What we need to become Contenders

[IBatch]

13 minutes ago, janisahockeynut said:

Here is a question for everyone...…..I really want everyone to really think about this

 

Is it more important that the Canucks move up the standings 7 or 8 ( 12/14 OA) positions this year or

 

remain down to get the prime possibly elite forward (4/6 OA) we really need? 

 

Never mind where you think we will eventually land, but what is more important to our future?

Yep.  Should consider that when blasting Benning for signing some toughness and grit, and leaving two spots open for skilled prospects.   Will say it again don't be too hard on whomever replaces the Sedins, or if they have a hard time getting 30 points there first year. Stamkos did too, and Thornton wasn't the first overall stud his first year either.   I'd be proud and happy if we just missed the playoffs, but would rather we stayed about the same, our first year pros developed in the AHL for the most part, and we had good odds for first overall.

 

The breakout will happen organically.  The following season or even the one after that it WILL happen, and having one or two more years of a load of guys pushing into the lineup will both help the team with ELCs to keep us under the cap, and draft two more core guys to give us a push for five more years once we make it.  This should give the team a ten year window to work with, WSH did it on year 13 with OVI, and still has a great core to work with for the next five years thanks to Kuznetsov, the next two drafts are our Kuznetsov, Point, Sergechev etc. guys.

[Standing_Tall#37]

3 hours ago, Baggins said:

Who do you put through waivers for your rookie or three to get their 9 games? That's a fools play just to give impatient fans a boo at the new toys.

 

They've been rebuilding all along. You simply refuse to acknowledge it despite the evidence. By my count Benning has more than three draft picks that have regularly played NHL. But for point of reference TO, that shining beacon of how to rebuild, who has had more picks than us and picked higher, has only 3 picks playing in the NHL. The only thing your narrative casts a negative light on is your own unrealistic expectations of draft picks. The only reason to leave roster spots open for kids is if you're absolutely certain they are ready to contribute at this level.

 

I think times have changed and that’s an old school way of thinking.

 The best players should earn that spot regardless of who is exposed on waivers. If the player in question plays $&!#ty enough to end up on waivers than it shouldn’t be taken as a loss if they get picked up.  In a league that the average age is barely 27 and 90-95% of players don’t play beyond the age of 34... it’s a very foolish concept to develop players into their mid 20s. 10-30 years ago it made sense, not anymore. Geriatrics/Elderly like you and I, need to adapt to change.

[steviewonder20]

On 2018-07-02 at 11:35 AM, brian42 said:

I see our Future(2-3 years) Lineup looking like this:

 

AAA - Petterson - Boeser

Baertschi - Horvat - AAA

BBB - Gaudette - Virtanen

Shaller(if resigned) - Beagle - Rousell

 

Hughes - CCC

Juolevi - CCC

Tryamkin or Brisebois - Gudbranson/Stecher

Gudbranson/Stecher

 

Demko

Markstrom (maybe Dipietro or UFA) 

 

XXX- top 6 forward- need two wingers or a Center and a winger if Petterson ends up a winger

YYY-Top 9 forward -need 1

ZZZ- Top 4 Right D - need 2

 

out of Jonathan Dahlen, Kole Lind, Lukas Jasek, Gadjovich, Madden & Lockwood -I believe we have 1 AAA(top 6) and 1 BBB(top 9).

Jett Woo may become a CCC(top 4 D) and i really like him as a pick but the chances of a 2nd RD pick becoming a top 4 D are slim.

 

This leaves us needing: 

1 top 6 forward & 2 top 4 right D-Man

 

I think the Canucks management have to do everything in their power to get 1 or 2 of these in a trade from the following list of assets:

Leipsic

Granlund

Goldobin

Sutter

Eriksson

Edler

Tanev

Pouliot

Hutton

 

Realisticly Tanev packaged with some of theses assets or picks (not 1st round) should be able to land us a current or future top 6 forward or a top 4 D.

 

Edler if he is now willing to waive his NTC considering he will be a UFA in a year and the Sedins are gone should get us a nice pick. 

If we can turn the other guys into any picks it will give us a shot of drafting a gem or packaging picks for a higher pick.

 

Trading these assets sooner rather then later is a good idea because we can lose guys on waivers and it would give us a better shot of drafting high in 2019.  for example if Tanev is traded for a future stud. 

 

Tanev +++ = 1 top 6 F or top 4 D

All other assets =  1 top 6 F or top 4 D

2019 1st = 1 top 6 F or top 4 D

 

If we can do this i think we will be a contender again in 3 years. If we get a couple top 6 forwards &/or a top 4 D-man we can also go after a top UFA in a year or two. 

 

What do you guys think we need to do to become a contender in the somewhat near future? 

I’d love to see Virtanen grow into a 2nd line winger (skill, speed and grit) and the 1st line winger (aaa) also needs grit (like a E. Kane without character issues) to balance a relatively soft top 6. I think the bottom 6 could pretty much be as you’ve outlined. Gadjovich could be an option for bottom 6. Hoping for trades to increase picks and some better luck at the draft next year (although getting Hughes this year was awesome luck and unexpected). 

[mikeyman109]

The biggest thing we need to become a contender is Depth at all positions. We need the current players like Horvat Boeser, Virtanen to continue to improve and then the next wave comes in...EP Dahlen, Lind Gadjovich, followed by another set that is in Utica learning the craft so that if injuries occur we have valid players to bring up to fill the void. No more Bouchers, Goldobins, Gaunces. We need to keep building this throughout the draft,

 

This process has to happen on D more than forward. When we went to the finals in 2011 we had 9 D men who played more than a handful of games that year on the big club due to the injuries we had. We need to be able to bring in players for injury relief who can play at an NHL level. That will take time, patience and very good drafting.

When you are a bottom feeder team you dont have a lot of options at trades due to the fact your team is a bottom feeder for a reason and that is you only have a couple decent players. Thats why you have to draft and draft well to improve. It doesnt happen overnight. It also means to get players to come in Free agency you have to over pay a bit on price and or term.

 

Benning might not be GM long enough to see the fruits of his drafting. But the pieces are there. Its the same thing that happened in Anaheim before they won their first cup. The Murrays built the team and when Burke came in he made the Pronger trade and boom things worked out. Benning is drafting better in my opinion than any other GM in Canucks history. let him do what he does best. The FA signings this year are fine, just a little long for term as far as i am concerned but i know why.

[Baggins]

2 hours ago, Standing_Tall#37 said:

I think times have changed and that’s an old school way of thinking.

 The best players should earn that spot regardless of who is exposed on waivers. If the player in question plays $&!#ty enough to end up on waivers than it shouldn’t be taken as a loss if they get picked up.  In a league that the average age is barely 27 and 90-95% of players don’t play beyond the age of 34... it’s a very foolish concept to develop players into their mid 20s. 10-30 years ago it made sense, not anymore. Geriatrics/Elderly like you and I, need to adapt to change.

You need to follow the conversation. Your response has nothing to do with what I was responding to.

 

I was replying to Theguardian`s stupid idea of giving up to 3 kids a 9 game showing to give fans hope of the future. Is it worth exposing roster players to waivers to give a few kid 9 games and then send them back to junior? Either they earn a spot or they don`t. It`s foolish to put roster players on waivers, and lose that depth, to appease impatient fans wanting a look.

 

Here`s what I was responding to:

 

I certainly don't expect much from the Canucks for the next two years, neither do the hockey media, bookies or a lot of knowledgeable fans  so why not let a prospect or three get nine games in to show the fans tangible hope rather than imagined hope? Is it because imagination is better than reality? As long as these players don't have to show their talents in the NHL management appears to be good, three draft picks in four years? On a team that is now finally rebuilding supposedly? Are they rebuilding, or just doing the same thing as they have done all along, sign vets and leave no roster spots, have just one draft pick play each year, spend to the cap, well maybe not this year at least not yet.

[Standing_Tall#37]

5 minutes ago, Baggins said:

You need to follow the conversation. Your response has nothing to do with what I was responding to.

 

I was replying to Theguardian`s stupid idea of giving up to 3 kids a 9 game showing to give fans hope of the future. Is it worth exposing roster players to waivers to give a few kid 9 games and then send them back to junior? Either they earn a spot or they don`t. It`s foolish to put roster players on waivers, and lose that depth, to appease impatient fans wanting a look.

 

Here`s what I was responding to:

 

I certainly don't expect much from the Canucks for the next two years, neither do the hockey media, bookies or a lot of knowledgeable fans  so why not let a prospect or three get nine games in to show the fans tangible hope rather than imagined hope? Is it because imagination is better than reality? As long as these players don't have to show their talents in the NHL management appears to be good, three draft picks in four years? On a team that is now finally rebuilding supposedly? Are they rebuilding, or just doing the same thing as they have done all along, sign vets and leave no roster spots, have just one draft pick play each year, spend to the cap, well maybe not this year at least not yet.

Hahaha yea.. I usually disregard what he has to say. I mistook your post for one of those typical... “we need to develop a player for 5 years” posts. 

[Baggins]

1 minute ago, Standing_Tall#37 said:

Hahaha yea.. I usually disregard what he has to say. I mistook your post for one of those typical... “we need to develop a player for 5 years” posts. 

I do believe in patience and making kids earn their spots. If that takes 5 years so be it. NHL capable isn`t the same as NHL contributor. As far as I`m concerned you go with the better option even if it means sending a kid to Utica or back to junior.

[Standing_Tall#37]

1 hour ago, Baggins said:

I do believe in patience and making kids earn their spots. If that takes 5 years so be it. NHL capable isn`t the same as NHL contributor. As far as I`m concerned you go with the better option even if it means sending a kid to Utica or back to junior.

Yes, but not every prospect needs it. And sometimes you have to admit that your top 5, top 10, or 1st rd pick is a bust when they show that they can’t make it.  

 

 I saw a graph about a month ago and wish I would have saved it or could find it again.. but it showed the % of players that make the nhl and peaks and primed and stuff. And the % was really high for high contributors in the NHL are usually in the NHL by 21 and most guys by 24, are 90% of what they’ll be, speed, skill and points-wise at their peak.

[Glug Datt]

On 2018-07-02 at 11:35 AM, brian42 said:

I see our Future(2-3 years) Lineup looking like this:

 

AAA - Petterson - Boeser

Baertschi - Horvat - AAA

BBB - Gaudette - Virtanen

Shaller(if resigned) - Beagle - Rousell

 

Hughes - CCC

Juolevi - CCC

Tryamkin or Brisebois - Gudbranson/Stecher

Gudbranson/Stecher

 

Demko

Markstrom (maybe Dipietro or UFA) 

 

XXX- top 6 forward- need two wingers or a Center and a winger if Petterson ends up a winger

YYY-Top 9 forward -need 1

ZZZ- Top 4 Right D - need 2

 

out of Jonathan Dahlen, Kole Lind, Lukas Jasek, Gadjovich, Madden & Lockwood -I believe we have 1 AAA(top 6) and 1 BBB(top 9).

Jett Woo may become a CCC(top 4 D) and i really like him as a pick but the chances of a 2nd RD pick becoming a top 4 D are slim.

 

This leaves us needing: 

1 top 6 forward & 2 top 4 right D-Man

 

I think the Canucks management have to do everything in their power to get 1 or 2 of these in a trade from the following list of assets:

Leipsic

Granlund

Goldobin

Sutter

Eriksson

Edler

Tanev

Pouliot

Hutton

 

Realisticly Tanev packaged with some of theses assets or picks (not 1st round) should be able to land us a current or future top 6 forward or a top 4 D.

 

Edler if he is now willing to waive his NTC considering he will be a UFA in a year and the Sedins are gone should get us a nice pick. 

If we can turn the other guys into any picks it will give us a shot of drafting a gem or packaging picks for a higher pick.

 

Trading these assets sooner rather then later is a good idea because we can lose guys on waivers and it would give us a better shot of drafting high in 2019.  for example if Tanev is traded for a future stud. 

 

Tanev +++ = 1 top 6 F or top 4 D

All other assets =  1 top 6 F or top 4 D

2019 1st = 1 top 6 F or top 4 D

 

If we can do this i think we will be a contender again in 3 years. If we get a couple top 6 forwards &/or a top 4 D-man we can also go after a top UFA in a year or two. 

 

What do you guys think we need to do to become a contender in the somewhat near future? 

I think a more realistic contender timeline would be 5-6 years out.. demko will need some time to really settle in, and most of the young bloods will also need to mature.. 

 

I still want to believe Jake can be a productive 2nd liner.. and in my wishful thinking, we draft a 1c (Hughes - cough) which puts ep on the wing.. 

 

and we all live happily ever after

[canucksnihilist]

FOA pick 2019

[spur1]

4 hours ago, canucksnihilist said:

FOA pick 2019 via trade 

 

[SKYO]

What the team currently needs for now and the long haul is top pairing right side dman who can score a ton.

 

 

 

 

[TheNewGM]

Im a die hard Canucks fan, but Im also intelligent and not delusional.

 

We will not even be a playoff team for many years. Let alone "contender" lol..

 

Its sad. When comparing to the laughs. Kadri would be our first line center.... That is saying alot.

 

Either we need to get reallly lucky and have a bunch of prospects turn into superstars ( not likely ) or we need to actually win some draft lotteries ffs.

 

Which will still take at least a few years to happen.. looking pretty bleak. Jim can sign more fourth liners though. That will push us over..

[Silky mitts]

1 hour ago, TheNewGM said:

Im a die hard Canucks fan, but Im also intelligent and not delusional.

 

We will not even be a playoff team for many years. Let alone "contender" lol..

 

Its sad. When comparing to the laughs. Kadri would be our first line center.... That is saying alot.

 

Either we need to get reallly lucky and have a bunch of prospects turn into superstars ( not likely ) or we need to actually win some draft lotteries ffs.

 

Which will still take at least a few years to happen.. looking pretty bleak. Jim can sign more fourth liners though. That will push us over..

Lol kadri is not better than horvat for sure , also boeser and Petterson will probably be superstars. 

 

 

[DrJockitch]

Time, another high end centre and d-man.