past offseason…

    • asdf

      I hope that Booth starts producing or that the Canucks buy out his contract next year.

      Amongst the players listed up for contract renewal, I’d prioritize this way:

      Raise: Santorelli, Tanev, Lack
      Pull a ‘Tanev’: Kassian, Schroeder
      Drop/Replace: Weise, Sestito, Alberts

      Then again, I’d also just throw up a bunch of prospects in the 4th line for kicks and giggles, so what do I know.

  • asdf

    Don’t object to this deal at all. In fact, I think it’s a pretty decent one for Canucks.

    Sedins will probably age well as far as hockey players go and the cap will go up.

    All in, the cap hit seems like fair value, the term favours the team so a solid deal by mgmt.

  • Mantastic

    Also of note is that the contracts of Gillis, Tortorella, Sedin & Sedin all expire at the same time.

    And the big money on Luongo’s contract also expires at the end of 2017-2018 at which time he may retire.

    Hopefully this “core” isn’t given more than another 1-2 years to show what it’s made of…

    • asdf

      Don’t think so, as I recall Torts was signed to a 5 year deal. Fair deal by all, virtually a no brainer. However, having said that I still hope Gillies gets the shaft tomorrow. Way too many deals gone bad. Also would like comments about the head of scouting and staff, I think Gradin delivers but the rest are cannon fodder!!!

    • asdf

      “Great set of deals for management.”

      Well said.

      Management just extended their own lifespans by a year or two by locking up the twins.

      Whether or not they can actually, you know, make the team a legitimate contender again in the Sedin era remains to be seen…

      • asdf

        Other than cap space (which MG/GM have shown to mishandle), what would be gained from letting the Sedins walk?

        (Legit question – I’m not sure on what, if anything we gain if they go to free agency)

        • asdf

          In a vacuum, I think the Sedin extensions are reasonable.

          However, I think the organization should have let the season play out before determining the direction of this franchise.

          That direction may or may not have included the Sedins.

          If this team ends up 5th in the division (their current rank based on points percentage) and somehow miss the playoffs entirely, does it really make sense to give raises to the same group and try again?

          Now I suppose there’s always the option of trading the Sedins if it doesn’t appear the Canucks can build a winner around them.

          But I don’t think this management team, for their own sake, can afford to do that…

  • asdf

    Let’s say we did let the Sedins walk, who in the FA class would be a possible target and replacement? I get the point about the need to provide adequate support pieces to them — I’m still not entirely sure that Higgins, Hansen, Burrows, and the D aren’t going to be that, but the jury’s still out. But let’s say we did let them go — who is there to fill the space of a 1C and 1LW (and even if their skills deteriorate rapidly which is less likely than if say they were PFs or their games were based on speed)?

    The only upcoming UFAs I see are either as old (or older than them) or guys like Vanek, Steen, or Setoguchi, clearly none of them stars who can lead a team.

    • asdf

      It wouldn’t necessarily be about trying to “replace” the Sedins.

      It would be about taking the franchise in another direction.

      Which, at the least, should be a consideration for every non-elite team with an old core…

      • asdf

        The sentiment I get from management is that they don’t want to screw up the legacy of the Sedins in the same way they screwed up Bure & to a degree, Linden.

        If anything, I think a trade would happen in the last few years, when it becomes painfully obvious that the window is closed and the Sedins still want to chase a Cup.

        For what it’s worth, I’m okay with a few more years of guaranteed ‘average’ performance rather than watching them screw up a rebuild with little/no icons worth keeping (ala Buffalo).

        • asdf


          Do you actually care about “legacy” if the organization can no longer build a winner around them?

          If management cared about “legacy”, they wouldn’t have gone down the path they did with Luongo…

          Also, I don’t see the comparisons to Buffalo.

          They were a successful payroll team for many years that now has to rebuild after the pipeline dried out.

          How exactly have they “screwed up” a rebuild?

          Their rebuild just started and it may include McDavid in 20 months…

          • argoleas

            Dont forget the whole legacy thing of Igilna in Calgary as well. That did not turn out so well. A proper business is run when both reality and the image are taken care of. And I dont see a good Sedin Legacy if their last few seasons are full of great stats on a lottery team.

            Speaking of McDavid, I wonder how many teams will commence their dives just so they can get him. I hope the lottery gives him to the team with the lowest odds. Hew, who knows, it may be the Canucks. Now how is that for fan koolaid?

          • asdf

            As much as this is a declining franchise, I’m not sure the Canucks will be a lottery team in the next few years as long as they keep fighting tooth and nail for every point in the standings.

            It very well could be like Calgary: four straight 1st round exits followed years of trying to make the playoffs before finally accepting reality.

            The Sedin extensions prolong the Canucks’ fate in the perils of mediocrity (11-20).

            Not sure there is a realistic path out of this in the next 3-5 years without a ripoff trade or two…

      • asdf

        And what direction would that be? Bottoming out to try and get more high picks/prospects into the pipeline? I’m just not sure what it is you’re suggesting. How exactly do these signings (or the others you’ve mentioned) hamstring the Canucks’ ability to be competitive (not just to make the playoffs but to do something once there)? Or are you suggesting that we do indeed need to bottom out in order to build a winning franchise for the longer term?

        • argoleas

          I’m saying that the best thing for the franchise would have been to play out the year before making a decision on the Sedins.

          The Canucks controlled the Sedins’ rights for another 8 months.

          That evaluation period has now evaporated…

          This team is quite clearly behind LA, SJ, STL & CHI in the Western conference.

          This was well known prior to the season.

          The question for this season is how many teams are going to usurp the Canucks aside from those 4 teams?





          Edmonton at some point?

          And if this team proves to be mediocre, what exactly is the purpose of giving raises to the same group and trying again in 2014-2015?

          The Sedin extensions in isolation are fine.

          But blowing the entire cap increase to give raises to the same group isn’t magically going to make this team any better…

          • andyg

            I’m not sure what waiting till the end of the year does other than leave the Canucks in a less strong bargaining position. They couldn’t trade the Sedins at that point even if they wanted to and they’d be competing openly with any other team that would want them — and I’m sure there would have been plenty of other suitors. I’m not sure how much of the “legacy” argument I buy but there is something to having a professional and one would hope successful atmosphere for younger players to enter into — indeed that’s what the Sedins stepped into with guys like Ohlund, Naslund, Linden and a few of the others when they were starting out (I shudder to think what might have happened to them if the likes of Keenan had still been around).

            What are the Canucks going to evaluate over these 8 months? Whether the Sedins have what it takes to get them over the playoff hump? Or whether they have adequate support personnel — which has been the main problem the past two seasons?

            I will grant you that the Canucks are behind Chicago and LA in terms of depth and that STL has the better young prospects. I will believe SJ when I see it — they’ve had this same mirage for a lot of seasons and for all the grief the Sedins get I’ve yet to see more useless playoff performers than Marleau and Thornton. As for your other contenders to displace the Canucks, Colorado is not going to stay this hot (especially if Varlamov is gone for any length of time), Anaheim maybe, Minnesota and Phoenix are not better than the Canucks and Edmonton — good god, when does next year finally appear for them? There’s a team with new directions but never the right ones.

            Look, I get what you’re driving at. But the reality is that this is the core we have and it continues to show that it’s competitive. If the prospects in the pipeline can develop sooner rather than later — and I agree with you that that’s a very big if — then I think we have a chance to do more than disappear in the playoffs once again. For what it’s worth as much as I don’t have all that much belief that a coach makes that much difference, the Canucks play under Tortorella has looked notably better.

            And I think you’re overstating things by saying that the entire cap increase is being spent on retaining the same group. Given the dearth of decent FA’s out there, the only way we’d really be in a challenge cap-wise is if we had a bunch of hotshot young players coming out of their ELC’s at the same time — as you’ve pointed out repeatedly that’s exactly part of the dilemma that we’re in NOT to be in that predicament.

          • argoleas

            “I’m not sure what waiting till the end of the year does other than leave the Canucks in a less strong bargaining position.”

            Only if you believe that resigning the Sedins was the only direction this franchise could have taken…

            “there is something to having a professional and one would hope successful atmosphere for younger players to enter into”

            Considering the Canucks haven’t drafted and developed an NHL regular since Mason Raymond, perhaps the Sedins are god awful mentors?

            Or, you know, maybe this is just a god awful environment for young players…

            “What are the Canucks going to evaluate over these 8 months?”

            Whether or not this team has slid too far down the mountain to contend in the next 4 years…

            “I will grant you that the Canucks are behind Chicago and LA in terms of depth and that STL has the better young prospects. I will believe SJ when I see it”

            SJ is quite clearly ahead of Vancouver. This is actually up for debate?

            “As for your other contenders to displace the Canucks, Colorado is not going to stay this hot (especially if Varlamov is gone for any length of time), Anaheim maybe, Minnesota and Phoenix are not better than the Canucks and Edmonton — good god, when does next year finally appear for them? There’s a team with new directions but never the right ones.”

            Aside from Edmonton, all of those teams are capable of taking a playoff spot away from Vancouver this season.

            Whether or not they are legit contenders is besides the point.

            The Canucks are nowhere near good enough to coast into the playoffs anymore…

            “For what it’s worth as much as I don’t have all that much belief that a coach makes that much difference, the Canucks play under Tortorella has looked notably better”

            Perhaps the East-heavy schedule has contributed to this mirage…

            “And I think you’re overstating things by saying that the entire cap increase is being spent on retaining the same group.”

            The raises to Sedin, Sedin & Hansen have already eaten up $2.95 million of the still-to-be-determined cap increase.

            There’s still Tanev and possibly Santorelli that will get significant raises as well as guys that are harder to project like Kassian, Lack, Schroeder etc.

            The cap isn’t going up $10 million for 2014-2015…

          • argoleas

            Yes, SJ’s success is up for debate. They come out barnstorming every single year and fade either in the season or come the playoffs.

            The bottom line is still, for me, the success they have and continue to have. If and when they fade badly I will agree with you. Until then much of what you’re saying is either premature or not particularly novel. Could the Canucks go through lean years after the Sedins and Luongo leave the scene? Quite possibly — there are very few elite teams I’ve seen NOT go through the ups and downs. In the 80s Detroit were called the Dead Wings with good reason; they’ve remained relevant due to some luck and good drafting, in a way that few if any others have done. Pittsburgh, Chicago, Anaheim, etc have suffered through years of horrendous failure in order to become competitive now.

            If your critique is that Gillis has not done enough to surround the Sedins with adequate support through their prime years to win a Cup that’s a notion I can entertain, though there’s no guarantees and seeing a Stanley Cup win as the only measure of success is foolish. But the movement of a franchise through the post-stars transition is one I have rarely seen work particularly well and I still have no idea what you mean by a “different direction” that the Canucks could’ve adopted after an 8-month trial of the Sedins. What would have possibly changed if they continued to score at the rate that they are? They show little sign of slowing down. If the problem is secondary scoring isn’t the prospect of addressing that at least a little bit better if they take as big discounts as they have?

  • asdf

    I don’t get the notion that they won’t be able to sign someone in free agency.

    It seems likely at this point that Booth will be bought out (compliance). Assuming that Kassian signs a bridge deal for around $1M, Tanev stays around $1.5, Santorelli comes back around $1M and the fourth line is filled out with two players (i.e. Weise and Welsh) about 600k each, and Lack comes in around a million bucks, the Canucks will still be comfortably under the CURRENT cap.

    But we’re not going to be under the current cap. We’re going to be under a cap that’s slated to increase to around $70M. From where I sit, after re-signing Kassian, Tanev, Santorelli, Weise, Welsh and Lack and calling up Corrado, the Canucks should have somewhere around $8 million in cap space to find a Booth replacement. With the numbers I put up above, it’s actually ~$8.9M – so even if everyone they need to re-sign got more, there’d still be lots of cash to spend.

    That’s assuming the kids don’t make the team next year – if you put Shinkaruk at 2LW, you end up with over 7M (7.9M with my numbers) with a full 22 man roster.

    It all depends on the cap going up but isn’t that largely assumed to be a sure thing at this point?

    Daniel Sedin ($7.000m) / Henrik Sedin ($7.000m) / Zack Kassian ($1.000m)
    Chris Higgins ($2.500m) / Ryan Kesler ($5.000m) / Alexandre Burrows ($4.500m)
    Jeremy Welsh ($0.600m) / Mike Santorelli ($1.000m) / Jannik Hansen ($2.500m)
    Brad Richardson ($1.150m) / Dale Weise ($0.600m)
    Jordan Schroeder ($0.700m) /
    Alexander Edler ($5.000m) / Kevin Bieksa ($4.600m)
    Jason Garrison ($4.600m) / Dan Hamhuis ($4.500m)
    Ryan Stanton ($0.550m) / Chris Tanev ($1.500m)
    Frank Corrado ($0.599m) /
    Roberto Luongo ($5.333m)
    Eddie Lack ($1.000m)
    CAP PAYROLL: $61,232,778

    • asdf

      Your raise estimates reek of homerism.

      1. Tanev received a $0.6 mil raise coming off his ELC.

      Considering he gains arbitration rights and is playing nearly 20 minutes a game, he is getting a significant raise from his current $1.5 million.

      2. Weise is not taking a paycut…

      3. Santorelli, even with a hometown discount, is very light at $1 mil even if he slows down from his current pace.

      He was making $1.6 million last season when the cap was significantly lower. If he should he can be a useful piece in the middle of a roster, he’s making a lot more than $1 million.

      Believe it or not, this is a business and not fantasyland for professional athletes…

      • argoleas

        First, context: under the new CBA, the higher end players continue to take up more of the cap while the lower-end players are forced out. This is why Andrew Alberts went from 1.1M to 600k this year as a (presumed) #6D coming into camp. The guys the Canucks need to re-sign are the types of players (RFAs and near-replacement level bottom line / pairing skaters) whose salaries have been depressed by the new framework.

        With that said,

        1. Why would Tanev earn significantly more than 1.5 million? He’s a #5 defenseman, just as before. Let’s say he makes $2M, then.

        2. Dale Weise can play for league minimum if he’s playing 4th line for less than ten minutes a game. If he won’t, a replacement player will.

        3. Okay, if 1M is a bit light, let’s say 1.25M for Santorelli then.

        Assuming a $70M cap and a compliance buyout on Booth, the Canucks would still have about $8M to spend. I mean, let’s say I’m wrong and they have to spread another 1.5M out to get these guys (or replacements) under contract, there’s still lots of money there to go hunting a Matt Moulson or someone to play 2LW.

    • asdf

      Thanks JDM. I was going to mention the same thing.

      Cap is going up and Aquillini is going to have to spend. The key is the Canucks don’t work in a vacuum and other teams will also have cap space.

      The real question isn’t likely cap space (at least not alone). It’s are the Cancuks a desirable team to play for? Forecasting the season for next season, this team should be able to attract a player or two. And hopefully one of Jensen, Gaunce, Horvat or Shinkaruk is able to make the leap.

      • asdf

        The cap is going up for everyone and already the Canucks have dedicated $2.95 million on three raises.

        Cap space is a big part of the question lest there be another summer filled with delusions about Grabovski and co…

    • argoleas

      I will have to quibble a bit with your numbers:
      – Kassian: If the trend continues (and the season is still young), he may get a one way deal of the Schroeder type, so he may actually go for less money, unless he has a breakout season, in which case its closer to 1.5M.
      – Schroeder. The guy just cant get a break (sarcasm aside), but even after his return he will have plenty of time to show what he is capable of, and I still believe that him and Kassian fit well together. And if he succeeds, his salary will also go up, say 1.5M
      – Tanev is getting a huge raise: 3M
      – If Jansen or Gaunce can step up, they are still in their EL contracts, but if both make it, add 1.7M to cap.
      – Lack is RFA, and if he plays well, his salary is also 1.5M
      – If Santorelli has a good season like he has played so far, then he is getting minimum Hansen money.
      – I do agree that if the kids work out, then Booth should be bought out (or traded for pucks if possible), but as has been mentioned, the health issue is a big one, so it is not guaranteed the team will be able to do this, and that could have serious cap implications, and may require some of that Gilman magic.
      – Not sure about the Waise money, and and definitely see the team wanting to keep him and/or Sestido for the fighting (unless thay can find an upgrade somewhere). Perhaps the team is looking for someone like Archibald to step into here, and thus negate the need for Weise AND Sestido.

      In any case, this does potentially cram the cap space, and we are making assumptions on how far up it will go. What if it doesn’t go up to 70M?

      But cap space is not the real issue here, is it? The team needs to play its prospects more, but go after more expensive but unhelpful free agents.

  • asdf

    I actually really like our core. Great goaltender in Luongo. One of the best top 4 D groups. Good, reasonably priced 3rd pairing. One of the best top lines in the league. C depth looking better with Kesler/Santorelli. Two quality wingers in Hansen/Higgins.

    The only contracts I don’t like with this team are short term (Sestito, Booth). Luongo is obviously a special case.

    Find it tough to judge Kassian/Booth when they don’t get the chance to play with a proper C, but they should be able to make a decent 3rd line with Santorelli. (I think Kassian won’t look out of place on any line he plays on – whether that’s with the Sedins or on the 4th line). If not, there’s definitely room for movement too. There are 6 of our top 9 locked up. We can bring in an entire line of talent if necessary. We’d only have ~ 7m to do it, but you’d expect at least one of those to be on an ELC.

  • BrudnySeaby

    Great deal for 2 great, great players. Also great for the Canucks as 7million per Sedin is a steal. They provide skill, scoring, leadership by example; they are the complete professional athlete. Even if their points would drop, younger players can look at them to see what it takes in the NHL to succeed over a long time.

    Also, the problem is not the Sedins. It never is the Sedins. It is the supporting cast that is build around them. And with the deals in value they took, they made sure that there is ample money for other quality players.

  • argoleas

    In terms of productivity, I dont doubt they will produce well over these four years, but for better or worse, the team has made a commitment to this team and its current players, and moreover to (try to) win. Not sure how compatible that is with bringing up prospects as replenishments. Yes, Detroit has done this well (perhaps until this season), and SJS recently, but the number of teams that do this well is small. The question now is how much pressure the team will face to make deals to help the Sedins immediately, as I cant imagine that the Sedins took the cap-friendly extensions just to be part of a rebuild that would consume the rest of their new contracts.

    And what effect that will have on their prospects and most recent draft picks? I dont just mean ill-advised trades, but also playing time. I have been harping on these boards for a while about Kassian’s TOI not because I’m convinced that he will be a great player, but about the approach of now giving prospects the time to play into success. How much room will that leave for Kassian and other prospects to play? This is as of now a huge unknown, and as of now I’m not persuaded that it will proceed well. Not saying it wont, but currently looking at the minutes of the players, I do not see this going in the right direction. It would help if we had more input from the team about this.

    I like the wins as much as anyone, but I increasingly do not see the possibility that the team brain trust will take the necessary hard steps of the veteran core does not pan out this season. I would say that I hope that things will turn out ok, that the team will be able to proceed smoothly with a SJS-type of prospect integration. But hope is for fans, not for GM and owner. And certainly not for a coach who is spending all his time playing the top line.

  • argoleas

    BTW I think the deal by itself, without looking at the context of where the team is, is a very good deal for the team. They will produce well over the term, and will be more than worth the money. And nothing the team can do in free agency can come close to giving over the next 4 years what the Sedins give.

    • argoleas


      Considering the marketplace, the Sedin deals are good.

      But blowing the entire cap increases on raises to this group isn’t likely to yield better results…

      • argoleas

        Well, apart form what the Sedins just got, they have already blown the cap space on the core. They are all locked in now. In other words, its already too late.

    • andyg

      Also my belief is that the best way to rebuild is to bring your youth into an environment where they can learn from quality veterans.

      I hate to say it but I was a Montreal fan as a kid. In their hay days they always brought in one or two new players every year. The twins are the kind of players that I want our your to learn from.

      This is what the oilers lack.

      • argoleas

        There is something to be said about having veteran leadership during a transition, and those two are on top of that list. As long as we have a well managed SJS-style transition, then this will work fine, as it would allow for the next 5 years (counting this one) as a means for the team to stay competitive. A combination of youth integration and appropriate free agents, and the odd reclamation project, will help this team remain competitive in the future, and increase chances of having a repeat of 2010-2011.

        But there are too many veterans, and not enough youth. Looking at capgeek, most of the veteran core is locked up until at least summer of 2017 (Kesler being the lone exception, and not counting Booth). And to here I need to add Santorelli, who if his current pace continues, will be rewarded with a better contract (could be another home discount coupled with NTC).

        This means that for the foreseeable future, your lineup looks like this:


        Now that does provide room for the youth to slot in, but it assumes Booth buyout, and if we add Kassian and Schroeder, and then you get into the 4th line. Where are the slots? And as things stand, where is their TOI?

        On defense, the team is locked into Hamhuis/Bieksa until summer of 2016, and Garrison/Edler for much later. We have Tanev soon to get a good contact, and Stanton looks to have that 6th spot locked. So again here, no room for more youth, except for some major injury.

        So those are my concerns as team moves forward. Even if the team overachieves this year, those concerns will continue. But what if they underachieve? Too many NTCs.

        • andyg

          We have 7 forwards locked up. The way I see it that leaves 5 spots to be fought for. Young players can start on the 4th line and work their way up. The concept that you put goons on the 4th line is a thing of the past. I don’t want a team with a forth line I want a team with 4 lines.

          Players like Gaunce and Jensen can start on the 4th line.

          • argoleas

            Sure those spots are and will be available, but how much TOI will they get? This is by far my main concern. Judging by today’s trends (and they may very well change) I’m troubled.

            If basically more than 2 lines are already booked for these veteran players, then the only way a young player breaks these two lines is by taking their spot. Which means that it could end up with an expensive player playing few minutes (lets say for argument’ sake, Higgins in 2 years) or benched (like Booth was).

            The length of these contracts means that effectively, our top lines and defense is frozen for the next 3+ years, unless some of these NTCs are ditched, and we have seen how easy that is with the Luongo.

            Whereas I have currently more optimism that some other writers here about the success the Canucks can have in the next year with the veteran core, this team will go nowhere if it does not take strong and immediate steps to bring in youth SJS style.

            Having Lack instead of a veteran backup is good. Good to see Tanev succeed and having Stanton looks like a very nice 3rd line addition. With Ryan Stanton playing 15 minutes as the lowest D TOI, there is good distribution of time on the D. But I’m not seeing this on the offensive lines. I do get that part of this is due to injuries, but this will not work long term.

          • argoleas

            The Canucks don’t have the young forwards on the NHL team or at Utica to make “saving” roster spots an issue.

            There’s Kassian, Schroeder & Jensen.

            None of those players is worthy of a “saved” roster spot.

            As for the CHL guys, there’s little reason to expect management will give them a legitimate shot to become NHL regulars before the age of 21.

            Have they done this with anyone in the last 6 years?

            They’ve been pretty vocal about “overcooking” their prospects.

            Which is ironic considering how often management has been burned…

        • argoleas

          It’s kind of hilarious that some fans are suggesting the team is going to be better in 2-3 years than the present version of the Canucks.

          2013-2014 may very well be the last best chance the Canucks have with this core and it’s not going to be a cakewalk to make the playoffs anymore.

          This is a mediocre team with a mediocre farm system.

          It’s a mediocre present with a mediocre future barring a one-sided trade or two.

          And it’s been awhile since this management team has been on the right side of a one-sided trade…

      • argoleas

        “Also my belief is that the best way to rebuild is to bring your youth into an environment where they can learn from quality veterans.”

        Let me play devil’s advocate and accept your belief…

        Wouldn’t everything we’ve seen in the last 5+ years suggest that this has been and continues to be an environment where youth cannot learn from quality veterans?

        It’s not easy to isolate the issue, though.

        Are the Sedins poor mentors?

        Have the Canucks not had the right young players?

        Is it that the organization tends to privilege veteran players despite the lip service to resets and youth integration?

        All the evidence in front of us would suggest this has been and continues to be a piss poor environment for young players…

  • argoleas

    There are folks that will always take shots at the twins for a number of reasons but if they went on the FA market those same fans would cheer if their team picked them up. Two of the classier individuals to play in the NHL in a long time. Good guys on the ice off the ice and GREAT in the community. We can go back and forth about cap implications all day long but if they left and we tried to get two players for the same 14 mil, it would be a disaster. Fact is they will be high level players for many years to come because of their hockey sense. Loss of speed won’t be a factor only injuries will keep them out. Unlike many stars, in future years the twins would take a back seat to younger players if need be and not complain. They represent Vancouver and the Canucks as well as any player has or will. They deserve to end their career in Van and join the ring of honor.
    Go get those freakin leafs tomorrow. I hate when they move up times just for TO… Ridiculous

  • argoleas

    If some of the young guys (19 to 24 year olds) can make a decent impact next year, there is no reason why this team can’t contend. That’s an if but at some point you have to use the draft picks and have faith like SJ.

  • argoleas

    Not a terrible signing. I was hoping it wouldn’t be over $6/yr for 3 yes but with this hot start and nothing on the farm, not a terrible move.

    Utica is not going to give us 2 top line forwards anytime soon. Horvat, Hunter, Jensen, Gaunce and maybe Cole Cassels could be top 6 guys but it isn’t a certainty. The Sedins hot start definitely helped as did a lack of scoring depth.

    I just pray we’ll have enough cap space to get a second line centre via free agency over the summer.