Got the Babych

Obviously I think the discussion is completely worthwhile, but participation is totally optional.

GMJB? Just kidding, but that pretty much sums up the argument for a retool vs rebuild. And here we are now. Yes, they were good, but our run was over. They helped to reach a final playoff appearance, and a quick first round exit. Who knows, maybe they had a chance, I'm not going to pretend I wasn't pumped that season. But the more important part, which succinctly makes my point (thank you), is that they were two valuable pieces that were past their prime and sure to decline. The downward spiral really gained speed the following year and it was clear it was time to start over. Guess what we did with these guys? Rode them hard in a futile cause, let them walk in free agency.

Sadly this really seems to be true. I'm sure he had dreams of more, but the moves made speak for themselves. Seems like the 6 year plan was to win a coveted wildcard spot. Mission accomplished-time to relax!

A few weeks ago i wouldn't have agreed, but hey it's worth a shot! At least you've put some thought into it, unlike what seems to happening behind the bench.

Don't think I made any of the points you are trying to counter here, but yes I know the "Lanche were up and down for a long time, but that doesn't mean they were in a rebuild the whole time. If overall sucking was the criteria, I guess you could say our current retool started in 1970. There can be some discussion around what is and what isn't a rebuild, sure. But I, and seemingly most, would consider that Colorado actively started a rebuild when they bottomed out in the 16-17 season. Or perhaps when J-Sack took over as GM in 2014. That's when the team began the rebuild process as I defined it in the OP. Does that mean no players or moves previous to this were a factor? Of course not.

Sure, not much trade value now. My whole point (or one of them) is that, even while we were at the bottom of the league, we didn't trade anyone when they did have value. Like a rebuilding team would do.

On paper we're definitely a helluva lot better than the hot mess we are seeing right now. But, we're not great even if we start playing. We have some great players, but there are a lot of holes to be filled and they won't be filled from within. So, that is a lot of free agents (when/if we have cap space), and we've seen how free agents have worked out so far...

? I included an example right there in the post.

I hope that's enough! I don't think we are as bad as we are playing right now, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if we turned it around and made the playoffs (it seems more unlikely every game though). Just can't see us being cup ready any time soon.

IMHO, this is what you get when you try the retool route rather committing to a full rebuild. The fun thing is, the last 6 years have been just as painful as if we did go full rebuild. So, are there any examples of a team that successfully pulled off a "retool on the fly" similar to ours? To clarify, this is how I define a rebuild versus whatever we have been doing: Rebuild: -trade valuable players on the verge of decline for picks/ NHL calibre prospects -save money/ cap space. Pick up bargains as they come, take advantage of other teams' cap issues -develop prospects in the minors -play with what you got. Fill holes with cheap, quality "character guys" -suck for a few years -draft high, draft well -hire cheap unproven coaching staff for the interim -hopefully start to compete after 3-4 years and be set up to stay competitive for another 5-7 years Lots of examples of successful rebuilds (and some unsuccessful ones), but the most recent would be the 'Lanche. Current roster is by all accounts a powerhouse on the verge of long term greatness, while still having a prospect pool that could probably compete with our NHL roster. Our "retool": -keep valuable but aging players until they go to another team during free agency -sign middling to bad free agents every year above market value and to term -play the hell out of the best players until injuries occur -blame injuries for team failure (see above) -make it rain/ spend to the cap -shove any prospect with NHL potential onto the roster as soon as they arrive -trade away picks and prospects -trade for rental players while hoping to attain a wildcard playoff berth -strive to be a playoff bubble/ wildcard team each year (unfortunately, even with the points above, we did not compete and were one of the worst teams for 4-5 years) -suck for a few years (didn't appear to be the plan, but happened anyway) -pick high/ draft OK. Nailed a few picks, but as bottom feeders consistently picking top 10 it'd be hard not to -hire cheap unproven coaching staff as long term plan We have a handful of great players and some bright spots, but through trading away picks the prospect pool is now back to depleted (OK, there's still Podz) and I don't see a way to get to the next level. By not committing to a rebuild we now seem to be built for a window of mediocrity, probably followed by a real rebuild. Happy Sunday!

Thanks, missed this! I was pretty angry and maybe a little drunk, so I've been AFK for awhile.

Are we still doing this? Can we agree that Marky saved a lot of peoples' jobs in the last couple of years? The players keep getting better but the same product on the ice. What's missing? Our team "identity" is to give up shots and scoring chances and rely on individual performances, and otherworldly goaltending. Not a long-term strategy, and results in the mysterious injuries we are somehow plagued with every year. 4games in sure, but is any of this new? Buying high, selling for zero is probably for another thread.

True, we have to get new blood into the system. But traditionally there's been a process of working through the ranks and proving one's ability before being handed a head coach job.

We are sucking in those gents' areas of expertise, but I feel it is the overall team "style" that is the problem, and that's up to the coach.

Agreed.

Why not have a good coach while they're maturing?

Maybe, but don't you think the talent level we're icing right now is pretty fricking great? I don't think firing Willie for another non NHL coach is playing our last card (if that's what you meant)

I could see it looking that way. I saw it more as confusion, like no one expected to do hockey. To me it looked like many individuals were going hard but surprised to be in an NHL game with no plan.

Been so freaking excited for weeks and jonesing for months. All our individual players have been looking great, and I was really hoping we could capitalize on our few week window. But I’ve been watching a lot more non Canuck hockey than usual lately, and watching real teams has been a rude awakening.

And, I was answering your question.

That's what leads to the big question. What's the end game? With Miller and Toffoli we might make the playoffs this year. Then what?

I don't disagree that it's a good test. Though with Demko looking pretty shaky so far I don't feel as confident they'll weather the storm. But the team (coaches) needed to realize that relying that much on a goalie (or any one player) is not sustainable.

Because of the cap compliance rules. It's probably less, but we would still be taking a cap hit for players we no longer have.

GMs say a lot of things. I don't share that optimism obviously, but we'll see and I hope you're right!

That does seem like the goal now, but even that feels high. Could be worse I guess, but I only have 30 years or so left (and that's if they finally prove that booze is good for you). And I've been waiting a long time. I'm gonna go on record now and declare that if they haven't won the cup in 20 years, I will switch allegiance to the newly minted Penticton Vees NHL expansion team.