TimberWolf Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 You’re making it seem like not trading Matthias is going to have a big impact on this teams future. Scouting Guru or not, the likely hood of turning that low pick into an NHL player is slim and it was smart for Benning to play the odds. As I said especially with the unknown of how Matthias would step up in playoffs or possibly injuries to the current roster. Every team has players hit UFA. Now every teams has different circumstances but teams all have players go to UFA. It’s not uncommon to have a player go to UFA, it’s not the end of the world. Canucks were in a playoff spot, whether you believed they had a shot or not they were not sellers at the deadline. Should have the Jets traded Frolik even though he was key to them making the post season. They knew he was going to ask for a big raise and likely unsign. This really is a stupid thing to even bring up and people are now just nitpicking. Canucks have 2 players over the 1 million range to hit UFA. Richardson and Matthias. Ducks have 4 players Bruin have 5 Sabres have 2 Calgary has 2 Hawks have 4 Av’s have 3 Stars have 3 DET has 4 EDM has 4 FLA has 4 LA has 4 Wild have 5 MTL has 3 NSH has 5 NYI has 3 NYR have 2 PIT’s has 5 STL has 4 Caps have 6 Jets have 5 I didn’t fill up with gas yesterday even though I knew I was close to empty, Now I have to fill up and the price has went up a couple extra cents. What ever will I do. Seriously this fan base needs to quit whining about pointless crap. Do not act like I think the future is shot. I never claimed that in any way. Every team has different UFA's and different reasons for not signing them and every player is different. In our case with Richardson he's the type that you ride out the contract. In Mathias' case, he's the type you trade while the value is high. It may or may not have an impact (we'll never know now) but in our situation we do not have a second or third round pick right now and that would have been a good way to get one back. That is my only beef with the move (or lack of it) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 You’re making it seem like not trading Matthias is going to have a big impact on this teams future. I could argue the same about keeping him It was a mistake. Was it a huge, franchise-altering mistake? No. But it was a mistake. As I said earlier, it's a notch in the "minus" column. Overall Benning has a lot more pluses than minuses though so I'm not losing sleep over it. And I think his value was high enough to get us a 3rd FWIW which is nothing to sneeze at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chalky Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 You’re making it seem like not trading Matthias is going to have a big impact on this teams future. Scouting Guru or not, the likely hood of turning that low pick into an NHL player is slim and it was smart for Benning to play the odds. As I said especially with the unknown of how Matthias would step up in playoffs or possibly injuries to the current roster. Every team has players hit UFA. Now every teams has different circumstances but teams all have players go to UFA. It’s not uncommon to have a player go to UFA, it’s not the end of the world. Canucks were in a playoff spot, whether you believed they had a shot or not they were not sellers at the deadline. Should have the Jets traded Frolik even though he was key to them making the post season. They knew he was going to ask for a big raise and likely unsign. This really is a stupid thing to even bring up and people are now just nitpicking. Canucks have 2 players over the 1 million range to hit UFA. Richardson and Matthias. Ducks have 4 players Bruin have 5 Sabres have 2 Calgary has 2 Hawks have 4 Av’s have 3 Stars have 3 DET has 4 EDM has 4 FLA has 4 LA has 4 Wild have 5 MTL has 3 NSH has 5 NYI has 3 NYR have 2 PIT’s has 5 STL has 4 Caps have 6 Jets have 5 I didn’t fill up with gas yesterday even though I knew I was close to empty, Now I have to fill up and the price has went up a couple extra cents. What ever will I do. Seriously this fan base needs to quit whining about pointless crap. And just exactly what are you doing? I can see your point, but I agree not trading Matthias was a mistake. The pick we lost for Vey would be really nice to have back, and Matthias was a piece we could have used to get it. Benning should have traded Matthias when his value was highest instead of losing him for nothing. You don't have to agree, this is a forum, it's for discussing different opinions, and the "fan base" (like every fan base) will never all be on the same page....nor should we be. It's OK to question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorvat Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Real hard to tell who's the BPA in our range unless someone falls in which case begs the question why said player would fall in the first place. McCann fell to us at 24 last year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Do not act like I think the future is shot. I never claimed that in any way. Every team has different UFA's and different reasons for not signing them and every player is different. In our case with Richardson he's the type that you ride out the contract. In Mathias' case, he's the type you trade while the value is high. It may or may not have an impact (we'll never know now) but in our situation we do not have a second or third round pick right now and that would have been a good way to get one back. That is my only beef with the move (or lack of it) How do we know he didn't put him out on the market, just to see what his value was. We don't know, perhaps the biggest offer coming back to us was another upcoming UFA, such as Bartkowski. What playoff contention teams were seeking out a player like Matthias, that were also willing to give up a value for him. PIT's, maybe but they already traded a first round pick and made moves on the point, Bruins, lIkely offering bartkowski. Ducks wanted D and Hawks went out and bought Vermette, pred went out and made other big deals.. Seriously what market was there for Matthias, what kind of message does trading a strong piece on the roster for a pick send to the rest of the team. I guess ever Gm in the league made a terrible mistake as all teams have UFA hitting the market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aqua59 Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Mathias was invisible in the playoffs. He was a disappointment down the stretch. We don't know what's been offered for Mathias or what kind of dough he's looking for. Those are 2 factors leading to where the Canucks sit right now . The Canucks cut their losses and move on . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 You're just upset that your man crush on Chychrun will forever be unrequited. Isn't that right, TODesiboy? In fairness to Desiboy, he doesn't repeatedly post half-naked pics of Sanguinetti in his signature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baer. Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Here is a look ahead to the draft with 70 scouting reports, a full mock draft and a bunch of other stuff. Plus it gets updated pretty often. http://lastwordonsports.com/2015-nhl-draft-headquarters/ They have us taking Larsson. With Svechnikov, Boeser, Roy, Harkins still on board. And they dropped Guryanov to 41, when he'll likely be picked in the first round. They also have Barzal 6th. Have to say no to that mock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 I'd prefer a young, big, 18 goal scoring Matthias over Richardson who may kill penalties well, put up 30-40 points last season but is on the decline. We've already got too many veterans, Benning needs to get rid of a lot of them now. His new name is Grenier, and while not as fast, he is more physical, a better play-maker, more consistent, younger, and far cheaper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 what kind of message does trading a strong piece on the roster for a pick send to the rest of the team. I guess ever Gm in the league made a terrible mistake as all teams have UFA hitting the market. You can't have it both ways. Either he was a "strong piece" definitely worth other teams interest (and likely retaining) or he was a decent complimentary but expendable piece that was inconsequential for us to hang on to and should have been moved given his value was arguably high. As for that final comment.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khay Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 "Thinks that it could be a busy year for trades at the draft" - I hope he's hinting at Canucks making a splash at the draft like the previous two. As I expected, it doesn't look like Matthias will be a Canuck next year. Sad now we only have Markstom from the Luongo trade. Also it looks like there will be atleast two prospects making the jump to NHL next year, which is exciting! Really looking forward to the draft! If KB3 is indeed going to get traded, which teams do you think will be interested?? Yep, Bettman sure did a great job to ensure that we get punished for signing Luongo to a 12 year deal. If you think back, the asset genealogy is something like, Linden->Bertuzzi, McCabe, Ruutu McCabe->one of the Sedins (let's say Daniel) Bertuzzi->Luongo->Markstrom, Matthias so Linden->Bertuzzi->Luongo->Markstrom. Markstrom and Daniel are the only two remaining assets derived from 1988 #2 overall pick, Trevor Linden. Assuming that the Sedins retire as Canucks, only thing that will remain from Linden will be what becomes of Markstrom. If KB3 is traded, I don't want to see him in the WCF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awalk Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Meh, around the trade deadline it actually looked like the Canucks could get out of the 1st round. If they hadn't have completely choked against Calgary we may all be talking differently about the Matthias decision. Sometimes you just have to hang on to that player for the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 You can't have it both ways. Either he was a "strong piece" definitely worth other teams interest or he was a decent complimentary but expendable piece that was inconsequential for us to hang on to. As for that final comment.... Not even close, canucks already had him on the roster so we don't have to give up anything to acquire him. Other teams have to determine a value for him if they were truly interested in using him for their team. Both teams looking to make playoffs with the understanding that he's likely going to test UFA, One team has to determine is Matthias worth said value, and vancouver has to determine if said value is worth moving him. Not rocket science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Meh, around the trade deadline it actually looked like the Canucks could get out of the 1st round. If they hadn't have completely choked against Calgary we may all be talking differently about the Matthias decision. Sometimes you just have to hang on to that player for the playoffs. Nope. Wnated him traded before the deadline, wished he had been after the deadline, REALLY wished he had been after the first round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 so Linden->Bertuzzi->Luongo->Markstrom. Markstrom and Daniel are the only two remaining assets derived from 1988 #2 overall pick, Trevor Linden. Assuming that the Sedins retire as Canucks, only thing that will remain from Linden will be what becomes of Markstrom. How about going back to Dale Tallon and seeing what we have now? Trevor Linden retired -- should we have traded him again, just to maintain an eternal asset chain? We've had some pretty good lasting value from that single pick, and still have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awalk Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Nope. Wnated him traded before the deadline, wished he had been after the deadline, REALLY wished he had been after the first round. I know YOU did, I wasn't debating that. But as a manager sometimes you have to make the tough decisions. This time it didn't work out in the Canucks favor unfortunately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awalk Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Matthias not being traded was a minor, understandable and even defendable decision. I think we can all agree Benning is bungling the goaltender situation, and that is a far bigger problem than the Matthias decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desiboynux4lifee******* Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 What's Jim Benning's goal? He should be thinking long term and start moving some of the veterans. This is not rocket science , if anyone listened to team 1040 after game 6, you had over 70 percent of the fan base wanting some of the veterans gone. I tell you, if he doesn't get rid of some of the core then just wow I guess, need to stay in limit with what I type. So yep, wow is the word. Also how can you not trade guys like Bieksa, Hamuis, Higgins ? You pretty much need to, the 2011 story is done we need to move on from the core and get value for this year. What shocks me is he didn't even ask them to waive, then how do you expect to move up in the draft? lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buddhahoodlum Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Love Benning !! I appreciate his nose for talent ! Miller signing was a beauty , it got us into the dance and gave us a shot to win the cup. That's all you can ask for every year, a shot ! Benning will focus on rebuilding the defence and drafting studs.I don't believe Lack is capable of handling starters role. (65 ish games) I would trade Lack and go w. Miller /Markstrom then have Demko in about 4 yrs. Love most of Bennings move except maybe Vey but he is still young and has lots of room for improvement. We went from picking 6th overall to the 6th best regular season in franchise history !! Keep up the great work Jim and Trevor!! What makes you think either Markstrom or Demko are capable of handling a starter role? Based on their huge body of NHL experience? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awalk Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 He said Demko in about 4 years LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.