Are The Canucks Close To Signing Mathieu Schneider?
by Sean Zandberg on Aug 24, 2009 6:27 PM PDT
in Free Agency
Email
PrintThere was a point a few days ago where Eklund pushed the Schneider to Vancouver rumor up to an E4. Then there was a guy I was hacking on Twitter for even bringing it up over and over again (I'll eat crow over it if I'm wrong). Now, Sportsnet is saying it's sources are saying the same thing.
Good lord, is this actually going to happen? Schneider still has wheels and can quarterback a power play very effectively, even at 40 years of age. The thing is, he was making $5.75 million last season. Is Gillis going to get a discount on the infamous D-man?
He'll have to free up towards $3 million if he lands Schneider... you know, trade some of his forwards away for draft picks...
75 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Yeah, father time on the blueline will solve that whole speed problem the Hawks showed us our D had. Blech.
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
I’m still trying to digest this possibility. Initially I like this concept.
by Sean Zandberg on Aug 24, 2009 6:39 PM PDT up reply actions
I hope we have enough cap space left for Chelios.
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Aug 24, 2009 7:00 PM PDT up reply actions
Is that an Ohlund diss? If so, a hearty boo to you sir – Mattias Ohlund is a saint! Or were you worried the Canucks would chase Bryan Berard instead of Schneider?
Or did I completely miss the rumours about the Canucks adding Mick McGough to the blueline?
by nucksandpucks on Aug 24, 2009 10:39 PM PDT up reply actions
He’ll have to free up towards $3 million if he lands Schneider… you know, trade some of his forwards away for draft picks…
We don’t have to free up anything, why would you think he would make what he was making last year, he was overpayed the last couple years of that contract anyways, I see us signing him for 2-3 mill and we have 4 mil in cap space anyways, he fits perfectly within the structure we have left.
Even with the pay cut for Schneider, why would Gillis want to be right up against the cap? Gotta be flexible, man!
by Sean Zandberg on Aug 24, 2009 7:19 PM PDT up reply actions
He also needs to pay for a certain goalie’s extension.
Schneider’s points have gone down steadily since the lockout. At least he’s a decent puck mover which is badly needed back there, but there isn’t a chance in hell he lasts 82 games (similar struggles: Schneider has 270 GP since the lockout and Salo has 249 GP). Either Gillis is counting on the kids to contribute heavily whenever Salo and Schneider go down or there’s another D man deal in the works out there.
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Aug 24, 2009 7:33 PM PDT up reply actions
Extension doesn't affect the cap this season
So if the contract is one year (hard to imagine it’s not), then the extensions don’t factor into the cap considerations of this potential signing. If this signing is true, that means the team will have 6 NHL regular defensemen and a lot of unproven youngsters. Ideally, the team would upgrade that group of D prospects by dealing away some extra depth at forwards.
Thats what a capoligist is for genius, it’s not like certain other players will be sticking around if we sign Sundin and Schneider. Come on man, use some common sense. Look for Wellwood, Raymond, among others to be moved to make room. Who would you rather have? It’s a no brainer, Raymond/Wellwood are not in our future plans anyways with the kind of top end prospects we have coming up anyways. We will have a little cap room, don’t worry about that. I have nearly a million in cap room left with Sundin signing for 3.5 and Schneider for 1.5.
Maybe he just hopes both don’t get injured at the same time! haha (Christ)
This deal is not done yet. There is no confirmation.
You’re making a lot of friends on twitter today!
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Aug 24, 2009 7:46 PM PDT up reply actions
I don’t see any hate except for the guy calling me an annoying bitch
by Sean Zandberg on Aug 24, 2009 7:55 PM PDT up reply actions
I call you an annoying bitch all the time, but us ex-pat Canucks fans are just catty like that.
(meow, hiss)
I’m for the Schnied’s signing for locker room/veteran Cup winning experience,
but if he’s facing the likes of Toews or getting paid more than $1.5 million you can break out the good meth and call my sponsor, Sneps-ish be goin’ on a bender.
PS-Who the hell is this Sean Zandberg character? Next thing you know I’ll find out
there isn’t in fact someone named ‘Yankee Canuck’ in real life.
I’d be happy to produce a birth certificate. My parents had a high sense of both hatred and irony.
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Aug 25, 2009 1:13 PM PDT up reply actions
Alliteration anyone?
Am I the only one excited about the potential prospect of icing Mathieu Schneider, Cory Schneider and Jordan Schroeder in the same line-up? Thank goodness that Bob Cole is on the outs at the CBC.
Bunch of closet superstars here...
Ummm…you bunch do realize that Schneider can still skate right? Yeah, he is 40…so what?
He didn’t look too slow last year, and still has some talent.
Maybe not the fastest skater in the NHL at 40, but I have no problem with this signing.
As for all the Cap worries…ummm…its August…they can be over the Cap until the end of camp.
I trust Gillis to sign Schneider and still have some flexibility. He will still make a trade if he signs Schneider, or a trade for a D’man if he doesn’t.
Either way…its all good
vancitydan
Yes I do have a problem with a guy who’s production has plummeted for the past four seasons, can’t stay healthy and, yes, is old. It’s nice he did well in his brief time with the Habs but that doesn’t translate over to anything.
The absolute best thing is he can move the puck and shoot probably better than Ohlund, but adding the oldest guy on the team to the splody bones duo (Salo and Demitra) doesn’t instill a ton of faith in my eyes. Get used to hearing “lower body injury”…in fact, that may just need to become a drinking game if this signing is true.
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Aug 25, 2009 3:44 AM PDT up reply actions
Yankee...
Reading the stats at NHL.com, he seems to have missed a game here and there over his career.
Injuries happen. Its a tough game. But overall he has been fairly durable.
So, the fact he was a good player last year means nothing? Thats not a very logical statement either.
I would think being his age and making that team better immediately when he went to the Habs would be a statement on his effectiveness and character.
He is waaaay more durable than Sami too. Lets not insult the guy now!
vancitydan
he seems to have missed a game here and there over his career.
Since the lock out he’s been consistently missing more games (72, 68, 65 and then a slight uptick to 67 last year). In the same span of time his goals (both ES and PP) have dropped off badly, his plus/minus (with the exception of his year in anaheim) has plummeted and even his SOG last year was the worst since he was in LA back in 2001.
And I’m sorry but last year does mean nothing. Different core group and different coaches on two subpar teams doesn’t equal instant success on a Vigneault-led Canucks squad. His landing in Montreal also had something to do with Komisarek being injured, Markov being overused and the Habs season basically going down the shitter (that’s a highly scientific study mind you!)
As a depth move, it’s fine. If he’s supposed to be leaned on to go up against the tough opposition and play 25 minutes a game, he’ll fall apart. That’s why I think, even if he does sign, Gillis won’t be done looking for a defenseman. But not questioning a 40 year old’s durability is as foolhardy as thinking last year Sundin would magically wander onto the team half way through and be completely fine. Vancouver is still very much a defense-first team; he’ll be expected to do more and, similar to Salo though for different reasons, he’s absolutely likely to break more.
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Aug 25, 2009 11:07 AM PDT up reply actions
As a fourty year old, I don’t think Schneider’s expected to play all 82 games. AV would probably want to spell him off occasionally ( no back to back games, etc.).
I've seen enough to know that I've seen too much.
Right…and in that case if he’s a expected to contribute as a bottom four guy, I have less of a problem with that. Sort of like Aaron Miller if he had an offensive upside to his game whatsoever.
BTW – you could play 82 games, don’t lie. ;)
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Aug 25, 2009 12:53 PM PDT up reply actions
Why?
Because you say so? I am reading nothing more than your opinion here Yankee. Not trying to get in a war, but just because you don’t like the player, don’t lie. If you can’t see that he helped the Habs and can still play the game, then you have less hockey sense than I gave you credit for.
Is he going to be as good as the younger half of his career?
Of course not.
But to just dismiss the great impact he had on the Habs shows a man thinking with something other than his head. Try to be a bit more rational and less emotional when it comes to judging players.
Scneider is 40…we know he has lost a bit of speed and all that.
But he is a very good player still.
And Sundin was a big reason the team had one of the best 2nd halfs in the league.
Period.
I guess we will just have to disagree on this one Yank’.
Read Nucks and Pucks post below…he is wise. And Shneider is in the just below category, and is far more than a “depth move”.
vancitydan
Jesus Christ, this has NOTHING to do with if I like him as a player or not
…and I can turn this back at you: You’re getting all emotional about his brief stint on the Habs and how splendid he was. And crediting Sundin with the team’s second half spark is about as subjective as it gets.
No, for the third time, I admit I have a problem with Schneider’s age. I didn’t dive into the bigger stat pool because a few folks around here get uppity when the statzi mindset rolls through here. But his basic numbers don’t blow me over (re: objective) and you’re the one saying he’ll be just fine on the Canucks because of 23 games played last season in Montreal?
Bottom line: I do not think a 40 year old should be playing top four minutes on this team. Great if you do, but don’t say I’m doing something here that I’m not. I’m looking at his record, his age and what he brings to the table for a defense that was exposed in the playoffs (my opinion) as being slow and unable to move the puck efficiently out of their zone.
If he wants a bottom four role, I’m much happier with that. In that vein, I’ll agree more along the lines of bitterguy below – he’s a band aid solution, albeit a band aid with a pretty nice upside if his minutes stay reasonable and he remains healthy, both of which I’m absolutely allowed to be suspect of.
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Aug 25, 2009 12:51 PM PDT up reply actions
Really?
Take away the first ten games and Sundin was a point a game player…same as his whole career. You are just being obstinate.
I am not going to discuss it further if you are just being obstinate. I know what I saw last year. A team that sucked on the PP rocketing up the league rankings.
A team that showed they missed him when he didn’t play in the playoffs. Where are the Canucks in the PP?
Thats right…17th, and 20th and 21st before that.
They need a PP QB, and Scneider is the best out there for that.
And where did I EVER say he was playing top 4 minutes? I believe we have a top 4 alreadt…I look for him in the 3rd pairing and on the PP.
Not being emotional at all Yank…just the facts.
You are welcome to your interpretation, but that doesn’t make it right.
vancitydan
I kindly invite you to journey back to earth with me dan. You can argue we’re both being obstinate but I’m sure not obstinate simply because I’m not in lock step with your line of thinking.
And we can discuss the flaws in your subjective Sundin stance at another time. I spent all of last season doing that (ask Zanny). But back to Schneider, some last points to end this back and forth on my end:
They need a PP QB, and Scneider is the best out there for that.
Says…who? If we’re staring blindly at the numbers, I see Marc-Andre Bergeron – 12 years younger – had the exact same amount of points (at both ES and PP) and at least his plus/minus wasn’t in the toilet. And he’s still out there…and I’m not suggesting he’s the best guy for the job either. I think you have to define what “the job” is: do they need a PP QB over having a smart, durable defenseman who can move the puck quickly for instance?
And where did I EVER say he was playing top 4 minutes?
I never said you said that. I was wondering aloud what his role is supposed to be since how the hell do any of us know? I think it’s reasonable to assume a guy his age should be playing fewer minutes than the top four guys. The less he is leaned on the better.
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Aug 25, 2009 1:33 PM PDT up reply actions
I hear you Yank, I hear you...
The thing with Schneider is, he is better in his own end than MA Bergeron. By far. Bergeron’s rep is a good offensive D man that hurts you in your own end.
Our PP sucks. A guy like Schneids helps that. He is a Cup winner. That helps. He is another of those 40 year olds than is a work out demon…and as Chelios has shown us, 40 + isn’t the end these days. Schneider’s +/- is more a product of playing in Atlanta then him as a player. His – last year is I think the 1st in his last ten years or so.
Lets hope I am right and you are wrong in our estimation of his talent.
Because if they sign Schneider and he is as good as I think, its a GREAT thing for the team…
Peace
Look, I look for him to play 3rd pairing minutes and the PP. That is fine with me. Its perfect for him, as far as I can see as a fit for the Canucks
vancitydan
not related to article, but....
on front page of NHL.com right now, there is a presser with Luongo, in which he says he’s working on a deal.
there’s a lot that he talked about.
GO CANUCKS GO!
“All I know is that every time I step on the ice I will be thinking about how it’s an audition to make the (Olympic) team,” Luongo said.
That is great news for Canucks fans lol, he is going to be even more of a wall than usual for the first half of the season.
I am FOR a Schneider signing and I agree that Luongo is going to be a wall
by Sean Zandberg on Aug 25, 2009 1:45 AM PDT up reply actions
schnieder is a band aid
on an amputated limb. i’m looking forward to the day when the canucks can get an actual premier defenseman on the roster, like in 8 years when luongo retires.
They’re going to have to develop that ‘premiere’ d-man from within. Barring a major trade, of course.
I've seen enough to know that I've seen too much.
who would that be?
next year’s draft pick? yann sauve? that player is not currently in the canucks system. bourdon would have been another of what we have – solid if unspectacular, and he was the best defensive prospect.
Where’s our Shea Weber-type of defenceman draft pick? Someday we’ll get one.
by Sean Zandberg on Aug 25, 2009 2:21 PM PDT up reply actions
I think Sauve is it. Be interesting to see what shape he’s in at camp.
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Aug 25, 2009 2:26 PM PDT up reply actions
Don’t forget Evan Oberg. He actually is reputed to be good as an offensive defenseman. Gillis talked about his great first pass on the Team, I think a few weeks ago…
vancitydan
Yeah, I’m pullin for Oberg no doubt about it
by Sean Zandberg on Aug 25, 2009 6:38 PM PDT up reply actions
I think the “premier defenseman” is highly overrated. It’s like superstar goalies – they’re great to have, but you can win without them (or lose in the 2nd Round with them… ugh).
Outside of Lidstrom, Chara, Pronger and maybe still Neidermayer I think there’s a lot of guys that are excellent d-men but not superstars. Guys like Green, Kaberle, Rafalski, Weber, Gonchar, etc. I’d say Bieksa belongs in that group, and possibly Edler in a couple years. So I don’t think it’s really necessary or realistic to chase a “premier” d-man because there’s not many of ’em out there.
Just as you can win a Cup with Osgood or Fleury in net, you could win a Cup with a solid group of d-men that includes no superstars.
I agree fully. I think a Bieksa/Edler twosome anchoring the backend is more than enough to carry us to a cup one day. Superstar defenseman are only good if they win, there are only a few who have. I would rather have a dangerous offence than a strong defense.
Every cup winning team always has a “surprise” defenceman who steps it up. We will be no different.
I would rather have a dangerous offence than a strong defense.
You keep talking like that and you’ll make AV cry
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Aug 25, 2009 12:54 PM PDT up reply actions
i'm talking about offense
vancouver has always had responsible, mostly journeyman, defensive defensemen, there hasn’t been very many good skating defensemen in the history of the franchise and i think that’s a big reason why there hasn’t been more success. by premier i mean the greens, kaberles, rafalskis, etc. i want a defenseman that can skate the puck out of his own zone, for once. bieksa and edler aren’t that guy.
Ohhhhhhhhh
You mean Eric Weinrich.
\runs away, hides behind couch
'Nucks Misconduct - Housing Swedish Millionaires Since 2000.
by Yankee Canuck on Aug 25, 2009 2:27 PM PDT up reply actions
Okay, here's the plan:
Gillis goes out and (re)acquires a whole defense corp of once-mediocre, over-40s. Coming back to the fold are Lumme, Weinrich, Dave Babych and Paul Reinhart. And maybe Robert Nordmark, just so everyone can boo him like it’s 1989. Joining the crew are Schneider and maybe Chelios (we need one former all-star on the blue line)
Think of the salary cap space we’d clear if they all sign for the minimum. This would allow Gillis to deal Bieksa, Edler, et al. for some top notch snipers. Luongo likes facing 50 shots a night anyway, and every game would be an entertaining barn burner. AV would suffer a heart-attack midway through the first period of the first game, further loosening up the offense.
Additional bonuses: This would be a great defense corps if you replicate it in NHL ’94; you can take that Lumme circa 1994 jersey out of the mothballs; and you can have fun poring through that box of 1991 Pro Set cards in your garage and picking out the Canucks defensemen.
by nucksandpucks on Aug 25, 2009 7:29 PM PDT up reply actions
Would you trade, today, Demitra for a solid D-man if you could – say, someone roughly on a par with Mitchell, Salo, Edler & Bieksa – to round out the core group?
I’m not a Demitra basher, I like him, but he’s getting older and he’s a UFA next year anyway. I guess it comes down to whether or not the younger guys (returning vets and prospects) can step up to fill the void, and can at least one of them be fully up to snuff by playoff time. Has anyone been to UBC and seen anything yet? Love to know who’s looking good there.
I would not trade Demitra. He is a UFA next year and knows that he HAS to produce and play a lot of get a new 2 year deal from someone. I’m not the guys biggest fan at all, but i’m predictin a big year from him.
Our defence is good, we could use a upgrade still, but i’m thinkin that we should head into the season as is and look at gettin someone around Christmas if needed.
And finally, NO on Schneider. We don’t need a soft 40 year old, I would rather take M.A Bergeron and thats sayin a lot.
Good point, which would bode well for his production for the regular season, but come playoff time that sort of thing evens out between players and the Canucks still need another D-man, no?
Yeah, we would need a solid d-man for the playoffs. But in March, some teams are in dump mode already. We could pick up a decent guy from a non-playoff team. Especially with the amount of young bottom 6’ers in our lineup and minor league team.Gillis would have the option to send a youngster away, and thats usually what the dumping teams want. I think that Gillis will stay the course, and see what we have before makin a move as big as sending our best 2nd liner away. Kesler should improve again this year, but he needs someone who can give him the puck on the fly. Demitra has had success in the league and knows how to score.
Demitra licked crotch in his contract year in Minny. Or let’s just say he didn’t overly improve.
by Sean Zandberg on Aug 25, 2009 1:13 PM PDT up reply actions
vcd,
Agreed, with a few yabbuts for consideration and angst.
Yabbut who can the Rangers offer in return?
Yabbut how many rookies can the Canucks put in the lineup and still be a contender in the playoffs?
Yabbut shouldn’t we wait and see how the prospects look in the preseason first? If, say, Shirokov dazzles then trading Demitra becomes a lot easier. But if all the kids, for all their promise, are still 3rd and 4th line material this year, the decision id trickier.
I’d still do it cuz I think a D-man is needed, but it’s not completely cut and dried.
Demo straight up for the Staal kid!
A man dcan dream right?
I agree though, lets give him a chance to produce. He will be playing for a contract.
vancitydan
I was thinking getting Sather to make his sniper happy by trading for his buddy Demitra…for Marc Staal, the D man for the NYR. They might make that deal cause they do have a little more cap space than us right now from Sather picking Gainey’s pocket for the overpriced smurf Gomez…
http://nhlnumbers.com/compare.php?season=0910 if the link doesn’t work for the copy and paste thing.
vancitydan
No chance in hell Sather does that. He’ll quit smoking cigars before that happens!
by Sean Zandberg on Aug 26, 2009 12:26 AM PDT up reply actions
Didn’t know that but it’s interesting. After years of defending these guys and their skills in negotiations, might Gillis have come to believe his previous rhetoric just a little too strongly? … presuming the Schneider rumor is true, that is, which we don’t know for certain yet.
Crazy how there is still no confirmation on a deal being done yet. Check out this site saying a deal is done with Luongo: 6 years @ $6.75 million per. I don’t believe that.
by Sean Zandberg on Aug 25, 2009 5:02 PM PDT up reply actions
It might be, it might not be. A healthy Luongo for 6 years is a good start on a stretch of competitive years. 6.75 is his cap hit today, is it not, so this’d just mean locking him in for 6 years. Given the way govts are printng money these days, inflation could make him pretty cheap by the end of that contract :)
Anyway, let’s wait & see.
That same site is saying Schneider’s deal is reportedly 1 year $1.5 million.
by Sean Zandberg on Aug 25, 2009 5:27 PM PDT up reply actions
At 1 yr, $1.5m, this signing would be a complete non-issue to me. Heck, that’d put his cost somewhere between Shane O’Brien and Kyle Wellwood, hardly a bet-the-farm deal, and would be a fair price for an aging vet brought in as a (hopefully solid) role player with reduced minutes .
But I’ll believe it when I see it.
I'm okay with Schneider
A one-year deal for a reasonably solid vet who can put up good numbers is something I can live with. And as an added bonus, I’d stop pestering people about Bergeron. 8)
I do think we’re okay in the back: I’d like to see a puck-mover added, but reckon the twosome of Bieksa and Edler is a darn fine one, and if Edler adds to his offence as he matures, we could well have our anchor for years to come.
I gotta say, if those numbers Zan linked to are right, or even close, I’m going to be having me some sheets-changing dreams about the coming season…
I think that Loungo flies straight to Vancouver after the team canada camp.
They want to make a big splash with the announcement. Maybe announce both at the same presser!
vancitydan
OK, now you’re getting me excited. Cut it out!
by Sean Zandberg on Aug 25, 2009 6:40 PM PDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Nucks Misconduct
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Nucks Misconduct Store
Your clothing sucks. Go fix it.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
