ActiveDouble Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 The truth is from the looks of it our next era of players will be like the WCE era; good enough to make the playoffs but not good enough to make the finals or win a president's trophy. Like the 02/03 was the height of the WCE era and that is as good as I see our next era becoming and that's if Kassian=Bertuzzi, McCann/Horvat=Naslund, Shinkaruk=Morrision. Either that or we become what Boston was in 2011 Kassian=Lucic McCann/Horvat= Bergeron Shinkaruk=Marchand Virtanen=Horton Cedarholm=Chara(k I know it's a stretch) ?=Krecji ?=Thomas either way though I don't see the next one being as successful as the sedins were even if they all pan out which I don't see happening for some of them. How about Tryamkin? Or how about we create our own identity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quoted Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 It's called discussion. And speculation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PuckRock33 Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 the want our young developing players to grow up and develop in a winning environment they think that will best allow them to flourish while the team is slowly reconfigured by adding youth that may be the smartest way to go you develop the youth in a better environment I think the trouble with what you are saying is the key word "developing". The Canucks haven't developed a solid offensive player since 2008 and that was Cody Hodgson (and how has his career been going lately?). Young players never seem to get a real opportunity to play here. When many of the top teams bring up someone they want to play in the top six they play them with top 6 players (like Brendan Saad playing with Toews when he was just breaking into the league). I understand that you have to earn time but when Chris Higgins is mired in a crazy long slump like right now what message does that send to the young talent that he is still getting top six minutes with 4th line output. Eventually you have to take the new guys, Kassian included and throw them into the deep end to see if they can swim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronalds.Kenins41 Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 I see what your saying, but as I also said don't judge a book by it's cover, don't judge a persons writing for their lack of knowledge. I understand your point of not putting an effort into the post and clarifying your reasons, but that person like myself may of not payed attention in school especially English to learn the basics of writing. There vocabulary may be not the proper english way, as many say a slang type, but that person could be a very intelligent person, although they just can't write or lack the knowledge of proper spelling grammar. Anyways regards to the D, the reason why I believe Edler looks so well with Tanev, is Tanev makes Edler look better then he is, for Tanev is always there to support Edler and his mistakes. Tanev is the perfect D pairing for someone who plays a more offensive style game, because Tanev is that calm cool stay at home defencemen. It's the same with Bieksa and Hamhuis, Bieksa wants to be that offensive D, but let's face it he's not a natural at it, but Hamhuis is the support player for him. I feel Edler should be that leader on the back end, he used to be, but he just isn't that same player anymore. Ideally the player I would want is Shea Weber, but it's obviously easier said then done, but he is the type of player who would be perfect he's just that damn good at everything. If I had to pick a trade with someone for a short term period, say for playoffs, who would also have some trade value in the off season if need be, would be Mike Green. Washington would like to free up a bit of salary on their back end, taking Edler would be 1Mill less for them, yes we would be paying 1M more, but I think for the price and the return for that offense on the back end would pay off. That would hurt both teams as Green has years of chemistry with Ovi and Edler has years of chemistry with the sedins. And that's exactly how long it takes to build chemistry, years. Gillis never realized this and let Salo who had a decades worth of chemistry with the sedins walk for nothing and brought in Garrison someone who had zero chemistry with the sedins. The end result was Garrison never become the Ehrhoff/Salo sparkplug for the sedins and become more remembered for missing his one timers wide of the net with Henrik Sedin making a afterwards. Henrik was used to Salo who always had to puck on net to create at least a rebound or good quality shot. Why would we waste an extra 1million to start from scratch to build that chemistry, not mention he is from the east where it is wayy easier to get points for forwards thereby padding greens point totals. Remember our failed East-West trades in Ballard and Booth? They never became how they were in Florida when they arrived here. Unless its for a goalie or someone of Crosby's calibre, trading with the east is likely to fail us with our current divisions size and defensive play (LA, Calgary). Malhotra Ehrhoff Richardson Vrbata Hamhuis Vey Pahlson All players that we can agree were good signings/ trades for their respective roles Garrison Ballard Booth Kassian Lapierre Higgins Diaz AHLberts Roy(will explain later down) We can only call half of these at most a success but I would say 2/9 for their expected roles. Main difference between the list of players is the top half played in the west for most of their careers, the bottom half in the east. And the only reason Lapierre and Higgins worked was because they don't have high expectations and they work hard every shift. Trading in the West if its the right fit is always more likely to result in success. I know some people may point to derek roy as an example but you must not forget he played a large part of his career in the east in buffolo. So he belongs on the East list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PowerAids Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 It's called discussion. Discussion would be great, but speaking in definites leaves no room for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronalds.Kenins41 Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 How about Tryamkin? Or how about we create our own identity? if we create our own identity we will either be up-tempo offensive with manageable defense like Hawks, Penguins, 2009-2012 Canucks (the top player is elite-superstar can get 80-100 points). Or we will be a team that is a bunch of grinders that works hard every shift, is physical and has a great defense but a offense that scores greasy dirty goals (the top player is a star player who can get 50-70 points). Or we can be a team that is excellent at both which is very very rare. What we become really depends on the players we are given and right now it looks like we are leaning towards the physical defensive model. But even right now we don't have a player capable of putting 50-70 points but that can change if we develop our prospects right. After the sedins leave 40% chance Uncertain what happens 23% chance We become the oilers for a while and stock up on picks and rebuild becoming like the WCE era team, with a average team that makes the playoffs but never gets past the second round. 17% chance We become the oilers, stock up on picks we try to become that Boston 2011 defensive model/Chicago offensive team, but fail because we don't have the players, we drop in the standings, the stands empty, benning gets fired, then we hire somone even worse then benning then aqualini's sell the team. Then we become the oilers again, then the new owners hire a new GM, who pulls off some crazy crap at a draft getting us the 2nd overall pick (we already have the first from sucking so hard) then we draft two of the greatest players to ever play for us (better then the sedins and bure). And in 2033 those two gems reach the finals as the best team we ever had (To be continued..) 10% We become a up-tempo Chicago offensive team under shinkaruk-horvat who end up becoming like kane-toews 10% Team has no superstar at Bure and sedin level so fans stop coming, then Aqualini is forced to sell to a owner in _____ and team relocates to _____ The league revenues go down at the start but later recovers in a big way after the new team in _____ wins a cup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odd. Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 if we create our own identity we will either be up-tempo offensive with manageable defense like Hawks, Penguins, 2009-2012 Canucks (the top player is elite-superstar can get 80-100 points). Or we will be a team that is a bunch of grinders that works hard every shift, is physical and has a great defense but a offense that scores greasy dirty goals (the top player is a star player who can get 50-70 points). Or we can be a team that is excellent at both which is very very rare. What we become really depends on the players we are given and right now it looks like we are leaning towards the physical defensive model. But even right now we don't have a player capable of putting 50-70 points but that can change if we develop our prospects right. After the sedins leave 40% chance Uncertain what happens 23% chance We become the oilers for a while and stock up on picks and rebuild becoming like the WCE era team, with a average team that makes the playoffs but never gets past the second round. 17% chance We become the oilers, stock up on picks we try to become that Boston 2011 defensive model/Chicago offensive team, but fail because we don't have the players, we drop in the standings, the stands empty, benning gets fired, then we hire somone even worse then benning then aqualini's sell the team. Then we become the oilers again, then the new owners hire a new GM, who pulls off some crazy crap at a draft getting us the 2nd overall pick (we already have the first from sucking so hard) then we draft two of the greatest players to ever play for us (better then the sedins and bure). And in 2033 those two gems reach the finals as the best team we ever had (To be continued..) 10% We become a up-tempo Chicago offensive team under shinkaruk-horvat who end up becoming like kane-toews 10% Team has no superstar at Bure and sedin level so fans stop coming, then Aqualini is forced to sell to a owner in _____ and team relocates to _____ The league revenues go down at the start but later recovers in a big way after the new team in _____ wins a cup. I'd never watch hockey again if that happened... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 The premise for this post is we are getting older, our good assets are the older players, and if we don't move some of them, we will have to do a slow rebuild....a slow painful rebuild. I get that some of you don't want to sell assets until they are no good, but then their value is nothing......IMO, not that it matters, we should move quicker and exploit what we have now....before those assets devalue..........my post was to point out that fact by showing some stats, that none of us can argue with. This is what I believe...it is my opinion..... In Vrbata's case, although I do not advocate selling players the same year as you sign them, I would in this case, the return to me, is too much to pass up. 5 years from now.....no one will remember, If you do it on a continuous basis, it would become a trend and everyone would remember. I advocate doing things as San Jose did / does. Sell players like Douglas Murray and Clowe. These guys were hindering team performance. Let players like Dan Boyle walk unsigned at term, but keep him through the balance of his last season so you don't let everybody down chopping the knee's out of a possible play off run. Re-sign franchise faces, and still highly productive guys like Marleau and Thornton. Draft, develop & integrate guys like Hertl, Nieto, Karlsson & Mueller, better examples being now established Pavelski and Couture. I dont agree with all they have done, including say the conjecture that became public this past summer. These (SJ) guys are still retooling on the fly and giving themselves a chance to win. Detroit and Anaheim have similar programs. I like all their chances of getting to a cup sooner than tank teams. The KEY is in our ability to make productive players out of picks like Jensen, Horvat etc. Create an army of guys knocking at the door. See Anaheim in their current state? LA when they had so many surplus young guys, they could trade for surplus veterans like Vrbata. That is how we will ultimately win. Not selling productive players like Hamhuis. Higgins stops being productive? Fine > See San Jose! Burrows loses the fire in his belly? Okay Cya! We're not there yet, because the young guys have not knocked them out of jobs! Kassian (Or Jensen or anyone) washes out? Take our lumps... The good teams just keep developing players because all, unsurprisingly, dont make it. They still have more coming. But I am of the firm belief your are undercutting both good players. And a team with a play off chance with your argument. at NO point in time did the OP actually say tank, he repeated talking points from about 6 different threads and has a valid point with his stats. If you want to address those you can. Any debate proposing selling your top goal scorer (Vrbata), one of your top 2 D men (Hamhuis) and including vague suggestions of selling your face of the franchise players, who may no longer be Hart candidates but are highly productive, is most certainly tank talk? Management has stated that they want to make the playoffs. That should render most of this discussion moot. Wow, someone who gets it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crabcakes Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Canuck Surfer.......Yes. The San Jose model of rebuilding on the fly is what is happening and has been happening for a couple of years now. Have people noticed how many centre prospects and draft picks there are in the system? I don't believe this is a random thing. Not all will work out but some will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck Surfer Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 The truth is from the looks of it our next era of players will be like the WCE era; good enough to make the playoffs but not good enough to make the finals or win a president's trophy. Like the 02/03 was the height of the WCE era and that is as good as I see our next era becoming and that's if Kassian=Bertuzzi, McCann/Horvat=Naslund, Shinkaruk=Morrision. Either that or we become what Boston was in 2011 Kassian=Lucic McCann/Horvat= Bergeron Shinkaruk=Marchand Virtanen=Horton Cedarholm=Chara(k I know it's a stretch) ?=Krecji ?=Thomas either way though I don't see the next one being as successful as the sedins were even if they all pan out which I don't see happening for some of them. It is pretty hard to accumulate 2knd and 3rd overall picks as the Sedin's were? Unless your Edmonton... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crabcakes Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 I just don't by this argument that there is a 0% chance of winning a cup without a top 3 overall pick. Sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jagorim Jarg Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Crosby, Malkin Lemuix-Jagr We are like Pittsburgh, we need another superstar tandem to keep the seats filled. It's actually less about a cup and more about superstars and a competitive team to have a chance for it in Vancouver. Like that way we don't need a cup and can still enjoy our team. This is why I said we depend heavily on Virtanen. Should also clear this up for those who only see in black and white. I don't 'hate Kassian' and I don't think we should 'tank for picks' but the facts are in front of your face. The team is old, getting older, and getting slower. The parts we brought in to replace some age during the off-season were good, unfortunately they did not bring any TALENT and you have to have BOTH to be an exciting team. I said, if this team is not in a hurry to make that happen in the next two years we will see an indefinite stretch of rotating door aging veteran core producing no results. We have two years to either acquire or bring up two more exciting/impact players that motivate the general public to be interested and buy tickets. Endlessly hanging on and letting all of our 'prospects' languish in the AHL until the age of 25 and older is not going to work. Neither is a lineup replacing one aging FA vet with another. That is one sure way to kill a team. I would hope the owners are smart enough to recognize there is an optimal point at which you have to throw in the playoff towel literally and bank on the next year and it DOESN'T MEAN TANKING FOR DAMN PICKS it means giving the young guys a chance to play- it means playing a game of musical chairs, let the weakest players move on and reward those left skating hard. Stop giving lineup spots away and make guys fight for them. I don't see Chris Higgings beating any driven rookie prospect at a lineup spot projection right now and why not believe that same logic in training camp instead of placing him in there because of his contract. It is a business, so what are you in the business of selling? Low risk boring snoozefest that nobody will buy? Take a hit to make the play(offs). Market greed for playoff ticket sales is going to get in the way of this logic and it will illustrate the true goals of the ownership. We'll be lucky to be excited and even luckier to witness a playoff game let alone a playoff run, but if that's what you (the overly patient also known as those who never act) want.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.I.A.H.N Posted January 18, 2015 Author Share Posted January 18, 2015 Goof Morning Surfer Hey, look! I started this post because I see the current team as weak. I could be wrong and would love nothing better than to be wrong, I would love to see the Canucks win the Stanley Cup with in the next 5 years, and my hat would taste very good if that happened. I am a Canuck fan, but also a realist. I do agree with everyone that says you can't trade all your vets at one time.....totally agree. As for trading the Sedins.....I do not recall ever saying that, as a matter of fact, I purposely avoided any suggestion of that.......and if I did, it wasn't my intent. What I wanted to do was bring it to everyone attention, just how the Canucks are truly playing, we haven't had many injuries, although loosing Hamhuis is a big loss, but in my opinion it hasn't really shown that much.....personally, I thought that Hamhuis had shown some questionable play before he had got injured...I think he is a minus player??? But I regress Bottom line for me is our players have a shelf life and the Sedins are a perfect example.........3 years ago, it didn't matter that they were of average speed, we had a higher end supporting staff. Now, it appears to me that they have lost a step, and in another 3 years I would imagine they will be even slower and will not be able to be first line players.......for older players the first thing to show they are starting to fall behind is their feet. Sedins are already showing this. So, OK! Let's go forward 2 years, the Sedins are slower, and are absolutely 2nd liners.........who will be our first liners? Where will our first line come from? Well, I advocate, that we move early and obtain another 1st round pick sooner, in a strong draft, where the chances of picking a higher end player later in the first round are better. When I started this, I actually had picked Vrbata, as we only have him for 2 years, he is top 5 in LW scoring and I believe is an easy sell to a team wanting to stock up...anywhere from 16th OA to 22 OA is fine with me, and he is worth it. Can you guarantee he will resign....why did he leave Arizona? I think money and loosing....well we will not be as strong in 2 years, neither will he be, so I say bite the bullet now, while his value is highest. We need so much in terms of High end talent.........we need at least 2 first line players and at least 1 first line defenseman to be picked in the next 2 years.....after all, it will take another year or 2 of junior and 1 or 2 years in Utica before they are ready, IF we hit it out, with those selections......they need to be the highest selections we can get, and as soon as we can. IMO. I was looking at the schedule for the rest of the year.....I noticed that we have 4 games left in Jan....we should go at least 2-2 in those games, when we go into Feb., we have 14 games I believe, this is where it will swing one way or the other, if the Canucks win some of the games we shouldn't and end up with a higher point total than what was expected, I will be surprised.....personally, I will be surprised if we go 7 and 7 in Feb......my call......5 and 9 for Feb. But you never know? I remember Benning saying something to this effect...."we will have a better understanding after Feb" I think I remember him saying that, correct me if I am wrong on that one. Either way, I am easy on them trading Kassian (although I wouldn't), Higgins, and maybe one of our UFA's (I think their value is higher than most would think).......but more importantly, I would make sure I resigned the remainder of those UFA's before they hit the market....all are able to play 3 line, and all show workman like leadership, something I agree our prospects need to be around. Lastly, I still want another first rounder, and probably another high second rounder, in this years draft, we shall see what transpires....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PowerAids Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 I think everyone agrees that picking up another first in this years draft would be great... But I also think it will be tough to do since every other team knows it's a strong draft as well and will want to hang onto their picks... JB has shown the willingness to make moves at draft and this will be his first TDL as a GM this year... It should be interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PowerAids Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 I strongly disagree with trading UFA's the same year you sign them though... It gives the team a bad rep around the league. Unless it's a completely mutual decision and it's just not working out between a team and a player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crabcakes Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Benning did say that he felt that we would know more in 5-8 games what position the team is in. I think he's referring to the league in general. All teams will know whether they are buyers or sellers and we will start to see trades from that point going up to the deadline. I think there is a possibility that some of the supporting players move. Maybe Kassian if somebody makes a great offer. Otherwise, I think he stays. As for actively selling. I don't see it happening. It flies in the face of everything Benning has been saying. You are entitled to your opinion and you have many good points. Chiefly, replacing the aging core. We are all worried about that. Benning has said that top 4 D are expensive. Teams want a roster player and a 1st round pick. We know JB isn't going there. I would think that the same is true for top 6 forwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronalds.Kenins41 Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Goof Morning Surfer Hey, look! I started this post because I see the current team as weak. I could be wrong and would love nothing better than to be wrong, I would love to see the Canucks win the Stanley Cup with in the next 5 years, and my hat would taste very good if that happened. I am a Canuck fan, but also a realist. I do agree with everyone that says you can't trade all your vets at one time.....totally agree. As for trading the Sedins.....I do not recall ever saying that, as a matter of fact, I purposely avoided any suggestion of that.......and if I did, it wasn't my intent. What I wanted to do was bring it to everyone attention, just how the Canucks are truly playing, we haven't had many injuries, although loosing Hamhuis is a big loss, but in my opinion it hasn't really shown that much.....personally, I thought that Hamhuis had shown some questionable play before he had got injured...I think he is a minus player??? But I regress Bottom line for me is our players have a shelf life and the Sedins are a perfect example.........3 years ago, it didn't matter that they were of average speed, we had a higher end supporting staff. Now, it appears to me that they have lost a step, and in another 3 years I would imagine they will be even slower and will not be able to be first line players.......for older players the first thing to show they are starting to fall behind is their feet. Sedins are already showing this. So, OK! Let's go forward 2 years, the Sedins are slower, and are absolutely 2nd liners.........who will be our first liners? Where will our first line come from? Well, I advocate, that we move early and obtain another 1st round pick sooner, in a strong draft, where the chances of picking a higher end player later in the first round are better. When I started this, I actually had picked Vrbata, as we only have him for 2 years, he is top 5 in LW scoring and I believe is an easy sell to a team wanting to stock up...anywhere from 16th OA to 22 OA is fine with me, and he is worth it. Can you guarantee he will resign....why did he leave Arizona? I think money and loosing....well we will not be as strong in 2 years, neither will he be, so I say bite the bullet now, while his value is highest. We need so much in terms of High end talent.........we need at least 2 first line players and at least 1 first line defenseman to be picked in the next 2 years.....after all, it will take another year or 2 of junior and 1 or 2 years in Utica before they are ready, IF we hit it out, with those selections......they need to be the highest selections we can get, and as soon as we can. IMO. I was looking at the schedule for the rest of the year.....I noticed that we have 4 games left in Jan....we should go at least 2-2 in those games, when we go into Feb., we have 14 games I believe, this is where it will swing one way or the other, if the Canucks win some of the games we shouldn't and end up with a higher point total than what was expected, I will be surprised.....personally, I will be surprised if we go 7 and 7 in Feb......my call......5 and 9 for Feb. But you never know? I remember Benning saying something to this effect...."we will have a better understanding after Feb" I think I remember him saying that, correct me if I am wrong on that one. Either way, I am easy on them trading Kassian (although I wouldn't), Higgins, and maybe one of our UFA's (I think their value is higher than most would think).......but more importantly, I would make sure I resigned the remainder of those UFA's before they hit the market....all are able to play 3 line, and all show workman like leadership, something I agree our prospects need to be around. Lastly, I still want another first rounder, and probably another high second rounder, in this years draft, we shall see what transpires....... Sedins will always be first line players, they are like Lidstrom and keep going strong into their early 40's if they wanted. They just need to have to right support and you will see how good they still are. Daniel I agree is not the same after his concussion but it doesn't matter anymore he's become Henrik 2.0 and now you have no clue who is going to shoot the puck which is what I like about having Vrbata there. He gives them that flexibility. He has also stated that he enjoys playing with the sedins a lot and you can see it every shift he plays. Why not ride the sedins out and give our prospects a chance to properly develop like Kesler, Edler, Burrows, Tanev did. We honestly have no choice as trading Vrbata will weaken this team but not get it within top 3 draft range and honestly that's where we need to be. Playing our prospects too early ruins their development, look at kassian for example. If we kept him in the AHL where he was just starting to find his game with Archibald he would have learnt to play the right way and give a good effort every night. Now he is being forced to play a style that doesn't match him at all. We have the luxury of not rushing our prospects and letting them develop properly so why not let it happen. We don't have to wait till they are 25 years old but the transition from CHL to AHL is huge and if players don't work out in the AHL they rarely ever work in the NHL. AHL is closer to an extension of the NHL in terms of skill so the more time players spend there the better for their development. Unlike many of the posters here, I still believe Jensen can make it in the NHL. He showed great skill in the AHL last year and even when he got called up. I think in one or two years he will be ripping it up in bigs and will surprise many people. People have to remember that we finally have a stable situation in the AHL now and have only had our great coach Travis Green for one season. The years before, I hate to admit were a waste in terms of our players development but the years now won't be a waste. We are lucky that we can watch entertaining hockey with the sedins while our prospects develop in the background. If its a luxury we have then we must take it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.I.A.H.N Posted January 18, 2015 Author Share Posted January 18, 2015 Sedins23 I wish I had your optimism. I don't think they are like Lidstrom, not even close. With all the love and respect all of CDC has for them, they just are not .....they are all Swedish, but that's about it. Lidstrom, was a elite skating multi winning Norris Trophy defenseman, that really came into his own quickly....remained there through out his career and left as still an elite defense. Both Hank and Dank were elite for a much shorter time, never were smooth skating, absolutely never were elite skating. They now show their skill against weaker opposition, but now have a great deal of problems against high end players and teams.....things have just changed. They are still better than our second line by a country mile, but will never again be considered in the same vain as they once were. They can still cycle like mad and are a joy to watch when on their game. But lets not worry about them......they are not going anywhere unless they want to, and I doubt anyone would ever ask them.......on that note though, if they ever said to management that they are going back to Sweden, and the trade deadline was near, would it be something to see them lift the cup as Ray Bourque did in Colorado? Although, as a Bourque fan, I always though it a little hollow, but a nice gesture by the Bruins. Personally, I think they would say no anyways.... PS......To stay on point, I remind you that the Sedin's have never been part of this conversation, really! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PowerAids Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 The beautiful thing about sports is that ANYTHING can happen, a team can get hot or gain confidence at different points in a year. Look at Nashville... Would any of us look at that forward group on paper at the start of the year and think they were going to be as successfull as they have been this year? The reclamation project of Ribeiro (sp?) as their first line C? If he was the first C in Vancouver the fans here would be losing their minds, but look at how he has played this year. All I'm saying is, don't count these players or this team out prematurely, odds are they won't win the cup or even go super deep in the playoffs, but they have a chance just like every other team. Blowing this team up mid season may seem like the best course of action on paper but I think it would have a detrimental effect in the long term. You trade Hamhuis now, where are we going to get another top 4 D man in the next couple years? We'll just end up paying someone else more for a d man later than we get in return for Hammer now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckNORRIS4Cup Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 That would hurt both teams as Green has years of chemistry with Ovi and Edler has years of chemistry with the sedins. And that's exactly how long it takes to build chemistry, years. Gillis never realized this and let Salo who had a decades worth of chemistry with the sedins walk for nothing and brought in Garrison someone who had zero chemistry with the sedins. The end result was Garrison never become the Ehrhoff/Salo sparkplug for the sedins and become more remembered for missing his one timers wide of the net with Henrik Sedin making a afterwards. Henrik was used to Salo who always had to puck on net to create at least a rebound or good quality shot. Why would we waste an extra 1million to start from scratch to build that chemistry, not mention he is from the east where it is wayy easier to get points for forwards thereby padding greens point totals. Remember our failed East-West trades in Ballard and Booth? They never became how they were in Florida when they arrived here. Unless its for a goalie or someone of Crosby's calibre, trading with the east is likely to fail us with our current divisions size and defensive play (LA, Calgary). Malhotra Ehrhoff Richardson Vrbata Hamhuis Vey Pahlson All players that we can agree were good signings/ trades for their respective roles Garrison Ballard Booth Kassian Lapierre Higgins Diaz AHLberts Roy(will explain later down) We can only call half of these at most a success but I would say 2/9 for their expected roles. Main difference between the list of players is the top half played in the west for most of their careers, the bottom half in the east. And the only reason Lapierre and Higgins worked was because they don't have high expectations and they work hard every shift. Trading in the West if its the right fit is always more likely to result in success. I know some people may point to derek roy as an example but you must not forget he played a large part of his career in the east in buffolo. So he belongs on the East list. This is the problem with some people they are just to afraid of letting go, why hang onto a guy who isn't producing offensively enough for what he's being paid for, for when you can get a player who will give you offence that you need. So your saying as long as the Sedins are here, there's no point in trading Edler because of their chemistry? I'm sorry but that doesn't always win you championships, taking risk and gambles for players who will give you want you need is what helps wins you championships. The good thing with Green is they can always trade him after say in the off season if he's not the right fit, and can use him to bring in someone else who may be better, he atleast has trade value and that's the key. If Pat Quinn back in 94 never made the trade to get Jeff Brown for his offense, good chance the Canucks wouldn't of even made it into the playoffs for a chance at winning the cup. I agree with Salo and another reason I hated Gillis, Salo was just such a smart player, who just knew what to do. Another one I hated was not giving Willie Mitchell a chance and taking the risk to sign him, pissed me off. Mitchell is one of the best shut down defensemen in the league, he is a winner and it showed in L.A. Was to sold on Garrison from the start, but that's another thing with Gillis, instead of going after the actual real producer type player he would try others and hope they would turn out to those real producer type players. I liked Ehrhoff I wish he was able to stay here, but for what he was asking he was no Shea Weber or P.K Subban, he wasn't worth that much, I'll agree with Gillis on that one. Regards to the signs, straight up honest opinion before they were made. Garrison - Wasn't that excited about it, was hoping for another offensive D who showed consistency already. Ballard - I was ok with this one, but after how he was utilized by AV it pissed me off and it just destroyed Ballard, blame AV. Booth - Also was sick and tired of the Florida trading, I know what Gillis was doing here as mentioned above, hoping for a rebound out of him, didn't like it. Kassian - Was more upset with the trade at the Time, said it should of been in the off season, or the trade should of involved the same calibre type players. But was tricked by Gillis and thought he would possibly turn into a real power forward type player, but it show he needed more time in the minors first and Gillis screwed that one up for his job. Lapierre - Liked this one a lot, we needed some grit and another Burrows type player to get under the Western side skin. Higgins - Wasn't that excited about it had my doubts, but I think this one did turn out well. Diaz - My reaction was , Dale Weise I liked, great 4th line player. Alberts - Was better then Rome imo, but that's all I'll say. Roy - Yes was not a fan of this. I understand the players in the West are the better options, out of that list Pahlsson and Richardson are the 2 when acquired I was not excited about, but all the others I was. The East ones, I was excited about only 1 Lapierre, but I wouldn't of traded or signed those ones in the first place. Knowing hockey, I know they weren't the right fit here in the West, or showed they were that good to begin with. There are the few in the East who are just good enough to get the job done anywhere, and those are the type of players as a GM you have to be going after, not hoping that player will be as good as the other one who you should of gone after. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.