Sign in to follow this  
-Vintage Canuck-

[Signing] Canucks sign Micheal Ferland

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, rekker said:

I remember hearing about something from his junior years. Sounds like he's all grown up now and over it. I wont judge him as I've been there, done that during my youth.  

Also sounds a lot more like he wanted to come back and play in Canada despite them wanting to re-sign him (for by the sounds of it, more money no less).

 

He rejected them, not the other way around.

  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, aGENT said:

I honestly don't know why he took any of those ^^^ picks. Should have moved them all for immediate playoff assets :lol:

 

It's almost as if they were rebuilding organizational depth and youth while simultaneously doing what they could (with their hands quite tied) to support the NHL squad...:rolleyes:

You must be right, because that wouldn't be the definition of a #properrebuild, and they clearly didn't know what they were doing with all the #mixedmessages.

 

2 hours ago, canuck73_3 said:

I really don't understand why this is so hard to grasp. 

I dunno, since Benning explicitly said what they were doing...
Every.

Single.
Interview.

 

2 hours ago, RonMexico said:

I know what it means. As in how can someone be so short sighted to think that the plan hasn't changed many times since the day Benning started.

Because again, they were looking at individual transactions in isolation instead of stepping back to try to see a big picture, to see how all the moves were part of the same whole.  "The plan" was not one-dimensional, there were several aspects at play at the same time.  Too many had the preconceived notion it had to either be "trade away picks for vets and competitiveness" or "move out vets for a rebuild" without realizing it can be both.  It's also what comes out from the 'tankers', a black-and-white dichotomy -- either go all in and win the cup, or burn it down to the ground and get picks.  Maybe some teams have done that, but it doesn't mean that's the only way.

 

As said, go back and look at the debates from 4-5 years ago.  Those who listened to (and believed) what Benning said eventually understood what they were doing, even if we couldn't understand every single move in isolation.  In contrast, others would say after every move, "Why are they still trying to make cup runs?  Why are they trading picks for young players?  Why are they bringing in veterans?  Why did they pick up defensive bottom-6 forwards when we need more scoring?  So many mixed messages, I just have no idea what's going on."

  • Hydration 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said:

You must be right, because that wouldn't be the definition of a #properrebuild, and they clearly didn't know what they were doing with all the #mixedmessages.

 

I dunno, since Benning explicitly said what they were doing...
Every.

Single.
Interview.

 

Because again, they were looking at individual transactions in isolation instead of stepping back to try to see a big picture, to see how all the moves were part of the same whole.  "The plan" was not one-dimensional, there were several aspects at play at the same time.  Too many had the preconceived notion it had to either be "trade away picks for vets and competitiveness" or "move out vets for a rebuild" without realizing it can be both.  It's also what comes out from the 'tankers', a black-and-white dichotomy -- either go all in and win the cup, or burn it down to the ground and get picks.  Maybe some teams have done that, but it doesn't mean that's the only way.

 

As said, go back and look at the debates from 4-5 years ago.  Those who listened to (and believed) what Benning said eventually understood what they were doing, even if we couldn't understand every single move in isolation.  In contrast, others would say after every move, "Why are they still trying to make cup runs?  Why are they trading picks for young players?  Why are they bringing in veterans?  Why did they pick up defensive bottom-6 forwards when we need more scoring?  So many mixed messages, I just have no idea what's going on."

Why the criticism for the Toronto plan?

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DrJockitch said:

You weren't comparing Andersson to Hutton you were comparing him to Baer.

 

Andersson was 20 when he started in the league, Hutton was 23.

 

Flames got a 5-6 D man as a rookie.  He just finished his second year.  Now since your posting on CDC you probably assume by the second year in the league he is a finished product but he is still developing.  Put in our lineup last year he would have been a lot higher than third pairing D.

 

Anyway, the point I was making is you can't just plug in how many points a player got and assume that tells the whole story especially since they play different positions.  By this logic, Tanev at his peak didn't have the value of most fourth line wingers.

It doesn't tell the whole story, you're right.

 

I was looking at points as an comparison as the Canucks needed scoring then more than anything with having Hamhuis Bieksa Edler and Tanev.

 

I was using Hutton as a sort of benchmark to grade Andersson with. And as far as I'm concerned baertschi is worth more than Hutton and I would say Andersson is about the same as Hutton was, taking age into consideration. 

 

Whether you do or don't agree with how I justify the value of players doesn't matter to me. I still stand behind the trade as being a good trade with no more lost than gained

 

And that's my final word as I've been a part of derailing the Ferland thread for too long now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Noseforthenet said:

So hey, not sure this was covered in the thread yet, but has anyone looked into Ferlands' apparent drinking/substance abuse issues along with concussion history? He was in the NHL program. The Canes decided on not re-signing him and now he has a no move for the 1st 2 years of the contract.

Might want to check this out:

 

Quote

 

"The toast of Calgary is public enemy No. 1 in Vancouver, and Gino Odjick is partially responsible"

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/vancouver-canucks-vs-calgary-flames-ferocious-ferland-leaves-a-mark-1.3040721

 

  • Like 1
  • Hydration 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said:

Where in there was it criticized?

You have many, many times. Just an honest question.

 

I think imo there was outside interference in the past making decisions for JB if you want my view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/10/2019 at 2:05 PM, ilduce39 said:

We're at the point where people who have lobbied to get JB fired the past 5 years are now uncomfortable with the idea the team might actually push for the playoffs this season.  Complaining about (mostly overblown) cap implications 3-4 years from now is pretty much the last foothold for them.. this offseason has undoubtedly left us a stronger club, in every conceivable way.  

I have some info that the cap is going to be HUGe in 3 or 4 years. Don't have a link but things Bettman himself said at the draft and some media coverage of, like an expiring TV rights deal for the NHL that is due for HUGE increases..and media rights globally being rolled out in the same timeframe..the cap is going way up in the new CBA because the money coming in is going way up about the time of the new CBA

 

side note: I am not a trevor linden fan, and I am curious if its a coincidence that the GM is doing "better" by my accounts since Linden left? Hrm.

 

I have always wondered if we would have won the cup if the injured Linden sat and let a healthy guy play in his place in the final? I know: sacrilege. haha

 

 

Edited by Primal Optimist
  • Confused 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said:

Might want to check this out:

 

 

Gino having a positive effect off the ice in so many ways for so many people !    Happy for Ferland he is on a better life path......still makes me sick to my stomach

knowing he is in the Blue n green though.... 

 

I see Jims idea not bad get stronger, get tougher, get bigger.  It better translate into GOALS though.  

 

2014-2015 Nucks GF 236 8th overall

2015-2016 Nucks GF 186 31st overall

2016-2017 Nucks GF 178 31st overall

2017-2018 Nucks GF 218 25th overall

2018-2019 Ncks GF 219 25th overall

 

Year after year see the same result lack of scoring.

 

Edited by Mr.DirtyDangles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

You have many, many times. Just an honest question.

 

I think imo there was outside interference in the past making decisions for JB if you want my view.

Elsewhere yes, but not in this post.  Sooner than a year from now, I think we're going to see some shaking Leaves in the Big Smoke.  Their team is arguably worse this year, and next summer won't be any easier for them.  As we've discussed (ON in particular) they've made questionable moves in the building of their roster and many of their acquisitions and contracts.  Sure, some say that about the Canucks too, but imo we're about to see the fruits of the #shanaplan about to blossom very shortly.

 

As for the Canucks, we may never know how much the owners were involved, aside from the admission that they were signing off on big contracts like Eriksson (and rightly so).  But it seems they are letting JB run things the way he wants, spending to cap if need be.  There's been some talk that their reputation may be of knee-jerkingly turning over management too quickly before giving them a chance to prove what they're doing, and that in this case they're purposely being patient.  But if Aqualini can be believed, his public comments all seem to indicate he understands and is willing to be patient and is confident the team's on the right track.  If we are nowhere near the playoffs come the Spring, then sure, Benning's on thin ice.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Primal Optimist said:

I have always wondered if we would have won the cup if the injured Linden sat and let a healthy guy play in his place in the final? I know: sacrilege. haha

Er, he did score our only two goals, right?  One of them short-handed, in fact.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, oldnews said:

 

Image result for lion cat mirror
 
 
 
Forsberg TG = educated, reasonable, of course.
 
Folks that disagree with him = blind homers, unable to 'discuss'.  lol.
 
"Myopic'.  how could anyone understand what Bennig's been doin?   Doesn't make any educated sense!
'Bennig tried to make another Cup Run and failed
 
 
 
And the kicker, FTG, the voice of  "the rest of the world"......
 
No delusions of grandeur there whatsoever.
 
Not sure where you got your 'education' lol but....
 
you keep being you, FTG.
 
 
 

Oldnews. The analytics guru who doesn’t understand how to apply analytics in context. 

Lol. 

 

The kicker is you couldn’t debunk a single thing I posted. Why...Because we both know you were the champion of the “this team doesn’t need to rebuild”. Heck I used to be on that train, which is why I find this even more hilarious now that you’ve all flipped script to the “we’ve been rebuilding the whole time” haha. 

 

 

 

 

You clearly understand what they were doing.......derp. 

“What we said is our goal every year is try to be competitive and make the playoffs......We want to be competitive next year,” Benning said. “Realistically, if you’re asking me when will the day be that we can compete with the best teams in the league, I think that (Sedin contract) timeline is fair. This is Year 2, and by our fourth or fifth year, I hope we’ll be there with the elite teams in the league.”

 

 

Follow that up with 75,69,73,81. Some well planned machine. Haha

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said:

Er, he did score our only two goals, right?  One of them short-handed, in fact.

yeah I am not barking down a popular path that is for sure. hahaha. I am very much in the minority by not ever liking Linden. I am not prepared to defend my stance..lol. Just a thought I have. 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hutton Wink said:

Elsewhere yes, but not in this post.  Sooner than a year from now, I think we're going to see some shaking Leaves in the Big Smoke.  Their team is arguably worse this year, and next summer won't be any easier for them.  As we've discussed (ON in particular) they've made questionable moves in the building of their roster and many of their acquisitions and contracts.  Sure, some say that about the Canucks too, but imo we're about to see the fruits of the #shanaplan about to blossom very shortly.

 

As for the Canucks, we may never know how much the owners were involved, aside from the admission that they were signing off on big contracts like Eriksson (and rightly so).  But it seems they are letting JB run things the way he wants, spending to cap if need be.  There's been some talk that their reputation may be of knee-jerkingly turning over management too quickly before giving them a chance to prove what they're doing, and that in this case they're purposely being patient.  But if Aqualini can be believed, his public comments all seem to indicate he understands and is willing to be patient and is confident the team's on the right track.  If we are nowhere near the playoffs come the Spring, then sure, Benning's on thin ice.

I'm not saying that, I'm defending JB saying others pushed him to make certain moves in hopes to sell playoffs tickets. I'm very happy with the team going into this season but I feel like it's JB having free reign now. No question we are buyers at the deadline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Why would I have an issue with giving Benning credit?  I think he’s done a lot of good things with this team.  I think he’s done a pretty decent job on the draft floor.  I don’t even blame him for the plan, ownership decides the direction the team goes, his just is to implement the best way to reach that goal.  But me liking JB doesn’t mean I don’t have criticisms or issues with some of the moves he’s made.  The problem some of you have, is that you take any differing opinion and write if off as hate, it’s why there’s not a single media report that any of you will call creditable, even Dhaliwal is getting turned on.   Unless you view it as worship you get immediately triggered.

 

 

 

That’s the one thing I hate about CDC. You can never have an opposite/negative opinion about our team without being targeted as a troll or as a hater. It’s like everything Benning does is perfect, and he cannot do any wrong. If Benning re-sign Eriksson at the end of his deal. Watch CDC spin that negative into a positive move.

Edited by shiznak
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

 

The new core that we hadn’t drafted yet. 

75 points, 69 points, 73 points   Riigghhtt.....

Do people just forget what actually happen? 

it's not about the results, it's about the message being sent that they're going to try. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.