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

wake up band wagoners


linden17

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, TimberWolf said:

Bandwagoning and not liking the management are not the same thing. 

 

Wouldnt creating this thread after an OT win be the very essence of bandwagoning? Is it a coincidence this thread wasn't created during our historic losing streak? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Toews said:

Here is what I want the organization to stop doing:

 

1) Trading picks for marginal NHLers or other teams' castoffs.

2) Giving players retirement contracts, ie Vrbata, Miller and Eriksson

3) Rushing young players who aren't ready into the lineup because there are no other options.

 

What I want them to do:

 

1) Draft and develop our own talent

2) Start to move out talent before they reach UFA. In the last couple of years this team has let Santorelli, Matthias, Richardson, Vrbata and Hamhuis walk for nothing

 

 

All of the above are what rebuilding teams do. What the Canucks are doing is something entirely different to what is happening elsewhere in the NHL. If I were to give it a label I would say it is "retooling" rather than rebuilding and rarely do those ever work out. Remember Calgary under Feaster and Toronto under Burke?

I agree with your "stop doing" list -- nicely summarized too. When I think of the space filled by the likes of Vey, Granlund,, Miller and Eriksson it is sad.  And the lost picks... uggh.

I agree mostly with your "to do instead" list.  The only thing I would add is that some range of age on the team can be helpful, otherwise learning may be hampered, and rare superstars like the Sedins might be chucked too early.  (But Eriksson and Miller are no superstars.)

 

The problem with the Canucks not consciously rebuilding to the max is that they have tended to "patch on" pieces (because they have a reliable core of the Sedins), rather than build the best group of players going forward.  Drafting and trading have both reflected too much of the "patch on to what we have already" logic.  And so... we don't have enough high end scoring talent, because we acted as if the Sedins were immortal.  Good D now, Demko on the way... but not enough scoring/playmaking.  I think in retrospect (always a bit unfair) you use the Virtanen pick for someone who is more assured of providing playmaking and/or scoring. The Juolevi pick could be criticized for the same thing, but 1D or 2D are so rare... you have to draft them.  (Although Stecher, Tryamkin and Hutton suggest you don't necessarily have to use a top-5 pick to acquire them.)  And, Virtanen is going to be the player we hoped for, he just needs a bit better development track which includes a lot more playing time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, linden17 said:

im actually confused to what u are asking? so we actually tried and didnt get a high pick is what you are saying?

I think they called it a 'reload' rather than a 'rebuild'. But here's one that was a head-scratcher: last year, we were pretty much already out of the playoffs and Henrik was clearly hurting (upper body injury) and the coming draft had 2 (arguably 3) franchise players in Matthews, Laine, and Pulujujarvi, and instead of resting Henrik and perhaps giving more playing time to other players, the Canucks kept playing Henrik. That seemed like something that a team that's NOT a rebuilding team would do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, LaBamba said:

 

Wouldnt creating this thread after an OT win be the very essence of bandwagoning? Is it a coincidence this thread wasn't created during our historic losing streak? 

 

Look at all the tanking threads popping up during the losing streak that weren't there during the first four wins. Are you new here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

3 hours ago, Baggins said:

 

Are you in favor of a league where up 20 teams will be trying to lose for the first overall pick?

 

If that's what plays out, 20 teams actually tanking, then it may not look pretty.  But between the two potentially conflicting objectives of management doing everything to win every single regular season game, and doing everything they can to win the Stanley Cup in the long term, I have to choose the second option.  I'm in it for the long haul.

 

The Penguins visibly tanked for Mario Lemieux in 1984, and it was some of the most effective rebuilding management in NHL history.  The Canucks were a historically worse team than the Penguins, and we got J.J. Daigneault at 10th overall that year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

I'm mostly asking you to defend your claim that the Canucks are rebuilding and doing it right.

 

Since you dismissed the acquisitions of McDavid and Matthews as lucking out, I was saying that both are instances of effective rebuilding.

 

I think what linden was getting at was the fact the rebuild for both those teams are decades long.  I'm happy to try to remain competitive.  Tanking the way Edmonton, Toronto and Buffalo have done is not only risky, but it should be a last resort

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Kevin Biestra said:

 

 

If that's what plays out, 20 teams actually tanking, then it may not look pretty.  But between the two potentially conflicting objectives of management doing everything to win every single regular season game, and doing everything they can to win the Stanley Cup in the long term, I have to choose the second option.  I'm in it for the long haul.

 

I have been in for the long haul already, since they joined the NHL. I do not want to see my team intentionally losing. I just can't get behind that. At my age I learned long ago 'my team' winning a championship doesn't make a lick of difference to my life. Being entertained throughout a season by a good team is far more important to me than winning the cup. Winning a championship is nothing more than a cherry on top.

 

One thing I will point out to you tank fanatics is neither Pittsburgh or Chicago drafted their "elite" talent first. They struggled for years prior to that. They had a start on their supporting cast with additional prospects developing before getting those top picks. If I recall correctly Mario was in the league 7 years before winning a cup. Even a legendary pick doesn't get you there without a supporting cast. A lot of legendary talent years wasted while getting that supporting cast after the fact. The truth is, there's no quick fix.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Toews said:

 

Let me try and make this as simple as possible

 

Team 1: You have a bunch of young elite players in their early 20s carrying you to a playoff spot and losing in the first round.

 

Team 2: You have a bunch of older superstars in their mid 30s carrying you to a playoff spot and losing in the first round.

 

Which team needs to seriously think about altering the course of their franchise? The team being carried by younger players is expected to improve while the  team being carried by 30 year olds can't say the same. They cant even rely on those older players to deliver the same performance in a few years due to age related decline.

So I am guessing Pittsburgh will be dumping Crosby and Malkin any day now? Don't know about you but I wouldn't mind the Canucks picking up those oldtimers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Baggins said:

 

I have been in for the long haul already, since they joined the NHL. I do not want to see my team intentionally losing. I just can't get behind that. At my age I learned long ago 'my team' winning a championship doesn't make a lick of difference to my life. Being entertained throughout a season by a good team is far more important to me than winning the cup. Winning a championship is nothing more than a cherry on top.

 

One thing I will point out to you tank fanatics is neither Pittsburgh or Chicago drafted their "elite" talent first. They struggled for years prior to that. They had a start on their supporting cast with additional prospects developing before getting those top picks. If I recall correctly Mario was in the league 7 years before winning a cup. Even a legendary pick doesn't get you there without a supporting cast. A lot of legendary talent years wasted while getting that supporting cast after the fact. The truth is, there's no quick fix.

 

I think we've both probably paid our dues with this team.  Mario Lemieux may not be a quick fix, but players like that are the best solution.  No Lemieux, no cups in Pittsburgh.  No Crosby, no cups in Pittsburgh.  No Kane or Toews, no cups in Chicago.  Drafting a generational player doesn't guarantee anything, but if there is one thing I could choose for my team it is a generational player.  Acquiring Lemieux alone is probably better than five years of smart rebuilding on all other fronts.  Yes, you have to make some smart moves with the rest of your lineup to win a Cup, but there is no better starting position than having that much scoring and talent concentrated in one roster spot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

If a player like McDavid comes along and you know it in advance (as we all did) and you aren't a remote Cup contender at the time (which we were not)...then you do whatever it takes to get that player in the draft.

 

Pittsburgh went from a joke to two cups because they got Lemieux.  Then from a joke to two more cups because they got Crosby.

 

McDavid is looking like the best player since Crosby, and Crosby for my money is the best player since Lemieux.  These rare players change the future of a team.

 

Sure the Oilers sucked, but sucking gets you high picks - top picks.  And it's better than just being "real bad" and getting Jake Virtanen.  Virtanen would be a complete throwaway in Oiler's prospect system, whereas he's close to our prized possession.

 

I'll agree that we're getting younger, but you need to have young elite players on the way up...not just young players.

 

I don't get anything out of barely missing the playoffs, or making it and getting bounced in 4-6 games in the first round.  That achieves nothing.  We're bad, and we may as well reap the fruits that should come (down the road) with being bad.  Toronto spent years scratching and clawing to miss the playoffs by two points and get a crappy draft pick.  That seems to be the closest parallel to what we are doing these days.

Why are you throwing Crosby's name in there? Pittsburgh didn't tank, lose intentionally or apply any other strategy to obtain Crosby. The Canucks had the same odds of obtaining Crosby as Pittsburgh did. It was shear luck that Pittsburgh got Crosby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Rick Blight said:

Tanking is when management is selling off assets or hiding them in the minors to avoid winning. Edmonton did neither of those......no, they did not tank.

So you're saying there is a purposeful tank, and a tank simply because a team stinks.  Yet, is not the result the same?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Alflives said:

So you're saying there is a purposeful tank, and a tank simply because a team stinks.  Yet, is not the result the same?

The result is exactly the same. The pro-tank folks want you to intentionally lose by selling off assets but a bad team is simply a bad team and not tanking. The Canucks appear to be a bad team and may finish in 30th place this year but you would not see any of the pro-tank posters saying they tanked.....they failed and were simply lucky to finish last.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rick Blight said:

The result is exactly the same. The pro-tank folks want you to intentionally lose by selling off assets but a bad team is simply a bad team and not tanking. The Canucks appear to be a bad team and may finish in 30th place this year but you would not see any of the pro-tank posters saying they tanked.....they failed and were simply lucky to finish last.

So in two of the our last three seasons, the result was (effectively) a tank, right?

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...