For Draftists/TankNation Only: What's a Realistic Well-Thought Out Plan for Next Few Years?

[oldnews]

8 minutes ago, kingofsurrey said:

 

Canucks need more organizational depth in pretty much all positions.   Secret is to increase our number of draft picks by moving a few pieces at the TDL.

 

Growing up on the sometimes  cruel streets of Surrey Central has tought me  the importance of honour  / integrity / and the will to win.

Canucks are moving in the right direction. I congratulate our management.  Now it is time to finish the job.  

 

We need a Jim Nill or a Ron Delorme in our lineup......

 

 

Now there's a welcome change of tune.

There are more ways to add depth than assuming we'll be sellers at the deadline though - and being sellers this year and hoping to land picks in an expansion summer is probably part pipe dream, part wishful thinking.  They may be able to rent a Miller or Burrows assuming they fall out of the playoff race (which if our D keep dropping like flies is a very distinct possibility despite the excellent showings recently) - but significant moves - involving pieces that might need to be protected, imo will be very difficult to make without taking a hit on the player's value, which may not make chasing picks in deals worthwhile. 

I don't see them sustaining a playoff pace with 1 of their top 4 in the lineup - but whichever way this season goes they are indeed headed in the right direction and have gotten a great deal of the initial rebuilding work done.

Say what you want about the prospect pool - teams like Edmonton, Toronto, Calgary - the other Canadian franchises that people woo over their players - those teams have their best prospects already in their lineups - straight into the NHL - whereas the Canucks have guys like Juolevi, Demko, Boeser on the way - something to keep in mind regarding the boost these teams could get from outside in the next year or two.

 

But I have to point out the irony of wanting more picks and naming Delorme in the same post.  Most people here have ripped the Canucks drafting under Delorme.

I know you're referring to the lineup and not the scouting cast, but, still, there's irony there.

As for the toughness, it's still a work in progress, particularly when you lose a few of your toughest players long term.  I think they're going to have to ride it out for the time being but I highly doubt that's not on Benning's radar.

[hearditall]

1 hour ago, CeeBee51 said:

or a Tiger Williams or Gino Odjick or Jack McIlhargey or Harold Snepst or Stan Smyl.... The list is long but it's pretty much all in the past.

Fraser, Diduck, Brashear, Cox..,

 

[oldnews]

23 minutes ago, hearditall said:

Fraser, Diduck, Brashear, Cox..

Canucks have definitely had some toughness over the years.

 

For me, this is one of the most signature moments of team identity of the past:

 

 

 

I don't mind the shift in the Gillis era to rolling without an enforcer - something that was initiated in large part by the 'Detroit model' - Gillis was open about his modeling after and regard for the Wings - and the Babcock era Wings pretty much initiated the trend towards not dressing an enforcer.

 

I also imagine Gillis may have regretted it after the Boston series.  Hence the acquisition of the next guy to step into that gap (aside from Dale Weise of course):

 

 

And the heir heavyweight of this management group:

 

Without Gud and Dorsett - not the toughest of lineups - just have to ride it out for the time being.

 

[J-23]

57 minutes ago, hearditall said:

Fraser, Diduck, Brashear, Cox..,

 

Now that, is a good hockey fight.

[hearditall]

11 minutes ago, J-23 said:

Now that, is a good hockey fight.

 

[J-23]

Just now, hearditall said:

 

Now that, is a quick hockey fight .

[hearditall]

 

 

 

 

Couple old good ones I remember off the top off my head.

[J-23]

10 minutes ago, hearditall said:

 

 

 

 

Couple old good ones I remember off the top off my head.

The best part about fights back in the day was they would get straight to business, by throwing fists and there was no holding back....

[IBatch]

10 hours ago, kingofsurrey said:

 

I thought the canucks had one of the best prospect pools of any NHL club....  LOL   as  thats what @sOiLeD  News told me 

Prior to the start of the year Vancouvers prospect pool was considered middling..Up from dead last from a few years ago.  Interested to see how we will rank as prospects continue to turn into bona fides ala Stetcher and Tryamkin ( who at the start of last year was considered our seventh best prospect and didn't crack the top 100 legaue wide).  Uticas problems have something to do with the youth injection and injuries with the parent club I'm sure.

[terrible.dee]

On 11/1/2016 at 7:54 PM, janisahockeynut said:

Drastic remodeling = Drastic moves

 

Sam Reinhart is a 3rd line center in Buffalo right now. Buffalo having Ryan O'Reilly and Jack Eichel, can afford to move Reinhart if the return works for them. The question what is the return? The good thing about Sam is he is a 2nd year player and he has shown success in the NHL already. 

 

Would anyone take ...........Reinhart, Kane...........for ...........Horvat and Virtanen ?

 

Personally, as much as I love Bo, he doesn't look to be an elite center, which I think Reinhart has the potential to be, and I think Virtanen is a 3rd line player for the most part. I also think this gives us more options going into the next 2 years, because we are not forced to look for that #1 center, or #1 dman, or first line winger, we just take what is up and fill in. I also think it is way easier to find that 2nd line center, either through the draft or free agency.

 

Yes we take a step back, and yes it hurts, but we get the best player in the trade, and although there is risk, Kane has alot of potential, and he is worth the risk, as was Kassian in Edmonton. 

 

I would also like to get Michael McCarron out of Montreal, which may mean another drastic move, so I would offer the following....................

 

Tanev, Jordan Subban and 2017-3rd..............for ........McCarron, Noah Juulsen and 1-2017 2nd rounder and 1-2018 2nd rounder

 

Lots of moving pieces and again, there is risk, but at the end of the day we have filled our roster with young players and increased tenacity, and increased our chances of a proper tank and prospects.

 

                         2018-2019 Roster                                                                                 Prospects/Picks

 

    Kane               Reinhart             Broeser                                                       2017 1st (Van) (1st to 4th)

Grandlund            Sutter                Erikson                                                       2017 2nd (Van) (31st)

 Baertschi           McCarron           Hansen                                                       2017 2nd (CBJ) (34th)

    XXX                 Gaunce                XXX                                                          2017 2nd (Mtl)  (56th)

                                                                                                                         2018 1st (Van)  (1st to 4th)

                Juolevi               Stecher                                                                   2018 2nd (Van) (31st)

                Hutton              Gudbranson                                                             2018 2nd (Mtl) (56th)

             Briseboise            Tryamkin                                                                 2018 3rd (Van)  (61st)

 

                          Markstrom

                             Demko

 

Now when you look at the line up, you are missing Hank, Danny, Edler, and Miller which equals = $25,000,000 + $2,400,000 from this year + rise in Cap? = A lot of money for upgrades, and we still didn't trade the Sedin's and we still have a chance somewhere along the line to move Edler, Hansen, Sbisa, Dorsett, and Miller somewhere along the line for additional picks.

 

This also does not include any of our late picks that could develope (Lockwood?McKenzie?Neill?Candella?Gaudette?)

 

My names Jan and I am a Tanker!

 

 

 

 

 

 

No No NO

 

iif you trade Horvat then we have the same problem.....you need TWO high level centers to win a cup

[terrible.dee]

14 hours ago, IBatch said:

Ugh.  Double ugh.  To all those that wish we just suck and suck and suck enough to draft our star players.  Do some research.  Check with experts.  Read what players have to say about this. And find out that in the history of this league the idea of tanking as a strategy is just ludicrous.  Find out how Buffalo and Edmonton played down the stretch.  Look into Mario Lemieux.  Tanking is myth not a strategy it is never going to happen so let it go.

1

 

 

seriously, do you know anything at all about hockey or the NHL?

 

PENGUINS : tanked/ Lemieux/ 91.92 cup winners

RANGERS: tanked/ Leech/ 94 cup

Colorado : tanked/ Sakic Forsberg, and too many others to mention, 96, 2002 champs

Detroit: tanked: Yzerman, Premix traded for Shanahan 97, 98, 2002, 2007 Stanley cups

Tampa tanked Lecavalier  2004 cup

Carolins: tanked/ Justin Stall Rod Brindamour via trade for Primeau  2006 cup

Penguins Sidney Crosby, Malkin, MAF ect. ect. 2008 2013 Stanley cup 

Blackhawks tanked Taves Kane 2010 2012 20016 Stanley cups 

Bruins tanked Bergeron Seguin via trade for Kessel 2011 champs

 

In fact the ONLY teams who have won cups without tanking for stars in the last 30 plus years have been the Devils and Canadians

 

You officially have NO idea what you are talking about

 

 

[CeeBee51]

There's a difference between tanking and being bad you know.  Guess you don't actually.

[IBatch]

3 hours ago, terrible.dee said:

seriously, do you know anything at all about hockey or the NHL?

 

PENGUINS : tanked/ Lemieux/ 91.92 cup winners

RANGERS: tanked/ Leech/ 94 cup

Colorado : tanked/ Sakic Forsberg, and too many others to mention, 96, 2002 champs

Detroit: tanked: Yzerman, Premix traded for Shanahan 97, 98, 2002, 2007 Stanley cups

Tampa tanked Lecavalier  2004 cup

Carolins: tanked/ Justin Stall Rod Brindamour via trade for Primeau  2006 cup

Penguins Sidney Crosby, Malkin, MAF ect. ect. 2008 2013 Stanley cup 

Blackhawks tanked Taves Kane 2010 2012 20016 Stanley cups 

Bruins tanked Bergeron Seguin via trade for Kessel 2011 champs

 

In fact the ONLY teams who have won cups without tanking for stars in the last 30 plus years have been the Devils and Canadians

 

You officially have NO idea what you are talking about

 

 

Spend some time and read some books.  None of those teams tanked...They were just bad teams and drafted well. The only exception is possibly Lemieux but even those teams argue that they did not intentionally tank.  No team in the history of the has tanked on purpose.  Go ahead and have your fantasy ideas about it

 Again do some research.

[westvandude]

So the idea behind (at least my) tanking & drafting isn't to tell the players to suck or use the wrong tactic to lose on purpose so you can draft high.. the idea is that if you don't see yourself contending (i.e. being the top 4-6 teams in the league) then you should change your focus to be a contender in the future. You then make sure you avoid giving big contracts to older guys who aren't going to be a key piece in that future contending team, and start accumulating young talent and drafts, and play these young guys in main roles. What happens then is your young players are probably gonna suck for a while, hence the inadvertent tanking which results in a high draft pick. But if your young talent plays good enough to make the playoffs or just miss, you don't get upset because this is the core of your future team, and shows you're that much closer to being the contender.

 

Case in point, as a draftist, I'm happy with our current performance because the main contribution is from our young guys who will be part of our future contender team. If they didn't play good enough and we tanked to get a high draft pick, I'd also be happy with that. Again because it keeps the team on the path of being a future contender. 

 

What makes me unhappy would be to go and get a bunch of rental/old guys and give up future assets, just cuz we can maybe make the playoffs. So the only thing that would worry me about this current canucks winning streak is if the ownership put that kinda pressure on the management at the trade deadline (cuz I'm sure management themselves aren't stupid enough to do that just for a round of playoffs).

 

Some examples of things that make me unhappy:

- the Eriksson contract (what he brings in 3 years vs the $6M cap hit isn't gonna help us much in that future contender team)

- playing Miller way more than Markstrom because we can maybe make the playoffs and Miller is hot! This is only an issue if it is slowing Markstrom's development into being our #1 in that future contender team; also if the current run helps fetch a higher return if we are going to trade Miller, then I'm happy with that as well

- holding on to expiring assets that can only help the team now (like Hamhius last year) instead of getting ANYTHING that would help in that future team, even if it's a tiny help in the form of a 3rd/4th round draft pick

- or winning a lot of games by getting lucky where you clearly aren't playing good enough to deserve the win, which means you're not going to get a draft pick appropriate for you level of crappiness

[westvandude]

Interesting to see if any of these thoughts and suggestions come to fruition in the next 8 days! Please don't disappoint us again....

[stawns]

On 09/01/2017 at 10:09 PM, hearditall said:

 

he was my favourite Canucks at the time.  He was a beast against Chicago in the 82 run.

[Gurn]

On ‎2017‎-‎01‎-‎10 at 9:47 AM, IBatch said:

Spend some time and read some books.  None of those teams tanked...They were just bad teams and drafted well. The only exception is possibly Lemieux but even those teams argue that they did not intentionally tank.  No team in the history of the has tanked on purpose.  Go ahead and have your fantasy ideas about it

 Again do some research.

Buffalo, going after McDavid.

[MikeyBoy44]

On 10/01/2017 at 10:47 AM, IBatch said:

Spend some time and read some books.  None of those teams tanked...They were just bad teams and drafted well. The only exception is possibly Lemieux but even those teams argue that they did not intentionally tank.  No team in the history of the has tanked on purpose.  Go ahead and have your fantasy ideas about it

 Again do some research.

I think you mean no team in the history of the nhl has admitted to tanking on purpose.

[TheGuardian_]

On ‎11‎/‎1‎/‎2016 at 4:39 PM, westvandude said:

This is only for those who consider themselves fans of tanking for high drafts (if this is not you, please don't waste your own time and ours with lame one liners)

 

I love reading well-thought out analysis... and considering the Canucks' rough start and all the predictions of where we are to end up this season, I wanna see what you guys think of a good plan for the next few years considering our needs and the prospects coming up that we could draft from, and potential realistic trades.

 

Here's a link to next draft's top prospects to aim for: http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/juniors/sportsnets-2017-nhl-draft-prospect-rankings-october-jeff-marek/

 

Looks like the top 4 are C and D, which arguably not what we'll need for our future top lines. And realistically, it's hard to aim that high anyways. 5 to 7 are RW and LW, which is a good place to aim for. 

 

So basically, please tell us if you have a well-thought out plan that includes:

- Realistic assumptions (so no when we finish last and get #1 pick...)

- Comprehensive analysis (includes drafts, trades and signings)

- Assumption that we are going to be bad for next 2 seasons and finish bottom 5-10

 

Thanks!

Again, Tanking is something GOOD teams do to dive in the standings, this is no longer a good team, they are trying as hard as they can to stay off the bottom.

This team is playing as good as they can, so if you mean tanking when referring to this team, then that would be playing prospects now to see if previous evaluations are accurate, in that I am in favour.

 

In that form, with this team, then they should start playing the team's prospects to see what they have, but they won't because it is easier to sell the "hope" that the prospects are better than they really are.

 

Because of the new drafting rules and drafts that aren't showing franchise or super star type players, at this time, the team will have to bite the bullet and trade for a couple or at least one, star player as well as clear enough cap space to sign a top level star player, not another Eriksson, but spend the same type of money (8 million a year) for a player like Taveras.

 

If the team has THE GOALIE, as shown, defence can be found, then suffer to sign goal scorer's, not guys that pop 20 goals as season, those SHOULD be 3rd liner's or marginal 2nd liners. Henrik rarely scores 20 goals a season, so it isn't just goal scoring but true first line players.

[Nucker 67]

Tanking is no longer a smart move. Picking order isn't guaranteed anymore, thanks to the Oilers for abusing this way of getting a 1st overall.