Si cela est vrai, c’est incroyablement frustrant et cela indique qu’ils ne sont peut-être pas très sérieux au sujet de la reconstruction.
—
Kaos_mission
@Canucks de Vancouver
Si cela est vrai, c’est incroyablement frustrant et cela indique qu’ils ne sont peut-être pas très sérieux au sujet de la reconstruction.
—
Kaos_mission
38 Comments
God why are we so fucking stupid
i mean on the longer term deals it makes sense. But seriously? We wouldn’t retain 50% on EVANDER KANE?
Aqualini being a cheapass?
WELL I NEVER
We’ve tried nothing and we’re all out of ideas!
Sure. Why not.
It depends on what this means, exactly. And it’s not clear.
Should the Canucks be « taking money back on deals » in the form of retention? Absolutely not on longer term deals.
Should the Canucks be willing to take bad contracts back? Absolutely if they are shorter term deals.
why would we not be ok with taking money back? (i’m assuming they mean we’re unwilling to take on bad contracts?)
Aquallini 100% turned off the trickle from the tap when he agreed to a rebuild
I hate it here
Holy fuck I hate this org so much.
If this trade deadline and draft doesn’t go well, I think I’m calling it quits on NHL hockey
I thought the Canucks only had one retention spot left? (Or are we talking something different?)
Aquilini wants to save as much $$$ as he can if the team won’t be selling winning!
In the context of NYI, it must mean not taking back Engvall? Which I kinda get, can’t even flip him down the line with how terrible his contract is.
I am choosing to believe, with no evidence, that this is baseless rage bait. My mental health is dependant on this report being wrong.
This could very easily just be: “the Canucks aren’t willing to take on Engvalls contract in a Conor Garland Trade”
Lets hold off on the premature fake outrage here.
Retaining on long term deals is disastrous when were A: at the cap already. B: already have the oel buyout.
Now if they’re unwilling to retain on short or expiring deals thats a different story.
retaining on Boeser and/or Garland and using a retention spot for 5+ years isn’t something we should be willing to do, it’s very shortsighted.
I rather we try and resuscitate value first before we start retaining. Have we not learned anything from OEL and Dickinson. We are going to suck next year with not many new long term faces so why not aim to rebuild value on some these guys with term.
Did they not just retain 50% on the Myers trade?
Ffs can this guy stop blue balling us on Isles trades
What an absolute nothing burger of a tweet lol. We only have one retention spot left for this year and could easily take a contract back to make moving one of our long term contracts easier. All this says to me is Allvin isn’t trading players for the sake of trading them.
Idk why people are so mad about this. We should not be retaining on Boeser or Garland for 7 years. Trade them now if there’s an offer that works or keep them to insulate the young guys and shop them when suitable.
No rush with these guys, I’m sure garland will waive if we continue to suck.
Stuff like this is going to sink the rebuild.
It depends on the contact. We we only have 3 retention slots and I don’t think it would be wise to retain on a player with term
we should not be taking money back on long term deals. Look, if we don’t get this done right now on guys like JDB then fine, get it done in the offseason instead. We weren’t expecting everythng to happen all this deadline anyway.
but if they don’t retain on Kane, what are we even doing here? brokeass owner
it’s not « impossible » it’s just « not as attractive »
the team is looking to acquire draft picks and prospects in exchange for developed talent, retaining salary to move them doesn’t help much unless they are looking to be at the cap floor next year and beyond while they rebuild.
otherwise it’s just baggage.
As a fan since 1970……Canucks deserve a new owner.
What the hell kinda namby pamby nothing burger of an update is this? Reports shouldn’t be open to interpretation lol this isn’t friggin slam poetry
They did on Myers.
Why does all my favourite teams have stupid people running it 😩
Canucks Pres of Business Ops Michael Doyle was known for cutting the quality of ingredients back at many of the Aquilini Investment Group restaurants when he ran them. This would result in a spike in short term business, but an overall devaluation of the restaurant as time went on. Sound familiar?
He’s also the one who thinks he can leverage the Canucks equity in the market to get their practice facility built for free, which has led to the project falling through over a dozen times now.
He has no understanding of long term growth and only has the job because he was classmates with Franny at SFU.
Bro worded that just vaguely enough to piss everyone off lol
Absolutely should **not** be retaining on anyone with term, but absolutely *should* be taking on bad short term contracts, maybe even longer ones depending on the situation
Use the cap space you idiots
Is it time to get pre-mad yet?
Not taking back money could mean there is a deal in the works elsewhere.
im willing to bet this is solely based upon them not wanting to retain on garland, who has 6 years to go on his next deal once this season is over, which i totally understand, i doubt many teams would be cool with retaining for that long
Bud made that post as vague as possible to get people angry and apparently it worked?
Like hello? We literally just traded Myers by retaining money on him. This entire thread here is proof that these sports reporters don’t need to do anything but stoke the flames and people here just line up with their torches lol