Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Patel Bure

Members
  • Posts

    3,904
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Patel Bure

  1. I like your thoughts but I think the Canucks will be better served using Miller as a winger, playing with Petey or Bo, instead of trying to manufacture depth by deploying Miller as a center. I realize that the Canucks went on a bit of a tear with Miller at center (before the Covid outbreak), but I still think we sacrifice too much on the top end by keeping Miller away from Petey and/or Bo.
  2. [proposal] With the Pearson signing, would trading Motte+ for a decent 3rd line center make sense? Please don't get me wrong here folks. I love Tyler Motte. He's almost everything that a 4th line player should be in terms of his hustle, speed, work ethic, etc. Playing Devil's advocate here for a second, let's be realistic about Tyler Motte's upside as far as offensive potential goes. This guy probably isn't the next Alex Burrows. As good of a worker as Tyler Motte is, he likely "is what he is" at this point. More importantly however, he does have some trade value unlike guys like Virtanen, Roussel, and Vesey for instance. So, just to play Devil's advocate here, lets pretend the Canucks did the following: 1) Re-sign Jimmy Vesey to a league minimum "show me what you can do" type deal. 2) Traded Motte+ for a decent 3rd line center. 3) Perhaps this is worthy of its own thread, but maybe we can entice Seattle to take Loui Eriksson off our hands? With only one year left + only 2 million in real dollars owed after this season, perhaps it would be realistic? Miller-Pettersson-Boeser Hoglander-Horvat-Podkolzin Pearson-????-Virtanen Vesey-Gaudette-MacEwen Roussel Hughes-Schmidt Tryamkin-Myers Juolevi-Benn Demko Holtby Now, a few things: 1) I absolutely do NOT know if a Hughes-Schmidt defensive pairing would ever work. My guess is that it could IF Hughes improved a little bit on the defensive side of things but that could be a stretch. Still - if the Canucks were to replace Edler with Tryamkin as seems to be slated, then Hughes and Schmidt would pretty much have to play together since they would be our only two top pairing calibre d-men. 2) Call me crazy, but I think a 4th line of Vesey, Gaudette, and MacEwen might be able to produce some decent offense. Gaudette may be out of his element in a top 9 role but I think he'd be pretty good in a 4th Line capacity. And let's not forget that Vesey scored 16 goals not too long ago. Maybe this 4th line does some damage. 3) Pearson and Virtanen on a 3rd line together (or Hoglander + Virtanen, or Podkolzin + Virtanen) is also interesting. Let's just stick with Pearson and Virtanen here for a second. Outside of this season, Pearson has been a pretty decent scorer and point producer for most of his career. Virtanen is also only one season removed from a 20 goal pace season even though that seems like it was ages ago. Would it really be farfetched to assume that Pearson and Virtanen, with a good 3rd line center, could form what would be a pretty good 3rd line? Obviously, Motte by himself wouldn't be enough to land the Canucks a good 3rd line center and so that "plus" would have to be pretty significant.
  3. 1) I don’t think Hamonic or Vesey will be back. Vesey will only be back if the Canucks move Motte at the deadline. 2) I think Beagle is done 3) Tryamkin will replace Edler 4) Benn will be back 5) Eriksson won’t be bought out. If the Canucks really want Eriksson gone, they’ll use a sweetener to move him. With one year and on,y 2 million in real money owed, this shouldn’t be too difficult.
  4. You can’t just look at AAV’s. Term needs to be considered as well. -Yes, Tanev’s AAV is relatively low, but does he have the type of game that will likely age well? When will Virtanen be off the books? -Yes, Markstrom is a 100x better than Holtby at only a slightly higher AAV, but HOLTBY is out of here in two years or less. How many years is Markstrom signed for? Does his body seem to be breaking down to you? The only mistake that Benning made in the off season, at least in my opinion, is Toffoli, but even with that being said, Benning must be feeling VERY confident that one of Hoglander or Podkolzin will be able to successfully fill the Toffoli void by the time October 1st 2022 (our real window) begins. Me personally? I’m not so sure that I would have taken that risk, and the loss of Toffoli does piss me off, but let’s at least see how Podz and Hogs pan out.
  5. You’re wrong. Most intelligent fans on Canuckscorner.com also appreciate the long term vision that Benning has for this team.
  6. He’s probably been reading too much HF Canucks.
  7. Even if the fans were pissed, it wasn’t warranted: 1) Demko is a better long term investment than Markstrom. Hell, he may even be the superior goalie at current. 2) Nate Schmidt is a better overall defenseman than Chris Tanev and will likely age much better than Tanev as well. 3) Toffoli. I’ll give you Toffoli. Even I’m disappointed that we let Toffoli go as he has the type of game that will age well ( at a good cap hit and term), and I don’t understand how we committed to far inferior players at only a slightly lower price. My guess is that term was the more pressing issue (ie Virtanen, Holtby, Hamonic, etc. will be off the books before October 2022) while Benning must have felt that Podkolzin and/Hoglander would be suitable replacements for Toffoli and didn’t want Podkolzin and/or Hoglander being “held back” on bottom six roles. Also, with regards to Toffoli, there were rumors apparently that the Canucks were trying to keep Toffoli while trying to move Brock (for a pick and good prospect) in order to clear cap space but Benning received low ball offers.
  8. I heard a rumor that he shot a German Shepard out of a cannon into the San Francisco Bay but I might be wrong.
  9. Looks like DMX may have been right. ”X gonna give it to ya”. :-( I enjoyed a few of his songs. RIP
  10. Nobody is watching the Canucks right now because they haven’t played in two weeks due to most of their team being in Covid protocol.
  11. 2nd round. Game 7 loss. Defeated the cup champs in the first round. Defeated the Wild to qualify for the playoffs. Ps - I never said we are contenders. What I have said however, is that progression isn’t usually a linear process. What happened after the Canucks made the 2nd round in 06-07? They missed the playoffs. What followed after that? ps - If the Canucks really had wanted to, they would have been able to sign all of Markstrom, Tanev, and Toffoli fairly easily by using sweeteners to get rid of bad contracts. Gee, I wonder why he didn’t? Perhaps Benning is thinking far more long term than people like you give credit?
  12. No they didn’t. They knew where the team was at when they took over and they wanted to give our aging core one last kick at the can. This is why guys like Bieksa, Garrison, and Higgins were shipped out relatively early in the process (while significant changes were made after our playoff loss to Calgary in 2015).
  13. Miller-Pettersson-Boeser Hoglander-Horvat-Podkolzin Pearson-Gaudette-Virtanen Roussel-Boyd-Motte MacEwen Hughes-Myers Tryamkin-Schmidt Juolevi-Benn Demko Holtby
  14. I didn’t realize that the Canucks had a bottom 10 team last season as a 2nd round appearance puts them in the top 5-8 category.
  15. Kudos to Benning for not acquiescing this past off season in trying to bring in OEL by giving up precious young pieces. Canucks might get to deal with Arizona from an even greater position of strength in this off season should it go this route.
  16. acquiring veteran talent (via signings) on a downward trending team will always be a difficult task. Hence, why unfavorable term and money are often given to these types of players by downward trending teams (otherwise why would they choose us over a better team, or a team that has a better travel schedule and/or pays far less in taxes, etc.). You either select this option, OR, you push kids into roles that they aren’t ready for and risk ruining them. As a team progresses towards their peak, it becomes easier to sign players to more favorable term and money. That’s the stage that the Canucks were at when Gillis took over, and also keep in mind that Gillis enticed players with some very significant riders in order to keep their cap hits relatively low.
  17. Agreed that Gillis did a lot of good while he was here (although his amateur scouting was absolutely atrocious). My point being that Burke and Nonis also played a very big role in the successful years of 2008-2013. It’s not like Gillis just took over an organization in shambles and turned them into Gold one year later. By contrast, Benning took over an organization that was clearly headed downwards. An aging and declining core + very little in the way of prospects due to the previous regimes’ abject failure in amateur scouting (sans Horvat whom they gave up Schneider for, and Markstrom who they gave up Luongo for.......to which the Benning regime developed Markstrom in the correct way).
  18. Show me a rebuild that takes a shorter time than that. Seriously - look at the top teams in the league right now. Tampa, Colorado, Florida, Carolina, etc., etc. These teams also struggled for YEARS on end before becoming elite. Progression was not always linear. Lots of peaks and valleys. Study Colorado from 2007 onwards. What was Tampa’s journey like from 2004? What was Carolina’s journey like since 2006? The Leafs and Oilers look poised to win a couple of rounds this season, but what has their journeys been like up until this point? (Edmonton since 2006 + Toronto since 2004). What about teams like Pittsburgh, Washington, and Chicago from about 1996 (Hawks), 1997 (Pens), and 1998 (Caps) onwards? Were they rebuilt overnight? How long were the LA Kings irrelevant for before they had their 2012-2014 window? Dallas Stars the last 15 years? The Canucks’ rebuild has been pretty typical of most teams. Like Calgary, Edmonton, and Winnipeg, we made the 2nd round and then had an expected dip.
  19. So the fact that Burke drafted the twins, Kesler, etc, etc, while Nonis traded for Luongo didn’t play a significant role in propping up Gillis’ record here? Don’t get me wrong - I like a LOT of what Gillis did here (sans amateur scouting), but it’s not like Gillis came here and he magically took us to the next level. The Canucks were clearly headed that way regardless.
  20. “Whenever we experienced success last season, it was due to a fluke, but whenever we struggled last season, it was a sign of deep underlying issues and symptoms,” Gotchya. Anyways, I am of the opinion that our 2008-2013 window will start at or shortly after the 2022-2023 season, and that we are currently in our 2007-2008 formative period (which may extend to next season as well). Speaking of which, I don’t seem to recall too many “fans” complaining or being irritated by the fact that we undeservedly defeated Dallas in the first round of 2006-2007 while making an unexpected 2nd round appearance. I don’t recall Canucks fans joking about our playoff qualification in (1991?) when we qualified despite being way below .500. In both those instances, what happened a few years later? Let’s sit back and watch things unfold.
  21. 1) Re - Skinner. I'll give you Skinner as there's no way he should have been paid that much, but the Sabres have also misused him horribly. Instead of playing Skinner with one of their many talented centres (i.e. Eichel, Reinhart, and Staal when he was there), they put Skinner with twits like Curtis Lazar and basically started to use Skinner in completely different roles for god knows what reason. 2) I myself don't understand the Toffoli thing but my guess is that the Canucks brass are/were VERY high on Hoglander and/or Podkolzin and didn't expect our Top 6 prowess to be a long term problem. We already saw significant things from Hoglander this year in his rookie year. 3) re 2020 season: Completely ridiculous comment on your part. We came within a game of making the 3rd round in the playoffs last season and were very impressive for most of the season. Even during our slump pre-covid (which was largely due to a hectic travel schedule in which our home games basically felt like an extended part of a monstrous road trip), the Canucks won their final 2 of 3 games against two very respectable opponents (Islanders and Avs). The Canucks were playing much tighter and Demko was starting to acclimate to the #1 role. As much of a possibility as it was that we would have continued slumping, there was just as much evidence to support the notion that we were coming out of it. We then qualified for the playoffs fairly and squarely by defeating the Wild, and then took out the cup champs. 4) And yes - those industry insiders are wrong when it comes to Pearson (although I do side with them that we shouldn't have let Toffoli walk). Pearson is a good 3rd line calibre player and should bring enough elements to a 3rd line to make it a decent threat at the 3rd line level. His defensive savviness should help a guy like Gaudette, and he has just enough offensive prowess to give a guy like Virtanen or Podkolzin some offensive support down there. Furthermore, Pearson should be able to play on a top 6 incase of injuries.
  22. 1) Insulate incoming youth with veteran players that can play in the tougher roles while the kids develop 2) Roster spots and positions and roles on the team were to be EARNED by the youth and not given. Make sure the kids are ready or close to being ready for certain roles before they supplant a vet . 3) Veterans with renowned leadership skills and/or veterans that were successful in the past can 'show the ropes' to the kids and help create good on ice and off-ice habits even if these vets aren't quite at the same level that they once were. 4) Get the kids to compete hard every night regardless of where they are in the standings. PUSH for a playoff spot and come into each season expecting to PUSH and COMPETE (which is NOT the same thing as "trying to compete for a cup" or "be a lock for the playoffs" like so many of the dolts at HF Canucks and media members seem to believe). Guys like Markstrom, Demko, Pettersson, Boeser, Horvat, Gaudette, Virtanen, Motte, MacEwen, Hughes, Juolevi, Stecher, and Hutton all benefitted from the presence of veterans in terms of their development (either in the form of being kept on the farm a little longer, or playing in protected minutes/certain roles at the NHL level while the vets took on tougher match-ups).
  23. Yes and no. What a lot of people don't realize, at least in my opinion, is that management has had this year circled for quite sometime now (2018? 2019?). The Canucks didn't just bring in guys like JT Miller and Tyler Myers to "go for it" in 19/20. Furthermore, it's of no coincidence that all/most of our transitional contracts will be off the books before the start of the 2022 season (Roussel, Beagle, Eriksson, etc.). Management clearly had 2022-2023 marked as the starting point for our window, and also had the assumption that there would be peaks and valleys before reaching October 2022 (i.e. pushing for the playoffs at certain points to get the kids some experience, letting some popular vets walk and having 'ready' kids take their roles, etc). It's the ultimate "ends means" approach in which peaks and valleys are expected. Why 650 sportsnet, HF "Canucks", and many other media members/fans can't see two feet in front of their noses is beyond me. Forest for the trees.
  24. Good post iBatch. My guess is that Benning clearly sees Hoglander and/or Podkolzin being locks for the top 6 which is why he may have felt comfortable walking away from Toffoli. Pearson is also the exact type of guy that one would want on their 3rd line (i.e. solid two way game, should be able to chip in offensively against inferior 3rd line opposition, and can also play higher up in the line-up for a finite amount of time in case of injuries). Pearson has also won a cup before and has leadership skills. Lets take a look at the next year's projects line-up: Miller-Pettersson-Boeser Hoglander-Horvat-Podkolzin Pearson-Gaudette-Virtanen. Pearson is a clear upgrade over Roussel on that 3rd line and brings enough defensive savviness in order to accommodate for Gaudette, and enough offensive ability to bring out something in Virtanen in a 3rd Lline capacity. Whether it's Hoglander, Pearson, or Podkolzin on that 3rd line playing alongside Gaudette and Virtanen, the bottom line is that we will likely have a 3rd line that will be able to generate at least some consistent offense.
  25. Maybe we should actually give Benning the benefit of the doubt given that this team and management clearly has the 2022-2023 season in mind. That's my point. Benning clearly seems bullish on Hoglander and Podkolzin which is why he felt comfortable in letting Toffoli walk. Pearson might be starting to decline, but he's the exact type of guy that one would want on the 3rd line given his solid defensive play. He also wouldn't look completely out of place in a top 6 role for a finite amount of time incase of injuries.
×
×
  • Create New...