bloodycanuckleheads

That shows you just how little the people around here know about hockey. We aren't making the playoffs. Not even close. We have 28 games left and we'd need to win all but 4 or 5 to make the post-season. Even if we weren't one of the worst teams in the league, we still wouldn't be able to go 24 and 4.

Imagine these two were on other teams - if you'd give up a top-5 pick and another first rounder for them, every GM in the league would laugh at you (and immediately come calling with ridiculous lowball offers, assuming you don't have a clue what you're doing).

You guys don't seriously believe that Virtanen's worth a 1st-rounder (or that Juolevi's worth a top-5 pick) anymore do you???

Yes, but... We'd be offering a 2nd or 3rd for Virtanen and a mid-to-late first round pick for Juolevi.

I love how the entire point of this thread is apparently that complaining about all the boneheaded things Canucks' managment do - somehow shows that there's something wrong with you (and not Canucks' management)!...

Don't forget that the very first thing these poor posters did to me was call me a troll (multiple times) and claim I'm not a fan. Personal attacks are far more incensing than logical arguments based on facts.

I apparently watched the same games as Sweden's coaches - seeing as they all ranked Nylander higher than Pettersson too... I love how everyone here thinks they know more about how people played than their national-team coaching staffs! And, to claim that Pettersson played better than Andersson is utterly ludicrous. Sure, you can argue that Pettersson was maybe the third best player on his team (but, to be fair, you can also make a decent argument that he was fifth), but you cannot argue that he was in one of the top two spots. Those were taken by Dahlin and Andersson. By a long-shot. Pettersson didn't even come close to those two. Not even remotely close. Andersson was plus-5, Dahlin was plus-7, Pettersson was minus-1. It's pretty hard to be a minus on a team that wins almost all their games. Just because you want Pettersson to be the best player on his team - doesn't make it so.

No, your opinion is actually the incorrect one. Pettersson's own coaches ranked him outside of the top 3 (for good reason). They know a lot more about how their players played than you do... Ha! Andersson was taken 7th overall. And, will almost surely play NHL games next year.

What, if I'm not delusional and I don't pretend that our players were the best players on the ice (when they weren't even close), I'm a troll and not a fan all of a sudden? Jesus. Must be fun watching our players with rose-coloured glasses all the time? I, however, prefer reality...

No he wasn't. Andersson clearly out-played him in the tournament. It wasn't even arguable. And, again, Pettersson was one of only three players on his team who finised in the minuses. If he was so dominant, how come the other teams scored more on him than he scored on them? Andersson was what, plus-6 (and scored more goals)? Do you guys really think national-team coaches don't know how their own players played?

Ummm, Pettersson wasn't even close to being in the top-3 on his team! Not even remotely close. He was a distant fourth. Dahlin was phenomenal and looks NHL-ready. Lias Andersson was head and shoulders better than Pettersson. And Nylander outplayed him too. EP was the only one of the four who wasn't a positive player (one of only three on his team). He floated on the outside the entire time. He was only a threat on the power-play. Etc...

Nico Hischier begs to differ!

And you are ignoring my point: we could have had Pettersson + a pick OR a higher-ranked-player + a pick. Both of those options are better than just Pettersson.

Wrong! Here's a quote from Benning himself: Notice the phrases 'I had no idea' and 'might have'? He didn't trade down because he thought someone might have taken Petterson. But, you're forgetting that, if he had traded down and the Rangers did take him - that would have meant that Benning had a pick and the choice between multiple higher-ranked players. That's not really losing at all.

Ummm, we could have traded down several spots and still got Pettersson. So, we could have had him AND a pick. Instead, we just got him.

Actually, the tank is over now - and not because anything's been accomplished. This summer, Benning finally realized that tanking doesn't actually work anymore (thanks to the stupid lottery rules). So, he tanked all last year and only got the 5th overall pick (while far better teams ended up with the best picks). He literally threw away an entire season. It's shocking that everyone here loves him so much. The first few years, he thought we were a decent team and tried to win, even though our team was god-awful. Then he threw away an entire season. And, now, at least he's trying to win - but he's done too much damage - so we're bound for the worst spot imagineable: not bad enough to get the good picks (absent of luck), but not good enough to make the playoffs. We are in the middle of a lost-decade thanks to him. And, I haven't even mentioned the fact that he made some abysmal choices when he did have those high picks (Virtanen, Juolevi).

No, our rebuild started a couple weeks before the 2017 trade-deadline. That was the day that ownership finally threw in the towel (almost 5 years too late) and gave the GM permission to blow everything up. Before that day, we were trying to win. So, that tells you how god-awful our ownership/management is! It took them almost 5 years to see what everyone else saw immediately. They ran our team into the ground by ignoring reality for so long. They could have turned everything around in a season or two (by starting when we had a good team). Instead, they waited far too long and it's now going to take 10 years to fix this mess (we are at the beginning of Year 5, so only perhaps 5 or 6 seasons to go). And, it gets worse... This off-season, they've clearly gone back to thinking they can win. Or, should I say, realizing that tanking doesn't work. We were the worst team in the entire league for long stretches of the last two seasons - and all we got for it was two 5th-overall picks (and chose the 10th best player each time). So, they probably realized that being the worst team in the league for the next few seasons comes with a humongous risk (of not getting a top pick yet again). So, we're back to trying to win. Only now, we don't have the players to do it. We are starting at the bottom. And, it's a thousand times harder to accomplish from the starting-position we find ourselves in now. We are in the middle of a lost-decade thanks to our ownership/management. And, there's basically no way out of it. We aren't going to be getting the kinds of picks that change a team's fortunes immediately. Our only hope is getting extremely lucky. And, when has this team ever gotten lucky?

Don't forget that - 2 times in a row now - we've had a top-5 pick but did not select one of the top-5 players (and our #6 overall pick went far worse than that). And, before you go attacking me and saying how amazing the players we got are (and how Dahlen and Pettersson are best friends) - remember that we could have traded down and still gotten Juolevi/Pettersson, but also had valuable assets to go along with them. And, if by some miracle, they were taken before they dropped to whevever we ended up - that means we would have had the assets plus multiple higher-ranked players to choose from. Win/win. We chose lose/don't-win instead. So, yeah, just getting the top picks isn't enough - you have to use them smartly. Something the Canucks have a long and storied history of not doing...

Maybe it was a typo - Kassian's good for 24 pints at the Roxy, isn't he?

Canucks team toughness: zero Top-3 Forwards: zero Top-2 Defensemen: zero Again, how on Earth has this been allowed to happen??? With a $70+ million a year payroll? And, about 5 years of advance-warning? Whenever you're tempted to say that Benning's doing a great job, just look at the above. The incompetence required to allow this to happen is just off the charts.

Wait, this isn't true at all. Virtually every list had Juolevi 6th to 8th. Almost no one had him higher. And, almost no one had Juolevi higher than Tkachuk either. Even the people from the Knights thought Tkachuck was the clear winner between the two. When we look back on it in 10 years, we are going to be kicking ourselves...

Everyone here is forgetting that, for about a year and a half before we signed him, Loui did everything he could to legally telegraph that he was coming to the Canucks. Everyone who was paying attention knew that he was coming here looooooong before free-agency kicked off. So, there was really no question we were going to sign him - and there was no choice between him and someone else. We signed him a year before we actually singed him. We just had to wait to avoid tampering charges. It was a unique situation the likes of which we'd never really seen before.

Yeah, Luongo's been trying to put up really strong numbers - but, he's not doing it. Go look up his stats and compare them to the rookies/sophomores who've been his back-ups since the Vancouver Olympics. You'll notice that multiple rookies have come in and completely out-played Luongo. Not by a lot, but we are talking about rookies here. Your starting goalie with the massive, long-term contract should NEVER get out-played by rookie netminders. Let alone getting outplayed for many years straight. Would you trade for an old goalie who's been outplayed by rookies consistently? What about when he has one of the most expensive contracts in the league?

No, that statement is idiotic! Gillis took over a team that Nonis had run into the ground (bottom 10 in the league). The very next season, we won our division. Then, we won our division the next year. The year after that, we won our division again - and our conference - AND we won the President's trophy - and we went to the Stanley Cup Final. The year after that, we were the best team in the league - again - and won the President's Trophy for the second year in a row. And, this year, we won our division yet again. Gillis took a bottom 10 team - and won our division EVERY - SINGLE - YEAR! He's, by far, the best GM we've ever had. By a long-shot. So, to call him an idiot is ludicrous...

No, we want Luongo shipped out because Schneider waited patiently for three years and didn't say a word - but three games after Luongo (rightfully) got shown the bench, he asks to be traded passive-agressively hints that he wants to be traded (same thing for all intents and purposes). Three games. Team-players don't do that after three games. Good riddance.