Canadiens to buy out P-A Parenteau, an update on Alex Burmistrov plus the latest on the Canucks, Maple Leafs, Senators and Oilers.
Canadiens to buy out P-A Parenteau.
LA PRESSE: The Montreal Canadiens placed winger P-A Parenteau on unconditional waivers for the purpose of buying out the remaining year of his contract. Parenteau expressed surprise by the move, claiming no one on the team informed him this was coming.
SPECTOR’S NOTE: Acquired last summer from Colorado that sent the fading Daniel Briere to the Avalanche, Parenteau failed to provide much of an offensive boost for the Canadiens’ anemic offense. He tallied only 22 points in 56 games. Parenteau was to earn $4 million in 2015-16. The buyout will free up over $2.6 million in cap space for the Habs for next season.
THE VANCOUVER SUN: The Canucks decision to trade popular backup goalie Eddie Lack to Carolina on Saturday isn’t going down well among Vancouver fans and pundits.
SPECTOR’S NOTE: It’s the return they got for Lack (third-round pick in this year’s draft and a seventh in 2016) that’s upsetting Canucks followers. The bottom line, however, is the Canucks needed to clear cap space. They had to decide between Lack and third stringer Jacob Markstrom, who played very well this season for the Canucks’ farm team, backstopping them to the AHL’s Calder Cup Finals. The more-affordable Markstrom finally appears ready to move into the full-time backup role and could perhaps become Ryan Miller’s successor in a couple of years. If that pans out as management hopes, the criticism of the Lack trade will quickly be forgotten.
WINNIPEG SUN: Jets coach Paul Maurice is open to the idea of Alex Burmistrov rejoining the club after spending the past two years in the KHL.
TORONTO SUN: Unlike previous Maple Leafs management, the current regime intends to take a more patient approach to free agency this year.
SPECTOR’S NOTE: It doesn’t hurt that this year’s free-agent market is perhaps the worst ever. There’s really not a lot there to significantly improve the Leafs. Not saying they won’t make any UFA signings, but I’m not expecting a big splash this year.
OTTAWA SUN: The Senators expect to put more focus on re-signing RFAs Mike Hoffman and Alex Chiasson than pursuing unrestricted free agents. They’re also still trying to trade little-used winger Colin Greening.
EDMONTON SUN: The Oilers moves during the NHL Draft has them making steps in the right direction toward playoff contention. However, they still must address their poor defense.
Lyle.
Markstrom isn’t more affordable. It’s going to cost last seasons NHL salary of 1.4 million to qualify him. Lack was making 1.3 with a cap hit of 1.15. There is no way to justify this deal. Vancouver should have waited, there are still teams that need goalies. NYR got twice as much for Talbot who is a clone of Lack or vice versa. Yet their #’s are almost identical, as are age, back ground etc. The only real difference is Lack has 82 regular season appearances to Talbot’s 57. Talbot assumed the starter role this season when Lundqvist was injured. Lack assumed the starters role 2 years in a row due to injuries & trades.
You’re conveniently overlooking the fact Lack is a UFA next summer and in line for a significant raise, more than the Canucks can afford. That was the reason why they dealt him. Markstrom is an RFA who can be re-signed to a more affordable term beyond 2015-16.
No I didn’t conveniently overlook it. I was simply commenting on your post & no reference was made to his UFA situation. Had it your argument would have been more sound & I wouldn’t have commented.
All good, a crazy few days with little to no sleep & an incredible amount of stress for you. Terrible situation, glad you made the hard choices & life will return to normal soon.
I had been advocating for Van to trade Miller even at a cost of 1/2 his remaining salary. For Vancouver to resign Lack before doing so to better manage his next cap hit.
The fact Vancouver only got a 3rd, 66th overall & a 7th next season for Lack but Talbot brought back 57, 79 & 184 is disturbing to me for Vancouver & I think Benning should have waited. Even if it meant not signing Markstrom until it could be resolved. Even after the start of the season if necessary.
Wait? For what? The goalie market shifted significantly. Furthermore, Benning stated before the draft he was seeking at least a second-round pick for Lack. You’re assuming he could’ve fetch more. That’s simply not the case.
Look at the going rate for those goalies who were dealt. The only one who got a first rounder was the Senators, and that had more to do with family connections. Even Talbot, the hottest commodity on the market, failed to fetch as strong as return as everyone assumed he would.
Benning held out for as long as he could, but the market changed and he had to accept the best return possible. Sometimes you can wait too long for a good return. Again, should Markstrom perform as projected, everyone will forget why they were all up in arms over the Lack return.
The following teams still need back ups. Arizona, Calgary, LA, NYI, Philadelphia & Pittsburgh.
SJ still needs a starter. A few other teams even though they appear to have back ups were bidding for goalies. Florida & Washington.
There was lots of time to address later & even starting the season with 3 goalies would not have been the end of the world. Goalies falter & get injured. Neither carry a significant cap hit Lack 1.15 & I can’t see Markstrom getting much of a raise if any over his expired 1.4 NHL salary. He only needs to be qualified at 1.4
I just don’t know why he had to move him then for a 3rd. Talbot may have been the hot commodity but Lack may well be the best goalie of the bunch that moved. Time will tell.
The chances that a 3rd round pick even make it to the NHL are slim to non existent. I think this move was terrible asset management & Vancouver made a bad choice moving Lack now for virtually nothing. Not to mention Miller isn’t a better option.
Thoughts from the bench.
Just one little flaw in your theory, and that’s the fact there simply wasn’t those returns to be had. You’re assuming Benning was incompetent in failing to secure a better return. Bottom line is the returns weren’t there as teams like Buffalo went in different directions. As for teams that need backup goalies, have you seen the UFA market? It’s filthy with them. And of course, there’s the little matter of Lack’s contract status beyond next season. All of them were factors, Striker, whether you want to believe them or not. I’m not trying to come off a Benning’s supporter here, but in this case I don’t feel he’s to blame for the poor return because the market shifted on him.
What I`m really saying Lyle is Benning should have waited. Nothing was gained by taking 66 now. Goalies are still going to move & the options have declined significantly & these teams that haven`t yet addressed their goalie situations will have do do something eventually.
Making a trade solely for the sake of making a trade when we are 3 months away from the start of the season is bad asset management. It`s not like Lack`s or Markstroms next contract are`cap issues.
In fact I would argue that by moving Lack prior to signing Markstrom you just gave Markstrom leverage in his contract negotiations as now he has no competition for the back up spot. With Lack on the books Vancouver was in a better position to force Markstrom to take the money they were prepared to pay him. His qualifying offer needs to be 1.4 million. Should he decline to sign it then Benning could have potential offered less in negotiations.
And what I’m telling you, based on all the information and facts that I have, is there was nothing to be gained for Benning by waiting. You keep overlooking their limited cap space for this season and the other issues they needed to address on their roster. Again, you’re assuming Benning acted in an incompetent manner. He didn’t. The market shifted on him and he had to get the best deal possible. It’s really that simple, Striker.
Other than possibly Ramo none of the remaining UFA goalies are great options. Sure they can be back ups but none have Lack`s success.
Lack`s SV% last season was .921. Talbot`s .926. I can assure you NYR plays a much better defensive game than Vancouver & the quality of shots faced by Lack compared to Talbot`s are significant.
That said the market is what it is. The reason I think Benning simply should have stood pat. He gained nothing taking 66 now & if the market wouldn`t pay later it mattered little as baring an intervention by God the chances again that 66 ever makes the NHL aren`t very high.
None of the backups have to be great options, Striker. In this day and age, most backups are limited to 20 games or less. There’s plenty of those option available this summer at affordable prices. Again, for the umpteenth time, there…was…NOTHING…to…be…gained…by…Benning…standing…pat…with…Lack. They have cap issues and other roster needs to address. They felt Markstrom is the better, more affordable long-term solution. Benning was patient but the market shifted and he got the best return possible. All along he stated his intent was to get a second-rounder for Lack. That was the assumed going rate heading into the draft. He didn’t get it because the market shifted. Those are the facts.
Actually, the Rangers defense wasn’t that much better last season than the Canucks overall. The Rangers were 14th in SA/PG, the Canucks 17th. I will concede, however, the Canucks had longer stretches where their defensive plays suffered compared to the Rangers.
I agree with Striker, the bottom line in the Lack deal isn’t necessarily the reason that they chose to deal Lack as much as it is why they had such an urgency to deal him when there was still plenty of time to get the full value they should have gotten for him.
And what, pray, do you believe he would’ve fetched? A first rounder? A top prospect? A good young affordable defenseman they dearly need? Sorry, the going rate for backup goalies at the draft was at best a second rounder. The Lehner return was an exception and that’s because it was the Murrays’ dealing with each other. Benning was patient, he didn’t rush into moving Lack, but unfortunately his patience failed to pan out. Doesn’t make him stupid or incompetent. Sometimes things go your way, sometimes they don’t. Honestly, this is small beer compared to the blunders made by the Bruins.
I would have been happy with a 2nd. Even a 3rd & a suspect prospect but 66th overall? I don’t like that deal & when Miller drops the ball, Markstrom’s not ready & it costs the Canucks a playoff spot, I’ll say see!
I accept the Canucks are transitioning to youth but this club wants it’s playoff revenue & it’s significant. This choice just cost them at least 3.5 million in profit. Although the top 10 draft pick will help down the road when they miss the playoffs next season.
I think benning wanted to move him for a draft pick and what better time than at the draft where he could replace him immediately, rather than wait for next years draft. The goalie market isn’t what it use to be Canuck fans and it hasn’t been for some time. Glad your up to speed now.
Boston just moved a 3rd round pick to get Zack Rinaldo. When Boston misses the playoffs next season this pick will be very similar to the pick Vancouver just got for Lack. You simply say no, you wait & hope for better or you keep him & risk losing him for nothing. They essentially got nothing anyway & Lack may have helped them make the playoffs. Time will tell who`s right & who`s wrong.
Apples to oranges, Striker, and you know it. that’s an absurd comparable. Regardless, if you believe Benning screwed up the Lack deal, fill your boots.
Possible Oilers UFA Dman targets?
i think that any goalie talk is a sensitive subject for Vancouver fans given the history. Eddie Lack was popular with teammates and fans and more to the point he was a proven commodity whereas Markstrom is unproven at the NHL level(he had one decent start last year against a depleted and demoralized Coyotes team who’d just traded a couple of their better players for prospects and picks and one absolutely horriffic start against the Sharks where he gave up 3 goals on 4 shots and Lack had to take over). as for the money issue Markstrom was just signed today to a 2 year deal for $1.55 million per year which is $400,000 more than Lack would’ve cost them against the Cap. Lack is a UFA next year but he’d expressed a preference to stay in Vancouver and with Vrbata ($5 million Cap hit), Bieksa ($4.6 million Cap hit), and Hamhuis ($4.5 million Cap hit coming off the books next year there would’ve been plenty of money to resign him.
when Benning signed Miller he had leverage as Miller had let it be known that he wanted to play for a west coast team and Vancouver was the only team looking for a goalie, he should’ve signed him to a 2 year deal maximum but he rationalized it by saying that Vancouver had a succession plan in place where Miller would be the number one the first year with Lack taking on more games in year 2 and then being the number one in the 3rd year with Thatcher Demko being ready to take over as the backup once Miller’s contract was up. at the beginning of the year Markstrom wasn’t even on the radar as Lack outplayed him to the point where Markstrom was waived and anyone could’ve picked him up for nothing , no one did.
if Benning has a fault it’s that he’s too loyal to guys that he scouted, that’s why he went back to Miller, why he gave up a 2nd round pick for Baertschi, why he tried to get Lucic (which would’ve been a disaster for Vancouver as he’s too slow), why he gave up a 2nd round pick for Vey (and resigned him for a $1 million when he doesn’t have the size or speed to be effective).
Benning traded away his picks and tried to recoup them by moving Lack and Bieksa and he blew it simple as that. he didn’t get value for Lack and he may have put himself in a position where he has to take little or no return for Bieksa simply because of the way a loyal player (who took less money to stay as a free agent when he had better offers) was treated much like Luongo. you don’t let loyal players twist in the wind if you want to sign free agents.