Benning rebuild on the fly.

[TimberWolf]

Vancouver fans are fickle. An extended period of missing the playoffs during a rebuild means an extended period where most fans stop caring, which means an extended period of lost revenue. Which means kiss your hopes for a real rebuild goodbye.

I'm ok with that however. Something about pro sports team having to be bad before they can get good bothers the hell out of me. And if it's done properly you can maintain a successful franchise while building for the future. It just takes the right amount of committed veterans and properly integrated youth. Should be interesting to see if Benning can pull it off.

Vancouver fans are also not as dumb as some on this board like to pretend.

It doesn't matter if they make the playoffs if it's the same group that lets everyone down. Attendance is already going into the tank because of the lackluster efforts and if the canucks thought that they could trick butts into seats by continuing to ice the same team of dead weight year after year they may find that they don't have a present along with a future.

Rebuilding on the fly should have started years ago. It didn't and now it's time to be a little more drastic about it. Does that mean tank? Not exactly but it does mean the cast needs to change. If we can win with new faces then great. If not we can draft.

[TOMapleLaughs]

^This. Rebuilding on the fly is what this team should have done for years. Instead they rewarded guys with NTC's, brought in bad contracts and built a country club atmosphere here that's still going on strong and now we're supposed to pretend that a GM change has changed all that and everything done before the change doesn't mean anything. Pardon me, but it's still the same franchise. A lot of the staff haven't changed. Ownership hasn't changed. So it's not like the 'to do lists' have vanished just because Benning and Linden arrived.

Rebuild on the fly? That's what Chicago did when they faced a huge cap crunch after 2010. That's what we should have been doing for the years after 2011. Now it's too late. Now we have to catch up quickly or face another dark ages here. And that's going to be pretty annoying when it was entirely avoidable.

[Me_]

^This. Rebuilding on the fly is what this team should have done for years. Instead they rewarded guys with NTC's, brought in bad contracts and built a country club atmosphere here that's still going on strong and now we're supposed to pretend that a GM change has changed all that and everything done before the change doesn't mean anything. Pardon me, but it's still the same franchise. A lot of the staff haven't changed. Ownership hasn't changed. So it's not like the 'to do lists' have vanished just because Benning and Linden arrived.

Rebuild on the fly? That's what Chicago did when they faced a huge cap crunch after 2010. That's what we should have been doing for the years after 2011. Now it's too late. Now we have to catch up quickly or face another dark ages here. And that's going to be pretty annoying when it was entirely avoidable.

I agree.

However, this time I have reasons to believe that this ship is finally going in the right direction. Jim Benning is a master at drafting. Last year, the Canucks drafted Virtanen, but they didn't draft McCann; Benning did.

BENNING'S DRAFT RECORD

BUFFALO - DIRECTOR OF AMATEUR SCOUTING ( 1998 - 2004 )

Picks that worked out

1998 - BUF - 1/18 - D - Dimitri Kalinin

1998 - BUF - 2/34 - LW - Andrew Peters

1998 - BUF - 6/164 - RW - Ales Kotalik

1999 - BUF - 5/138 - G - Ryan Miller

2000 - BUF - 7/220 - C - Paul Gaustad

2001 - BUF - 2/32 - C - Derek Roy

2001 - BUF - 2/55 - RW - Jason Pomminville

2002 - BUF - 1/11 - D - Keith Ballard

2002 - BUF - 1/20 - LW - Daniel Paille

2002 - BUF - 8/241 - D - Denis Wideman

2003 - BUF - 1/5 - RW - Thomas Vanek

2003 - BUF - 3/74 - LW - Clarke McArthur

2003 - BUF - 4/106 - D - Jan Hejda

2004 - BUF - 1/13 - RW - Drew Stafford

BOSTON - ASSISTANT GM ( 2006 - 2014 )

Picks that worked out

2006 - BOS - 1/5 - C - Phil Kessel

2006 - BOS - 2/50 - LW - Mila Lucic

2006 - BOS - 3/71 - LW - Brad Marchand

2008 - BOS - 1/16 - Joe Colborne

2008 - BOS - 3/77 - G - Michael Hutchison

2010 - BOS - 1/2 - C - Tyler Seguin

2011 - BOS - 1/9 - D - Dougie Hamilton

Jim Benning's lifetime batting average at the draft is 21/103 (as of 2011).

20.39% of players drafted under Benning made it as regulars in the NHL.

An average of 1.6 players per year drafted by Benning make it to the NHL.

TOO EARLY TO TELL (2011 - )

2012 - BOS - 1/24 - G - Malcolm Subban

2012 - BOS - 3/85 - Matt Grzelcyk

2012 - BOS - 5/131 - RW - Seth Griffith

2012 - BOS - 5/145 - D - Cody Payne

2012 - BOS - 6/175 - D - Matthew Benning

2012 - BOS - 7/205 - F - Colton Hargrove

2013 - BOS - 2/60 - D - Linus Arnesson

2013 - BOS - 3/90 - RW - Peter Cehlarik

2013 - BOS - 4/20 - C - Ryan Fitzgerald

2013 - BOS - 5/150 - D - Wiley Sherman

2013 - BOS - 6/180 - LW - Anton Blidh

2013 - BOS - 7/210 - LW - Mitchell Dempsey

2014 - VAN - 1/6 - RW - Jake Virtanen

2014 - VAN - 1/24 - C - Jared McCann

2014 - VAN - 2/36 - G - Thatcher Demko

2014 - VAN - 3/66 - D - Nikita Tryamkin

2014 - VAN - 6/126 - D - Gustav Frosling

2014 - VAN - 6/156 - C - Kyle Pettit

2014 - VAN - 7/186 - D - MacKenzie Stewart

[Psycho_Path]

I for one would not enjoy 10 years of mediocre/bad hockey. Chicago was mediocre/bad in 9/10 seasons prior to their winning seasons. I suppose LA only really had to endure 6 before they had Doughty/Kopitar (though 3 were really bad seasons). Pittsburgh almost got moved with their 4 years of being terrible, and were only saved because they had Crosby and Malkin in consecutive years. Very unlikely to get such high end talent for us if we tank. Anaheim really only had 4 of 5 bad years previous to them being a successful team, but they got 2 1st rounders in one of the deepest NHL drafts ever and also managed to get 2 of the best Canadian D men to ever play the game for them in Pronger and Neidermayer (neither of which they drafted).

Detroit can't really be compared since they got their best players at late rounders in the draft (aside from Yzerman, if you want to go back that far). Boston as well had 2 really bad seasons, but they also got Chara from the Senators.

I suppose a tank could work if we were to draft a total stud D-man like Ekblad last season, but teams don't win cups without star Dmen (Edmonton's previous leadership failed so hard to realize this).

Maybe sucking next season to get Chychrun as TOMapleLaughs is suggesting could work. Either way, I don't want to watch a season of the Canucks sucking, let alone 5+.

[Ihatetomatoes]

"Were going to go through other teams reserves list and were going to make up lists of names of guys that we think we can develop and that are going to help us win going forward,"

Man never stops trying to improve his team. No matter what others think, I believe Benning will be here for a long long time.

"Hard work beats talent when talent doesn't work hard" Tim Notke

and I believe Benning has both

I love the way Benning is targeting young talent. its how you end up with guys like Naslund and Bertuzzi. If he can hit a homerun with a Vey or Baertshi or Clendenning or another future guy we will be laughing and we will be singing his praises.

Where Benning will fail is with his cap management. I believe he is too nice, instead of being a hard negotiater he plays nice guy and gives players what he feels they deserve rather than try to get them for the cheapest. It happened woth Miller when he had no other suiters and with sbisa. It happened in Boston when he was there paying lucic 6mil and bottom 6mil guys much more than they're worth.

[Psycho_Path]

I agree with Henrik that for the first time in his veteran career in Vancouver there is now a youth movement that can potentially come in and provide the energy and dynamism that the team needs from the 'bottom' in order to push them back up the ladder to contending.

My opinion is that the franchise has a wealth of forward prospects (Jensen, Virtanen, Baertschi, Shinkaruk, Gaunce, Cassells, McCann....and Bo and Kenins of course) , and an improving pool of young blueliners that tend to be under-rated on these boards. A lot of folks seem to be under the impression that there are one or two potential NHL defensmen in the system, but imo any of Corrado, Clendening, Pedan, Tryamkin, Subban, McNally, Cederholm, or even Sautner or Hutton have shots at making the NHL. The goaltending pool is strong.

They have a good top 6 that could be strengthened by the emergence of a young forward or two.

They have a very solid trio of blueliners in Edler, Hamhius and Tanev - imo the biggest question mark at this point is who will be Hamhuis' partner next season. They have a wealth of depth from the 5 to 10 spots.

Their forward depth and bottom 6 were clearly one of their key strengths this year and should remain that way moving forward.

Goaltending is the least of their concerns moving forward imo, although it's also the most volatile position.

In any event, retooling on the go is the constant disposition of good franchises imo. The best of them never need to resort ot 'rebuilding', because they head off serious imbalances by building and keeping a strong prospect pool. There is no better proof that high picks are not necessarily vital in that process - than the Detroit Red Wings - as they've picked in the top 20 only a few times in the last two decades.

The Ducks likewise are a team devoid of high picks on their roster. Aside from Lindholm at 6th overall and Fowler at 12th, the Ducks are a team of late picks.

I really like the balance, quality and depth throughout the franchise at this point (Utica is also far more competitive than in recent years) and I think Benning is now in a position where he can hone in on another few key additions that could really help them take another step next year.

The problem being that our defense being probably to "make the NHL" isn't very useful. We need stand out defensemen. Look at all the recent cup winners. They all have 1 if not 2 (Anaheim the year they won) stand out defensemen. Edler's close, but he's no Lidstrom/Pronger/Niedermayer/Keith/Doughty/Chara. I suppose none of Pittsburgh's d-men were quite at that level either, but Gonchar was no slouch.

[RonMexico]

I love the way Benning is targeting young talent. its how you end up with guys like Naslund and Bertuzzi. If he can hit a homerun with a Vey or Baertshi or Clendenning or another future guy we will be laughing and we will be singing his praises.

Where Benning will fail is with his cap management. I believe he is too nice, instead of being a hard negotiater he plays nice guy and gives players what he feels they deserve rather than try to get them for the cheapest. It happened woth Miller when he had no other suiters and with sbisa. It happened in Boston when he was there paying lucic 6mil and bottom 6mil guys much more than they're worth.

Can you honestly say to yourself that Benning is the only one in control of managing the salary cap and ensuring that all new contracts fit into the planned structure?

Have you ever been involved in contract negotiations? Saying Benning is too nice because you think he overpaid for Sbisa, Dorsett or Miller is a highly simplistic point of view since you have no idea what was said to either side.

[Me_]

I love the way Benning is targeting young talent. its how you end up with guys like Naslund and Bertuzzi. If he can hit a homerun with a Vey or Baertshi or Clendenning or another future guy we will be laughing and we will be singing his praises.

Where Benning will fail is with his cap management. I believe he is too nice, instead of being a hard negotiater he plays nice guy and gives players what he feels they deserve rather than try to get them for the cheapest. It happened woth Miller when he had no other suiters and with sbisa. It happened in Boston when he was there paying lucic 6mil and bottom 6mil guys much more than they're worth.

Benning isn't "too nice" with cap. He pays fair value in exchange for NHL services an most importantly, the right to NOT give NTCs to players.

[stawns]

Can you honestly say to yourself that Benning is the only one in control of managing the salary cap and ensuring that all new contracts fit into the planned structure?

Have you ever been involved in contract negotiations? Saying Benning is too nice because you think he overpaid for Sbisa, Dorsett or Miller is a highly simplistic point of view since you have no idea what was said to either side.

Not to mention I think in a year or two most people are going to think Sbisa's deal is pretty fair market value. he's got a significant upside

[nlife]

I love the way Benning is targeting young talent. its how you end up with guys like Naslund and Bertuzzi. If he can hit a homerun with a Vey or Baertshi or Clendenning or another future guy we will be laughing and we will be singing his praises.

Where Benning will fail is with his cap management. I believe he is too nice, instead of being a hard negotiater he plays nice guy and gives players what he feels they deserve rather than try to get them for the cheapest. It happened woth Miller when he had no other suiters and with sbisa. It happened in Boston when he was there paying lucic 6mil and bottom 6mil guys much more than they're worth.

Pretty hard to hang the cap management issues on the assistant GM like you're trying to do with Benning in Boston.

Neil

[oldnews]

The problem being that our defense being probably to "make the NHL" isn't very useful. We need stand out defensemen. Look at all the recent cup winners. They all have 1 if not 2 (Anaheim the year they won) stand out defensemen. Edler's close, but he's no Lidstrom/Pronger/Niedermayer/Keith/Doughty/Chara. I suppose none of Pittsburgh's d-men were quite at that level either, but Gonchar was no slouch.

we don't really have any way of predicting their 'ceilings' though - it's possible there are stand out defensmen in that mix, it's just too early to say. I am optimistic though, with the depth of D in this draft, that they'll pick up a damn good one with their 1st.

[Boudrias]

Best player or specifically picking a dman? Benning's specialty is evaluating talent so I expect best player available will be tempered.

Hoping for a dman draft. Also hoping he can move up.

[Canuck Surfer]

L Lager has one key point > "The plan hasn't changed, the message is clear. Winning Culture."

Durameter another. We were ranked 18th overall in prospect talent recently. But before we injected Clendenning and Baertschi. We are ranked much higher. Does that really not leave us 8th or 10th? (That after being 28th or 29th just 2 years ago)

Then an anecdote: when Gillis started he was great with the big club, but horrible at drafting. And gave away so many picks. As we peaked; he did a 180... A lot of his on ice moves became questionable. Even good players he acquired (Garrison) did not really fit. We were also crucified in the media fishbowl with his attitude and blunders. From pumping up CoHo to trade him, to losing a staredown with Lou. It was such a distraction having leadership with no direction. But from 2012 on he actually left us a very solid list of drafted players, who now are a big part of that ^ vastly improved prospect pool.

Here is my real assessment;

Our forward group moving forward looks scary good! We have Kassian & Bo who are top 15 picks already on the team + 6 more first round picks lurking for a spot. Plus depth prospects like Grenier, Kenins, CASSELLS. And the Twins are still Top 25 in the world forwards with at least another year with Vrbata. That's good!

Our goaltending is close. And might even be more stacked in guys with upside? Forget Miller for a moment; we have Lack who is showing he is a starter on many NHL squads + not one, but two blue chip prospects. Maybe O'Connor as well? That's also good!

D is where we have assets, but questions. Both on the big club and in prospects. Yes we have good players who will have careers. Clendenning has the skills, but average athleticism. Subban the athleticism but not the size. Hutton may surprise, but needs a more mature game. I could go on, but we are looking to develop guys who had holes in their games at lower levels among some promising skills, into the stud D man we are already missing now. Odds are they will be complimentary players. Hamhuis is the only D in our system, big club or prospects, who is a first round pick. Our D needs an investment!

My only complaint with Trevor Benning > none of the noise we hear addresses the D!. I personally buy grooming our prospects in this winning culture. Among pro's and vets who teach people to compete, train, eat, breathe like a hockey player. I accept the 4 line concept they espouse. I buy the Twins are still valid, many of our other vets as well (where many on CDC have them in the pasture!). I am happy with the message as a whole, and our coach. But Babcock in Detroit will out and out tell you, he wants a horse for his back end!

Lets start adding some truly STUD D! By draft. By trade. By UFA. One each over this summer and next. We can be a contender!

And let me add this; we already "re-tooled" Schneider, Lou, Kesler and Garrison to inject new vitality. It has given us a shot in the arm. How long do guys want to go selling off the farm?

[BigFoot44]

This team is looking bright in the near future:

-Horvat can be the future #1 Center

-Mcann/Cassels #2 Center

-Virtaanen,Baer,Kassian,Shinkaruk to round out the top 6

-Gaunce #3 Center

-Corrado, Clendening, Tryumkin in the top 4.

[Fred65]

 

L Lager has one key point > "The plan hasn't changed, the message is clear. Winning Culture."

Durameter another. We were ranked 18th overall in prospect talent recently. But before we injected Clendenning and Baertschi. We are ranked much higher. Does that really not leave us 8th or 10th? (That after being 28th or 29th just 2 years ago)

Then an anecdote: when Gillis started he was great with the big club, but horrible at drafting. And gave away so many picks. As we peaked; he did a 180... A lot of his on ice moves became questionable. Even good players he acquired (Garrison) did not really fit. We were also crucified in the media fishbowl with his attitude and blunders. From pumping up CoHo to trade him, to losing a staredown with Lou. It was such a distraction having leadership with no direction. But from 2012 on he actually left us a very solid list of drafted players, who now are a big part of that ^ vastly improved prospect pool.

Here is my real assessment;

Our forward group moving forward looks scary good! We have Kassian & Bo who are top 15 picks already on the team + 6 more first round picks lurking for a spot. Plus depth prospects like Grenier, Kenins, CASSELLS. And the Twins are still Top 25 in the world forwards with at least another year with Vrbata. That's good!

Our goaltending is close. And might even be more stacked in guys with upside? Forget Miller for a moment; we have Lack who is showing he is a starter on many NHL squads + not one, but two blue chip prospects. Maybe O'Connor as well? That's also good!

D is where we have assets, but questions. Both on the big club and in prospects. Yes we have good players who will have careers. Clendenning has the skills, but average athleticism. Subban the athleticism but not the size. Hutton may surprise, but needs a more mature game. I could go on, but we are looking to develop guys who had holes in their games at lower levels among some promising skills, into the stud D man we are already missing now. Odds are they will be complimentary players. Hamhuis is the only D in our system, big club or prospects, who is a first round pick. Our D needs an investment!

My only complaint with Trevor Benning > none of the noise we hear addresses the D!. I personally buy grooming our prospects in this winning culture. Among pro's and vets who teach people to compete, train, eat, breathe like a hockey player. I accept the 4 line concept they espouse. I buy the Twins are still valid, many of our other vets as well (where many on CDC have them in the pasture!). I am happy with the message as a whole, and our coach. But Babcock in Detroit will out and out tell you, he wants a horse for his back end!

Lets start adding some truly STUD D! By draft. By trade. By UFA. One each over this summer and next. We can be a contender!

And let me add this; we already "re-tooled" Schneider, Lou, Kesler and Garrison to inject new vitality. It has given us a shot in the arm. How long do guys want to go selling off the farm?

 

Here's a solution Sabotka is withering down in the KHL if he turns down St L again, maybe there's a player to be had. Gifted centre, high skill and gritty despite his size.... think fire hydrant. This would allow you to move down the current centres, this guys a deffinite a good #2

[TOMapleLaughs]

Ah yes, 'Winning Culture.' Not that it's anything but corporate pump-up speak, but in the sports world, isn't that just something that needs to be backed up by... Y'know, winning? I don't think it should apply to continuing mediocrity, should it? I mean what winning culture are we going on about here? Let's look at the corporate pump-up angle:

Just from a sample corporate self-help website:

Five ways to create a winning culture:

1. Define values and ingrain them in everything you do.

Here I suppose that means valuing regular season accomplishments and making the playoffs above all else. I dunno. Probably could be amped up to winning the cup above all else. Maybe that's the main value here, who knows. I read a lot about just making the playoffs being the goal here though.

2. Team members, not employees.

That means everyone is on the same page, blah, blah, blah, everyone buying into the same goal. Makes sense. The goal is what matters more of course. But is everyone on the same page? Not sure. I think there are a few players that may not be. At least one has been singled-out by the new regime.

3. Create an environment of trust.

This one's a bit murky here, and it has to do with everyone being on the same page. The environment right now is not primed for trust. How could it be? When you see players leaving and other players coming in during a rebuild phase, then trust cannot be assured. Perhaps when the rebuild phase is complete and the goal is reset to winning the cup, then trust could be built.

4. Set the right goals and constantly raise the bar.

Since it's a process, the rebuild, this makes a lot of sense. But on that note, shouldn't the main goal right now be to accelerate the rebuild? That would make it possible to reset the goal to winning the cup, building trust, getting on the same page, etc. a lot faster.

5. Focus on results and build accountability.

This one is interesting, because while making the playoffs is a goal, achieving that goal may take us farther away from winning a cup, due to the delaying of the rebuild. It's all about the result you want to hold people accountable for. Note that we held Gillis accountable when we missed the playoffs, but isn't what he was doing going to help us out a lot in the long run? He's responsible for getting us pieces we need for the rebuild, which will be needed if we are to achieve what should be the main goal here, winning the cup.

I think it's important to define what the 'Winning Culture' here truly is, before we go on defending it as a positive. I for one could care less about making the playoffs if the team isn't going to put up a serious effort to win in the playoffs, and I think that until this team finally sets it's goal to win a cup, it never will.

So what's the goal here? Making the playoffs? Or winning a cup? Because we all know what it should be.

[BMorrison 7]

^ this, TML I couldn't agree more.

[PistolPete13]

I don't know why the Detroit model or the Boston model are always brought up. I like the way that Anaheim and Chicago have retooled after their cup wins. Neither team had to tank to roll over about 50% of their rosters.

[Baggins]

So what's the goal here? Making the playoffs? Or winning a cup? Because we all know what it should be.

The goal here this season was make the playoffs. Which means having a winning season. Did you believe we'd win the cup this year? I'm guessing not. If we had gut the team would we have won the cup this year? No. So what exactly are you whining about? Which creates more of a winning attitude on the team the 101 point season or the 56 point season? You can't win the cup if you don't make the playoffs. A slim chance is better than no chance at all.

Gut the team and you're years away from making the playoffs and the fans here disappear. Build on the fly and you may have a run in the playoffs but realistically you're a few years away from making a real push. Neither comes with guarantees but a winning season is definitely more fun to watch than wallowing at the bottom of the league. Voice of experience there. I'll take the current plan thanks. I prefer 82 games of entertaining hockey and cheering for the team in the playoffs (regardless of result) than 82 games of pain and watching other teams compete in the playoffs. Just ask Blue Jacket fans if they'd trade their teams record since 2000 for ours. I bet I know what their answer would be.

[5Fivehole0]

Ah yes, 'Winning Culture.' Not that it's anything but corporate pump-up speak, but in the sports world, isn't that just something that needs to be backed up by... Y'know, winning? Team had a winning record, made the playoffs after being predicted to be a bottom feeder this season. I don't think it should apply to continuing mediocrity 2nd in their division(all season pretty much) hardly mediocre., should it? I mean what winning culture are we going on about here? Let's look at the corporate pump-up angle:

Just from a sample corporate self-help website:

Five ways to create a winning culture:

1. Define values and ingrain them in everything you do.

Here I suppose that means valuing regular season accomplishments and making the playoffs above all else. I dunno. Probably could be amped up to winning the cup above all else. Maybe that's the main value here, who knows. I read a lot about just making the playoffs being the goal here though. If the Canucks didn't make the playoffs you would be complaining about how they should have tanked. If the Canucks beat Calgary, you'd still be calling them mediocre because they probably wouldn't beat Anaheim. If the Canucks beat Anaheim you would be complaining because they didn't win the cup. Unless the Canucks won the cup this year, you would be complaining. It's not 2011 anymore, they had a great bounce back season, and had a winning record against play-off teams.

2. Team members, not employees.

That means everyone is on the same page, blah, blah, blah, everyone buying into the same goal. Makes sense. The goal is what matters more of course. But is everyone on the same page? Not sure. I think there are a few players that may not be. At least one has been singled-out by the new regime.

Being on the same page while playing for or organizing a team is huge, you can't go out there and not understand what you teams goals are. Also, there is nothing wrong with setting your goals at the play-offs, that's a good goal, as it's the next step to the cup.

3. Create an environment of trust.

This one's a bit murky here, and it has to do with everyone being on the same page. The environment right now is not primed for trust. How could it be? When you see players leaving and other players coming in during a rebuild phase, then trust cannot be assured. Perhaps when the rebuild phase is complete and the goal is reset to winning the cup, then trust could be built.

You don't understand the politics of sports of teams. The players know they are assets, unless you have a NMC, expect a trade.

4. Set the right goals and constantly raise the bar.

Since it's a process, the rebuild, this makes a lot of sense. But on that note, shouldn't the main goal right now be to accelerate the rebuild? That would make it possible to reset the goal to winning the cup, building trust, getting on the same page, etc. a lot faster.

Whats wrong with setting the par at the the play-offs, then second round, then conference finals, then the cup? It would be exciting hockey. Why would you accelerate the rebuild? You mean go all in? Or do you mean tank? Because tanking does not accelerate rebuilds, its a lengthy process that has years of losing. Vancouver fans already proved they won't pay for a losing team. It's a business.

5. Focus on results and build accountability.

This one is interesting, because while making the playoffs is a goal, achieving that goal may take us farther away from winning a cup, due to the delaying of the rebuild. It's all about the result you want to hold people accountable for. Note that we held Gillis accountable when we missed the playoffs, but isn't what he was doing going to help us out a lot in the long run? He's responsible for getting us pieces we need for the rebuild, which will be needed if we are to achieve what should be the main goal here, winning the cup.

The Canucks, are not, and will not tank, get over it.

I think it's important to define what the 'Winning Culture' here truly is, before we go on defending it as a positive. I for one could care less about making the playoffs if the team isn't going to put up a serious effort to win in the playoffs, and I think that until this team finally sets it's goal to win a cup, it never will.

So what's the goal here? Making the playoffs? Or winning a cup? Because we all know what it should be.

A winning culture is a team like Detroit, they don't purposefully LOSE or ice a team they think will lose to get better draft picks. They ice the best team possible while acquiring draft picks through trades, and drafting correctly. Anaheim and San Jose are winning cultures. Despite them not winning the cup recently, or at all. They stay competitive, especially San Jose. They teach their players to never quit and always go for the win.

Edmonton is a losing culture, their players know losing and that's it. They had such a bad team for so long, they are hungry and are soon to turn it around, but they have been awful since 2006? and even then they were still bad. I don't feel like watching the Canucks lose for 5+ years just so they might maybe possibly have a chance to win the cup.