Do You Have Confidence In The Canucks Front Office..?

[canucksnihilist]

On 8/17/2019 at 10:37 AM, gurn said:

Can you back up this statement?

I only ask because there are so many picks and yet so few of them become players that it seems to contradict what you have said.

Just with logic.

 

if the goal is to get the Highest quality players on your team, the question is how to get them?  And u don’t want a lot of low quality, you want a few really high quality.  Let’s compare the methods with this goal in kind.

 

1. Drafting.  In any draft selection you may get an amazing player.  There is no upper limit to the quality of player you might get in the first few rounds.  Even in the later rounds!  You may also get nothing.  

 

2. Trades for older players.  A few years after the draft - to be fair.  Typically the player is being traded because they are expendable.  They haven’t worked out on the team, or don’t fit, or haven’t progressed as well as the everyone thought.  Maybe they need a new team.  Maybe they are a late bloomer.   Really only the late bloomers are worth it, the rest are just middling players or average quality.  And not many players are late bloomers....

 

conclusion:  do u want to take a chance on an untried pick... or a player who has not made an impact yet but might be a late bloomer?   If your goal is the highest quality player u choose the draft.  If u want to fill the team with lower quality but more of them then u choose to trade.

 

you could argue that JB wanted to fill the team with middling players on purpose - and there is a case to be made for that.  But u can’t say that you get better players that way.

 

or... please provide a logical reason against this line of thinking please 

 

thanks!

 

 

 

 

[canucksnihilist]

On 8/17/2019 at 10:44 AM, stawns said:

No it didn't, you just refused to look

Ok then please tell me logically what the different plans were and when.  Just in general.  And we can see if there was a plan.   Just a few points about each year would do.

 

i think you will see the plan did change.

 

this method will allow us to list the changes so we can agree on the facts before just stating our (different) opinions.  Maybe we can reach a concensus.

[Gurn]

1 hour ago, canucksnihilist said:

1. Drafting.  In any draft selection you may get an amazing player.  There is no upper limit to the quality of player you might get in the first few rounds.  Even in the later rounds!  You may also get nothing.  

True, you may get nothing, like Daigle and many other flops.

 

1 hour ago, canucksnihilist said:

2. Trades for older players.  A few years after the draft - to be fair.  Typically the player is being traded because they are expendable.  

Typical the player is being traded because the other team feels they want a pick more than that player, it can happen for many reasons.

The team may be overstocked with that type of player in that position so trading from strength to shore up weakness. The team may also be in cap trouble and have to trade the player.

 

Every year, now, 31 teams draft 7 players a piece equaling 217 potential players, but since we know that not every team ices a line up with 7 rookies per year, it indicates that players are more valuable than picks.

 

 

[canucksnihilist]

15 minutes ago, gurn said:

True, you may get nothing, like Daigle and many other flops.

 

Typical the player is being traded because the other team feels they want a pick more than that player, it can happen for many reasons.

The team may be overstocked with that type of player in that position so trading from strength to shore up weakness. The team may also be in cap trouble and have to trade the player.

 

Every year, now, 31 teams draft 7 players a piece equaling 217 potential players, but since we know that not every team ices a line up with 7 rookies per year, it indicates that players are more valuable than picks.

 

 

But those players u are talking about are not star players.   they don’t have that potential.

 

my point is that if u really want high quality u have to use the draft.  A team isn’t going to trade u a budding star defense man for picks.   Or an EP.  those players aren’t in the equation for trades to move up or down a few years after the draft.  You are talking about players to fill the roster out with - support players.  I’m talking about how to get a bunch of higher quality star players.

 

how did the current team get em?  Were any of them from trades?   Who did we trade for our core:  EP, Boeser, Horvat (haha but that was for the pick so it still fits) or QH?   We didn’t.  Cause those players are never available.  So u can trade away all the picks u want but u are never getting a star player player back - except if u just get super lucky with a late bloomer; which almost never happens.

 

i think u are talking about players in general and I am talking about building a star caliber team that can win    Thoughts?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[mikeyman109]

52 minutes ago, canucksnihilist said:

But those players u are talking about are not star players.   they don’t have that potential.

 

my point is that if u really want high quality u have to use the draft.  A team isn’t going to trade u a budding star defense man for picks.   Or an EP.  those players aren’t in the equation for trades to move up or down a few years after the draft.  You are talking about players to fill the roster out with - support players.  I’m talking about how to get a bunch of higher quality star players.

 

how did the current team get em?  Were any of them from trades?   Who did we trade for our core:  EP, Boeser, Horvat (haha but that was for the pick so it still fits) or QH?   We didn’t.  Cause those players are never available.  So u can trade away all the picks u want but u are never getting a star player player back - except if u just get super lucky with a late bloomer; which almost never happens.

 

i think u are talking about players in general and I am talking about building a star caliber team that can win    Thoughts?

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't disagree with your logic when it comes to drafting star or higher skill level players because I have used the same logic when it comes to drafting Norris caliber defensemen. they just don't come up in free Agency very often if ever and trading for a star D man will cost you a lot of prospects or picks.

Now having said that there has to come a time when you decide we have our core players and you supplement what you have with Role players. You need a grinder or two to retrieve the puck for said star players. You need some grit to be harder to play against and that can come from role players or even a star player if you have that luxury.  You need a face off man, if you use one of your star type players you don't maximize their offense. Bo is a perfect example here. Almost leads the team in goals last year yet takes 80% of the faceoffs in his own zone. His Offensive starts were way down due to the Sutter and Beagle injuries.

What I am saying in a roundabout way is you cant keep depending on your draft picks to fill all the holes you have. You have to determine what you don't have in your prospects and look for that elsewhere. JB has done a good job of doing that in Free Agency this year. We needed a serious upgrade on the D and he has done that, whether you like the Myers signing and Benn as well he has upgraded over Stecher and Hutton.

Trading the pick for Miller and signing Ferland gives this team a bit more bite up front which it has sorely been lacking since Torres and Lapierre left.

There are many was to build a team. If you look at the way Pat Quinn did it he mostly built through trades. His drafting and development were not as good as JB's

He traded Patrik Sundstrom to get McLean and Greg Adams. Starting from the goal out he had his goal tender.

He traded to get Ronning, Dirk and Momesso. Skilled center, tough D man and tough winger

Of course he drafted Linden His leader and Captain. and Bure but that was due to some inside information.

Craig Janney was traded to get Jeff Brown Bret Hedican and Nathan Lafayette

again there are different ways to get to the same goal. I like the core players we have now. EP Brock, Bo, Quinn Hughes and the prospects coming in Podkolzin, Woo, Lind, Madden and maybe Hoglander although I am not as high on him as some here

The role players we have will make this team successful in the playoffs, Ferland, Miller, even Jake might be a playoff performer. Its going to be fun this year to see if they can make it and do some damage depending on which teams we match up against. Cant wait for October

[dpn1]

As far as Jim and his team are concerned I am very comfortable with what Jim has been doing and happy with his extension.

[Baggins]

5 hours ago, canucksnihilist said:

But those players u are talking about are not star players.   they don’t have that potential.

 

my point is that if u really want high quality u have to use the draft.  A team isn’t going to trade u a budding star defense man for picks.   Or an EP.  those players aren’t in the equation for trades to move up or down a few years after the draft.  You are talking about players to fill the roster out with - support players.  I’m talking about how to get a bunch of higher quality star players.

 

how did the current team get em?  Were any of them from trades?   Who did we trade for our core:  EP, Boeser, Horvat (haha but that was for the pick so it still fits) or QH?   We didn’t.  Cause those players are never available.  So u can trade away all the picks u want but u are never getting a star player player back - except if u just get super lucky with a late bloomer; which almost never happens.

 

i think u are talking about players in general and I am talking about building a star caliber team that can win    Thoughts?

3 out of those 4 are top 10 picks and the other still a 1st rounder. We weren't trading those picks thus you don't "expect" that type of return. Just as you don't "expect" to get an EP or Boeser with later round picks. Those are the very rare pleasant surprises. 

 

No team is made up of nothing but stars. Many players on top teams are just very good at their role, or a complementary player to a line.

[Smashian Kassian]

More confidence now the first couple years. Full confidence on draft day for sure. I really enjoy Jim's honesty with the media.

 

Still not fully confident on the pro-side, but that Pearson trade was a good step in the right direction. 

[aqua59]

On 7/31/2019 at 2:19 PM, WalkWithElias40 said:

after this FA yes I do,

 

What GM JB and staff did this off season addressed our needs..

 

Michael Ferland - to protect Petey, and adds scoring to the top 6

Tyler Myers/Jordie Benn- Big upgrade on defence since forever.

JT Miller- great acquistion to the Top 6 either on Peteys or Bo's line

 

 

never been soo excited for upcoming season in a long time !

Well stated. Thank goodness there are articulate people on this site regardless of view. Myself not so much. 

People like to dump on JB calling for his head yet fail to come up with a viable replacement. It’s not just Jim Benning, he has a staff. Jim goes some jobs go . Lives change. 

A replacement costs more money. 

Edited August 21, 2019 by aqua59
Spelling

[canucksnihilist]

9 hours ago, mikeyman109 said:

I don't disagree with your logic when it comes to drafting star or higher skill level players because I have used the same logic when it comes to drafting Norris caliber defensemen. they just don't come up in free Agency very often if ever and trading for a star D man will cost you a lot of prospects or picks.

Now having said that there has to come a time when you decide we have our core players and you supplement what you have with Role players. You need a grinder or two to retrieve the puck for said star players. You need some grit to be harder to play against and that can come from role players or even a star player if you have that luxury.  You need a face off man, if you use one of your star type players you don't maximize their offense. Bo is a perfect example here. Almost leads the team in goals last year yet takes 80% of the faceoffs in his own zone. His Offensive starts were way down due to the Sutter and Beagle injuries.

What I am saying in a roundabout way is you cant keep depending on your draft picks to fill all the holes you have. You have to determine what you don't have in your prospects and look for that elsewhere. JB has done a good job of doing that in Free Agency this year. We needed a serious upgrade on the D and he has done that, whether you like the Myers signing and Benn as well he has upgraded over Stecher and Hutton.

Trading the pick for Miller and signing Ferland gives this team a bit more bite up front which it has sorely been lacking since Torres and Lapierre left.

There are many was to build a team. If you look at the way Pat Quinn did it he mostly built through trades. His drafting and development were not as good as JB's

He traded Patrik Sundstrom to get McLean and Greg Adams. Starting from the goal out he had his goal tender.

He traded to get Ronning, Dirk and Momesso. Skilled center, tough D man and tough winger

Of course he drafted Linden His leader and Captain. and Bure but that was due to some inside information.

Craig Janney was traded to get Jeff Brown Bret Hedican and Nathan Lafayette

again there are different ways to get to the same goal. I like the core players we have now. EP Brock, Bo, Quinn Hughes and the prospects coming in Podkolzin, Woo, Lind, Madden and maybe Hoglander although I am not as high on him as some here

The role players we have will make this team successful in the playoffs, Ferland, Miller, even Jake might be a playoff performer. Its going to be fun this year to see if they can make it and do some damage depending on which teams we match up against. Cant wait for October

Lots of good thoughts there!

 

I would argue that JB wouldn’t do the same thing in his first few years if he could do it over again.  His latest moves show an experienced GM....  his first moves show an inexperienced one... no surprise there.

 

however the point is that at the time we needed to find star players we were trading away picks for role players.  When we didn’t have a core yet.  That much is not debatable.

 

so definitely it has evolved!  Will be an interesting season ahead!

[canucksnihilist]

5 hours ago, Baggins said:

3 out of those 4 are top 10 picks and the other still a 1st rounder. We weren't trading those picks thus you don't "expect" that type of return. Just as you don't "expect" to get an EP or Boeser with later round picks. Those are the very rare pleasant surprises. 

 

No team is made up of nothing but stars. Many players on top teams are just very good at their role, or a complementary player to a line.

Just timing...   we were in need of star players and were trading picks for role players.    See my other post / reply

[Baggins]

1 hour ago, canucksnihilist said:

Just timing...   we were in need of star players and were trading picks for role players.    See my other post / reply

We needed an entire team and the role players take longer than the elite players. I've maintained all along you need to add the elite players at the end to maximize their highest production years. This is why we had small windows with the WCE and then the twins. Took too long to build the team around them. The Pens and Hawks have had a big window because the elite players came in with a lot already in place maximizing Toews/Kane and Crosby/Malkin best years. Neither team still needed to replace 75% of their team with nothing on the farm. They came at the end of rebuilding, not the start. Had we got Petey and Boeser off the hop we still would have had 3/4 of the team to replace and nothing on the farm still. Wasting several years building the team around them and waiting on those later picks to develop and a few more again as they become good enough to support a cup run. That's the real timing to maximize the benefit of your star power.

[canucksnihilist]

1 hour ago, Baggins said:

We needed an entire team and the role players take longer than the elite players. I've maintained all along you need to add the elite players at the end to maximize their highest production years. This is why we had small windows with the WCE and then the twins. Took too long to build the team around them. The Pens and Hawks have had a big window because the elite players came in with a lot already in place maximizing Toews/Kane and Crosby/Malkin best years. Neither team still needed to replace 75% of their team with nothing on the farm. They came at the end of rebuilding, not the start. Had we got Petey and Boeser off the hop we still would have had 3/4 of the team to replace and nothing on the farm still. Wasting several years building the team around them and waiting on those later picks to develop and a few more again as they become good enough to support a cup run. That's the real timing to maximize the benefit of your star power.

No....  the wce and sedin eras had such short timespans because those players didn’t start to become stars until their mid-late 20s.

 

if they had been stars earlier the team would have been competing for a cup earlier.  Not sure how your logic works on that one...

 

getting support players isn't tough. Every team seems to be able to do it when they need them.  Besides Edmonton who just had incompetent management.  But to get them before u need them seems a bit odd don’t you think?  I mean develop them sure... but to trade for them, to support an empty core???? Haha it’s just misguided.   U must be able to see that no?

[alt kilgore]

11 hours ago, Baggins said:

We needed an entire team and the role players take longer than the elite players. I've maintained all along you need to add the elite players at the end to maximize their highest production years. This is why we had small windows with the WCE and then the twins. Took too long to build the team around them. The Pens and Hawks have had a big window because the elite players came in with a lot already in place maximizing Toews/Kane and Crosby/Malkin best years. Neither team still needed to replace 75% of their team with nothing on the farm. They came at the end of rebuilding, not the start. Had we got Petey and Boeser off the hop we still would have had 3/4 of the team to replace and nothing on the farm still. Wasting several years building the team around them and waiting on those later picks to develop and a few more again as they become good enough to support a cup run. That's the real timing to maximize the benefit of your star power.

Don't mean to pile on here, but ...seriously?   How would that work exactly? You'd, as a GM, have to have giant balls to pull that off. Creating a team of "role" players, and just hope you land a Pettersson or a Boeser to top off your teams requirements, at the exact right time.  All the while trading picks away to build that team of role players in anticipation, and thus cutting down your chances of landing that Pettersson quality player to complete the plan.  Meanwhile your cap  is all topped up on competent, but average players, who's play only deteriorates as their contracts go on.  And compounding a "rebuild" like that would be if an owner meddled and demanded the GM keep trying out new batches of free agents every year in order to earn him some playoff revenue.

 

"Role" players make up the majority of the league.  Some quality ones can even be snagged off the waiver wire from a team having cap issues themselves. JB landed Beagle, and Rousell last summer, and Myers, Benn, and Ferland this summer. It ain't that difficult to find them when you need them.  Another problem that will develop if you fill your cap with older role player contracts too early, and commit that cap for years ahead, is not being able to add that really special final piece when you REALLY need it.

[Baggins]

7 hours ago, canucksnihilist said:

No....  the wce and sedin eras had such short timespans because those players didn’t start to become stars until their mid-late 20s.

 

if they had been stars earlier the team would have been competing for a cup earlier.  Not sure how your logic works on that one...

 

getting support players isn't tough. Every team seems to be able to do it when they need them.  Besides Edmonton who just had incompetent management.  But to get them before u need them seems a bit odd don’t you think?  I mean develop them sure... but to trade for them, to support an empty core???? Haha it’s just misguided.   U must be able to see that no?

It sure seemed to be tough to get the support players for those guys, one cup run between the two in 15 years. Years of their high production was wasted just trying to accomplish building the team around them. Particularly the Sedins and the revolving door on RW. Then of course there was Burke's revolving door with goalies until settling on Cloutier. What you consider easy isn't. A lot more than two elite players need to be assembled. The more assembled prior to the elite players means a longer window of opportunity with them.

 

What Benning traded for was prospects that had done well in the AHL, Considerably better than any we had on our farm. One wouldn't expect them to become elite players but the potential was there for "good" players. What I find humorous in this is the panic over the possibility of losing Gaunce first to the expansion draft and then those saying we're "giving up too soon" on him when he wasn't qualified. He cost us a 1st. That's the difference in attitude to using the pick (they will all be stars) and trading one for partially developed prospect (they are all rejects). If we drafted him he'll be great despite mediocre AHL numbers and not impressing on call-ups. Yet trading a pick for a prospect will automatically lead to a bust despite good AHL numbers. Hypocracy at it's finest. Just as 1st rounder Shinkaruk was going to be our top line winger and many lost it over trading him. Well Vey put up far better AHL numbers and there's all this crying about trading a late 2nd for him when Shinkaruk cost us a first. Despite being a lower pick he had more potential than Shinkaruk based on AHL performance but they got very different reactions in the trades.

 

Whether using the pick or trading it for an AHL prospect the result is the same - you get a prospect. The junior player may have a better chance to be elite but also a much higher chance of being a complete bust than the successful AHL prospect. But it doesn't mean the AHL prospect can't, or won't, be a good player simply because you didn't draft him. It's also doesn't guarantee success. Both are prospects, both carry risk/reward. 

[Baggins]

9 hours ago, The 5th Line said:

You really need to rethink your logic.  

I did and came up with the same result. See above.

[Baggins]

3 hours ago, kilgore said:

Don't mean to pile on here, but ...seriously?   How would that work exactly? You'd, as a GM, have to have giant balls to pull that off. Creating a team of "role" players, and just hope you land a Pettersson or a Boeser to top off your teams requirements, at the exact right time.  All the while trading picks away to build that team of role players in anticipation, and thus cutting down your chances of landing that Pettersson quality player to complete the plan.  Meanwhile your cap  is all topped up on competent, but average players, who's play only deteriorates as their contracts go on.  And compounding a "rebuild" like that would be if an owner meddled and demanded the GM keep trying out new batches of free agents every year in order to earn him some playoff revenue.

 

"Role" players make up the majority of the league.  Some quality ones can even be snagged off the waiver wire from a team having cap issues themselves. JB landed Beagle, and Rousell last summer, and Myers, Benn, and Ferland this summer. It ain't that difficult to find them when you need them.  Another problem that will develop if you fill your cap with older role player contracts too early, and commit that cap for years ahead, is not being able to add that really special final piece when you REALLY need it.

We were in the worst situation I've ever seen for a new GM and I remember Bobby Orr's rookie season. No prospect pool and an entire team to replace. One, count 'em, one player under 27 worth keeping. House cleaning would have wasted years of high end talent with a bunch of AHL'ers and low end UFA's to back them up. This is why the Beniing transition plan and try to remain competitive made complete sense to me. Time spent adding prospects and getting the team younger. As it went on moving out the aging veterans the fall was bound to come. In the meantime you're adding younger players and building a prospect pool. Then comes the bottom and the elite talent. The elite guys transition faster and why they should come towards the end of the rebuild.not the beginning. 

 

You see the difference between the Pens, Hawks, and us is they didn't have an entire roster to replace and no prospect pool. Particularly the Hawks who had sucked for some time. Both had pieces in place, and a pool, before hitting bottom and getting Toews/Kane and Crosby/Malkin. This is where the delusion of two top picks and you're a contender for years in the snap of your fingers comes from. Their starting point when those guys were drafted is ignored.

 

The problem with this "easy to get" notion is it really isn't. Otherwise every team with two top players would be a contender for years - because thge rest is easy.

[canucksnihilist]

6 hours ago, Baggins said:

We were in the worst situation I've ever seen for a new GM and I remember Bobby Orr's rookie season. No prospect pool and an entire team to replace. One, count 'em, one player under 27 worth keeping. House cleaning would have wasted years of high end talent with a bunch of AHL'ers and low end UFA's to back them up. This is why the Beniing transition plan and try to remain competitive made complete sense to me. Time spent adding prospects and getting the team younger. As it went on moving out the aging veterans the fall was bound to come. In the meantime you're adding younger players and building a prospect pool. Then comes the bottom and the elite talent. The elite guys transition faster and why they should come towards the end of the rebuild.not the beginning. 

 

You see the difference between the Pens, Hawks, and us is they didn't have an entire roster to replace and no prospect pool. Particularly the Hawks who had sucked for some time. Both had pieces in place, and a pool, before hitting bottom and getting Toews/Kane and Crosby/Malkin. This is where the delusion of two top picks and you're a contender for years in the snap of your fingers comes from. Their starting point when those guys were drafted is ignored.

 

The problem with this "easy to get" notion is it really isn't. Otherwise every team with two top players would be a contender for years - because thge rest is easy.

Ok I’ll grant that it isn’t easy.  But it isn’t as hard as getting he core pieces to begin with.  Many teams never get a full core - most teams.  So to strive after the complementary pieces prematurely still seems odd to me.

 

Aka how do you know the pieces you will need until you have a core - so u know what it needs?

 

 

[mikeyman109]

5 hours ago, canucksnihilist said:

Ok I’ll grant that it isn’t easy.  But it isn’t as hard as getting he core pieces to begin with.  Many teams never get a full core - most teams.  So to strive after the complementary pieces prematurely still seems odd to me.

 

Aka how do you know the pieces you will need until you have a core - so u know what it needs?

 

 

This i agree with , you need to find the core players you want to play the type of game you are going to play. If you have a big tough strong core you might supplement it with a couple speed players, or if you have a skill based core like the Canucks do you might look for more rough and tumble role players.

One thing i have learned from watching the game for 50 years plus is that there is no "one" way to build a team. Some have done it through the draft , others have built through trades. I think it all depends on what your GM's strengths are. Benning's is drafting. Quinn's was trading. Both can be successful its just different. So how you build the team can be the same  way. I don't know that I share the idea of having a team full of plumbers waiting for superstars to come later but i do like what we have currently on the team and what JB added this summer.

[Baggins]

15 hours ago, canucksnihilist said:

Ok I’ll grant that it isn’t easy.  But it isn’t as hard as getting he core pieces to begin with.  Many teams never get a full core - most teams.  So to strive after the complementary pieces prematurely still seems odd to me.

 

Aka how do you know the pieces you will need until you have a core - so u know what it needs?

 

 

Many of the players that aren't elite are the core though. Really "core" are the guys the will be long term which is 4 to 6 guys. Then there's short term coreYou don't need to draft top 10 or 5 to get them. The reason TO went from bottom to playoff team is they added their three stars in one season pushing forwards down. Kadri for example blew as top line but was good on 2nd line. Adding the elite talent at the end pushes others down the line-up where they can excel easier. No matter how you slice it, elite youth adapt faster.

 

Most teams don't have to replace the entire team. They'll already have guys of an age and quality that can carry over with the rebuild. We weren't in that position at all. That's why I keep saying I've never in all my decades of following the NHL seen a GM take over a team in a worse position. One player under 27 worth keeping and nothing worth a damn on the farm team. It's precisely why I thought the way Benning went about was the right way. There wasn't going to be a quick fix for this rebuild. McD has already wasted three 100+ point seasons on a bad team in Edmonton. Crosby and Toews had won cups by then because more was already in place when they were drafted.