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

Dazzle

Members
  • Posts

    11,843
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Everything posted by Dazzle

  1. Seattle's a complete mess, imo. Giordano is good, and so is Eberle and Gourde. However the rest of the team is pretty medicore. Mixed in with head scratching signings of Larsson and Oleksiak, it's hard to see why Francis is trying to reinvent the wheel. They don't look like a playoff team, so why are they acquiring these FAs like they'll complete the team, and on longer contracts? I honestly feel bad for Seattle fans. Such an underwhelming series of acquisitions for such a highly publicized event. Why did the commentators talk so much about the available recognizable players, only for them to pick someone like Davin Bayreuther from Columbus, instead of Kevin Stenlund, an underrated forward, or Gabriel Carlsson if they were looking for young promising defensemen.
  2. I think it's the cost control factor. But yeah, Calgary has been playing catch up with the league. I don't think they'll be much better than last year.
  3. "Asset management" I think what's also dumb are those tv commentators that talk about this guy being depth for Seattle. Well that didn't last long. And only for a 4th rounder. Our 3rd for Dickinson is miles better than this trade.
  4. Great insight in this thread by you. /sarcasm I think most, if not all people, know about your blatant bias toward Gillis, and how he cannot be criticized for anything at all. You've made tons of excuses for the drafting and development failures, shifting it to his staff, rather than the GM itself. Meanwhile, I've seen you (more than once) target Benning for his own failures, notably Virtanen. I think the purpose of these threads is a discussion, one that you are obviously not capable of having because you reject evidence that doesn't match up with what you think about the situation. Gillis did a lot of good things, but drafting/development was not one of them, which you've repeatedly tried to downplay that weakness. And it is the theme in this thread that Gillis' ineptitude in that field was why this team is still in a hole. No goaltending prospects whatsoever under Gillis. Laughable. No defensive prospects from the ground up. (Tanev doesn't count in this regard - he was a pro scout find). Hutton is obviously a depth defenceman, and not a replacement for Edler from 2004. LOL. And no forward prospects aside from Hodgson and Horvat, both of which were high picks. Drafting has never been consistently good until Benning. If you'd actually look at the freaking charts, you'll see that Nonis had complete misses, and so did Burke, but at least their players did contribute to the roster, more or less. Under Gillis (2008 to 2013), the players were largely absent. https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/teams/dr00008756.html
  5. You just got schooled by yourself in the other thread lmfao.
  6. You'll have to eat your hat right now because he did get this.. Came 6th... With several first place votes...
  7. Drance also said that Lou Lam was an amazing GM who should be GM of the year for throwing away a 2nd round pick this year, a 2nd round pick next year and a 3rd round pick in 2023 - to clear 5.5 mill of dead cap. The premise was that he didn't have to use a 1st rounder to do it. Drance has these terrible takes that really make him a bit of a parrot.
  8. Gillis missed several rounds entirely with his picks. He couldn't draft a serviceable goalie for crying out loud, nor a defensemen, aside from Hutton. And you're saying from that chart he is good at drafting because he got Hodgson or Horvat? A few ppl unfairly say Benning is "only good" with his high picks. That oddly characterizes Gillis. The man cannot draft at all. The chart shows it. There is no excuse. Coming up with these explanations about Gillis supplementing the roster he had proves that he was not able to sustain this reality.
  9. There's no sense in paying for Reinhart. We are trying to make the playoffs, not win the Stanley Cup. Let other teams overpay for their reach. We are doing just fine right now. We will compete very very soon.
  10. Let's be honest. Tampa didn't win because of superior analytics. They already had a good team regardless of the deep dive in numbers. Good teams have eye tests plus analytics. A team dedicated to analytics however has not been successful, as Alf snidely pointed out. Coyotes sucked. I found this article to be really fun to read. https://puckprose.com/2019/05/03/moneyball-type-analytics-will-never-work-professional-hockey/
  11. A lot of players at 6'4 don't end up being NHL players. It's pretty risky to be a 'size Queen' when your team has natural expectations to perform, and the game is not entirely about size anymore. Besides, Francis got a couple of 5'9 guys as well. It is a young team, but the reliance of analytics in doing these picks could backfire badly.
  12. You missed the point entirely. I was highlighting how dire the situation was. If you count Horvat as a draft success, it was the only success that draft, proving that even if he hit a home run with the pick, the fact was that he was a failure at generating depth.
  13. You don't really benefit by getting journeyman players, some of whom have barely any NHl experience. Haydn Fleury, for example, is a consensus pick of a first round bust. I'm not knocking the guy's character, but I don't think Anaheim lost any sleep at all because of him ggoing Underwhelming picks by Francis. If this analytics thing doesn't pan out for Seattle, we'll have yet another team that tried to "outthink" the competition.
  14. While he spent all his time building the main roster, he completely neglected the replacements. Look no further than the fact that we had no goalies and no defencemen, aside from Hutton. He bungled the Luongo/Schneider situation, and ended up nearly messing it up. Had Horvat not panned out, like his other picks, we'd be even more screwed. No goalie prospects. No defensive prospects. No forward prospects.
  15. I guess Juolevi's all healthy and ready to assume top 6 duties /sar
  16. It's sad when people will use the excuse that we were top of the league during those years (which is true). However, it doesn't excuse the fact that we missed on all the picks even though we had a first round pick, as well as the 2nd rounders. Gillis (as well as other GMs before him, like Nonis) had a tendency to throw 2nd rounders away. If you're not drafting well, I suppose trading them would be better than trusting your scouts. The problem was that when they did draft the players, it was very rare for the picks to be serviceable players. This of course leads to cap problems/overspending and prospect depletion.
  17. Looking back at our draft history... our drafting/development was awful!

    1. Show previous comments  9 more
    2. Dazzle

      Dazzle

      @NewbieCanuckFan
      The problem is that 7 years ago and beyond that, he could've drafted a goalie for starters in any round, or a serviceable forward or defenceman, and we'd still be afloat.

       

      The only players of any consequence that he ever drafted was Hodgson, Hutto, and Horvat, during his 6 years here. Horrible.

    3. NewbieCanuckFan

      NewbieCanuckFan

      He traded for a 24 year old goalie that was 4th in Vezina voting a season ago.  Also signed undrafted 24 year old Tanev.  (should clarify both were 24 years old when Benning was hired).  

       

      Right now our blueline is a complete mess.  None of them can play defense even on the level of a 31 year old Hamhuis (his age when Benning came aboard) save Schmidt (who is 30 years old now himself).  That's not on Gillis.

       

      Ultimately he was fired for his inability to draft.  When new GM's come into a job, of course there's going to be problems.  If there weren't, the job wouldn't be open (barring previous GM moving voluntarily elsewhere).

    4. Dazzle

      Dazzle

      The Schneider trade was a bad trade at first glance: trading away a known commodity (with a lack of developed goaltending prospects) for an unknown quantity, in which scouting is obviously a weak point of Gillis.

      If Dreger is to be believed, the return from Edmonton was supposedly a lot better than just a 9th. We'll never know. I'm not saying we 'should've' done that trade, but the return for ONLY a 9th is just bad.

      Hence my point, had Horvat not panned out, he would've been yet another long list of failed prospects. Gillis smugly said that his teams usually drafted "24 and above".

  18. And then you'll have Gillis who will probably a do-over on almost every single pick... Just horrendous. I've always cheered for every GM's picks, and I realize that it's not all the time that every player pans out. I get it. But when you miss entire rounds, including your top picks, that has long term consequences. We are still paying for those mistakes even today.
  19. In my most unprofessional and unqualified opinion, I think he's overthinking the game. He's acquired some older players like Eberle, mixed in with some really unproven/underrated guys, but I don't really see a pattern with that team. He could've chosen some better players (not journeyman players like Rayheuther from Columbus) and still kept within an internal cap. Kole Lind - where does he fit on the team? Why did they pick the player who had 7 NHL games with 0 points? He's very likely to go back to the AHL, which means waivers, which means a wasted pick. I'm totally not a fan of Seattle's expansion, and if I was a fan of the team, I'd feel let down. The players they brought in aren't really "marketable" or "exciting" players, minus guys like Eberle.
  20. Pretty meh contract. Three years of NTC could be bad. Seattle could've gotten loads of goalies for free, at controlled costs.
  21. So why sign FAs especially at max price if that's the case? You could easily ice a competitive team by taking on reasonable contracts that another team has.
×
×
  • Create New...