DSVII
-
Posts
2,115 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by DSVII
-
-
Third most favorable schedule in the league from a rest day POV. No excuses this year.
-
6 hours ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:
That's if they draft them;
If they trade the picks away,
No prospects to watch.
Canucks approach draft
With less picks than contenders
Short term for playoffs
-
15 minutes ago, Bob.Loblaw said:
To clarify: he is absolutely not the right fit for this team. We have a little cap space and it's unwise to burn it all on a 3C. We're also not a super-competitive team that's going to invite veterans on cheap contracts. If Staal wants a cup maybe he can join his brothers in Florida.
But contract price aside, I see no reason why he wouldn't be a solid player for years to come. What do I think Staal will look like a year or two from now? Pretty much the same. He's always been a high-end middle six talent that's kept himself relevant for years on end.
Look at the complete list of 37+ skaters left in the league. Ovechkin, Bergeron, Perry, Burns, Carter, Stastny, Suter, Goligoski, Bellmare, Parise, Pavelski, E. Staal, and Giordano. Some players like Bergy, Ovie, Pavelski & Burnzie are still elite-level talents, while the rest of them have all aged really gracefully. Again - I'm not saying Jordan Staal would be the right fit for us, but if he did sign something like a $4M x 3/4 years, I have zero doubt he would live up to his contract. I just think we're a bit jaded here because our previous veteran contracts led to us buying out OEL.
I wouldn't say you're necessarily wrong, i would love a Pavelski style outcome, but we already have one of those bets in JT Miller, I'm wary of the team making another one.
It's also survivorship bias, for each of those names you listed there are perhaps hundreds more players that have fallen off a cliff when they're in their mid 30s. Staal would be battling against the odds here, and i acknowledge it is totally possible he continues playing at a high level. From a team construction standpoint, I'm just not willing to pay the price on a player who has to hit a ~95th percentile outcome to break even on his contract value at 4M.
With the 4.7M dead cap coming from OEL and Peteys extension, we need to make efficient, cheaper high reward signings and Staal doesn't fit that mold to me.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Bob.Loblaw said:
I can't believe you're trying to compare current Jordan Staal to Canucks Jay Beagle. The guy was dark horse candidate for the Selke trophy this year. When the voting list comes out, I fully expect him to have earned a couple fifth place votes. Incidentally, Beagle did get a few Selke votes back in 16-17, when he truly was a great defensive forward. But Staal is still an amazing defensive forward today.
Not a direct player to player comparison. But the thought process is eerily similar. Consider the projection of where you think a 35 year old centre is gonna look like even 1 year into a 4 year deal.
It's a high risk low reward gamble we should not make IMO.
Even your comparison is between Beagle 2-3 years into his deal with us vs Staal today. I'd like to see Beagles chart moved back three years for an apples to apples match. And even then Staal is older. I have no interest hoping he plays the same quality when he's 38 years old as your deal time horizon suggests
-
Honestly wouldn't bother. Not
our price or age range, let another team hold the bag.
Shades of Beagle
[ The 32-year-old center had 22 points (seven goals, 15 assists) in 79 games with the Washington Capitals last season and ranked first on the Capitals with a 58.5 face-off win percent ]
-
1
-
1
-
-
43 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:
I mean he left him more than nothing however, what he left wasn't much and too many had full-too much trade control. When even Jannik Hansen has a NTC you're getting kinda ridiculous territory. Gilman gets far too much credit for his "genious" around here.
No one's calling him a genius. But on the other side of the ledger you have posters claiming that the Sedin era core was an auto-pilot lock to make the finals and credit Gillis with absolutely nothing.
-
Flames are imploding
Like Oceangate submarine
Pass the popcorn, please
-
3
-
-
No. Keep the draft pick and use the cap space to squeeze another capped out team for their defense. Like a Reilly or Gryzlck out of Boston.
I don't think Hanafin fits in our D-core anyway.
-
1
-
-
On 6/17/2023 at 6:24 AM, Junkyard Dog said:
As it turns out, they are willing to make sacrifices for the short term gain.
It's what happens when every GM under Aqua is told to make playoffs at all cost or be fired in 2 years.
With that incentive, any GM will make a move that hurts in 5 years but helps today.
-
1
-
-
16 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said:
Marino has the same hype as Tram, and is meh for $4.4 million dollars. He has one good attribute, he at least can defend.
But he's very overrated too.
I'll take that over all the failed pro-scouting acquisitions from Benning era.
-
Considering we had all the leverage in this OEL deal (OEL wanted only to come here or Boston and Boston said no way in hell) AND we end up paying the 1st along with all the dead cap. I think this one hurts more in terms of opportunity cost.
We couldn't be in on the Marino trade and God knows how many other past and future moves to come because of this.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:
The LARGE cap dumps that Arizona took at LONG OFF their books. Meanwhile they got a 1st round pick for their troubles.
Remembering the going rate during flat cap era. 1 year/ 6 mil of cap = 1st rounder.
Benning paid a top ten 1st to give Arizona 6 years worth of 1st rounder value in cap space.
-
2
-
-
3 minutes ago, iinatcc said:
Yeah but history will repeat and this team will just keep gushing relying on some hallow optimism. Heck people here are already penciling Arthur Silovs as the next franchise goalie. Lol
For Canucks fans blind optimism is hard to resist
We go to sports to escape the realities of life.
I don't blame fans for trying to get some enjoyment out of their team. Rather than confront the fact that by following this team, you can't ever escape pain.
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, JohnTavares said:
I remember everyone completely hating and downvoting people that didn’t like the trade.
Let’s just say the collective IQ of this fanbase is not very high…
The hivemind is slowly shifting towards seeing the true damage of the Benning era at least
-
1
-
-
30 minutes ago, Sharpshooter said:
Hronek moves up in the lineup?
At this point. Him and Hughes are the lineup
-
1
-
1
-
-
There's really no chips left to play. Gotta make playoffs next year. And that terrifies me for our long term picture
-
From just Loui deal
Bad cap spanning three decades
Thank you Jim Benning
-
How we spend that cap space really determines whether this was the right move or not. I'd prefer to wait a year but they must really think OEL is unsalvageable.
And God damn. All of Bennings moves post 2016 can't even seem to last one year before going stale.
The only bright side is that Aquilini is feeling that $20 mil sting. Hopefully this teaches him to meddle less.
-
7 hours ago, AnthonyG said:
Lol head on over to Toronto bud. Clearly no faith in those players. Glad to know their careers are done and over with and never amounted to anything like the Sedins+Kesler+Burrows and Schneider
hmm lets see it took the Sedins 10+ years to hit 100 points…. Took Pettersson 6? Calder trophy? Miller over 80 points twice, Kesler…none? Name some players who won a Selke on a bottom team or outside the playoffs. I’ll be waiting…. For awhile. Demko vs Schneider? Who was a starter earlier in their career? Oh right Demko by a 3-4 years.
you guys get more and more pathetic lmao. Comparing full careers to guys almost entering their prime LOL.
how do you side with such ridiculousness @DSVIII've said this to you many times.
If Benning and his post-2014 drafted core averaged 106 points per year and made playoffs for 6 of the 8 years. You would be building shrines to him.
Again, we are Canucks fans, it's great we love our players. I love laughing at the Leafs. A lot. But we have to take our sunny rose tinted glasses off when it comes to evaluating our core on whether they can win a cup.
The fact remains, despite how great Petey is as a Calder player, he isn't good enough to take this team to the playoffs in an 82 game season, at least not yet. And when he does, he still has a way to go before he can match the last core.
I think with the Sedins, we can agree their development and peak were not ideal and very unique among hockey players. The fact that they couldn't peak when the WCE was still here is one of my many 'what ifs'
As for ridiculousness
You're comparing what these guy's primes COULD be, under perfect cirucumstances, and saying they'll be better than what the best team we ever had as a team is.
-
On 6/13/2023 at 11:53 AM, AnthonyG said:
Yea and Salo, Jovanoski, Kesler, Burrows, Bieksa, Hansen, Demitra, Mitchell, Malhotra saw seasons under 60, hell a handful of them saw seasons under 20 games.
And guess what? As an aggregate, the man games lost and % of cap space on IR under Celebrini's tenure exceeded Burnie. Again, it's not blaming him for hockey being violent, but by the numbers, the team spiked way above the league average in these categories.
QuoteI’ve said many times and I’ve had this conversation previously with you.
Gillis did infact run this organization into the ground in an attempt to go all in. I do not blame him for what he did, I supported it and I understood the consequences, something you and countless others do not seem to grasp.The Canucks had a first rate front office when Gillis left, sleep doctors, training programs, an analytics department, a farm team infrastructure, capologist etc...Those still remained even after the Torts year, Benning systematically took these apart while the rest of the league adopted these innovations.
I understood the consequences too, and was hoping Benning would too, but he explicitly said this was a situation he could turn around quickly with confidence. So you have to hold him accountable for that. It's something you haven't grasped.
QuoteThe sh*thole he left behind made JBs job 10x harder. That takes soooooo much longer to bounce back from as an organization.
Hard Disagree. Benning had the picks, the cap space, and the infrastracture to pivot easily to a retool and rebuild effectively had he chosen so. The team he inherited scored over 100+ points the following season. We've seen teams go all in on cup runs and restock the cupboards in the same amount of time Benning tried to tread water in a Pacific division that was mostly rebuilding.
10x harder? That is hyperbole.
Also, i'll reiterate again.
Every GM had to deal with Covid (by the time Nucks were infected, they had a <10% chance of making it)
Every GM had to deal with flat salary cap
Every GM had to deal with the expansion draft
In fact, the flat cap is one of the reasons why we can laugh at the Maple Leafs since they couldn't fully load up for their playoff runs with their overpaid core, but even then they've accomplished more than us. In the same timeframe, they drafted a core, and competed with a playoff spot for 6 consecutive years since Benning started. Averaging 106 points.
If Benning had those results, 110% guaranteed you'd be singing more praises for him.
QuoteBut but draft capital??? You always talk about draft capital. “Picks are better than no picks”
Benning found guys beyond 20. Whats Gillis’s excuse? Couldnt he develop anyone?? What was wrong with development from 2005-2013?"Guy", singular. What's the point of drafting a 40 goal scorer in McCann if you trade him for a high-risk/low-reward play in Gudbranson? Drafting is far from the most important function of a GM.
What was wrong, as I had explained many times to you, was that Gillis had no control of the farm team since the Jets took over the Moose in 2011. We were affiliated with the Chicago Wolves and they had full control of our prospect deployment, so we were unable to even get them to put our guys in top positions to succeed. For a guy clamoring about the importance of development you are sure are ungrateful for the fact that GMMG set up the Utica Comets for Benning.
Quote
Just in the 20’s
200822nd - Eberle
27th - Carlson
(Pssst Hodgson 10th, Karlsson 15th. Yikes)
2009
22nd - Schroeder
24th - M. Johansson
26th - Palmieri
2010
21st - Sheahan
24th - K. Hayes
26th - Kuznetsov
28th - Coyle
30th - Nelson
201120th - Murphy
26th - Danault
27th - Namestnikov
29th - Jensen
30th - Rakell
2012
20th - Laughton
22nd - Maata
23rd - Matheson
26th - Gaunce
28th - Skjei30th - Pearson
- 1 of 7 GMs to not find NHL talent in the 1st round. 23/30 picks played over 200 games, mostly over 400.
2013
20th - Mantha
23rd - Burakovsky
24th - Shinkaruk
26th - Theodore
29th - Dickinson - lol longer career than almost every 1st round MG selected
30th - Hartman
You obviously don't even get the concept of draft capital, and are throwing it around like you do.
Yes, stars can be found in the 20s and potentially 30s. The existence of Brock Boeser at 23rd, just because he outperformed someone drafted at say 5th. Doesn't make a 23rd pick more draft capital than a 5th in a draft.
You're basically telling me. "See? This guy hit on a 20% ticket, so Gillis should be able to match what Benning did with a 95% ticket!"
QuoteYou act like no other GM who was competing or contending, couldnt find talent or develop players. Looks to me like Washington did quite well. So did Anaheim.
Compared to his peers, he really sucked at drafting. Those are just first round picks in the 20s… what about everything beyond that? Nada.
Again, i'm not even claiming that the drafting wasn't sub par under Gillis, but there are reasons for this. Especially in the development department with the Chicago Wolves. I would flip that around and tell you that in 8 years, with a fully set up farm system and higher quantity and value of picks than GMMG, having only 1 Utica graduation in Demko is an uglier result than the shitty Gillis drafting.
QuoteLike I’ve argued countless times with you, its about development.
It is about development. And Benning has done squat considering he was set up for success better than GMMG was with the Chicago Wolves. He never fully utilized the Farm team to set up his high end prospects for success and rushed them.
Who did Benning graduate from Utica outside of the 1st round besides Demko?
Jake
Hoglander
McCann
QuoteBut here you are going back on your draft capital stance and saying that the chance of those mid-late 20s picks are such a small chance of panning out that it doesnt matter about selling them off. Pick a side and stick to it, you continue moving the goal posts again and again to suit YOUR argument when you see fit.
The 20th place pick argument was never about selling them off (those were your own words), but that when you have a GM picking constantly in the 20s, you don't expect them to walk away from the draft with the same amount of talent as a GM picking constantly in the top 10s.
And just because Brock Boeser exists does not change this, because it is pure mathematics. Because you are using the fact that players like Boeser exist in the 20s that there is no excuse for Gillis to not succeed at drafting at that range.
Draft capital only exists for you as a phrase to throw around whenever you think you have a shot at someone. You truly don't understand it. Because I do recall in a past conversation that you said draft position is a weak argument to explain why Gillis didn't produce as many NHLers as Benning.
QuoteYou always preach capital and I preach development, now capital means nothing?? What about development??? Why was MG unable to successfully develop any real talent?? He had no reasons to rush anyone, he had no need to throw anyone into the fire. He ha alllll the time in the world to develop prospects between the guys who Nonis selected and Gillis selected. Almost nothing came of it. Why was development not addressed???? This is what great organizations do and have continued to do. JB had to fill a roster and a bloody farm, you think its fair to knock his prospect pool when Gillis’s picks were also part of that pool? Gillis left no imprint anywhere other than going all in and “almost” winning.
See: Chicago Wolves. If Benning had the same hardship you would be excusing him just as you are for the Covid/Flat cap. But you see, unlike those circumstances, this one was unique to Gillis because it was to facilitate the Jets. But guess what, he got it solved.
All the time in the world? He was busy trying to get a cup, which you fully support by the way. So why are you not more understanding of the fact that despite all those obstacles, he got the infrastructure set up for Benning?
Gillis left an imprint on the organization and culture of the team, the programs and infrastructure he set up in the front office with the vision of the team as a fast paced team that punished you on the PP.
The standards died really when the Sedins and Tanev/Edler left. Benning did nothing to supplant that culture, he let it run to the ground (in your own phrase)
"almost winning" by the way, is a stratosphere above whatever Benning achieved. Again you move the goalposts to suit Benning.
QuoteI see plenty of other winning teams with worse draft positions doing far better than Gillis did.
Give me an example, I've given you so many others.
Define winning too. Because to you winning to achieve 15th place in 2020 is better than Game 7 in 2011
QuoteI am taking alllll of that into account. Are you? He left nothing behind. He left an aged out washed up roster and some halfand Benning had to start from below ground zero. How are you not taking any of that into account? How do you expect Benning to succeed so quickly with what prospects? Who from Nonis and Gillis was going to take over for the twins? No one. Who was going to help transition into the new era or at least be a place holder to allow for either sheltered NHL development or AHL development.
The whole point was Gillis hung onto 2011 far too long, his changes at the 2012 deadline? Nothing significant at all. Got smoked in the 1st round.
“I felt from Day 1 that it’s stale. That’s not their fault. This is a group that has been together for a long time. It’s stale. It needs youth. It needs a change. I felt that from Day 1. We’re not in 2011. We have to stop talking about 2011. The team needs to be retooled. It’s a young man’s game.” – John Tortorella
The roster still competed for playoffs the next year. Benning did not start from ground zero, he started from 100 points. Then he ran the team into the ground rather than rebuild and trade for prospects.
I seem to recall his initial UFA signings were his best, Vrbata, Miller.
Also, when you make it to game 7 of the stanely cup finals, and your core is still intact, you run it back. Just ask Tampa Bay what they did after 2015 or the Capitals after all those years.
Again, why are you applying perfect hindsight to all of Gillis' actions? And not look at the circumstances around them.
Benning meanwhile, you are applying the perfect scenario to justify his shortcomings (Petey/Hughes/Demko will one day be on the level of the WCE and Sedins)
Quote2013-14 those are the vibes from the head coach day 1. Gillis did what he had to, to go all in, in 2011. Which when you have disposable assets, its not difficult. He held onto that “almost” for another season, made no changes at the 2012 deadline other than Hodgson for Kassian. Then he goes and holds on the following season, another 1st round exit. The year after that 23rd overall, a sign of things to come.
If he was at all smart he would have retooled. But he never let go of 2010-11. Just go look at those rosters between 2010-2013, how much change do you see?
Garrison, Booth, Kassian. Traded Erhoffs rights for a 4th. Erhoff was a HUGE factor in our 2010-11 season/run, 50pts and all we got was a 4th??? 3 years after a cup appearance, the Jennings tandem is gone.
You do realize that Torts was no Gillis' hire right? Gillis wanted to rebuild in 2013, he wanted to let go. The only person who didn't was Aqua.
This whole section is a tangent. What Gillis did try a semi retool up till 2013, he was just constrained by the effects of the cap crunch, which I understand but I was also running out of patience and wanted a rebuild. To his credit, he wanted to rebuild in 2013 after the SJ sweep.
Guess what though, Benning also had disposable assets in 2015 after seeing the team fail in the 2015 run. He just chose to not trade them as well. Where is your outrage on this if Gillis made the same mistake in 2013?
You are applying different standards to both. Goalposts I can understand because I know from your vantage point, Benning is working with a 10x handicap, but as you can see, I don't agree at all. He was very well set up.
QuoteFired before he could do anything?
Luongo?
Schneider?
Hodgson?
Samuelsson?
Erhoff?
no prospects?
his biggest problem is HE NEVER DID ANYTHING AFTER 2010-11, what did he do to improve the team? The moves he did make were awful. His drafting and development was horrendous. Lmfao and you wanted THAT GUY, to lead a rebuild??? Buddy, come on. That would be the worst rebuild ever.
Gee I wonder why they hired a guy with a very highly respected scouting background……. Could it be, maybe, it was to help with a rebuild??????? It wasnt a full on rebuild, it was a stealth rebuild and his first 5 years indicate that. They would not mention the “R” word because that would
1) Be a kick in the balls to the twins
2) hurt revenue
Out of respect for the Sedins they didnt crush their hopes of a cup, JB built through free agency and kept his picks. Did his best to add picks with the very few trade chips he had.I mean, as a fan who consumes hockey, I think you understand that a rebuild takes more than one season of work. And up until 2013, he was going for it under express directive from ownership.
He tried to improve the team, those moves didn't work out. He recognized that and wanted a rebuild. We will never know how good Gillis was at rebuilding, i personally wanted to see what he would do with one more year, but what we do know is already better than what we got (Larkin > Virtanen). Whose to say. But you are slagging him on something he might have done, not something he has.
HAHA, the twins are grownups, they said themselves they'd be happy to mentor kids for a rebuild.
I see you subscribe to the stealth rebuild. And this is where draft capital comes in.
this was not a rebuild, in any sense of the word.
A rebuild stocks up picks
A rebuild stocks up on higher draft position picks
This is a chart based on the HockeyDB drafts of all the teams that finished below the Canucks in those 'rebuilding' years.
Aside from being capped out, Benning had fewer picks going into the draft than any rebuilding team around him for most years.
Based on these draft values: https://soundofhockey.com/2022/06/06/examining-the-value-of-nhl-draft-picks/
For reference, the cost of Hronek (17th + 43rd) equates to about 242 points on the weighted chart.
This was never a rebuild, it was a failed franken tool.
Quotevehemently disagree?
so he sells off 2 #1 goalies
leaves JB with 2 unproven goalies.
the twins were unmovableEdler refused to waive
Kesler held the keys to his own destination
Tanev was still young and like you claimed “still a prospect”
Burrows was signed to a 4x4.5mil deal and was massively underperforming, good luck with that one, thanks Gillis
Hansen was nothing spectacular and got us what he did, then JB turned a bratty Dahlen into a promising Karlsson
Garrison had trade protection and was an anchor.
He had 3 years to leave something behind after 2010-11, he left jack sh*t. He didnt have a chance to?? Why not? Did he “ run out of time”?
You think he left him valuable trade chips? Give your head a shake.
JB did sign Miller (which was a fine add) and had Marky and Lack which made playoffs.
Twins should not be moved, they were an important part of the team and culture.
The entire Pacific was rebuilding
Kesler had two destinations, and JB still got a 1st and two roster players from him (personally i wanted Shea Theodore from Anahei, he was available)
Garrison was traded away, as was Burrows and Hansen because they still had value to the roster
And not to mention 30-35% of the cap space to play with after those trades.
The fact we made playoffs in 2015 showed there was something still there. Again, I have a hard time believing you saying you are objectively evaluating anything that Benning didn't touch.
QuoteUmm hello??? My point was Salo was here when Berstein was. He missed how many games?? Lol you take no accountability of Salo’s injury history or MANY other Canucks who played under 50 games under Bernstein.
Nice deflection Pavelski.The accountability comes from the fact that even when including Salos injuries and games lost, the team as a whole was still less injured under Burnie's stewardship than it was under Celebrini. You are willfully ignorant of the hard line numbers (# of man games lost / year) that don't support you.
Quotewhat great work by Gillis to recreate the Boston model, didnt even change the roster.
Garrison, Booth and Kassian
Again you can thank Aqua.
Seriously, my score of 4/10 was because I was trying to be charitable to the fact Aqualini tied Benning to a flawed strategy. If you aren't willing to even be objective enough to see that 2013 onwards Gillis was forced by management to go for it with Torts and the like, then Benning is a 2/10 GM for me. And Jake Virtanen can go back to being 100% Benning's responsibility.
And after the remarks that came out from Trevor today, and Benning throwing him under the bus, a 2/10 he is.
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/longer-vision-linden-canucks-management
How you can support a guy that's done so much harm to this organization is beyond me.
QuoteOh but Gillis’s contracts didnt suck and could be moved??? Did YOU ever consider that??? Doesnt seem like it at all.
My whole point was without any changes made, once our star players began playing like star players, we were the hottest team in the league down the final 40-50 game stretch. Imagine if they showed up to play on time? Imagine if Petey wasnt pointless in 24 of the first 44 games? Or if Demko played like Vasilevskiy, Shesterkin etc do from the start of the season.
You look past the details and look at the results and think the worst. Maybe educate yourself on the positives.But they were moved or were moveable. Garrison/Kesler/Burrows/Hansen/Hamhuis
Unfortunately I don't deal in fantasies. I mean, we imagined the Boudreau bump would last to this year too.
again, you're slagging on Gillis on what he may have done in a rebuild. And now you're asking me to praise Benning because of what this core may have done under sunny circumstances? Real world doesn't work like that. We need to see consistent results.
QuoteI threw draft capital in there because its your favourite…. You’re losing an argument on your own bloody ideology that draft capital>development. Shall I dare pull up our previous debates? 29th->30th isnt much movement??? More 29th and 30th overall picks played more games and produced more than all of Gillis’s picks period. Draft capital bud.
Except that was never my ideology. Heck, ideology? This isn't politics, this is just hockey.
Straw Man.Please pull up that debate. Pull up where I said development doesn't matter. I'm curious where you got that idea.
Even if you do pull up something where my words can be misconstrued, i'm telling you now that's not what I mean. You need both in tandem to rebuild, and Benning failed on both fronts.
QuoteHe’s responsible sure, but when his draft picks have no competition at camp, kinda hard to send them down and say “you didnt earn it”
How many players did Gillis assign to the AHL that never succeeded?? What happened bro? Only JB was responsible for developing players?
What happened the following season? He sent JV to the minors, what happened the after that? JV made the team again and he continually built on each and every season. While being given less than Sounds to me like that was progress and positive on his future until Green chose to keep his TOI under 15mins each season mostly under 13 minutes
2015-16 11:34TOI 55gp 6g 7a - 55.2%oZS
2016-17 10:09TOI 10gp 0g 1a - 49.3%oZS
2017-18 11:59TOI 75gp 10g 10a - 45.2%oZS
2018-19 14:49TOI 70gp 15g 10a - 49.1%oZS
2019-20 13:05TOI 69gp 18g 18a - 55.1%oZS
2020-21 12:15TOI 38gp 5g 0a - 39.6%oZS
ummmm WHAT???? Continues to produce, gets less TOI and more dZS.
Its hysterical how many times you continue to move the goal posts.
For a guy who claims to understand development, it's not just about competition in camp, it's about whether they have the habits and standards required to succeed at the NHL level, and even if you're the number 1 guy at camp, you aren't gifted a spot because of that.
oZS is meaningless unless you also back it up with quality of competition, you have to determine whether or not Jake is being sheltered or driving play himself. I'd also take a look at his linemates and production with and away from top stars.
You and I have a very different definition of built on. I think similar to Hogs, Jake got as far as he could without the foundation and structrual habits playing in the AHL for a long time can get for you. Luckily, Hogs is on that right path.
I've repeated the Utica issue enough. Benning should be thankful he inherited that farm team when he started, but he just never fully utilized it.
-
1
-
-
58 minutes ago, AnthonyG said:
Did I say finals? Or did I say his first “full time” years. Aka 2013 and 2014. He was a full timer. But injury prevented him from playing… “full time”
And guess what, 60+ games is still better than 40-50.
QuoteLet me re-iterate what I’ve said MANY times to you and others.
I do not blame Mike Gillis for going all in on a Stanley cup, ultimately these are the consequences when you fail to achieve your goal. Especially when you fail to draft anything of significance or develop anyone.
That's really not the impression you're portraying here. You've spent entire threads saying that Gillis ran the team into the ground and didn't stock the farm and that he left Benning with nothing.
You do realize by virtue of picking in the late 20s and trading picks away to make those cup runs that you don't blame him for, the chances of him stocking the farm are probably in the bottom range of outcomes when compared to his peers?
Because if you truly weren't blaming him for going all in on the cup, and you're looking at the effect those weaker draft positions had on the team Benning inherited, you would be taking that into account rather than calling him 'Gilass'. (cringe by the way, same way I cringe whenever i read 'Benning Bros')
There are consequences, yes, and here's what I've been telling you many times. Gillis was fired before he could even do anything, and what he did do in the time he had left, Benning rode into the ground (Markstrom, Bo, Tanev)
So why are you slagging him for not leaving Benning anything when he didn't have a chance to? (even though I vehemently disagree, he left Benning with plenty.)
Quotelmao move the goal posts on a lost argument some more. Just completely gaslight the fact he is banged up just as much as Tanev. Yet other guys on the roster managed to stay healthier longer than both. One guy its impossible to stay healthy, the other was preventable? Give me a break.
HAHA well for one thing, this is completely unrelated to Celebrini, Salo wasn't even here when Benning started. So this is a strawman. Because that's all you claim to win on.
Guess what though, even with Salo and Tanev on the roster at once, Burnie came up with lower man games lost average than Celebrini, in both games lost and $ of cap hit man games lost.
If Salo had Celebrini, i fear for his life.
Again, you cry 'gaslight', but it's really a straw man argument from you.
QuoteThe complaint was not making playoffs, 3 wins was close and a step in the right direction.
The cost of 3 losses = 15th overallThe cost of 1 loss = the future
Gillis’s 1 loss hurt us so much more than Benning’s 3 extra losses last season. who was absent and our current management group sat by idly and made no changes.
I think highlighting this 'argument' for all to see is enough to refute the utter inanity of it.
The 1 loss from Gillis did hurt, but really because it broke Frankie's poor brain and made Gillis hire Torts and go for the Bruins build style.
As for last season, have you also considered the management group sat by idly, because Benning's contracts sucked and couldn't be moved? Or that they wanted a chance to evaluate this roster?
QuoteWe came up 3 wins short and came out with a 15th overall. Your 1 loss was far more devastating, draft capital, figure it out bud
You kinda just threw in draft capital like it means anything there? Because from a draft capital perspective, 30th->29th isn't much movement.
QuoteOh so the GM is responsible for coaching as well? He’s supposed to set the lines and systems?. Coach GM scout you name it, he apparently had to do it all by himself. So was that Gillis who sat Luongo in the winter classic and ended up with Luongo demanding a trade out?
GM is responsible for roster construction, the coach works the lines and systems.
He's responsible for assigning players to the NHL or AHL and working with the coach to set him up to succeed.
How many games in Utica did he play before making it to the big show?
QuoteEdit: In bold, how tell me you lost an argument without saying so.
I lost an imaginary argument you conjured up in your own mind. That's really all you have.
QuoteCool good to know JB’s job was even more complicated than I ever knew
-
1
-
-
13 minutes ago, CanuckleHorse said:
All moves before he so called undercut is on LINDEN if that is the case so we could blame the poor moves at the drat and in signings.
Linden bares responsibility for the strategic direction yes. But it wasn't him that signed Sbisa to an extension or Trade 2nds for Vey. Etc..and when he tried to course correct for a slow cooked rebuild. He was let go.
Execution was still JB.
I'm always intrigued that Benning inspires so much loyalty that supporters easily throw character guys like Linden and the Sedins (for OEL) under the bus for him.
-
1
-
-
34 minutes ago, CanuckleHorse said:
I mean Mike is a good example of a good salesman he had the owner in his back pocket just like Green had Benning in his Green is the guy we should all be pissed at.
Benning did a much better job selling himself when he undercut Linden to the Aquilinis.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, AnthonyG said:
Oh thats cute, you missed the first couple “full time seasons” of Tanev
Movin the goal posts I see.
oh hey and by the way Burnie did great for Salo
Those quotation marks are right because I never said Full seasons. I may as well call you scarecrow with all the strawman you keep bringing up. And Tanev was far from a full timer, more of a prospect in the years before the final
Let me simply it for you.
60-65 games of Tanev > 40-55 games of Tanev. Considering you made a big kerfuffle about missing some years playoffs by 3 games. That is astronomical by your own metric.
But then again, the value of 1 win seems to change whenever it suits you.
3 wins shy of a playoff berth -> praise Benning
1 win shy of a cup -> Dead in the water, no prospect pool, useless
I think we can all agree, the only thing that could have helped Salo was if we gave him the wolverine syrum. Again you brought him up, not me.
QuoteSo open gates, slew foots, knee on knees, blindside hits to the head, suicide passes that lead to devastating hits are all to blame on Celebrini?
Oh and Mumps is the fault of Celebrini too?
Canucks' Tanev thought he broke jaw prior to mumps diagnosis | theScore.com
Nah, that's the equivalent of you blaming Gillis for not fully stocking a farm while gunning for a cup.
It's the time returning from injury, and the chance of reinjury that also feeds into this. And also a funny coincidence that Tanev started playing at his 60+ game clip once Celebrini jumped ship in the middle of the season to lead the Golden state warriors to their injury riddled finals lost.
I wouldn't say one NHL season is particularly more violent than the last one, so if there is a substantial change in it, you question the staff. It is indisputable that the team had above average man games lost and to more key personel under Celebrini than Burnstein.
This is just pure man games lost, doesn't take into account weighted cost of the missing person.
QuoteVirtanen was ENTIRELY MISHANDLED
18g 18a in 13:05TOI no PP1 time and he then got demoted to 12:15min TOI and 39% oZS compared to 55% the prior.... 16% drop in ozone deployment?!?!?! Its NO WONDER HE STRUGGLED. He always had more takeaways than giveaways every season, he rarely got scored on, threw tons of hits and gets put further and further away from the offensive zone.... WHAT?!??! His career ATOI is 12:45!!!!!! Under 50% oZS!!! 11 minutes ATOI in the playoffs and 7oiGF and 4oiGA I THINK HE WAS ACTUALLY A POSITIVE FACTOR ON THE ICE IN THE PLAYOFFS. Our goalies had a .962sv% when he was on the ice at 5v5
Great and under whose management was his development mishandled?
Canucks release 2023-24 regular season schedule
in Canucks Talk
Posted · Edited by DSVII
The better to destroy our draft position if we dig a hole for ourselves in November
It'll be meaningless wins in March. We also don't leave the Pacific time zone from Feb 21st onwards so if we are hopelessly out of a playoff spot by TDL, the wins will be even more frustrating.
Safe to say this isn't a year for even team tank to find any hope if we aren't in a playoff spot by TDL. It's playoffs or bust.
And if the team can't even make playoffs with the 3rd most favorable rest schedule. I'd say consider tearing it down and start over properly for once.