Player by player state of the rebuild, and a bit of ranting.

[GritGrinder]

1 minute ago, 'NucK™ said:

 

You two need to get a room.. 

No its the rest of you that need a a room... a safe room...free from stats, facts and truths about the hockey team you cheer for...that way you can all sit around and say how great the team has been for the past 4-5 years and say how you're 1-2 pieces away from contending and how JB is playing 3 dimensional chess while the other GM's are playing checkers. It'll be great...you can serve soda and pie.

[THINKER]

Just now, 'NucK™ said:

It is so ironic that you are calling out people for looking for positives while you have an entire twitter page devoted to dissecting every negative thing you can find about the Canucks.

Why don't you just cheer for a different team? Seems a lot easier

I'm not calling anyone out for being positive.  I'm simply interested in engaging a discussion about the facts.  I base my opinions around the facts.  If you want to ignore the facts and just be "rah rah Benning's doing a great job, hooray, everything will be fine" that's up to you.  Just make it known that you don't care about reality and that's your stance and I'll avoid having a discussion with you.  But I'm here with the intent to discuss the state of the team based on the facts.  And the facts point to this being a poorly run team that's among the worst teams in the league (actually the worst team over the last 3 and a quarter seasons).

[spur1]

4 minutes ago, THINKER said:

I wouldn't call using facts to show how this team

a) isn't in a rebuild, and

b) is in an awful state

 

is considered trolling.

Facts you say. Only in your mind.  

['NucK™]

2 minutes ago, THINKER said:

I'm not calling anyone out for being positive.  I'm simply interested in engaging a discussion about the facts.  I base my opinions around the facts.  If you want to ignore the facts and just be "rah rah Benning's doing a great job, hooray, everything will be fine" that's up to you.  Just make it known that you don't care about reality and that's your stance and I'll avoid having a discussion with you.  But I'm here with the intent to discuss the state of the team based on the facts.  And the facts point to this being a poorly run team that's among the worst teams in the league (actually the worst team over the last 3 and a quarter seasons).

Your facts are that the team has sucked for the last three years.. essentially the opposite of what the OP's post was about. And also, you think we don't already know that?

[Shift-4]

@xereau

 

Fantastic post!

I might not precisely agree with everything you have written but damn that was a pleasant read!

Well done

['NucK™]

5 minutes ago, GritGrinder said:

No its the rest of you that need a a room... a safe room...free from stats, facts and truths about the hockey team you cheer for...that way you can all sit around and say how great the team has been for the past 4-5 years and say how you're 1-2 pieces away from contending and how JB is playing 3 dimensional chess while the other GM's are playing checkers. It'll be great...you can serve soda and pie.

lol youv've just been here riding @THINKER this entire time talking about "CDC regulars" with a tone as if you're above being on the forum all the time. I haven't seen any facts from you whatsoever 

[THINKER]

4 minutes ago, spur1 said:

Facts you say. Only in your mind.  

Only in my mind?  Uh no.  These stats are facts:

 

Canucks since the beginning 2015/2016:

- Last in points percentage.
- Last in GF/game.
- Second last in GA/game.
- Last in goal differential (-179). Next worse is ~20% better at -147 (Arizona). Fourth worst is at -99.
- Third last in PP% and PK%.
- Second last in xGF% and last in adjusted xGF% at all game states.

 

 

Other facts:

 

Benning turned down the 9th overall pick in 2015 for Ryan Miller.

Benning turned down a 1 in 2016 and Dano from Chicago for Hamhuis, because he started the trade process with Hamhuis too late because he was still debating making a push for the playoffs.

 

Source:  https://canucksarmy.com/2016/11/16/6-ways-the-canucks-have-whiffed-on-their-attempt-to-rebuild-on-the-fly/

 

The Canucks had a draft pick deficit in 2018.

Benning has not traded a player for a draft pick outright since 2015 when he traded away Bieksa for a 2nd round pick, but rather than using that 2nd round pick he gave it away to Pittsburgh in the Sutter trade.

 

It took Benning only 2 years to trade away as many draft picks as the previous GM, who had a team that was heading for a Cup run not heading for the lottery.

 

25 points in 30 games is the worst 30 games to start a season under the Benning era.

 

And I think we're at the point where we can say it's factual to claim that Benning messed up the 6th overall pick in 2014 and 5th overall in 2016 by drafting Virtanen and Juolevi over Ehlers/Nylander and Tkachuk.

 

 

Please tell me..which of these facts are you disputing?

[THINKER]

4 minutes ago, 'NucK™ said:

Your facts are that the team has sucked for the last three years.. essentially the opposite of what the OP's post was about. And also, you think we don't already know that?

 

The OP is taking an overly optimistic view of the team.  I've seen posts around the internet in the same tone from back in 2014.  

 

The facts point to Jim Benning being an awful GM.  I'm saying this thing won't get better until we replace him as GM and bring in someone who knows how to build a hockey team.

['NucK™]

1 minute ago, THINKER said:

Only in my mind?  Uh no.  These stats are facts:

 

Canucks since the beginning 2015/2016:

- Last in points percentage.
- Last in GF/game.
- Second last in GA/game.
- Last in goal differential (-179). Next worse is ~20% better at -147 (Arizona). Fourth worst is at -99.
- Third last in PP% and PK%.
- Second last in xGF% and last in adjusted xGF% at all game states.

 

 

Other facts:

 

Benning turned down the 9th overall pick in 2015 for Ryan Miller.

Benning turned down a 1 in 2016 and Dano from Chicago for Hamhuis, because he started the trade process with Hamhuis too late because he was still debating making a push for the playoffs.

 

Source:  https://canucksarmy.com/2016/11/16/6-ways-the-canucks-have-whiffed-on-their-attempt-to-rebuild-on-the-fly/

 

The Canucks had a draft pick deficit in 2018.

Benning has not traded a player for a draft pick outright since 2015 when he traded away Bieksa for a 2nd round pick, but rather than using that 2nd round pick he gave it away to Pittsburgh in the Sutter trade.

 

It took Benning only 2 years to trade away as many draft picks as the previous GM, who had a team that was heading for a Cup run not heading for the lottery.

 

25 points in 30 games is the worst 30 games to start a season under the Benning era.

 

And I think we're at the point where we can say it's factual to claim that Benning messed up the 6th overall pick in 2014 and 5th overall in 2016 by drafting Virtanen and Juolevi over Ehlers/Nylander and Tkachuk.

 

 

Please tell me..which of these facts are you disputing?

good job, you can google... now maybe post this on your hate filled twitter page instead of a forum post that has nothing to do with the last 3 years but is trying to analyze our future 

[GritGrinder]

5 minutes ago, 'NucK™ said:

lol youv've just been here riding @THINKER this entire time talking about "CDC regulars" with a tone as if you're above being on the forum all the time. I haven't seen any facts from you whatsoever 

"Riding" the guy that looks like he signed up today looking at his # of posts? That literally makes zero sense. And I put stats and facts in a majority of my posts. Go back to my original response to Xereau. I disagreed with his assessment of the Bonino/Sutter trade and provided stats and facts to support that disagreement. We were going along fine until other people started chiming in.

[spur1]

6 minutes ago, spur1 said:

Facts you say. Only in your mind.  

 

11 minutes ago, THINKER said:

I wouldn't call using facts to show how this team

a) isn't in a rebuild, and

b) is in an awful state

 

is considered trolling.

A for starters 

['NucK™]

Just now, THINKER said:

 

The OP is taking an overly optimistic view of the team.  I've seen posts around the internet in the same tone from back in 2014.  

 

The facts point to Jim Benning being an awful GM.  I'm saying this thing won't get better until we replace him as GM and bring in someone who knows how to build a hockey team.

right because a rebuild is supposed to take <5 years... you equate us to the Oilers... do you know how long their rebuild has (/is still) taking? 

['NucK™]

3 minutes ago, GritGrinder said:

"Riding" the guy that looks like he signed up today looking at the # of posts? That literally makes zero sense. And I put stats and facts in a majority of my posts. Go back to my original response to Xereau. I disagreed with his assessment of the Bonino/Sutter trade and provided stats and facts to support that disagreement. We were going along fine until other people started chiming in.

i guess maybe you're too young to know what that means.. 

 

and listing 2 player's goals and assists over a few years are stats, not facts. you can't just say one player is better than another as a FACT based on that alone

[THINKER]

Just now, spur1 said:

 

A for starters 

Okay, please explain to me how this team is in a rebuild then.

 

Typically, rebuilding teams stockpile draft picks and prospects.  Benning has not done this.  

 

Typically, rebuilding teams avoid signing veteans to long-term, bloated contracts.  Benning has spent big money every July 1.

 

What the Canucks are is a team that's not good enough to make the playoffs, that has been constructed as primarily a veteran team.  People sometimes confuse bad teams with rebuilding teams.  Rebuilding teams know they're going to lose games.  They're designed to lose.  They focus on flipping veterans for draft picks.  The Canucks are a bad team that has picked up some prospects by virtue of drafting high in the draft every year (because that's how the draft works).  It's not a rebuild.

[THINKER]

2 minutes ago, 'NucK™ said:

right because a rebuild is supposed to take <5 years... you equate us to the Oilers... do you know how long their rebuild has (/is still) taking? 

That's because they have had bad management, just like the Canucks.

 

And yes, rebuilds can take less than 5 years.  Just look at the Leafs.  They started their rebuild when Shanahan got there and aggressively went into it.  The Canucks did the opposite.

['NucK™]

Just now, THINKER said:

Okay, please explain to me how this team is in a rebuild then.

 

Typically, rebuilding teams stockpile draft picks and prospects.  Benning has not done this.  

 

Typically, rebuilding teams avoid signing veteans to long-term, bloated contracts.  Benning has spent big money every July 1.

 

What the Canucks are is a team that's not good enough to make the playoffs, that has been constructed as primarily a veteran team.  People sometimes confuse bad teams with rebuilding teams.  Rebuilding teams know they're going to lose games.  They're designed to lose.  They focus on flipping veterans for draft picks.  The Canucks are a bad team that has picked up some prospects by virtue of drafting high in the draft every year (because that's how the draft works).  It's not a rebuild.

Right.. that is why our prospect pool is ranked #1 or 2 

[THINKER]

1 minute ago, 'NucK™ said:

i guess maybe you're too young to know what that means.. 

 

and listing 2 player's goals and assists over a few years are stats, not facts. you can just say one player is better than another as a FACT based on that alone

 

Um what?  Stats are facts.  

[spur1]

1 minute ago, THINKER said:

Okay, please explain to me how this team is in a rebuild then.

 

Typically, rebuilding teams stockpile draft picks and prospects.  Benning has not done this.  

 

Typically, rebuilding teams avoid signing veteans to long-term, bloated contracts.  Benning has spent big money every July 1.

 

What the Canucks are is a team that's not good enough to make the playoffs, that has been constructed as primarily a veteran team.  People sometimes confuse bad teams with rebuilding teams.  Rebuilding teams know they're going to lose games.  They're designed to lose.  They focus on flipping veterans for draft picks.  The Canucks are a bad team that has picked up some prospects by virtue of drafting high in the draft every year (because that's how the draft works).  It's not a rebuild.

Again only in your mind. 

Feeding time is over

[GritGrinder]

Just now, 'NucK™ said:

i guess maybe you're too young to know what that means.. 

 

and listing 2 player's goals and assists over a few years are stats, not facts. you can just say one player is better than another as a FACT based on that alone

Oh man...and clearly you can't read very well either. The facts I mentioned were Bonino's durability and contributing to a winning team, including being a major contributor to a Cup run. Those are facts, not stats...see how that works?

[THINKER]

Just now, 'NucK™ said:

Right.. that is why our prospect pool is ranked #1 or 2 

It's not.

 

Our prospect pool actually isn't very good since Pettersson has graduated.  

 

And if prospect pool rankings were the be all, end all, Edmonton would be a great team by now (ranked 4th in 2012).