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

Rebuilding from the net out: The Current State of the Franchise


Bert Diesel

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, LaBamba said:

 

Which brings us back to the Ottawa senators. Good drafting team with solid homegrown NHLers on their roster. However, since Erik Karlsson, Ottawa hasn't been able to hit another homer. They get on base a lot, but just can't find that elite talent from their draft position and from blowing picks to help them now.  You could also compare us to the New York rangers. Again, missing a few pieces to put them over the top but continued mediocre success.  

 

If you look at every successful team in the league over the past 5 decades losing had a lot to do with winning. Whether it be from the talent they recieve in the draft, or the character they build from being on rock bottom. You can win while being mediocre. It's just really hard to find examples of that model in comparison to losing. Even the Boston Bruins. They were mediocre for at least 25 years before they got lucky. A lot of us won't even live to see a similar path. 

 

There are many examples of teams who have lost a lot and then became powerhouse Stanley Cup champions. But then there are also a lot of examples of teams who have lost a lot AND are still losing. So even though you can look at teams like Chicago and LA and maybe Edmonton now as examples of needing to lose for a long time before you can become elite again there are still teams like Columbus, Buffalo, Carolina, etc who have gotten high picks for years but are still bottom dwellers. 

 

At the end of the day you need a GM who can take those high picks and also pick up solid free agents and make some good trades in order to take your team over the top. Chicago and LA were able to do that. The other teams weren't able and so they are still stuck in the bottom. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, oldnews said:

don't agree.  I wouldn't put my franchise in the hands of Murray either.

 

and I think you fail to look enough at teams like Anaheim, Boston, Detroit, San Jose, Los Angeles, etc

 

Do I? I think you fail to look at teams like Chicago and Pittsburgh. You can't sit on top of a mountain and call everyone a loser who thinks that a 1st overall pick drastically increases your chances of possessing a Art Ross or Norris Caliber hockey player that can lead a franchise to success. Your smug dismissal of that method is boardline bigotry. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Harvey Spector said:

 

There are many examples of teams who have lost a lot and then became powerhouse Stanley Cup champions. But then there are also a lot of examples of teams who have lost a lot AND are still losing. So even though you can look at teams like Chicago and LA and maybe Edmonton now as examples of needing to lose for a long time before you can become elite again there are still teams like Columbus, Buffalo, Carolina, etc who have gotten high picks for years but are still bottom dwellers. 

 

At the end of the day you need a GM who can take those high picks and also pick up solid free agents and make some good trades in order to take your team over the top. Chicago and LA were able to do that. The other teams weren't able and so they are still stuck in the bottom. 

 

I never say we need to tank. I just can't stand people who are so narrow minded that they'll actually make an argument with people that picking 1st overall doesn't matter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, LaBamba said:

 

Do I? I think you fail to look at teams like Chicago and Pittsburgh. You can't sit on top of a mountain and call everyone a loser who thinks that a 1st overall pick drastically increases your chances of possessing a Art Ross or Norris Caliber hockey player that can lead a franchise to success. Your smug dismissal of that method is boardline bigotry. 

lol.
warm Canadian. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, LaBamba said:

 

I never say we need to tank. I just can't stand people who are so narrow minded that they'll actually make an argument with people that picking 1st overall doesn't matter. 

don't be daft LB.  you're not that.

 

 

Murray was a one hit wonder that thought he had the best prospect pool in the NHL a year after he got there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Aircool said:

 

I watched a couple NHL games yesterday from around the league... I was flicking between Buffalo-Boston and Chicago-Philadelphia... It's kind of sad to watch real hockey being played.... The puck movement is just so much better than our team, our puck movement is so pathetic.... I don't know if that's coaching or talent (probably a lot of both to be honest) but we're not winning a cup for at least 10 years.... Our team plays horrible hockey.... It's as simple as that.

 

Shhhhhh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Harvey Spector said:

 

The goalie is a part of the team. Where would Montreal be without Price?  Without Price they are a playoff team. With Price they are a Stanley Cup contender.  It was the same when they had Patrick Roy and stole two Stanley Cups with him. Martin Brodeur stole New Jersey 3 cups. Richard Brodeur got the Canucks into the finals. Dominic Hasek almost gave Buffalo a cup. Ken Dryden came out of nowhere and gave Montreal a cup. 

 

I could go on but I'm sure you got my point. Having strong goaltending can make up for deficiencies in other areas. It depends how you want to build your team. I'm not suggesting we should rely on Miller simply to steal games but if he does then that's a part of the game, it shouldn't be looked at as a weakness. 

Brodeur didn't steal 3 Cups, the Devils were one of the best teams in the league and had the added benefit of a system that fit their players perfectly. Placing your faith on goaltending to steal you a Cup is not a wise strategy all things considered. Guys like Luongo and Lundqvist have consistently given their teams Vezina caliber goaltending but they weren't able to lead their teams to a Cup. Being outchanced and outworked all over the ice and relying on your goaltender to consistently bail you out does not work 99% of the time. There is no guarantee that a guy like Demko ever reaches the level of a Carey Price either. In all likelihood a successful outcome is if he can become a top 10 starter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LaBamba said:

 

I never say we need to tank. I just can't stand people who are so narrow minded that they'll actually make an argument with people that picking 1st overall doesn't matter. 

 

First overall does matter in the sense that you can instantly obtain a potential franchise player. The problem though is that every year is different. One year that pick is McDavid and another year that pick is Yakupov. So you can't just rely on finishing last as the talent at the top that specific year may not even help you. Also with the lottery rules in place now you can't plan on getting that first pick anymore regardless if you finish last. 

 

Also and most importantly when you decide you are going to rebuild and try and accumulate draft picks that is a decision that affects your whole roster. In the Canucks case that would involve trading the Sedins. You also have to have a fanbase that is okay with years of losing hockey. 

 

I believe that the Canucks decision not to fully rebuild comes down to two things. Whether you agree with them is another matter. First is that they have decided that they will not trade the Sedins. So that pretty much eliminates a full rebuild. Second our fan base cannot tolerate years of losing without the owner losing millions. Francesco knows this as he has been a fan since the 1970's and a season ticket holder in the dark days of this franchise when the club was on the verge of being sold by the Griffiths family in the 80's when we were getting 7,000 people at the games at the Coliseum. I used to work those games selling programs and souvenirs as a teenager so I remember it all very well. You look at Rogers Arena today and it's starting to get to where we were 30 years ago. Two bad years and we have thousands of empty seats at the rink. 

 

Francesso won't tolerate this and so Benning is trying to rebuild on the fly by keeping the team competitive while incorporating youth into the squad. Whether this works or not we will find out in a couple years but that is the strategy and we have no choice as fans but to watch it unfold. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, oldnews said:

don't be daft LB.  you're not that.

 

 

Murray was a one hit wonder that thought he had the best prospect pool in the NHL a year after he got there. 

 

I disagree, I think Murray is actually too good for his own good. They are just like us. Doing everything the can to avoid losing with a very mediocre result.

 

With the amount of information passed around today it's going to get harder and harder to draft Jamie Benn. Sure you'll find your Hansen's and Hutton's in the later rounds but finding the player that separates a team from the pack after the top 10 will become harder and harder as scouting evolves. 

 

Which brings us us to the other angle of this dilemma. If there is so much Art Ross talent after the top 10 then we better start keeping our God damn draft picks and maybe even get creative and manufacture a few. The clock is ticking Oldnews. When those Sedin's retire your worst fear will be reality. We will be the bottom of the bottom and your going to have to stomach a top 3 pick god forbid. 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, LaBamba said:

 

I disagree, I think Murray is actually too good for his own good. They are just like us. Doing everything the can to avoid losing with a very mediocre result.

 

With the amount of information passed around today it's going to get harder and harder to draft Jamie Benn. Sure you'll find your Hansen's and Hutton's in the later rounds but finding the player that separates a team from the pack after the top 10 will become harder and harder as scouting evolves. 

 

Which brings us us to the other angle of this dilemma. If there is so much Art Ross talent after the top 10 then we better start keeping our God damn draft picks and maybe even get creative and manufacture a few. The clock is ticking Oldnews. When those Sedin's retire your worst fear will be reality. We will be the bottom of the bottom and your going to have to stomach a top 3 pick god forbid. 

 

 

Murray aside (who is both over-rated and average).  Like I said before, wake me up when we start making stupid trades like the Bobby Ryan deal.  We (Benning) is nowhere near as 'close' to them (Murray) as you suggest imo.

 

Two things:

 

I don't care where we draft.  Top 3 great.  15th great.   I'm nowhere near as attached to short term results or draft position than I am with each step in the process.  I have no fear of losing - far from it.  I've lost a lot in life.  I know the value of it.

 

The Sedins are not keeping this team from a top 3 pick.  Far from it.  They are no more important to the team's present success than about 10 (or more) other players on the roster.   Which separates me that much more from your perception.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Toews said:

Brodeur didn't steal 3 Cups, the Devils were one of the best teams in the league and had the added benefit of a system that fit their players perfectly. Placing your faith on goaltending to steal you a Cup is not a wise strategy all things considered. Guys like Luongo and Lundqvist have consistently given their teams Vezina caliber goaltending but they weren't able to lead their teams to a Cup. Being outchanced and outworked all over the ice and relying on your goaltender to consistently bail you out does not work 99% of the time. There is no guarantee that a guy like Demko ever reaches the level of a Carey Price either. In all likelihood a successful outcome is if he can become a top 10 starter.

 

Yes New Jersey had a great system in place with Lou. Brodeur was probably a bad example of a goalie stealing a cup, although in that trap system they perfected they did need a star goaltender to be able to win those low scoring games. I would add that Niedermayer was also a key cog after Brodeur. Without Niedermayer I don't think they win those cups. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Harvey Spector said:

 

First overall does matter in the sense that you can instantly obtain a potential franchise player. The problem though is that every year is different. One year that pick is McDavid and another year that pick is Yakupov. 

 

I won't argue with that. Yes, a player can bust from anywhere in the draft. Let's look at everyone's dream draft position while we are in the midst of this hurried succession plan. 

 

30 teams.

definition of mediocre = 15th overall 

 

2015 Zachary Senyshyn
2014 Dylan Larkin 
2013 Ryan Pulock
2012 Cody Ceci
2011 JT Miller
2010 Derek Forbort
2009 Peter Holland
2008 Erik Karlsson 
2007 Alex Plante
2006  Riku Helenius

 

 

how many players do you see on that list who can replace the Sedins? I see about 1.5 in 10 years. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Harvey Spector said:

 

Yes New Jersey had a great system in place with Lou. Brodeur was probably a bad example of a goalie stealing a cup, although in that trap system they perfected they did need a star goaltender to be able to win those low scoring games. I would add that Niedermayer was also a key cog after Brodeur. Without Niedermayer I don't think they win those cups. 

Don't forget Tim Thomas in 2011. He had a couple of off nights but was the Bruins MVP in that cup run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, oldnews said:

Murray aside (who is both over-rated and average).  Like I said before, wake me up when we start making stupid trades like the Bobby Ryan deal.  We (Benning) is nowhere near as 'close' to them (Murray) as you suggest imo.

 

Two things:

 

I don't care where we draft.  Top 3 great.  15th great.   I'm nowhere near as attached to short term results or draft position than I am with each step in the process.  I have no fear of losing - far from it.  I've lost a lot in life.  I know the value of it.

 

The Sedins are not keeping this team from a top 3 pick.  Far from it.  They are no more important to the team's present success than about 10 (or more) other players on the roster.   Which separates me that much more from your perception.

 

I don't like our conflicting process(s) 

 

ok, great, let's aim for the playoffs. If we are going to aim for the playoffs we need to increase our number of picks to overwhelm the odds with Volume. You cannot go for the playoffs, trade draft picks, and rebuild for 5 years down the road at the same time effectively. You gotta focus on 1 process at a time. That is why I don't see this plan as a Sedin replacement plan. I see it as a surround the Sedins with new players plan. It's stupid

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Harvey Spector said:

 

First overall does matter in the sense that you can instantly obtain a potential franchise player. The problem though is that every year is different. One year that pick is McDavid and another year that pick is Yakupov. So you can't just rely on finishing last as the talent at the top that specific year may not even help you. Also with the lottery rules in place now you can't plan on getting that first pick anymore regardless if you finish last. 

 

Also and most importantly when you decide you are going to rebuild and try and accumulate draft picks that is a decision that affects your whole roster. In the Canucks case that would involve trading the Sedins. You also have to have a fanbase that is okay with years of losing hockey. 

 

I believe that the Canucks decision not to fully rebuild comes down to two things. Whether you agree with them is another matter. First is that they have decided that they will not trade the Sedins. So that pretty much eliminates a full rebuild. Second our fan base cannot tolerate years of losing without the owner losing millions. Francesco knows this as he has been a fan since the 1970's and a season ticket holder in the dark days of this franchise when the club was on the verge of being sold by the Griffiths family in the 80's when we were getting 7,000 people at the games at the Coliseum. I used to work those games selling programs and souvenirs as a teenager so I remember it all very well. You look at Rogers Arena today and it's starting to get to where we were 30 years ago. Two bad years and we have thousands of empty seats at the rink. 

 

Francesso won't tolerate this and so Benning is trying to rebuild on the fly by keeping the team competitive while incorporating youth into the squad. Whether this works or not we will find out in a couple years but that is the strategy and we have no choice as fans but to watch it unfold. 

I agree that every year is different but every year there are some good players available at the top of the draft. Even if you aren't able to draft Ekblad, McDavid, or Matthews you have guys like Draisatl, Bennett, Strome, Marner, Puljujarvi, Dubois etc. You don't need to win the lottery but finishing last guarantees you a player of the caliber of the names mentioned. I still think considering the Canucks lack of elite forward talent, a pick in this range is huge.

 

Why does it have to involve trading the Sedins? The Canucks are a bad enough team already that selling a few key pieces could see them plummet to the bottom rather easily. With the current parity in the league, the Canucks don't have to get significantly worse in order to bottom out.

 

Aquilini milked everything out of this franchise when it was successful, surely he can bear the growing pains of a few seasons of losing. Its not like the fans will stay away for very long either. When the Canucks have their own young elite talent, people are bound to show up to watch. Teams like the Coyotes have been bleeding money but can still manage to make the decision to rebuild. All it takes is a willingness to invest in the long term future of the franchise. A big reason for the empty seats fan apathy and its a direct result of the direction the franchise has taken. Many season ticket holders have cancelled because they disagree with this strategy of treading water for a few years. Why should they pad Francesco's pockets for a mediocre product when he refuses to take a few losses in order to build for the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, LaBamba said:

 

I won't argue with that. Yes, a player can bust from anywhere in the draft. Let's look at everyone's dream draft position while we are in the midst of this hurried succession plan. 

 

30 teams.

definition of mediocre = 15th overall 

 

2015 Zachary Senyshyn
2014 Dylan Larkin 
2013 Ryan Pulock
2012 Cody Ceci
2011 JT Miller
2010 Derek Forbort
2009 Peter Holland
2008 Erik Karlsson 
2007 Alex Plante
2006  Riku Helenius

 

 

how many players do you see on that list who can replace the Sedins? I see about 1.5 in 10 years. 

 

 

If you did the same analysis for the 5th overall pick you'd probably come up with the same conclusion. 

 

The Sedins were top 3 picks. The only way to replace them is with top 3 picks OR with a blockbuster type trade. Like Nashville did. But like I said even if you get a top 3 pick or even the first overall pick you may end up with a Yakupov instead of a Sedin. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Toews said:

I agree that every year is different but every year there are some good players available at the top of the draft. Even if you aren't able to draft Ekblad, McDavid, or Matthews you have guys like Draisatl, Bennett, Strome, Marner, Puljujarvi, Dubois etc. You don't need to win the lottery but finishing last guarantees you a player of the caliber of the names mentioned. I still think considering the Canucks lack of elite forward talent, a pick in this range is huge.

 

Why does it have to involve trading the Sedins? The Canucks are a bad enough team already that selling a few key pieces could see them plummet to the bottom rather easily. With the current parity in the league, the Canucks don't have to get significantly worse in order to bottom out.

 

Aquilini milked everything out of this franchise when it was successful, surely he can bear the growing pains of a few seasons of losing. Its not like the fans will stay away for very long either. When the Canucks have their own young elite talent, people are bound to show up to watch. Teams like the Coyotes have been bleeding money but can still manage to make the decision to rebuild. All it takes is a willingness to invest in the long term future of the franchise. A big reason for the empty seats fan apathy and its a direct result of the direction the franchise has taken. Many season ticket holders have cancelled because they disagree with this strategy of treading water for a few years. Why should they pad Francesco's pockets for a mediocre product when he refuses to take a few losses in order to build for the future.

Excellent post.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Toews said:

I agree that every year is different but every year there are some good players available at the top of the draft. Even if you aren't able to draft Ekblad, McDavid, or Matthews you have guys like Draisatl, Bennett, Strome, Marner, Puljujarvi, Dubois etc. You don't need to win the lottery but finishing last guarantees you a player of the caliber of the names mentioned. I still think considering the Canucks lack of elite forward talent, a pick in this range is huge.

 

Why does it have to involve trading the Sedins? The Canucks are a bad enough team already that selling a few key pieces could see them plummet to the bottom rather easily. With the current parity in the league, the Canucks don't have to get significantly worse in order to bottom out.

 

Aquilini milked everything out of this franchise when it was successful, surely he can bear the growing pains of a few seasons of losing. Its not like the fans will stay away for very long either. When the Canucks have their own young elite talent, people are bound to show up to watch. Teams like the Coyotes have been bleeding money but can still manage to make the decision to rebuild. All it takes is a willingness to invest in the long term future of the franchise. A big reason for the empty seats fan apathy and its a direct result of the direction the franchise has taken. Many season ticket holders have cancelled because they disagree with this strategy of treading water for a few years. Why should they pad Francesco's pockets for a mediocre product when he refuses to take a few losses in order to build for the future.

 

Sure you can get a top end talent at 3 just like you can get one at 15. It depends on the talent pool available that year. But as has been mentioned many times it's easier to hit at 3 than at 15 so naturally people want the higher pick which means you have to be really bad. 

 

In terms of the Sedins I am sure we could be bad without having to trade them. But I am just going by what Lindem is saying which is they want to remain competitive while the Sedins are still here. It makes it a lot easier to do a full rebuild if they weren't around. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Harvey Spector said:

 

If you did the same analysis for the 5th overall pick you'd probably come up with the same conclusion. 

 

The Sedins were top 3 picks. The only way to replace them is with top 3 picks OR with a blockbuster type trade. Like Nashville did. But like I said even if you get a top 3 pick or even the first overall pick you may end up with a Yakupov instead of a Sedin. 

 

Where would you have the better odds? 

 

Like I have said over and over and over again. I don't care how we do this.

 

I just don't make up best case scenarios in my head to make myself feel better.  

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...