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

The Gap Coming.


badassian9

Recommended Posts

I have really enjoyed this last half decade of Canucks Hockey and will continue to embrace what is left of our "window". However it doesn't take a genius to recognize we have a violent gap approaching quickly.

Much of our core is 30 and above. With the key player exceptions of Kesler, Hansen, Elder and Garrison who are in their late 20's.

After that there is a violent drop off of talent in terms of age until we get to the likes of Horvat, Shinkaruk, Gaunce, Corrado, Kassian, Jensen and to a lesser extent Schroeder.

While it may seem far off now there isn't a next wave that will be able to produce somewhat now but more so in the 3-5 years we will need the next influx of steady talent. I am worried.

Do you think the Canucks as a brand could sustain a full fledged rebuild?

Let me know what you CDC'ers think!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have really enjoyed this last half decade of Canucks Hockey and will continue to embrace what is left of our "window". However it doesn't take a genius to recognize we have a violent gap approaching quickly.

Much of our core is 30 and above. With the key player exceptions of Kesler, Hansen, Elder and Garrison who are in their late 20's.

After that there is a violent drop off of talent in terms of age until we get to the likes of Horvat, Shinkaruk, Gaunce, Corrado, Kassian, Jensen and to a lesser extent Schroeder.

While it may seem far off now there isn't a next wave that will be able to produce somewhat now but more so in the 3-5 years we will need the next influx of steady talent. I am worried.

Do you think the Canucks as a brand could sustain a full fledged rebuild?

Let me know what you CDC'ers think!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The transition this time around is a little bit different. Naslund/Bertuzzi/Morrison were 30-32 when the Sedins emerged at 24.

The Sedins/Burrows are 32 now and Kesler/Hansen are 27. At this point Kesler and Hansen are already approaching prime and are not top line players.

It will likely take 5 years for Horvat / Shinkaruk to hit their prime, if they ever do become top line players, putting the Sedins at 37.

I have a feeling the team will maintain competitiveness through trades and free agency, although we probably won't an elite team anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with that, I think we will be able to stay competitive but will likely drop back from the elite teams during that transition.

I think we will be able to mange without a full fledged rebuild. Its going to make us miss thos 2008-2011 years quite a bit. I'm just hoping that we can add to our talent pool via trade and UFA's.

If we rely on whats on the farm it could be bumpy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I enjoy Canuck hockey win or lose. I mean yeah being lower in the standings for a few years is a bummer, but it is coming. I just hope certain core players stay around, being fairly young I have never been able to really develop a "connection" with players until now, if you guys understand what I mean by that.

I love the idea of players like hamhuis and bieksa signing for 2M or so each after their current contracts are up in order to play 4-5th d man minutes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depends on the players.

You would have said (not "you") that Detroit's gap would have come after Yzerman was past 35... but he went on, and Lidstrom got past 35... but they lasted. And their last few cups came when both the old vets were still productive and the younger guns were producing.

The Nucks have thrown too many picks away for rentals (and bad rentals too - really stupid moves) so there really is no next wave coming to help the vets NOW which is what is required. Look at San Jose, where would they be without Couture? Nowhere, that's where.

Based on my observation of our prospects, there is no Couture in our young guns - at least not for 5 years. We might have a Naslund or HS type that takes 5 years to develop, but we have no instant star just sitting there - and no desire to trade for one either (cause we have to keep the core together, even if it doesn't work anymore...)

anyways, on the positive side: IF Schroeder and IF Kassian can make an impact this year, and turn into 2/3rd line players we have a chance. And IF Jensen and IF Gaunce can make the team in the next 1-2 years and not be busts... And IF Horvat and IF Shin can make it in 3 years..... But right now none of these players are even better than Sistito / Richardson / Weise / Dalpe / Santorelli. That we even had an interest in these 5 guys says SO MUCH about the lack of depth it is ridiculous. These players are borderline AHL players - but they are better than any of our prospects.

Er... I was trying to be positive --- hold on --- ok, I'll try again: 6 prospects. Typically 63 percent of of 1st rounders have a meaningful career in the NHL: ( source: http://proicehockey....aft_success.htm ) So that would mean - if our drafting is average, that 4 of them should make it. We "had" a player that made it, and traded him for a prospect (sorry Kassian fans - but he's not better yet - hope!) so we kind of went a bit backwards on that one (long term, who knows). Anyways, let's break this down:

1999: DS and HS: pass x 2

2000: Nathan Smith: fail.

2001: RJ Umberger: fail for the canucks, but only because of Burke.

2002: n/a

2003: Ryan Kesler: Yes!

2004: Cory Schneider: Yes!

2005: Luc Bourdon: fail, but would have been a YES (the pain... sucks sa;lkskdfj;22l4 u)

2006: Michael Graner: fail, only because we can't develop anyone (maybe that will change) for our own team - obviously a yes otherwise.

2007: Patrick White: fail.

2008: Cody Hodgson: Yes!

2009: Jordan Shroeder: ?. Not yet... this year is make or break.

2010: no pick. Ballard. fail.

2011: Nicklas Jensen: ?. Not yet... has another 2 years realistically to make the team

2012: Brendan Gaunce: ?. Not yet... another 3 years even.

2013: Horvat and Schin: give them 2-4 years.

So going back 15 years, we have 5 of 15 (THAT PLAY FOR US, OR WHO WE TRADED FOR PLAYERS WHO PLAY FOR US). really 5 of 17. and we have lost 2 of those Yes picks for unproven prospects, meaning we are left with 3 of 17 in our current lineup. 17%.

League average is 63%. Our average is 17%.

But if you jetison the last 5 years (cause too early to tell): out of 11 picks, we have 6. However, 3 of them are gone (traded for other young picks who haven't made it yet), giving us 3 of 11 (instead of 5 /11): IN OUR LINEUP which is all that counts. 27%. If we had kept Schneider and Hodgson we would be 45% - still WELL below the league average, but looking a lot better.

So in short - Burke / Nonis made 45%, but MG threw the proceeds out and we're down to 27% for their stay here.

MG himself is batting 0% cause we threw out Hodgson. Too early to tell, but if history repeats itself (and he gives up on his own picks as quickly as he does other gm's picks) then nothing is going to change.

But to be positive: we could bat 100% with these 6 prospects, and be back up to NHL normal %... Anyone want to make a bet?

Edit: damn, forgot about Grabner in some of those %... but it is another fail for the canucks any way you slice it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "gap" is only because Gillis is too incompetent to adress our needs.

Apparently our top 6 is fine, we don't need a 3C, and our fourth line is tough enough.

The excuse at the end of the year: "Its a process. We're still learning the new system. Next year the boys will begin the season fresh with the gameplan already known."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...