aGENT Posted March 5, 2019 Share Posted March 5, 2019 3 minutes ago, appleboy said: Additional top ten picks? What are you even talking about? I said we would have had a shot at higher end talent. No where did I say more top ten picks. We would have had a lot more picks and maybe a first or two. If their agenda was picks then they might have got one out of Kesler. Or flipped players traded for Kes for picks. They had the opportunity to acquire picks in 2014 but it was so far from their agenda...….. The 'high end talent' you're clamoring for, overwhelmingly comes from top 10 picks out of the draft. Not late 1sts and even later rounds. We did get a pick out of the Kesler deal. Let's try to get facts straight here. Where we obtained exactly the 'ok' (ie: not 'high end') talent you can expect to get with a late 1st. 9 minutes ago, appleboy said: The higher end talent would have come because in 2014 we would have blown up the team. From where? How? The ether? You still have not explained where these additional top ten picks would have come from from 'blowing up the team'. We already have the existing top 10 picks from simply being a rebuilding team. Where's the additional ones? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
appleboy Posted March 5, 2019 Share Posted March 5, 2019 1 hour ago, aGENT said: You still have not explained where these additional top ten picks ARE YOU DEAF or DAFT? No one said additional I said higher end. If they tanked in 2014 they would have drafted HIGHER and had more picks. It should have been about accumulating picks. They only hit on 3 out of six first round picks. THEY WOULD HAVE HAD MORE PICKS AND HIGHER PICKS. Not more top ten picks. DO YOU UNDERSTAND NOW? They could have had a few top3 picks and maybe a first overall. WAS BOESER A TOP TEN PICK??????? LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurn Posted March 5, 2019 Share Posted March 5, 2019 12 minutes ago, appleboy said: No one said additional I said higher end. 12 minutes ago, appleboy said: and had more picks 13 minutes ago, appleboy said: THEY WOULD HAVE HAD MORE PICKS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted March 5, 2019 Share Posted March 5, 2019 1 hour ago, appleboy said: ARE YOU DEAF or DAFT? No one said additional I said higher end. If they tanked in 2014 they would have drafted HIGHER and had more picks. It should have been about accumulating picks. They only hit on 3 out of six first round picks. THEY WOULD HAVE HAD MORE PICKS AND HIGHER PICKS. Not more top ten picks. DO YOU UNDERSTAND NOW? They could have had a few top3 picks and maybe a first overall. WAS BOESER A TOP TEN PICK??????? LOL I honestly don't think you know what you're arguing. Boeser's an outlier (yay for us). You can't count on getting elite snipers with late 1sts when historically they tend more to be Gaunce's and McCann's (if you're lucky and get an NHL'er at all). Again, higher end players, the one's you're looking for, predominantly come from top 10 picks. Without more of those, your 'plan' hinges on little more than hopes, prayers and outliers. That's not a plan. Would we have had higher picks through 'tanking' though? You can't remotely guarantee that with the way the lottery is structured. Any difference between picking 6th instead of 7th or 4th instead of 5th is pretty damn minimal (and in the case of Pettersson in particular, likely wouldn't have made a lick of difference anyway) when you can't guarantee a lotto win/top 3 pick. Again, hopes and prayers aren't a plan. It also doesn't take in to consideration the quality of the team/leadership around young players already here. Getting high end, top 10 drafted players takes time. All your wishful, fanciful ranting about tanking and selling off middling players for late 3rds doesn't change that reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
appleboy Posted March 5, 2019 Share Posted March 5, 2019 1 hour ago, aGENT said: I honestly don't think you know what you're arguing. Boeser's an outlier (yay for us). You can't count on getting elite snipers with late 1sts when historically they tend more to be Gaunce's and McCann's (if you're lucky and get an NHL'er at all). Again, higher end players, the one's you're looking for, predominantly come from top 10 picks. Without more of those, your 'plan' hinges on little more than hopes, prayers and outliers. That's not a plan. Would we have had higher picks through 'tanking' though? You can't remotely guarantee that with the way the lottery is structured. Any difference between picking 6th instead of 7th or 4th instead of 5th is pretty damn minimal (and in the case of Pettersson in particular, likely wouldn't have made a lick of difference anyway) when you can't guarantee a lotto win/top 3 pick. Again, hopes and prayers aren't a plan. It also doesn't take in to consideration the quality of the team/leadership around young players already here. Getting high end, top 10 drafted players takes time. All your wishful, fanciful ranting about tanking and selling off middling players for late 3rds doesn't change that reality. So you admit that we are in for another five years of this? You realize that it is going to take that long to land the players that we will need? Five more years if they hit on every first round pick and if we are drafting in the top ten. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted March 6, 2019 Share Posted March 6, 2019 3 minutes ago, appleboy said: So you admit that we are in for another five years of this? You realize that it is going to take that long to land the players that we will need? Five more years if they hit on every first round pick and if we are drafting in the top ten. 'This' is pretty nebulous. I think we have another high draft pick this year, probably a 10-20 pick next year (+/-) and that we'll have trades, UFA's and the odd outlier likely round out the roster. I don't think we're 5 elite/top 10 picks away from a playoff team. 'Could' it take another 5 years? Certainly. As I said elsewhere, earlier today, there are no guarantees in sports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted March 6, 2019 Share Posted March 6, 2019 10 hours ago, AlwaysACanuckFan said: As much as I'd love a Kaapo Kakko, but with current standings, draft simulator had Canucks selecting Podkolzin, Byram and Boldy mostly. It's a draft lottery. Goes by odds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.I.A.H.N Posted March 6, 2019 Share Posted March 6, 2019 3 hours ago, aGENT said: I honestly don't think you know what you're arguing. Boeser's an outlier (yay for us). You can't count on getting elite snipers with late 1sts when historically they tend more to be Gaunce's and McCann's (if you're lucky and get an NHL'er at all). Again, higher end players, the one's you're looking for, predominantly come from top 10 picks. Without more of those, your 'plan' hinges on little more than hopes, prayers and outliers. That's not a plan. Would we have had higher picks through 'tanking' though? You can't remotely guarantee that with the way the lottery is structured. Any difference between picking 6th instead of 7th or 4th instead of 5th is pretty damn minimal (and in the case of Pettersson in particular, likely wouldn't have made a lick of difference anyway) when you can't guarantee a lotto win/top 3 pick. Again, hopes and prayers aren't a plan. It also doesn't take in to consideration the quality of the team/leadership around young players already here. Getting high end, top 10 drafted players takes time. All your wishful, fanciful ranting about tanking and selling off middling players for late 3rds doesn't change that reality. Sorry Secret Agent Man...I have to jump in on this one I guess #1. Is that statistically, it does make a difference, and there is always a critical tipping point, where you want to be one the right side of that, when picking, scouting and draft position are both important. Not to say, you win every time, because you don't, but it helps. And that small improvement helps you not make critical mistakes. #2. There is a graph which I posted several months ago, showing that teams with more overall picks, produce a greater amount of 200 game players, and that is all picks included...plz don't ask me for it now, but it is easily found ( Last day in Manzanillo)....I am sad enough! I however think that tanking or sell offs need to be scheduled and calculated, hail Mary's probably don't help as much. I love Benning, but the #3 point is that, some GMs have an uncanny 6th sense of knowing just when to dump a veteran. I think Benning does have that sense, Sam Polluck had it....... But in saying all that....what is done is done....Benning just has to be right, that's all, or we all suffer longer....I hope he is right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crabcakes Posted March 6, 2019 Share Posted March 6, 2019 17 hours ago, crazycry said: Visual graph for anyone interested. So the Canucks have a differential of -8. The next worst schedule is -4 (New Jersey) and the best schedule is Edmonton +10 I only see a real problem if the differential is more than 1 standard deviation away from the mean. So I ran the numbers: Average (mean) = 0 Median = -1 Standard Deviation = 3.47 3 teams more than 2 Std Dev's away from the mean Edmonton +10, NYR +8, Van -8 2 more teams more than 1 Std Dev's away from the mean Arizona +7, New Jersey -4 Comments stats nerds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.I.A.H.N Posted March 6, 2019 Share Posted March 6, 2019 43 minutes ago, Crabcakes said: So the Canucks have a differential of -8. The next worst schedule is -4 (New Jersey) and the best schedule is Edmonton +10 I only see a real problem if the differential is more than 1 standard deviation away from the mean. So I ran the numbers: Average (mean) = 0 Median = -1 Standard Deviation = 3.47 3 teams more than 2 Std Dev's away from the mean Edmonton +10, NYR +8, Van -8 2 more teams more than 1 Std Dev's away from the mean Arizona +7, New Jersey -4 Comments stats nerds? Friggin good job CC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steviewonder20 Posted March 6, 2019 Share Posted March 6, 2019 4 hours ago, aGENT said: 'This' is pretty nebulous. I think we have another high draft pick this year, probably a 10-20 pick next year (+/-) and that we'll have trades, UFA's and the odd outlier likely round out the roster. I don't think we're 5 elite/top 10 picks away from a playoff team. 'Could' it take another 5 years? Certainly. As I said elsewhere, earlier today, there are no guarantees in sports. I agree. But we do need a first line LW, a second line RW, a #1 D (EK in my dreams only), OJ and Hughes to both live up to their potential and hype, and Gaudette to be a great third line center; then we are competitive and a playoff team. I also think appleboy has some valid points. Benning was interviewed a few years ago and gave a timeline of the end of the Sedins' contract for being competitive (this was quoted in an article I read in the past week). He thought we just needed some tweaks, hence the UFAs he brought in. I do think with the benefit of hindsight that dumping more players for picks would have gotten us closer to where we need to be. Trading Burr and Hansen was the beginning of realizing what should have happened several years earlier. He has certainly not stockpiled picks. Those trades were good ones, as obviously were the picks of Petey and Bo, but it's been five years and we still have a number of boxes to tick to get to the playoffs, a crappy defence and inadequate depth. We have also lost a number of players without any compensation (yes, I have heard JB's responses to that). I think this summer is make or break time for JB: who gets traded, what picks can he get, do we get any UFAs that are not just reclamation projects or more bottom six guys. We will see if a clear plan is in place by September. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vancouverbucsfan Posted March 8, 2019 Share Posted March 8, 2019 I was there in Las Vegas watching them play. They didn't show up! Score had been 10-0 had Markstrom not stood on his head which he did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schneider.Man604 Posted March 10, 2019 Share Posted March 10, 2019 On 3/3/2019 at 3:42 PM, WHL rocks said: Most likely vs SJS It'll be heck of a series. SJS or Flames.. can't wait till playoffs. I'll be going for WPG vs CGY WCF. At least one Canadian team in SCF uhh no Calgary is getting bounced out in the first round. Do you remember our play off runs where Flames msg boards would have A B C ( anyone but Canucks)??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.