Ronalds.Kenins41 Posted January 18, 2015 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! I compared them to Lidstrom not because they had the same path and skills to get to elite status but because they can still keep producing points if they have guys like Vrbata with them. Who else is as old as them and producing that many points? They play a simple game that will stand the test of time and they are always growing in terms of their hockey smarts. I agree they aren't elite skating. And their age shows when they play good quality competition but it still stands that they find ways to produce consistently. Right now they are close to point per game scoring, last year when Torts over-used them and ran them into the ground Henrik still put up 50 points in 70 games 12 games of which he played seriously injured. That is why they will always be top line players because they find ways to keep producing no matter what you throw at them. Yes they feed mainly off the weak teams with multi point games against them and no points against the good teams but at the end of the day they produce the most goals and points. And whoever produces the most goals and points is your top line. Although their numbers maybe dip I don't see anyone overtaking them until they retire. That's what I mean by they will always be our top line. Who else is their age, producing the numbers they are, and is playing with a player their age- No one. Goals by line 1st-35 goals 2nd-26 goals 3rd- 23 goals 4th- 17 goals Points by line 1st- 105 points 2nd- 60 points 3rd- 49 points 4th- 38 points Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jagorim Jarg Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 ....it's would have. Not 'would of', but I mostly agree with what you meant. I knew not bringing Willie Mitchell back was a bad idea, among other things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jagorim Jarg Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 That's what I mean by they will always be our top line. Who else is their age, producing the numbers they are, and is playing with a player their age- No one. Goals by line 1st-35 goals 2nd-26 goals 3rd- 23 goals 4th- 17 goals Points by line 1st- 105 points 2nd- 60 points 3rd- 49 points 4th- 38 points Yeah, and this should be setting off alarm bells everywhere. You cannot win championships by having a first line who have a combined age over 100 years old. How many other teams have that despite their ability to still put up points. Can you imagine where this team would be without 35 year olds being the leading scorers?? Where is the production going to come from when they retire? Do you expect them to be leading the team at the unfathomable age of 40? That says volumes about what this team's management will have done to prepare to pass the torch, which is little to nothing, if they allow that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronalds.Kenins41 Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 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. I never said don't trade Edler as long as the Sedins are here, I am saying that trading Edler for Mike Green is a bad idea. We rarely have a defencemen from the East work here. Salo was the last one and he barely spent any time playing there. Also your saying if Green doesn't work out after the Edler trade we can just trade him in the off-season....... No disrespect to Green but even though he makes more then Edler we all know who is more valuable to this team and for trade bait. Think about it this way your a GM and you have both Edler and Green on your team and have told others your willing to trade them. Who do you think you will get more calls for? Taking risks is necessary but they have to be calculated and well thought out risks. If we get a defencemen from the east they better be big and have a good track record against western teams. Just because they have good point totals doesn't mean they will have the same here. Subban for Edler+1st+prospect would be more suitable but its not happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronalds.Kenins41 Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Yeah, and this should be setting off alarm bells everywhere. You cannot win championships by having a first line who have a combined age over 100 years old. How many other teams have that despite their ability to still put up points. Can you imagine where this team would be without 35 year olds being the leading scorers?? Where is the production going to come from when they retire? Do you expect them to be leading the team at the unfathomable age of 40? That says volumes about what this team's management will have done to prepare to pass the torch, which is little to nothing, if they allow that. I never said they will win championships with a top line like that. Also they most likely will not be 40 and playing for us as they have stated in the past that this most likely is their last contract and that they want to spend a few years in Modo after playing in the NHL. If they leave for modo after this contract they can spend a good 4 years playing there. And for where the production will come from when they retire... yeah that part worries me too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreyHatnDart Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Not a frequent board responder, but this one intrigues me. Short term pain, meaning some sort of poor season to capitalize on a supposedly deep draft. Let's see; we dropped the home sell out streak last year, so ticket sales, et al, are down. Hmm, a little money/income lost. Do you think we can afford to tick off an already proven fickle fan base any more? The owners are businessmen; they won't put up with hemorrhaging money for very long. Additionally, we would be drafting players that are years away from becoming good players, IF EVER. I know McDavid seems like a sure thing, but nothing is guaranteed. I don't know if Edmonton "tanked" at any time, but their collection of high first round picks isn't a great example of "long term gain". Only example I can think of this working was Pittsburgh, getting Malkin and Crosby in back/back years-oh yeah, didn't we get two pretty good players back/back once? Like the twins? No, hitting home runs in the draft is about like a Vegas craps table, not a good way to get rich. No, I think Benning/Linden are doing the right thing. Were any of our picks, other than Horvat, truly ready for the NHL? No way. At best, Corrado will be truly contributing by the end of this season. Next year, maybe, MAYBE Guance and Jensen. So its two years until our depth becomes viable. We had to sign Vrbata, and Miller, and trade for Vey and get (or accept) Sbisa in the Kesler trade, just to bridge the gap until our youth is truly ready. Would I like to see success before then? People, I've been a fan of the Canucks since Harold Snepsts was a rookie, and the Canucks had had exactly 1 winning season. I've suffered through them losing 3 Cup series, multiple horrible years/coaches/drafts/players, and many times when they should have done something different. I will follow that misery lived up with what I see as (FINALLY) some hope down the road. While we don't have anyone, really, to replace the twins, we do have the makings of a entire team with the players in system that are 26 years old or less, a fairly good one at that, I thnk. If management can somehow work around the salary cap hell that will ensue once the twins, and Luongo, retire, we'll have a good team with the cap to sign a PROVEN star to take us to the next level...and I believe current managements long term views of this team will get us there. You should post more often. Great points sir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jagorim Jarg Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Well I just reiterate that it is true they are producing way above the expectations for guys their age. That said the team is lucky they are producing like that because if some have their way, we will watch this team descend into the dark ages of retiring veteran free agents while hiding draft picks in the closet for all time, and we will become the next Toronto Maple Leafs. The time to find more top line talent is right now. The time to start using the prospects instead of 30+ year old passengers is right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronalds.Kenins41 Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Well I just reiterate that it is true they are producing way above the expectations for guys their age. That said the team is lucky they are producing like that because if some have their way, we will watch this team descend into the dark ages of retiring veteran free agents while hiding draft picks in the closet for all time, and we will become the next Toronto Maple Leafs. The time to find more top line talent is right now. The time to start using the prospects instead of 30+ year old passengers is right now. Except those prospects have not found out how to score consisently in the AHL yet like Burrows, Kesler, Hansen and Raymond did before they came up here. And even then it took them years to find it in the NHL when they did. History has shown us good examples to players that skip AHL development or never get over the AHL hump and its not pretty (Hall, Eberle, Nugent-Hopkins, Yakapov, Kassian). Not that these players are failures but they just haven't reached anything near close to their potential for a sustain period of time. Unless you have crosby/bergeron/toews/kane level players you let the players develop the way they should. The time will come when our prospects are ready but right now none of them are. Some are getting close but they aren't quite there yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jagorim Jarg Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 I'd take Taylor Hall on this team in an instant in exchange for an aging vet package. The names you listed off as underachievers have very good production for unrderachievers, except for Kassian. I wouldn't blame them for their team's situation when we know what we do about how that team is managed. Players do not suddenly become all-stars. They need to be groomed, in the fire. They need to be thrown in the deep end to learn to sink or swim. The alternative is they never learn what it takes to be pro, to have the desire to be better. You do not get that result by pampering and rewarding guys for doing nothing. Let's play a game and list off the players who were drafted low, that learned to be productive pros by learning to play NHL hockey in the NHL instead of somewhere else, and compare that to the Jensens of this world who are over 25 and still, STILL rolling around in the AHL. How is that working out? I know he isn't 25, but let's look at this shall we? Players, people, humans, intelligent life in the universe, it learns from making mistakes. Make mistakes often and early, and you will quickly become a pro. Or, alternatively, watch a bunch of old floaters teach you how the game should be played if you just want to collect a paychecque? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronalds.Kenins41 Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 I'd take Taylor Hall on this team in an instant in exchange for an aging vet package. The names you listed off as underachievers have very good production for unrderachievers, except for Kassian. I wouldn't blame them for their team's situation when we know what we do about how that team is managed. Players do not suddenly become all-stars. They need to be groomed, in the fire. They need to be thrown in the deep end to learn to sink or swim. The alternative is they never learn what it takes to be pro, to have the desire to be better. You do not get that result by pampering and rewarding guys for doing nothing. Let's play a game and list off the players who were drafted low, that learned to be productive pros by learning to play NHL hockey in the NHL instead of somewhere else, and compare that to the Jensens of this world who are over 25 and still, STILL rolling around in the AHL. How is that working out? Jensen is bad example, he first of all had to play on team that was constantly moving and had no stability (Moves from Manitoba to Chicago then to Utica) and also we didn't have our current coaching staff there that is teaching them how to score the goals the right way in the NHL. It's no surprise that in Travis Green's first year here Jensen went on torrid goal scoring streak, then got called up here and did well up here as well. Disregard all the years before and think of it this way; we finally have a good stable AHL environment for our prospects to develop. Now we must be patient with it. Also why would we compare players who were drafted low? All of the forwards that have any potential were drafted in the 1st round by us or we drafted in the first/second round; Horvat, Shinkaruk, Virtanen, McCann, Gaunce, Jensen, Kassian, Cassels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jagorim Jarg Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 How can a guy like Zack Kassian become the player everyone wants him to be when he isn't allowed to make any mistakes, meanwhile you have guys going flat on the same team for whom the same rules do not apply- and you want to wonder why guys don't develop here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jagorim Jarg Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 .. our current coaching staff there that is teaching them how to score the goals the right way in the NHL. There is one way to teach a guy to shoot the puck accurately, by drilling and repetition. There is one way to teach a guy to score on an NHL goaltender, and that is by scoring a goal in practice or in game at the NHL level on an NHL level goaltender. Travis Green's advice is great but these guys learn by doing. Putting it in perspective, how do you learn to drive, by looking at your vehicle parked in a garage and listening to your dad's advice, and never getting to touch the wheel? How do you learn a trade without being an apprentice on the job site? How do you learn to cook when you aren't allowed to taste the food? Travis Green telling Jensen how to score at the NHL level is not going to make Jensen an NHL level scorer. He is going to have to teach himself once he gets another chance behind the wheel. And what is scoring goals 'the right way' as opposed to the 'wrong' way? Is there such thing as a goal scored the 'wrong' way? Or does it have to be preceeded by 16 passes first because that's how the Canucks score goals? 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 just voted for your #121 post....you made my case perfectly...........#125 is not bad either....voted that one too! Jagorim Jarg I voted for you as well Post #123.....hit the nail on the head....rather liked #127 Funny how 2 posters that are arguing in completely opposite directions....can agree with each other inadvertently Thanks for the help S23 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William_Clarkson Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 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 agree the team isn't that great. 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. Agreed. 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 His play wasn't questionable, he was mainly minus because he was lumped with Sbisa & Bieksa. 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. Agreed. 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? They probably will still be on the first line. Might not be first line players at that point (although their gameplay may be able to sustain it, but they might need a spark on their other wing). There is not prospect that will be able to develop that fast, unless Kassian changes his attitude. 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. Possibly, but wait until the deadline before anything like that is done. 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. Not sure how that's possible since he's not a left winger and he wouldn't even be top 5 in LW scoring. He stated that he came to the Canucks mainly to be the Sedins' winger (goal scorer wants to play with two high level playmakers). Also, if the Canucks are in a playoff spot they wouldn't make a trade. If they fall to 9th or 10th in the west maybe, but why bring Jensen up to play on a losing team when the Comets could use him? 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 went over all of that in post 88. 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. We'll see what happens. 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. I'd hold off for now. Lastly, I still want another first rounder, and probably another high second rounder, in this years draft, we shall see what transpires....... Would be nice, but no point trading veterans at the trade deadline if the team is in a playoff position. Trades can be made on draft day if necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronalds.Kenins41 Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 There is one way to teach a guy to shoot the puck accurately, by drilling and repetition. There is one way to teach a guy to score on an NHL goaltender, and that is by scoring a goal in practice or in game at the NHL level on an NHL level goaltender. Travis Green's advice is great but these guys learn by doing. Putting it in perspective, how do you learn to drive, by looking at your vehicle parked in a garage and listening to your dad's advice, and never getting to touch the wheel? How do you learn a trade without being an apprentice on the job site? How do you learn to cook when you aren't allowed to taste the food? Travis Green telling Jensen how to score at the NHL level is not going to make Jensen an NHL level scorer. He is going to have to teach himself once he gets another chance behind the wheel. And what is scoring goals 'the right way' as opposed to the 'wrong' way? Is there such thing as a goal scored the 'wrong' way? Or does it have to be preceeded by 16 passes first because that's how the Canucks score goals? k there is no right way to score goals. What I meant to say was there is a way to play in the NHL that definitely is more beneficial to practice learning in the AHL and get it into your habit of thinking the game. But the bigger point I forgot to mention is that if we had our prospects playing for us right now "thrown into the fire so to speak" we would be burning up all their elc. Once we burn a year off one of these that's one year which we will have to pay more. This effect compounded will result in us eventually losing some of our prospects, or having to overpay to keep them, further handicapping us. The way we have it right now, if they prove themselves we risk burning their elc cause they have a higher chance at success. That's how it should be, cause calling them up here just for the sake of "throwing them into the fire" will only punish us long-term. And as the title says, short-term pain for long-term gain; not the other way around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilbur Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 I wish our prospects were sent down because the Canucks didn't want to burn a year on their ELC. They're not up here right now because they simply aren't good enough yet. Horvat was good enough, that's why he's up here. Once any prospect is good enough to play here, they will. Year off the ELC be damned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronalds.Kenins41 Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 I wish our prospects were sent down because the Canucks didn't want to burn a year on their ELC. They're not up here right now because they simply aren't good enough yet. Horvat was good enough, that's why he's up here. Once any prospect is good enough to play here, they will. Year off the ELC be damned. thats exactly what I am saying. We only risk burning a year off if they have shown they are good enough. If they are not why would we bother burning a year off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jagorim Jarg Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 That's a fair point. It does require a committment by the team. I don't think it's a bad thing to have new guys playing like they want to make some money though. In this case there should be cap space to go around in the next few years too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jagorim Jarg Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Next year I would expect to see two spots open for young guys to own. I want to see Jensen given a shot at Higgins' position (edit, of course he's a LW, maybe I'm being optimistic but it could still work). I'd like to see the team trade Kevin Bieksa for a defensive prospect like what we lost in the Roy trade. That was a total loss. I say it with the heaviest of hearts because I have been a huge fan of #3, but age has caught up to him too. He has his marketable strengths. His tendency to look so casual even when under pressure are frustrating. We could get a lot for him while there's time left on his contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilbur Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 @sedins23 Heh, look s like we're on the same page just different editions I've been of the belief ELC status shouldn't really ever enter the equation for player development. You never know how a player will progress and what their value will be worth at the end of the ELC. If a big pay day happens to come earlier, great! That means the Canucks have a keeper. ELC status is something I think people overthink sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.