Linden: We're building a new core group and will stick to plan (TSN1040) (Nov 21)

[oldnews]

3 minutes ago, combover said:

Fair enough. I respect that.

I want nothing more than linden and benning to prove me and may others wrong (and I'm not trying to troll anyone ) but 

I don't see it the same on some levels. But I guess that's why it's a discussion board and not an agreeing board besides that would be boring. 

 

I don't take you as a troll combover.  I read your posts as coming from someone with no belief whatsoever in the current group and not a lot of patience left.

 

I know what that's like - I felt precisely that way through the Keenan era and again when we put the coaching keys in the hands of Tortorella and seemed effectively without an acting GM.  It was biding time - until they left town and we got our franchise back.

I think Gillis was a very bright manager who was gifted with a far easier set of circumstances than Lindenning - but in both cases I have a lot of regard for their hockey intelligence.

 

 

[oldnews]

15 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Make a plan.  Stick to it

Man makes plans and god just laughs.

[DeNiro]

The only thing I worry about with their plan is that it won't buy Benning enough time to rebuild through the draft.

 

I don't wanna see us lose him because I think he has a great scouting ability. But the shelf life of a GM isn't typically more than 5 years. So he has 2 years left after this season in theory if we don't see results.

[DIBdaQUIB]

39 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I agree with you where the Tortorella hiring was concerned - I think Gillis was a ghost-GM by then, and judging by the attempts to reassure us all that it wouldn't happen again and that Linden would have full autonomy, I think there was fire behind that smoke, not simply mirrors.

But I also think it's reasonable in the current context to take the course of action they have - not necessarily believing in a tankdown/teardown, having players like the Sedins in the fold, that are legitimate franchise lifers if they choose, and looking to restructure the franchise without levelling it and choosing not to compete for a few years - those imo are justifiable balances - and in the end, the team's moves have been hockey moves.

I'm not going to comment on ownership - they've only really surfaced during the Linden hiring - but I have a lot of respect for Linden and Benning and don't consider comments that they are "puppets" to be fair or substantiated on any level.

We may disagree on many of management's moves (and on Edler's value) but I agree that Linden is no puppet.  He is, however, the spokesperson for the team and owners. I see him stepping up here and running interference for JB and WD knowing the heat they are feeling and the anxiety level of the fans.  That's how he played the game so it's no surprise he would still take one for the team. 

[billabong]

There's no way the aquilinis haven't meddled with the direction of this team

 

i know ideally the Canucks could always stay competitive while bringing in young talent but that takes years and years to develop and gillis left this team in shambles with not much to work with and a lot of ntc's 

 

sink. Sell miller, sbisa, Hansen, or whomever for some picks. Draft Patrick. Sign boeser. Offer sheet a young rfa. Boom. I just did your job 

 

[cripplereh]

33 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

The only thing I worry about with their plan is that it won't buy Benning enough time to rebuild through the draft.

 

I don't wanna see us lose him because I think he has a great scouting ability. But the shelf life of a GM isn't typically more than 5 years. So he has 2 years left after this season in theory if we don't see results.

I agree and have been saying that

 

this team needs to keep benning as in a couple years the picks and later ones should be on the team right when the Twins contracts are up

 

so one more draft will not give us what we need to make bigger moves

we need Benning for atleast three more years

[ForsbergTheGreat]

1 hour ago, combover said:

The current core was built around a 2 and 3rd overall draf picks not picks  10 and 20th. Linden was the center of the core at his time here, that what was his draft position again. 

Pretty obvious what needs to happen. 

trade for a 3rd overall pick?

[6string]

Year three ( Linden-Benning ) with lofty expectations for some it seems, cleaning up after Gillis was no easy task.

 

Personally I enjoy watching the team transition from core to the future, I just hope it won't be as long and as failed as a Toronto or Edmonton rebuilding a rebuild in all honesty! Somewhere between a San Jose and or Tampa would be very niii-iice.

[kenhodgejr]

I am very happy we did not go after Evander Kane. We need to keep as many draft picks as possible. I am also really looking forward to watching 6ft 5 Joseph LaBate give LW a try on the Canucks. I would also like to see guys like Laplante, Cassels, Carcone, and Pedan get more time with the big club. Not to mention Virtanen and Demko of course. I think next year they will all have a chance and cracking Canucks opening line up. Travis Green is an amazing players coach and will work well developing these guys this season. I expect Green to take Willy's job next year. We will be lucky to get Travis Green!

[Joe_Kerr]

8 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

trade for a 3rd overall pick?

Draft a top notch center and left wing....rebuild over....

[drsofthands]

our team right now, were the calgary flames like 4 years ago, and the oilers like 7 ago. We have a ways to go

[JamesB]

1 hour ago, Jasmijn Meeuwissen said:

Whatever the plan is, they're apparently sticking to it.

 

Wasn't the plan to retool?

 

Now are they actually going to rebuild?

 

Because there's no way we're going for the Cup...

 

Are we?

 

1 hour ago, DeNiro said:

He said that he knows people want this to be a fast process?

 

I think it's more that people aren't on board with the process of signing vets and trying to squeak in the playoffs.

 

If you sell fans on playoffs they're gonna get impatient when it doesn't happen and we lose out on a higher pick. If you sell them on a rebuild and drafting top 3, I think most fans would get on board.

 

Fans are just frustrated that management appears to be trying to have the best of both worlds.

 

1 hour ago, combover said:

The current core was built around a 2 and 3rd overall draf picks not picks  10 and 20th. Linden was the center of the core at his time here, that what was his draft position again. 

Pretty obvious what needs to happen. 

 

I have always liked Linden and still do. I met him once at an airport and engaged in a conversation with him. Instead of giving me a quick brush-off (which is what I expected and maybe what I deserved) he was very pleasant and very gracious. I think he is very genuine and is genuinely a very nice guy.

 

Right now he is doing his best for the team. He is not going to give an interview where he seems to be at odds with ownership, with the GM, with the coach, etc. He is trying smooth the waters and he did a good job -- reminding people about contributions of the Canucks to the community, what a great guy Bo is (i.e. a lot like Linden was). etc.

 

That said, his interview did not have a lot of content and I agree with the criticisms above. The original plan seemed to be to squeak into the playoffs. It "worked" in the first year, "failed" in the second year and is not looking good for the third year.

 

As DeNiro says, it is not a question of patience. Patience implies that we will get where we want in the end (i.e. becoming a Cup contender again). The problem with the current strategy is that is never likely to yield a Cup contender. It is likely to produce a team that hovers around the margins of the playoff race and crashes out early when it manages to squeak into the playoffs.

 

Cup contenders are pretty much always built around 2 or 3 genuine stars -"franchise players". As combover indicates, this team needs is a couple of franchise players to replace the Sedins.

 

Those guys do not necessarily have to top 3 draft picks, but your chances of getting a franchise player there are much higher than lower in the draft. Even so, lower draft picks sometimes develop into franchise players and getting more picks improves your chances. 

 

It is absolutely crucial to draft well and that should be the cornerstone of the strategy. That means acquiring draft picks, not trading them away, and it should have meant accepting two or three years of low finishes in the standings and correspondingly high draft picks. 

 

I think Linden probably did want to go with the full rebuild strategy, but was pressured by ownership to go with the "compete now" model and I think Benning also likes the "compete now" model.   

 

 

[JM_]

2 hours ago, Incursio said:

Too many other people have said otherwise for me to believe him.

 

Like CDC and Botchford? I haven't seen anything out of anyone that would have first hand knowledge of "meddling" whatever thats supposed to mean. 

[oldnews]

49 minutes ago, DIBdaQUIB said:

We may disagree on many of management's moves (and on Edler's value) but I agree that Linden is no puppet.  He is, however, the spokesperson for the team and owners. I see him stepping up here and running interference for JB and WD knowing the heat they are feeling and the anxiety level of the fans.  That's how he played the game so it's no surprise he would still take one for the team. 

 

I think the three of them deserve a lot of credit for what they've done to suit the circumstances.

 

I mean throw out the short term results - because while I judge them and expect the team to remain relatively competitive, the whole crowd that thinks the current group sucks really doesn't have grounds to expect superior results - these struggles for them are just the reality of the team.

 

Now - context.

 

They have a pair of (becoming former) franchise players that have constituted their top line for the better part of a decade - and while they may no longer be a premier top line in the NHL, they're still serviceable and are the identity of the franchise.

So, in two senses, the last thing the team needs to accomplish is replacing the Sedins.  That may have become the first order of business in the present, but that would be testimony to what these three have accomplished in two years.

 

The other fundamental part of the context imo - the contending years produced a gap, a demographic gap between the past and the emerging core - and in addition, by virtue of perenial late picks, challenged the team to manage an unrealistic Detroitesque continuity despite that fact - but at the very least, do their best to emulate the powerhouse results of the master perenial retoolers of the NHL.

 

Filling that generational core gap is fundamentally an 'unrealistic' challenge.   People can make fun of the idea that players like Sutter or Gudbranson are 'core' or foundational players, but barring dealing their absolute best young assets to top picks to acquire current NHL proven core/foundational players, the team literally has to pull a few rabbits out of their hat.  Well, the continuing returns/progression of the Kesler deal imo is not that far off.

 

Has the team been "rebuilding"?  Whatever.  I couldn't care less about cookie cutters or semantics.   Gillis brought two (imo) core pieces back in preliminary rebuild/retool deals in Horvat and Markstrom.  Benning has kept all his high picks and the bulk of the rest of them as well - and he's added another group of potential core pieces - Demko, Boeser, Tryamkin, Virtanen, etc through the draft.  Has he dwelled on stockplling every future? No, of course not - he needed to come up with something to come between the 30-35 yr old core and the 20 yr old next ones.   So he did his best there and imo, not such a bad job considering what he really spent - Kesler, Bieksa, Garrison....I'll take what's been managed with the returns.

 

The other aspects of the rebuiltool imo also make perfect sense.

You dont' built a house from the top down, with a bunch of top floor skilled forwards at the top, and a foundation lagging behind, particularly when you're never going to have those 1st overalls to be spoon fed generational talents.

 

So, two reasons to build from the back forward.

1)  It takes longer to develop goaltenders and defensemen and they're a lesser certainty regardless.

2)  You already have an existing core of skilled forwards in the transition, and in additiion, it's easier to plug young forwards into key productive roles and be competitive than it is to do so on your back end.

 

So all in all, we have a progression plan that starts from the back and looks like:

 

The transitional core pieces to give way - Sedins, Edler, MIller (no assets) with (hopefully) a few that will remain - Honey Badger, Eriksson...

A few transitional secondary pieces to give way - Burrows, Dorsett, Sbisa (tbh I'd have no real problem with Sbisa transitioning into a future fixture if he continues to progress as he has and we deal someone else to fill a need - but regardless, the third piece of the Kesler deal - not so bad).

 

Markstrom Demko

Juolevi Gudbranson Tryamkin Tanev Hutton Stecher + relatively unknown quantities in the prospect pool

Horvat, Sutter, Boeser, Granlund, Virtanen, Baertschi? + unkonwn quantities [+ Hansen, Eriksson]

 

Are there a few pieces that the team needs to add - of course there are.

Do we have a few unknown quantities that could be far more than we expect (ala Tryamkin, Hutton, Stecher) in our incubating forward group?  Who knows - Lockwood, Zhukenov, whomever - maybe one or two of these guys become solid top 9 forwards  - the next Burrows or Hansen etc.

 

But is the "plan" really so difficult to conceive?

And is/was the alternative - dealing the Sedins - really that realistic?  Or even attractive.  Myself - I'd rather they be the lifers than retool chips, for a number of reasons.

 

Does the team need an elite forward or two in the near future?  Probably, maybe, who knows, but likely.  However, is it so unrealistic that Benning come up with that?

He has his 1sts.  He has a couple 2nds this year.  He has the potential to deal a defenseman to either bring in a current forward, or add some futures that could increase the possibility of drafting one.

 

Aside from the current, short term results - which the most vocal protesters would sacrifice in any event in order to "rebuild" - is there really the grounds for the doom and gloom?

 

We may not have forwards like the Coil or other tankers - but what about the equally important back end?  How do the Canucks fare there - and what part of the rest would people rather be faced with completing.

 

I personally am perfectly content with the form and content of what these three - Lindenningardins - have accomplished in two years.

They also have 10 million in expiring veterans next summer - in positions that they're fairly healthy in succession.

People have complained a lot about Benning's contracts, and yet where is the lack of health in terms of their future flexibility?

 

I don't know.  Can someone explain how they should have done so much better?

What I hear is stuff like 'stop acquiring 'old' players - essentially Sutter, Gudbranson, Granlund etc - because that makes no sense to me unless we're looking to collapse in between generations/cores.  I think the team has more self-respect and respect for the Sedins to do that.

I also hear the idea of stockpiling every future possible - but wadr - are we all that much better off with another pick as opposed to Hansen for example?

Aside from that, I hear some hindsight dreamers that thought water should have been drawn from stones like Vrbata et al - or an injured Hamhuis, or an injured Higgins, etc.

A few losses, yes - Kass, Vey/Garrison,(I'd say the 5th/Forsling/Clendening, but they converted Clendening into value on Sutter that is hard to argue with) - but you simply cannot make the volume of moves necessary without taking some losses.  It's like the game itself - you win some, you lose some, but where the rebuild/tool goes, I'd say they're doing pretty well with some ways to go, but probably better prospect of adding to their futures as opposed to having to spend (albeit relatively marginal ones) moving forward.

 

I've been very impressed with this teams' amateur and pro scouting in the past two years - I see no reason they can't finish the top floor.

[JM_]

8 minutes ago, JamesB said:

Cup contenders are pretty much always built around 2 or 3 genuine stars -"franchise players". As combover indicates, this team needs is a couple of franchise players to replace the Sedins.

 

Those guys do not necessarily have to top 3 draft picks, but your chances of getting a franchise player there are much higher than lower in the draft. Even so, lower draft picks sometimes develop into franchise players and getting more picks improves your chances. 

 

It is absolutely crucial to draft well and that should be the cornerstone of the strategy. That means acquiring draft picks, not trading them away, and it should have meant accepting two or three years of low finishes in the standings and correspondingly high draft picks. 

 

I think Linden probably did want to go with the full rebuild strategy, but was pressured by ownership to go with the "compete now" model and I think Benning also likes the "compete now" model.   

 

Thats right on 2-3 elite players - we maybe have 2 in Juolevi and Boeser, we'll see. Maybe Demko too. Add to that a high pick from this year to Bo, and we're starting to get somewhere, and not that far away either. 

 

I do think Benning has done a good job drafting so we may see at least one other really good top 9 player there too, in Gaudette or Lockwood.

 

 

[stanleysteamersmyl]

The Canucks will not win anything if they keep trading for and signing midget sized players.  Not even one tough, big gritty forward who can fight and score like a Backes, Brouwer, Foligno, Ladd, Lucic and Kassian.   There is nobody in the pipeline.  Meanwhile, most of the other teams' prospects are bigger sized. 

Bo is a lover, not a fighter.

[oldnews]

20 minutes ago, JamesB said:

 

 

Cup contenders are pretty much always built around 2 or 3 genuine stars -"franchise players".

 

 

Yeah, but what you guys don't seem to realize is that sometime those 2 or 3 genuine stars are guys like Ryan Getzlaf and Corey Perry (late 1sts - like Boeser) or Patrice Bergeron (a 2nd) and Zdeno Chara (a 3rd, not unlike Tryamkin).

 

You're free to assume that there's a must tank en route to gettng a Toews and Kane or Crosby, Malkin, but that's simply not what the evidence bears out.

 

There is luck in winning a lottery, and then there is 'luck' in the draft itself - where sometimes the best player in the world arguably happens to be a 2nd round pick (ie Weber or Bergeron) or a 7th (Datsyuk). 

It's not all lottery or odds. 

We may already have our Bergeron and Chara.  We may already have our Krejci.  We already may have our Seidenberg.  We may already be in the process of adding the supporting cast.   You and I simply don't know a thing about two years from now.

We could also be what people pretend to know - a middling team missing the playoffs. 

The fact of the matter though - is that the projections one way or the other are 'analytics' that are full of themselves.

You want to project the future of a franchise - you'll need to do more than star gaze at a couple players.

[JM_]

5 minutes ago, stanleysteamersmyl said:

The Canucks will not win anything if they keep trading for and signing midget sized players. 

 

Not even one tough, big gritty forward who can fight and score like a Backes, Brouwer, Foligno, Ladd, Lucic and Kassian.   There is nobody in the pipeline.  Meanwhile, most of the other teams' prospects are bigger sized. 

Bo is a lover, not a fighter.

 

Like Panarin? We need  a couple of small speedy wingers exactly like this guy. Thats what Gaudette or Lockwood may be for us in a couple of seasons.

 

No one in the pipeline? How about Jake? Or LaBate if you're looking for bottom 6 grit and fight?

 

[NHTyrany]

10 minutes ago, S'all Good Man said:

 

Thats right on 2-3 elite players - we maybe have 2 in Juolevi and Boeser, we'll see. Maybe Demko too. Add to that a high pick from this year to Bo, and we're starting to get somewhere, and not that far away either. 

 

I do think Benning has done a good job drafting so we may see at least one other really good top 9 player there too, in Gaudette or Lockwood.

 

 

Agree although I'm still pissed we decided to win some games at the tail end of a huge deep draft year. Just look at Laine and Mathews. One could have easily been in a nucks jersey but some suggest it would have been bad habit for the team to take a few xtra nights off while on the road. I guess we can say we did it the honest way...

[oldnews]

3 minutes ago, NHTyrany said:

Agree although I'm still pissed we decided to win some games at the tail end of a huge deep draft year. Just look at Laine and Mathews. One could have easily been in a nucks jersey but some suggest it would have been bad habit for the team to take a few xtra nights off while on the road. I guess we can say we did it the honest way...

You can't win the lottery by losing a couple more games.  Sorry, but that's not a 'plan' - it's a pipe dream.

We lost the lottery.  It's that simple.