[Report] Gudbranson out indefinitely after wrist surgery

[WHL rocks]

Just now, Slegr said:

 

Despite their claims, Toronto has been rebuilding for several years. I remember an article about five years ago, asking whether the Oilers or Leafs will become a contender faster, when Leafs were trying to rebuild on the fly. Just because they tore everything done  starting two years ago doesn't mean they hadn't been rebuilding for years before that.

Yes, just like the Canucks have been rebuilding for the past 3 years. I believe our rebuild started with the Horvat pick. We've had 2 top 10 picks since then and another one coming next draft. We've rebuilt our D, and have brought in several forwards. Still a long ways to go but this is a rebuild no doubt. 

 

 

The reason why teams don't like to announce they are rebuilding is if they did fans would have no hope for the season. There would be no hope for the playoffs and of success. Ticket sales hit rock bottom and the team loses more money. It's all about marketing and sales. TL and JB know this is a rebuilding team, they just never admit it because they are selling hope to the fans. 

 

[Provost]

1 hour ago, Honky Cat said:

Well said..There's no timeline,or correct way to do a rebuild...It just takes good decisions,and a massive dollop of luck.

 

Luxk definitely the key component.  The teams always trotted out in the "tank" logic are Pittsburgh and Chicago.  They both got remarkably lucky in their draft positions which made the difference.

 

... and that was before the lottery rules made it even harder

[WHL rocks]

17 minutes ago, Provost said:

 

Luxk definitely the key component.  The teams always trotted out in the "tank" logic are Pittsburgh and Chicago.  They both got remarkably lucky in their draft positions which made the difference.

 

... and that was before the lottery rules made it even harder

Can you give examples of teams that rebuilt and won the Cup in 2 or 3 years? And when did it happen, if it ever did? What was the CBA like back then, was it possible to "buy" a Cup unlike it is in the hard cap era? 

 

Pitt, Chicago and LA are the current day champs, they were rebuilt in today's NHL environment and the latest Cup winners. It's only natural and normal for those teams to be used as examples. Why would anyone use 1940's teams as examples for 2016 team building. That would make no sense. 

 

If it was possible to rebuild that fast teams wouldn't hesitate to do it. The reason teams hesitate to do full rebuilds is they know its a long and arduous process with many years of low ticket and merchandise sales. 

 

And with the draft rules the way they are now, it's even more difficult to rebuild faster. Before you can tank and get a Mario Lemieux not any more as we all know how BUFF tried to tank and get McDavid. 

[numb3r 16]

 

[Provost]

22 minutes ago, WHL rocks said:

Can you give examples of teams that rebuilt and won the Cup in 2 or 3 years? 

 

Every single team is "rebuilding" every year.  There is no magical start and end date you can possibly point to.

 

Every single Cup winner in history has used a combination of drafting, signing, trading, and developing to win.  Each of those winning teams has used a different combination of each of those variables.  No team has ever only used just one of these methods for building their roster.

 

Every single team which hasn't won the Cup each year has used a combination of the same variables.

 

Theee is no single strategy you can point to and say that = Stanley Cup.

 

Draft High?  Yep, lots of winner have drafted high.  I can point to you a bunch of teams that same year with a greater number of top 5 picks in their lineup that did not win.  I had made a post a year or so ago showing how many top 5 picks each team had over the past 20 years and how many playoff series they won in that period.  Turns out teams that have sucked badly enough to have lots of high picks have continued to suck.  There was a direct correlation between how many top 5 picks you had and your likelihood of not winning a single playoff series.  

 

That mathematically makes it a terrible strategy to use.

[WHL rocks]

5 minutes ago, Provost said:

 

Every single team is "rebuilding" every year.  There is no magical start and end date you can possibly point to.

 

Every single Cup winner in history has used a combination of drafting, signing, trading, and developing to win.  Each of those winning teams has used a different combination of each of those variables.  No team has ever only used just one of these methods for building their roster.

 

Every single team which hasn't won the Cup each year has used a combination of the same variables.

 

Theee is no single strategy you can point to and say that = Stanley Cup.

 

Draft High?  Yep, lots of winner have drafted high.  I can point to you a bunch of teams that same year with a greater number of top 5 picks in their lineup that did not win.  I had made a post a year or so ago showing how many top 5 picks each team had over the past 20 years and how many playoff series they won in that period.  Turns out teams that have sucked badly enough to have lots of high picks have continued to suck.  There was a direct correlation between how many top 5 picks you had and your likelihood of not winning a single playoff series.  

 

That mathematically makes it a terrible strategy to use.

 Of Course every team adds players every year. I'm not sure what the purpose of this post is. 

 

You don't address any of the points I brought up regarding how long it will take for this team to become a contender. 

 

BTW if you haven't noticed this team is tanking. It finished 3rd worst last year and looks to do no better this year. Add to this you had Virt at 6th and you see a "tank" rebuild, on purpose or not, it's a tank. 

 

[Conscience]

Is that why he's been so bad?

[iceman64]

3 hours ago, VIC_CITY said:

7-10 years is pretty brutal. Sure, teams have taken that long before but it's completely unacceptable and would involve multiple management groups and coaches. 

 

I agree that we likely won't be a whole lot better next year, but I'm hopeful for the year after that. 

geeeeez that's with teams that have had no core at all....   that's NOT the case here, ahhhhh the CDC strikes again, that's just someone's "opinion"

[WHL rocks]

1 minute ago, Conscience said:

Is that why he's been so bad?

No, he was always a 4/5 Dman. FLD and Tallon knew he wasn't worth 5 mill per year and that's why they didn't sign him to a long term deal at those figures. 

 

Many people on CDC overvalue every Canucks prospect and player until reality creeps in. Virtanen was going to be a dominant power forward in 3 years. Next year is 3 years and now everyone is hoping he makes the 3rd line next year. 

[WHL rocks]

4 minutes ago, iceman64 said:

geeeeez that's with teams that have had no core at all....   that's NOT the case here, ahhhhh the CDC strikes again, that's just someone's "opinion"

That's what a rebuild is. A new core. And TL is on record from a couple of weeks saying that this team will not deviate from rebuilding a new core. 

 

So yeah, we're building a new core. AtlAt Least according to TL we are. 

Linden: We're building a new core group, will stick to the plan

http://www.tsn.ca/radio/vancouver-1040-i-1410/linden-we-re-building-a-new-core-group-and-will-stick-to-plan-1.613671

[iceman64]

 

Just now, WHL rocks said:

That's what a rebuild is. A new core. And TL is on record from a couple of weeks saying that this team will not deviate from rebuilding a new core. 

 

So yeah, we're building a new core. At Least to TL we are. 

Linden: We're building a new core group, will stick to the plan

http://www.tsn.ca/radio/vancouver-1040-i-1410/linden-we-re-building-a-new-core-group-and-will-stick-to-plan-1.613671

we already have some of the old core left...  sedins edler....

[WHL rocks]

1 minute ago, iceman64 said:

 

we already have some of the old core left...  sedins edler....

Yes, and they will be long gone before this team is a Cup contender, atleast they won't be the core of the new team. 

[iceman64]

Just now, WHL rocks said:

Yes, and they will be long gone before this team is a Cup contender. 

the point still is, we do have some core left.... 

[WHL rocks]

1 minute ago, iceman64 said:

the point still is, we do have some core left.... 

 

Actually the point is we are 3rd worst in the league and are in the process of rebuilding. THis includes a new core. 

[Conscience]

11 minutes ago, WHL rocks said:

No, he was always a 4/5 Dman. FLD and Tallon knew he wasn't worth 5 mill per year and that's why they didn't sign him to a long term deal at those figures. 

 

Many people on CDC overvalue every Canucks prospect and player until reality creeps in. Virtanen was going to be a dominant power forward in 3 years. Next year is 3 years and now everyone is hoping he makes the 3rd line next year. 

I just hope benning sees this and doesn't pay him that.

[Provost]

45 minutes ago, WHL rocks said:

 Of Course every team adds players every year. I'm not sure what the purpose of this post is. 

 

You don't address any of the points I brought up regarding how long it will take for this team to become a contender. 

 

BTW if you haven't noticed this team is tanking. It finished 3rd worst last year and looks to do no better this year. Add to this you had Virt at 6th and you see a "tank" rebuild, on purpose or not, it's a tank. 

 

 

I never said that the team will win a Cup in the next 2-3 years.  You came up with that straw man argument on your own.

 

I outlined the reasons that there is no such thing as a "rebuild" in the way you are trying to define it.... which makes your question nonsense.

 

You are now trying to define "tank" in your own way, which is also nonsense.

 

You are suggesting losing = tanking.

 

If that were the case, half the teams playing in a given night are tanking and 29 out of 30 teams are tanking each season.

 

Every single member of the Canucks has been clear in stating that we are trying to win and make the playoffs.  They even signed a big free agent to help in that regard.

 

They weren't successful this season, well mathematically it is still possible, but realistically highly improbable considering how many teams ahead of us play each other and are guaranteed points.  

 

Lots of other teams won't make the playoffs either, and none of them are tanking.

 

Tanking is more realistically defined as intentionally going into a season (or several) with the aim of losing as badly as possible to try to get a high draft pick.... in the hopes that means a high level of success in some season in an ill-defined future.

 

 

[WHL rocks]

7 minutes ago, Provost said:

 

I never said that the team will win a Cup in the next 2-3 years.  You came up with that straw man argument on your own.

 

I outlined the reasons that there is no such thing as a "rebuild" in the way you are trying to define it.... which makes your question nonsense.

 

You are now trying to define "tank" in your own way, which is also nonsense.

 

You are suggesting losing = tanking.

 

If that were the case, half the teams playing in a given night are tanking and 29 out of 30 teams are tanking each season.

 

Every single member of the Canucks has been clear in stating that we are trying to win and make the playoffs.  They even signed a big free agent to help in that regard.

 

They weren't successful this season, well mathematically it is still possible, but realistically highly improbable considering how many teams ahead of us play each other and are guaranteed points.  

 

Lots of other teams won't make the playoffs either, and none of them are tanking.

 

Tanking is more realistically defined as intentionally going into a season (or several) with the aim of losing as badly as possible to try to get a high draft pick.... in the hopes that means a high level of success in some season in an ill-defined future.

 

 

I stopped reading after "there is no such thing as a rebuild"  i'm not interested in some philosophical jibber jabber. I'm talking NHL and I'm talking hockey.  Enjoy rest of you Sunday, perhaps different topic on a different day. 

[Jam126]

If you think rebuilds take a decade than you're out of your mind. If that was the case, 2/3 of the league would be terrible and only 3 or 4 are legitimate cup contenders. The rebuild does not end when you win the cup, it ends when you become a consistent Playoff team.

 

 

 

Anyway, get well soon Erik! I guess we figured out why he was not playing like himself lately.

[Provost]

21 minutes ago, Jam126 said:

If you think rebuilds take a decade than you're out of your mind. If that was the case, 2/3 of the league would be terrible and only 3 or 4 are legitimate cup contenders. The rebuild does not end when you win the cup, it ends when you become a consistent Playoff team.

 

 

 

Anyway, get well soon Erik! I guess we figured out why he was not playing like himself lately.

 

That is a good way to put it.

 

Every team outside the playoff picture is "rebuilding" to get back to the playoffs.

Every solid playoff team is in win-now mode and looking to find ways to go deeper.

[LaBamba]

How are people even debating this anymore? Tank or stay competitive. It's pretty clear that we can't stay competitive, so where does that leave us ? The debate is over ladies and gentlemen. It's time to suck it up.