Hindustan Smyl

I couldn’t agree more as well. Chicago, LA, Boston, Pittsburgh, and Washington all followed this model. Drafting is the cake, but you need the icing as well. Signing and trading for players is that icing. Graham James knows a thing or two about icing as well I believe.

No one will agree with my plan, but here is what I would do (cue to the “thank god you’re not the GM” jokes). It would be a combination of trading, UFA, and drafting. 1) Trade our 2019 1st with Sutter, Eriksson, and Schaller to Ottawa for Jean Gabriel Pageau. The great value of our 1st + the negative value of those other 3 contracts should equate to Pageau. Either way - we reduce significant cap space and get a half decent asset. 2). Solve the issue of our defensive depth in this off season. We sign two of the following in the off-season: -Gardiner -Myers -Stralman -Jordie Benn Although there are a number of reasons why we haven’t been a playoff team these last 4 years, the biggest reason is due to our lack of quality depth on defense. Sign Gardiner and Myers, and the Canucks will have atleast 5-6 2nd pairing defensemen on the team. The Canucks can now trade from a position of strength. Targetting these types of defenseman also allows us to NOT sign any one player for over 10 million......which perhaps give us a chance to get guys like Pettersson and Hughes to take discounts (8.5-8.8 million range?) when their ELC’s expire. 3) Trade Hutton for a forward. Defensemen are a commodity in this league. If Gudbranson can land Pearson, then Hutton should be able to land a respectable 2nd line forward as well. 4) Move Edler and Tanev when guys like Tryamkin, Woo, and Juolevi are ready to step into the line-up. 5) Commit to Markstrom. Sign him long term. Yes, it’s a risk and a leap of faith, but you have to do this. Demko can prove his worth as a back-up over the next few years, and then the Canucks can decide what they want to do after that (ie trade Marky or Demko). The absolute worst thing the Canucks can do however, is move Markstrom and give the car keys to a Green Demko. There’s a big difference between being a back-up and being THE guy. 6) LTIR Baertschi or move him to clear cap space. Move him for a low end pick. Virtanen-Pettersson-Boeser Pearson-Horvat-[Hutton return] Roussel-Gabriel Pageau-Gaudette Motte-Beagle-MacEwan Edler-Stecher Hughes-Tanev Gardiner-Myers Markstrom Demko.

Congratulations Troy! I think Stecher would beat up Gudreau in a fight.

I almost read that as, Stecher will become Mason Raymond one day.

He stated on Team 1040 about a month back that he’d be open to returning in a hockey capacity, but it would have to be as a President (too old to be a GM), and he’d have to have leeway to do everything “his way,” without any ownership interference whatsoever.

Mike Gillis and “Canuck fans” on Hockeysfuture should just &^@# off to Seattle when they start playing so we never have to hear about them on the radio and on Messageboards.

It wouldn’t work because Gillis and Benning have almost polar opposite hockey philosophies. Benning would need to go. Gillis also stated that he’d only be open to returning if he had complete control and did things HIS way. Given the Acquillini is very “hands on” and has an old school philosophy much like Benning, I don’t think Gillis would be a good fit here. Only way Gillis comes back if current ownership and management were gone.

Although I am often wrong with my predictions and forecasts, on every thing I DID accurately predict last season was that the Tavares signing would likely result in a zero sum game for Toronto. Adding Tavares while losing guys like JVR, Bozak, and others, would create a “robbing Peter to pay Paul” situation. Toronto will now have to deal with the monster known as the Marner situation. Do they trade Marner for picks? Or, do they hemorrhage even more depth by creating room for Marner’s new contract?

I completely agree......which is why this Karlsson debate is so interesting to me. On the one hand, it’s been proven that teams with cost controlled elite talent + depth (ie the old Chicago and LA models) can win multiple cups. As has been pointed out however, those old models might be going the way to the dinosaur due to the cap increase.....and that in the future (and even present), it’s pretty much a pipe dream to try and get elite talent to “buy in” by taking a discount of some kind. As much as we might want someone like Elias Pettersson to sign for 8.5-9 million dollars when the time comes (instead of 10.5-11), is it a realistic wish? I’m not so sure.

One major con: This isn’t just applicable to Erik Karlsson, but take a look at the remaining teams lefts in the playoffs: -Colorado -San Jose -Dallas -St. Louis -NYI -Carolina -Boston -Columbus Now - take a look at the cup winning teams since 2010: -Chicago -Boston -Los Angeles -Pittsburgh -Washington -2019 winner Do you want to know what ALL of these teams have in common? Not a single one of these teams had 1) A 10+ million dollar player on their team. Take a look at Chicago and LA’s cap when they won their multiple cups. Ditto for Boston. You know what? I’ll even mention Vancouver here since they won back to back Presidents Trophies. Look at their cost controlled cap hits between 2010-2012. I honestly don’t know if those “cost controlled cap hits to elite players” model are about to go extinct (ie Although Pittsburgh and Washington had relatively cost controlled cap hits relative to that of some other elite teams, that percentage was a little high), but if it ISN”T, then I would strongly consider holding off on Karlsson. The formula for winning still seems to be as follows: -cost controlled elite talent -depth (ie cost controlled elite talent allowing for this). -2 elite centers -1 elite defenseman at minimum -1 elite winger at minimum -1 “very good” goalie at a great cap hit that can play at an elite level when it matters most -Speed -Toughness and size (that doesn’t compromise team speed to the point where team speed is a weakness). IF the above is true, then perhaps an Erik Karlsson Signing would prevent the above?

[discussion] The Pros and Cons of Adding Erik Karlsson This seems to be a hot topic on many different Canucks message boards and so I wanted to give my thoughts on this: For me, it boils down to the following: Is it realistic and/or possible that guys like Pettersson, Boeser, and Hughes will take discounts to play in Vancouver when their ELC’s expire?.....and if so, what is the approximate likelihood? I honestly don’t know what the likelihood is. What I will say is this: 1) If it’s probable that management can convince Pettersson, Boeser, Hughes, etc., to take discounts when their ELC’s expire, then I would pass on Karlsson. 2) If it’s extremely unlikely that you can get Pettersson, Boeser, and Hughes to sign discounts when their ELC’s expire, then you absolutely go after Erik Karlsson in this off season. Period. Throw massive coinage at Karlsson, and worry about potential cap complications later.......IF it’s inevitable that our RFA core will get significant raises anyways and WON’T take discounts. IF Karlsson signed here, the Canucks would likely have to alter their strategy. If Karlsson signed here, I think the Canucks’ greatest chance to make a cup run would be within the next 2-3 years (while atleast one of Pettersson and Hughes are on ELC’s). IF the Canucks signed Karlsson on July 1st, then I would highly suggest “trading 4 green houses for a red hotel” in terms of trading strategy. IF the Canucks signed Karlsson, the focus would be on winning a cup within the next 2-3 years. IF the Canucks signed Karlsson, then maybe guys like Virtanen and Hutton could be packaged for a major winning piece right now. I think all of the above is what it would TRULY entail if we signed Karlsson. As for my opinion on the subject, I feel as follows: It all depends on how likely it is that Pettersson, Boeser, and Hughes will sign discounts of some kind when their ELC’s expire. If this is unlikely, then perhaps we really do need to go the Erik Karlsson route.

Calgary and Tampa: small men with small egg rolls? Over the past few years, the mantra has been that the game has changed. Speed was now the name of the game and teams with smaller players could now thrive. While I do agree that “speed” is the name of the game today, I think these playoffs have also shown that size and physicality are still very important elements, even if they have diminished in importance. On an unrelated note, while I usually do pretty well on playoff pools (I usually average out to 12/15), I’m getting slaughtered this year.

Perhaps it’s possible for the Canucks and *insert team here* to make a trade *before* July 1st (or both teams mutually agree to have something in place on July 1st midnight). On July 1st 12:00 am: *team* signs *RFA player to a long term deal that *team* knows that it can’t afford, but with the expectation that they will trade said player. #SignAndTrade July 1st 12:00 am: Canucks announce a deal with said team for said player. Why the other team does this: 1) They receive a higher compensation for said RFA (Two 1sts + Hutton) as opposed to a 1st, and 2nd, and a 3rd. 2) They aren’t straddled with a contract for one year that they can’t afford. Why the Canucks do it: 1) They get a young core piece signed long term. They have the cap space to afford it.

RFA offer sheets do more harm than good for GM’s in my opinion: 1) RFA offer sheets are almost always matched. 2) GM’s making RFA offer sheets take a big hit rep wise (in a negative way). My advice for Benning would be to see if a deal can be worked out with this teams for those cap crunched teams. 2019 1st + 2020 1st + Hutton should get the attention of some of those teams that are at high risk of losing their players to predatory RFA offer sheets. 1) Let cap strapped teams *begrudgingly* match predatory offer sheets from other teams (the operative word being ‘other teams.’). 2) Let us come in afterwards as the knights in shining armours, and offer our above package.

The only player that I would give up four 1sts for would be McDavid. On that above list, I’d be willing to two 1sts, a 2nd, and a 3rd for most of those players, but not a single one of those players are worth 4 1st round picks.

Callahan only has one year left on his deal right? (He becomes a UFA on July 1st 2020). If thats the case, then I would definitely be willing to absorb Tampa’s contract for 31OA.

My thoughts on this: 1) Depth is key. Have elite talents at relatively cost friendly cap hits + invest a little more in depth. This is what made Chicago, LA, and Pittsburgh successful when they multiple won cups between 2010-2017. 2) Center is the most important position. All teams must have atleast one franchise center. 2 extremely good centers + 1 franchise d + 1 first line superstar winger + 1 very good goalie that can get hot when the time is right appears to be the formula. + depth. 3) Team toughness is like goaltending. The importance of this may have diminished since 2003, but it’s still important......and will stand out like a sore thumb if you are deficient in this area. You can’t cut corners here. 4) Patience with kids + play kids in positions where they are in a position to succeed and can comfortably grow. Don’t overburden kids if they aren’t ready. If a kid becomes about 90% as good as a vet, then move said vet to make room for the kid by virtue of being more cost effective and banking on the fact that the kid will grow by 10% or more by virtue of more ice time. Still - kids need to EARN their spots. Nothing should be gifted. 5) Less on American Pro Scouting and more on Swedish Scouting (Pro and amateur). American collegiate athletes are far less likely to come to Vancouver since Canadians pay far more in taxes. Swedes view Canada and Vancouver as a great place since it’s considered to be safety than America (we won’t tell them about Surrey and East Van ;)). We’ve had a great history with Swedes here and so Vancouver might be wise to sell Swedish prospects on this. In general, Swedes are hard working, loyal, and very low maintenance. Swedes also seem the most likely to “take one for the team” if it means taking discounts in order to build a multiple cup winner.

Not proven. Someone with potential. The “Gaudette equivalent” on Right Side D who is of a similar age.

Just an FYI, I don’t want to dangle Gaudette because I found his first year here underwhelming (not true by the way). I only want to consider moving Gaudette because..... 1) We are relatively deep down the middle 2) We are very anemic on right side D. The reasons why you suggest that we keep Gaudette are the same reasons why he would have value. Drafting Söderström + getting the Gaudette-equivalent in right side D, would give us more balance in my opinion.

Perhaps, but maybe you can get someone going with upside? (Liljegren, Bode Wilde, etc?). I don’t know....

Keep in mind that I’m not suggesting we trade our 2019 1st. Why not draft Soderstrom (or Broberg) *and* trade one of Gaudette or Madden for a young RHD?

I do agree with this line of thought (Soderstrom is also the guy that I’m creaming my pants over), but I’m also of the belief that it doesn’t hurt to have more in the pipeline.....especially when you consider the fact that we’re anemic on that right side while being relatively deep down the middle.

I think Parayko would cost us too many assets unfortunately. Guys like Dobson, Bouchard, and Boquist would be nice, but I think those teams’ asking price would be too high (and rightfully so given their respective ages and ceilings). I wonder if it would be worth it on our end to inquire about Timothy Liljegren from Toronto? Benning and Dubas have an excellent relationship, and I don’t think it would cost us an arm and a leg to get Liljegren (although in Toronto’s case, I think they need a young RHD to emerge almost as badly as we do). If we get Bode Wilde out of Long Island, we’d have two of the coolest names in the NHL. :p (Bode Wilde + Jet Woo).

[proposal] Adam Gaudette and/or Tyler Madden for a young RHD Pretty self explanatory: 1) Would you do it? 2) What kind of player/prospect would Adam Gaudette fetch us? 3). What kind of player/prospect would Tyler Madden fetch us? Originally, I would have been interested in trading Gaudette for Fabbro (Dante Fabbro) but Nashville is pretty set down the middle, and I think they want to give Fabbro a legit shot. A young RHD would be nice however, and Gaudette/Madden are pretty decent bargaining chips are they not?

I’m about to go into corny territory here, but here goes: 1) The draft is in Vancouver this year. 2) We have the 10th pick. 3) Pavel Bure wore number 10. 4) Why not fly Bure out to Vancouver from Russia or Florida (or wherever he is right now) to make the selection? Keep it as a surprise as well. Spoil the fans.