Orcasfan

Members
  • Content count

    52
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

65 Neutral

About Orcasfan

  • Rank
    Aces Star

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0
  1. This. Plus, Willie's main strength, as perceived by management, was his proven ability to develop young players...the right way. I don't think there is any doubt that he has succeeded in that area! Look how Bo has grown under his tutelage. Also what an amazing job he has done with both Baertchie and Granlund! Both were reclamation projects, and both of them have reclaimed their abilities with his coaching. Does he have weaknesses? Of course, like every coach. But, given the state of this franchise, their number one need in the coach is the ability to develop young talent. And that's what Willie gives them. Hopefully, he will be back next year to begin training the new crop of young talent!
  2. And those stupid sports DJs on 1040 had the gall to doubt that this market would turn their backs on a team that was "rebuilding". Why don't we look at the difference between, say Toronto, and Vancouver in the process of rebuilding. During the last decade plus (2006-2016), Toronto had 6 picks in the top 10 picks of the draft ( #'s 5,7,5,8,4 and #1); Vancouver had 4 picks (#'s 10,9,6 and 5); and, of course, Toronto did get a top #1 pick in Matthews! I wonder where they would be without that stroke of luck? During that time, Toronto made the playoffs just once. Vancouver made the playoffs 8 out of 11 times. Not only has Toronto had a huge advantage in draft position during that time, but they gave their fans nothing but grief! And, by the way, when a club has 4 top 5 picks in nine years, you would hope that they would be quite a bit further along the rebuild process than a team that has had only one top 5 pick during the past 17 years! The reason I mention this particular stat comparison is because when it comes to the draft the top 5 picks are usually way more talented than picks 5-10. Those are the picks that are pure gold for teams. Now, do we want to look at say, Edmonton, for another comparison?
  3. This situation was all predicted by guys like Bob MacKenzie months ago. TB has to move one of their not-so-great contracts in order to not only sign Kucherov, but also give them some breathing room for the rest of the season as well as their next RFA contracts. I think they would like to target Callahan or Coburn or Garrison. The problem is that Callahan has a NTC, and has really underperformed. They would really have to sweeten the pot for teams to bite. Coburn also has at least a NTC (maybe a NMC?). The other possibility is FIlpulla...another underperforming contract. Another NTC or NMC, though. And who would bite? Looks like Jason Garrison might be the odd man out here (again!). Didn't he lose his NTC when we traded him?
  4. Really good work, FTG! You just can't ignore those numbers! If you want a top D, it's obvious that you more than double your chances if you grab a D-prospect in the first 20 picks. If you pick one within the first 10, the odds are nearly 13% that you get a top pairing guy. Those odds slide to 9% if you draft one between 11 and 20. After that the odds fall precipitously. This century, the Canucks have used a first round pick only once on a D-man...for Luc Bourdon (rip). He had great potential. It is time to go for that top-pair D. If we were actually picking at #3, there would be no question - one of the Finns. But at #5....I do think JLD is our BPA. But if the Oil take him, then I would seriously consider taking one of the D - Juolevi, Sergachev, or Chychrun. It might be an easier decision if we had a lower pick, say between 6 and 10. One option (if JLD is gone before #5), is to trade down a couple of picks (hello Arizona!) in order to get extra picks in the 2nd round. Somehow, I don't see JB going down that road. But if JLD is gone, then all bets are off. I know it looks like JB should really love Tkachuk (given his "style"), but I'm not sure he would abandon a chance to pick up a potential top D for the sake of a more highly skilled Virtanen.
  5. I don't doubt that JB & Co are looking at that possibility. The most tempting trade down could be with Arizona, who have the 7th pick. They also have the 20th pick. If the targeted player is gone by the time the Canucks pick, it would be interesting to trade that 5th pick to Arizona, who could be very tempted to either add someone like a Tkachuk (with their history of liking offspring of NHLers0, or even their targeted D'man. JB could then pick one of Dubois (however unlikely), Tkahcuk, Nylander, or one of the top D prospects. Then with the 20th, he might be lucky enough to grab Fabro or Bellows. That I could live with! For my money, if Dubois is gone, the next tier (though not really that much of a drop) of players is a group of 6 or 7 that (at this stage in their development) don't have anyone who truly stands out.
  6. How about a dose of reality to put this argument against drafting college-bound kids into perspective? A recent study reveals that 30% of current NHL players come from the college ranks. So, you're willing to just give up on 30% of the prospect field because of your paranoia? And, as far as not drafting USHL prospects is concerned - you really are nuts if you just delete them from your draft list. That would mean that we would no longer have our 2nd ranked prospect - Brock Boeser. Actually, I think it's reasonable to expect the number of American draftees to equal Canadian draftees very soon. And then what?
  7. And I thought the "sky-is-falling" fans of CDC were nuts! Most posts over there were just ignorant drivel. Here's the issue I have with fans who insist that JB and Linden are lying about what transpired at TDL...they choose to believe so-called sports journalists (especially the idiots on 1040) as if these guys had some kind of integrity. Most of the BS that comes from these guys with "sources" is just unfounded rumour-mongering. Would you believe anything that came from Dreger with his history of total BS and misinformation concerning the Canucks. Or would you choose to believe the "sources" in Dallas from that paragon of journalism, the Moj. All tyhat stuff that was being spewed out on TDL was all about trying to up their listening ratings. When was the last time anyone remembers one of the "sources" of those guys being right? Sure, guys like MacKenzie got somewhat caught up in the rumour-mongering on TDL. So? He was probably getting fed by the same "sources" that was feeding the rest of the pack. I still think management is doing alright, and I look forward to the Draft!
  8. How can any of you people actually believe anything those hacksters on 1040 have to say? They pretend to be sports "journalists" with "sources", but there is no evidence that these so-called "sources" are legit, let alone reliable. Did anyone ask them about how "reliable" these "sources" have been, based on past performance? Of course not. Negativity is always believed by the "masses." When Moj asked JB directly about his info about the Canucks nixing a deal with Dallas, JB emphatically denied it. Jeez, these 1040 idiots make Eklund look like the Pope! Here's the real deal. This Trade Deadline was a total bust for the media and TSN (not the first time). So, they try to salvage something out of their artificially created media event by creating all these negative rumors about teams like the Canucks. It gets at least some attention from gullible hockey fans (especially, unfortunate 1040 listeners!). Don't be so easily manipulated for gods' sake! Think rationally, not emotionally. It's OK to be disappointed - especially because Vancouver's sports media (led by TSN 1040) have been hyping up the potential for trade returns on those UFA's for a few weeks. But think about it...JB & Co probably only got the green light from ownership to be sellers within the last couple of weeks. Ownership has made it very clear - they want the team in the playoffs whenever possible. Understandable, given the exchange rate these days (and players are paid in US$). So playoffs mean more revenue. Obviously, the only valuable assets made available were the two UFA's - Hammer and Vrbata. Both with NTC's. Very limited potential buyers. So, compare the situation in Calgary. Two UFA's available - Hudler and Russell. Neither had NTC's. And Calgary has known for weeks and weeks that they were not playoff-bound. So, lots of time to start working deals. And, no restrictions as to which teams to deal with. Two very different situations for those GM's. It shouldn't be any surprise that the team with all the advantages were successful. But, here's the question you should really be asking yourselves...would you trade places with Calgary? In my opinion, even though they started their rebuild a couple of years before the Canucks, they are actually behind the timeline of the Canucks, even after those Deadline deals!
  9. I wish people would get some perspective on this situation! This Trade Deadline never was going to work very well for Vancouver as a help to a rebuild. Simply put, they did not have the assets they were willing to deal to get good value in return. And, the UFA players - Hamhuis and Vrbata, had their own limitations. Hammer made it clear that he wanted to re-sign with Vancouver. And he was only willing to be "rented" to a couple of teams. What kind of value could be returned for Vancouver in that situation? Any team who traded for him would know that he would be a pure, short-term rental. Russell obviously was a different asset - younger, cheaper, and with the potential to be signed. Why would a team (Dallas) choose Hamhuis over Russell? If Jim Nill had made that choice, he would have deserved to get the chop! As far as the Chicago deal is concerned...it sounds like they wanted Vancouver to take Bickell's contract. That would have been a huge mistake for Benning! So that looked like a no-go just from that angle. No one's fault here. Why would you not be happy with Hammer staying? I don't know about Vrbata. I assume that it didn't help that he was injured. And his cap-hit would have been a problem. I don't know who was on his "list" either, so that could have been a severely limiting factor too. Benning was not interested in trading his "usable" assets (despite what some on CDC would like!). Hansen was more valuable to the team as a roster player as opposed to getting some 3rd round pick (which could have a 20% chance of even making it to the NHL). The problem with Burrows was his contract. Not sure if he has a NTC. All the other fringe players and Comets prospects (not "valued") would only land late round picks. Big deal! The real opportunity to continue with this rebuild is at the Draft and during the summer. I have no problem with that. Sometimes the only moves a GM can make are no moves.
  10. Well, Hammer certainly holds all the aces in this game! There is no shortage of teams that would love to have him for their playoff runs. And, even if they are not real cup-contenders, it might be that their teams would be able to make a deeper run with Hamhuis. And, for a lot of these teams, each playoff game at home can be worth up to $2mil for their owners - straight into their pockets! But, I imagine that for Hammer, the choices are limited. He would probably only waive to go to a team that could actually contend this year. Who is that? In the West - Chicago, L.A., St Louis or Anaheim. In the East - Washington, NYR, or, maybe Boston?
  11. I had no idea that Shinkaruk was such an elite prospect! Get real, people. If Shink had that kind of potential, he would have stood out in the pre-season. What actually was revealed was his "incomplete" game. The AHL is not the NHL. Prospects can really cut it up in the AHL, but just can't translate their game to the NHL level. Offense is nice, but if you can't play a 200 ft game in the NHL, you'll warm the bench. I think Shink has been vastly over-rated by this fan-base, who love his personality and his flair. But that's not enough sometimes...I hope he does well, even if it's in Cowtown. But throughout this season, it's been developing that Shink was slipping down the depth chart - not because of his own failings necessarily, but more because of the newcomers...young pros like Beaertchi and Rodin, and Benning draftees like Jake and Boeser. I haven't seen a lot of Granlund. But he does seem to have a 200 ft responsible game already. Coaches can trust him, I think. We'll see just how much upside he has over the next couple of years, and, we really do need another Finn!
  12. It's too bad that most of CDC has been bamboozled by the hype that has consistently poured out of the Vancouver sports media about the how Frankie Corrado is a shoe-in for the team. All based on a few games he played in 2013. Obviously, all of those so-called sports journalists never bothered to watch him play in Utica. He was quite disappointing last year, especially in the playoffs. Simply put, he was not able to up his game. And, in the training camp and pre-season, it became obvious that both Bartowski and Hutton had leap-frogged him on the depth chart. The best thing for him and his potential development is to be getting AHL experience. As far as potential call-ups are concerned (for the D), I think Biega is ahead of Corrado. It looks like Vey is one of those guys who show promise, but are slow to put it all together. He needs to find out how he can fulfill a role on an NHL team. The best place for him to learn that is in Utica. I don't blame JB too much for the mis-read on Vey when they gave up a 2nd rounder. It may be that he passed muster from the pro scouting staff. Benning, after all, had spent his whole NHL career in the Eastern Conference, so probably had not so much knowledge of depth guys on the Western teams. Overall, good moves by management. Can people now cool it about how slow the "rebuild" is with the Canucks?
  13. I like this trade. I doubt that Bonino was ever going to become a good 2nd line C. And, as others have said, he doesn't have the skill-set or the attitude to be that reliable 3rd C who can check other teams' top players. Actually, I do think he will fit better in the East. I thought Clendenning played himself off the potential roster with his tepid play during the Comets' playoff run this season. Poor and unreliable defensively is not a way to get your coach's confidence as a D man!. Sutter is a more developed and reliable player. He will be a big upgrade as the 3rd C. He is a great penalty killer, which the team will need after losing Richardson. He also scored 21 goals! That will be welcome. All in all, I'm looking forward to what he can offer this team. I think the draft pick swap will be mostly a wash, given the relative positions of the picks involved. So, overall, Benning improved the team with this trade, and, without a big cost. That's what you need to accomplish in a trade.
  14. Talk about a typical CDC over-reaction! This is a perfect example why this site has such a woeful reputation. Why should there be a guarantee of a job for anyone in this organization? I expect Linden is firing Burnstein because he is bringing in someone who he expects to do a better job. That simple! And, this new guy, as it seems, is in the forefront of professionals who work with fitness and injury management and treatment. It looks like his knowledge and skill-level in this field is at another level compared to guys like Burnstein. Can you guys just stop this gut-reaction thing when it comes to the changes that Linden/Benning are making? And, as far as this latest change is concerned, somehow I think Trevor knows a helluva lot more about fitness than anyone posting here!
  15. Good move. I think Gilman was vastly over-rated, thanks to those idiots at 1040. Why is it that he gets all the credit for those good contracts, like the 2nd Burrows one, but never takes the heat for all those NTC's? He was the point man on all those contracts, people! He did help Gillis make adjustment to the job of being a GM, mind you. And, oh yeah, look at the job he did! Lorne Henning had just been in the job too long. That simple. Crawford was Gillis' man He was the final arbiter on all the player assessment for trades, as well as amateur (drafting). He definitely needed to go, with more of those assessments being made by Benning & Co. Overall, it looks like Linden handled this well. Gave everyone a year to figure it out, rather than prematurely acting last year.