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

jyu

Members
  • Posts

    1,344
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by jyu

  1. The poor guy knows, it’s another first round exit. They are not winning anything with those guys.
  2. Ah that’s what you meant by pro players.
  3. I think you are giving this Drance guy too much credit. IMO, most fans here belong to two groups: 1) about 20-30% of the people want to go for it right away and these are typically people that are in love with Miller and 2) about 40-50% want a short two year retool since Petey, Hughes, Demko are great foundations and the team is too good to bottom out with them on the team and why two year retool? That happens to be when we can free ourselves of most of our cap problems. Then, there are minority that complain at everything no matter what, but only 10-20% belong in this group. I think majority of the fans acknowledge the potential greatness of 40, 43, and 35 and are not wanting a full fledged rebuild nor do fans think it's possible with those three players on the team. IMO, most fans like myself realize that there are holes to be filled but we are cap crunched so while the cap problems resolve, we understand that we are not able to sufficiently address those holes to build towards contention. So at least for me, I'm fine with retooling and draft high so that we can get another core player or two over the next two drafts and stockpiling picks, young players, and cap space to acquire any missing pieces in around 2024 when we have identified new core players and are ready to go for it. Those retooling years could also be used to develop younger and cheaper players like Hogs, Podz, Kravs, Kilm, Aman, and Raty to replace the existing more expensive players like Boeser and Garland and fill vacant positions like 3C/4C so that we don't need to acquire those positions from outside by trading away draft capital/young prospects and in general, minimize the number of pieces that need to be acquired from outside. Benning didn't do a great job but to compare to Seattle and Vegas who paid 650 mil and 500 mil to start with clean cap efficient roster, is a bit unfair IMO. Yes. The current cap problems are mostly inherited from the previous management but the current management have not made it easy on themselves. Re-signing Miller and Boeser for example, Mikheyev and Kuz, now brought in Hronek. Putting aside whether this signings and acquisitions are good or bad (I think mostly good), they did try to do the difficult task of adding high salaried players while being cap crunched. They could have made it easy on themselves by saying, "we are going to undo the cap problem first and do minimal upgrade on the roster" but they chose the hard way. I commend them for it and wish them good luck. It won't be easy. YEs, very encouraging. They are quite decisive and I like that about this group. There's two sides to this but no one can predict the future, just projections. Last season, they failed to improve the defence and admitted that was because clearing cap was much harder than they thought. This offseason, hopefully it's a different story and that you are right. We can clear Garland pretty easily I think but he is a good player and you don't want to give assets away cheaply -- that's just not how you build a contender with inefficient moves. Boeser with retention may be tradeable in the offseason or maybe not. Myers will need a sweetener but hopefully his contract is attractive to cap floor teams -- by the way, how many teams are considered cap floor teams next season? Arizona... and? Yes, I think they are making good moves but they are in a tough situation and fans have the right to be concerned. I like their moves but their first offseason was a bit of a disappointment so they haven't fully earned the trust of the fans yet. If they pull off the right moves and clear a lot of cap and upgrade the defence, fans will come around.
  4. Only Miller? What about Hughes, Hoglander, Podkolzin, Toffoli, and Garland? All of these players came since Petey got drafted and were pretty good players. Hoglander and Podz each had very promising first seasons. Toffoli had like 10 points in his first 10 games and that playoffs. Hughes was magic from the start.
  5. Good post! I like posters like you who back up opinions with sound reasoning. Cheers.
  6. You said the guy has same last name as the guy that’s on our team and plays for Michigan. There’s no Nemec on our team.
  7. If Hoglander has no real value and he is negative value as you claim then there's no way teams take him for Hoglander. So Myers + Hoglander for 7th is not even an option anyways. Why would a team take on two negative valued assets for a draft pick even if it's a 7th round pick? I agree Garland being a good NHL player. In a world where we are not cap crunched, he stays on the team 100%. But we don't have other assets of positive value that can be traded to clear cap. You have to understand that we are at a point where we may need to give away a good player like Garland cheaply -- put yourself as the GM of a cap crunched team and other teams are asking for major value for taking on your cap dumps. You have surplus on wing and one player with the highest cap hit happens to be Garland. Maybe my example of Garland for 2nd vs Myers + Hoglander for 7th is what you are unhappy about? That comes from our differing views on Hoglander. I see 140 NHL games from Hoglander as a positive while you see it as being too slow to make it after being given all the chances in the world to make it. Garland was playing about 130 AHL games before making it full time in his D+4 season. If we are in the same situation with Garland in Hoglander's position coming off his final AHL season, about 130 AHL games, you would have traded Garland? Or you wouldn't because spending 130 AHL games is OK for development and not "too long" because he wasn't given proper chances?
  8. Dang it, I want to disagree so badly with your comments but I can't. How dare you spell out facts? Me and my comrades at CDC want to live in denial! Win the cup in 2024!! Plan the parade! You hit the nail in the coffin regarding Raty. I thought he was more NHL ready but the truth is that he is quite a bit away. His ceiling is 3C, his floor is an AHLer. Hronek and Beauvillier, I think too soon to say but I agree that there are some concerns. Although I'd like to be bit more on the optimistic side with both players being a good top 4D and glue guy in the top 6.
  9. Don't forget Hughes-Nemec. Enviable position indeed. Great situation capwise too. Jack Hughes at 8 mil is the best bargain deal in the NHL. And Hischier at 7.25 mil is the second best bargain deal in the NHL. The fact that their two stars sucked in the beginning and them believing in them really came through for Jersey in terms of great value contracts and added sucking helped them to get L. Hughes and Nemec. They will win a cup shortly.
  10. Or did you confuse Hughes with Nemec. If you are referring to Nemec, you are right. Nemec probably replaces Severson next season. They don't need Bear.
  11. They need to re-sign a lot of guys but they also have Hughes and Nemec coming up as possible replacements. Nemec might replace Severson right away in which case, they don't need to replace Severson anyways.
  12. who? never heard of him. Seriously though Luke is an LD and Severson is RD. Maybe they want an RD to replace an RD?
  13. Yes totally reasonable. If it's Myers + Rathbone , yes, it's time to let Rathbone earn a chance elsewhere. I'd say though that from cap perspective and in a retool, two of the players you listed, Boeser and Garland should be traded ahead of Hoglander and that Hoglander should be given a chance. Neither of them bring good defensive play and while they are putting up decent points, their overall effect on the scoresheet is negative in terms of GF/60 vs GA/60 -- although Garland is about par and you can claim that Garland is earning his money. Garland has positive value and Boeser with cap retention might be tradeable. If it comes down to trading Garland for say a 2nd rounder vs trading Myers + Hoglander for 5th or lower, I'd go with Garland for 2nd to get a breathing room then seek out Myers trade from a better spot without giving up Hoglander. But I agree that I'd seek out Myers trade as early as possible so that we can make other moves come draft and free agency. If we fail to do so, we will "run out of time" again and not be able to upgrade the roster in any meaningful manner.
  14. I'd do that trade for sure. Two questions: how much does Bahl cost and will NJD who are now in contention see Bear as good replacement for Severson. Remember, Bear wasn't able to crack Carolina's lineup and Carolina is one of the teams that NJD is trying to overtake.
  15. Both needs to take a discount. Probably combined 2.5 mil, 3 mil max. We are over the cap already. Let's say everything goes well and we clear 6m from Myers and 4m from Boeser (with retention). 10 mil in total. If we sign Bear and Schenn combined for 3mil: Hughes-Schenn x-Hronek OEL-Bear Hronek, Bear, and Schenn are all capable in secondary PK roles so they can somehow share the PK minutes but we still don't have primary #1LD PKer and that means crappy PK once again and the losses will pile up. Defensive 3C is also important as we seek to improving our PK. Getting a good 3C can bring balance to the line up in general. We have some good young wingers that can shine if they have a better centerman. We have 7 mil to find a top 4LD and 3C. Maybe Raty is the solution for 3C, then problem solved. If not, good 3Cs in the UFA market could easily cost upwards of 4 mil. Top 4LDs cost 5+ mil in the UFA market. So what we have is clearly not enough to find both 4LD and 3C from the UFA. We will have to get one or the other via trade but what can we give up for a top 4LD or 3C? And who will give us one if it's not an overpayment? Even if we do somehow find them via UFA and/or trades, that takes us right to the cap and we have very little left for depth. I suppose some of the young players like Johansson in Sweden could be our depth on RD and maybe Breezer and Wolanin are good enough options. If we sign Livingstone, he would provide good depth on the right side. At the end of the day, if all things go well, we have a wild card team. If there is a significant injury or team doesn't have much balance/chemistry, then we are back to the drawing board.
  16. That is true. The raise would be 1.25-1.5 mil for 2-3 years? Livingstone would be on an ELC so about 1 mil. Bear is mobile and generally a decent bottom 6 player but a little expensive for our team because we have so little cap space. I guess he could prove me wrong and take a paycut to stay here.
  17. I'm one of the negative nellies. I never watch or listen to Drance once. So there, you are proven wrong. It's funny though. @SilentSamonce had a wild suspicion that I'm Drance. So maybe I'm just not watching or listening to myself
  18. If we can sign Livingstone, then I'd just part with Bear and re-sign Schenn. Livingstone and Schenn will cost 2 mil or less together. Bear alone makes 2 mil now and I don't think he is looking for a paycut. Hughes-Schenn Gavrikov-Hronek OEL-Livingstone Gavrikov would be a good get, I don't know if we will be able to get him though.
  19. I like what you say in general not just this post and sort of agree with this post too. I would like to think this team is not that far off... But that is exactly what we say every year until the season starts and we lose to some crappy Buffalo or Detroit teams and return from a relatively easy Eastern road trip 1-4-2. And then disappointment follows. At this point, all we are doing is mental masturbation. Until these players prove themselves, we are far off. One thing I disagree with is that if Garland is here, the spot on the roster for him is on the scoring line beside Miller. He has shown very little chemistry with other centers so far. As we are retooling, I'd rather see cheaper Hoglander in the lineup and trade both Garland and Boeser.
  20. This makes sense. So if Hoglander is not good enough to make the team, we move him with Myers and that's no big deal. But we won't know for sure until the training camp, which is September and it's too late by then. I think everyone would agree that cutting Grabner loose too soon was a mistake considering we could have used a player like him in 2011 SCF and 2012 series against LA. I think the same thing will happen with Hoglander if we dump him as sweetener. Grabner had to crack the roster of President's trophy winning team where everyone knew their roles and perfected it. This team still has jobs up for grabs especially if Boeser and Garland are gone. And Nils has 100+ NHL games already while Grabner had 20 games by the time we cut him loose -- that was a mistake IMO. While I respect AV as a coach, it was part of his job to find a way to infuse youth and create competition to challenge the veteran roster players. But he just never bothered all that much and instead preferred to acquire veterans.
  21. Rathnone yes but in draft plus six season, he won’t have much value. Hogs has so much potential. We might not be able to re-sign Beau for cap reasons and a player like Hog on a cheaper contract will be needed. He will be ready by then.
  22. I hope the cap goes up by 4-5 mil. That's 120-150 mil league wide. Offloading contracts will get a lot easier. Otherwise...
  23. Yikes. Sorry Patrik, it's only getting worse from here on out. Teams know you are backed into a corner. We are giving up Garland for future considerations and/or Myers + Hoglander to a cap floor team just to stay cap compliant and ice the same roster. And we will be left again with Boeser and OEL on the team with no cap for major upgrade on defence. Good job on acquiring Hronek but in doing so, you put yourself in a terrible situation. If we end up giving up Garland for nothing and trade Myers with Hoglander, Hronek deal really becomes Hronek for NYI 1st, Van 2nd, Hoglander, and Garland. This is insane more I think about it. I hope this nightmare scenario isn't realized but man it's hard not to think about it as a diehard fan of the team.
  24. PLEASE LET IT BE JIM BENNING PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE
  25. When I first started to follow hockey, it felt like every team was sort of dumb. So Canucks didn't stick out even when they didn't make smart decisions. Since the introduction of cap and over time, many teams have gotten smarter while the Canucks have stayed the same old way. So the Canucks way looks distinctively dumb.
×
×
  • Create New...