Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

Your Canucks in 3 to 4 years time.

Discussion

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
82 replies to this topic

#61 higgyfan

higgyfan

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,239 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 12

Posted 23 November 2012 - 11:43 AM

Canuck draft picks and undrafted pickups since 1999, including traded and Luc (RIP).

Sedin Sedin Burrows
Umberger Kesler Grabner
Jensen Hodson Hansen
Raymond Mallet M.Brown
Schroeder

Edler Tanev
Bourdon Bieksa
Corrado N.McIver
Conauton

Schneider
Canata

Not going to win a SC, but not that bad either.

#62 Primus099

Primus099

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,009 posts
  • Joined: 17-October 12

Posted 24 November 2012 - 01:51 PM

Or we could make a few key trades, draft an impact player late in the first round like Giroux, and have multiple prospects pan out.

Don't pretend to know the future.


yes because we're known for our awesome drafting...lol

other than the Sedins and Kesler we've pretty much failed at the draft

Edited by Primus099, 24 November 2012 - 01:54 PM.


#63 Primus099

Primus099

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,009 posts
  • Joined: 17-October 12

Posted 24 November 2012 - 01:52 PM

How come the windown in Detroit never seems to be closed?


because they're good at drafting and developing players, we aren't

#64 Primus099

Primus099

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,009 posts
  • Joined: 17-October 12

Posted 24 November 2012 - 01:55 PM

Canuck draft picks and undrafted pickups since 1999, including traded and Luc (RIP).

Sedin Sedin Burrows
Umberger Kesler Grabner
Jensen Hodson Hansen
Raymond Mallet M.Brown
Schroeder

Edler Tanev
Bourdon Bieksa
Corrado N.McIver
Conauton

Schneider
Canata

Not going to win a SC, but not that bad either.


so it's no different from any team in our history then :bigblush:

#65 Yung Pony

Yung Pony

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 706 posts
  • Joined: 13-January 09

Posted 24 November 2012 - 01:55 PM

I'd rather start a full rebuild by then, complete overhaul ala. Pitts, Chicago, Edmonton.

Something to be excited about instead of holding on to the geezers and be a mediocre team for another 40 years.

Please dont become the Flames...

But what if we can pull a detroit
Posted Image

#66 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,902 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 24 November 2012 - 02:04 PM

Canuck draft picks and undrafted pickups since 1999, including traded and Luc (RIP).

Sedin Sedin Burrows
Umberger Kesler Grabner
Jensen Hodson Hansen
Raymond Mallet M.Brown
Schroeder

Edler Tanev
Bourdon Bieksa
Corrado N.McIver
Conauton

Schneider
Canata

Not going to win a SC, but not that bad either.

Pretty solid. If we plug Hamhuis, Higgins, Lapierre and Luongo, then we would be a very strong Cup contender.

In my eyes drouin is overrated he can score in the qmjhl but did nothing in last two gold medal games that canada lost. Fox will be better pro than him talk to me in five yrs


   ryan kesler is going to the chicago blackhawks ...       quote me on it


#67 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,260 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 24 November 2012 - 03:06 PM

Canuck draft picks and undrafted pickups since 1999, including traded and Luc (RIP).

Sedin Sedin Burrows
Umberger Kesler Grabner
Jensen Hodson Hansen
Raymond Mallet M.Brown
Schroeder

Edler Tanev
Bourdon Bieksa
Corrado N.McIver
Conauton

Schneider
Canata

Not going to win a SC, but not that bad either.


I would put Gaunce ahead of Mallet if we're going off potential.

And if we're including players who passed away, why not Rypien instead of Brown?

yes because we're known for our awesome drafting...lol

other than the Sedins and Kesler we've pretty much failed at the draft


Yea, I guess Schneider, Edler, and Hansen are just plugs. I guess getting Bieksa in the 5th round was just a complete fail too...

And the trades we've made have just been horrible. Getting Ehrhoff for White and Rahimi, man we got ripped off there. Or getting Higgins and Lapierre for a couple picks and low end prospects, horrible move.

And don't even get me started about our inability to attract free agent defencemen. Hamhuis, Garrison, and Tanev? What was Gillis thinking...

Edited by DeNiro, 24 November 2012 - 03:24 PM.

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#68 Canuck Surfer

Canuck Surfer

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,454 posts
  • Joined: 27-December 10

Posted 24 November 2012 - 03:34 PM

Look; if you asked me two years ago I would have called MG the best GM in the game. At that time he was. What with re-signing guys who then won back to back scoring titles, a Selke, depth players like Burr for smashing value and rounding out his line up near perfectly (Samuelsson, Hamhuis, Erhoff who was a major score)?

You can argue Sundin was overpaid, even Demitra... But at that time we had cap space, developing talent and needed a push in top end talent. I argue that when we lost to Chicago with Sundin; it might have even been a better team than our SCF team?

But as much as Garrison is promising (he is), our overal balance is not anywhere near as good.

We're out of balance; way overloaded on left wing, and lacking both size, sandpaper and play making up front. Booth was a great deal, cuz we needed that size and athleticism, not to mention Samuelsson could have walked. But suddenly we had a hole on RW and in play making behind Hank. So the trade created as big a void as it filled; same with Hodgson who was then traded for a RW which further depreciated our play making. That was also good at face value (I hope) but still leaves us with roles to fill. Similarly we are also badly overloaded at left D, and lacking on the right side; requiring both a puck rushing D and perhaps a 2knd body (besides Garrison) who can move bodies in front of the net. And no heir apparent s to the Twins... 2 years ago we managed all complimentary pieces in deals. Not deals which tore up as much as they accomplished.

Gillis has retained assets, (Lou, some LW and left D), so not a lost cause by any means. And still a very good GM. But he does not look as sharp as he did two years ago and has more work ahead of him...

I would put Gaunce ahead of Mallet if we're going off potential.

And if we're including players who passed away, why not Rypien instead of Brown?



Yea, I guess Schneider, Edler, and Hansen are just plugs. I guess getting Bieksa in the 5th round was just a complete fail too...

And the trades we've made have just been horrible. Getting Ehrhoff for White and Rahimi, man we got ripped off there. Or getting Higgins and Lapierre for a couple picks and low end prospects, horrible move.

And don't even get me started about our inability to attract free agent defencemen. Hamhuis and Garrison? What was Gillis thinking...


Edited by Canuck Surfer, 24 November 2012 - 04:24 PM.


#69 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,260 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 24 November 2012 - 04:29 PM

But as much as Garrison is promising (he is), our overal balance is not anywhere near as good.

We're out of balance; way overloaded on left wing, and lacking both size, sandpaper and play making up front. Booth was a great deal, cuz we needed that size and athleticism, not to mention Samuelsson could have walked. But suddenly we had a hole on RW and in play making behind Hank. So the trade created as big a void as it filled; same with Hodgson who was then traded for a RW which further depreciated our play making. That was also good at face value (I hope) but still leaves us with roles to fill. We are also waay overloaded at left D, and lacking on the right side; requiring both a puck rushing D and perhaps a 2knd body (besides Garrison) who can move bodies in front of the net. And no heir apparent s to the Twins... 2 years ago we managed all complimentary parts.

Gillis has some assets, (Lou, some LW and left D), so not a lost conversation but does not look as sharp as he did two years ago? At best he has more work ahead...


I don't really see us as overloaded at left wing. Burrows, Booth, Higgins, and Raymond can play both wings quite effectively. If anything that just means we have more versatility up front.

Yes, we lack some size and grit up front, but no more than we did with our 10/11 roster. And a move to acquire Kassian was meant to address that. I still believe that was a good move, I just think the timing of it didn't work out too well.

And as far as not having enough playmakers with Hodgson gone, I'll go back to the 10/11 roster which had Malhotra as the third line center. That team was first in goals and won the president's trophy. Goal scoring is not this team's problem, that aspect has always been driven by the Sedins, Burrows, and Kesler primarily. Our depth scoring will be improved by the addition of a top prospect or two (either Schroeder or Jensen).

And as far as our D goes, we have 3 left side D (Hamhuis, Edler, Ballard), and 3 right side D (Bieksa, Garrison, Tanev). Where's the lack of balance? All we need is a depth right side D like Vandermeer to go with Alberts on the depth chart. And as for grit, Garrison is a whole lot grittier than Ehrhoff, and if we were able to add a guy like Vandermeer, we would be good in that department.

Bottom line is, this teams window is now. You can't worry about who's gonna replace the Sedins, because those guys are irreplaceable. A team rarely ever has franchise players just waiting in the wings ready to go. It's gonna take a few average seasons and some luck to try and get back to the level we're at now. So just enjoy being a top team while we can, it may not last forever.

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#70 Dogbyte

Dogbyte

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,040 posts
  • Joined: 31-March 07

Posted 24 November 2012 - 05:54 PM

I don't really see us as overloaded at left wing. Burrows, Booth, Higgins, and Raymond can play both wings quite effectively. If anything that just means we have more versatility up front.

Yes, we lack some size and grit up front, but no more than we did with our 10/11 roster. And a move to acquire Kassian was meant to address that. I still believe that was a good move, I just think the timing of it didn't work out too well.

And as far as not having enough playmakers with Hodgson gone, I'll go back to the 10/11 roster which had Malhotra as the third line center. That team was first in goals and won the president's trophy. Goal scoring is not this team's problem, that aspect has always been driven by the Sedins, Burrows, and Kesler primarily. Our depth scoring will be improved by the addition of a top prospect or two (either Schroeder or Jensen).

And as far as our D goes, we have 3 left side D (Hamhuis, Edler, Ballard), and 3 right side D (Bieksa, Garrison, Tanev). Where's the lack of balance? All we need is a depth right side D like Vandermeer to go with Alberts on the depth chart. And as for grit, Garrison is a whole lot grittier than Ehrhoff, and if we were able to add a guy like Vandermeer, we would be good in that department.

Bottom line is, this teams window is now. You can't worry about who's gonna replace the Sedins, because those guys are irreplaceable. A team rarely ever has franchise players just waiting in the wings ready to go. It's gonna take a few average seasons and some luck to try and get back to the level we're at now. So just enjoy being a top team while we can, it may not last forever.


We should really be more concerned about how that is going to work. Booth is really the only guy that belongs in the top 6, we've already seen that this moneyball approach to hockey isn't working.

Canuckslogo160x160.jpg


#71 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,260 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 24 November 2012 - 06:19 PM

We should really be more concerned about how that is going to work. Booth is really the only guy that belongs in the top 6, we've already seen that this moneyball approach to hockey isn't working.


How can you say Burrows doesn`t belong in the top 6?

He has a more proven track record than Booth.

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#72 Dogbyte

Dogbyte

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,040 posts
  • Joined: 31-March 07

Posted 24 November 2012 - 07:30 PM

How can you say Burrows doesn`t belong in the top 6?

He has a more proven track record than Booth.


Because I watch him play. Leaving positions in your heart for players does not translate into genuine players. Would Burrows be a 35 goal scorer without the Sedins? He's awesome but you can't keep putting borderline players in your top 6 and hope to be succesful. End of story.

Canuckslogo160x160.jpg


#73 Canuck Surfer

Canuck Surfer

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,454 posts
  • Joined: 27-December 10

Posted 24 November 2012 - 07:57 PM

Isn't Garrison a left side D, who plays right side on the PP?

Back to forwards; Our first line is dynamic offensively (large part for talent, but also an element that they afforded the highest O'zone starts of anyone in the league). But it, with 3 185 pounders, is vulnerable. That was our down fall against Boston is guys as big as Chara shut down the Twins. So in reality we really do need a complimentary bigger body than Burrows at times (another reason loosing Samuelsson caused problems; he filled in admirably 3 years ago against Chicago when Seabrook and company were also running over the Twins / Burr. It's why Doan was so heavily recruited. Without a first line that can compete physically, it actually has to be shielded from D and neutral starts. And particularly with so many guys, honest crack at it or not, playing the off wing, we are not going to dominate like that. So then the game becomes a match up game.

Coaches like Quenneville and Julien have beaten AV at that game with their line ups, even Trotz had an honest crack at it. They have proven that once the Twins were negated the balance of forwards no longer had enough firepower and were also at risk to size mis-matches. It's called play off hockey.

(Kesler ending hurt last 2 years also was a big factor to be fair, he's our best physical player when healthy).

So yeah; I agree there is a reason we can make the Kassian trade work. We have to, we needed the size and the RW. Take Hodgsons backroom politics out and I believe (believed) we would have been better off trading from depth on the left side. Even if Kass becomes a force, that still leaves us lines that can be mismatched.

Related to drops in scoring, where we are still close to elite > I attribute that to loosing Erhoff 30% and teams having scouted all those breakout patterns that we use to use so well in 2010/11 another 30%. Yes Edler scores as much as Erhoff, but he does not carry the puck as well (another reason the breakout and PP dropped, the main drop in scoring), and as stated, it also leaves a void in talent on the right side. Add that Manny and Torres could physically dominate when they were here and healthy? When not, more lines take pressure as a result? Age, more focus on the Twins and loosing Samuelsson (the passer) the balance.

All of these are rectified by bringing back the balance we once had and by trading from depth, not just BPA. Yes we should be trading a left wing and a left D should we start the season next week.

I don't really see us as overloaded at left wing. Burrows, Booth, Higgins, and Raymond can play both wings quite effectively. If anything that just means we have more versatility up front.

Yes, we lack some size and grit up front, but no more than we did with our 10/11 roster. And a move to acquire Kassian was meant to address that. I still believe that was a good move, I just think the timing of it didn't work out too well.

And as far as not having enough playmakers with Hodgson gone, I'll go back to the 10/11 roster which had Malhotra as the third line center. That team was first in goals and won the president's trophy. Goal scoring is not this team's problem, that aspect has always been driven by the Sedins, Burrows, and Kesler primarily. Our depth scoring will be improved by the addition of a top prospect or two (either Schroeder or Jensen).

And as far as our D goes, we have 3 left side D (Hamhuis, Edler, Ballard), and 3 right side D (Bieksa, Garrison, Tanev). Where's the lack of balance? All we need is a depth right side D like Vandermeer to go with Alberts on the depth chart. And as for grit, Garrison is a whole lot grittier than Ehrhoff, and if we were able to add a guy like Vandermeer, we would be good in that department.

Bottom line is, this teams window is now. You can't worry about who's gonna replace the Sedins, because those guys are irreplaceable. A team rarely ever has franchise players just waiting in the wings ready to go. It's gonna take a few average seasons and some luck to try and get back to the level we're at now. So just enjoy being a top team while we can, it may not last forever.



#74 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,260 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 24 November 2012 - 08:57 PM

Because I watch him play. Leaving positions in your heart for players does not translate into genuine players. Would Burrows be a 35 goal scorer without the Sedins? He's awesome but you can't keep putting borderline players in your top 6 and hope to be succesful. End of story.


Would any player be a 35 goal scorer without other elite players to play with? Sorry, but that's a dumb argument.

Burrows has been just as important for the Sedins elevating their game as anyone.

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#75 n00bxQb

n00bxQb

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,966 posts
  • Joined: 05-July 09

Posted 24 November 2012 - 09:00 PM

35-goal scorers are a dime-a-dozen :ph34r:

#76 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,260 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 24 November 2012 - 09:03 PM

Isn't Garrison a left side D, who plays right side on the PP?

All of these are rectified by bringing back the balance we once had and by trading from depth, not just BPA. Yes we should be trading a left wing and a left D should we start the season next week.


Garrison can play both sides the same.

We still have the same depth we had in 10/11, plus we finally have multiple prospects who are likely ready to step in. It's not like Hodgson even made an impact during our most dominant year. We still have Lapierre and Malhotra. People are writing them off too quickly as third line center possibilities.

And like you said, we have assets that can be traded for depth at center if necessary. This team`s roster isn`t as bleak as you`re trying to make it out to be.

Edited by DeNiro, 24 November 2012 - 09:05 PM.

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#77 Primus099

Primus099

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,009 posts
  • Joined: 17-October 12

Posted 25 November 2012 - 03:24 PM

Would any player be a 35 goal scorer without other elite players to play with? Sorry, but that's a dumb argument.


Rick Nash says hi

#78 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,260 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 25 November 2012 - 04:03 PM

Rick Nash says hi


That's one exception. He did have Zherdev to play with two out of the three years he put up 35+ goals. He's an elite player. And the other year he had Huselius, who is not elite, but is a legit top 6.

Either way, he was a 1st overall pick, and those players can often perform on their own. He still underachieved though. He could have easily been over a point a game player if he had an elite centerman to play with.

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#79 Canuck Surfer

Canuck Surfer

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,454 posts
  • Joined: 27-December 10

Posted 26 November 2012 - 12:44 PM

The teams roster is not bleak at all;

but we do have roles to fill in an ideal world.

1) A playmaker behind Hank to help secondary scoring.
2) A defender who can carry the puck up ice (we have plenty that can pass it, a luxury, but still need this)
3) Not enough defenders who clear our net
4) Presuming we keep all the left wingers we have (none are big except Booth); we need another RW with size beyond Kassian.

Hey; if Jensen can be both #1 and 4, fantastic, but again he is a natural on the left. That gives us a fighting chance with a Lou trade and a free agent pick up. Currently we have 4 potential 30 goal scorers, maybe 5 available as wingers on our 2knd and 3rd lines not counting Burr. What good does it do if each line is missing either size or play making? Further, I don't know if our 4th line was playing even 6 minutes a game, so there is something holding back our depth.

I look at the last 4 years and who eliminated us. 3 of those 4 years I believe we had the talent to win a series we did not (Chicago's cup year they were amazing). But we lost those 3 series on match up issues, because we were missing essential elements to compliment the good depth players we do have! Yeah Kassian and Tanev have to assume a role, but who else is ready?

Too much depth is a great problem, some of it should be traded for missing parts.

Garrison can play both sides the same.

We still have the same depth we had in 10/11, plus we finally have multiple prospects who are likely ready to step in. It's not like Hodgson even made an impact during our most dominant year. We still have Lapierre and Malhotra. People are writing them off too quickly as third line center possibilities.

And like you said, we have assets that can be traded for depth at center if necessary. This team`s roster isn`t as bleak as you`re trying to make it out to be.



#80 EddieVedder

EddieVedder

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 94 posts
  • Joined: 28-September 11

Posted 27 November 2012 - 07:25 PM

IF the Sedins are still playing at a high level, they need to be paired with a legit top flight right winger entering his prime. Jensen is a guy who I can see up there.
One thing we have to remember is how old some of these players will be in 4 years time. The only reason I still see the Sedins as top 6 wingers is because of their ability to play with eachother. Their chemistry is unmatched, and that is as great a weapon as any. The team will need Kassian and Jensen to be, simply put, awesome. Finally, Kesler will need to learn how to play with other players... hes been in the league for several years now and the only player hes consistently shown to have chemistry that translates into success is with is Burrows... its ridiculous at this point.

Barring any major trades or signings....

Sedin-Sedin-Jensen
Mallet-Kesler-Kassian
Burrows-Guance-Hansen
Volpatti-Lapierre-Friesen

Edler-Garrison
Hamhuis-Bieksa
Tanev-Connaughton

#81 Bodee

Bodee

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,257 posts
  • Joined: 26-May 11

Posted 28 November 2012 - 03:46 AM

IF the Sedins are still playing at a high level, they need to be paired with a legit top flight right winger entering his prime. Jensen is a guy who I can see up there.
One thing we have to remember is how old some of these players will be in 4 years time. The only reason I still see the Sedins as top 6 wingers is because of their ability to play with eachother. Their chemistry is unmatched, and that is as great a weapon as any. The team will need Kassian and Jensen to be, simply put, awesome. Finally, Kesler will need to learn how to play with other players... hes been in the league for several years now and the only player hes consistently shown to have chemistry that translates into success is with is Burrows... its ridiculous at this point.

Barring any major trades or signings....

Sedin-Sedin-Jensen
Mallet-Kesler-Kassian
Burrows-Guance-Hansen
Volpatti-Lapierre-Friesen

Edler-Garrison
Hamhuis-Bieksa
Tanev-Connaughton


Sorry Eddie but what year is this?............You have named 5 prospects in that team and quite honestly there isn't one of them showing the kind of form that would place them in an elite team like the Canucks.

Personally I think we have yet to know the players who will take these player's places. As in the past we will likely soldier on with maybe one prospect.......Gaunce seems most likely because of his size, ability to use it and his leadership qualities. The rest will come from trades.

Mallet in the 2nd line..........wow! he must be the brother of the guy playing for the Wolves just now.
Jensen in the top line?...........Poor Sedins, pummelled even in their retirement years.
Friesen is a tricky one, he is actually a centre and he may be the surprise package due to his gritty determination to succeed.

Edited by Bodee, 28 November 2012 - 03:52 AM.

Kevin.jpg

#82 Lancaster

Lancaster

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,584 posts
  • Joined: 03-September 12

Posted 29 November 2012 - 02:04 AM

Daniel - Henrik - Kassian
Jensen - Kesler - Schroeder
Burrows - Lapierre - Hansen
Mallet - Gaunce - Malhotra

Edler - Garrison
Bieksa - Hamhuis
Connauton - Tanev

#83 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 29 November 2012 - 02:31 AM

Not even Mike Gillis could tell you what the roster will look like in 4 years. It's safe to assume we will see most of our top prospects on the Canucks. Canucks will pbbly do a rebuild around that time.

I'd rather be a Detroit type team, making the playoffs every year and having a decent shot at the cup every year. Lets not have bad years to rebuild, lets be consistent and hopefully our draft picks will be better than predicted (like Zetterberg and Datsyuk clearly were).

I think every one would want a Detroit type team. Even Detroit will no longer be a Detroit type team.


How come the windown in Detroit never seems to be closed?


They had Lidstrom for the past 20 years. I remember when he came into the league. Yzerman was known as a playoff no show but with the arrival of Lidstrom everything changed. Now that he's retired Detroit will no longer be the power house they once were. Sucks cause I'm a huge Redwings fan also.




Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.