SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME

On the positive side (or negative side, depending on how you view having a $3M 4C in the lineup), Drance recently said on the Vancast (about 20min into the May 26th podcast) that there’s a “pretty widespread organizational view that Beagle will not end up on LTI for next season.” Apparently Beagle will be seen by a specialist over the summer and recent indications are that he’s now expected to recover and play next season.

Have to wait and see if Jim hands him $2M in schedule B’s. (Kidding) Predicting Podkolzin’s deal will be right at league standard. $925K cap hit, $850K (max) schedule A bonuses, zero schedule B bonuses, $1.775M AAV, $92,500 (x3) signing bonuses, $832,500 NHL salary, 70K AHL. Basically a carbon copy of the Horvat (9th overall) ELC and the exact same contract most NHL teams give to players drafted in that range. I’d be very surprised if it’s anything different. Anyway, very exciting that he’s finally signed and joining the team. Can't wait to see him hit the ice in Canucks colours.

Good player, but not really a fit here. If we were sitting with several million in free cap space, had already constructed most of a contending lineup, with a top notch top-4 D, and three excellent centremen already in place, then adding a guy like RNH could make a lot of sense. But he’s definitely not our centre depth solution. He a very good hybrid C/W who you’d want to insert into a lineup as a swingman, not as an everyday centreman.

Yeah, I’m pretty sure all contracts run for the hockey season, and not calendar year, so team contractual employees, whether players, managers, coaches, scouts, etc, would all have contract years that run from July 1st to June 30th. The main difference is that it’s very unusual for anyone other than players to actually work through almost the entire season, during the final years of their deals, without having an extension in place. This is, of course, completely normal for players, but for coaches/managers/etc, the “lame duck” label gets applied as soon as they enter their final year. It’s usually a signal that the team is unsure about whether or not they’ll be bringing someone back, or that they’ve already mostly decided not to. It’s almost never the case that teams run out the final year on a contract for someone they’re completely happy with and intend to retain. It’s just not how things tend to get done. This season, in addition to the coaching staff, the Canucks also waited until well into the final contract years of many of their scouts, which is highly unusual. Scouts are usually extended much sooner than that. I don’t think I’ve ever heard of a scouting staff that’s had to face the uncertainty of waiting that late for their extensions. The coaches, well, they were kind of on the hot seat, and it’s probably fair to say that the owners weren’t really sure whether or not they wanted to bring Green back, and so they kind of were letting him twist in the wind for most of the season. (Possibly this was a negotiating play, as I’m sure Green wanted more than two years, and he probably wanted a significant bump in salary. Apparently he got the salary, or close to what he wanted, but had to give in on the term.) And, at the very least, a “lame duck” coach creates an unnecessary distraction, when it comes to media and fans. It also affects the way the coach works with his team. It’s generally not a good thing to have somebody coaching to keep their job, versus coaching for what’s best for the team, both short and long term. Same can be said for managers. We know that Benning was allowed to make preliminary offers at the beginning of the season, when it came to coaching extensions, but then something happened, and it would seem that ownership stepped in and forced him to press pause. Jim gave several interviews during the year where he indicated that he wanted to bring back Travis and the staff. But nothing was getting done for most of the season. Pretty much radio silence. Then, the owners had their talks with the advisors, they decided Benning would be brought back (even though he was under contract for two more years, it was apparently still necessary to tell him on May 18th that he was actually returning next season), Francesco decided to loosen the purse strings, empowered his manager to start managing the team again, and very quickly, almost like magic, a Green extension was done, and Jim was allowed to start negotiations with Ian Clark, and consulting with Travis on filling out the rest of the coaching staff. It was weird. Of course, it’s also been a very weird year. But the way these negotiations and extensions have gone down, whether the head coach, assistants, or the scouting department, has been far from “business as usual” in the NHL. Not even “business as usual” for the Vancouver Canucks. (For example, Gillis and Vigenault were given their extensions in May 2012, while both still had the full 2012-13 season remaining on their multiyear deals.) I know many people on CDC prefer to take an “everything’s fine” and “there’s nothing to see here” approach to the way the team has handled things this season. They would like to think it was just media “fake news” or the anti-Benning crowd on Twitter stirring up trouble. But it’s pretty clear that the owners had all options on the table, even as recently as early May, and that even included firing the GM and his management team, as well as clearing house on the entire coaching staff. It now looks like most, and possibly all, will be coming back. But it would be a mistake to think that any of this was a certainty, or that the way things played out this year was anything close to normal, as far as how NHL teams usually tend to operate (unless a major change in direction was, in fact, being seriously considered by ownership).

Legend says that, after the cameras cut off, Maclean told Cherry that he thought Green and Palffy were both “positive for something.”

Yup. Targeting Ovechkin is clearly the centrepiece of the “aggressive offseason” than Benning and Aquilini have planned for us this year. Of course, it’s never gonna happen, but how fun would it be to have Ovechkin on your team for the coming years? Next season, he’ll likely pass Dionne, Hull, and Jagr, to claim #3 on the all time goalscoring list. The year after, he should pass Howe. And then we’ll see if OV8 can chase down Gretzky and 894 goals, before age finally catches up. Ovechkin deserves the title. By era-adjusted scoring, he’s already passed Gretzky, and well within striking distance of Howe. By the time he finishes his career, he should be considered the greatest goal scorer in NHL history. Hopefully he sets the actual record (and not just era adjusted), and silences all doubters, before he hangs up his skates. It sure would be fun to watch all that stuff happen with Ovechkin wearing a Canucks jersey. (And certainly more enjoyable than being the team everyone else sets records and reaches their milestones against. )

He’s definitely a bag of something.

I’m not sure I’d even sign Kuznetsov as a UFA right now for $7.8 million over four years (which is what’s remaining on his current deal), never mind trade valuable assets for him, given his contract, and his trajectory. I mean, even before this season, Dom Luszczyszyn’s GSVA model rated Kuznetsov’s contract a “D” grading and put it at -$15.8M (as in negative, or overpayment) in value over the remaining term. And since that rating, Kuznetsov’s 2020-21 season saw him posting his worst scoring production rate since 2014-15 (his sophomore NHL season). I definitely wouldn’t trade Boeser or Miller, plus other assets (as suggested in some posts here), for Kuznetsov. Both Boeser and especially Miller, have outproduced and outperformed Kuznetsov for the last two seasons, and they are both younger, and on better deals. Kuznetsov appears to be starting his age related decline curve, and could potentially approach “negative value” territory and even buyout candidacy before his current contract expires. Some Caps fans say he’s already not earning his money. That’s not very likely to improve as his rounds age 30 and continues to get older and see his production decline. In any trade for Kuznetsov involving one of our younger, star forwards, I’d expect Washington to be the team adding pieces, and significant ones at that (assets like a high draft pick, top prospect, second roster player, etc). And even still, I’m not even sure I’d do it, unless the deal was massively weighted in our favour (like offloading Eriksson’s cap hit, getting a premium future asset in the return, etc). Kuznetsov is also really bad at faceoffs, especially for a 29 year old veteran. He’s actually worse than Pettersson is on draws. Difference is Petey is young and will get stronger and better at faceoffs. Kuznetsov is probably already past his prime and he’s a career 43.5% on faceoffs, and was around 41% last season. He’s not very likely to get better. He’s a talented player, no doubt, and if acquisition costs, and salary cap implications, were not factors in the equation, I’d be happy to insert a skilled forward like Kuznetsov into the lineup. However, in the real world, I’m not sure I see a realistic pathway to make it happen, or at least one that really works in the best favour for the Canucks.

Podkolzin’s English has already greatly improved, since draft day, and I’d imagine this summer he’ll continue to work on it so that he’s more than ready when he arrives. He’s also the type of guy who’s active in his community and takes a leadership role on his teams (when playing with his age group), and just has a good mental makeup, so he’ll probably have an easier time transitioning to a new team, city, and country, than some of his peers. I don’t anticipate any problems, other than some media shyness similar to what we’ve seen from Petey, when he’s not sure about the right words or phrasing (even though Elias speaks better English than most people you meet on the street in Vancouver). Having a Russian player would, of course, be nice for Podkolzin, but probably more due to the shared culture, and just having somebody to talk Russian stuff with, but I don’t think it’s necessary. And the Canucks could just as easily hire someone with a Russian background for a team staff/training role, if they really want to provide a “security blanket,” and at pennies on the dollar compared to even a league minimum salary player. But, again, probably not necessary. Podz is going to be fine. I’m not worried about him. He’s a different sort than Tryamkin, and I expect far less culture shock and growing pains, as he enters his rookie NHL season, compared to what we saw with Nikita.

Maybe they should aggressively rebuild pro scouting? Amateur scouting seems to be in good shape, but our pro scouting still seems to be pretty weak. Results have been very mixed, with some costly mistakes along the way. And we are now at the stage where we definitely need to be more successful in identifying undervalued current NHL players. Being able to target current NHLers poised to breakout, either due to development trajectory, or underutilization on their current team, is an area where top notch pro scouting can pay real dividends, and offer a pathway to turn this team around quickly, and on the cheap. I’d love for Benning to aggressively push Aquilini to expand the front office budget. We already have one of the smallest and leanest front offices and staffs in the league, so there’s lots of room to bring in some quality people. I’d love to see more tradition/conventional pro scouts added, and a shuffle of our existing pro scouting department, plus also expanding the analytics staff, to utilize that tool in targeting players with strong underlying profiles that can indicate the potential to succeed in larger roles, or being poised for a dramatic uptick in production, based on trajectory. Great teams seem able to find players on bottoms of the lineup salaries who can exceed the value expected from their roles and placement in the lineup. Finding established pros, on cheap deals, who can offer far more value than their salaries would indicate, is a great way to quickly fill out a roster, without breaking the cap. Easier said than done, of course, but other teams seem to manage to find those types of players, so why not us? And if we can’t do this, under our current staffing, then why not look to bring in some new people, on the talent evaluation side, and expand and reshuffle the staff, to make the pro scouting side just as strong as our amateur scouting? Hopefully ego isn’t holding Jim back, but it’s more about ownership cutting corners, that’s led to the current thin staffing. Benning is a strong evaluator of talent, and his built his career on his scouting ability. He may believe that he has all the help he needs (and he’ll get little argument from the owners, who like the cost savings, or from the invisible spectre serving as current Team President). Benning might believe that his pro scouting record is good enough, when it comes to acquisitions, and that he’s just been unfortunate, when finding the right roster fits, or having good players decline due to what are seem as uncontrollable factors (like injuries, although age curves also clearly play roles, in some cases). Personally, I see pro scouting as an area with lots of room to improve, and one where Benning could really benefit from some help, if he was willing to accept it. He’d still get the credit for any pro scouting “wins,” but adding some more talented people to make his job easier, would not be a bad thing. Right now, I see our pro scouting “wins” as a pretty short list: Motte, Miller, and Pearson (the trade, but not the recent extension). Am I missing any? As far as the pro scouting losses, take your pick of any veteran signing at market or above market AAV, lengthy contract term, and players brought in as UFAs who were paid at premium while on the downside of their age curves (it’s a long list of the usual subjects). (You could also add in some of the trades where picks were spent on role players or age gap fillers. The pro scouting was generally poor on those targets, and the process, in terms of “asset management,” was generally negative.) What we need to start doing to signing players before they peak, and not after. That takes exceptional pro scouting, which we don’t seem to have, but possibly we could build, with the right staffing additions, and department construction/organization. Basically, we need to be the kind of team that finds players like Antoine Roussel when they are young and cheap, and able to provide greater roster value than their contracts. We need to be able to identify players like a Colin Blackwell, signed as a UFA to a two-year deal at $725K AAV, and producing middle-six level scoring. Or guys like Conor Sheary, coming off of deals seen as overvalued, but then available at severe discounts on “show me” deals ($735K for middle-six level scoring). Alex Wennberg looks like a popular target for free agency this year. We need to have the pro scouting that targets him last year, after his buyout, signs him for $2.25M, and would give us a player who could be our 4th highest scoring forwards, while being only our 12 highest paid forward. Or guys like Evan Rodrigues (700K), Patrick Maroon (900K), Frederick Gadreau (700K), et cetera (could easily go on and on). And, when we have a player already in the season, we need to know when to hold onto them. We went and spent big on Jay Beagle. And I like Beags, respect him, and appreciate his contributions, on and off the ice. But $3M x 4 for a 33-year old fourth line centre, who will be 36 when his deal expires? What about the guy we had here, and who went on to replace Beagle? I’m not saying I could see it at the time, but Nic Dowd has basically done the same job as Beagle, just at 1/4 the cost, and five years younger. We had Dowd here, and let him walk and sign with Washington, who let Beagle go and sign with us, because, while they liked Beags, they couldn’t justify spending $12 million on him, and they knew they could replace him, and save money in the process. We need to be the kind of team that can see we already have a Nic Dowd, instead of paying 4x as much for Jay Beagle to do the same job (and arguably less effectively, especially as he ages). Anyway, this is getting lengthy, and it’s a rambling mess of a post already, so I’ll cut things off here. But the main point: how about we aggressively rebuild the pro scouting this offseason? I mean, it couldn’t hurt, right?

BC Restart Plan

Since Hughes won this year’s Babe Pratt Trophy, maybe give the Dave Pratt award to Myers? It’s not exactly a trophy, but a replica pair of Pratt’s infamous leather pants. Myers gets to wear them all summer. Might give him the chance to finally earn that “Big Sexy” nickname.

Ross Geller? (Google “Ross Geller,” turn on sound, click the little couch at the top right, enjoy)

It’s not just about the coach. The Canucks can survive replacing Clark. They will probably lose some amounts of wins, just from the drop off in talent, when it comes to the coach/consultant developing the goalie prospects, and maintaining/improving Demko’s game, but it’s not all that dire, in the big picture. A lot of the work is already done, and can be continued by Sanford, who has been working alongside Clark and is familiar with his methods and approaches. It’s more about what it tells us about the front office, and how it’s currently funcitoning. The team has an asset in Clark that they almost certainly cannot improve upon. He was happy here and willing to stay on. He’s universally praised by the goalies he works with (and the other players—Myers just added another statement in support of Clark). He’s viewed in the hockey world as one of, if not the best, goaltending coach/consultant in the world. And even Benning said he wanted to bring Clark back. But ownership appears to have been blocking management, when it came to making timely decisions on the coaching staff. Otherwise, it’s pretty obvious that Clark would be re-signed already. It’s always a bad thing when the owners start sidelining management on decisions that the GM should have been granted the authority to make. It points to a bad situation in the front office. The Clark issue is just an obvious symptom of the underlying illness. And it’s also just a brutal unforced error, if he’s simply allowed to walk. Survivable? Absolutely. A downgrade in the goalie coach should not sink any team, and the Canucks will be okay, whatever happens. But it will mean that we have a front office that wasn’t able to complete what was basically a layup, when it came to extending a non-cap contract that would have retained one of the very best people in the world (possibly the best), in a key role. And with our roster structure and game plan/systems being so dependent on us getting quality goaltending, in order to be competitive, keeping Clark in his role should have been a no-brainer for the folks running hockey ops.

Sure. But leaving things this late would be the reason why Clark might now have moved on from the Canucks and have other alternatives lined up. So let’s not set up a ready made excuse, for Benning and Aquilini, if things go sour. It will be the fault of management/ownership, if Clark isn’t brought back. I saw absolutely nothing through 2019 or 2020 to indicate Clark wanted anything other than the come back and finish the work he’d started with the Canucks and the goalies. He wasn’t unhappy. Quite the opposite, based on everything we’ve seen and heard over the past couple years. He had great relationships with the goalies. He has the type of role he wanted, with input into draft picks and signings (when it came to goalies), as well as his regular, day to day coaching duties. And he had two young guys, in Demko and DiPietro, who he can really have an impact on and possibly even build up into Vezina contenders. He should have been fairly easy to extend, if approached early, offered fair compensation, and treated with the level of respect he deserves. But we also knew that things could get messy if the Canucks made him wait. It’s been talked about to death. This isn’t a guy you leave to the last minute and then circle back and hope to sign to an 11th hour extension. Clark likes certainty. And he’s done enough in his career to earn it. He always has other options, and he will start to make other plans, if he’s left on the back burner, and doesn’t get the sense he’s a priority, being shown the appropriate respect, or that his continued employment with the team is guaranteed. Clark is now rumoured to have interest from teams like Florida, Toronto, and Calgary. I’d imagine that list grows to a dozen or more teams, if he’s not re-signed the week, and becomes a free agent on the market. It’s not lip service when all these people in hockey say that Clarkie is the best. It’s the truth. I’ve never heard otherwise, whether from fans, media, or the actual folks working in the biz. He’s consistently seen as top-3 in the world, and those who like him say, without a doubt, he’s #1. That’s an asset you do everything in your power to keep, and it’s pretty clear that the Canucks have not. Word is they are now “taking a run” at re-signing Clarkie, finally. They really should have been working on signing him to an extension a year ago. (Hopefully they were doing so, quietly, and this last step is mostly a formality, but the extension is already basically agreed on and they just need to put pen to paper.)

Depends on the roster. Are we getting any major improvements next season? A healthy team, with Pettersson the full year, Podkolzin’s arrival, Rathbone up for the full year, continued development of the young players, and maybe a key addition or two (if there’s money) should be able to push for a playoff spot. But how much dead salary will we be carrying? Is Eriksson still on the books? Beagle, Roussel, Ferland? LTIR? Will we still be icing a defence that requires playing Tyler Myers for 22 minutes per game? Lots of questions. One I don’t have is whether or not Travis Green will provide competent coaching behind the bench. I can’t say whether or not we’ll make the playoffs. But if we do miss, it probably won’t be because of the head coach. It’ll more likely be because of the team assembled to play the games in 2021-22, either due to roster building/cap management, or because of illnesses/injuries preventing the full team from playing.

Probably worthwhile to gather all these quotes into one post. Holtby: DiPietro: Demko: Every goaltender of significance in this organization sees Clark as one of the best, if not the very best, goalie coach/consultant in the world. They all want him here. They all believe Clark makes them better. The two younger goalies (Demko and DiPietro) credit Clark for their success as pros and their development into the players they are today. And they feel that Clark staying to critical to continuing the work, and making them the best NHL goaltenders they can be. These guys (especially Demko) have been practically begging management/ownership to just figure it the **** out and do whatever is necessary to get a deal done, before it’s too late (if it’s not too late already). Hopefully we hear good news soon, now that the decision has been made on Green. Because I’m probably gonna lose my ****, if it’s bad news. “Running out of time” on Clark would be sheer idiocy. So I really hope the team has been in communication with Clark, and he was willing to wait for this all to play out, or he had been privately given some assurances, and will now get re-signed and announced shortly.

Hi

Best Canucks news this week. Green was never the problem here. He’s gotten good results and generally overachieved with the rosters he’s been given to work with. And the players like him and have confidence in him. Cautiously optimistic this could mean Ian Clark also returns, as I’ve been hoping the team was holding off on announcing Clark until they’d made a decision and come to an agreement on Green, but that they might have had a handshake agreement on Clark for months, but just weren’t willing to create a distraction by signing an assistant coach/consultant before the head coach. We shall see.

I knew how this thread would go just from reading the title, and CDC did not disappoint. Fan protests and “demands” always seems a bit pointless and childish. And the one position in hockey where you kind of get to do whatever the **** you want, is team owner, so long as you don’t run afoul of the NHL or break any of the basic governing agreements. So yeah, Frankie doesn’t owe us anything. However... We also know that the Aquilinis are very reactive, and even stuff that seems really dumb, like flying #FireBenning banners,, chanting “fire Gillis,” wearing anti-ownership/management T-shirts, holding rallies/protests, negative press stories about “fan confidence,” angry social media posts, and the like, are all things that ownership notices and reacts to. It all has an effect, and these owners will react. Their approach and actions are greatly influenced by whatever feedback they’re getting from the fans. JB appears to have been given another year, for the time being, so the #FireBenning movement did not (yet) succeed. However, the conversation around Benning’s job security has certainly changed, and that’s mostly because of the fans. Jim already came much closer to getting canned this year than he would have without the actions of the anti-JB fan movement, and he’s not out of the hot seat, by any means. Same thing goes for ownership bringing in all these new advisors, and looking to give themselves cover, by bringing in former players, especially the universally loved Sedins. Probably none of that happens, if Canucks fans were simply united in their positivity and agreement with the plan and approach taken by this team. So, while a lot of this stuff may seem, to many on CDC, like a bunch of petulant, wet diaper, childish fans throwing silly tantrums, the fact remains that ownership does notice and react to negative fan sentiments, and it does shift their approach to how the team is run.

It’s crazy though, if it’s about the money. They invested $25 million in Demko, when there wasn’t a rush to get that extension done (had plenty of time), but don’t pay the pennies on the dollar (we’re talking maybe a few 100k per year) to secure Clark and protect that $5 million per year investment in Demko. And they had money to re-sign Pearson, who also costs cap space, but no money for Clark? It’s mind boggling stuff. And now Demko is literally pleading with the team to get something done to keep Clark. While DiPietro also just raves about Clark and how important he’s been in Mikey’s development. These are our future goalies, and, in Demko, a main core asset on a big ticket contract. Just ridiculous not to invest the money in Clark that protects the value of these assets and investments. Makes no sense, from a business standpoint, and even less sense, hockey wise. I really hope we get a pleasant surprise and they somehow smooth things out with Clark (after basically showing him zero respect, based on what’s the norm in these situations, and especially for a coach/consultant of his stature). and get him extended and locked in for the next several years. Not holding my breath, but still holding our hope. I really don’t want to have a freak out, but this Clark thing has kind of become the rubicon for me. I’m basically done with ownership (and management too—even if this issue 100% ownership driven, it’s completely dysfunctional that management can’t make the decision to keep Clark, and I’d have no faith in the ownership/management relationship being workable, as far as any future team success), if as key asset like Clark is simply allowed to walk.

Pretty much my feeling as well, after sitting with the news a while. We can certainly question the timing, as the team just needs a PR “win” right now, and I’m sure that was a factor. However, it’s been known for a while that the twins wanted to return to hockey at some point, in a front office/hockey ops type of role. So maybe the timeline was moved up a little, but I doubt that much, and this was probably going to happen at some point, regardless of the team situation, or the owners needing window dressing. The twins are nobody’s fool. They are not going to just get “used.” Regardless of the circumstances of their joining the team, the end result, for them, will be getting in the door, and building up their expertise and qualifications, likely leading to long second careers for Hank and Danny, as hockey management/executives. And there are very few human beings on this earth that are higher quality individuals than the twins. Any organization would be better for having them. And I expect they will be very successful, at whatever roles they take on, and whatever challenges they face.

It was a cool show. I’m really glad I was in town for it. So unusual to get that kind of lightning in Vancouver. Apparently, we might get more tonight and tomorrow, although I doubt anything quite like last night, which seemed like a once in a quarter century type of storm, at least for this area. I’m born and raised here and I can’t really remember the last time we had such an energetic storm, especially happening right over the city.

Definitely like the idea of the twins more than Courtnall, especially the timing, in light of the Virtanen sexual assault accusation. Just bad optics to bring someone with Courtnall’s history into the organization. The Sedins, however, are nothing but class, and have squeaky clean reputations (I just hope they avoid the kind of tarnishing that Linden took). I mean, short term, it seems like mostly a PR play, but longterm, if the twins are going to pursue a future in NHL hockey operations, there’s never a bad time to start building up their experience and qualifications, to hopefully take on larger roles and weightier positions down the road.

How to tell somebody didn’t grow up during the Cold War: They say “portal,” when I immediate think nuclear bomb flash. ”Duck and cover” almost kicked in.