I could watch that gif all day
- neem55

Not surprising.

Can't send him down until next season starts, I read again and you suggested he's gone by the end of the month.... which he's not retiring by it MTA. Anyways, love the optimism, I'm not drinking that much kool-aid.
- Pres.cup

No I never said end of month you don't comprehend well being on all that kool-aid. It was plan B waiting on Tryamkin and prospects that is by then LE would be gone. That would be well into the next season.

What is not being grasped is that the easier moves for the Canucks are the ones they can control more. They can't control trades it involves multiple variables. Dealing with a player's status to play is in their hands. That is why when you can move 9.5M off cap its not a hard choice for them to pursue.

No I never said end of month you don't comprehend well being on all that kool-aid. It was plan B waiting on Tryamkin and prospects that is by then LE would be gone. That would be well into the next season.

What is not being grasped is that the easier moves for the Canucks are the ones they can control more. They can't control trades it involves multiple variables. Dealing with a player's status to play is in their hands. That is why when you can move 9.5M off cap its not a hard choice for them to pursue.
- NuckUp

Are you saying an MTA is solely in the Canucks hands? Because, you know, the player has to agree to it. Mutual Termination Agreement.

He should be given an opportunity to prove himself in Utica.
I have about as much faith in Tryamkin as a player as I do Loui Erickson....zilch.
- Reubenkincade

then why bother at prime years leave the KHL to come over that's so realistic. The Canucks also wouldn't want to sign him to come over for the AHL he's not a junior kid. He's either good enough to be in the top 6 or don't bother.

Those without biased perceived attitude objections will see he has the tools to make the roster now. We'll know how well he does after a season.

Anyone know if Kesler's contract is being paid through insurance?

Edit: NVM Apparently 80% is covered by insurance.

Are you saying an MTA is solely in the Canucks hands? Because, you know, the player has to agree to it. Mutual Termination Agreement.
- NewYorkNuck

No I said its in their hands on how to deal with a players ability to play. That goes for Ferland and LE. They can make moves on them to keep them off the team. Now the outcomes do involve a response but the first moves the control factor is in the Canucks hands.

No I said its in their hands on how to deal with a players ability to play. That goes for Ferland and LE. They can make moves on them to keep them off the team. Now the outcomes do involve a response but the first moves the control factor is in the Canucks hands.
- NuckUp

How do they deal with their ability to play? How do they keep them off the team and free up, as you said, 9.5 mil in cap space without the players filing grievances?

How do they deal with their ability to play? How do they keep them off the team and free up, as you said, 9.5 mil in cap space without the players filing grievances?
- NewYorkNuck

Ever hear of Manny Mmalhotra? Oh and there are waivers too. Those are control factors that can force players into positions that would clear cap.

Ever hear of Manny Mmalhotra? Oh and there are waivers too. Those are control factors that can force players into positions that would clear cap.
- NuckUp

Ever hear of Manny Mmalhotra? Oh and there are waivers too. Those are control factors that can force players into positions that would clear cap.
- NuckUp

Manny Malhotra had a puck hit him in the eye, and they were able to use that as a guise to medically clear him not to play – and they didn't MTA his contract, they just put him on LTIR.

Putting anyone on waivers also just saves 1 mil to send them to Utica.

Again, your dream of the Canucks being able to axe players' contracts in full isn't realistic.

Manny Malhotra had a puck hit him in the eye, and they were able to use that as a guise to medically clear him not to play – and they didn't MTA his contract, they just put him on LTIR.

Putting anyone on waivers also just saves 1 mil to send them to Utica.

Again, your dream of the Canucks being able to axe players' contracts in full isn't realistic.
- NewYorkNuck

I agree, yes the player (Eriksson) can be sent to Utica, doesn't solve $6,000,000.00 (for Don) in usable cap space. Also if Ferland has been medically cleared to play there is absolutely nothing the Canucks can do other than waivers, again certainty not $9.5 in usable cap space.

Can an MTA happen, sure it can, is it likely, about as likely as the meteor that is to brush earth the day before the US election, ending the world as we know it.

I agree, yes the player (Eriksson) can be sent to Utica, doesn't solve $6,000,000.00 (for Don) in usable cap space. Also if Ferland has been medically cleared to play there is absolutely nothing the Canucks can do other than waivers, again certainty not $9.5 in usable cap space.

Can an MTA happen, sure it can, is it likely, about as likely as the meteor that is to brush earth the day before the US election, ending the world as we know it.
- Makita

At least we'll be done with the LE contract.

I agree, yes the player (Eriksson) can be sent to Utica, doesn't solve $6,000,000.00 (for Don) in usable cap space. Also if Ferland has been medically cleared to play there is absolutely nothing the Canucks can do other than waivers, again certainty not $9.5 in usable cap space.

Can an MTA happen, sure it can, is it likely, about as likely as the meteor that is to brush earth the day before the US election, ending the world as we know it.
- Makita

NuckUp is Don. Don is NuckUp. It all makes sense.

At least we'll be done with the LE contract.
- A_SteamingLombardi

Manny Malhotra had a puck hit him in the eye, and they were able to use that as a guise to medically clear him not to play – and they didn't MTA his contract, they just put him on LTIR.

Putting anyone on waivers also just saves 1 mil to send them to Utica.

Again, your dream of the Canucks being able to axe players' contracts in full isn't realistic.
- NewYorkNuck

I don't think you are getting the simple concept was it is more in their control to deal with these 2 players then make trades to clear cap.

Also, Malhotra is perfect example of LTIR move that player didn't want and can be made for Ferland in multiple concussions. Brain injuries more serious today.

Plus its not a dream or mine its a perfectly legitimate option forcing LE off the team by waiving. With an AHL season, at some point he's gone. That is where you get the eventual cap savings. Its not an instant solution but one that can come about as soon as in season.

The ultimate objective of getting the $9.5 off cap is a much easier road of control then trying to make trades of them or move Sutter and Beagles' 7M cap. That is the reward vs control factors that make it much more probable then other options.

I agree, yes the player (Eriksson) can be sent to Utica, doesn't solve $6,000,000.00 (for Don) in usable cap space. Also if Ferland has been medically cleared to play there is absolutely nothing the Canucks can do other than waivers, again certainty not $9.5 in usable cap space.

Can an MTA happen, sure it can, is it likely, about as likely as the meteor that is to brush earth the day before the US election, ending the world as we know it.
- Makita

You are in error in the facts, concept and execution but hyperbole away its your shtick to opine.

Ever hear of Manny Mmalhotra? Oh and there are waivers too. Those are control factors that can force players into positions that would clear cap.
- NuckUp

Wow.

NuckUp is Don. Don is NuckUp. It all makes sense.
- NewYorkNuck

Go (frank) yourself

Wow.
- Marwood

Yeah wow you are so smart you know that Malhotra wasn't forced off the Canucks. They used the excuse it wasn't safe for him to play to move cap off even though he wanted to play and can, if needed, do the same with Ferland.

At least we'll be done with the LE contract.
- A_SteamingLombardi

You are in error in the facts, concept and execution but hyperbole away its your shtick to opine.
- NuckUp

He doesn't agree with you, so he is wrong?
Most people here have a hard time even making out what you are saying, it is not easy deciphering your run-on sentences, your riddles, and your innuendo.

But hyperbole away, it is your shtick to argue about how right you are and everyone else is wrong.

Yeah wow you are so smart you know that Malhotra wasn't forced off the Canucks. They used the excuse it wasn't safe for him to play to move cap off even though he wanted to play and can, if needed, do the same with Ferland.
- NuckUp

You just can't see beyond the rainbow and showers of glitter. At least you're in a happy place.
Have a beautiful Sunday afternoon.

He doesn't agree with you, so he is wrong?
Most people here have a hard time even making out what you are saying, it is not easy deciphering your run-on sentences, your riddles, and your innuendo.

But hyperbole away, it is your shtick to argue about how right you are and everyone else is wrong.
- Reubenkincade

it would be funny if it was not coming from you. You do you.

Not what I said, do or alluded. We are all wrong in someone's eyes because people have different opinions or ways of seeing things. A concept you fail to appreciate.

He doesn't agree with you, so he is wrong?
Most people here have a hard time even making out what you are saying, it is not easy deciphering your run-on sentences, your riddles, and your innuendo.

But hyperbole away, it is your shtick to argue about how right you are and everyone else is wrong.
- Reubenkincade