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

Rebuild coming ahead with MG firing.


Sandro17

Recommended Posts

I'll be danged...

I remember debating earlier in the year it was great to have good players on our 3rd line; but it would be hard to expect them to be up to the task of defensive matchups against line ups like Thornton / Marleau / Hertl who run something like 228, 220 and 214 lbs. And that it changed our bench, because Kesler, and the (illuminated in the article) Twins who got misused doing it drew tougher match ups.

I am not of the belief we need a rebuild. The Twins are decorated players who still have gobs of talent, Kesler (I hope he stays) is an all world match up problem for other teams. I have always (perhaps wished is a better term) asked for an elite player or two to compliment them up front. Bemoaned not getting 210 lb goal scoring speedster Carter. However, Raymond was amongst the fastest in the league, Samuelsson was 220 lbs and did have some puck moxy, 220 lb Malhotra was a match up equalizer, 215 lb wrecking ball Torres punished D fore-checking, Hansen is far from slow. When we did our best we did back up the Twins with speed and size.

I do, firmly, believe we need a different style of play. We don't have a PMD, but we do have a mobile quality two way defence core. However the team is (has been under Torts) asked to collapse to the net and take up space, not let shots get through. What you need for that style is at least a couple of Hall Gill style behemoths and the mobile qualities to attack the puck we have is underutilized. In fact when they succomb to instinct to attack the play, often find themselves out of position. Similarly at forward, Hansen was almost invisible. He has no purpose in life if he is not charging out to the blue line to harass defenders with the puck. We used to attack defensively with AV, to put pressure on puck handlers and force mistakes, make them make plays to beat us. Burrows loses much of his effect as well, and look how much Burr and Hansen were limited offensively because we no longer pressured, created turnovers, nor had any transition game? Where their speed was an advantage! Santorelli, Richardson, Kesler, even Higgins, Booth and Kassian are mobile to very fast as well. IMO an attacking defensive style, which creates turnovers and heads up ice quickly with space is a much better way to go with all this speed!

And the above paragraph does not even get into the Twins. AV had a manual on how to use them; enough info is archived where any incoming coach can refer and get better results than Torts did. Nor address that we had precious few big bodies on our top two lines to supporting what they were asked to do. That was damning when THEY shouldered all the big defensive match ups. If we went 50/50 against Cali teams, we make the playoff's and this panic becomes moot.. But we won two games all year, playing into their matchup advantages. Preaching we have to play mano o'mano with our best guys often outweighed by 25, even 35 lbs. Remember, all those BIG California teams? And expending the energy, wracking up injuries away from the puck and not in scoring position?

Derp!!! :sick:

All that said; an incoming GM has a team that can be structured to compete. Between Booth, Mathias, Kesler, perhaps Kassian there is plenty enough size to throw at defensive roles and matchups. I said perhaps with Kass cuz I prefer him for an offensive role. Replace him with Horvat, maybe even supplement with Gaunce. We also have Burrows, Hansen, Richardson and potentially Santorelli who can be speedy, attacking, harassing defensive forwards. There is no reason we cannot ice two aggressive attacking defensive lines. Jensen, Shinkaruk and draft pick # (?) 7 can inject speed, creativity, puck control to the offense. Add Kassian to a top 6 and it no longer lacks size either. The team need to gets smarter, not significantly different.

IMO, we need these things to be a contender;

Kassian to fulfill his potential, grab a spot with the Twins.

An attacking defensive style that uses our speed / size to neutralize match ups, pressure, create turnovers, tempo and space!*

A home run on one of Jensen, Shinkaruk or our 2014 pick that add's dynamic offensive elsewhere in the line up.

Lets call it "sheltered" offensive role for the Twins / Edler to utilize what skills they do offer.

A guy who has dynamic offensive skills and speed on the back end.

That tempo and space will also immediately create transition opportunities for guys like Santorelli, Burrows, Higgins, Mathias, Kesler, Horvat. And they will add secondary scoring from defensive pressure!

IMO, only the PMD has to be a challenge for the new GM. That plan can get setback if Kassian or the young guns don't materialize. But we would remain a play off team for 2 to 4 years and there is every reason to believe its within probabilities. The long term vision of the team prob needs to add a future Hank replacement, but we have time for that. A depth crease clearing D could help as well, but that has no reason to be a challenging plug in.

Here is some logical roles;

Danny Hank Kass

Mathias Kesler Burrows

Higgins Horvat Gaunce Hey, Gaunce prob starts in the AHL, Hansen fits, plug in Archibald, Sestito, Lain or Sestito on the 4th. Depth is OK!

Richardson Santorelli Hansen

Hamhuis Bieksa

Edler Tanev (offensive roles, might get a whole season out of Tanev)

Garrison Corrado

D distinctly needs a young guy like Pouliot. But that team above makes the play off's, maybe even 2knd round in 2015. Plug Horvat and Gaunce into more significant roles in 2015/16 for Mathias and Richardson, add Jensen, Shinkaruk, and perhaps Nylander or Virtanen (I'd cream if it could be Drasaitl or Dal Colle) and its a 3rd or 4th round team. Get the PMD and its done! :frantic:

We do need to start drafting some D to have a succession plan for when contracts of Bieksa, Hamhuis and Garrison start expiring. And there is spare parts and picks to offer for a Pouliot and the long term Hank replacement.

There is a lot of future in this team. I see no reason to put us through rebuilding hell!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is some logical roles;

Danny Hank Kass

Mathias Kesler Burrows

Higgins Horvat Gaunce Hey, Gaunce prob starts in the AHL, Hansen fits, plug in Archibald, Sestito, Lain or Sestito on the 4th. Depth is OK!

Richardson Santorelli Hansen

Hamhuis Bieksa

Edler Tanev (offensive roles, might get a whole season out of Tanev)

Garrison Corrado

D distinctly needs a young guy like Pouliot. But that team above makes the play off's, maybe even 2knd round in 2015. Plug Horvat and Gaunce into more significant roles in 2015/16 for Mathias and Richardson, add Jensen, Shinkaruk, and perhaps Nylander or Virtanen (I'd cream if it could be Drasaitl or Dal Colle) and its a 3rd or 4th round team. Get the PMD and its done! :frantic:

We do need to start drafting some D to have a succession plan for when contracts of Bieksa, Hamhuis and Garrison start expiring. And there is spare parts and picks to offer for a Pouliot and the long term Hank replacement.

There is a lot of future in this team. I see no reason to put us through rebuilding hell!

I agreed with everything you said (which is rare enough), until this. That team has oodles of cap space. Probably 7-9 million with the cap increase depending on re-signings. Not to mention that's a lot of rookies and a lot of guys getting suddenly bumped above Jensen on the depth chart. I highly doubt having rookies jump up into those roles will magically make us good. I have no problem with them being on the roster, but what you're imagining requires letting a lot of people go (Dalpe, Sestito, Schroeder, Stanton) so we can give unproven players too much ice time. I would rather pick up 2 good players for 8 million, maybe make a trade, then let the kids play lower minutes and under less pressure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another good question to ask is how many Gillis DRAFTED players are in the line-up as a significant player. I honestly can't think of any.

His drafting/development record is piss poor.

Not technically drafted, but Tanev and Lack were very solid youth additions. Gillis was never exactly in a position to draft well due to the team finishing high in the standings... last year being the exception via trade, and Horvat looks very promising.

If there is anything to really complain about with Gillis it would be his long term core signings and the handling of Luongo/Schneider debacle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agreed with everything you said (which is rare enough), until this. That team has oodles of cap space. Probably 7-9 million with the cap increase depending on re-signings. Not to mention that's a lot of rookies and a lot of guys getting suddenly bumped above Jensen on the depth chart. I highly doubt having rookies jump up into those roles will magically make us good. I have no problem with them being on the roster, but what you're imagining requires letting a lot of people go (Dalpe, Sestito, Schroeder, Stanton) so we can give unproven players too much ice time. I would rather pick up 2 good players for 8 million, maybe make a trade, then let the kids play lower minutes and under less pressure.

I don't disagree with that. As I said; we need one of Jensen, Shinkaruk or our upcoming pick to come full bottle as an offensive force.

No reason that same offensive burst could not come from a UFA? We should have some room.

But how is the question. I would be careful trying to solve all with a UFA? With a big long term contract anyway. I dont think we're close enough where a Stastny for $45 mill, for example, makes us a legit contender. And so while we are "re-tooling" we've tied up all cap money and roster flexibility before putting it back together. That could make it hard to fit a PMD or whatever else we need. Injecting mid tier guys for two or three years might make for a good plan IMO? Adding guys like Samuelsson and Demitra worked well to provide some more polished scoring to allow our younger guys time to develop and someone to work with. Vrbata??? Or a more senior guy, say Iginla, on a 1 or 2 year deal? Sundin helped in a similar strategy.

Ultimately its still best, long term and cost wise, if we build through the draft and good young players are the backbone of improvement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not technically drafted, but Tanev and Lack were very solid youth additions. Gillis was never exactly in a position to draft well due to the team finishing high in the standings... last year being the exception via trade, and Horvat looks very promising.

If there is anything to really complain about with Gillis it would be his long term core signings and the handling of Luongo/Schneider debacle.

Linden is in a great position, he'll get the accolades but a lot was already in place when he arrived IMO, the team was re tooling and well on the way. Next year is not going to be great but I suspect we'll see a turn around the season after when some of these youngsters mature. Gillis took a hit this year by keeping the youngsters back rather than rush them. He gets the can tied around his neck and Linden will get the toast of the town treatment. The Schneider / Luongo situation was not good but the NHL did screw Gillis with the Luongo rule making him an untradeable commodity....and not helped by Luongo getting recalled by Mrs Luongo for too much chesterfield rugby. This left him with no alternative but to bite the bullet and trade Schneider...and take the heat. He new he couldn't move Luongo and he couldn't go through another season with both of them. He got Horvat and if that turns out to be a quality player very soon there's going to be a lot of posters praising the trade....short memory syndrome.

In hindsight I didn't like the Ballard or Booth trades but if we're all honest with our selves every one thought just like Gillis and his crew it was good at the time. There's a lot of revisionists on this forum

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with most of what you say and I too thought that firing of MG was a knee jerk reaction by the greedy owners. But.. how is this year's struggle not MG's fault?

I mean, if you are the GM of a team with abundance of assets, you should have been able to foresee these troubles and needed to make tough decisions on your assets early on so that you can continue to ice a competitive team no matter what the circumstances. Basically, MG failed to do that.

Imagine if he decided to trade Luongo sooner, like during the draft, after losing to LA. Wouldn't we have been able to get some assets back in return similar to Bo Horvat? I think we probably could have. And I'm a Luongo fan and even I think that trade should have taken place 2 years earlier.

Then there is Torres and Salo, who should have been retained. Especially Salo who deserved the 2 year contract that he was asking and a chance to retire as a Canuck. Salo wasn't even asking for that much money, I really don't get this decision to let go of Salo.

What about Ehrhoff? Yeah he went for the money but there was a window of negotiation before July 1st at which point, he could have made a decent offer, say a front loaded contract at say 5 million per for 5,6 years... Would that have been too much money to give away? Had we kept Hoff, we wouldn't have signed Garrison at 4.6 per so, basically MG went for 0.4 M savings in the cap. It's clear that Ehrhoff's absence had some effect on Sedins' production so the value of Ehrhoff goes beyond 40-50 pts that he was putting up.

Ballard and Booth? They took valuable cap space, for the total of 8.4 million dollars. That money could have been used to sign a quality second line winger for Kesler or a quality third line center to replace Malholtra.

My point is that MG made fair share of mistakes, which is OK, I mean all GMs make mistakes. But, clearly MG is at least partially responsible.

To be fair to MG, he did more good stuff than bad and I think he was borderline between good and great. He may have been heading towards greatness had we won the cup in 2011 and had he made some tough decisions at the right times... Alas, he just ended up being a good GM but not a great one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I understand but what most don't want to acknowledge is MG had a deal in place with Burke at that time in TO. Gil Lupien, ( later fired by Roberto) Luongo's agent at the time told Roberto don't take the trade ( it was RL option) as Forlida are trying to work some thing out for you. Well that turned out to be cod's whollop, then BB was fired and Nonis refused to honour BB agreement when the Florida deal turned out to be a dream. In the mean time there was a no trade period while the strike went on and in the new CBA there was an all new Luongo clause inserted by the NHL.

Gillis got stiffed by, the NHL, Lupien, Roberto and Dave Nonis but he carried the can and never said a bad word about any of the events. I don't understand how people can honestly forget all this

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I understand but what most don't want to acknowledge is MG had a deal in place with Burke at that time in TO. Gil Lupien, ( later fired by Roberto) Luongo's agent at the time told Roberto don't take the trade ( it was RL option) as Forlida are trying to work some thing out for you. Well that turned out to be cod's whollop, then BB was fired and Nonis refused to honour BB agreement when the Florida deal turned out to be a dream. In the mean time there was a no trade period while the strike went on and in the new CBA there was an all new Luongo clause inserted by the NHL.

Gillis got stiffed by, the NHL, Lupien, Roberto and Dave Nonis but he carried the can and never said a bad word about any of the events. I don't understand how people can honestly forget all this

Very well said .. there may come a day when some haters on this site will be changing their moniker's because Gillis' work pays dividends and he gets the credit due .. time will tell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't disagree with that. As I said; we need one of Jensen, Shinkaruk or our upcoming pick to come full bottle as an offensive force.

No reason that same offensive burst could not come from a UFA? We should have some room.

But how is the question. I would be careful trying to solve all with a UFA? With a big long term contract anyway. I dont think we're close enough where a Stastny for $45 mill, for example, makes us a legit contender. And so while we are "re-tooling" we've tied up all cap money and roster flexibility before putting it back together. That could make it hard to fit a PMD or whatever else we need. Injecting mid tier guys for two or three years might make for a good plan IMO? Adding guys like Samuelsson and Demitra worked well to provide some more polished scoring to allow our younger guys time to develop and someone to work with. Vrbata??? Or a more senior guy, say Iginla, on a 1 or 2 year deal? Sundin helped in a similar strategy.

Ultimately its still best, long term and cost wise, if we build through the draft and good young players are the backbone of improvement.

Hmm... Not a bad idea. Sadly, it won't happen because as soon as we don't spend to the cap the news will be full of "New GM can't sign anyone!" and "Aqualinis telling GM he can't sign free agents because not enough seats are being sold". All from TSN and the Province of course :picard:

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...