Sign in to follow this  
aqua59

Jim Benning

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Is it time for the annual team MVP poll thread?

 

Someone reading should create it, unless it already exists. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Is it time for the annual team MVP poll thread?

 

Someone reading should create it, unless it already exists. 

4-way toss up for me, I don't see how we would be competitive missing any of them

 

marky

quinn

jt

petey

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Chicken. said:

4-way toss up for me, I don't see how we would be competitive missing any of them

 

marky

quinn

jt

petey

Goes to show how far this team has come along. If one was to tell me at the end of the 2017-18 season, that in 2 years time, we will have 4 players on this team ahead of Horvat and Boeser (who were the best players on the 2017-18 team) I would not have believed it!

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 3/25/2020 at 9:11 AM, ruilin96 said:

Goes to show how far this team has come along. If one was to tell me at the end of the 2017-18 season, that in 2 years time, we will have 4 players on this team ahead of Horvat and Boeser (who were the best players on the 2017-18 team) I would not have believed it!

Proof that selecting at the top of the draft is a viable rebuild strategy.

 

Tank Nation

 

 

 

At any rate, I’d vote Miller. 
He was more dynamic while also being consistent. 
 

EP and QH are right there with Marky.

 

Many of us had projected the team’s season’s chances to rest on the health of either or both of EP and Marky, but QH was an unexpected surprise to the mix. 
 

A few players like Pearson may have had career years. It was a season of overachieving, in some regards, as well as some melancholy-like stretches of seemingly indifferent play. 
 

JB tried, but failed, with his lavish UFA plan. However, despite those obvious misses, the stellar play of other recent Canuck players smoothed the landing, to the point of this being a resoundingly positive season for the franchise.  
 

Silver linings remain JB’s golden crutch, IMO. I’ll take a lucky GM over most, anytime.  

Edited by 189lb enforcers?
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/10/2020 at 6:43 PM, Canuck Surfer said:

Stealth tank.

 

You reckon they honestly believed we would win with guys like Bartkoski or Megna? :huh: 

Yes.  Yes they did.  At least Aquilini did, and JB went along with it.  

The problem was the mixed messaging.  And the revisionist "rebuild" history. that many CDC posters are falling for.

 

Good article explaining it;

https://www.vancourier.com/pass-it-to-bulis/jim-benning-s-revisionist-rebuild-history-doesn-t-hold-water-1.23923166

 

“The past was alterable. The past never had been altered. Oceania was at war with Eastasia. Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia.”
- George Orwell, 1984

 

...It’s also not how Benning spoke at the time. Instead of taking the first-round playoff exit as a sign of a need to rebuild, Benning and his management team seemed to take making the playoffs at all as a sign they were moving in the right direction, at least publically. In an interview with Bob McKenzie heading into the 2015-16 season, Benning suggested the Canucks would once again be a 100-point team and make the playoffs thanks to an infusion of youth, speed, and toughness.

 

For the moment, however, let’s ignore what Benning said and look at what he did. What did Benning do immediately after they made the playoffs that first season?

There were a few early moves that could be interpreted as rebuilding moves. Benning sent Eddie Lack to the Carolina Hurricanes for a 3rd and a 7th-round pick. He somehow got the San Jose Sharks to give him a 7th-round pick for Patrick McNally. Kevin Bieksa was moved to the Anaheim Ducks for a 2nd-round pick in 2016.

Those are decent moves to add picks, particularly when you consider how Lack and Bieksa saw their play drop off significantly after they were moved and McNally lasted just two seasons in the AHL before dropping to the ECHL and going overseas to Europe. Benning also traded Zack Kassian and a 5th-round pick to the Montreal Canadiens for Brandon Prust, but their reasoning had more to do with Kassian’s personal struggles off the ice than the team itself.

Benning’s biggest move, however, was the polar opposite of a rebuilding move. He traded Nick Bonino, Adam Clendening, and a 2016 2nd-round pick for Brandon Sutter and a conditional 3rd.

That’s a move designed for short-term success, not for a rebuild that prioritizes long-term success at the cost of short-term pain.

If we fast forward a year to 2016, when the Canucks would supposedly be on year into their rebuilding process, there’s no sign whatsoever of a rebuild taking place.

2016 was the year Benning traded Jared McCann, a 2nd-round pick, and a 4th-round pick for Erik Gudbranson and a 5th. That’s a move that sacrificed multiple pieces with future potential for a player that was meant to help the Canucks win immediately.

2016 was also the year Benning signed Loui Eriksson to a six-year, $36 million contract. That’s not the signing of a rebuilding team. With an eye towards how Eriksson had performed with Daniel and Henrik Sedin in international competition, that was a win-now-and-damn-the-future-consequences signing.

The intent here isn’t to revisit a couple of Benning’s most-derided moves as Canucks GM, but to instead drive home the point that the Canucks were absolutely not in rebuild mode in 2015 or 2016. There is no possible way to interpret the moves made in those years as those of a rebuilding team.

 

.........

 

The moves made by Benning in 2016 and 2017 make sense if the team was trying to get back to the playoffs. You can argue whether they were the right moves or not, but at least they make sense. If the team was rebuilding, however, then his moves make no sense whatsoever.

 

As I see it, there are three ways to interpret Benning’s revisionist history. One is that he’s being dishonest and trying to spin his early years as GM to look better. That’s not a particularly good look.

Another possibility is that he’s being absolutely honest and that everything he and the Canucks did after his first year on the job was, in fact, a rebuild. That’s not a good look either. Apart from drafting fairly well, the Canucks didn’t do any actual rebuilding in 2015 or 2016.

The third possibility is that Benning is being completely honest, but that he has a definition of the word “rebuild” in his mind that bears no resemblance to how anyone else defines the word “rebuild.”

 

.......

 

I just think it's worthwhile to have a clear view of the past. There's nothing wrong with being optimistic about the future of the Canucks and believing that they are currently on the right path for success, but those that revise the past are doomed to repeat it.

 

 

I agree with that last paragraph.  It was an "accidental" rebuild. Which was salvaged through great scouting and some luck too in their top draft picks, ready to play right way, in the last few years. But our position in those drafts, being low enough in the standings to be so high in the lottery, was not in the plan.  I'm still optimistic.  But lets not rewrite history. 

 

Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia

Benning has always been rebuilding the Canucks

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JT Miller has been the engine of this team this year with Hughes and Marky being there along side him when it counted the most in many games.

  • Hydration 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Chicken. said:

4-way toss up for me, I don't see how we would be competitive missing any of them

 

marky

quinn

jt

petey

It is a toss up. I would have to go with Marky though.

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'd say JT or Marky, quinn pretty close.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/24/2020 at 5:44 PM, Vanuckles said:

My apologies, some personal stuff going on and I was kind of taking a break from CDC. Stay safe everyone. Let's see if we can pick this discussion back up, if you are still so inclined.

 

Rebuilding is changing of the guard and building a new core that gives the team a good shot at Lord Stanley with the right supporting cast. We've acquired the new core more or less, aside from one or 2 players that are still coming imo. Namely, Rathbone and maybe one of Juolevi or Podkolzin. We are on track - aka it's not done yet. This core is not ready to really compete for a cup yet. Even if they did have cap space to bring in good support players. The core is still too young and they're the ones driving the bus to win in the Playoffs. BUT imo we do have a very good young core that is capable of eventually giving us a good shot at winning the cup. Would you agree? That's why some of us are saying that the cap hits you are worried about are not as debilitating as you are making it out to be. They are all good character guys, no reports of any locker room cancers, just good leadership, most of whom were capable players when they were brought in. Eriksson hasn't worked out since the beginning but at the time he was signed he was supposed to be a top 6 player. Sutter and Baer were very capable players at first when they were brought in but injuries took their toll. Myers is a less than ideal #4 (#5 on a good team), but he also provides good leadership and deflects some attention off the young guys so they don't have to take on too much before they are ready.  Seems to me like you are upset about the contracts themselves as opposed to the philosophy of bringing in veteran leadership in to usher in the new age. Am I on correct with that remark? I realize what you're saying regarding the contracts, but the thing is you can't bring in all 4th liners to show the kids how to be consistent competent players, and if you need to bring in good players, which we did, you have to pay $$ and term especially when you want them to come to a rebuilding team. And we did need to bring them in because again, we are NOT competing for the cup right now. Nobody thought Hughes and Petey would make the impact they have made so far in their young careers. Nobody thought they can elate the team like that right away. Young guys typically don't do that. Keep that in mind when you are thinking about those contracts, which again will be off the books when the team is ready to be a cup contender.

 

Markstrom and Tanev are the priority imo. I'd rather keep Tanev than Stecher because we have a lot of young guys coming up on the backend that could replace Stech, but you can't expect any of them to match up against the opposition's top line right away. And we need someone to matchup against top lines if we don't want to take a step back. Virtanen is an RFA so we don't have to lose him for nothing if the cap doesn't allow us to re-sign him. While he's turned into a good player, he's not irreplaceable. There could be plenty of takers for Sutter at 30-50% with 1 year remaining on his contract so we could potentially also bring back Toffoli. I also firmly believe that Eriksson was not going to return next year... obviously I don't know for sure but retirement and "advising" could have very much been in his future. I don't think he's too keen on coming back and playing here for another year either. Who knows.... Anyways, yes the contracts could have an impact on us losing one player to free agency, but is it catastrophic enough to break the team or for it to be a "failed rebuild"? Not by a country mile. Which leads me to my next point.

 

 

Do you think we are building a good enough core with key pieces that can eventually give us a shot at the Stanley cup? I called you impatient because of the "failed rebuild" remark. You called it a failed rebuild after 4 years of no playoffs. There is no way anybody should be saying that at this point, especially not someone like you who's been around for a while. I don't mind your attitude regarding the losing. It absolutely sucks. BUT it's not unexpected, and it's only been 4 years of no playoffs. If they don't make the playoffs this year - if we have playoffs with all this Covid19 BS - then that would be incredibly disappointing considering the position they were in before Marky went down, but again not something that unexpected in the grand scheme of things and not something that can't be rectified next year. But I think we're in a good position to come out of this rebuild in about 2-3 years.

 

Sorry @The 5th Line, believe it or not I actually tried to keep it as short as possible :lol:

This is more of someone just making up their own definition.  "changing of the guard"  Okay so if we traded the Sedins for Jagr.  Changing of the guard = rebuild.  

 

Rebuilding in hockey terms means selling off for young assets, this is not a complicated secret.   We just traded a 1st, 2nd, 3rd and Madden for two 27 year old players.  That would define us as all-in for the playoffs/competing, it doesn't mean we're rebuilding.  You can't be all in for playoffs, trade all your draft picks and be rebuilding at the same time.  I'm not discrediting those two moves I'm just using them to make a point

 

The core is good l but it's also not ready like you said and I completely agree with both of those statements...now where we are running in to problems is that if we had not rushed the need for overpaid vets we would be in a better spot to help this core(that is actually quite decent) right now.  That's what I said.  "it's looking like a failed/rushed rebuild" because we are a decent young core stuck with aging players who we tried to patch holes with at the start, now it is hindering our progress.  I never said it was a failed rebuild.  I do not believe having that many vets has done more good than having more cap space/more young assets during times like these and this is not hindsight seeing as how most of these vets signings/trades have made me cringe at the time.  

 

 

"I realize what you're saying regarding the contracts, but the thing is you can't bring in all 4th liners to show the kids how to be consistent competent players, and if you need to bring in good players, which we did, you have to pay $$ and term especially when you want them to come to a rebuilding team"  

 

I love the idea of veteran leadership but the money and assets dished out to get it has been crazy.  Leadership can't be evaluated from an outside perspective that a fan has I will admit that but you could probably find the same leadership for half the price that we paid over the years combined. 

 

You yourself say Myers is a #5 on a good team, that's pretty much equivalent to a 4th line player 6mil  We literally signed a career 4th Liner Jay Beagle to a 4 year contract.  Schaller borderline 4th liner 2.5 mil.  Sutter has basically played like a 4th liner since he's been here 4.2 mil  Gagner 4th liner 3+ mil  Eriksson 4th liner 6mil.  Young assets given up for 4th liner Erik Gudbranson.      

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 3/25/2020 at 9:05 AM, Chicken. said:

4-way toss up for me, I don't see how we would be competitive missing any of them

 

marky

quinn

jt

petey

I agree. I would probably have to vote for Marky, but that's because a goalie can easily win or lose a game pretty much single handed, so more often has the bigger impact than any one skater. But it's like trying to decide what is the most important part of the car, the engine (JT), the transmission (Petey), the steering (Quinn) or the brakes (Marky). Take out any one of the four and you're not going to get where you want to go.

Edited by WeneedLumme
  • Hydration 2
  • Burr 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/27/2020 at 7:39 AM, The 5th Line said:

This is more of someone just making up their own definition.  "changing of the guard"  Okay so if we traded the Sedins for Jagr.  Changing of the guard = rebuild.  

 

Rebuilding in hockey terms means selling off for young assets, this is not a complicated secret.   We just traded a 1st, 2nd, 3rd and Madden for two 27 year old players.  That would define us as all-in for the playoffs/competing, it doesn't mean we're rebuilding.  You can't be all in for playoffs, trade all your draft picks and be rebuilding at the same time.  I'm not discrediting those two moves I'm just using them to make a point

 

The core is good l but it's also not ready like you said and I completely agree with both of those statements...now where we are running in to problems is that if we had not rushed the need for overpaid vets we would be in a better spot to help this core(that is actually quite decent) right now.  That's what I said.  "it's looking like a failed/rushed rebuild" because we are a decent young core stuck with aging players who we tried to patch holes with at the start, now it is hindering our progress.  I never said it was a failed rebuild.  I do not believe having that many vets has done more good than having more cap space/more young assets during times like these and this is not hindsight seeing as how most of these vets signings/trades have made me cringe at the time.  

 

 

"I realize what you're saying regarding the contracts, but the thing is you can't bring in all 4th liners to show the kids how to be consistent competent players, and if you need to bring in good players, which we did, you have to pay $$ and term especially when you want them to come to a rebuilding team"  

 

I love the idea of veteran leadership but the money and assets dished out to get it has been crazy.  Leadership can't be evaluated from an outside perspective that a fan has I will admit that but you could probably find the same leadership for half the price that we paid over the years combined. 

 

You yourself say Myers is a #5 on a good team, that's pretty much equivalent to a 4th line player 6mil  We literally signed a career 4th Liner Jay Beagle to a 4 year contract.  Schaller borderline 4th liner 2.5 mil.  Sutter has basically played like a 4th liner since he's been here 4.2 mil  Gagner 4th liner 3+ mil  Eriksson 4th liner 6mil.  Young assets given up for 4th liner Erik Gudbranson.      

 

 

 

 

 

 

Quote

This is more of someone just making up their own definition.  "changing of the guard"  Okay so if we traded the Sedins for Jagr.  Changing of the guard = rebuild.  

 

Rebuilding in hockey terms means selling off for young assets, this is not a complicated secret.   We just traded a 1st, 2nd, 3rd and Madden for two 27 year old players.  That would define us as all-in for the playoffs/competing, it doesn't mean we're rebuilding.  You can't be all in for playoffs, trade all your draft picks and be rebuilding at the same time.  I'm not discrediting those two moves I'm just using them to make a point

 

Well no, what I'm trying to say is there's more than one way to skin a cat. Sorry Alf if you're reading this. Just because they are not following your script for a rebuild doesn't make it less of a rebuild. Again, it seems like you just want to be in the armchair and do it your way, otherwise they are screwing up the rebuild. We are not all in for the playoffs, they didn't sell out everyone in the farm to try to get to the playoffs, they were dealing from a position of strength and decided to bring in ONE player that will help with the playoff push at the deadline because it is vital that this young core experiences what the playoffs are like. Gillis sold Schneider - a very capable starter at the time - for a 1st round pick. Does that mean he was rebuilding?

 

 

 

Quote

The core is good l but it's also not ready like you said and I completely agree with both of those statements...now where we are running in to problems is that if we had not rushed the need for overpaid vets we would be in a better spot to help this core(that is actually quite decent) right now.  That's what I said.  "it's looking like a failed/rushed rebuild" because we are a decent young core stuck with aging players who we tried to patch holes with at the start, now it is hindering our progress.  I never said it was a failed rebuild.  I do not believe having that many vets has done more good than having more cap space/more young assets during times like these and this is not hindsight seeing as how most of these vets signings/trades have made me cringe at the time.

 

I love the idea of veteran leadership but the money and assets dished out to get it has been crazy.  Leadership can't be evaluated from an outside perspective that a fan has I will admit that but you could probably find the same leadership for half the price that we paid over the years combined. 

On 3/9/2020 at 4:12 PM, The 5th Line said:

What? The half-assed/rushed rebuild is starting to look like a failure?  

But regarding the rest of the quote directly above, I think we've gone down this road enough where we're going to start going in circles at this point. No? Agree to disagree?

 

Quote

You yourself say Myers is a #5 on a good team, that's pretty much equivalent to a 4th line player 6mil  We literally signed a career 4th Liner Jay Beagle to a 4 year contract.  Schaller borderline 4th liner 2.5 mil.  Sutter has basically played like a 4th liner since he's been here 4.2 mil  Gagner 4th liner 3+ mil  Eriksson 4th liner 6mil.  Young assets given up for 4th liner Erik Gudbranson.

Well no a 3rd pairing guy averages more than 15 mins a night whereas a 4th liner is around 8-10. Myers can probably capably play around 16-18 mins a night. Plus he's filling in as an ok top 4 for us, to help Tanev with depth on the right side. Key reason (along with Stecher stepping up his play this year) why Tanev has missed a TON of time with injuries this year imo. I don't wanna argue each one of your assessments regarding contracts/player roles there but let's just say that I disagree with maybe the exception of Beagle. Also Schaller was 1.9 not 2.5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@Vanuckles This argument won't go anywhere. Making your team older/going for the playoffs and rebuilding are the same thing now?  Might as well get rid of the term completely

Edited by The 5th Line

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/2/2020 at 11:05 AM, The 5th Line said:

Would you trust Steve Yzerman to do the job?  Why has Stevie Y collected more 1st 2nd and 3rd round picks in his 2 years with Detroit than JB has done in his 6 years with us?  

 

Why does Ottawa have 3 first, 4 2nds and two 3rds in this years draft alone and another 3 2nds for next years.

 

Why are we spending to the cap every year and giving all our 2nd round picks away?  Because we are rushing the process.  

 

How does the Kool aid taste? 

 

 

cause were actually competing for a playoof spot. Like seriously we  are, were in. 2021 were in. Otttawa, Detroit  umm no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Hockey101 said:

cause were actually competing for a playoof spot. Like seriously we  are, were in. 2021 were in. Otttawa, Detroit  umm no.

Cap teams are like that.

Ottawa might be awesome soon, for longer, than we are. 
I’m routing for them. That city deserves some winning hockey more than most, IMO. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/2/2020 at 9:14 AM, Alflives said:

I said at the time of the Tofu trade that Madden and a second (assets wasted IMO) should have been used as sweetener in a deal this summer (or at that TDL) to dump Loui, or Sutter, or Baer.  We needed to clear one of those three deadwood contracts more than getting Tofu, and just trying to squeeze into the playoffs.  Now, we will miss the playoffs, and still have to dump those contracts.  Can you say wasted assets getting piled on to the already high pile?  

I accept I’ve been negative on the team’s drpirection and coaching for a while, but IMO the facts justify the serious concern.

We have Petey and Hughes.  These are two generational players.  We should be building around them, so when they are physically and emotionally mature we have the support players needed for them to lead us to Cups.  Going all in now is a foolish waste of assets, that will be needed when we actually are ready.  

This is not JB though.  He is only the puppet; Aquilini is the puppeteer.  Any GM Aquilini hires will be one he can control.  He will not hire a strong willed, and experienced GM.  Plus, those guys won’t work here anyway.  

Alf..  JB will do what he has to do to get things done, cap wise I mean, if he signs TT then I love what we're going to look like top 6 wise.. the only issue we have now is on D and we're in the middle of seeing what the farm has and act accordingly, and for once, when that gets looked after (2 seasons) we will end up with 4 pretty good rolling lines and will be hard to play against, but Alf..  TT was the perfect fit for our top 6 to top off picking up JT Miller for peanuts... And by the time the team matures together there will be a dog fight for any available spot on the roster from farm depth.. when have we ever had that? Never! Not f'n once in the history of this franchise.. yeah there's work to do but we're getting closer than we ever had before and we can thank JB for that, no he's not perfect but he sure has caught on, is he done in his own development curve? Nope but like the team, he's close. 

We'll be fine Alf... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Cap teams are like that.

Ottawa might be awesome soon, for longer, than we are. 
I’m routing for them. That city deserves some winning hockey more than most, IMO. 

If they have JB-like drafting/luck they definitely could be. They've had pretty $&!# luck though.

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I am not convinced that our farm has much to offer the NHL other than a few bright spots. Besides those, the calibre of players available to supplement this roster appear more like depth players rather than anything else. Depth-depth, in most cases, seems to be a probable synopsis, IMO. 

 

The Canucks are currently a middling-team trending upwards and this will obviously impact their draft position. They may also be inclined to surrender a few more picks for this period of contention they find themselves in, which could further impact the prospect pool. 
 

With the combination of the surrendering of quality draft picks, a weaker draft position and a fairly unremarkable current prospect pool besides the Pods and Hogs who certainly push the prospect grade level into a higher, but temporary, grade than it may deserve, I anticipate that beyond those few names that the pool may only deliver depth players, perhaps depth-depth players to the Canucks during this phase of the roster life cycle, which is less than ideal, given the relative age of the bulk of the roster outside of it’s core. The core is relatively young, but with relatively expensive, quality FAs insulating them, especially within the top 6 and top 4. I have concerns with how this will play out as those vets begin to slow down or leave. 
 

The kids will be looking for raises just as some of the key vets are declining. With less money to spend on the top minute positions, I suppose the thought/hope is that money currently being spent on the Beagles, etc, will be available, but this assumes that Beagle-calibre prospects will seamlessly and inexpensively take over those roles, which doesn’t appear to be the case, IMO. It is possible that the lack of quality in the pool hampers either the top or bottom half of the roster within a few years, just when it’s time to replace most of it, but with less money to go around. 

 

When JB abandoned the slow and steady approach of rebuilding through the draft and vaulted the team into contention with all those fancy UFA signings, he gambled on his pool being ready to supplement his NHL roster. I wonder how it will all turn out, now that silver linings, like drafting 5-7 OA and selecting franchise changing super-kids, is no longer his mandate; no immediate, cheap help is coming in annual waves to keep fans happy, let alone his boss. 
 

I should add the context here that I am not all that high on Woo, Rafferty, Lind, etc. Not in the sense that I anticipate those players replacing Tanev, Edler, Myers and Pearson, which looks about 3 seasons out, if I were to guess. 

Edited by 189lb enforcers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone that can't figure out why Ottawa has accumulated the picks they have and Vancouver hasn't is hopelessly stupid. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/30/2020 at 6:12 PM, The 5th Line said:

@Vanuckles This argument won't go anywhere. Making your team older/going for the playoffs and rebuilding are the same thing now?  Might as well get rid of the term completely

I think there's a balancing act in the end.

 

If you want your team to get better right away you need to get older (ie. need to trade for an existing NHL player). Exceptions to this means you got lucky.

If you want your team to get better gradually in order to keep your youth, you need to develop from the inside.

 

Neither of these type of moves will ever be guaranteed to work. As a result, I believe if you want the best result, you need to hedge your bets and do both in the end. Obviously there's a time and place for it all, but if you get the right players in the end, does it really matter how the team developed?

 

Personally, I just want a good team in the end and this moaning and groaning over the details of it, even if we get a good player like Toffoli out of it for a time, is kind of silly, but that's my opinion on it.

  • Hydration 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, The Lock said:

I think there's a balancing act in the end.

 

If you want your team to get better right away you need to get older (ie. need to trade for an existing NHL player). Exceptions to this means you got lucky.

If you want your team to get better gradually in order to keep your youth, you need to develop from the inside.

 

Neither of these type of moves will ever be guaranteed to work. As a result, I believe if you want the best result, you need to hedge your bets and do both in the end. Obviously there's a time and place for it all, but if you get the right players in the end, does it really matter how the team developed?

 

Personally, I just want a good team in the end and this moaning and groaning over the details of it, even if we get a good player like Toffoli out of it for a time, is kind of silly, but that's my opinion on it.

This. While some people have done nothing but bitch for the last three years the team has gotten markedly better (goal diff. has improved by 70+ I believe). At what point do you just get over it ? If they hit 100+ points next season is that enough? 110 points? Where is the threshold where you just stfu, enjoy the team, and stop being a pedant ?  

  • Thanks 1
  • Hydration 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.