-
Posts
11,007 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by J.I.A.H.N
-
OK, I have tried to write something about 5 times here, and can't get it all out in a coherent manner......but I am going to try again. 5 Years ago, Jim have a plan. I would imagine it was a 5 year plan to competitiveness. That is good, and I have no problem with that. But in that 5 year plan, you would have had to plan for evaluations, and contingencies. Now 5 year plans are not static and should be revised each year, prior to the up and coming year. So that would have meant that before the end of last season, and having already known what Covid was doing to your plan. He would have made adjustments. Now, as part of the plan, Jim should have done a internal assessment and a external assessment, meaning how is your team looking? And how are other teams looking? Jim should have known which teams were in financial distress, and what teams were not. What UFA's were available, and a basic understanding of what those players would cost. Now, he should have been able to know that, by his own predicament, and by discussions with other GM's................. Bottom line is Jim should have known, and that is where his unmaking is. Yes, he is a good drafter. But truthfully, his other actions are suspect. His assessments of NHL players is poor, because he has as many disappointments as successes in his UFA signings and trade moves. Average at best. And his manipulations of the Cap are dismal to say the least. Would I let Benning run my draft table.....sure! Do I have confidence in his ability to navigate through these next few years? Not as much! And that is where I am today. I have no confidence in Jim's ability to do that, and absolutely no confidence in Green and his coaching staff, which also falls under Jim's umbrella. What I see on the ice, is not what I see on paper, and what I see of the front office, is not what I want to see going forwards. It has been just over 20 games, and I am exhausted, I can't imagine how it must be for the players.
-
Here is the question that keeps nagging me........... If Benning had any idea that last year was a one off, and we were going to fall back, why did he go and invest in Toffoli and Miller? I mean, these type of moves are an indication that the club is moving forward and getting better....... But if he did not know..............why the hell not? To me, this is why he should be fired, he is paid to know He basically painted himself into a corner, with Myers, Toffoli and Miller, which is 16 Million and which set us back, when you look at it The 16 million would have let us buy dead end contracts.....or Toews (Colorado)or a number of others, and we would still be sitting with Madden, 2020 1st, 2020 2nd, and still had money to buy Duclair, Wennberg, and Hoffman at a hell of alot less ( 8 millionish) Aqualini really screwed up, as he should have probably listened to Linden, and canned Benning, this rebuild was not finished and we still would have been in a better spot
-
Just seen your interview Tyler! Well done!
-
The Canuck Power Play (Discussion)
J.I.A.H.N replied to J.I.A.H.N's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
Alot of times today, the puck goes low, and then back to the side wall, and it is basically the same thing as what I suggest, except it is a 90 degree rotation of the set up. In our set up. it goes to Hughes, then to the side wall, then down low, then they move it around on a very stationary cycle, which I hate immensely. IMO, it is so easy to defend. Hammer thinks it might take a shooter away, but with Hoglander being quick and having the lacrosse goal option, it greatly increases our chances, to answer Hammers concerns. The whole point of what Gretzky did, was to have the defenders looking at him, and that is when the box breaks down. It did not seem to prevent Gretzky from getting points. But here is the scenario, as I see it. The puck goes low to Hoglander...... No Dman goes after him, then he has the ability for his lacrosse goal, or to be able to walk out from behind the net. The key is, that as soon as a Dman commits to Hoglander, a shooter slides into that spot and sets up for the one timer.. It is basically the spot were Horvat scores his goals from. Now if Hoglander fakes to come out one side, then goes back the other way, it pulls the other Dman out of position. Now, the set up for Hoiglander is with his bum facing the goal judge, resulting in him being able to go out either side, quickly without having to turn, because it is more a shoulder change of direction with a crossover, then a complete pivot. I don't think you see it much anymore, because not many can fit, into that position, without turning one way or another, but somehow Grezky did it. The set up for Hoglander is quite easy, it is getting the movement of the other players down that makes the difference. If I recall there were alot of fakes into the holes, where players would dart towards the hole and then fall back.......remember, they are facing Hoglander as this is happening......so alot of confusion as the box breaks down. The Oilers were masters of breaking down that box.......I just thought it would be interesting to talk about....... -
The Canuck Power Play (Discussion)
J.I.A.H.N replied to J.I.A.H.N's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
Style of play changes and returns, screens, point shots, putting the puck into the middle, running the plays from the sides, etc have been here before. The only time is does not, is when innovation changes something. I can tell you, the first time they see it , they would be like what the hell? And yes, stand up goalies are rare now, so that works in Hoglander.s favor. I tell you once that puck is behind the net, it would cause problems for the bottom of the box. -
The Canuck Power Play (Discussion)
J.I.A.H.N replied to J.I.A.H.N's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
Now Grit don't take as rude.......... but First off, you are not taking it in the spirt it was written, and why don't you tell me why not. I just told you why it might work...... so your turn -
So, this is will not start as the discussion you thought it was, but it first came to my mind, as a way to have Pettersson with the puck more, and morphed in a, well maybe Hoglander might be the guy that can pull it off better. So, for those of you that are little older, and can remember the Gretzky days, you will remember how he set up behind the net on the power play. Well, like I said in the introduction, I first thought that it may be a good spot to put Pettersson, but then I started thinking that we would be wasting his shot, so I started looking for others, who may fit the bill. Hoglander immediately came to mind. Now when Gretzky was behind the net, he could control the play and if someone came behind after him, he would go out the other side, or pass it to the open man who was left alone. Well, Gretzky could turn quickly, so he always beat that Dman chasing him. Hoglander, is quicker and turns faster, which is why he can go into the corners and come out with the puck, he is simply just quicker than the Dmen. Now, as I started thinking about this, I started thinking about Hoglander's lacrosse goals, and how he actually does not have to come out from behind, to score, so putting 2 and 2 together, I started thinking this might change up our PP, and give it another dynamic. Now, one of the reasons why this was so effective when Gretzky did it, was that both Dmen had to face the back of the net, otherwise, Gretzky would come out that side, so when they both turned, they lost the position of the 2 forwards that were on either hash marks. Further to that, the top of the box, would start to collapse, to defend, where their Dman were suppose to be, so it really broke the PK defenses quickly. Now, I had fun, with this post, just imagining the mayhem it would cause, and how actually having 2 point men, would actually help defensively, if we gave it away. So, don't think too hard, but imagine the crazy it would cause as the 2 Dmen and the Goalie tried to figure out, what Hoglander was going to do. So, basically all plays run from behind the net, instead of the half wall. Note the other 4 PP players are continually moving, in and out of holes, including the slot, where no one is, until they are!
-
[Proposals] With an eye to the future
J.I.A.H.N replied to Provost's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
The problem I have is not knowing the players around the league as well as I know our own Canucks So, I have to stat watch to some degree..........I wonder about these 3 centers for our 3rd line Tierney's name does come up a lot Wennberg in Florida look like he may be a player Laughton in Philadelphia looks to be under utilized -
I can't read much more of this...........Geez It is not that I don't agree with you all, but man! Aqualini has to get a handle on this. It starts at the top and if he can be bambozzled by Benning, then nothing changes He has to start by getting a president of Hockey Operations Someone over Benning so he can get an honest answer The question is......how many years until we have the personnel to compete? The next question to the new President, is what do we do, going forward? 3rd question is. Is Jim Benning the guy to take us there? 4th question is. Is Travis Green the right coach? 5th Are the assistant coaches good enough to support Green? But, I will say this.............let this season play out Move Pearson at the TDL at 50%................get's us a late 2nd Move Hamonic at the TDL at 50%................get's us a 4th Move Benn at the TDL at 50%......................get's us a 3rd No moves until the summer except for the TDL.......but get the President of hockey Ops now. None will be here after the summer, and we are not making the playoffs
-
I like what I saw of him last year......yes fast
-
New Jersey - Vancouver (Proposal)
J.I.A.H.N replied to J.I.A.H.N's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
@IBatch Yes, My guy was Bure, but before that Linden and before that Smyl.....................common theme.............no days off..............absolutely never! I do not see that yet on the Canucks, or at least not at a high level. Hoglander may be that guy, with his never ending energizer bunny efforts but it is too soon! But getting back to my original proposal.......and remember, my date for when they will be top 10 is 3 years from this year.................so let me illustrate Foote.............Pettersson..............Boeser Smith..................2021 1st Demko Hoglander.........Horvat.......... Podkolzin Juolevi................Woo DiPietro Motte................2021 1st...............Lind Rathbone.............xxxxxxxx xxxxxx..............McEwen..........Lockwood Now that would be 2 top 10 -2021 1sts (3 years from today) That does not include Pearson, Miller, Schmidt, Myers, Holtby, Virtanen, Gaudette or Tryamkin. who would or could still be there. It also does not include any other picks from 2021, 2022 or 2023 Or any UFA's that might be available. Now I put it down on paper only to illustrate, and not to say in absolute terms. I know that you understand that, but there will be people that take this at face value. Up until that date, I think you try to move pieces around while not weakening the team anymore. Personally, I would be focusing on a proper 3rd line center who age might fit in with the group 3 years from now.......some one who is 23/24 today, and who strength is in faceoffs and defensive play, but still has some offensive up side.......names that come to mind are Eriksson Ek (24) and Scott Laughton (26), both would be out standing 3rd line centers. Ek would cost more, but that is the type of player. This year is now a write for me, and I see it more as a year of building, which means moving players at the TDL...... In the end, I want as big, as fast, and as aggressive as we can manage. -
New Jersey - Vancouver (Proposal)
J.I.A.H.N replied to J.I.A.H.N's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
For sure! I agree Quinn Hughes is special and IMO, what I suggested as a return, is indicative of how special he is. In saying that, someone suggested getting a good stay at home defenseman for him........which I agree, may work But at what cost? And who gives away, big strong, stay at home dmen? To me, it's kind of robbing Peter to pay Paul, as what ever asset we use, will leave a void behind i his spot And I am 150% not in favor of using our 2021 - 1st to get that player I am, maybe to a fault, believe that our young guys will fill most voids and feel that a left side of Hughes, Juolevi, and Rathbone will work for us for years I also feel that Tryamkin needs to be brought in, and tried, as he brings many of the attributes we need to help Hughes But I am also of the belief we are 2 years away from being that real dominant team and I do not see the players needed on the RH side yet........hopefully Woo But if things playout this year, we will be in position to draft a good RHD, which we never have had before IMO, though , we have things to move around, I would not be adverse to moving some of them, to fill the hole It is a game of chess for sure, and I think a wrong move could set us back........ It is a big picture problem for sure........If our forwards take a step forward, and dominate in the offensive zone more It will help us defensively, so getting Podkolzin in will help for sure.......Hopefully! I am also one of the few, from what I can tell, in having Pearson resigned........IMO, he is part of our solution and bringing in Podkolzin and letting Pearson walk is not a net gain, immediately So, I would like to keep him...short term IMO, having a strong 3rd line, will help out our forwards and our defense It is such a domino type situation, and one move depends on another, for the most part, which IMO, shows us we are not finished our rebuild, which Benning and others seem to think we are. This is one of the reason's I felt the urge to through out this option.......as it fills the holes much quicker It is a 3 for 1................special deal for Tuesday But, when you look at the teams needs, and the, long term success, I believe you need a young, big, and strong talented team To mature together, with veterans to fill in holes, not the other way around. -
[Proposal] JB will circle back to OEL
J.I.A.H.N replied to The King's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
What I really want is a BIG stay at home Dman for Quinn And I want Tryamkin signed and tried in that spot I am probably wrong, but before going out and putting us in another cap bind I want to try that........Tryamkin has very little offensive tenancies and will protect Quinn defensively Now, if it is not Tryamkin, then someone in the same vain As for our LHD We have 3 young guys Hughes, Juolevi and Rathbone So, I want to see them all playing before throwing out the bathwater -
[Proposal] JB will circle back to OEL
J.I.A.H.N replied to The King's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
King, if Jimbo has a crystal ball and can guarantee me that OEL does not decline for 6 or 7 years, sure, lets look at it, but history does not look kindly in general to defensemen that are 34, 35 or 36, which is when that contract would look very huge. Sure, I might like the first 4 years, but I sure wonder what would it look like in the back half with no escape mechanism. If you look at Eriksson's 6 million contract, and weigh what it prevented us from doing, how would $8.250 million look while trying to resign the likes of Horvat, Hughes and Pettersson. I am a hard no. Now if you do have a crystal ball and can promise me those latter years will be good, and we win a cup......hey, I am all for it! And just for interest, can you explain to me, why Jim wants another LHD? -
New Jersey - Vancouver (Proposal)
J.I.A.H.N replied to J.I.A.H.N's topic in Proposals and Armchair GM'ing
Hi IBatch What I would really like is to get Robb Zepps opinion on this....it would be interesting to consider his take on it I think people are getting me wrong here. What I am all about is making the team better, if not trading Hughes makes us better, than I am all for keeping him, or any other player for that matter. I am simply not married to any one player. In my life time, I have seen the best 2 players ever to lace up, play for multiple teams, and in Orrs case, it made me switch teams, when he moved from Boston. ( Meaning I went 100% away from Boston, and went 100% Vancouver, which was not always the case). So, I do relate with the posters that could just not see a player being traded. Upon reflection, I do see warts in my proposal, and things could go terribly wrong with it, if none of the players develop on the Vancouver side. Hughes vs Smith alone, I take Hughes 10 out of 10 times, but I guess it really depends where the pick ends up, how Foote develops and if Smith can continue to develop. If all 3 parts turn out to be 2nd pairing and 2nd line players and better, then it is a big win for Vancouver, if not, well I guess I am wrong and moving. Again, if making a trade like this strengthens the team over all, and we end up winning a cup, then again, I would trade my mother. But I would need my crystal ball, before pulling the trigger. I would just like CDC to be open to moves like this. Especially on this forum, where we should debate decent proposals. I would think if you asked a New Jersey Devils fan, they would consider it an over payment by the Devils. But it would take at least that much to make me happy. And I do recognize that it could backfire quickly. Which is why, I made the proposal in the first place, as I welcomed people to digest the proposal and give me their opinion on it. -
So, here is my first statement I have no problem with Muslim's It is not my religion, but there are a lot of not my religion's out there So, here is my question Would you vote to allow Canada to let all Uighurs to immigrate to Canada? I am not sure how many there are, but we have plenty of land and water and alot more money than them, so I am sure, we could afford it, with a little down turn in our economy, but we would rebound eventually So would you vote yes? Let's be honest here!