Lui's Knob Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 <p>Just started to think back now on some critical organizational decisions made the past few years and thinking whether decisions made/not made in the new regime are coming back to bite us? 1) Schultz - tearing up the AHL, and while there was a push, decides on the Oilers; now knowing Edler/Garrison have injury issues and K-Conn is having an average year....did not getting him and being with another conference team going to cost us? 2) Luongo and his contract - at first everyone loved his contract and now with the murky new CBA, he may never be offloaded or if he does get traded, is dealt for less than he could of been...was his massive contract going to hamper the team's needs? 3)Hodgson - no need to go into this one; but with Kesler battling 'major injuries' and rumors he's still a ways away/may never regain his former game (wrist/shoulder injuries) plus add the fact we traded him for another 'question mark' - did it not make sense to either get back a centermen or keep Hodgson as C depth that appears needed now? 4)Drafting Pat McNally - was our only high pick that year (no 1st rounder) and now he's developmentally in limbo (Harvard school issues) 5) Sami Pahlsson = waste of a pickup (given away high picks) and then moved to the SEL 6) Corrado = plays well but then gets surprising cut; Gaunce injured and can't even try out for junior tournie = both a step back for development? 7) Lockout = this isn't the teams' fault, but every time there's a decision for the league to do a lockout, the Canucks suffer significantly on the ice(see 94, 04 and TBD for 2012?) I can only think of one decisions in hindsight which turned out well = acquiring Higgins/Lapierre/Torres who were instrumental in the last cup finals run....There could be more to add to this list that I'm missing, but does it seem lately decisions are not favoring the organization? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strawberries Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 1) Not really a mistake, we just lost the sweepstakes. Edmonton was able to promise him more than we could. 2) Yeah, maybe not the best decision, but only in hindsight. It seemed right at the time. 3) Way to early to make that assumption. That will only be determined in the future. 4) He was a 4th round pick who actually has some decent potential. He was a good pick. 5) Ellington and 2 4th round picks. Hardly a price to pay, even if he did only stick around until the end of the year. One could say picking Ellington in the first place was a mistake though. 6) Corrado was a steal of a 5th round pick. Gaunce's injury can in no way be considered a mistake by the Canucks. He was a good pick. 7) Like you said, not really a Canuck decision to have a lockout. In summary, theres been some bad luck, but I wouldn't attribute most of them to us making a mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JensenFan2011 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 lol you are saying a 5th round pick is taking a step back after being a shocking cut for the world juniors? dude corrado did an amazing feat just reaching the potential of making the try outs for team canada... some people geez Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil_314 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 I used to have me one of these... Frankly, how are any of these (marginally the 5th, 2nd and maybe the 3rd point, the rest ) be used to condemn the team? Schultz didn't WANT to sign here, nothing the team did for #4, 6 or 7. I'm done answering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shift-4 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 You forgot kopitarz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Since when are two 4th's considered 'high picks'? Pahlsson was ok while he but still that price was next to nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeyville88 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 A few years ago I really liked the direction we were headed in. The goal was clear - we had an all star goalie who needed some support around him, so that what we went out and got. We got Ehrhoff, Hamhuis, Ballard, Malhotra, etc all in an attempt to play a "D first" mentality. In addition, our stars were starting to shine up front so goal scoring wasn't a concern. Now all of a sudden we have a changing of the guard in net, our top scorers have been shut down in critical playoff games for the past two seasons, and we have no real notable players coming up from the farm. We traded away our prized prospect, and we still get run and beaten up physically by all the other teams. Our biggest problem is that our core is not getting any younger and we don't have any up and coming players who can take over the role of "core players" in a few seasons. It remains to be seen how we stack up once hockey gets going again, but I can't help but feel that we missed our window of opportunity and that the window won't come again till a whole rebuild takes place again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tortorella's Rant Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 <p>Just started to think back now on some critical organizational decisions made the past few years and thinking whether decisions made/not made in the new regime are coming back to bite us? 1) Schultz - tearing up the AHL, and while there was a push, decides on the Oilers; now knowing Edler/Garrison have injury issues and K-Conn is having an average year....did not getting him and being with another conference team going to cost us? 2) Luongo and his contract - at first everyone loved his contract and now with the murky new CBA, he may never be offloaded or if he does get traded, is dealt for less than he could of been...was his massive contract going to hamper the team's needs? 3)Hodgson - no need to go into this one; but with Kesler battling 'major injuries' and rumors he's still a ways away/may never regain his former game (wrist/shoulder injuries) plus add the fact we traded him for another 'question mark' - did it not make sense to either get back a centermen or keep Hodgson as C depth that appears needed now? 4)Drafting Pat McNally - was our only high pick that year (no 1st rounder) and now he's developmentally in limbo (Harvard school issues) 5) Sami Pahlsson = waste of a pickup (given away high picks) and then moved to the SEL 6) Corrado = plays well but then gets surprising cut; Gaunce injured and can't even try out for junior tournie = both a step back for development? 7) Lockout = this isn't the teams' fault, but every time there's a decision for the league to do a lockout, the Canucks suffer significantly on the ice(see 94, 04 and TBD for 2012?) I can only think of one decisions in hindsight which turned out well = acquiring Higgins/Lapierre/Torres who were instrumental in the last cup finals run....There could be more to add to this list that I'm missing, but does it seem lately decisions are not favoring the organization? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogbyte Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Not one of these things is an issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King of the ES Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 <p>Just started to think back now on some critical organizational decisions made the past few years and thinking whether decisions made/not made in the new regime are coming back to bite us? 1) Schultz - tearing up the AHL, and while there was a push, decides on the Oilers; now knowing Edler/Garrison have injury issues and K-Conn is having an average year....did not getting him and being with another conference team going to cost us? 2) Luongo and his contract - at first everyone loved his contract and now with the murky new CBA, he may never be offloaded or if he does get traded, is dealt for less than he could of been...was his massive contract going to hamper the team's needs? 3)Hodgson - no need to go into this one; but with Kesler battling 'major injuries' and rumors he's still a ways away/may never regain his former game (wrist/shoulder injuries) plus add the fact we traded him for another 'question mark' - did it not make sense to either get back a centermen or keep Hodgson as C depth that appears needed now? 4)Drafting Pat McNally - was our only high pick that year (no 1st rounder) and now he's developmentally in limbo (Harvard school issues) 5) Sami Pahlsson = waste of a pickup (given away high picks) and then moved to the SEL 6) Corrado = plays well but then gets surprising cut; Gaunce injured and can't even try out for junior tournie = both a step back for development? 7) Lockout = this isn't the teams' fault, but every time there's a decision for the league to do a lockout, the Canucks suffer significantly on the ice(see 94, 04 and TBD for 2012?) I can only think of one decisions in hindsight which turned out well = acquiring Higgins/Lapierre/Torres who were instrumental in the last cup finals run....There could be more to add to this list that I'm missing, but does it seem lately decisions are not favoring the organization? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lui's Knob Posted December 18, 2012 Author Share Posted December 18, 2012 lol you are saying a 5th round pick is taking a step back after being a shocking cut for the world juniors? dude corrado did an amazing feat just reaching the potential of making the try outs for team canada... some people geez Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JensenFan2011 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 You're not reading it correctly - I didn't say Gaunce/Corrado were 'bad picks' what I meant is that the decision of Corrado being cut and Gaunce not being to play due to injury ...will that in hindsight hinder their development? Seems we got the raw end of that decision (again not the organization's fault)....make better sense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markus Alexander Cody Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 i believe even just getting the chance to compete for the spot on team canada boosted corrado since at the begining of the season no one thought once about him having a chance. Corrado has a great mindset he will work hard and develope not making canada will not be his achilies heal if anything its the push he needs te become a great player rather than a good player Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
250Integra Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 and here's johnny! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanuckRow Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Posts like this make me realize why I should not come on CDC during the lockout. The fact that you think that yours points are Canucks managements "mistakes" is hilarious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SamJamIam Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 When King of the ES agrees with you, it's best to stick your head in a doorway and smash the door onto it for a few hours in an attempt to jump start brain activity. You're exhibiting a piss poor understanding of hockey right here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goalie13 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Is it really a mistake if it can only be thought of that way in hindsight? Decisions are made based on the best information available at the time. MG doesn't have a crystal ball to know what things will look like down the road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 A few years ago I really liked the direction we were headed in. The goal was clear - we had an all star goalie who needed some support around him, so that what we went out and got. We got Ehrhoff, Hamhuis, Ballard, Malhotra, etc all in an attempt to play a "D first" mentality. In addition, our stars were starting to shine up front so goal scoring wasn't a concern. Now all of a sudden we have a changing of the guard in net, our top scorers have been shut down in critical playoff games for the past two seasons, and we have no real notable players coming up from the farm. We traded away our prized prospect, and we still get run and beaten up physically by all the other teams. Our biggest problem is that our core is not getting any younger and we don't have any up and coming players who can take over the role of "core players" in a few seasons. It remains to be seen how we stack up once hockey gets going again, but I can't help but feel that we missed our window of opportunity and that the window won't come again till a whole rebuild takes place again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ice orca Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 When King of the ES agrees with you, it's best to stick your head in a doorway and smash the door onto it for a few hours in an attempt to jump start brain activity. You're exhibiting a piss poor understanding of hockey right here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.