Canucks Season End Media Availability (Green, Linden, Benning, & Players)

[PhillipBlunt]

4 minutes ago, Rush17 said:

Green is a boss lol. He's like I don't like your narrative so let's toss that away or re-write that. Its so refreshing that he stays in control.  Willie walked into a lot of landmines poor guy.

Absolutely. Travis is clearly in charge of his ship. The fact that he's fiercely intelligent just makes him that much more of a headache for the reductive morons in the local media.

[Rush17]

1 minute ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Absolutely. Travis is clearly in charge of his ship. The fact that he's fiercely intelligent just makes him that much more of a headache for the reductive morons in the local media.

Yeah. If only Jim had those attributes but hey. I'm not complaining Jim is amazing at his job so I'm all for him doing his thing. I like how friendly and down to earth he is.  I would love to work within the organization one day.  

 

Green really helps fend off the media which I believe helps management at times.  Green puts the emphasis on the team. So the group takes the heat not individuals. Issue with that is your leaders of your team have to answer for it. Which is great if that system functions and the leaders can give the problem makers a kick in the butt or the mental/emotional support they need.

 

Goldobin seemed pretty emotional for a guy who hasn't been here long. I think the twins really took him under his wing.  Alex to me seems like a member of the twins family.  You can see he's emotionally involved in their lives and this city.  Apparently Alex and Trevor's wives are very close too.  

 

I can imagine Alex would be the twins ideal pick to wear the C but there are probably reservations if he can handle it. That's where suttsy comes in and aids Alex. That comment by the media to Alex like "do you need a letter to be a leader imo was very rude and disrespectful. 

 

He is now the longest tenured Canuck and they just $&!# on him.   He seemed very flustered by the question then Suts came in and saved him.

 

I'm pretty pissed at those in the media from yesterday's presser. We need torts as a media relations guy ^^

 

 

He can be like that is a stupid and insensitive question. Grill him a bit then say. Next question. Lol

 

[PhillipBlunt]

9 minutes ago, Rush17 said:

Yeah. If only Jim had those attributes but hey. I'm not complaining Jim is amazing at his job so I'm all for him doing his thing. I like how friendly and down to earth he is.  I would love to work within the organization one day.  

 

Green really helps fend off the media which I believe helps management at times.  Green puts the emphasis on the team. So the group takes the heat not individuals. Issue with that is your leaders of your team have to answer for it. Which is great if that system functions and the leaders can give the problem makers a kick in the butt or the mental/emotional support they need.

 

Goldobin seemed pretty emotional for a guy who hasn't been here long. I think the twins really took him under his wing.  Alex to me seems like a member of the twins family.  You can see he's emotionally involved in their lives and this city.  Apparently Alex and Trevor's wives are very close too.  

 

I can imagine Alex would be the twins ideal pick to wear the C but there are probably reservations if he can handle it. That's where suttsy comes in and aids Alex. That comment by the media to Alex like "do you need a letter to be a leader imo was very rude and disrespectful. 

 

He is now the longest tenured Canuck and they just $&!# on him.   He seemed very flustered by the question then Suts came in and saved him.

 

I'm pretty pissed at those in the media from yesterday's presser. We need torts as a media relations guy ^^

 

 

He can be like that is a stupid and insensitive question. Grill him a bit then say. Next question. Lol

 

I think Edler just lets it roll of his back. I thought it was pretty funny when Markstrom, Edler, and Horvat cracked up. 

[AlwaysACanuckFan]

1 minute ago, PhillipBlunt said:

I think Edler just lets it roll of his back. I thought it was pretty funny when Markstrom, Edler, and Horvat cracked up. 

 

[Canuck Surfer]

3 hours ago, Pete M said:

Like the young forward group that is coming next year...however, for them to take flight, JB needs to fix the "D"....OJ and possibly Tryamkin coming sooner than later could help with the tire fire...possibly a trade or picking up a UFA that has upside could also help.

 

Liked TG's straight forward comments about Hutton and Pouliout...also, including Stecher as part of the leadership group was a good comment.

This

[oldnews]

2 hours ago, PhillipBlunt said:

There is definitely a difference in the questions being asked. The tools like Botchford and Patterson always ask leading questions with assumptions built in. Glad to see that neither Green nor Benning are having any of it.

 

Linden is still too nice of a president, accommodating the media weasels way too much, which in turn tends to sow the seeds of confusion which the jackals pick up on.

I don't think any of them regard some of those trolls very highly - and it's actually nice to see them return the disrespect in appropriate but still relatively respectful ways - but I don't mind the diplomacy as long as there is also the direct and assertive heading off of the bullshizz that has taken route in this media market - and Green is the perfect guy, in a number of senses, to take on that task.  He's very quick 'on his feet' - it's part of his game and necessarily so - and I couldn't enjoy it more when he throws things back in the face of smarmy media that attempt to finesse that weak crap.   Green doesn't allow trolls to define the terms of a conversation - he shuts it down from word one.  Great to watch - just as pleasing as the style of hockey he has the team playing.

There is so much pretense in this media market - to know better than this management group - and Green wrecks that head on in the process of giving realistic assessments of players that the media have formed crap (and rose) goggles narratives around - and in the process he also vindicates Benning, who by extension is the target of most of that pretentious crap.

Green has both the authority - as a proven professional coach - and the respect as a guy that has brought us all a form of hockey that few of us don't love to see - up tempo, hard working, consistent and tight systems hockey that anyone with an eye for the game could see shining even through depleted lineups and struggles to get results.  I'll take the way this team plays the game anyday.  I love that two-way responsibility from top to bottom that Green expects - that's the modern NHL - people that don't get that really don't understand the modern game.

 

I really could not be happier with the direction and statements that the group collectively (Green, Benning and LInden) have made:

 

1) they call out myths where players like Virtanen are concerned.  Jake has been the subject of some of the most blind and obtuse player assessments you will see in the game - from allegedly being 'lost' without the puck, to lacking hockey intelligence.   Has never been the case, and that fact becomes more and more evident with each of his development strides.  The media, not just locally, but nationally have made somewhat of a whipping boy of Virtanen, while Green et al quietly and consistently worked with him to develop a player poised to make a lot of people that trolled him eat a fair amount of crow.  Jake's game, particularly without the puck (where hockey intelligence, engagement and awareness are arguably most important - and difficult - has been excellent.  As Green pointed out, he's solid enough defensively to get stints in a shutdown role with Sutter - and threatening enough with his speed to become a potential game-breaker.  Already has his summer task list set - to continue to work on his fitness/skating - but to also focus on his hands so he can add that possession element - and improve his finish.  I thought his vision and patience with the puck was improved - but he identified an area in that press conference that really shows he's aware of the parts of his game that, if improved, could get him to the next level.  His growth overall is very obvious and Green must take a lot of pride in his effects on JV.

 

2) they've exposed the weak 'analyticz' myths in this market - ie absurd claims to the effect that a guy like Hutton was a 'top pairing' D - while a guy like Gudbranson is a third-pairing / replacement level NHL blueliner.   Green will have absolutely none of that.   Most of us like Hutton - but we also prefer reality to pseudo analytical fantasies - and the reality was that Hutton struggled all year long, was not a top 6 on this team and did not deserve to be - and no cherry-picked, oversimplified and pretentious 'analyticz' were going to change the reality that he needed to play much better, and needs to really work hard to regain ice time.  That battle is even more uphill with guys like Pouliot leapfrogging him and the likes of Juolevi on the way, who it is exceptionally difficult to see Hutton outcompeting in the longer term for a spot.   There is the fact that we have an aging Edler and a veteran Del Zotto who probably won't be here  long term, (that may provide an opportunity for Hutton) but regardless, Green laid some 'analyticz' myths to waste.   The irony is that the 'analyticz' pretenders that were propping up Hutton were doing him no favours - if anything that tire-pumping got in the way of reality. 

 

3) the team struck a very good balance where Gudbranson was concerned - and the (controllable) results were pretty much ideal imo.  Gudbranson may have suffered some injuries, may have had difficulty getting footing in short samples (to be expected with a big guy coming off injuries), but if you looked at the whole, he is a guy who could be a mammoth force for this team in the future.  Has humility that enables him to be aware of where he needs to work and improve, but also has the confidence and intelligence to realize what he can bring.  That kind of speed, size and defensive intelligence is rare.  Again, the franchise did not cave to a wave of boyscout 'analyticz' and did the right thing in a range of ways where Gudbranson is concerned - and now the player also stands to benefit by being able to deal with surgery when it doesn't cost the team - or himself.  Great to see him extended and at very good terms imo.  The uninformed pressure to dump him for a pick was appropriately ignored.

 

4) the transition - has been missed by teardown types and pick gazers who didn't see a wave of future talent right beneath their noses.   Er, what is Bennig doing out there?  When is the 'rebuild' going to begin.  Difficult circumstances to step into for Benning - but I think he's managed it like a boss for the most part.  I'm extremely impressed with the depth of young talent he's built despite a number of limiting factors (clauses) and some unfortunate developments (injuries to players approaching the trade deadlines, loss of key guys like Dorsett to injury, Tryamkin to the K, Sbisa to expansion).  Nevertheless, he's really maximized his futures regardless, and a lot of it via the unpopular route of acquiring prospects as opposed to picks.  I'm not sure I like this team's future anywhere near as much if you take the Granlund, Baertschi, Leipsic, Motte, Pouliot, Goldobin, Dahlen type acquisitions out of the mix.  I may be in the minority, but I loved the deadline moves the team made - think they were among the best out there - regardless of the form lol (I'll take a prospect like Leipsic or Motte as readily as a pick anytime, particularly with the vacancies on the way).

 

5)  there has been an endless complaint about the additon of placeholding veterans during a phase when the team didn't really have viable youth to step into roster spots.  And now that the team arguably does have that youth to build with from within, many of whom are ready to take the next step - ironically, you hear the opposite complaints emerging - that the team is suggesting it won't go hard in free agency - to add multiple layers of more veterans to the mix - or to try to expedite competitiveness with expensive free agent options.  I think the changed circumstances ought to be clear enough - but regardless, I like what I hear regarding approaching free agency with caution and looking to the talent within to fill the key holes moving forward.  I'd be surprised by the protests around this approach - which I think is at the right stage to take - if this weren't Vancouver and CDC. 

[SilentSam]

Yesterday’s “presser” was just the recorded truth that 90% of the media in this town do not understand hockey.. have never been key players themselves on an ice surface, and are out of touch with the ethic, workmanship and character of the players and management they question to create a story.

They seem to be always over psycho-analyzing with questions.. and the next day writing dumbass tales with their jerk opinions.

Its hard to enjoy any player/ fan relationships with these nerds as middle men to the fan base.

 

Have been enjoying Bertuzzi on 650 Tuesday’s .  Who needs to listen to greasy bull $#!+ , when the experienced gritty truth is better.

 

[Phat Fingers]

19 hours ago, 6string said:

I disagree especially if soon to be big leaguers are afraid or unable to handle media knobs and puck bunnies then they should be working in another field.

 

 

 Think your logic is flawed and allowing our prospects to bond and learn outside of the lower main land fishbowl is better for development. 

 

While fans may may want more access to our prospects

and there are positives for having the team located in the west, this also fixes something that isn’t broke. 

 

We became a powerhouse team

in large part because of the development of players like Kesler, Bieska, Burrows, Hansen, Schiender, Edler.  That was lost with the move to Chi town and cost us about ten years of youth development.  

 

To jepordize what is fast fast becoming a hockey factory in Utica when the team needs it the most is unnecessary and not worth it. 

 

5 years from now, when we are relatively set up, that could be the time to move.  This is far to critical of a time to risk any upsets for our youth program. 

[6string]

1 hour ago, Eastcoast meets Westcoast said:

 Think your logic is flawed and allowing our prospects to bond and learn outside of the lower main land fishbowl is better for development. 

 

While fans may may want more access to our prospects

and there are positives for having the team located in the west, this also fixes something that isn’t broke. 

 

We became a powerhouse team

in large part because of the development of players like Kesler, Bieska, Burrows, Hansen, Schiender, Edler.  That was lost with the move to Chi town and cost us about ten years of youth development.  

 

To jepordize what is fast fast becoming a hockey factory in Utica when the team needs it the most is unnecessary and not worth it. 

 

5 years from now, when we are relatively set up, that could be the time to move.  This is far to critical of a time to risk any upsets for our youth program. 

O0000Oh a hockey factory?

 

I didn't read your post but I did see "hockey factory".

[Phat Fingers]

1 hour ago, 6string said:

O0000Oh a hockey factory?

 

I didn't read your post but I did see "hockey factory".

I am sorry you can’t read,

but glad you can get two words right.  Good for you.

 

Got your sarcasm and won’t bother to respond to you again. 

[Crabcakes]

6 hours ago, oldnews said:

 

 

4) the transition - has been missed by teardown types and pick gazers who didn't see a wave of future talent right beneath their noses.   Er, what is Bennig doing out there?  When is the 'rebuild' going to begin.  Difficult circumstances to step into for Benning - but I think he's managed it like a boss for the most part.  I'm extremely impressed with the depth of young talent he's built despite a number of limiting factors (clauses) and some unfortunate developments (injuries to players approaching the trade deadlines, loss of key guys like Dorsett to injury, Tryamkin to the K, Sbisa to expansion).  Nevertheless, he's really maximized his futures regardless, and a lot of it via the unpopular route of acquiring prospects as opposed to picks.  I'm not sure I like this team's future anywhere near as much if you take the Granlund, Baertschi, Leipsic, Motte, Pouliot, Goldobin, Dahlen type acquisitions out of the mix.  I may be in the minority, but I loved the deadline moves the team made - think they were among the best out there - regardless of the form lol (I'll take a prospect like Leipsic or Motte as readily as a pick anytime, particularly with the vacancies on the way).

 

5)  there has been an endless complaint about the additon of placeholding veterans during a phase when the team didn't really have viable youth to step into roster spots.  And now that the team arguably does have that youth to build with from within, many of whom are ready to take the next step - ironically, you hear the opposite complaints emerging - that the team is suggesting it won't go hard in free agency - to add multiple layers of more veterans to the mix - or to try to expedite competitiveness with expensive free agent options.  I think the changed circumstances ought to be clear enough - but regardless, I like what I hear regarding approaching free agency with caution and looking to the talent within to fill the key holes moving forward.  I'd be surprised by the protests around this approach - which I think is at the right stage to take - if this weren't Vancouver and CDC. 

Nice post.  Agree with almost all of it.  I just wanted to add 2 cents about the future.

 

The so called place holders are invaluable additions.  I don't think we can overstate the value of developing players having to compete for every rung up the roster they are able to climb.  DelZotto is forcing Hutton and Pouliot to beat him out of a 2nd pair spot (which i think is a little over his head).  You could call it sheltering or you could call it show us that you really deserve to be a top 4 D.  Paying Hutton $2.8M and sending him off to play with Team Canada after his rookie year may have gone to his head.   Having said that, I think that only one of Hutton or Pouliot stick around past next year.  I actually hope that they can add some value to Hutton before they move him (if it's him).

 

As the line up sits now, who will be the 2C next year?  Is it Sutter?  Is it Gagner?  Neither are exactly at that level but like MDZ, will they do?  I could easily see Benning bring in a real 2C for the short to medium term to set the bar for Pettersson and Gaudette.  This could be an important play for Benning to make for the develpment of these 2.

 

 

 

 

[oldnews]

1 minute ago, Crabcakes said:

Nice post.  Agree with almost all of it.  I just wanted to add 2 cents about the future.

 

The so called place holders are invaluable additions.  I don't think we can overstate the value of developing players having to compete for every rung up the roster they are able to climb.  DelZotto is forcing Hutton and Pouliot to beat him out of a 2nd pair spot (which i think is a little over his head).  You could call it sheltering or you could call it show us that you really deserve to be a top 4 D.  Paying Hutton $2.8M and sending him off to play with Team Canada after his rookie year may have gone to his head.   Having said that, I think that only one of Hutton or Pouliot stick around past next year.  I actually hope that they can add some value to Hutton before they move him (if it's him).

 

As the line up sits now, who will be the 2C next year?  Is it Sutter?  Is it Gagner?  Neither are exactly at that level but like MDZ, will they do?  I could easily see Benning bring in a real 2C for the short to medium term to set the bar for Pettersson and Gaudette.  This could be an important play for Benning to make for the develpment of these 2.

 

I  agree that moving Hutton would probably make sense - if he had any value - but I think he's at a point where he needs to rebuild his value - and there's not much room for him to do so.  If he doesn't kill it in camp he may not be around much longer.  The thing about paying him 2.8 million - he scored 25 points, so you might be able to shave a bit off that, but realistically it was his market value before regressing.

 

As the lineup sits right now I'd opt to play Granlund at 2C.  He's a solid two way, highly intelligent player who can handle hard minutes but also has the upside and playmaking abilities to complement a young winger well.  Is he a veteran?  No - but at the cost of bringing in a 2C I'm not sure we give up much in Granlund.    Pettersson, if he makes the team, imo should probably start at wing - playing center in the NHL requires handling opponents down low that I don't think he's ready for.  Gaudette - who knows - he may prove to be like Boeser and ready to step straight into a top 6 role - he has the kind of groundwork to his game that makes it a possibility, but you certainly can't expect - or plan - for that.

 

Bringing in a Bozak type to play 2C is certainly a possiibility - although players like him might push the comfort levels in term - and cap - that you want to spend on a 32 year old.

I'd be as inclined to take my chances on Granlund and Gaudette - and sign a veteran shutdown faceoff guy instead to strengthen the bottom six and create more 'sheltered' or opportune minutes for your younger guys.

ie

Leipsic Horvat Boeser

Pettersson/Goldobin Granlund Virtanen

Gaunce Sutter Eriksson

Baertschi *veteran C / Gaudette Gagner

 

* Brad Richardson, Jay Beagle, Derek Ryan, Antoine Vermette, Derek Grant - a solid faceoff, hard minutes type veteran on a short term deal who - if a guy like Gaudette forces his way up the lineup, doesn't leave you committed to a long term, high priced veteran who may not actually hold onto that 2C spot...

 

 

[6string]

2 hours ago, Eastcoast meets Westcoast said:

I am sorry you can’t read,

but glad you can get two words right.  Good for you.

 

Got your sarcasm and won’t bother to respond to you again. 

A Hockey factory, I will truly miss.

[Crabcakes]

1 hour ago, oldnews said:

I  agree that moving Hutton would probably make sense - if he had any value - but I think he's at a point where he needs to rebuild his value - and there's not much room for him to do so.  If he doesn't kill it in camp he may not be around much longer.  The thing about paying him 2.8 million - he scored 25 points, so you might be able to shave a bit off that, but realistically it was his market value before regressing.

 

As the lineup sits right now I'd opt to play Granlund at 2C.  He's a solid two way, highly intelligent player who can handle hard minutes but also has the upside and playmaking abilities to complement a young winger well.  Is he a veteran?  No - but at the cost of bringing in a 2C I'm not sure we give up much in Granlund.    Pettersson, if he makes the team, imo should probably start at wing - playing center in the NHL requires handling opponents down low that I don't think he's ready for.  Gaudette - who knows - he may prove to be like Boeser and ready to step straight into a top 6 role - he has the kind of groundwork to his game that makes it a possibility, but you certainly can't expect - or plan - for that.

 

Bringing in a Bozak type to play 2C is certainly a possiibility - although players like him might push the comfort levels in term - and cap - that you want to spend on a 32 year old.

I'd be as inclined to take my chances on Granlund and Gaudette - and sign a veteran shutdown faceoff guy instead to strengthen the bottom six and create more 'sheltered' or opportune minutes for your younger guys.

ie

Leipsic Horvat Boeser

Pettersson/Goldobin Granlund Virtanen

Gaunce Sutter Eriksson

Baertschi *veteran C / Gaudette Gagner

 

* Brad Richardson, Jay Beagle, Derek Ryan, Antoine Vermette, Derek Grant - a solid faceoff, hard minutes type veteran on a short term deal who - if a guy like Gaudette forces his way up the lineup, doesn't leave you committed to a long term, high priced veteran who may not actually hold onto that 2C spot...

 

 

Agree.  I was working out a similar line up.

 

Baertschi Horvat Boeser

Granlund *Gagner Pettersson

Gaunce Sutter Eriksson

Leipsic *Gaudette Virtanen

 

It's certainly would be easier to land a lower end centre than a 2C.  I would say that it depended on the opportunity.  That is availability and term.  Within 2 years, I would expect Pettersson to be out competing the 2C and Gaudette should be pushing Sutter in the shut down role.  

 

If Hutton's issues are fitness and skating (edgework) then he should be able to correct these things over the summer.  It's up to him.  It would be a shame to lose him on waivers.

 

[SilentSam]

11 hours ago, AlwaysACanuckFan said:

 

Didn’t he get injured on that play?

[Googlie]

It may have been asked already , but should we read anything into the non-appearance of Eriksson, Pouliot, Dowd and Gaunce?

[250Integra]

45 minutes ago, Googlie said:

It may have been asked already , but should we read anything into the non-appearance of Eriksson, Pouliot, Dowd and Gaunce?

That's pretty normal for Eriksson.

[appleboy]

I liked a lot of what I heard. Linden said that they would probably be under the cap. That says it all !

Management  and ownership is on board with the fact that we will not be very good for a few years. Some say that the rebuild is well on its way and we have made some big strides in building a very solid prospect pool. 

I think the rebuild has "just" begun. Sedins signal the true start of rebuilding this core and I look forward to a few years of struggles but exciting times watching the next group of kids. Along with this we will see some more very high picks. Maybe even some trades made for the future.

[ChuckNORRIS4Cup]

On 4/9/2018 at 3:52 PM, Rush17 said:

wow yeah your right that is scary.  He said later on its like a 2-3 week heal time but earlier on he goes on about it being a "long term" injury.  I'm confused.  Is it something that will need regular upkeep or is he just emotionally spent from all the time off?  Players had exit meetings today maybe Green wasn't to happy with his rehab program.  Shouldn't really speculate but it makes you wonder when he says he's going to take it "serious".  Rehab should be taken serious regardless so it raises some concern for sure.

Yeah not good, and the reason I think he also said that 2-3 week thing, speculating but because Gud and Tanev both seemed to be able to give positive timelines for their return and Baer couldn't but then decided I should try and give them something, but it wasn't promising imo like Tanev and Gud seemed. Time will tell obviously all speculation for now but still didn't look good in that interview, that part we don't need to speculate on.

[Pete M]

20 hours ago, appleboy said:

I liked a lot of what I heard. Linden said that they would probably be under the cap. That says it all !

Management  and ownership is on board with the fact that we will not be very good for a few years. Some say that the rebuild is well on its way and we have made some big strides in building a very solid prospect pool. 

I think the rebuild has "just" begun. Sedins signal the true start of rebuilding this core and I look forward to a few years of struggles but exciting times watching the next group of kids. Along with this we will see some more very high picks. Maybe even some trades made for the future.

I liked these words from Linden..."we are going to be a young team next year" 

 

Hope his words match his actions.