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

[fan petition] please rebuild this team


Ted Lasso

Recommended Posts

On ‎2016‎年‎11‎月‎15‎日 at 11:56 PM, LaBamba said:

 

I like you but not this. This is garbage.

 

Yeah, you sound a jolly good bloke yourself. An honest league, world peace, & daily winking lasses, so we can all go home happy. Everyone deserves kindness, HONESTY, courtesy & happiness. Perfect world, & all that jazz...

 

- No Cdn Champs since '93

- Rabid fanbases, with teams that'll spend

- Shyte reffing, & DPS rulings that defy description

- Opaque rev-sharing BS. Who knows all the pesos they funnel south?

 

This is a crooked, billion $ biz. If you, or any/all CDC'ers choose to believe it/buy in, it's certainly your perogative, & there's no issue in that. "Why do I come here?"(inevitable ?, which usually follows). Chalk it up to a hobby since childhood(street/ice hockey), & largely nostalgia..interest in Nuckers since 70's.

 

Personally, feel I've been around long enough to know a rigged deck, when I see/smell it. I DON'T get involved in rigged decks. Offer me 1st class tix/primo hotel in Vegas..free. Sorry, out of principle I'd ask you donate that elsewhere. I'm a stupidly-stubborn human being. 80-95% of the shyte surronding us is stupid & plastic. Reject it, or embrace it.

 

But acknowledge IT for what it is.

 

Disappoints me very much(last 25 yrs of this league). I remember youth(70's, 80's) when Cdn/US teams were on level-footing. Lots of folk get pi**ed when I suggest it, but THOSE days are long-gone.

 

Cheers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/15/2016 at 0:13 PM, Baggins said:

 

Both Chicago and Pittsburgh sucked for five years before getting their 2 big stars. Edmonton and Toronto have sucked for a decade. Tell me they had quick turnarounds. There are no shortcuts. I'll also point out 7 of last seasons top 10 point producers were not top 3 picks. How has it worked for Columbus, Arizona, Buffalo, and Winnipeg/Atlanta? Any quick fixes there? They've cleaned house more than a few times. LA, Boston and Detroit didn't tank for their cups. Maybe there's more than one way. Maybe there's no way that comes with any guarantees. Maybe it actually has more to do with good management and patience.

I agree with you Baggins and I disagree with you.......Bang on with Chicago and Pittsburgh............

But as you pointed out......it took 5 years to rebuild, with good management, not 10 years, as some have suggested it will take

 

But you can not compare Chicago and Pittsburgh with Edmonton and Toronto, as the difference is that, and it has been said many times, Toronto and Edmonton did not have good management......now in saying that, look what happens within 2 years or less, with both franchises, after they stop dickin around and hire a good management team...and I am including Toronto, as they are moving quickly into being a competitive team. 

 

Started by moving out vets for picks..........................and I am not talking about their top 3, but their depth on the farm, which has improved in a very short time

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

So Canucks Army claiming today that Benning turned down an offer of San Jose's 2015 9th overall pick for Ryan Miller.

 

And they're not presenting it as a rumour but as fact:

 

 

 

http://canucksarmy.com/2016/11/16/6-ways-the-canucks-have-whiffed-on-their-attempt-to-rebuild-on-the-fly

 

When questioned in the comments section on the source for this information, the response was as follows:

 

 

 

 

Hard to know how strong the source is but shocking stuff if true. And while I know many people on here consider CA "the enemy" (and I have questioned their editorial slant myself numerous times), it's worth noting they are fairly well connected, have several former writers now working on NHL staffs around the league, and when they've really stuck to their guns on a scoop, they've actually tended to be proven right.

 

The recent example of CA sources holding up being when JD Burke announced the Carcone signing, based on an inside source, and then nothing happened. People mocked him mercilessly but he repeatedly said his source was good and that the signing would happen. Eventually the announcement came, confirming that Burke was correct and his source was good.

 

I only bring that up because this Miller "scoop" is coming from JD Burke again and is based on another source that he's sticking with even though no one else in the media has reported the information. The CA writer today (Jackson McDonald) asked Burke's permission to report the information as fact and not merely rumour or speculation. And Burke agreed to that request.

 

Which certainly makes a person wonder if the information might actually be accurate on this story.

 

And if that's the case, all I can say right now is wow. 

 

We turned down a Cory Schneider level return for Ryan Miller? 

 

Wow. :blink:

I would have traded Miller as fast as I could answer the phone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said:

I would have traded Miller as fast as I could answer the phone.

if Zacha was gone, Rantanaan is who I would have tabbed. No guarantee he, as opposed to Jake, is going to be the big sniping winger we currently want?

 

But the odds are good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Fozzy said:

Yea I look forward to another 6mil a season spent on another Loui Eriksson.

I like Benning, but starting to think he would make a better director of scouting. Some of the moves though, sound like Ownership is making the executive decisions. Jake being up on the big club even though Willie clearly thought he wasn't ready. Maybe Linden wanted Jake in Utica and FA wanted him here. This signing you speak of reeked of a bad signing when I first heard 6x6.

 

If the Miller for a 9th deal is real and they declined it...baffles my mind.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the owners did care about revenue then don't let management spend to the cap.

 

Trade everyone to get to the cap floor and whatever revenue you lose will at least be partly subsidized by the fact you are a floor team.

 

I get that's not the most popular option but if the owners did care about revenue that's better then what we have now. Right now we are a bottom 3 team plus spending to the cap, which is absolutely embarrassing. Might as well save money and not spend to the cap. Obviously they don't care that much about money and revenue as many people claim or else they wouldn't have allowed for that Sutter/Bonino swap or Sbisa/Dorsett contract, or the Miller contract. If you are willing to dish out 18 million dollar contract for a slight upgrade in goal, you clearly don't care too much about the finances. Or you are incompetent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, jovocop55 said:

this team just doesnt want to go full rebuild...  not sure what they are doing..

 

just look at last 2 seasons, they started winning games at the end of the season for nothing.. and lose out on mcdavid/eichel and matthews..

 

Yes, what were thinking? They should be like - let's go out there and throw games!

 

I don't know if you've ever played any competitive sports but it was never in me to try and lose. Complete lack of pride.

 

10 hours ago, janisahockeynut said:

I agree with you Baggins and I disagree with you.......Bang on with Chicago and Pittsburgh............

But as you pointed out......it took 5 years to rebuild, with good management, not 10 years, as some have suggested it will take

 

But you can not compare Chicago and Pittsburgh with Edmonton and Toronto, as the difference is that, and it has been said many times, Toronto and Edmonton did not have good management......now in saying that, look what happens within 2 years or less, with both franchises, after they stop dickin around and hire a good management team...and I am including Toronto, as they are moving quickly into being a competitive team. 

 

Started by moving out vets for picks..........................and I am not talking about their top 3, but their depth on the farm, which has improved in a very short time

 

Actually Pittsburgh and Chicago took 7 years. I said 5 years of sucking before getting their two big stars. The two stars each (Crosby/Malkin & Kane/Toews) came in years 6 and 7. The reason they went to cup contender quickly after that was they had years of drafting high and building a good prospect pool before getting their big stars. Edmonton and TO have had even longer to build up prospects before getting their saviors. As I keep saying there is no quick fix.

 

If we completely bottom out when the Sedins retire we'll have had 4 years of building youth before hand. Doesn't that sound like Chicago and Pittsburgh? The handful of picks moved have been for young NHL ready players to bridge the void left by Gillis. When the Sedins retire those guys will be our veterans to transition to Benning draft picks.

 

I actually think Benning has gone about it the right way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

So Canucks Army claiming today that Benning turned down an offer of San Jose's 2015 9th overall pick for Ryan Miller.

 

And they're not presenting it as a rumour but as fact:

 

 

 

http://canucksarmy.com/2016/11/16/6-ways-the-canucks-have-whiffed-on-their-attempt-to-rebuild-on-the-fly

 

When questioned in the comments section on the source for this information, the response was as follows:

 

 

 

 

Hard to know how strong the source is but shocking stuff if true. And while I know many people on here consider CA "the enemy" (and I have questioned their editorial slant myself numerous times), it's worth noting they are fairly well connected, have several former writers now working on NHL staffs around the league, and when they've really stuck to their guns on a scoop, they've actually tended to be proven right.

 

The recent example of CA sources holding up being when JD Burke announced the Carcone signing, based on an inside source, and then nothing happened. People mocked him mercilessly but he repeatedly said his source was good and that the signing would happen. Eventually the announcement came, confirming that Burke was correct and his source was good.

 

I only bring that up because this Miller "scoop" is coming from JD Burke again and is based on another source that he's sticking with even though no one else in the media has reported the information. The CA writer today (Jackson McDonald) asked Burke's permission to report the information as fact and not merely rumour or speculation. And Burke agreed to that request.

 

Which certainly makes a person wonder if the information might actually be accurate on this story.

 

And if that's the case, all I can say right now is wow. 

 

We turned down a Cory Schneider level return for Ryan Miller? 

 

Wow. :blink:

 

Please be false.:(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Canuck Surfer said:

I would have traded Miller as fast as I could answer the phone.

 

This is why you are a bandwagoner and you are wrong.  Disgrace to true CDC.  

Why would we trade Miller when we can make the playoffs this year and stay competitivezsgvess!!!  

 

Be an Apollo! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, C.Schneider said:

 

This is why you are a bandwagoner and you are wrong.  Disgrace to true CDC.  

Why would we trade Miller when we can make the playoffs this year and stay competitivezsgvess!!!  

 

Be an Apollo! 

 

I know there is a sense of sarcasm in your post?

 

I have to admit I am growing to like Miller. I find him entertaining. He's so quick.  But I was never for signing Miller. And as such, have never been against trading him.  Seemed big in Benning's plans so I also never so the point in getting hyped on the possibility of him being moved...

 

I wanted to spend his money on a good RHD when Miller was first signed. I was all over these boards with that suggestion before and after he arrived. A good goalie versus an average one has a .920 vs .910 save percentage.  1 save, 1 less goal in 100 hundred shots.  A good D inhibits more than 1 shot against every game. Hopefully increases our shot total at the other end. And we were bleeding D at the other end. On our 4th consecutive year going backwards in D quality.

 

It was especially problematic because we had D problems in 3 key areas.  Not big enough, not fast enough and not enough skill all at the same time.

 

But dang, Miller for a 9th overall is also a tasty morsel to turn down!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Toronto last year did the proper rebuild, dumped their anchors and kept their gems (like JVR).  Canucks would have to get rid of Tanev, Edler, Dorsett and perhaps Hansen.  The Sedins will stay with the Canucks to retirement and Miller should stay to give Marky breathing room until Demko comes in.  Right now Canucks has a very shallow prospect pool, very thin on replacements from Utica.  They should use every draft pick possible comes next draft rather than trading them.

 

PS- that 2016 9th overall could've grabbed us a forward like Logan Brown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Canuck Surfer said:

 

I know there is a sense of sarcasm in your post?

 

I have to admit I am growing to like Miller. I find him entertaining. He's so quick.  But I was never for signing Miller. And as such, have never been against trading him.  Seemed big in Benning's plans so I also never so the point in getting hyped on the possibility of him being moved...

 

I wanted to spend his money on a good RHD when Miller was first signed. I was all over these boards with that suggestion before and after he arrived. A good goalie versus an average one has a .920 vs .910 save percentage.  1 save, 1 less goal in 100 hundred shots.  A good D inhibits more than 1 shot against every game. Hopefully increases our shot total at the other end. And we were bleeding D at the other end. On our 4th consecutive year going backwards in D quality.

 

It was especially problematic because we had D problems in 3 key areas.  Not big enough, not fast enough and not enough skill all at the same time.

 

But dang, Miller for a 9th overall is also a tasty morsel to turn down!

Nothing wrong with the signing of Miller.  Problem was, as in the case of Benning handling most contracts, is his contract.  It was one year too long.  Benning, as often the case, when he has the leverage (what other west coast team was going to sign Miller at the time?), he waives the white flag.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Canuck Surfer said:

 

But dang, Miller for a 9th overall is also a tasty morsel to turn down!

 

Just think of what we poached last time we drafted 9th overall.  

Then imagine JB (well F.A.) saying no because we want a "shot" at making the playoff with this team of ours...

Now picture our last 9th overall player.  

Then imagine JB (well F.A.) saying no because we want a "shot" at making the playoff with this team of ours...

Now...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, C.Schneider said:

 

Just think of what we poached last time we drafted 9th overall.  

Then imagine JB (well F.A.) saying no because we want a "shot" at making the playoff with this team of ours...

Now picture our last 9th overall player.  

Then imagine JB (well F.A.) saying no because we want a "shot" at making the playoff with this team of ours...

Now...

Werenski, Hanafin, Provorov were all gone.  I did want a D in the draft as well.

 

I could show you my draft charts from two years ago?  I did have Rantanen tabbed at 9th. And if we had that pick, as the draft unfolded, that's who I would have taken.  He plays C and either wing.  Rantanen would have been ours. We could have had;

 

Rantanen Bo Jake

 

Three extremely fast, all top ten drafted talent, 220 lb forwards slaughtering people on the fore check.  And I do believe another big forward pushing Jake would have had the impetus for Jake to step up his game?  (I would hope anyway).  That he would have had multiple guys to keep up with him also tends to push a competitive environment!

 

I repeat, if JB had that on the table he should have pushed the button!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Baggins said:

 

Yes, what were thinking? They should be like - let's go out there and throw games!

 

I don't know if you've ever played any competitive sports but it was never in me to try and lose. Complete lack of pride.

 

 

Actually Pittsburgh and Chicago took 7 years. I said 5 years of sucking before getting their two big stars. The two stars each (Crosby/Malkin & Kane/Toews) came in years 6 and 7. The reason they went to cup contender quickly after that was they had years of drafting high and building a good prospect pool before getting their big stars. Edmonton and TO have had even longer to build up prospects before getting their saviors. As I keep saying there is no quick fix.

 

If we completely bottom out when the Sedins retire we'll have had 4 years of building youth before hand. Doesn't that sound like Chicago and Pittsburgh? The handful of picks moved have been for young NHL ready players to bridge the void left by Gillis. When the Sedins retire those guys will be our veterans to transition to Benning draft picks.

 

I actually think Benning has gone about it the right way.

 

Ok, I understand where you are coming from.........not too far off what I think.......

 

Last night I was thinking that the next 2 years will bring us 2 - 1st and 3 - 2nds, without any trades or player movement, I would image that both years will yield top 6 picks and most likely top 4 picks both years, so we should have some very nice prospects to show for our futility...................

 

This is where we probably split, as I would vote to move an Edler, Miller,  Hansen, and possibly the Sedins on their last TDL...............

IMO that yields us substantial extra picks and prospects and further speeds up our rebuild

 

Matter of fact, if we could land a #1 line player, I would consider moving Tanev..............maybe not all of them, but the majority of those named, still have good value, and would substantially add to our rebuild, and because our team would be so young, we would still have very good picks, for even the year or 2  after the Sedins depart

 

So as much as I know, all of CDC thinks it is crazy to move all those players, and it would never happen. I feel that adding even 2 more 1sts and a 2nd in the next 2 years, is in the teams best interest..............

 

I am just so tired of seeing us waste assets and spending 2nd rounders............build through the draft is my firm belief!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Baggins said:

 

Yes, what were thinking? They should be like - let's go out there and throw games!

 

I don't know if you've ever played any competitive sports but it was never in me to try and lose. Complete lack of pride.

 

 

Just wanted to comment on this........I am old and broken now, but in my day, played hockey, boxed, football, tennis, and just about anything else I could......played some of it competitively, some it recreationally, but never once did I sit back......always full out, almost always a captain or leader............

 

My point is as a player, I could not comprehend ever not playing 110%...................but that is as a player............my goal was the present.....no long term planning.......play hard, don't worry about my old age

 

But as a manager, I feel you have to manage for today, and for the future.........decisions are based on age of equipment, market, production, return, future return, etc......sometimes borrowing money today for future markets tomorrow........but I have never seen managers just say "let our assets decay", let's not upgrade, lets not plan for the future..............this is very different than what a player thinks....very different

 

Players play for the day.......................managers manage for tomorrow!

 

Now if you want to take Broeser, Demko, Joulevi, our 2017 1st, and our 2018 1st, and upgrade, well, we could really up grade our team and contend today.......but tomorrow would be pretty sad!

 

As for today........we are already pretty sad........do you think moving a few players over the next 2 years is going to change the "Today?"

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...