-
Posts
3,904 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by Patel Bure
-
[Proposal] Virtanen/Gaudette for Ekholm
Patel Bure replied to krishcanuck's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
Nashville laughs and says no. Why would they trade a top pairing dman for two bottom 6 forwards? -
[Proposal] Virtanen to washington
Patel Bure replied to teepain's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
I am of the opinion that we should keep Virtanen. I realize that he’s only been playing well in these last stretch of games but I’m willing to see this through and continue to give him chances. When Jake is “on”, he’s basically our Alex Tuch. Let’s see if he can develop into that guy. -
For some reason, I read this thread title as, “Lord Benning is offering us his moon.”
-
[Article] Ten Good Things So Far from the 2021 Season
Patel Bure replied to -AJ-'s topic in Canucks Talk
He’s wrong. The sources that I’ve looked at all indicate that Tryamkin has take a significant step forward: https://www.prohockeyrumors.com/2021/01/snapshots-ullmark-tryamkin-thornton.html -
[Article] Ten Good Things So Far from the 2021 Season
Patel Bure replied to -AJ-'s topic in Canucks Talk
I don’t think Tryamkin will be a game changer but I do see him being a very good #4 that can be a stabilizing defensive presence to one of Hughes or Schmidt (whoever plays on that 2nd pairing in the future). -
Best thing the Canucks can do is focus on one game at a time. The Canucks play Edmonton and Calgary enough times to gain significant ground on them.
-
Jim Benning's mid-season press conference
Patel Bure replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
All teams go through this. It’s inevitable. We were “competitive” last season so I’m not sure where you’re getting this “decade” from. Or like Sportsnet 650 and HF Canucks, are you pretending that our 2nd round appearance last season didn’t happen? -
Jim Benning's mid-season press conference
Patel Bure replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
Using a sweetener to move Eriksson in order to resign Toffoli, Tanev, and Markstrom is what would have been short sighted. You are critical of Benning’s plan because you do not understand Benning’s plan. Period. -
Jim Benning's mid-season press conference
Patel Bure replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
Benning could.....but he won’t because he’s thinking long term. Teams are still taking on money if the situation calls for it. Detroit for example, took on one year of Marc Staal with a sweetener attached. Pre-Marc Staal trade, they would have easily jumped at the idea of taking on Eriksson + 1st + whatever........IF Benning had TRULY wanted to keep Markstrom, Tanev, and Toffoli. He could have....::but he didn’t, because he’s thinking long term. -
Jim Benning's mid-season press conference
Patel Bure replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
1) Getting playoff experience for the kids is good for the kids’ development. Since the Canucks were within striking distance of the playoffs at the deadline, they acquired Toffoli. If I recall correctly, Boeser had just gotten hurt and so Benning didn’t want to see the teams’ hard efforts not be realized. 2) JT Miller was brought in earlier in the off season for a variety of purposes other than just “competing for 19-20.” Miller was brought in to help Pettersson in a few areas while also being a key component (at a very good cap hit) when the Canucks’ real windo begins in 22-23. 3) Benning wants the Canucks to be a competitive team for the long haul and not just 2 seasons. Hence - guys like Tanev and Markstrom were let go. The Canucks fielded offers for Boeser (picks and prospects to clear cap space) so that they could keep Toffoli but the Nucks received low balls offers for Boeser. -
Jim Benning's mid-season press conference
Patel Bure replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
-When Benning took over the team in 2014 and had his press conference, what do you think would have happened had he spoken honestly? (Ie we need to rebuild and bring in more youthful players). As a new GM, do you think that would have been a smart way to ingratiate yourself to the core players that had been there for many years and had done so much for the city? -Given the contracts on our team (Sedins, Edler, etc., with NTC’s and NMC’s and with heavy cap hits), do YOU think we would have been able to move those players and get a fair value in return? -Why do you think a guy like Bieksa was moved for a 2nd, or why Higgins was dropped in favor of Baertschi, or why guys like Burrows and Hansen were moved for prospects? -Ignoring any narratives about mentorship, etc. what happened to the kids on our team and in our system when we brought in guys like Ryan Miller, Sutter, Eriksson, Baertschi, Roussel, Beagle, Schaller, Myers, Ferland, etc.? (and again, I am NOT talking about mentorship and intangibles here.....never mind that......what I’m asking you here, is where were the kids on our TEAM placed, and what kinds of players stayed on the farm as a result of these vets occupying spots). Good performance or sub par performance by the aforementioned players aside, how did the young players on our team and in our system benefits from the presence of those vets?.......and again, I’m NOT talking about mentorship here). . -Related to the above point, do you think the Canucks have done better than most teams in the terms of converting draft pick selections into NHL roster players? (Pettersson, Boeser, Hoglander, Gaudette, Virtanen, Juolevi, Hughes, Demko). What about guys like Rathbone, Podkolzin, and Tryamkin that are slated to join us next season? -
Jim Benning's mid-season press conference
Patel Bure replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
The Canucks could very easily clear cap space by ridding themselves of a bad contract with a high sweetener if they truly wanted to. They could have done that this past off season as well. That’s why I find it funny when critics of Jim Benning accuse Benning of being short sighted and not caring about the future. Morons like Satiar Shah then accuse Benning of not having a consistent plan. -
Jim Benning's mid-season press conference
Patel Bure replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
It’s Summer 2014 and you’re Jim Benning. You have just taken over the Canucks and are holding a press conference in which you are asked about the state of the team and goals for the coming years. Why would it be prudent and even advisable to say, “I think we can turn this around pretty quickly” as opposed to saying, “We will be looking to rebuild our team in the coming years.” If you (Benning) were to have said the latter, what kind of message would it have sent to guys like the Sedins’, Bieksa, Burrows, Hansen, Edler, Higgins, and other players that had been a part of our successful core for so many years? What kind of relationship and impression would you (Benning) have created had you said the latter? Would you have ingratiated yourself to the new team and players? Ps - When the Canucks lost to the Flames in 2015, did Benning give you the impression that he still thought he could win with the current core, or that changes intended for the future needed to be implemented? -
Although Green has done a better job than most people give credit, I think a coaching change would be appropriate if the Canucks miss the playoffs. My hope is for Gerard Gallant starting next season.
-
Jim Benning's mid-season press conference
Patel Bure replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
No one ever wants a 9 year plan but it does take a substantially long time to build a consistently elite team. The problem that I’m having with posters like you is that you assume that the Canucks are one of the only teams in the league that have taken this long to rebuild. Again, -Look at the teams in our division and their paths over the last 20 years. -Look at teams like Dallas, Colorado, Carolina, Florida, New York Islanders, etc, etc., and how many years they missed the playoffs for and how long they took to become good. -Look at Colorado from 2008, Tampa Bay from 2004, etc. Building a consistently elite team takes time. Our 2nd round appearance last season was an important step forward last year. Progression isn’t always linear. Remember the Canucks 2007-2008 season? How did they do the year before? What happened between 2008-2013? -
Jim Benning's mid-season press conference
Patel Bure replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
So you don’t think it’s coincidence at all that all of our bad/transitional contracts will come off the books this year and next? Or that guys like Horvat, Miller, and Schmidt will still be on relatively cap friendly deals when the 22-23 season starts? Teams don’t have to choose between “going with the youth” and “bringing in now” players. It’s possible to do both and still have both a short term and long term plan. Sounds to me like you’ve been listening to Sportsnet 650 a little too much......or have been spending too much time at HF Canucks. Leave it up to those two places in which 20 something/early 30’s kids are “smarter” than NHL GM’s, owners, and managers. -
Jim Benning's mid-season press conference
Patel Bure replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
The Canucks biggest long term need is a viable Edler replacement (ie a top pairing all situations dman that can log big minutes). That’s why Benning hyper focused on OEL. Going after OEL would have also allowed Benning to move a bad contract (Eriksson). Benning wouldn’t have minded keeping Markstrom, Tanev, and Toffoli for the right term, but they were expandable since we have players in the system that are younger and will replace them (Demko, Tryamkin, Hoglander, and Podkolzin). The reason why many media members and fans are confused is because they think you have to be doing “only one or the other” in terms of bringing in “now” players or running with the youth. Any attempt at doing both is perceived as “changing direction” which is completely false thinking. People think that we brought in Miller, Myers, Ferland, Beagle, and Roussel because we were “trying to win a cup,” but that isn’t the case at all. Myers filled a hole in our weakest organizational position while taking pressure off of Tanev (while also allowing us to move on from Tanev). Beagle and Roussel took defensive pressure and responsibilities off our top young guys. Contracts like Miller’s and Schmidt’s are going to look like gold in the 22-23 season with all of our bad contracts off the books. Forest.Trees. -
Jim Benning's mid-season press conference
Patel Bure replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
Am I correct in assuming that Markstrom wasn’t offered Expansion Draft protection by the Canucks? -
Jim Benning's mid-season press conference
Patel Bure replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
Juolevi is still developing his game at the NHL level and as being deployed as such. Why would he be given extended minutes against top competition? Once OJ proves that he can handle 2nd and 3rd line opposition, he will be given more responsibilities. -
Jim Benning's mid-season press conference
Patel Bure replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
Unfortunately, guys like JD Burke, 650 Sportsnet, and HF Canucks are cancers to the Canucks hockey community. Team 1040 was awesome and although they were critical of the Canucks at times, they have praise when it was called for and really knew how to see things objectively. -
Jim Benning's mid-season press conference
Patel Bure replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
Agreed. Unfortunately, Demko wasn’t quite ready to take on more starts at the time. Although I don’t like Holtby’s cap hit, his presence will allow for Demko to be well rested. -
Jim Benning's mid-season press conference
Patel Bure replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
Benning wanted to sign Markstrom for the term he offered Holtby. Markstrom declined. Given Demko’s performance in the bubble combined with Markstrom’s ailing body, the plan was to commit to Demko long term. -
Jim Benning's mid-season press conference
Patel Bure replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
1) Beagle and Roussel were brought in because guys like Gaudette and MacEwen weren’t quite ready at the time. Even with that being said, their contracts will come off the books just when our real window is about to begin. The same goes with a lot of our other bad contracts. Those contracts were signed as a way of insulating the kids in our system and on our team. It’s of no coincidence that... A) All of those bad contracts will be off the books this year and next. B-) Many of our drafted and/or acquired kids have not only made the team, but are also on the verge of making it. 2) Higgins had no trade value at the time. He was demoted because the Baertschi was ready enough to be given a legit opportunity. 3) Eriksson was signed because our only top 6 RW at the time was Hansen. Virtanen was too green while Burrows was washed up. No PTO’s or cheap vets were available to sign with us at favorable term and money. The Canucks wanted to protect Virtanen’s development and so they signed LE. They figured that Eriksson and the twins could possibly help us make a push for the playoffs where our kids would get some valuable playoff experience. 3) I agree with what you said about 3rd/4th line players but your other description is also an extremely valid reason. Those 3rd/4th line players for instance, in those roles that you cited above, really helped us in the bubble against St.Louis. 4) Two years from now when all our bad contracts are off the books, good players will want to sign with our team due to the young and promising nucleus of talented that we will have assembled. -
Jim Benning's mid-season press conference
Patel Bure replied to -Vintage Canuck-'s topic in Canucks Talk
1) How many teams that won cups in the last eleven years won with their top star players on ELC contracts? How many teams won cups with their top star players on post ELC contracts at relatively cap friendly deals....with some very good players on ELC’s? (Not best player on team but among the best). 2) Our team cap is only a nightmare for this season and next, and had been designed this way while our kids developed on the team and on the farm. When these bad contracts come off the books, the original kids will become the leading vets (ie Horvat, Boeser, Pettersson, etc.) 3) If Benning really wanted to get rid of the farm, he would have done so already. He would have used many of the players as sweeteners to trade away bad contracts so that guys like Markstrom, Tanev, and Toffoli could have been signed.