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

1 hour ago, hearditall said:

Edmonton drafted 3 times #1 overall before McDavid. They also had many top ten picks as well during that time & they absolutely never improved.

I doubt Chicago wins cups without Duncan Kieth drafted #52 or Seabrook mid round pick...  

Wow you're brilliant with that assessment! Winning a first overall pick doesn't mean a cup. Doesn't even mean the best player in the draft. It does mean  you had the best chance of picking the best player.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, IBatch said:

I saw Vancouver put 70+ shots on net live against Mtl and then Ott back to back games in the middle of their losing streak outplaying two of the better teams in the league this year.  And it wasnt painful to watch.  This team won't hit their low cycle until the Sedins are done and right now it might not be perfect but at least it's entertaining.  

It's like slowly pulling off a bandaid though.  We are a crappy team, so why not get the pain of a rebuild over sooner?  Let's yank that bandaid off!  Maybe our owner is a big scare D cat.  "Ouch, that rebuild hurts". "I want a retool".  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Alflives said:

The lower we finish the better our chances of getting a higher pick.  That's my point.  JB seems to scout the lower picks better than the top picks, so maybe we should just trade our first rounders?

It's really so unrealistic now to say we need #1 or nothing. We could finish dead last & not get 1st overall or even 2nd with lottery system.

Our team at best is a wild card team. Now with the injuries I think we'll now be a bottom 10 team.

You can not lose on purpose. U can not tell Bo, Baer, Burrows, Sedins, Stecher, Tryamkin, Miller, Markstrom, Hutton, Gub, Hansen, Sutter, Eriksson, etc. to NOT TRY to score or win & play bad & hurt your overall play/progression so we can finish dead last & pick a player that will come in & take one of your jobs away.... LMAO. Just doesn't work like that at this level of play. 

Has anybody here ever played competitive sports? When did u ever give up if u did? U could be the worst team on paper & be playing the best team on paper, but u still believe U can win. The paper means nothing if you're actually competing.

The moment U give up U aren't competitive anymore & u definitely don't belong in the NHL...:towel:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, hearditall said:

It's really so unrealistic now to say we need #1 or nothing. We could finish dead last & not get 1st overall or even 2nd with lottery system.

Our team at best is a wild card team. Now with the injuries I think we'll now be a bottom 10 team.

You can not lose on purpose. U can not tell Bo, Baer, Burrows, Sedins, Stecher, Tryamkin, Miller, Markstrom, Hutton, Gub, Hansen, Sutter, Eriksson, etc. to NOT TRY to score or win & play bad & hurt your overall play/progression so we can finish dead last & pick a player that will come in & take one of your jobs away.... LMAO. Just doesn't work like that at this level of play. 

Has anybody here ever played competitive sports? When did u ever give up if u did? U could be the worst team on paper & be playing the best team on paper, but u still believe U can win. The paper means nothing if you're actually competing.

The moment U give up U aren't competitive anymore & u definitely don't belong in the NHL...:towel:

So should we trade away our first round pick?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/4/2016 at 0:48 PM, Bert Diesel said:

          Although it's nice to win (especially against the Leafs) it's in the team's best interest to finish in the bottom 5-10 in the league for another year. With Juolevi, Boeser and some of the other prospects coming into the system in the next few years, the organization will get stronger from Utica up. Right now it's somewhat amazing to see this new young defense core come out of nowhere. Stecher, Tryamkin and Hutton have been beams of light through a dark past few years.

 

        For all the whining I here about the Lindbenning regime on social media and on this board, people don't give them enough credit for making some shrewd moves(just as Gillis was often unfairly criticized). Losing a guy like Corrado on waivers or failing to gain assets for Vrbata and Hamhuis were minor mistakes when you compare them to the finds they have garnered in the later rounds of the draft or, like Stecher, in free agency. The scrutiny of the media in this town creates an environment where the most minor mistakes are evidence of a general incompetence from management or a conspiracy from ownership. Can you imagine the reaction in this town if we had traded Lawson Crouse to get rid of the Dave Bolland contract as the new GM in Florida did recently. The pitchforks would have been out in full force. People shouldn't forget that the current management hands were tied with No-trade clauses, many of which were given out as rewards for previous sweetheart contracts and a highly successful era under Gillis. Yes, the team is going through some pain since the Tortorella year but our pain is extremely minor compared to the likes of Toronto or Edmonton who have suffered for over a decade. Have some perspective people. 

 

       Comparing the team to last year, the Canucks' defense could have never sustained the injuries it has this year and still remained competitive. Having Bartowski, Weber and Biega on the back end was an unmitigated disaster but the options were limited. Benning has managed to rebuild the defensive core in a rapid fashion. With Tanev and Edler out, they have the youngest defensive core in the league. If were are rebuilding from the net out, they now have a stable of young prospects (Demko, Garteig, Juolevi, Brisebois, Subban, Pedan, Neil) as well as the Hutton, Stech and Tryamkin trio already making big NHL contributions. This also allows for the possibility that the team could trade one of the more veteran guys (Tanev, Gudbranson or Edler) for some picks or young forwards. 

 

        The clear weakness of this years team is the lack of depth in the forward ranks. Having Megna and Chaput as regular forwards illustrates this. Injuries have hurt particularly Hansen and Rodin. The last few drafts have seen us gather Boeser, Lockwood and Gaudette all three have blossomed in the NCAA this year and last but there is still not enough organizational depth here particularly with the MCcan trade(I wonder if they'd take that one back). There is an obvious lack of size and speed in the Canucks as currently constructed. Virtanen and Boeser could help solve this problem but the regime needs to come out of the 2017 draft with a young, blue chip forward preferably a center. Ideally, the Canucks need to drop the Sedin's down to third or fourth line minutes and powerplay time if they are going to survive a few more seasons. In order to do this, they need to get an offensive threat coming out of junior. This may take about 2-3 seasons but the great positive of this year is that the team is more fun to watch and much more competitive despite not always seeing success in the standings.

 

"(particularly with the MCcan trade(I wonder if they'd take that one back)"

 

Your not serious are you?  we were paying 4m a season for Bieska and Guds brings better fighting skills and then defensively better by FAR!  Guds is already better than Bieska is now with all his experience. Seen him make the same old boneheaded plays more often that not but Guds doesn't do that much at all. You don't see him in the penaly box half as much or even 1/4 as much. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, hearditall said:

:picard::sadno::picard:

Who the heck ever said that...................:wacko:

I thought you did by indicating the high picks aren't really a sure thing?  If we could get Sam Reinhart for our coming first + Tanev would that not be worth it?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Westcoasting said:

You could do this with every number in the draft... Unless you are claiming a number 1 pick will have less chance?

Statistically in the last 20 years the 2nd overall pick has more cups. 

 

1st overall - 4 players

2nd overall – 5 players

3rd overall – 3 players

4th overall – 1 player

5th overall – 1 player

6th overall – 0 player

7th overall – 0 players

8th overall – 0 players

9th overall - 0 players

10th overall – 0 players

11th overall – 2 players

12th overall – 2 players

13th overall – 1 player

14th overall – 1 player

15th overall – 0 players

16th overall – 0 players

17th overall – 0 players

18th overall – 2 players

19th overall – 1 player

20th overall – 0 players

21st overall – 1 player

22nd overall – 1 player

23rd overall – 0 players

24th overall – 1 player

25th overall – 0 players

 

But as we all know, 1 player doesn’t win the cup.  So we could dig deeper into this and determine what combination is more likely to win a cup.  For example 1st overall + 3rd overall or 2nd overall + the 11th overall. 

 

But in the end all this is pointless because draft picks aren’t static, they fluctuate year to year.  You can’t give a 1st overall pick or second overall pick an exact value because of this.  One year a first overall pick is McDavid and the next it’s a Yakupov. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Alflives said:

I thought you did by indicating the high picks aren't really a sure thing?  If we could get Sam Reinhart for our coming first + Tanev would that not be worth it?  

Alf, why would we do that?  we have enough in the shelf now, next year comes Boeser...  but essentially we need bigger faster players and we can pay them more next yr too with Miller off the books and Burr gone too or signed for less. We're fine bro...  no need to give up Tanev or a first and that's not even counting Rodin either

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, iceman64 said:

"(particularly with the MCcan trade(I wonder if they'd take that one back)"

 

Your not serious are you?  we were paying 4m a season for Bieska and Guds brings better fighting skills and then defensively better by FAR!  Guds is already better than Bieska is now with all his experience. Seen him make the same old boneheaded plays more often that not but Guds doesn't do that much at all. You don't see him in the penaly box half as much or even 1/4 as much. 

I think you just got hooked. B)  of course Gudbranson is a keeper.  You should hear Pierre McGire talk about that Gudbranson for McCann trade.  He thinks Florida was nuts.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Alflives said:

I think you just got hooked. B)  of course Gudbranson is a keeper.  You should hear Pierre McGire talk about that Gudbranson for McCann trade.  He thinks Florida was nuts.  

McG was right of course...  didn't take rocket science that McCann is as any rookie is...  no experience, so why bet on something that you don't know what it will be in years vs what Guddy already showed... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, IBatch said:

I saw Vancouver put 70+ shots on net live against Mtl and then Ott back to back games in the middle of their losing streak outplaying two of the better teams in the league this year.  And it wasnt painful to watch.  This team won't hit their low cycle until the Sedins are done and right now it might not be perfect but at least it's entertaining.  

 

There is a HUGE difference between good hockey, with good puck movement, and putting shots on net... I wonder why they lost those games? It probably had nothing to do with not generating strong scoring chances with incisive passing, and instead settling for bad shots from the perimeter. I don't even remember those games and I'd wager that was the case... Shots don't matter, it's goals that matter... Shooting too much is a bad characteristic, it's why Erik Gudbranson is an anchor in the offensive zone... He gives away so much possession taking bad shots and missing the net.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Aircool said:

 

There is a HUGE difference between good hockey, with good puck movement, and putting shots on net... I wonder why they lost those games? It probably had nothing to do with not generating strong scoring chances with incisive passing, and instead settling for bad shots from the perimeter. I don't even remember those games and I'd wager that was the case... Shots don't matter, it's goals that matter... Shooting too much is a bad characteristic, it's why Erik Gudbranson is an anchor in the offensive zone... He gives away so much possession taking bad shots and missing the net.

 

that's usually because someone has taken too long and the play is well defended against, we're extremely guilty of that...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, iceman64 said:

that's usually because someone has taken too long and the play is well defended against, we're extremely guilty of that...

 

Which was exactly the point of my original post, our puck movement sucks.... we hold the puck way too much and we move it in predictable patterns... The Sedins are just so gifted at passing and creating that despite this they can score goals, but the rest of our team needs to make transition plays or power-moves to score because that's the only way to score despite bad puck movement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Alflives said:

I thought you did by indicating the high picks aren't really a sure thing?  If we could get Sam Reinhart for our coming first + Tanev would that not be worth it?  

Hows our Defence looking for the future to U?

 Stecher (22), Hutton (24), Gubranson (24), Tryamkin (21), Sbisa, Pedan, Olsen, Neil, Subban (21), Juolevi (18), Tanev, Brisbois (19), etc. 

Looks like to me, JB has pretty much re-build the Defence already & is looking very promising for the future. Nice blend of young talent, size & compete now. Some great work there as defence is always the hardest part to re-build especially if u want to one day compete for the CUP... TY JB.

 

Our Goalies - Miller, Markstrom, Demko, Garteig  solid young talent there. Future also looking good between the pipes. TY JB...

 

With Horvat, Boeser, Virtanen, Baer, Rodin, Gaunce, Lockwood, Gaudette, Zhukerov, etc., this is where we are definitely looking to develop & improve. Drafting, developing & possibly trading in the next few years is the only way to improve this area. Heck Boeser & Rodin may be the 2 answers we are looking for???

In the few years he's been here he's fixed the hardest & most important parts of this team. I'm pretty sure JB  sees what's next & is already on it, developing, drafting, scouting, possible trades are all in the near future. Can't do everything overnight....

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, hearditall said:

Explain to me how U get that #1 overall pick? Lose on purpose but then lose the lottery draft???

Also McJesus & Mathews aren't usually the norm.

Before them 2014 - Ekblad

2013 - Mackinnon

2012 - Yakupov

What's to say that isn't the calibre of players coming in the next few years again? More likely than another McJesus or Mathews. Not exactly guaranteed to march u to the parade players...

So if u are telling me that finishing dead last is the only way than sorry I'm not buying that especially with the lottery system...

Ekblad and MacKinnon would instantly become the face of this franchise would they have been drafted by us. If anything, you just singled out Yakupov as the outlier. 

 

A 1OA doesn't have to be a generational talent... unless your scouting department somehow sabotage themselves, the pick is more than likely a franchise-defining one though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, guntrix said:

Ekblad and MacKinnon would instantly become the face of this franchise would they have been drafted by us. If anything, you just singled out Yakupov as the outlier. 

 

A 1OA doesn't have to be a generational talent... unless your scouting department somehow sabotage themselves, the pick is more than likely a franchise-defining one though. 

Or maybe after your 4th in 6 years you get yourself a 'franchise-defining' one.

If the balls fall your way of course.

And then you still have the little matter of building a team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, guntrix said:

Ekblad and MacKinnon would instantly become the face of this franchise would they have been drafted by us. If anything, you just singled out Yakupov as the outlier. 

 

A 1OA doesn't have to be a generational talent... unless your scouting department somehow sabotage themselves, the pick is more than likely a franchise-defining one though. 

Ok so U want a 1st overall pick, who the heck doesn't...

Explain exactly Mr. knowitall how we are supposed to get that pick exactly???

Tell everyone on the team to quit trying no matter what it does to there own career stats so Canucks can maybe pick #1 if the lucky lotto goes our way too? LOL...

Tell the coach to keep playing the 4th line on PP's?

Tell Bo, Stecher, Tryamkin, etc. to give up & stop trying to get better? Maybe give the puck away instead of keeping possession of it? LOL...

Play the vets, tell them to not score so we can draft the player that's going to take your job next year? LOL...

What exactly do u do to get #1 seeing that U knowitall???

I've definitely hearditall....

 

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...