Do you buy into what management is selling?

[LaBamba]

23 minutes ago, naslund.is.king said:

Never understood the guys all hot for a rebuild and the gm..Do you not realize that Benning was hired by ownership not us?

Benning was never brought here to do a full rebuild and that's obvious. Look at his track record and the history of our team

Ownership doesn't support it, end of story.

 

This makes perfect sense. If you are a guy who is like, "ownership is responsible for this vintage method of building a team, I'm just going to go with the flow and support it regardless" I can respect that. It's the guys who defend the ideology forced down by ownership that drive me crazy.   

[WhoseTruckWasIt]

3 hours ago, LaBamba said:

If that isn't taking something out of contex then I don't know what is. AGAIN, the player for pick value is irrelevant. Taking the pickes over the player is building for the future. Not today, 5 years from today. By doing this you finish lower in the standings and you receive higher picks. 

 

As I pointed out earlier. Benning has traded 8 picks away and drafted 20. We have given up a 40% increase in our prospect pool for basically 3 players. That isn't including all of the picks he could have obtained if he sold some of the pending UFA's. Im not on board with that.

So you're saying it's not about the team we build, it's about the principle?

[harrytoolips]

2 hours ago, LaBamba said:

I don't think any of this is worth 10 extra prospects I'm sorry. Our young roster is poop. We finished 3rd last so quit acting like its some kind of glorious victory. The only one victorious is me, the guy who wants to finish last. 

You must be as SMRT as your avatar looks..if our young roster is poop to you, then obviously trying to explain what we have coming up the ranks compared to Gillis's tenure is pointless..

[WhoseTruckWasIt]

2 hours ago, CanadianRugby said:

Sure.  We gave a 5th and Kassian for a guy we couldn't give away on waivers.  Awful trade from the start.  A past his prime slow skating goon.  It's stupid to just throw away picks.  Hutton was a 5th round pick. 

 

What about the 2nd that was thrown in the Sutter trade.  Based on their career and recent stats (especially playoff stats/results) it's a bad 1 for 1 trade for us.  But also lost a 2nd rounder there. 

I think I know how this went down:

 

Rutherford: "So we got a deal then?"

Benning:  "Wait a sec....I was gonna throw in a second rounder"

Rutherford:  "Seriously Jim?  Yeah, sure".

 

Sounds about right to me.  HE JUST THREW IT IN.  I THINK YOU FIGURED IT OUT.

[WhoseTruckWasIt]

1 hour ago, LaBamba said:

This makes perfect sense. If you are a guy who is like, "ownership is responsible for this vintage method of building a team, I'm just going to go with the flow and support it regardless" I can respect that. It's the guys who defend the ideology forced down by ownership that drive me crazy.   

I am certain that Benning believes in what he is doing.  He doesn't think tanking works.  Honestly, please come up with one thing that indicates otherwise.

[LaBamba]

9 minutes ago, WhoseTruckWasIt said:

So you're saying it's not about the team we build, it's about the principle?

i don't even know what this means so I guess I'll respond with a no. 

[WhoseTruckWasIt]

Just now, LaBamba said:

i don't even know what this means so I guess I'll respond with a no. 

It sounds like what you are saying is, "I'm not against every little thing, just against trading picks", as though the return didn't matter.  I guess what I mean is, if we make it to the conference final, will you think that you were right or wrong?

[LaBamba]

8 minutes ago, WhoseTruckWasIt said:

It sounds like what you are saying is, "I'm not against every little thing, just against trading picks", as though the return didn't matter.  I guess what I mean is, if we make it to the conference final, will you think that you were right or wrong?

The conference final means nothing to me. 

[naslund.is.king]

2 hours ago, LaBamba said:

This makes perfect sense. If you are a guy who is like, "ownership is responsible for this vintage method of building a team, I'm just going to go with the flow and support it regardless" I can respect that. It's the guys who defend the ideology forced down by ownership that drive me crazy.   

I'm not trying to say anyone's ideology is wrong..but for every guy you just described, there's the exact opposite. Whom blame everything on not rebuilding...not saying you personally but people like to blame Managment and that..well if that's the case How's rebuilding going to be anymore of a success? Who's saying they won't mess that up?? In their eyes managment always blow..well to rebuild right...you need alot of things to go right,when everything's going wrong..players are still very much a product of the system no matter how good they are(exceptions yes).

I can't blame an ownership whom have never won..,for going all in on a slim hope instead of a long drawn out,non guarantee rebuild

 

 

 

[Gaudette Celly]

1 hour ago, WhoseTruckWasIt said:

I think I know how this went down:

 

Rutherford: "So we got a deal then?"

Benning:  "Wait a sec....I was gonna throw in a second rounder"

Rutherford:  "Seriously Jim?  Yeah, sure".

 

Sounds about right to me.  HE JUST THREW IT IN.  I THINK YOU FIGURED IT OUT.

Not to mention completely ignoring the fact that we got a 3rd back, and in fact only 9 spots lower in the draft.

 

Sutter, 64th pick

Bonino, 55th pick, Clendening

 

Once again, when the facts do not fit the narrative, they simply ignore them.

[Frikandel]

On July 6, 2016 at 1:31 PM, Warhippy said:

I am 50/50

 

Depending on the rumours of Benning potentially wanting another top 6 winger and the endless comments from industry insiders about management desiring and ownership demanding playoff runs with the twins still here BEFORE they commit to a true rebuild; I am swayed to say nope

 

40+ years of watching us shed depth and skilled youth for shots at the playoffs only to wallow in mediocrity for multiple seasons after has me very worried about more of the same

Well said Warhippy.  I, personally, am "okay" with what management is doing.  We have slowly shifted to a new, much younger core, although they (Horvat, Virtanen, Hutton and Markstrom) are not fully ready yet to lead by example.  Canucks will still go as the new Sedin/Sedin/Erickson line goes.  We still don't have the depth to truly compete this year, BUT I'm not a fan of tanking either.  I have to believe that Sutter will be healthier/better next year, and with another season, the likes of Granlund, Etem and Beartchi will improve to help establish solid secondary scoring.  In 2017/18, with Miller and Burrows gone, you'd think that there would be an opportunity for Boeser to make big club as a 20 year old?

 

2017/18 lineup

 

Sedin-Sedin-Erickson

Beartchi-Sutter-Hansen

Virtanen-Horvat-Boeser

Dorsett-Granlund-Etem

Gudbranson-Hutton

Tanev-Edler

Joulevi-Tryamkin

Markstrom

Demko

 

Looks promising IMO :-)

[WhoseTruckWasIt]

1 hour ago, LaBamba said:

The conference final means nothing to me. 

So in other words, evidence that we had built a contender would not change your view on the one and only way to build one.

[Ted Lasso]

I buy that management is trying to rebuild while remaining competitive.  I'd rather roll the dice with this strategy than disgrace ourself by trying to lose. 

 

Nearly every forward line and defensive pair has a chance to take a step forward next year.

 

I'm on board.

 

[kingofsurrey]

I am not on board.

 

I do not see a single first line forward  on our club that is in prime of their career. 

 

Our top line this year  can get the post game seniors discount at Denny's. 

 

We are going to enter another 5 years of hard times. 

Are you up to it ?

 

I know i am. I love this club.

 

We just need to keep drafting and developing. 

 

These UFA's we are signing ( about to sign ) are only going to delay our rebuild by  taking us out of the top 5 draft position.

Counter productive moves designed to sell a few season ticket packages.....

 

 

 

 

[Gaudette Celly]

1 minute ago, kingofsurrey said:

We are going to enter another 5 years of hard times. 

Are you up to it ?

 

Based on what?  The new core is taking shape, supplemented and led by quality vets.

 

You want to talk 5 years of hard times ahead, go look at Toronto.

[Baggins]

5 hours ago, LaBamba said:

You know you are a hardcore homer when you actually take the time to work out the average games played by a 2nd rounder then take Vey's tweener 100 games and be like "mission accomplished"

Actually the numbers are taken from two separate articles written about second round picks. One article is based on 200 NHL games played, the number required to get an NHL pension, and the other was based on playing 100 NHL games (a lower bar). The results were a 25% playing 200 NHL games or more and 30% managing 100 NHL games. Neither set of numbers has anything to with being a homer  or the quality of the player that exceed 200 games. Vey has already done better than 70% of second round picks. The simple truth is we could have used that pick, waited 5 years, and the odds are had a player that never plays 100 NHL games.

 

4 hours ago, LaBamba said:

To all you BTK's stop downgrading the value of a draft pick while praising your masters ability to draft. It defines contradiction. 

Are are actual percentages "downgrading the value of a pick"? The numbers are the numbers. Benning has done well over the years drafting but not every pick will be a winner for anybody. His eye for talent is unlikely to end at junior players. The same principles apply to assessing AHL and NHL talent.

[LaBamba]

30 minutes ago, Baggins said:

Actually the numbers are taken from two separate articles written about second round picks. One article is based on 200 NHL games played, the number required to get an NHL pension, and the other was based on playing 100 NHL games (a lower bar). The results were a 25% playing 200 NHL games or more and 30% managing 100 NHL games. Neither set of numbers has anything to with being a homer  or the quality of the player that exceed 200 games. Vey has already done better than 70% of second round picks. The simple truth is we could have used that pick, waited 5 years, and the odds are had a player that never plays 100 NHL games.

 

Are are actual percentages "downgrading the value of a pick"? The numbers are the numbers. Benning has done well over the years drafting but not every pick will be a winner for anybody. His eye for talent is unlikely to end at junior players. The same principles apply to assessing AHL and NHL talent.

I'm not sure how many times I need to clarify this but I don't really care about the percentages. Using the pick rather than spending it on a player does 2 things. It leaves a roster spot open for a Gaunce or Grenier to further develop them. Also, by keeping your picks rather than cashing them in on players, you keep your cap lower and your team lower in the standings.  This should give us a better shot at drafting a real player with franchise defining  talent. 

 

Now before you reply with the exact same thing the last 14 people have said to me over the coarse of this thread. Understand that I have seen everything you could possibly counter with and I will continue to not agree with this direction. It's Friday night and I'm sure a stud like yourself has a lot of women to juggle, so go on now, get outta here. 

[Baggins]

1 minute ago, LaBamba said:

I'm not sure how many times I need to clarify this but I don't really care about the percentages. Using the pick rather than spending it on a player does 2 things. It leaves a roster spot open for a Gaunce or Grenier to further develop them. Also, by keeping your picks rather than cashing them in on players, you keep your cap lower and your team lower in the standings.  This should give us a better shot at drafting a real player with franchise defining  talent. 

 

Now before you reply with the exact same thing the last 14 people have said to me over the coarse of this thread. Understand that I have seen everything you could possibly counter with and I will continue to not agree with this direction. It's Friday night and I'm sure a stud like yourself has a lot of women to juggle, so go on now, get outta here. 

Actually I am relaxing the night before my son's wedding. Showing you're assumptions to be about as accurate as your hockey insight.

[LaBamba]

2 minutes ago, Baggins said:

Actually I am relaxing the night before my son's wedding. Showing you're assumptions to be about as accurate as your hockey insight.

Don't hate me because I'm not like you. And congrats, I hope you 2 step your Baulz off. Rest up. 

[Honky Cat]

5 hours ago, kingofsurrey said:

I am not on board.

 

I do not see a single first line forward  on our club that is in prime of their career. 

 

Our top line this year  can get the post game seniors discount at Denny's. 

 

We are going to enter another 5 years of hard times. 

Are you up to it ?

 

I know i am. I love this club.

 

We just need to keep drafting and developing. 

 

These UFA's we are signing ( about to sign ) are only going to delay our rebuild by  taking us out of the top 5 draft position.

Counter productive moves designed to sell a few season ticket packages.....

 

 

 

 

First line forwards do not grow on trees,and when Benning came on the scene,there was little in the way of assets to acquire one (barely a prospect pool and an ageing roster)...If Dubois or the Fins would have been available at this years draft,they would be eventual replacements for the Sedins.......Hopefully Eriksson will rejuvenate them.

 

Why are we in for 5 years of hard times?..In 2017,we get Boeser,Juolevi,and probably Demko on the team.