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

whysoserious

Members
  • Content Count

    143
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

whysoserious last won the day on November 8 2014

whysoserious had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

163 Good

About whysoserious

  • Rank
    Comets Prospect

Recent Profile Visitors

4,960 profile views
  1. Can we stop targeting players based on past pedigree.
  2. Theodore, Girard and Chychrun were signed before they really broke out. Sergachev and McAvoy are signed to bridge deals. I think if we want to sign Hughes around this cap hit it will have to be a bridge deal. I think he can easily make the argument he's the most valuable defenseman on the Canucks and should be paid as such, i.e. > 6M.
  3. Square one to getting a cup is icing a competitive roster year in and year out, which is difficult to do when you are not prudent about how you manage your team’s assets. This idea that “anything can happen in the playoffs” is largely nonsense. When was the last time a team that barely squeaked into the playoffs won a cup? At the end of the day, no team is happy with just making the playoffs. If you haven’t already seen it, check out Masai Ujiri’s end of year conference call. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDDZTThhVxs
  4. All these players were acquired via our own picks (except maybe Rathbone?), we would have been able to pick regardless. Rebuilding teams should have a surplus of picks. If we are good at drafting, we should be drafting more often. This is exactly the mindset that gets us into trouble. We have not been able to acquire bottom 6 players cheaply and easily, and have one the worst and overpaid bottom 6s in the league. Again, every contending team has a deep roster, effective 3rd and 4th liners are still needed. Whether or not Madden turns out to be a useful player is still up in the air, bu
  5. I agree the goal should not be collecting assets for years and missing the playoffs every year. But, what we’ve been doing is missing the playoffs while NOT collecting assets. The objective of a hockey team should not just be make the playoffs. The objective is to win the Stanley Cup, just squeezing into the playoffs and hoping for the best is not enough. Last year we were at the stage where it looked like our competitive window was beginning to open, making deals that only improves us short term while not helping at least in the medium term is bad asset management. We need to ensure our compe
  6. Without hindsight you don't see Sergachev developing into a top pairing defenseman, again he was still an unproven albeit highly rated prospect. You can even go back to the CDC post for the trade and see that by no means was it seen as terrible at the time.
  7. If we lost 10 out of 10 game we likely still qualify for the play ins. But, in any event we should avoid hypotheticals. You can't justify the Toffoli trade by looking at how it looked at the time and then decree that Sergachev-Drouin trade was one of the worst in history. At the time, Drouin was coming off a 50 point season and Sergachev was still an unproven prospect. The result was a terrible trade for Montreal but at least they still got a few seasons of Drouin. The Canucks literally have nothing to show for the the Toffoli trade, it was objectively bad asset management.
  8. I think it's pretty disingenuous to say that Toffoli helped us make the playoffs considering we lost 6 of 10 games he played. The play ins were the reason we made the playoffs and Toffoli did not play in any of the games we won.
  9. Yes, that's where I would put their value if we were looking to trade them. Similar to when the we traded for Pouliot, Leipsic, etc. But, given our lack of depth we're probably better off holding onto them at that price. If you think they're worth more than that, how about changing your proposal to add 3 2nd round picks and take Juolevi, Lind, Gadjovich out.
  10. When Jones was Juolevi's age he was already a 40-50 point defenseman. Lind, Gadjovich and Juolevi have very little trade value, they are probably worth the equivalent of mid/late round pick. They certainly would not move the needle in a trade for Seth Jones. Jone is probably a bit overrated but no way he is traded without a guaranteed 1st or a top prospect going back the other way.
  11. That might be a worse offer than Raymond, Ballard and 1st
  12. Not sure if true, but I read on HF that he had a really bad combine.
  13. @markhmasters: Lazar on scrum w Finns in 3rd: "Jake & I were bugging Connor. He didn't want to get in there. Up to us Western guys to take care of that." @markhmasters: Virtanen on coming to Lazar's defence: "Sticking up for my teammate & let them know we're not going to take that lightly esp w our captain"
  14. Just like Hertl and Goldoblin?
×
×
  • Create New...