Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

-Article- Huge if True


CanadianRugby

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, BabychStache said:

What a ridiculous article.

 

 

The Canucks aren't as bad as people are making them out to be. They were without their #1 Dman, there 2C, 1C was hurt, and they had upwards of 5 rookies playing!

 

this year they added a huge snarling Dman, an elite 2 way 30 goal scorer and didn't pull much of anything off the roster. If they stay healthy and the kids progress they will be a better team than the pundits think. My guess is a 104 pt season.

They added Erickson and Gudbranson. They let Vrbata and Hamhuis walk.  

 

Age: Erickson > Vrbata 

Offence: Erickson > Vrbata 

Defence: Erickson > Vrbata 

 

Age: Gudbranson > Hamhuis 

Offence: Hamhuis > Gudbranson (similar)

Defence: Hamhuis > Gudbranson 

 

But only once next season ends can we truly judge whether these were the right moves. Everything is speculation at this point. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Ronalds.Kenins41 said:

They added Erickson and Gudbranson. They let Vrbata and Hamhuis walk.  

 

Age: Erickson > Vrbata 

Offence: Erickson > Vrbata 

Defence: Erickson > Vrbata 

 

Age: Gudbranson > Hamhuis 

Offence: Hamhuis > Gudbranson (similar)

Defence: Hamhuis > Gudbranson 

 

But only once next season ends can we truly judge whether these were the right moves. Everything is speculation at this point. 

Add Grit and Erickson > Vrbata; Gudbranson >>>>>>> Hamhuis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Winter Soldier said:

Such as...?

http://www.thehockeynews.com/blog/gillis-downfall-as-canucks-gm-was-loving-his-players-too-much/

Quote

There’s no doubt the Canucks have issues that run deeper than Gillis. Owner Francesco Aquilini has been rumored to be heavily involved with major team decisions, including the hiring of John Tortorella last summer.

I suppose this is the article from the grassy knoll or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure, but are there any journalists or analysts out there that actually support what the Canucks are doing? Does any of them have anything nice to say? Even our own writers in Vancouver seem to be depressed about the Canucks, always pointing out what we don't have, instead of being supportive. Are we blind as fans or are they blind as writers?

 

I think the Canucks are a decent team, and had a lot of bad luck last year with the injuries. I think the Canucks would've made the playoffs if they stayed relatively healthy. Probably a good thing they didn't, otherwise we wouldn't have Juolevi in the system.

 

I take everything in the news with a grain of salt, but it is annoying to read over and over about how bad the Canucks are, and that our GM doesn't know what he's doing, and the team lacks vision - to rebuild or re-tool or go for it etc. The way I see it, on paper, the Canucks will have a better team this year than they did last year.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, alfstonker said:

And my Toyota beat a Porche 911 with a faulty gearbox. 

When will people acknowledge the kind of season we had last year and how massive injuries, unsuitable replacements and too many inexperienced prospects influenced it?

This is fair.

 

But the injuries heal over the off season. Sutter & Edler for example. Some of the holes filled by unsuitable replacements have been filled.  And the entire prospect pool is more experienced. In some cases hopefully ready, example Tryamkin, Baer, Hutton maybe Jake, to take on bigger roles and be effective.

 

What we also have to consider is a bigger picture item; the Sedin's health. Last year they played through injury, same as Torts year, and we struggled. WD's first year they were fit and we made the dance.  Everything may hinge on how healthy we can keep Danny & Hank?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said:

I'm not sure, but are there any journalists or analysts out there that actually support what the Canucks are doing? Does any of them have anything nice to say? Even our own writers in Vancouver seem to be depressed about the Canucks, always pointing out what we don't have, instead of being supportive. Are we blind as fans or are they blind as writers?

 

I think the Canucks are a decent team, and had a lot of bad luck last year with the injuries. I think the Canucks would've made the playoffs if they stayed relatively healthy. Probably a good thing they didn't, otherwise we wouldn't have Juolevi in the system.

 

I take everything in the news with a grain of salt, but it is annoying to read over and over about how bad the Canucks are, and that our GM doesn't know what he's doing, and the team lacks vision - to rebuild or re-tool or go for it etc. The way I see it, on paper, the Canucks will have a better team this year than they did last year.  

But that's just all media these days.  I think it's more of a reflection of our society and the media is just capitalizing on it.  Negativity and fear, stories based on these two things get more attention in all forms of media than any other topic these days.  And that's pretty sad actually.

 

Writing positive stories or trying to focus on the positive at least would probably get far less attention than what's being written about now, so these folks gotta do what keeps them employed.  Everyone is down on the Canucks, even a lot of the fans believe that pain is coming and the only dispute is the time frame of when it'll happen and for how long.  Truth is the Canucks probably aren't as bad as a lot of people are saying, and aren't as good as others are promoting, but it's kinda boring to take a level headed balanced approach, so pick a side and exasperate your opposition with extreme views! Lol

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said:

I'm not sure, but are there any journalists or analysts out there that actually support what the Canucks are doing? Does any of them have anything nice to say? Even our own writers in Vancouver seem to be depressed about the Canucks, always pointing out what we don't have, instead of being supportive. Are we blind as fans or are they blind as writers?

I think the cause has a lot to do with the fans in Vancouver.  They like to give canucks fans a good troll because they know they will get a good reaction out of it,  reaction equals page views and page views equals revenue. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After so many years being at the top of the pile for Canadian teams (and amongst the best in the entire league), you know there is resentment built up.  Every year the pundits in Toronto and elsewhere talked about their teams making huge strides and the Canucks falling off a cliff.

 

For many many years they were wrong.  They continue to be wrong as their teams have shown zero improvement. 

 

It is not sustainable for the Canucks to be President's trophy winners every year, nor do we have to go through dramatic boom and bust cycles.

 

We have made huge strides in making our defence younger and better to the point where we will have the entire defence in their just hitting their prime for the next 5 years.  Edler is the oldest one by a long shot at 30 and we have his replacement in Juolevi who will almost certainly be ready in perfect timing as Edler fades.  It would be great to trade one of our defensive guys for a more offensive one or finding a true #1 guy (the Tanev+ for Subban would have given us a perfectly balanced D corps for example)... but there aren't a lot of teams with perfect defence and I take ours over that of any other Canadian team at present (Winnipeg is good, but three of their top guys are over 30.  Ottawa has Karlss which is worth a lot but again Phaneuf and Methot are signed to big dollars and term and in their 30's).

 

We have work to do with the top six of our forwards, but we have also greatly increased our prospect pool and depth of younger guys in the bottom half of the lineup.

 

The small misses by management are really overblown.  Look at all the interest Vrbata has generated as a free agent, does that not point to the reality of how impossible it was to trade him at the deadline for any sort of asset?  Sure, trading him away last summer would have been good but no one could predict his precipitous fall and you don't often see GMs trading away 30+ goal scorers.  A very late pick in return for Hamhuis (which is what was offered by all reports), is effectively worthless and most certainly worth less than the mentorship he gave Tryamkin and Hutton for those few extra months.  The young guys were always quick to point out how much he had helped them, even off the ice getting them set up in town and inviting them over for dinner and such.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, snipes2539 said:

But that's just all media these days.  I think it's more of a reflection of our society and the media is just capitalizing on it.  Negativity and fear, stories based on these two things get more attention in all forms of media than any other topic these days.  And that's pretty sad actually.

 

Writing positive stories or trying to focus on the positive at least would probably get far less attention than what's being written about now, so these folks gotta do what keeps them employed.  Everyone is down on the Canucks, even a lot of the fans believe that pain is coming and the only dispute is the time frame of when it'll happen and for how long.  Truth is the Canucks probably aren't as bad as a lot of people are saying, and aren't as good as others are promoting, but it's kinda boring to take a level headed balanced approach, so pick a side and exasperate your opposition with extreme views! Lol

 

 

 

You nailed it perfectly! This x 1,000,000. Been wanting to write something similar for a while. It is indeed a reflection of what's going on in society.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Canucks finished 28th last season,so these jabs are to be expected...Also,when bloggers get the touchy Canuck fanbase in an uproar,they've pretty much hit their intended target.

 

The blog itself was a lot of words,that didn't really say anything.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Ossi Vaananen said:

 

 

What I get from it, Edler is our first choice to move, though unlikely, and real value is in Tanev. 

For sure, but I didn't need to read all of that venom to be told something I think most Canuck fans that have a working brain can figure out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Honky Cat said:

Canucks finished 28th last season,so these jabs are to be expected...Also,when bloggers get the touchy Canuck fanbase in an uproar,they've pretty much hit their intended target.

 

The blog itself was a lot of words,that didn't really say anything.....

Yeah, the bolded was my issue with the piece. I couldn't care less about tone or negativity if an article is well written and has good content. I actually like reading a variety of perspectives on this team (and any topic really), so long as it is intelligently written.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So... Puck Daddy has been a major supporter of the Canucks for many years. As an example of this, I remember when others were bashing the twins, he was pumping their tires. When the rest of Canadian media was saying that the Canucks are the most hated team in Canada (and even the NHL), he was relatively outspoken about his love of the Canucks.

 

Imho, his views are not dissimilar from a lot of the long-time posters here who have been suffering with the Canucks for decades and who fell madly in love again during that creatively brilliant Cup contending run from the 2008 to 2013 seasons and who long to see those years again. He is not comparing this year's Canucks to last year's, but instead, he's comparing them to Cup-winning teams and finding them lacking in talent and youth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

Yeah, the bolded was my issue with the piece. I couldn't care less about tone or negativity if an article is well written and has good content. I actually like reading a variety of perspectives on this team (and any topic really), so long as it is intelligently written.

So you must LOVE reading my posts. B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, CanadianRugby said:

Puck Daddy doesn't like Benning. 

https://ca.sports.yahoo.com/news/huge-if-true-how-will-the-canucks-get-a-scoring-winger-152749226.html

 

Huge if True: How will the Canucks get a scoring winger?

 

For some inexplicable reason, the Vancouver Canucks continue to pursue a Jay Feaster-like pursuit of “going for it.”

In this case, as in the case of the Calgary Flames several years ago, the “it” is merely making the playoffs, something more than half the teams in the league do annually. And while making the playoffs is therefore no great shakes, nor really any indicator that a team is even all that good, the Canucks still feel like they’re some ways away from even being at that point.

To that end, GM Jim Benning has recently undertaken the task of beefing up his club’s defense and trying to bolster its offense simultaneously. Benning traded picks and a promising young former first-rounder for Erik Gudbranson in May, publicly admitted to being in on the P.K. Subban trade market (and getting a tampering fine as a result), and then signing Loui Eriksson on July 1.

A few other depth players were signed as well, and Chris Higgins bought out just before the free agency period, but that’s about it in terms of changes to the roster that finished third from the bottom of the league last year.

The team’s problem (in this area, anyway) is that for a club with this bad of a roster, they Canucks aren’t exactly swimming in cap space. Right now General Fanager has them at less than $3.48 million, which isn’t enough to add much of anything to the cause.

So instead, Jim Benning understands that if he wants to add some extra top-six help on the wing, he needs to make trades to do so. Because if he doesn’t, he understands that Sven Baertschi probably isn’t up to the task.

“We’ve been talking to some teams and it would be a hockey trade,” Benning told the Vancouver Sun. “The first part of free agency was guys signing and the second layer is going to be teams wanting to move contracts or bodies. Teams know what we’re looking for and we’ll see how it goes.”

Some names have already been mentioned in certain circles who the Canucks could target, but you’ll never guess what they are…

 

The Rumor

That’s right: Nothing concrete, and highly speculative.

Let’s have a at The Hockey News’s take on the situation first. The Canucks’ current top-six is probably something like Sedin-Sedin-Eriksson and Baertschi-Sutter-Hansen, and Benning rightly believes that’s not good enough to compete with most teams in the Pacific (probably not even Edmonton at this point, even after the Taylor Hall trade).

Benning wants to add a “proven scorer with some grit” (don’t we all?) and that’s not easy to find without taking on a liability contract or giving back a player that provides significant value at his price point. So who does The Hockey News suggest?

Gustav Nyquist and Tomas Tatar from Detroit, Scott Hartnell from Columbus, Chris Kunitz from Pittsburgh, and Evander Kane from Buffalo.

And if that feels a lot like it’s just picking some names out of the “rumored for a trade hat” that’s because it probably is. As far as Nyquist and Tatar — neither of whom I’d categorize as necessarily “gritty” — go, it’s worth noting that well-connected people in Detroit think Ken Holland will deal at least one forward at some point this summer, but that while it’s a position of strength for the Wings, they’d probably only do it for a higher-end defenseman. Which is something that Benning doesn’t really have at hand for his own team, let alone someone else’s.

Hartnell certainly fits the bill, though, and Columbus has allegedly been looking to deal him since at least last year. With that contract, it’s easy to see why. Now, it’s worth asking a lot of questions here, including, “Would Hartnell waive his no-move to go to Vancouver?” But he’s exactly what the Canucks seem to be targeting “perfectly good at what he does, and on the wrong side of 30.”

As for Kane, well, that’s a lot of money for a guy who might be headed to his third club in as many years, and who apparently has plenty of trouble with the law.

If Benning is indeed “going for it,” doesn’t Hartnell seem like the logical jumping-off point for any trades here?

 

Who’s Going Where?

So here’s the big question on any Canucks trade: What is Benning willing to give up that anyone would want?

The answer probably is on the blue line, at least in terms of players who would fetch the value necessary to get a top-six winger. After all, if Adam Larsson is enough to get you Taylor freaking Hall — pretty close to a top-six winger in the entire league, let alone on any one team — the market is just screwed-up enough to get you almost anyone you want if you can offer value.

Some speculation says the Canucks might be willing to move on from Alex Edler, once a very good defender in the league who is coming off a broken leg suffered late last season. Edler, a left-shot defender, is also 30 years old and signed for three more years with a $5 million AAV but $16.5 million owed in actual money. The all-important “bonus” money in his contract is no longer an issue. That’s all worth noting given where the league is headed.

But 30 and coming off a broken leg? Nah, probably not too many takers there.

Meanwhile, there’s basically no way there’s a market for Luca Sbisa, right? And the Canucks are probably all set with the idea of trading a good young defender like Ben Hutton, or a younger, upside-ier guy like Nikita Tryamkin (he’s 6-foot-8 for crying out loud).

So the only other guy on the blue line who might be movable, and who probably does fetch you a solid price, is Chris Tanev. And Jason Botchford says it’s probable that the Canucks have at least looked at the possibility of trading him.

 

The Implications

Yeah, I mean, the Canucks need help up front, but if they trade Edler — who wasn’t very good last season even before getting hurt — that probably doesn’t end up affecting them too much. If it’s between trading him or Tanev, to me there’s not even a question. Edler is older, more expensive, and worse.

Tanev is one of the best shot-suppression defenders in the league and generally outperforms a team that, admittedly, isn’t very good to begin with. Over the last three seasons, his relative effect on adjusted shot attempts against is in the same neighborhood as Marc-Edouard Vlasic and Oliver Ekman-Larsson.

He’s ranked seventh in the league in this regard. And when it comes to relative expected goals-for, he’s third behind only Vlasic and Anton Stralman. This is over a three-year period. So while Tanev is basically a no-offense defenseman (12 goals and 43 assists over three years), even if he’s a right-shot guy, this is the kind of shutdown defender teams should be targeting left and right.

If the Canucks are this desperate to add scoring, and it costs them Tanev, they’ll add goals but probably give up more as well. It’s a real cut-off-your-nose-to-spite-your-face move from where I sit.

They’d be much better off seeing if there’s a buyer for Edler.

 

This Is So Huge, If True: Is It True?

On a B.S. detector scale of 1-5, with one being the most reasonable and 5 being the least:

The Canucks are certainly desperate to fulfill ownership demands of making the playoffs at least one more time before the Sedins sail off into the sunset, but to what end, and at what cost?

The Canucks trade for a top-six winger:

 

poop

 

(It’s far more likely than not, but nothing is guaranteed given what they could offer in trade.)

The Canucks lose either Tanev or Edler in that trade:

 

Screen Shot 2016-07-21 at 10.44.48 AM

 

(Basically the only chips they have to give away, unless they dip into the prospect pool instead.)

The Canucks miss the playoffs anyway: 

Screen Shot 2016-07-21 at 10.45.34 AM

 

(I mean come on.)

Wow. That dude must be real fun at parties.

 

Debbie Downer with first wold problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main difference between Edmonton and Toronto is that Edmonton knows they're terrible. Toronto is stuck on their high horse, and has been for so long that it won't change. Who is Toronto to tell us how to build our team?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly I don't care what articles say. Authors are just doing their job and what is asked of them. Our Canucks are a well managed team. Although some moves have been questionable like Shink deal, we've done our job on the draft floor. We will be a contender with the additions of Guddy and Eriksson. Who knows maybe even Juolevi can make the team and I won't be surprised

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Qwags said:

The main difference between Edmonton and Toronto is that Edmonton knows they're terrible. Toronto is stuck on their high horse, and has been for so long that it won't change. Who is Toronto to tell us how to build our team?

I am pretty sure Puck Daddy is not out of Toronto, they are U.S based.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, vinny_in_vancouver said:

So... Puck Daddy has been a major supporter of the Canucks for many years. As an example of this, I remember when others were bashing the twins, he was pumping their tires. When the rest of Canadian media was saying that the Canucks are the most hated team in Canada (and even the NHL), he was relatively outspoken about his love of the Canucks.

 

Imho, his views are not dissimilar from a lot of the long-time posters here who have been suffering with the Canucks for decades and who fell madly in love again during that creatively brilliant Cup contending run from the 2008 to 2013 seasons and who long to see those years again. He is not comparing this year's Canucks to last year's, but instead, he's comparing them to Cup-winning teams and finding them lacking in talent and youth.

Puck Daddy isn't a person; there are a bunch of writers who contribute. Well, for the most part I should say "writers". They have supreme twitter embedding skills, put it that way.

 

Without clicking on this one (I stopped giving them that quite awhile ago) I'll go ahead and wager that this is by that Ryan Lambert guy. All that poop gives it away.

 

2 minutes ago, ice orca said:

I am pretty sure Puck Daddy is not out of Toronto, they are U.S based.

NYC I believe. Their lead writer, Wyshynski, seems almost to be a league employee. A lot of the official NHL statements and stuff go directly from Daly to Wysh.

 

11 hours ago, drummerboy said:

Jesus man.  

Why do these writers all hate the Canucks so much?

I don't know if it's connected but their general stance on the Canucks seemed to go downhill around the time that Harrison Mooney (Pass it to Bulis) got the boot from Puck Daddy after getting all skeevy with some female hockey bloggers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...