• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

53 Neutral

About Skrody

  • Rank
    K-Wing Regular

Contact Methods

  • ICQ 0

Profile Information

  • Location vancouver
  1. personally i'm afraid of linden in any role. dude has been away from the game too long IMO to be given a president position. as a VP, i like the idea.
  2. Who would you like to see? edit: my bad, brain fart.
  3. i feel like at this point he and torts are in the same boat. very aggressive guys that players are just losing their ears for.
  4. i was interested in exploring what the statistics for NTC/NMC's are right now. right now, the average age for a player with a NTC/NMC is 31.1, Vancouver is JUST under this at 31. team avg col 35 ana 34.7 njd 34.3 det 33.7 tbl 33 phx 33 fla 33 mtl 32.7 sjs 32.1 dal 31.9 min 31.6 pit 31.3 van 31 phi 30.9 stl 30.5 cgy 30.4 nas 30.1 chi 30 ott 30 nyi 30 cbj 29.8 buf 29.8 bos 29.6 edm 29 nyr 28.7 tor 28.4 car 28.4 was 28.3 wpg 28 and i was also curious what the 'average years remaining' were amongst these teams. the average is 2.7 years. team avg nyr 5 min 4.75 tor 4 van 3.7 pit 3.4 bos 3.36 win 3.29 cbj 3.2 car 3.14 buf 3 phi 2.88 was 2.75 ana 2.7 nas 2.57 stl 2.5 nyi 2.5 edm 2.5 njd 2.4 chi 2.33 det 2.3 sjs 2.12 cgy 2 dal 1.9 tbl 1.88 ott 1.8 phx 1.57 mtl 1.57 fla 1 col 0.67 after this season, the following are set to lose what % of their NTC/NMC's to free agency. team loss col 67% det 50% buf 50% phx 43% ana 33% mtl 29% njd 29% was 25% fla 25% pit 20% cbj 20% ott 20% cgy 20% dal 18% stl 17% tor 14% car 14% win 14% nas 14% tbl 13% phi 13% sjs 13% chi 11% van 0% bos 0% nyr 0% edm 0% nyi 0%
  5. unlike oiler fans, leaf fans, i dont live in the past.
  6. great replies and answers and insight everyone! i meant to respond earlier but life got a little hectic. jensen is an AV type player. he won't succeed in this new system. he'd be one of my first players to trade. im excited about horvat and shink, but the jury is out on fox/gaunce right now. fox right now, being bypassed in the draft x many times, looks great because he's playing on a team with unreal offensive capabilities.
  7. 1. i honestly do not think gillis can make a bold move that would make us happy. look at the assets edmonton has and mactavish hasn't been able to pull off a bold move either. EDIT: what would constitute bold in my books would be trading someone like kesler, or the sedins. but in the same breath you're not going to do something like that because it sends a horrible message to free agents. "sign here so i can trade you away". 2. honestly i value stanton more because he is more physical, but i can see some teams appreciating what tanev can bring to a d-core. tanev makes the safe play almost all the time, and doesn't put the team in trouble by mistakes. we're not going to get a prospect and a first for him or anything like that, but we might get a piece. tough to say.
  8. This is an excellent point i meant to make. Calgary is in such a horrible spot because they refused to deal Iginla when he was worth something, and essentially got handcuffed when he only wanted to be traded to the Penguins.
  9. A change of the guard would be really nice.
  10. Firstly, allow me to preface by saying this post isn't being posted because of our recent slide, I've been working on this for the entire season, and as the games go on it gets tweaked and edited for relevance. If you'll notice I've been a member for 11 years, and have only posted 200 times, so I try my best not to post out of emotion. Having said that, I present to you: The next four years are going to be tough as a Canucks fan. Current Roster 10 current Canucks have no movement clauses (Sedin, Sedin, Kesler, Burrows, Higgins, Edler, Bieksa, Garrison, Hamhuis, Luongo) which is easily one of the biggest reasons for a player to get complacent. When you've secured a long term contract that guarantees you wont get buried in the minors, and pretty much secures a spot on the roster for you - what worry does a player have? Play well or not they're going to be a member of the team. This situation isn't specific just to the Canucks, we see it all around the NHL when a player who has underperformed during the duration of their contract, suddenly play well when the term is up, this is known as a "Contract Year". I believe that once a player with a family gets a contract with a NTC/NMC their main focus becomes providing for their family (which it should, don't get me wrong) and less on winning a Stanley Cup. You hear it every time a player is asked about what it is like to be a father and for the bulk of the time their answer is "It shows you there are more important things in life.." (which, I agree, but for sake of the argument). Having almost 50% of our roster guaranteed to stay is a big problem for a team to have. When you look around the league Vancouver has the 2nd highest amount of NTC/NMC's behind Boston & Dallas (11), and tied with Pittsburgh (10). For a team who is trying to "re-tool" this is one of the worst possible situations to be in. team nmc/ntc boston 11* dallas 11 pittsburgh 10* vancouver 10 chicago 9 detroit 9* minnesota 8 philadelphia 8* tampa bay 8* washington 8 carolina 7 montreal 7 nashville 7 new jersey 7 phoenix 7 san jose 7 toronto 7 winnipeg 7 anaheim 6* st. louis 6 calgary 5 columbus 5 ottawa 5 buffalo 4 florida 4 colorado 3 ny rangers 3 edmonton 2 ny islanders 2 los angeles 0 * denotes has a player on LTIR with a NTC/NMC I understand that sometimes you need to sweeten the pot when it comes to Free Agency and sometimes a NTC/NMC is the deciding factor, but they shouldn't be handed out to just everyone who asks for one. Taking a look (points wise) at the players who have NTC/NMC's who are on par or more with Vancouver: player team G A P s. crosby pit 27 48 75 t. seguin dal 24 31 55 c. kunitz pit 27 28 55 e. malkin pit 16 39 55 j. benn dal 22 28 50 j. neal pit 18 24 42 d. krejci bos 12 35 40 d. sedin van 13 27 40 h. sedin van 9 31 40 m. lucic bos 16 23 39 r. kesler van 19 18 37 p. bergeron bos 14 21 35 b. marchand bos 17 16 33 c. higgins van 15 16 31 j. garrison van 6 22 28 r. peverley dal 7 20 27 z. chara bos 13 13 26 -----------------average------------------ e. cole dal 14 11 25 a. goligoski dal 2 22 24 r. whitney dal 6 15 21 p. dupuis pit 7 13 20 k. bieksa van 4 15 19 l. eriksson bos 6 12 18 s. gonchar dal 2 16 18 s. horcoff dal 7 9 16 d. hamuis van 4 11 15 j. boychuk bos 2 13 15 a. edler van 4 9 13 p. martin pit 2 10 12 b. orpik pit 1 10 11 d. seidenberg bos 1 9 10 t. daley dal 4 5 9 c. kelly bos 3 5 8 s. robidas dal 4 1 5 a. burrows van 0 4 4 r. scuderi pit 0 2 2 m. savard bos - - - player team GAA S% W m. fleury pit 2.25 .917 30 t. rask bos 2.09 .929 25 k. lehtonen dal 2.55 .915 20 r. luongo van 2.32 .919 19 The interesting statistic amongst all of this is that LA has 0 NTC/NMC's and has managed to win a Stanley Cup recently. However, there are a lot of other factors that go into a retooling process. Of the players who are not locked in with a NTC/NMC, we have very little in terms of trade bait. David Booth carries a large price tag, but thankfully it's an expiring contract that ends after next season, so it is moveable. Jannik Hansen, has value, and a reasonable contract. Chris Tanev is likely our best trade bait. I hate to say it, but this guy has won me over with how solid he has played, and if we're going to move someone, that is movable, he's the guy. In 2016-2017 we'll have the following contracts: Daniel Sedin $7,000,000 NTC Henrik Sedin $7,000,000 NTC Roberto Luongo $5,333,333 NTC Alex Edler $5,000,000 NTC Jason Garrison $4,600,000 NTC Alex Burrows $4,500,000 NTC Chris Higgins $2,500,000 NTC Jannik Hansen $2,500,000 Luongo will be 37, Daniel and Henrik will be turning 36, Burrows will be 35, Higgins will be 33, Garrison will be 32, and Hansen & Edler will be 30. Higgins, Garrison, Hansen, and Edler would make up a realistic core since the other guys would be getting in the 'too old to be core players' category, which isn't too bad in my books. Drafting Let's take 2008-2012 as a sample size because not too many players from 2013's draft have made the NHL. First off, the age ol debate for how poorly we draft will forever reign on because we could have had X, but we took Y instead. The best odds you have of finding an NHLer in the draft are statistically in the first two rounds. Round 3 and 4 are where you find your diamonds in the rough, and the rest of the draft are projects, but certainly aren't a waste of a pick. In the mentioned sample size above, Vancouver is the second worst drafting team in the NHL, behind the Penguins, and tied with Chicago: rd 1 rd 2 rd 3 rd 4 rd 5 rd 6 rd 7 total nyi 6/7 3/7 1/8 3/5 3/7 3/4 0/3 19/41 46% min 5/6 4/6 1/2 1/4 0/3 1/5 1/5 13/31 42% nyr 4/5 2/4 2/4 1/3 1/7 1/4 0/2 11/29 38% ott 4/6 3/4 1/4 3/6 2/5 1/5 0/7 14/37 38% nas 3/4 3/7 2/5 2/7 1/4 1/6 2/6 14/39 36% ana 7/7 4/8 2/7 1/4 0/6 0/4 0/4 14/40 35% bos 4/5 2/4 0/4 3/4 1/4 0/5 1/5 11/31 35% cbj 4/4 2/6 0/2 1/7 2/6 2/5 1/5 12/35 34% phi 3/3 0/1 2/7 1/5 0/3 2/5 2/6 10/30 33% was 4/6 1/3 1/3 3/6 1/5 0/5 1/6 11/34 32% col 2/4 3/6 2/3 1/4 1/6 1/5 0/5 10/33 30% tb 4/7 2/4 1/4 1/5 1/4 1/6 1/7 11/37 30% nj 4/4 3/5 2/5 1/5 0/5 0/5 0/5 10/34 29% edm 5/6 3/6 0/7 1/7 1/5 1/4 0/4 11/39 28% fla 5/6 4/8 0/8 0/6 0/4 1/4 1/4 11/40 28% la 4/5 3/4 0/7 1/4 1/5 0/6 1/5 10/36 28% tor 3/5 1/5 3/4 0/3 1/8 2/6 0/6 10/37 27% cgy 3/4 0/4 2/5 1/7 0/3 1/4 1/4 8/31 26% car 3/4 3/7 0/5 1/6 0/2 1/5 1/5 9/34 26% det 2/2 3/7 0/6 1/4 1/6 0/5 2/5 9/35 26% phx 4/7 3/7 1/5 1/5 0/3 0/4 0/4 9/35 26% wpg 5/6 2/3 1/5 1/5 0/6 0/7 1/6 10/38 26% buf 6/7 1/2 1/7 1/5 0/5 0/5 0/6 9/37 24% dal 3/4 1/7 1/4 0/3 2/6 0/3 0/3 7/30 23% mtl 4/4 0/3 1/4 0/8 2/5 0/3 0/5 7/32 22% sj 2/2 1/4 0/3 0/3 2/7 1/5 1/8 7/32 22% stl 4/5 3/8 0/8 1/5 0/4 0/5 0/4 8/39 21% chi 1/6 3/8 2/6 0/3 2/5 1/8 0/8 9/44 20% van 3/4 1/3 1/3 0/4 1/5 0/6 0/5 6/30 20% pit 3/5 1/3 1/4 0/5 1/6 0/6 0/2 6/31 19% 76% 43% 21% 21% 18% 14% 11% Our 2013 draft has left fans pretty excited that we finally have someone to be excited about. Horvat and Shinkaruk are argueably our best assets since...? but the problem with this is that we're seeing and hearing that, if we're wanting anything in return in a trade, we'd have to give up on one of them (no thanks). Our drafting tendancies are almost predictable. Our scouts like a certain something. Since Gillis has taken over, we've drafted predominantly Canadians, mostly from the OHL and QMJHL. One frustrating thing, in my opinion, is that we're underutilizing the WHL. Right here in our own backyard, we have a team. There's no reason Gallagher should have went to Montreal, especially being a 5th round pick - but I digress. OHL 9 QMJHL 7 SWE JR 6 WHL 3 US-HS 3 NCAA 3 CJHL 1 CCHL 1 AJHL 1 BCHL 1 FIN JR 1 SWE 1 CAN 19 USA 7 SWE 6 CZE 2 NOR 1 FIN 1 DEN 1 D 14 C 10 LW 5 RW 4 G 3 In the 2014 draft, the Canucks currently have a pick for every round, except the 4th round. If the league were to end today we'd be looking at 17th overall pick give or take a slot. The way Gillis has drafted is what beat them the previous season, which is usually size. In 2011 & 2012, every draft pick was 6'1 to 6'5. Size isn't necessarily a bad thing to draft, but at some point you need to draft skill. Not every pick is going to turn into a Stewart or a Lucic. Trading Vancouver has lacked a big punch when making trades. We've never landed someone of name, someone who can get fans excited and for the most part we're left scratching our heads because of what we've given up. It's no secret that Vancouver has made some poor decisions when it has come to deadline deals and we usually wind up losing the player to free agency anyway. Going forward, we're going to have a tough time making trades, it isn't going to be easy on us. We're unlikely to get assets in trades and will be left to develop our own guys. Let's take a look back at some of the deals under Gillis' tenure in the last 4 years. to van: zac dalpe, jeremy welsh to car: kellan tochkin, 2014 4th to van: 2013 1st (bo horvat) to nj: cory schneider to van: derek roy to dal: kevin connauton, 2013 2nd (phillipe desrosiers) to van: zack kassian, marc-andre gragnani to buf: cody hodgson, alexander sulzer to van: samuel pahlsson to cbj: taylor ellington, 2 2012 4th (josh anderson, taylor leier) to van: david booth, steven reinprecht, 2013 3rd (cole cassels) to fla: marco sturm, mikael samuelsson to van: christopher higgins to fla: evan oberg, 2013 3rd to van: keith ballard, victor oreskovich to fla: steve bernier, michael grabner, 2010 1st Gillis has done a good job of dumping guys who are no longer serviceable though, we can give him that credit, but he has been unable to pull a 'Naslund for Stojanov' type deal. Some of the guys Gillis has pawned off onto other teams include: Sergei Shirokov, Evan Oberg, Shane O'Brien, Dan Gendur, P.C. Labrie, Patrick White. Staff I strongly believe that Tortorella is the right man for the job. He has a Stanley Cup ring on his finger, he is a passionate guy and is not afraid to let a player know where he is at within the organization. Which is a huge departure from what AV brought to the table. As much as I think Torts is the right man to coach a team, we might not have the appropriate roster to play a 'Torts Style' game. Having placed big responsibility on the Sedin's to play the power play, and block shots, it is clear that this element of their game is missing for a reason. I thought going into this season that some guys wouldn't respond (Bieksa, Edler) and others would thrive (Kesler) but as the time goes on, there is one difference between what Tortorella had in NY and here in Van, and that's youth. Looking at what he did for young guys like Callahan, Hagelin, Stepan, Miller, McDonagh, etc. He was able to develop these guys tremendously. Eventually it wore off, but he had a window. In Vancouver, our window is closed with this group, they need to re-discover the love of the game and the want to win a Stanley Cup. Gillis has been a loyal-to-his-players GM, which has carried over since his days as an agent, and thats likely why we've been having some issues getting deals made. That and he is pulling an Edmonton and overvaluing what we have on the table. The economy has changed in the NHL and some times you have to bite the bullet to make a deal that will help you in the long run. I appreciate that Gillis doesn't want to handicap the team, and I admire that. He doesn't want to give our players away, which is also admirable, but at the same time we don't want our players to lose such significant value that he can't get anything back for them. I think this duo can work, but changes need to be made in the way we draft, how we approach free agents, and certainly how we develop. Development has been a big issue with the Canucks over the years. For instance I'll refer to the Cody Hodgson situation. When CoHo got playing time with the Canucks he was behind Sedin, Kesler, Malhotra in the depth chart and essentially was a 4th line Center, getting minimal ice time. That is NOT the kind of player he was but AV insisted on playing him there. He got some time on the 2nd unit PP, and actually did okay. He was traded (which was the right move) because he would never climb the depth charts past Kesler or the Sedins. This is why I'm a supporter of a changing of the guard. Most recently San Jose re-signed Marleau and Thornton to new contracts. They continue to age but have accepted they are not the top guns anymore, handing the reigns over to Couture, Pavelski, Hertl, etc. When Horvat and Gaunce come into the line up, they will be playing BEHIND the Sedins, without a doubt. If Kesler is still on the roster when they crack the squad (I predict he'll bolt after this contract) then they will be playing behind him too. It's going to be tough as a Canucks fan to see our prospect not really get their chance, even though "we need to be younger". In summary, it's going to be a TOUGH handful of years going forward because as we know change doesn't happen overnight. Unless youre Philadelphia, who seems to flip the switch on the team the second it doesn't work. We're going to be in for an odd re-tooling, it's going to be tough on us. We're a good team, capable of making the playoffs. With the right motivation and a little hot streak we'll get there. But we're absolutely doomed in the playoffs, and it really leaves the question for what would make a successful season? Is making the playoffs and getting swept a measure of success? What would save the season? A big trade? A shake up? Gillis and co have their work cut out for them. TL;DR? - Draft better, Trade better, no more NTC's. EDIT: sorry the 'code' formatting isn't better.