Wow to the teams who traded away first round picks......

[J.I.A.H.N]

3 minutes ago, qwijibo said:

It almost certainly wouldn’t be the same.  But I think it’s more fair to base the seeding on only the games that have been played.  I can see your point of view. And although I don’t agree I can’t say I’d be outraged if that’s how they did it. I’d just prefer them to base it on fact. Not assumption. (Even is the data set is incomplete and partially flawed) 

Well as a Canuck fan,,,since we seen did not see the playoffs...……...

 

I would argue, my way is better 

[Jester13]

On 3/17/2020 at 7:43 AM, DownUndaCanuck said:

Good on them for doing so, the season isn't over and there may well be playoffs and a Cup winner.

 

Leading into 2011, Gillis just got us a couple of 3rd liners. He should have blown the absolute bank and traded away all our 1st and 2nd round picks of the next 2 years to give Kesler and the Sedins two 30 goal scorers to play with. We not only would have won in 2011 but arguably again the next season and could have created a dynasty. Biggest fault of MG tenure was not going all-in and becoming the ultimate buyer. We could have had a couple of cups. Plus, those picks didn't turn out the best anyway...

I can't agree more. MG never brought in a Miller or Toffoli or Pearson into the mix, and we were stuck with Raymond, Higgins, Booth, Samuelson-type guys. Don't get me wrong, the latter were ok, but not as good for the post season as the former.

 

On 3/19/2020 at 6:41 PM, Lazurus said:

LA might make an offer for Miller. Tofu will go to LA again, kids, family and LA needs him. He has expressed before the trade how much he loves LA, I think LA looked at who to trade and decided Tofu was the best "rental" trade because of his strong ties in the area. They could have traded other players at that price but Tofu was the most adamant about staying.

Still speculation. I think it's equally as possible he signs with us, an up-and-coming team with a chance to win with an exciting new core and in one of the nicest cities in the world. He and his wife seem to like the change. They're still young, so it's not like they wouldn't mind a change in their lives for a few years.

 

On 4/4/2020 at 10:55 AM, coastal.view said:

i think one sensible solution to consider

is to cancel all trades made at the tdl

since those were made in contemplation of a playoffs that did not happen

 

or to simplify this a bit

maybe cancel all compensation made in these deals

but still require the receiving team to pay any/all salary due to the player after the trade for this season

as the receiving team still got some limited benefit from the player who joined their team

No way this'll happen. Guys get traded, move, buy places, move children into new schools, etc., all of which also comes into play. And there likely isn't an avenue to reverse deals like that, whereas already in place is a "trade is a trade". Unfortunately, or fortunately, it is what it is. I just hope if they resume play that it's done as fairly as possible, because the last thing anyone needs is controversy surrounding an altered season and champion. Imagine if a team gets in over the Canucks in a miscalculated way and they go on to win the cup. Aye yi yi.

[Lazurus]

51 minutes ago, Jester13 said:

On 3/20/2020 at 1:41 AM, Lazurus said:

LA might make an offer for Miller. Tofu will go to LA again, kids, family and LA needs him. He has expressed before the trade how much he loves LA, I think LA looked at who to trade and decided Tofu was the best "rental" trade because of his strong ties in the area. They could have traded other players at that price but Tofu was the most adamant about staying.

Still speculation. I think it's equally as possible he signs with us, an up-and-coming team with a chance to win with an exciting new core and in one of the nicest cities in the world. He and his wife seem to like the change. They're still young, so it's not like they wouldn't mind a change in their lives for a few years.

Don't think his wife wants to move permanently and lose her career.

And no matter how good this team looked it was a comparison to last few year's teams, which have been horrible. This isn't really that good a team, just immensely better than the previous 7 years and at that they were not a lock to even make the playoffs

[Jester13]

6 minutes ago, Lazurus said:

Don't think his wife wants to move permanently and lose her career.

And no matter how good this team looked it was a comparison to last few year's teams, which have been horrible. This isn't really that good a team, just immensely better than the previous 7 years and at that they were not a lock to even make the playoffs

You're right, this team isn't that good, if you compare them to the elite teams right now, but I did clearly state up-and-coming team; a team that includes three Calder nominees/winner(s) in a row and one of the deepest propsect pools in the league. 

 

You seem to think on behalf of his wife, but the reality is you have no idea any more than anyone else; and who's to say she has to sacrifice her career for Tofu to play with us? The possibility of him signing with us is at the very least equally as great as him resigning with LA. I personally believe the odds are in our favour with how much they've both stated, he and his wife, how much they like the team and city. I digress.

[Lazurus]

3 hours ago, Jester13 said:

You're right, this team isn't that good, if you compare them to the elite teams right now, but I did clearly state up-and-coming team; a team that includes three Calder nominees/winner(s) in a row and one of the deepest propsect pools in the league. 

 

You seem to think on behalf of his wife, but the reality is you have no idea any more than anyone else; and who's to say she has to sacrifice her career for Tofu to play with us? The possibility of him signing with us is at the very least equally as great as him resigning with LA. I personally believe the odds are in our favour with how much they've both stated, he and his wife, how much they like the team and city. I digress.

I guess it would just end up being a number of things then, where is house is, his wife's family, a bunch of friends he still keeps in contact with, the taxes, the fact he only played for one team before playing a few games here, his old team well be better thinks to his sacrifice, they need him too, they can pay him more or the same.

He is a hockey player, he knows good teams win championships, he has been there so he also knows he has a better chance with retooled LA than a wannabe Vancouver with no future. Did you know Vancouver has more older and fewer young players than LA?

[Jester13]

13 minutes ago, Lazurus said:

I guess it would just end up being a number of things then, where is house is, his wife's family, a bunch of friends he still keeps in contact with, the taxes, the fact he only played for one team before playing a few games here, his old team well be better thinks to his sacrifice, they need him too, they can pay him more or the same.

He is a hockey player, he knows good teams win championships, he has been there so he also knows he has a better chance with retooled LA than a wannabe Vancouver with no future. Did you know Vancouver has more older and fewer young players than LA?

This conversation ends here, ha! 

[22and33]

2 hours ago, Lazurus said:

I guess it would just end up being a number of things then, where is house is, his wife's family, a bunch of friends he still keeps in contact with, the taxes, the fact he only played for one team before playing a few games here, his old team well be better thinks to his sacrifice, they need him too, they can pay him more or the same.

He is a hockey player, he knows good teams win championships, he has been there so he also knows he has a better chance with retooled LA than a wannabe Vancouver with no future. Did you know Vancouver has more older and fewer young players than LA?

Source? 

Because this source says LA ranks 31st (30.9yrs) for average age where as Vancouver ranks 4th (27.6yrs)

 

https://www.rosterresource.com/nhl-roster-breakdowns/

[Conscience]

On 3/16/2020 at 10:39 AM, smithers joe said:

JB has said they hope to get a 2nd round pick back by moving someone in the off season. not to worry.

That doesn’t make up for it. That’s still having one pick instead of two. And ofc he says that, every Gm hopes to get more picks, doesn’t mean he will.

[smithers joe]

39 minutes ago, Conscience said:

That doesn’t make up for it. That’s still having one pick instead of two. And ofc he says that, every Gm hopes to get more picks, doesn’t mean he will.

it was a good gamble that may still work out. good that JB is trying to bring a good team here. they may still sign TT. glad he has guts.

[coastal.view]

On 4/7/2020 at 6:58 AM, Jester13 said:

No way this'll happen. Guys get traded, move, buy places, move children into new schools, etc., all of which also comes into play. And there likely isn't an avenue to reverse deals like that, whereas already in place is a "trade is a trade". Unfortunately, or fortunately, it is what it is. I just hope if they resume play that it's done as fairly as possible, because the last thing anyone needs is controversy surrounding an altered season and champion. Imagine if a team gets in over the Canucks in a miscalculated way and they go on to win the cup. Aye yi yi.

you realize most did not even play for their new team for 3 weeks before the nhl shut down

you think they all bought new houses, moved their families, etc etc

that is not typically how trade deadline deals actually play out

a trade is a trade if the purpose of the trade is even partly realized

all these trades were frustrated and the tdl teams that did these for immediate playoff success

did not get any value for what they gave up

these deals need to be addressed by the league if there are no playoffs this season

[Jester13]

26 minutes ago, coastal.view said:

you realize most did not even play for their new team for 3 weeks before the nhl shut down

you think they all bought new houses, moved their families, etc etc

that is not typically how trade deadline deals actually play out

a trade is a trade if the purpose of the trade is even partly realized

all these trades were frustrated and the tdl teams that did these for immediate playoff success

did not get any value for what they gave up

these deals need to be addressed by the league if there are no playoffs this season

I agree it will all be addressed (I mean, it'll have to be), but how/where they draw the line will be very interesting, and I don't think the solution will be to just reverse all the transactions. It'll likely have to be on a case-by-case basis and with further negotiation between the two teams. But, I'll admit, I have no effing clue and am merely spit-balling 

[coastal.view]

Just now, Jester13 said:

I agree it will all be addressed (I mean, it'll have to be), but how/where they draw the line will be very interesting, and I don't think the solution will be to just reverse all the transactions. It'll likely have to be on a case-by-case basis and with further negotiation between the two teams. But, I'll admit, I have no effing clue and am merely spit-balling 

i doubt "they" can do it on a case by case basis

is the nhl going to renegotiate every deal for the 2/3 teams involved?

very unlikely

 

they'll have to come out with a general policy approved by all team owners

so it will likely be an either / or outcome

the trades are cancelled or they are not

i see little middle ground on this

 

i cannot see how these trades will be allowed to stand though

as tdl trades are always playoff focused and they require playoffs to be valuable

as there is almost always over payment by the playoff team

[Jester13]

4 minutes ago, coastal.view said:

i doubt "they" can do it on a case by case basis

is the nhl going to renegotiate every deal for the 2/3 teams involved?

very unlikely

 

they'll have to come out with a general policy approved by all team owners

so it will likely be an either / or outcome

the trades are cancelled or they are not

i see little middle ground on this

 

i cannot see how these trades will be allowed to stand though

as tdl trades are always playoff focused and they require playoffs to be valuable

as there is almost always over payment by the playoff team

I don't mean the NHL renegotiates the deals, I meant the two teams do. But I agree, where is the middle ground? What if two teams can't agree? Lots won't want to give up a good trade. But how would anyone even agree which was a rental deal or anything like that? There's nothing written, is there(?), that defines deals but rather it's all convention, so what team that thinks they got the better deal will want to simply let go of the deal and have it reversed? Do we get madden back? What if we do and then Tofu signs with us in the summer now that he's had a taste for the team and city?

 

The reason why I think it's more likely a trade is a trade is because you can't predict something like this happening, and you can have winners and losers by reversing the trades, as that would be incredibly unfair to a lot of teams. I get that it's incredibly unfair that teams didn't get to experience the fruit of their trades, but it's just an unfortunate reality in that sense of unfair, whereas reversing is a manufactured unfairness. 

[coastal.view]

 

19 minutes ago, Jester13 said:

I don't mean the NHL renegotiates the deals, I meant the two teams do. But I agree, where is the middle ground? What if two teams can't agree? Lots won't want to give up a good trade. But how would anyone even agree which was a rental deal or anything like that? There's nothing written, is there(?), that defines deals but rather it's all convention, so what team that thinks they got the better deal will want to simply let go of the deal and have it reversed? Do we get madden back? What if we do and then Tofu signs with us in the summer now that he's had a taste for the team and city?

 

The reason why I think it's more likely a trade is a trade is because you can't predict something like this happening, and you can have winners and losers by reversing the trades, as that would be incredibly unfair to a lot of teams. I get that it's incredibly unfair that teams didn't get to experience the fruit of their trades, but it's just an unfortunate reality in that sense of unfair, whereas reversing is a manufactured unfairness. 

i think tofu was unlikely to sign again with la anyway

so could have signed with the nucks this off season anyway

or anyone else.... which he still can do

 

what is really unfair

is that nucks got less then 10 games from tofu, and so far likely no playoff games at all

yet la gets to keep madden for that ???

that is not even remotely fair

 

Edited April 10, 2020 by coastal.view

[Jester13]

6 minutes ago, coastal.view said:

 

i think tofu was unlikely to sign again with la anyway

so could have signed with the nucks this off season anyway

or anyone else.... which he still can do

 

what is really unfair

is that nucks got less then 10 games from tofu, and so far likely no playoff games at all

yet la gets to keep madden for that ???

that is not even remotely fair

 

I get that, but if you reverse the trade it's extremely unfair for LA, as they got a really good return for Tofu that I'm sure they're happy about. So the only way to make this the most fair is to stick with the trade and say that it's just a very unfortunate reality of a situation for teams like our Nucks. 

[coastal.view]

1 minute ago, Jester13 said:

I get that, but if you reverse the trade it's extremely unfair for LA, as they got a really good return for Tofu that I'm sure they're happy about. So the only way to make this the most fair is to stick with the trade and say that it's just a very unfortunate reality of a situation for teams like our Nucks. 

well i think

we just disagree

with eachother

 

and that is ok and trivial

in this time of crisis

 

cheers

[Lazurus]

On 4/7/2020 at 9:08 PM, 22and33 said:

Source? 

Because this source says LA ranks 31st (30.9yrs) for average age where as Vancouver ranks 4th (27.6yrs)

 

https://www.rosterresource.com/nhl-roster-breakdowns/

I simply use NHL ref. and count how many players and their ages.

Vancouver has 12 players on the roster 26 and under,

Los Angles has 16 players 26 and under

 

Vancouver has 9 players in their 30's

LA has 6 players in their 30's

 

LA = more 26 and under

Vancouver = more 30 and 0ver

[22and33]

11 hours ago, Lazurus said:

I simply use NHL ref. and count how many players and their ages.

Vancouver has 12 players on the roster 26 and under,

Los Angles has 16 players 26 and under

 

Vancouver has 9 players in their 30's

LA has 6 players in their 30's

 

LA = more 26 and under

Vancouver = more 30 and 0ver

I'd check again I just counted LA having 10 players on the roster 26 and under. Also what happened to the 27-29 year olds?

[IBatch]

On 3/16/2020 at 3:57 PM, oldnews said:

Gillis limited his rental cost to a maximum of  2nd round picks - to acquire rentals that fit organizational needs.

Most notable was Roy - who he spent a 2nd and Connauton on.

Arguably, those teams did not need to add key, high end pieces - they needed secondary, support pieces.

In other words I agree with Gillis' philosophy in those stages - to retain their 1st round picks and not waste them on rentals.  The problem was not insufficient talent on those rosters or failure to spend enough - in hindsight the problem was that retaining those picks did not lead to the kind of drafting or development that would sustain a competitive franchise.  The team did not produce the prospects necessary - which are also good 'capital' to have if you're looking to acquire key pieces in potential cup runs.

 

I actually consider Gillis' rental work to be top notch (in spite of Roy not really working out).

 

Their principal needs were typically centers - and there is/was literally no better rental than a player like Pahlsson (an absolute playoff  beast that was a great pickup at a time the team, however, as a whole, was not peaking).  He cost 2 x 4th round picks - and by today's standards would cost a whole hell of a lot more to rent.

Likewise with key support pieces he managed to acquire - he stole Ehrhoff - he stole HIggins - he landed Lapierre for a 3rd round pick.   Vigneault had enough to work with - they simply did not have the health necessary at key times imo (and didn't capitalize on the picks they retained in the end - so in hindsight trading those picks would not have cost the franchise much). 

 

However, Gillis did not have a simple 'now' or 'all in' philosophy - he believed in a 'Detroit model' - he just was unable to emulate it.  He did not believe in wasting key futures on short term pieces.  And - he believed it was essential to balance towards the future even in the midst of competing - ie no better example than dealing Schneider for a 1st/Horvat - which did not exactly serve his own short term window / self-preservation interests.

 

I agree with his philosophy entirely - it's unfortunate they didn't manage to rebuild the scouting, system and development aspects of the franchise sufficiently, but realistically, he was an exceptional GM in the specific context of the needs of a contender - he knew how to fill out the key parts of a roster.   Players like Malhotra, Higgins - Lapierre - were key/critical support pieces that enabled the kind of top 6 they had.  A pmd like Ehrhoff is a very difficult piece to add - and he did it at yard sale prices.   So while he may not have completed the task, he sure as hell made the right moves in attempting to - there's just more to it than the right moves - it also takes some luck, health, good fortune in general - that did not smile on them.

 

Ummm...Ballard cost us a first - and Mitchell because if we didn't spend the money on Ballard and instead re-signed Mitchell with it we probably would have cup memories instead of cup and playoff exits.  Considered a top 25 all-time blunder by this organization and there have been some doozies.   Pretty stiff price all considering - not to mention he went to LA and then won with them (and played AGAINST us), and we had to use a buy-out for Ballard in the end...plus the endless Ballard Raymond and a? trade proposals...depth defenseman...Mitchell was a boss while playing with us and we could have used him against Boston in particular...

 

Edit:  Compare that to the first we traded to acquire Miller - that's how you do it.  Not even a rental...a force - a leader and our leading scorer this year.

Edited April 18, 2020 by IBatch

[Standing_Tall#37]

4 hours ago, IBatch said:

Ummm...Ballard cost us a first - and Mitchell because if we didn't spend the money on Ballard and instead re-signed Mitchell with it we probably would have cup memories instead of cup and playoff exits.  Considered a top 25 all-time blunder by this organization and there have been some doozies.   Pretty stiff price all considering - not to mention he went to LA and then won with them (and played AGAINST us), and we had to use a buy-out for Ballard in the end...plus the endless Ballard Raymond and a? trade proposals...depth defenseman...Mitchell was a boss while playing with us and we could have used him against Boston in particular...

 

Edit:  Compare that to the first we traded to acquire Miller - that's how you do it.  Not even a rental...a force - a leader and our leading scorer this year.

That’s not completely accurate. While I had always felt Gillis overpaid in paying a 1st for a 4/5 defenseman(wouldn’t matter anyways Gillis Sucked at drafting).... remember that the Canucks were extremely leery of signing Mitchell because he started having Concussion issues(not unlike Ferland lately).      

     Fortunately Willie recovered eventually and had a successful finish to his career. I think it was the Canucks that walked away from Willie and didn’t even offer him a contract if I recall.