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. Don't agree with this suspension at all. MacKinnon made himself really small and the SJ player was already committed to the hit. It's an unfortunate hit, period. There was no obvious malice.
  2. For sure. We moan about GM and coaching all day here.... clearly, it's not as easy as winning NHL2020 and become a GM the next year. Funny how stawns' argument falls apart...
  3. Watch for Michaelis to be in the press box... Typical Green. My theory is that Juolevi isn't going to be playing for a while this season, so maybe they'll have him eventually go to the AHL to get some time in. We know Green's going to be icing veterans this entire time. I just can't stand how he manages his roster. Giving crap minutes to Macewen who's energetic, for example.
  4. So how do you justify how the ref just let Frederic commit two penalties?
  5. 1. It's not clear if Tanev would've wanted a NMC (to prevent expansion), if so, that means we'd use a spot for him. He did acquire a NTC though. Juolevi is a first round round pick - not sure if he would've been exempt though. I agree, defensively wise, we would've been okay. I think signing Tanev might have been the only correct move Benning should've done. I'm still not convinced that Tanev would've stopped our bleeding this season. There's only so much one person can do. Coaching has always been an issue - and I began to see more and more this last playoffs. I will maintain that coaching should've been changed. Specifically Baumer. He sucks. Benning should've changed this dude. 2. And as soon as you said "It's not our money" - that's where your argument falls apart. Until you're actually an owner and you're paying for $&!#, you don't want to throw away money, all to satisfy a bunch of CDCers who aren't attending games. There is no revenue, so the owner has to be smart with finances. I don't know anything about Ferland's situation to comment.
  6. No, because I already told you the depth of this team is much better than what GIllis left with. "Hope this helps". Your refusal to see the evidence is alarming. The reason I bring up Gillis was that he's the predecessor that we can compare the performance of each GM. Is it useful at all to compare Benning with the GM of Tampa Bay? NO. Tampa Bay has always had drafting success. We did not. Apples and oranges. When looking at cars, do you look at the HP of a minivan vs a Corvette? And then say, "Oh, obviously the Corvette is better." Never mind the fact that the car is meant for a suburban mom who doesn't need the HP - and the Corvette doesn't do the job that she wants, which is to take her kids to soccer practice. Apples and oranges.
  7. So what about the Gillis + 1st for Ballard trade? https://www.nhl.com/news/ballard-traded-to-canucks-in-five-player-swap/c-532776 But Ballard, a first-round pick back in 2002, was due $4.2 million in each of the next five seasons and Tallon is trying to remake the team with younger talent. Earlier this week, he moved forwards Nathan Horton and Gregory Campbell to the Boston Bruins in exchange for defenseman Dennis Wideman, the No. 15 pick this year, and a third-round pick in 2011. https://www.litterboxcats.com/2010/6/26/1538249/the-ballad-of-keith-ballard-victim Last year Ballard sank with the rest of his troops; simply from an observer's post he never appeared comfortable. Strange, given the monster contract and all. Regardless, he was not the same player Martin had acquired. Still had the hits, kept up the physical stuff, but he was never again the guy Panthers fans fell in love with a season earlier. Almost like your hands gripped the seat/beer/remote control a little heavier when he hit the ice, hoping for the best. Ultimately he was a "Martin" guy, and that may well have been his undoing in SoFla. Rather jarring that Tallon would deal this guy away, a dood who (publicly) espoused a rah-rah, it's-all-about-the-team persona. Jarring, but refreshing as well. The caveat? We'll miss his presence. Not to the point that games will be lost due to his absence, but he was simply a decent guy. Ballard will do fine in LuongoLand. Another "change of scenery" situation, just unfortunate it didn't happen in Sunrise. He's a genuinely nice guy with killer instincts coming off a bad year. All the best to him. Hard to justify this trade, even at the time. I was ALWAYS against this trade. Throwing away the first for a cap dump was really bad. At the same time, J.T. Miller was a center that we did not have. We lost one asset, as opposed to two. I do not think it's hard to determine which trade was worth it or not. Also, Ballard did get bought out. Ouch. Hope that helps.
  8. Really? So what if the team declines this year, even with Markstrom? Can you imagine committing so much money for an aged goalie for a team that isn't necessarily ready for a push. Benning did inherit nothing - at least nothing of substantial value. If you and I could get first round picks for every single player that Gillis left behind, you think the GMs would've done it? No, the value they were offered for the pieces were either very poor or not even offered at all. There seems to be an assumption that Benning (or whoever the GM was going to be) would've gotten 'full' value for any of the players. Kesler was kind of a tip of the iceberg. Vancouver was never going to properly rebuild with the assets Gillis left behind. As you've failed to address, Gillis had next to no prospects in the pipeline. Did we have a Hoglander in our system? What about Linus Karlsson? What about Gaudette? What about Arvid Costmar? None of these players are first round picks. I haven't even mentioned Lind, Gadj and Woo - all three who are doing really well in the AHL. The amount of prospects in our system RIGHT NOW are a night and day difference between the two regimes.
  9. Everyone knows about the expansion draft. What makes you think teams would've given up a blue chip prospect that they didn't have to protect, versus an asset that they would have to?
  10. I'm really not moving goalposts at all. Well, that's funny you say "see, this is why." Because none of us - everyone really - has the ability to see the future. We don't know if a decision is any good until we see the results after it. For example, if we chose Pettersson in 2017 and he turned out to be a bust, can you imagine the backlash on here? I don't think Tanev's contract is terrible either. So really, the decision was between Tanev and Toffoli. But we also have to keep in mind the expansion draft. 2. You know what? I agree with part of your points. I would've liked to see the Canucks try out new coaches this year. That being said, why does he have to shell out a couple of million extra to sign some coaches that he hasn't an interview process with? As an owner, you don't want to burn money, which Benning has done plenty of. I think if you look at it from this perspective, you wouldn't want to pay coaches to leave. I think it's awfully generous to expect people to pay for $&!# that you probably wouldn't pay for yourself. Imagine throwing away 1 million dollars for nothing.
  11. You do realize that the expansion draft would've exposed Demko right, if we had taken Markstrom? This is a no brainer really to let him walk. Now the decision is between Tanev and Toffoli.
  12. No, he could've picked one of the three. Instead, he took the safer approach of letting all three because of the expansion draft. You do realize that if we committed to one of these players, we would lose a valuable asset, namely Demko (if we chose Markstrom).
  13. 1. It's not a benign point at all. We have Eriksson and he is the cautionary tale. Do you want two more cautionary tales? Tanev being injury prone, and to some extent Markstrom, both of whom are over the age of 30. Tanev's contract isn't terrible, but Markstrom is 6 x 6. 2. Montreal just fired all their staff. I think it says a lot about their panicked state. They are not certainly taking your approach, "well we do have 5 games in hand". They obviously see the writing on the wall - or rather Bergevin has. I'm guessing if Montreal doesn't make the playoffs, he's getting canned. You see, Montreal's last 10 game record isn't great. We can only analyze trends and form opinions. GIven we are half done and Montreal is "just" a few points above us, I don't think that's much of an accomplishment, considering how many moves they've made this offseason.
  14. And it makes you wonder that he didn't commit himself to signing Tanev and Markstrom (and Toffoli), despite the fact that all three of them would be over 30. This is a similar criticism that people have been making about spending too much money on bottom 6 forwards that are anchoring the roster... and given how age is so exaggerated as a reason for performance decline, it is a risky move to make for a team when there's no guarantee for success. What happens if all three players begin to decline? For christ sake, we see Eriksson right in front of us. We had a ton of data on players like Neal, Lucic and Eriksson. All three were taken off the FA market for 6 mill each. Neal may be the only one who's marginally more useful to his team than the other. Yet all three are considered FA failures. I think you've made the case for me that Benning has learned from his mistakes.
  15. I'm saying we aren't doing good at all, and neither is Calgary/Montreal. What I'm highlighting is that you can't buy your way out of mediocrity. What I'm saying is that we cannot just assume that are no risks to signing long term contracts. What I'm also saying is that 5 games in hand (in the case of Montreal) does change IF they win all their games. But given their downward spiral, along with ours, it doesn't seem likely.
  16. You missed my point. I was highlighting the "overreaction" by people who claimed Calgary was massively improved because of the acquisitions of Tanev and Markstrom - yet they could barely help a team get 2 points more than us, and we were supposed to have taken a step back. I am not crapping on Tanev and Markstrom. I'm just saying that signing players long term has this risk that they won't perform. It's a cautionary tale not to read too much into "10" percent of the season as being indicative of reality. No, we're not doing well at all. It's plain to see. Calgary and Montreal aren't doing much better. Toffoli is doing amazing though, but if we could pick and choose all the best case scenarios and eliminate all the bad ones, that is called hindsight GMing. If one were to re-do the last year's draft, I'm sure lots of GMs would pick Hoglander much higher than he was last year. See my point?
  17. I think when you said "to each their own", that was maybe the most reasonable thing you've stated in recent memory. I can accept that you have a different opinion, provided that you can defend it. However, I didn't "miss the point". Too much credit has been given to Gillis and his winning years. While he did bring the Canucks very close to winning it all, the price he made the team pay is what I have always been trying to highlight. All those players you mentioned, namely Kassian, Jensen, Shinkaruk, etc etc. aren't playing or flourishing on NHL teams. Maybe this was unlucky - or maybe, based on evidence, they weren't cut out for the NHL. Kassian may be playing for the Oilers, but this is what he's doing this season. 1 goal, 2 assists, 3 points. 9th overall 2009 pick. Great asset. He's 30 years old. 13 1 2 3 -3 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 8.3 https://oilersnation.com/2021/02/08/whats-wrong-with-edmonton-oilers-zack-kassian/ "But the Oilers signed him to a four-year, $3.2-million contract last year and simply put, his production hasn’t matched his expectations." This is a signing that is really bad in hindsight. So much talk about Benning putting too much money for useless parts, and little is said about this. I really don't know what else to say, Alain. I don't know why you continue to defend Gillis' legacy because his drafting and developing, based on evidence, has not helped this team, regardless if Benning took over or not. It's so plain to see. Another way of looking at this: if Shinkaruk was worth a 1st or a 2nd, wouldn't any one of us as GMs just trade them away and rebuild the team since we're all so knowledgeable about how to rebuild a team? Obviously, their values weren't worth nearly as much (if at all) what Gillis had started off with vs. when he was fired.
  18. I don't understand how he could've avoided committing "interference" in that situation, simply by trying to stay onside. Meanwhile that trip on Hughes was uncalled. Garbage reffing.
  19. What's the inside scoop if you can provide some on Dahlen? Why did he want out so badly? Why did SJ let him go back to Sweden after they got him? And above all, why did he re-join his second tier Swedish team, instead of the first tier? https://www.eliteprospects.com/player/212368/jonathan-dahlen Look at the most recent stats, I don't see any clear progression. This was a really good trade for the Canucks in hindsight.
  20. I think he'll work on his skating and everything is golden. Not saying Karlsson is Boeser, but I am very impressed with the skating improvements that he's made this offseason. Wow, what a trade to get rid of self-entitled Dahlen. Such a shame that he didn't pay his dues in the AHL so he could fight for his chance in the NHL.
  21. Actually, I've been criticizing Benning for keeping some lame duck coaches for as long as he did. It's clear that WD wasn't good, yet TG has had a much more talented roster and STILL has a similar win/loss record. This is on Benning. WD/Green hasn't adapted their approaches, minus some games in the playoffs. FA did the right thing not to fire anyone because that will reek of desperation. Whoever the GM is, they need to replace the coaches. Green's not getting extended, obviously. Baumer sucks at D.That's my angle.
  22. Why was he so highly touted? There were a number of scouts, minus Craig Button and a couple of others, that pegged him from 6 to 18.
  23. You DO realize that Demko was a Benning pick right? LOL they had 'value' - but obviously not a lot to rebuild a team with. Your excuses are endless. Gillis wrecked this team in pursuit of this cup. Maybe the owner had given him permission to do it. But through this process, the team was left with little in the cupboards (if at all). At no point in this time did Gillis have the kind of depth that Benning has on the drafting. But of course, your excuses for Gillis will be endless because you don't care about seeing evidence that contradicts your own viewpoints.
×
×
  • Create New...