Ownership and Fans Disconnect.

[48MPHSlapShot]

To be honest, I think our problem is that we have no true projected first-line talent in the prospect pool at all. After the Sedins, it's all players pushing beyond their talent.

Whereas EDM, CGY, BUF, WPG, and every other team that's trying to re-build has legit first-liners coming into their system.

I do believe this can change with one GREAT draft, or one GREAT offseason, but the mentality to spend 6mil for 3 years on a 34 year old goaltender, and 6-7mil on "role players" shows a lack of willingness to suck bad enough to get one of those players the good ol fashioned way, drafting.

I figured I would highlight this part just for sh#ts and giggles.

The day that this organization purposely puts a crap product on the ice in order to get a good pick is the day that my blood stops being blue and green.

[RonMexico]

The disconnect is that fans are largely an ignorant and panicky bunch. Management is not.

I'm ok with that disconnect

Ignorance can't be helped but is it really panic JR?

By now, we all know what this team can do. We've seen virtually the same core trotted out for many years with some changes to the spare parts to no avail. Lot's of hope but nothing much to show for it and many of the players are getting a little long in the tooth.

Many fans want real change. They see many other teams trying to rebuild their teams through youth. You can't argue with the success you see around the league. All you have to do is look at the Canucks first round loss to Calgary. Calgary has turned around their fortunes in a relatively quick sense and it all started when they shipped out Iginla which wasn't that long ago.

Looking ahead to next year, you have to think that teams like Dallas and Colorado will be pushing to get back into the playoffs. Do you really expect much drop off from teams that are younger than the Canucks? Do you think Winnipeg and Minnesota fall off? Calgary might pull a Colorado but that's not a given. I can easily see next year's Canucks suffering a similar fate to SJ; a team that waited too long to move out their aging core and ended up missing the playoffs. Is anyone expecting a huge rebound in SJ? At least they have Couture, Pavelski, Hertl, Burns, Vlasic and Braun to move forward as a new core; which is way further ahead than the Canucks are.

[DrJockitch]

Your initial presumption in your argument is demonstrably incorrect. One bad, hard to watch year and the sellout streak ends. It takes a lot hard work and the very likeable Trevor Linden as well as a playoff push to maintain good attendance.

Vancouver has always been a place where good teams do well attendance wise but poor teams suffer quickly. There is too much going on in Vancouver. You live in Winnipeg in the winter, what else you going to do.

Imagine where the attendance would be if we were as bad as the Oilers or even the Flames in recent years, nowhere near where those teams in much smaller cities has been.

[DrJockitch]

As an addendum, it would help if we didn't have the most expensive average attendance cost in the league. If we charged what Tampa does we would be full every night no matter how bad we were.

[J2Dzilla]

I'm fully on board with the plan.

I would prefer if the team continues to be competitive while infusing youth into the lineup. The change won't happen overnight, but it is better than building a team that is comfortable with losing.

Like Edmonton... you need to show the young guys how to be professional. The more of them their are in any given year the harder it becomes.

[ButcherG]

I would fully support a retool. I don't see dipping down in an off year from bad injuries et al, to get a better pick as a bad thing. Last years draft was very successful with Virtanen and McCann.

Our management is paying the price to develop players in Utica. This is not a Chicago Wolves scenario. The Canucks are trying at all levels now. We need to put more high draft picks into Utica.

The NHL system is set up to dip down and sell at the deadline, if things are not working well. That does not mean I would endorse selling the whole team, but I do see this core is getting older. I do like the Sedins and Burrows. But I would have no issues with Higgins, Bieksa, or Miller being moved for more youth or picks.

I think we need to transition from the older vets to a younger core, but it is important to remain competitive.

[aGENT]

Ignorance can't be helped but is it really panic JR?

Yup.

Everyone was fine with or at least resigned to the plan started last year of being basically a playoff bubble team and slowly developing and adding youth over the next few years as we phase out the previous core/veteran players.

Then the team played a bit over their heads and got expectations raised and now a bunch of fans are panicking that we ended up where (or slightly better than) we were expected to. A playoff bubble team.

We added youth last year and we'll add more this summer. HOPEFULLY, Benning also has plans to start to face-lift the D this summer as well. He's going to continue with the plan of getting younger, bigger and faster. So.... I expect we'll get progressively younger, bigger and faster...

Next year we have expiring contracts of Hamhuis, Bieksa and Vrbata. The year following, Burrows, Higgins and Miller. I'd expect probably at least 1/2 (if not 2/3) of those guys will be moved ahead of their expiring contracts either this year or the next as we bring in more youth. (My money's on Bieksa, Vrbata, Miller and Higgins.)

The team isn't standing still as many of the chicken littles on here seem to believe. And that ^^ doesn't even account for any UFA's we might sign.

Besides, any team with the Sedins (who are not moving anywhere) is going to be too good to tank (never mind how flawed "tanking" is as a game plan). Even if we wanted to, we couldn't.

Change doesn't occur over night.

[Sedintwinpowersactivate]

I think fans need to accept the fact that we will be a bubble team for a while. Unless Horvat, Kassian and Baertchi surprise us next year and play like 1st line players. And Virtanen is rookie of the year. And we acquire an true #1 d man then we could compete for the cup? This is unlikely to happen. We will be on the cusp of making the playoffs again. And if we are way out of it by the trade deadline then Trader Jim will do want needs to be done! Because you get maximum value for vets at the trade deadline and not at the draft! There is no disconnect. We are reaping the fact that we had our chance and failed and our core is no longer in it's prime. For those of you that want to tank... you better be prepared for 5-8 years of missing the playoffs.

[Captain Hindsight]

Lol @ the notion Canucks fans know what they want!

[Frazzy Desjardins]

Linden and Benning both wanted to try this season out with more or less what they had when they started. In the grand scheme of things compared to last year this season was a success, but we are also light years away from the ultimate goal. I would imagine that other than the twins, any other players with ntc's are vulnerable to be asked to be moved. Time to fix things.

[TimberWolf]

And it's all in how you view it...I fixed this part for you:

Watch how other fanbases respond as their teams are eliminated....like night/day. We wait to harshly criticize every single thing rather than appreciate the run for what it was. Teams that are being swept still have people on their feet, applauding their efforts.

Sure, this has been a roller coaster Jekyll & Hyde year but, as I keep saying.....it's not as easy as it looks. Clearly.

Tired of the Debbie Downers that surround this team. I will be back next year, hopeful for whatever changes the powers that be decide upon. Afterall, they're the experts.

Some things I pulled from some other teams forums:

Wild:

"This team probably has too many Americans on it. Needs more Belarussians. The only good ones on the entire team are Parise, Suter and Zucker. Parise's half-Canadian and Suter's 100% BS on the PP, entirely dictatorial about his defence partner (at the expense of the team), obviously dictatorial about his ice-time (at the expense of the team"

"we are so screwed if we don't pick our game up soon. However i will say that if it is not clicking now.. why should it later?? unless you make major player or coaching changes.. we have been scratching at the playoffs for 3 years hardly making it, every year the same crap .. down to the wire... why would it be any different this year. In fact this year we have a higher probability of not making the playoffs"

"Kick him off the team, the other 4 guys on the ice all have a transparency, battling like the goalie does, and goalies get pulled. Why's it that a forward gets to loaf around like that, do nothing but pose all game long in a "close-enough" position, and everyone's talking about how a goalie might get pulled? The forward gets to skate around and watch. Such BS"

Blues:

"Elliot is not a big time goalie. He's a regular season pretender. Hitch has no confidence in him for good reason. He completely stumbled down the stretch and Hitch had no choice. They should have stuck with Halak. They've screwed up two seasons with that idiotic trade for Miller and Ott."

"I think the biggest problem is the losing culture, I'm not saying we need to blow everything up, but the core needs a tweaking. We need fresh blood to bring a more optimistic positive hope to the dressing room."

That's just a quick look and all I have time for but you get the point. Picking apart the team when we lose is what some fans do and while it doesn't make them better fans no does it make those that don't and love unconditionally better fans either.

Nothing wrong with being critical, cheerleading or anything inbetween we are all Canucks after all. Granted there are those that take it to ridiculous extremes on both sides but every faction has a few zealots.

And no, no one here is an expert but no one in the position of GM or coach is beyond criticism either. Or are Torts, Keenen, Gillis, Renny, or the infamous Gordon unquestionable experts as well? Doesn't mean everyone know everything but we discuss what we observe and some of us have observed a losing culture despite claims to the contrary.

[GreyHatnDart]

Its about making the right picks and developing them properly. Vancouver is taking the right approach to developing talent. They aren't rushing kids into the league, they are giving them time to mature and get stronger.

How many of the kids that Edmonton has drafted have suffered some pretty bad injuries in their first year?

Personal opinion, kids should be required to pass a certain strength test before being allowed to play in the NHL before they turn 20. There aren't many of them that are physically mature enough to handle seasoned veterans hammering on them.

Horvat has been an exception, but he is also an incredibly strong player. Even with that, Vancouver didn't just throw him into top 6 service as Edmonton would have done. They gave him 4th line minutes and let him learn and adjust and gain confidence from his success. The end result, by the end of the season, he was arguably our 2nd best center behind Henrik. Another off season of training and working on his first couple of step speed (was really impressed by how his higher end cruising speed has developed), he could really be our #2 center, starting to fill in for what we lost when we traded Kesler.

I don't believe the method of going all youth works. They need established players to mentor them and help them build success.

Great post sir.

[J.I.A.H.N]

I can not think of a successful business model that allows for assets to just age and expire....key word is "successful"

I do know of many businesses that have fired their manager, staff, closed the doors, gutted the building, rebuilt, and hired new staff, and continued to have success.

Yes, in most cases, there was money loss while closed, and money spent, but in the end it was, short term pain for long term gain.

Only in sport can you liquidate asset and then purchase new asset (UFA's) and continue to thrive, but in the end you still have to move aging asset before they rot!

Say what you want, but if we would have liquidated and spent the next 2 years, drafting higher end prospects, and turning over our aging veterans, we would have had a short time in the basement.

To me it is the question of "when" not "IF".

[khay]

I can not think of a successful business model that allows for assets to just age and expire....key word is "successful"

I do know of many businesses that have fired their manager, staff, closed the doors, gutted the building, rebuilt, and hired new staff, and continued to have success.

Yes, in most cases, there was money loss while closed, and money spent, but in the end it was, short term pain for long term gain.

Only in sport can you liquidate asset and then purchase new asset (UFA's) and continue to thrive, but in the end you still have to move aging asset before they rot!

Say what you want, but if we would have liquidated and spent the next 2 years, drafting higher end prospects, and turning over our aging veterans, we would have had a short time in the basement.

To me it is the question of "when" not "IF".

You talk as if though the Canucks are refusing to bring in young players. JB and TL stated over and over again that they will bring up young players and look for trades to acquire players in certain age group etc. We saw Horvat, Kenins, and Vey as young players. We also saw trade for Baertschi and Clendening. What else does he have to do?

I'm watching Calgary vs Anaheim right now and they are playing great as a team. And none of their players are top 5 picks, except for 18 year old Sam Bennett.

[48MPHSlapShot]

Again, I'm saying for the record that the minute that management decides to put a bad product on the ice is the moment when I start rooting for another team. Tanking is unacceptable and pathetic.

[J.I.A.H.N]

48MPH

You kind of left yourself wide open, there, but I understand your feelings. I understand a lot of CDC doesn't agree with me. That is ok.

It is kind of funny how CDC works, some say we need to keep our picks and develop, others say the opposite, but this year we are short our 2nd and 3rd picks, so CDC says trade vets to get them back.

Look we "could" trade our picks and prospects and have a top 10 competing team by trading and upgrading, some would say, we should not have traded fan favorites. Others have a hard and fast rule never to trade the Sedins or Vrbata or Edler, or Tanev or Burrows or Horvat etc.

But we have to trade assets, and move assets, and we may go back a step or 2, but it may be for the best. Were you happy seeing our Canucks out played by Calgary? Because next year, it could be a lot worse, as our vets age 1 more year.

My point is Higgins easily out played Vey this year, and that is a bad thing, as Higgins isn't that good anymore, so just going out and getting any young player isn't the answer. IMO that was a coach wanting a player and JB not having the jam to say no.

And my point really isn't Vey, it is acquiring young elite talent to replace the aging elite talent.........

I suggest trading this player and that player, suggest saying maybe McCann maybe an asset be can do with out and CDC goes wild, but Cassels shut down McDavid tonight, do we need another center right now, when we could be upgrading defense with that asset..........there is a lot of questions here, and I am as scattered as the next, but moving assets is needed, and again that may cause us to take a step back..

But if you are a true fan, you will understand and love them anyways!

Life is hard man!

[BI3KSA-]

I believe he is right in his assumption about the majority .. the problem here isn't benning or anyone else in management . The problem is a greedy owner who cares more about a quick buck than he does winning . Im guessing Daddy has clamped down and that he is actually making the monetary decisions

That bolded line shows how absolute ignorant you are on this subject. Must be easy to sit there and recommend tanking when it might not even work when it isnt your hundreds of millions of dollars that will be lost.

[BI3KSA-]

I can not think of a successful business model that allows for assets to just age and expire....key word is "successful"

I do know of many businesses that have fired their manager, staff, closed the doors, gutted the building, rebuilt, and hired new staff, and continued to have success.

Yes, in most cases, there was money loss while closed, and money spent, but in the end it was, short term pain for long term gain.

Only in sport can you liquidate asset and then purchase new asset (UFA's) and continue to thrive, but in the end you still have to move aging asset before they rot!

Say what you want, but if we would have liquidated and spent the next 2 years, drafting higher end prospects, and turning over our aging veterans, we would have had a short time in the basement.

To me it is the question of "when" not "IF".

The NHL is littered with teams who tried that same thing and did not have a short time in the basement. People act like a full on tank is the only way to win a cup and that if you do full on tank its guaranteed to work, when in reality that is massively far away from the truth.

[BI3KSA-]

It pains me whenever people point to Edmonton as why you shouldn't rebuild.

reason 1. The most dominant teams that have won the cups recently (Chicago, LA) have gone thru full rebuilds to get there.

reason 2. Edmonton just got Mcdavid. so don't write off their rebuild. The biggest problem with their rebuild was incompetent management. With chiarelli in, things should improve.

reason 3. Has anyone who uses the Edmonton example ever been to Edmonton?? I mean seriously.... Im from BC, and I can tell you BC is superior to Alberta. But currently living in alberta, I can tell you that even Calgary beats the hell out of Edmonton.. Edmonton is just a miserable place.. a cold depressing place, where unlike calgarys occasional Chinook it stays cold thoughout the winter. It's downtown is dead, a craphole and a good place to get assaulted/mugged. did I mention its depressing?? Its literally just blue collar jobs, The oilers, and the west Edmonton mall. There is a reason why Edmonton always makes the list of players' no trade lists...

Extremely difficult to build a team in such an environment when nobody wants to come there, and you have to grossly overpay AHL calibre garbage like nikitin 2 year 10 million dollar deals to sign. extremely difficult to build a team in such a environment.

Vancouver is an extremely beautiful/desirable city. vastly superior to anything in alberta and on a different universe then Edmonton.

Winnipeg will face this same problem as soon as the whole new team scent goes away. Winnipeg is a like a smaller, crappier version of Edmonton.

The only top 5 or 10 pick iirc in LA's core, that they drafted, is Doughty. So I'd hardly say a full on rebuild is what built that team.

[khay]

48MPH

You kind of left yourself wide open, there, but I understand your feelings. I understand a lot of CDC doesn't agree with me. That is ok.

It is kind of funny how CDC works, some say we need to keep our picks and develop, others say the opposite, but this year we are short our 2nd and 3rd picks, so CDC says trade vets to get them back.

Look we "could" trade our picks and prospects and have a top 10 competing team by trading and upgrading, some would say, we should not have traded fan favorites. Others have a hard and fast rule never to trade the Sedins or Vrbata or Edler, or Tanev or Burrows or Horvat etc.

But we have to trade assets, and move assets, and we may go back a step or 2, but it may be for the best. Were you happy seeing our Canucks out played by Calgary? Because next year, it could be a lot worse, as our vets age 1 more year.

My point is Higgins easily out played Vey this year, and that is a bad thing, as Higgins isn't that good anymore, so just going out and getting any young player isn't the answer. IMO that was a coach wanting a player and JB not having the jam to say no.

And my point really isn't Vey, it is acquiring young elite talent to replace the aging elite talent.........

I suggest trading this player and that player, suggest saying maybe McCann maybe an asset be can do with out and CDC goes wild, but Cassels shut down McDavid tonight, do we need another center right now, when we could be upgrading defense with that asset..........there is a lot of questions here, and I am as scattered as the next, but moving assets is needed, and again that may cause us to take a step back..

But if you are a true fan, you will understand and love them anyways!

Life is hard man!

I agree that moving assets is absolutely necessary.

For example. Think back to how we got Bertuzzi. We had Linden, whose value was high but was sort of getting lower. Fortunately, it was high enough to get us two pretty good prospects in Bertuzzi and McCabe (and Ruutu). McCabe became part of a deal that got us one of the picks that turned into a Sedin. That's an example of how to move an asset at the ripe time. It was unpopular but it was a good move in hindsight.

Continuing along, Bertuzzi was an asset that turned into Luongo. Another good example of moving asset before they lose their value. But sadly, Luongo turned into just Markstrom and Matthias thanks to Bettman's obsession with punishing those that makes him look stupid coupled with poor asset management by the Canucks.

Yeah, so you are absolutely right. You really need to move these assets before they become stale like Luongo did (but I guess Luongo's value went stale almost overnight because of salary recapture rule).

But here's the problem. We just simply don't have valuable assets that can be traded for other team's valuable assets.

McCann? Can he bring us a top defence prospect, maybe like Haydn Fleury? I guess so if Carolina really wants McCann, but what's so special about McCann that would make Carolina really want him? Especially since Fleury was picked like 7th overall as opposed to McCann's 24th. If Carolina really wanted, they could've picked him at 7th. I'm sure the same reasoning applies to other top prospects. Simply put, the other teams picked their prospects because they liked those guys and would be unwilling to give them up without a compelling reason.

Sedins? You are right that there shouldn't be any player that is off limits but we know that the Sedins are going to retire as Canucks. Given the special circumstances that are surrounding them being inseparable and having to trade both to the same team or they would use their NTC... trading $14 million cap in salary cap era is nearly impossible. You might say, "retain half of their cap." And to that the owners will knock on your door and ask for $7 million dollars. I hope you are rich.

Hamhuis and Edler probably have the highest trade value among our defence. If we can land an elite prospect for one of these players, then that would be great. But can we? Can you say that these players have more value than Kesler? Kesler got us Bonino, Sbisa, and 1st. Can we get another Bertuzzi and McCabe by trading one of these players? And don't forget, both of these guys have NTCs so they decide where they go. I have a feeling that they are not going to get us anything more than what Kesler got us. Would you trade Edler for Bonino, Sbisa, and 1st assuming that we didn't have these players already?

Going back to Haydn Fleury. I guess if we approached Carolina about acquiring Fleury for Hamhuis or Edler, that deal probably will go through. If this is the kind of asset movement that you are referring to, then that is called tanking and this is what Buffalo did this season.

Others? Vrbata can fetch us mid-late 1st rounder, sure. Burrows and Bieksa? Maybe 2nd rounder at best. No one will give up a top prospect for Burrows and Bieksa in the cap era. Higgins and Hansen? Tanev? Lack? Miller? All of these guys are worth at most late 1st round pick. So, no asset that can fetch us sure fire elite prospect.

Horvat? If we are trading Horvat, then it better be a sure NHLer with at least an equal upside. Who? Terravainen maybe? Terravainen may have higher upside in terms of skill but almost everything else, Horvat wins. Player like Terravainen will shine the most if you already have a player like Horvat on your team. For example, Patrick Kane is a great player but playing on a Toewes-less team, would he shine as much as he does now?

It's really hard to place a value on Horvat. On one hand, you have a 215lbs player who plays a heavy game and may become your Bergeron or Toewes. And on the other hand, he might not.

I know one thing for sure. I wouldn't trade Horvat for Terravainen but I would trade McCann for Terravainen, but would Chicago do that trade?

Basically, in the cap era, you need to filter out older players and bring in your own young players. And I think we've seen this process take place this season. Sure we are at least two years late in starting this process.

This process seems slow and hopeless without elite prospect like McDavid, but consider the following.

You mentioned how Calgary outplayed us. If Kesler was still on our team, then we would have had Sedin-Kesler-Horvat-Richardson as our centers. After watching Kesler take all of the defensive draws and winning most of them tonight, I think the outcome might have been very different had Kesler still played for us instead of Bonino.

Note that the only new addition to Sedin-Kesler-Horvat-Richardson is Horvat... who would've thought this was possible? This one "non-elite" prospect Horvat...

So this process, even though we don't have McDavid, it's not too bad. The prospects that we have already are good pieces and we can bring them up. Some of them I'm sure will make big impact like Horvat and some won't. We just don't know yet.

Who knows? Maybe this Virtanen kid could Horvat his way into the lineup next year.