45
Photo Credit: Brace Hemmelgarn-USA TODAY Sports

The Canucks and Brock Boeser are reportedly working on a contract extension

After scoring 29 goals and 55 points in 62 games, good for second place in Calder Trophy voting, Brock Boeser isn’t far away from getting paid.

The Canucks’ first-round pick from 2015 will be in need of a new contract after the 2018-19 season as he’s entering the final year of his three-year entry-level deal. According to Ben Kuzma of The Province, the Canucks and Boeser have started discussing a contract extension.

“We haven’t got down to talking term,” Benning said Tuesday. “We plan to circle back and I’m not sure where it’s going to go, but we want to see if we can get somewhere. There’s no time frame on it. “Brock is going to see the best matchup line and best defensive pair, but I don’t expect a drop-off. He has pushed himself hard to pick up where he left off and there are other contracts coming up in the league in the next six months that could drive up the price — I understand that part of it. But it has to make sense for everybody.”

The Canucks inked Bo Horvat to a six-year deal worth $5,500,000 annually prior to the start of the 2017-18 season. In that case, the Canucks allowed Horvat to play out the entirety of his entry-level deal before they ultimately agreed to that deal about a month before the season began. Horvat had played 231 games when that deal was signed.

Boeser, on the other hand, has only played just 71 games at the NHL level. Given his success in the NHL and NCAA before that, it seems likely that we know what Boeser is as a player. Still, handing out a long-term deal to a player with under 100 NHL games under his belt is a little risky. On the other hand, if Boeser goes and has a season even better than his rookie deal, he’s going to command even more money.

Similar players to Boeser who have signed post-ELC deals recently are Dylan Larkin who got a five-year deal worth $6,100,000 annually, Nik Ehlers who got a seven-year deal worth $6,000,000 annually, and David Pastrnak who got a six-year deal worth $6,666,666 annually.

  • Steg

    Why the rush? JB said it himself, “Brock is going to see the best matchup line and best defensive pair, but I don’t expect a drop-off”. So, I’m guessing then that his contract will be based on the expectation of no drop-off? What are we losing by waiting a year and seeing how he does? If he falters in the face of consistently facing the opposition’s best, then that’s good information to have going into finding the right price point and term. If there is no drop-off, then give the superstar his payday and be happy to do it! It seems like you’re heading in that direction anyway. We’re all excited to see BB pick up where he left off, but there’s little downside in waiting to make sure this will happen.

    • Jamie E

      I’m quite happy for the Canucks to sign an extension now, based off one year’s injury shortened work. I think it likely offers the team the best opportunity to sign Brock at a savings.

  • PQW

    Guys, too much hype too soon for this kid in a market where the rabid, fickle fanbase consistently trips over its own tongue in desperation of having something to believe in ahead of time.

    Sure, Boeser looked great last term BUT let’s see at least another TWO years of Bure-like progression before erecting a statue and shelling out silly money to the kid eh.

    Also love the Larkin, Ehlers and Pastrnak comparisons/namechecks… ALL THREE of these studs were available to Dim JIm, and guys, he passed on em all… draft guru my a$$…

    • Jamie E

      Benning passing on Ehlers is fair criticism, given where we picked and where he was chosen. Singling Benning out for criticism on Larkin, who went 15th overall, and ESPECIALLY Pastrnak who went 25th overall and have simply outperformed EVERYONES initial expectations is just BS, hindsight, cherry picking. It’s also hilariously ironic that it occurs in the exact same comment in which you weakly attempt to tear down Boeser, who is himself a late first round gem from Benning.

        • liqueur des fenetres

          Humor me here, but what if the problem isn’t Benning’s picks but the teams ability to develop them? The Red Wings have a reputation for finding diamonds but they make them sparkle before bringing them to the NHL. Who have the Canucks developed in Utica? Markstrom, Virtanen, Gaunce…. Even Hughes felt he’d benefit more by staying in the NCAA than trying Utica.

          • TheRealPB

            I’m not sure I’d use the Red Wings as the foil in this argument. They have a well-deserved reputation from an earlier era for developing home-grown talent, but that’s not really the case today. Larkin, Janmark, Mantha and Bertuzzi are the only players who’ve become full-time NHLers in the last five drafts. That’s sort of the same rate as the Canucks over the same period and in both cases some of those players ended up with other teams.

          • TD

            I know Larkin played 6 playoff games in the AHL after his NCAA season ended. Not sure about the others. But exactly how much did The Wings develop Larkin during 6 AHL playoff games?

      • liqueur des fenetres

        Why does he get a pass on Pastrnak?? He worked for the team that ended up picking him, which means that he had been on their short list. The bigger question should be why did he take McCann over Pastrnak only to unload McCann a year later.

        • Beer Can Boyd

          The best GM in the NHL is David Poile. Follow his model, and get the young players locked up for term at reasonable rates. Nashville has guys like Jossi, Ellis and Forsberg locked up for years at very reasonable rates. If Boeser would sign one of those contracts, 7 years for 6 million, the Canucks would be stupid not to pay it.

        • TheRealPB

          Because there’s always a gamble at the draft table and you lose some of these bets. How much does Detroit regret taking the older Svechnikov a few spots before Boeser? Or Dallas Gurianov? This is a foolish game to engage in

          • liqueur des fenetres

            I agree that it’s not fair to play the “why didn’t they take that guy” game as all teams possess different information about the guys on the board…except in the Pastrnak case. Benning had Boston’s assessment of Pastrnak, and sure Boston may have wanted other guys that were no longer available when they chose him, but that doesn’t explain why Benning basically wasted a pick on a guy with an attitude problem over Pastrnak. It would have been harder to argue if he had chosen Jake in that spot, but the team was pursuing a quick retool, and missed on a pretty obvious piece that they would need.

      • bobdaley44

        Ehlers did nothing in that playoff run. Time will tell but i think if JV continues his development I’m good with this pick. Showed signs of taking over games last year not to mention the skating and real heavy game he plays which Ehlers just can’t provide and the Nucks so desperately need. Some guys need a little more time.

        • Beer Can Boyd

          Plus Ehlers plays on a stacked Jets team where other teams are paying more attention to Laine, Wheeler, Sheifele and Byfuglien than him. And you are correct. No goals in 15 games in the playoffs. JV is going to surprise a lot of people this year.

    • crofton

      Pasternak was chosen 25, so some 24 other Dims passed on him as well…? Ehlers was chosen 9th….your “genius” Sabres took Reinhardt second, Calgary took Bennett 4th, the Isles took Dal Colle at 5th, Carolina took Fleury at 7th. Larkin at 15th…14 Dims there as well? Or perhaps all just Dim Sumthings ?

    • Gino's 3rd Cousin

      PQW….its sad that your acronym is associated with the late Great Pat Quinn. Do us all a favour and just fug off for the rest of your life 🙂 You add nothing of substance.

  • Jamie E

    This comment is apropos to absolutely nothing about Brock Boeser but just a general lament about the fact that Canucks Army is not doing its annual prospect rankings this year. I have always enjoyed that series quite a lot and give the fact that the Canucks actually have a good prospect pool now, it would have been fun to see what the Canucks Army consensus ranking are. Let me suggest that even if it doesn’t involve 20 big, detailed separate postings, it would be nice to see the rankings this year even if it is put out as a single, less detailed piece. Cheers.

  • I’m looking forward to hearing he shoots, he scores, for many years to come.

    I like Bo Horvat as a comparable. I also have no problem with the other three listed.
    Also, Canucks have to make a decision on Edler. I wouldn’t leave it hanging for too long.

  • Pay him market rate x 8 years, he’s worth it. It’s better to pay top dollar through his prime so pay matches performance. Better than intentionally going cheap now and paying much more later (i.e. Subban) or trying to retain him on a bloated loyalty contract (i.e. Toews, Seabrook).

  • Dirty30

    Pasternak, for example, did three years on his ELC, and his new contract has some bonuses and a modified NTC, NMC (10 team no-trade list).

    Pasternak had 46 and 51 games played in his first two years (Hockeydb) and 76 in his third (82 games last year).

    Brock had 9 and 62 games in his first two years (hockeydb) which is about 2/3rds of what Pasternak played.

    Letting Brock play another 30 games before making assumptions about what to sign him for in a long term contract seems prudent.

    It does seem a bit ironic that management says the young guys need to earn their toi but then hand out millions in contracts without seeing what players can actually do with that toi.

    • North Van Halen

      Let’s see, Horvat, good deal, Stecher, seems fair, JV, okay price, Tanev, nice deal. Baertschi, again good cap hit.
      The only bad re-signing was Hutton because he used it as a finish line.
      But yeah, assume the worst despite ample evidence to the contrary.

  • truthseeker

    Just like after the first season of Bure I knew he was 99% likely to be a top player for the rest of his career, I feel the same about Boeser. Kid is the real deal and it’s obvious.

    Lock him in now. The longer you wait, the more expensive it will get unless the team is really willing to play hardball.

    Sign him to 8 years at around 6 million. Good deal for both sides.

      • Kevlar73

        If B.B. would sign for 6.3 for 8 years that would be a steal for the team. My guess is it ends up being around 7 mil for 7 yrs. If Brock wants more he will need to go out and put up 45 goals this year

        • truthseeker

          Kevlar….You’re probably right that he’s worth 7 but the canucks should try to utilize their position and make him take closer to 6. I don’t agree with teams having such strong control over players for so long, but it is what it is and the canucks should take advantage of it if they want to build a deep team.

  • Fortitude00

    I think you will see these talks go until mid season and the team will be looking at his ability to stay healthy. They need to be cautious about giving him superstar money if he struggles to play a full season again. He is a great player and I say they wait until mid part of season to see how he does before signing anything. He’ll probably get the Pastranak money comparison so slightly more.

  • TD

    I’m okay with 6-8 years at those comparables. If he struggles this year, you could get him cheaper. If he has a great season he could be closer to 8. So to gamble on his rookie season at 6 to 6.5 mil seems like a good bet.

  • Bud Poile

    The Canucks have initiated contact or talks. That’s it.
    Since an NHL player agent receives 5-10% of his client’s contract Boeser is not signing for fan wishlist money
    Daniel and Henrik made $7m and Boeser had as many points as Daniel and five more points than Hank – in 20 fewer games.
    If I’m his agent I do a bridge deal for $7-7.5m.
    If Boeser scores forty he’s going to get $8m.

    • Sandpaper

      If Boeser scores 20-40 goals per, is it considered a bad signing if he is paid at the 8 Million dollar rate?
      I would prefer if we wait too see what Laine gets, before Boeser signs, as I believe Laine and Pastrnak are more in line with what we should expect from a player of Brock’s talent.