Contrasting Views

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

He should, but at this point we don't really know what he'll add, could be a weber 2.0 or could turn out to be a missing link, either way you're right it is more depth to help improve our PP.

 

The team this year compared to last year has far more scoring depth.  Last year we ran with Higgins, Vey, Prust, two rookies in McCann, a unmotivated Vbrata and even Cracknell.  When Sutter went down we didn't have much in scoring ability.

 

This year Horvat and Baertschi are a year older,  we've added Eriksson, we've added Rodin, we've added granlund.  All players with offensive strengths, all are there to help take off pressure on hank and danny. 

I think our D is harder to play against too.

[oldnews]

4 hours ago, Fred65 said:

I agree with a couple of posters too many fans have tunnel vision and tend to concentrate on star players. The Stars will come likely through the draft. But what JB can do right now is change the bottom 6 forwards and build better depth on the blue line. He wants to add character and supposedly size ( although I don't see too much evidence of that, he has improved the speed IMO ) I've mentioned this before the prospects JB had to work with from the last regime is not exactly a poor showing keeping in mind Gillis left a few prospects after his run to 2 presidents Trophies and SC run....different times for sure . Horvat, Hutton, Markstrom, Gaunce, Cassels, Tanev, Subban and Grenier  ( Zalewski & Shinkaruk who I personally like  )

 

What I do like about JB is his willingness to admit mistakes ( Vey, Vrbata ) and move on. He does throw the odd wobbler such as Corrado ( who I believe has just signed a one way contract with TO) Where he fails  IMHO is he does not seem particularly adept at sourcing vets.

 

I believe the media ( mostly eastern ) have convinced too many that the only route to go is the total rebuild and so convince fans that because JB does not follow their assessment then he must be an idiot. Sadly to many have fallen in line.

 

As to the current roster I don't see too much fall off with the Sedins, the only thing they suffer from is  no second line to take some of the heat. Sutter is as I understand a character player as is Horvat. Things are not quite as bleak as our our friends from the eastern media paint. JB has added a couple of nice pieces ( we hope ) with Baertschi and Gudbranson. Hutton & Horvat were a gifts left by Gillis and we hope Markstrom is as well.

Imo it's every bit as important to look at a team's weakest link as it is to look at it's star power.

There are a few things that not many people tend to  focus on - and that is that the teams that win Cups tend not only to have those stars (that tankers seem to think deliver Cups) but they also tend to have the best third and fourth lines and third pairings.   Depth and defense also wins championships - not just pedigree.

 

So looking at this team, I look at where they need to upgrade most in order to be competitive. I'm not of the school that thinks the team overachieved two years ago - I think it's just as true to say they underachieved last year with obvious mitigating factors.

 

Imo you build from the back forward, so that's the progression I'd take in looking at the team.

 

Goaltending:

Miller, Markstrom, Demko, Garteig - I don't have much concern in the goaltending presently or the succession - not their weakest link.  In fact I'd consider Markstrom and Demko in a class with the best young progression plans in the NHL.   A few teams may have better (ie Tampa) but they face the obstacle of the expansion draft.  Teams positioned extremely well through expansion - better than Vancouver - are few imo.  I'd put Washington in that class with Holtby and Samsonov - but the Canucks imo are positioned extremely well in the crease in terms of the future.  They don't presently have an elite starter, but they've set themselves up to and aside from a blockbuster goaltending deal - which doesn't imo make sense for this franchise, imo they've laid the groundwork as well as anyone could hope.

 

Blueline:

Edler Tanev - imo a very serviceable top pairing - that will benefit from increasing depth and the presence of another solid shutdown force in Gudbranson.  Not concerned.  Edler has been a workhorse in recent years, but imo Gud, Sbisa and Tryamkin could significantly change that dynamic.

Hutton Gudbranson - Hutton showed signs of being a future top 4 - this year he'll have to step up to that role.  The upside is that he'll be doing so with a far better, more stable partner (than Weber) - and the risk of a 'sophomore' setback shouldn't be substantial.  He has a positive mindset and a skillset that is an important complement to the group and with Gudbranson anchoring him, he stands to provide the most growth on the blueline  (although Tryamkin and Sbisa can't be ruled out).  Hutton's defensive presence is under-rated imo and the demands upon him down low should be far less this year.  I am looking forward to seeing this pairing - combined they have very high two way upside imo.

Sbisa, Tryamkin, Larsen, Pedan - the third pairing is a question mark as to who'll command the spots, but if this team is healthy (an asterisk you have to put on virtually any team's fortunes) Sbisa should be playing a role that doesn't pull him above his calling for a change.  I'm in the camp that thinks he's better than generally represented - and I also believe that he and Tryamkin could form an outstanding third pairing that again has the effect of freeing up the top 4 to a greater extent.  The wildcard of course is Larsen, whose upside may force him onto the roster.

The common doubt/question where the blueline is concerned is where the offensive push will come from, but imo, even without Larsen, Edler and Hutton are not slouches on the offensive side of the puck, and both of them should benefit from the presence of Gudranson and the increased ability of the third pairing (if that turns out to be Sbisa Tryamkin) to handle harder minutes.  Otherwise, the third pairing, if Larsen owns a spot, will represent three D pairings with one of the pair representing an offensive presence.

Pedan is a pretty solid 8th man.  If the team is reasonably healthy, the blueline imo should uptick.  If they lose 2 or 3 top 4 D again, of course they'll start to look like a lottery team, but that's true of any team, and imo this team has more depth than it's had in a long time to shoulder injuries.

Where the future is concerned, obviously Juolevi represents a tremendous push - and a whole handful of wildcards from Stecher, Subban, Olson, Brisebois, Neill - with the bulk of their present blueline being 26 and under, the progression plan is solidified with Juolevi's addition, and the needs are far less than they were prior to the arrivals of Gudbranson, Hutton, Tryamkin et al.

 

Forwards

The top line is still a 60 pt per player line.  Not concerned.  The concern of most is the progression plan, but imo the urgency is over-stated and as usual, the tank sentiment that there's nothing in the pipeline isn't entirely representative.

Center:

Hank Sutter Horvat Granlund, Gaunce, Chaput, Megna, Cassels, Laplante.  I like the center depth presently - I think the team will obviously look to replace the future upside of McCann's departure - draft with a view to their center progression - but for the next few years the team is solid down the middle - and I'm a believer that Cassels is a sleeper that will surprise once he's healthy.  They have solid two way centers throughout the system.  Not their weakest point, but certainly a progression focus to add a scoring center in the next few drafts.

RW

Eriksson, Hansen, Dorsett - Virtanen, Rodin, Grenier, (Burrows, Etem dual wingers) - with Boeser in the pipeline.   Solid imo - right wing, like the blueline, has shifted from the position of concern to a strength of quality and depth under Benning.  Imo the team is solid presently and in the future at this position.

LW

Here imo is where the team stands to add - could be considered their primary need or weakness - something clearly stated by Benning as well.

However, as a weakness, I think it indicates a pretty solid roster and depth from top to bottom and the reason being that the greatest concern the team has is in it's middle six left wing spots.

Daniel - still a 60pt floor imo.

Baertschi - could potentially be a legit 20/20 2nd liner - not an unreasonable expectation - but could have support there and an additional comparable talent could serve the team well.

However, I believe that Etem could potentially be precisely what the team is shopping for.  Imo he's handled hard minutes very well through his young career - has excellent defensive sense for a young player, brings speed and physicality and his upside is perhaps highly under-rated around here.   Baertchsi/Etem - if that is the team's weak spot - I can certainly live with that considering the support they have above, below and behind the middle six.    Burrows, Gaunce, Zalewski, Carcone...

When I look at this position as Sedin, Baertschi, Etem, Burrows, Gaunce with a few solid callups that are NHL ready, I don't consider the team's most pressing need to be terribly problematic.  If one of Baer, Etem, or Burrows steps up, the team is looking damn good, and regardless, they are very solid at the bottom 6 spots and 1LW - with the potential of either Baertschi or Etem to step up.

 

I don't think it's unreasonable at all to consider that a competitive team with a realistic shot at the playoffs. Their weakest spots are not evidently going to hold them back (middle six LW or scoring push from the blueline) and their strengths are understated imo - particularly the quality and depth of their middle and bottom six, their goaltending and their 5 through 8 blueliners.

 

Let the puck drop where it may.  I'm looking forward to that group feeding a lot of Eastern trolls their due crow.

[higgyfan]

21 minutes ago, TheGuardian_ said:

Most of the team had clauses? Right, he just signed 4 more.

Kesler, only two teams he could look to, makes that part of the job pretty easy doesn't it? Definitely the #1 coming back was good, Bonino had to come to make a roster spot and salary, Sbisa, because they had a platoon of young guys and reduced the salary. Canucks gave them a 5 million dollar guy, they gave back 4.7 million in contracts.

Chicago didn't want him, so yeah, pretty simple just dealing with one team.  The hard part was getting a decent return when it was obvious to everyone that Kes wanted out.  JB did quite well on that count, considering the situation.

 

21 minutes ago, TheGuardian_ said:

 

The team has almost no cap space now, (around 3.5 mil) so is this situation his fault? At the time he took over he had over 9 mil in cap space once he jettisoned Garrison. The Sedins and Burrows (33+) were the only high priced with clauses, now Miller, Eriksson and somewhat Sutter. Tanev's was okay IMO.

Miller's contract was short term and will be done at the end of this season.  Sutter's NTC is modified after two years, so I have no issues with that and like you've stated, Tanev's NTC being modified next year is fine.   Eriksson's NMC is modified after 4 seasons.  I don't really have any issues with these contracts, as they are relatively short term when you consider the modifications.

 

As far as cap space is concerned, they may try to move Bur and hold back $2m, I suppose.  I don't really see it as an issue for this year, as I don't think they will upgrade the 2nd line until later in the season.

 

21 minutes ago, TheGuardian_ said:

 

So he got rid of three clause contracts and signed four.

Does your argument still hold water about clause contracts?

All those years the Canucks were in limbo, neither good enough or bad enough and then came Linden, many very, very good trades, a steal at the draft (Bure) and a cup run, then back to limbo. Then came Burke, some good trades and the Sedins, later a cup run.

 

Commonality, very good to exceptional talent from the draft, daring trades and cup runs. Both times the Canucks bottomed out first.

 

There is very little of my own opinion here, I bolded what might be taken for opinion. I just tried to list things that happened.

 

BTW, a very good post.

Benning has had a 5th overall (that should have been a 3rd) a 6th, 23rd (Boeser- may end up being a steal) and acquired Gudbranson for his other 1st rounder (McCaan).  Demko may end up being a top notch goalie as well.  I would call this 'building through the draft'.  The Lotto draft makes it very hard to acquire a top pick and I can't see the Sedin situation happening again.

 

Good trades are hard to come by these days.  Seems like most teams are keeping their elite players locked into  long term contracts.  It looks to  me that any future exchanges for top players will be 'hockey trades' where neither team 'hits the ball out of the park'.  More than likely, the best a gm can do is grab a good player from a cap strapped team that is desperately trying to shed salaries.

 

I think the method(s) of building a SC contending team has changed substantially in the past couple of years.  I think GMs have to be more creative in acquiring players and have a solid vision of the team they are building.  I'm not so sure that hoping to get an elite player by tanking for a few years is going to do the trick anymore.

 

Quote

 

 

Quote

 

 

[Aircool]

1 hour ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Sedins will be better because our PP will be better.  Eriksson is an improvement over last year vbrata, Hutton is a year older, and no more relying on Weber. We have more depth, which will take some focus on them.  Will they be 100 point player, likely not, but last year they put up 60, so an improvement of say 10 points seems reasonable. 

There is nothing to suggest our PP will be better. It might, we'll see, but nothing suggests that. This is another claim that I can't understand the logic behind. I don't set the bar at 100 points for them by the way, I just read a post a couple days back of some idiot with way too many posts on these forums saying that they'd reach 100 points.... It's just scary how delusional some people on CDC are.

 

1 hour ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Key injuries happen to every team, they are possibly, but not something that can be planned out to preventing.  Would capitals struggle if Holtby got injuried.  MTL sure struggled when Price went down.  Their's a difference between depth and depth for key players. Key players are just that, key's, you need them to win.  Sure if a player goes down for a short while you might be able to make do, but long term it will affect your roster. GM can't just go out and get depth to replace those key players, not in a cap world. 

Washington without Holtby is still a playoff team. Chicago without Kane is still a playoff team. San Jose without one of Pavelski/Couture/Thornton is still a playoff team. Vancouver without Henrik Sedin is bottom-5 in the league. That should say enough about where we stand in the league, and what our team should be doing. You can disagree with these evaluations if you must, I won't reply back though, because we'd just never agree then.

 

 

[canucklehead80]

15 hours ago, kingofsurrey said:

No PP QB

No second line

Top line gets seniors discount at Denny's -  we will need a truckload of tape to keep them taped up  and  playing all season. 

No  1 D or 2 D  on our club right no.  Sorry Edler and Tanev are more 3 D's on most teams. 

 

Yup its going to be a long season.  Probably drafting in the 25-30 range.  Hopefully we can get a future 1 C in the draft next year. 

 

Hopefully this is rock bottom and we can start to go up from here........

I'm confused. Are you saying it's going to be another bad year or a good playoff run and maybe a cup? Rock bottom would not have us drafting 25-30, but making the conference or Stanley Cup final would. 

[ForsbergTheGreat]

27 minutes ago, Aircool said:

There is nothing to suggest our PP will be better. It might, we'll see, but nothing suggests that. This is another claim that I can't understand the logic behind. I don't set the bar at 100 points for them by the way, I just read a post a couple days back of some idiot with way too many posts on these forums saying that they'd reach 100 points.... It's just scary how delusional some people on CDC are.

 

Logic suggests that.  Will Eriksson be better than Vbrata was last year?  Is that not a reasonable assumption? What about replacing weber with a year older Hutton.  Do was not expect an increase in Huttons production.  What about canucks offensive scoring depth this year compared to last year? Have we not reduced that amount of slow, grinding forwards and replaced that with young skilled forwards? 

 

If you say yes to any of the above you can then assume Sedins will produce at a higher rate than they did last year. 

 

27 minutes ago, Aircool said:

Washington without Holtby is still a playoff team. Chicago without Kane is still a playoff team. San Jose without one of Pavelski/Couture/Thornton is still a playoff team. Vancouver without Henrik Sedin is bottom-5 in the league. That should say enough about where we stand in the league, and what our team should be doing. You can disagree with these evaluations if you must, I won't reply back though, because we'd just never agree then.

 

 

That's all your opinion,  I disagree with all you said.  You take out a 70+ player or a #1 goalie off your roster for a significant amount of time and your team struggles.  Some team can subdue it for a period but eventually it catches up. 

 

Take Kane out and is Panarin as lethal, is that second line as dangerous?

Take Holtby out and caps lose their best line of defense.  Yes the caps are good, i watch them as much as I watch canucks but, night in and night out Holtby is the best player on that team.  With Holtby the caps were 48-9-5 with Grubauer last year they were 8-9-1. 

 

But even still you only picked the teams in the NHL,  can you say the same about the middle 10 teams. 

 

Take Quick or Doughty off the kings

Take Varlamov or Duchene of the Av's

Tavares off the Islanders

Price off the canadians

Bergeron off the Bruins

OEK off the Yotes

 

again Keys players are just that, keys.  You can't plan for replacing their depth for long term, salary cap won't allow it. 

 

[Fred65]

1 hour ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Wrong they gave back 4.075.

Sbisa was 2.175 cap

Bonino was a 1.9 cap

 

Math is hard.... 

 

 

I suspect McCanns salary was included in the salary coming this way

[kingofsurrey]

21 minutes ago, canucklehead80 said:

I'm confused. Are you saying it's going to be another bad year or a good playoff run and maybe a cup? Rock bottom would not have us drafting 25-30, but making the conference or Stanley Cup final would. 

Sorry my bad

Finishing 25-30 in the NHL standings.

 

Drafting 1st -5th  overall

 

We will hit rock bottom as a franchise soon. Maybe this year.   Then it will be onwards and upwards slowly.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

Just now, Fred65 said:

I suspect McCanns salary was included in the salary coming this way

Well considering his salary was zero at the time it wouldn't have mattered.  No one expected a 24th overall pick to make a roster 2+ years after the draft, and considering at the time of the trade JB didn't even know who was going to be available at 24 it would be an invalid argument to use that salary as "cap coming back"

[Aircool]

33 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

 

Logic suggests that.  Will Eriksson be better than Vbrata was last year?  Is that not a reasonable assumption? What about replacing weber with a year older Hutton.  Do was not expect an increase in Huttons production.  What about canucks offensive scoring depth this year compared to last year? Have we not reduced that amount of slow, grinding forwards and replaced that with young skilled forwards? 

 

If you say yes to any of the above you can then assume Sedins will produce at a higher rate than they did last year. 

 

That's all your opinion,  I disagree with all you said.  You take out a 70+ player or a #1 goalie off your roster for a significant amount of time and your team struggles.  Some team can subdue it for a period but eventually it catches up. 

 

Take Kane out and is Panarin as lethal, is that second line as dangerous?

Take Holtby out and caps lose their best line of defense.  Yes the caps are good, i watch them as much as I watch canucks but, night in and night out Holtby is the best player on that team.  With Holtby the caps were 48-9-5 with Grubauer last year they were 8-9-1. 

 

But even still you only picked the teams in the NHL,  can you say the same about the middle 10 teams. 

 

Take Quick or Doughty off the kings

Take Varlamov or Duchene of the Av's

Tavares off the Islanders

Price off the canadians

Bergeron off the Bruins

OEK off the Yotes

 

again Keys players are just that, keys.  You can't plan for replacing their depth for long term, salary cap won't allow it. 

 

haha... okay so your opinion is Kane off of Chicago relegates them to a non-playoff team. I won't even try argue with that lunacy.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

51 minutes ago, Aircool said:

haha... okay so your opinion is Kane off of Chicago relegates them to a non-playoff team. I won't even try argue with that lunacy.

In other words you got nothing. But you can try to pretend that it all hinges on the hawks statement and ignore the rest. 

 

How did islander do when JT was out after olympic break? 

How did MTL do when price went out last year? 

How did stars do in 2014-15 season when Seguin went out?

 

Very few teams can withstand a long term injury to their best player, and the few teams that can, would be considered a cup contending team, no one considers canucks a cup team, we are a middle of the pack team.  Any middle of the pack team that loses their best player for 2-3 month and is not likely making playoffs (as pointed out above). That's not a JB thing, that's an NHL thing. 

 

 

[The Lock]

1 hour ago, Aircool said:

haha... okay so your opinion is Kane off of Chicago relegates them to a non-playoff team. I won't even try argue with that lunacy.

Okay. How about this? I want you to look at EVERY sentence Forsberg said in your reply to him and explain why he's lunacy. EVERY sentence. Not just the selective sentences in order to save grace for yourself. EVERY sentence. It's my challenge to you.

 

Oh, and don't say each sentence is irrelevant either without saying why. I want to see you actually debate rather than spewing just random paragraphs of nothingness.

[khay]

21 hours ago, JamesB said:

It could be my imagination but it seems there is an unusually wide range of opinion on the Canucks right now, both on CDC and between the media and CDC.

I have summarized the contrasts below. Nothing really new here but I think the contrasts are interesting. (And I emphasize that none of these views are necessarily mine. My opinion comes at the end.)

 

Benning:

Positive Spin: Benning knows what he wants to achieve and does not want to be a bottom feeder for 5 years in the hope of stockpiling a few high draft picks. He is building a team that is bigger, faster, tougher, younger, and more skilled than the team he inherited. He is pulling out all the stops. In addition to drafting well, he is bringing guys in from Europe, making trades, and signing UFAs. Last year was a tough year but things should look good from here on. He knows what he is doing and the pipeline is great with guys like Boeser, Juolevi and Demko in the mix. I like the vision and expect a genuine Cup contender soon. 

Negative Spin: Yes he is pretty good at evaluating young talent. His draft record is good and he has brought in some good prospects through trades. But he is not the draft wizard that a lot of people think he is. In all other areas including trades of established players, UFAs signings, asset management, player development, contract negotiations, etc. he has made newbie mistakes and is no better than average (if that) among NHL GMs. He does not even understand the tampering rules. Vision – are you kidding me? More like confusion.

 

First Line:

Positive Spin:

The Sedins are great players. They are getting older but are still very good and putting them with a legitimate first line winger like Eriksson should allow them to have a good year. And they are always great leaders who create the right environment for young players. They deserve one more cup run with the Canucks.  

Negative Spin:

The best forwards on the team will be 36 by the time the season starts. Yes, they have had great careers and are still good players. But they were below-average first liners in the second half of last year. You would be happy to have them as second liners next year but if your first line is built around two 36-year-olds, then you are in trouble.  

 

Other Forwards:

Positive Spin: With Sutter, Horvat and Granlund up the middle (and Gaunce and Zalewski providing depth) the Canucks are solid up the middle. On the wing, Hansen is valuable and can play anywhere. In the second half of last year Baertschi showed that he is a legitimate top 6 forward, and Dorsett is a tough guy who can play and is a mainstay on the 4^th line. Burrows might be overpaid but he is still good, and Rodin has a good chance to contribute. Virtanen and Etem are young guys with speed, size, and toughness who are poised for breakout seasons. (And a year from now Boeser joins the mix.) Things are looking good.

Negative Spin: Come on. The bottom 9 are setting up as two third lines and an undersized 4^th line. Hard to see where the scoring is going to come from. Rodin, Virtanen and Etem are all long shots who have not proven they even belong in the NHL yet. Horvat and Baertschi are good young players, but there is no way they score enough to put the Canucks in the playoffs.

 

Defence:

Positive Spin: Edler will be healthy. Love the Gudbranson pick-up. Hutton looks great and Tanev remains very good. Sbisa is better than he gets credit for and I am really intrigued by Tryamkin – Chara 2.0? Larsen could help the PP. And Pedan has a lot of potential. This is a D that is going to make life a lot less pleasant for opposing forwards.

Negative Spin: Edler wasn’t that good even when he was healthy last year. We replace Hammer with Guddy. I like Guddy but I am not sure that exchange makes the team better. Hutton has offensive skill but he is soft and makes too many defensive mistakes. Tryamkin is a lottery ticket (and so are Larsson and Pedan). Sbisa? Don’t get me started. Don’t see where the offensive support is coming from.

 

Goal:

Positive: Two solid #1-quality goalies.

Negative: Yawn. Average goal-tending on a below average team.

 

Overall:

Positive: This team is improved in important areas and will surprise a lot of people. I expect the Canucks to make the playoffs and maybe win a round or two this year.

Negative: This team won’t score enough to even contend for the playoffs. Looking forward to next year’s draft. Just hope Benning doesn’t trade away more picks.

 

Bottom Line: Right now I am staying firmly on the fence, but will jump on one side or the other after this season. 

Nice job. I think Benning is assigned with the difficult task of trying to compete now whilst rebuilding this team for the future. JB can find good talent even in the latter part of the first round as well as in the later rounds so it's possible but it is hard task to pull off. For example, this team does have a scoring problem that needs to be addressed if it wanted to compete for the playoffs now. But I don't think is going to be easy to address this issue without giving up an asset for the future. 

 

And, you are being too nice, because the negative fans are really like this:

 

Benning

Negative spin: He's a moron. He's a joke. He doesn't know what he's doing. Trading away 2nd round picks like candy. 

 

First line

Negative spin: As long as the Sedin sisters are on the Canucks, this team is going no where. Eriksson? Are you kidding? Gordie Howe can't help the Sedins. They are that soft. 

 

Other forwards

Negative spin: We should have picked Nylander. That way we would have our 2RW. Virtanen will stop developing and top out as a 4th line player. Should not have traded Bonino. Trade Hansen. His value is high right now.

 

Defence

Negative spin: Trade Edler. Edler sucks. Or, trade Tanev. We gave up McCann and a high 2nd for Gudbranson? Gudbranson wasn't wanted on the Panthers. We overpaid. McCann will be get 70 points next season. Sbisa? LOL. I would gladly trade Sbisa for a bag of pucks. He has 0 value.

 

Goal

Negative spin: Trade Miller to San Jose for their 1st or 2nd or 3rd or even a 9th round pick. He is old and overpaid.

 

Overall

Negative spin: We need to suck hard and accumulate high draft pick. Benning sucks. He doesn't know what he's doing.

 

[Fred65]

1 hour ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Well considering his salary was zero at the time it wouldn't have mattered.  No one expected a 24th overall pick to make a roster 2+ years after the draft, and considering at the time of the trade JB didn't even know who was going to be available at 24 it would be an invalid argument to use that salary as "cap coming back"

As you like, just a different perspective maybe

[oldnews]

2 hours ago, kingofsurrey said:

Sorry my bad

Finishing 25-30 in the NHL standings.

 

Drafting 1st -5th  overall

 

We will hit rock bottom as a franchise soon. Maybe this year.   Then it will be onwards and upwards slowly.

keep on walkin' in the mall world, kotes.

[Aircool]

41 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

In other words you got nothing. But you can try to pretend that it all hinges on the hawks statement and ignore the rest. 

 

How did islander do when JT was out after olympic break? 

How did MTL do when price went out last year? 

How did stars do in 2014-15 season when Seguin went out?

 

Very few teams can withstand a long term injury to their best player, and the few teams that can, would be considered a cup contending team, no one considers canucks a cup team, we are a middle of the pack team.  Any middle of the pack team that loses their best player for 2-3 month and is not likely making playoffs (as pointed out above). That's not a JB thing, that's an NHL thing. 

 

 

You completely miss the point. Our star players are OLD. Our future is grim. The players on middle of the pack teams you list are in their primes or younger. They have a lower expectation of injury than the Sedins, and aren't as likely to regress in terms of performance in the short term. 

 

I agree with you, teams that can suffer losing their best players are cup contenders usually. Isn't that the bar for our team? That's where I set the bar. It would be one thing if we were a cup contender with the risks that surround relying on the Sedins at their advanced age, but we're nothing close to that.

 

This is why so many people on CDC are complete lunatics. There are people who are capable of seeing that we are not a cup contender, that we can't withstand the loss of either Sedin, that the Sedins are close to retirement and are regressing every year, that we lack any semblance of secondary scoring, and still come to the conclusion that we should try to contend. They start with the premise that we must try to contend, then analyze the facts that can only suggest the opposite, and twist them or ignore them to suit their desires. 

 

Again, our teams essential flaw is that our competitive window closes when the Sedins retire, and as they regress, the teams you are listing don't have that flaw. So yes, they aren't yet constructed to be a "cup contender", and aren't capable of withstanding significant losses. You can only plan for so many contingencies, and if Seguin gets injured for 50 games every year, well you can only do so much about that. The reality is that he won't, and you are planning for realistic outcomes. At least Seguin will be performing at a high level for several years, where okay one year goes bad, but three years go well... That's just not the case for the Canucks. 

 

 

[JamesB]

57 minutes ago, khay said:

Nice job. I think Benning is assigned with the difficult task of trying to compete now whilst rebuilding this team for the future. JB can find good talent even in the latter part of the first round as well as in the later rounds so it's possible but it is hard task to pull off. For example, this team does have a scoring problem that needs to be addressed if it wanted to compete for the playoffs now. But I don't think is going to be easy to address this issue without giving up an asset for the future. 

 

And, you are being too nice, because the negative fans are really like this:

 

Benning

Negative spin: He's a moron. He's a joke. He doesn't know what he's doing. Trading away 2nd round picks like candy. 

 

First line

Negative spin: As long as the Sedin sisters are on the Canucks, this team is going no where. Eriksson? Are you kidding? Gordie Howe can't help the Sedins. They are that soft. 

 

Other forwards

Negative spin: We should have picked Nylander. That way we would have our 2RW. Virtanen will stop developing and top out as a 4th line player. Should not have traded Bonino. Trade Hansen. His value is high right now.

 

Defence

Negative spin: Trade Edler. Edler sucks. Or, trade Tanev. We gave up McCann and a high 2nd for Gudbranson? Gudbranson wasn't wanted on the Panthers. We overpaid. McCann will be get 70 points next season. Sbisa? LOL. I would gladly trade Sbisa for a bag of pucks. He has 0 value.

 

Goal

Negative spin: Trade Miller to San Jose for their 1st or 2nd or 3rd or even a 9th round pick. He is old and overpaid.

 

Overall

Negative spin: We need to suck hard and accumulate high draft pick. Benning sucks. He doesn't know what he's doing.

 

Thanks. Maybe these views are more reflective of the average negative fan than what I wrote in the OP.  Anyway, I found these comments quite amusing.

[WeneedLumme]

1 hour ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

In other words you got nothing. But you can try to pretend that it all hinges on the hawks statement and ignore the rest. 

 

How did islander do when JT was out after olympic break? 

How did MTL do when price went out last year? 

How did stars do in 2014-15 season when Seguin went out?

 

Very few teams can withstand a long term injury to their best player, and the few teams that can, would be considered a cup contending team, no one considers canucks a cup team, we are a middle of the pack team.  Any middle of the pack team that loses their best player for 2-3 month and is not likely making playoffs (as pointed out above). That's not a JB thing, that's an NHL thing. 

 

 

A very logical post. Do you think that troll you quoted is going to respond to facts and logic that conflict with his clear agenda of annoying as many Canucks fans as possible?

[canucklehead80]

4 hours ago, kingofsurrey said:

Sorry my bad

Finishing 25-30 in the NHL standings.

 

Drafting 1st -5th  overall

 

We will hit rock bottom as a franchise soon. Maybe this year.   Then it will be onwards and upwards slowly.

I'm of the thinking that we've already hit rock bottom. Expecting improvement this year. Playoffs? Not so sure, but barring the insane number of key injuries last year and hopefully more improvement from B & B and development improved play from some of our younger players I think we should be at least in the hunt closer to April. 

[kingofsurrey]

Quote