Performance per Dollar

[lmm]

19 minutes ago, Alflives said:

I don't know that; that's up to HW.  Whether on purpose (Leafs/Sabres style) or not, this team is IN THE TANK.  We might as well sink to the friggin bottom, where the chances are better at the draft lottery, no? 

idoubt we can climb much or fall really.

But we might get up to 10th in our conference if we traded this and next years first for Phil Kessel

 

[JM_]

3 minutes ago, oldnews said:

If you're expecting to win under the circumstances, I think you need a good dose of @LaBamba.

 

The irony for me is that folks like yourself who honestly did not believe the team could compete - ignore some key additional context - and yet wonder why the results aren't at the level the team is striving for.

 

I also can't get on board with complaining about how 'weak' the draft if supposed to be - I find those kind of premature declarations say as much about the glasses of the viewer as they do reality.  There will be very good players available when the Canucks step up to the podium, and we won't be winning any lotteries regardless.  Expect to drop a few spots in draft order - it's the healthiest and most realistic disposition with respect to the draft (or any thing Canuck).

 

Thats sound advice. True tanking is no longer guaranteed, they way its structured now, if you finish last you're only guaranteed a 48% chance of a top 3 pick. 

[robvp]

6 hours ago, Moonshinefe said:

Entertainment per dollar for Canucks tickets: you're better off just doing literally almost anything else. Unless of course you love spending what is it $10, $15, $20 per beer now? Plus hundreds of dollars in time, ticket and traveling fees to come see a bottom of the basement team lose live! That's what I thought of based on the topic, anyway.

What you said! Even when I get freebie's I still end up spending $50-75 on beer. It's outrageous(and no, I don't want to hear about how I could go and sip water).

[riffraff]

2 hours ago, HorvatToBaertschi said:

Mike gillis traded for rentals, bénning trade for young players looking to build à New core.

Baertschi

Gudbranson 

Larsen

Vey (damn)

Etc....

 

All of them are teetering on "damn"

[chickenman92]

7 hours ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

Have been droning on about this, as of late.

 

4 Swedes: slow, not gritty, & one of them breaks a stick every 2nd shift. All for a bargain basement 25 mill/AAV.

 

Just hope Benning can do for the fwds(in about a yr), what he did for the D.

 

Need patience now.

Can we drop the "Benning has done an amazing job with the defence" talk?

While there does appear to be some decent talent, the Canucks Defence sucked last year and they are pretty much just as bad this season. 

- 4 defencemen in the bottom 50 +/-

- 27th in GAA at 3.10 goals given up per game

 

That's not a good defence. The Canucks defence still has a long way to go before it's anything to brag about. 

[oldnews]

9 minutes ago, chickenman92 said:

 

you can drop whatever you want.

[aGENT]

25 minutes ago, chickenman92 said:

Can we drop the "Benning has done an amazing job with the defence" talk?

While there does appear to be some decent talent, the Canucks Defence sucked last year and they are pretty much just as bad this season. 

- 4 defencemen in the bottom 50 +/-

- 27th in GAA at 3.10 goals given up per game

 

That's not a good defence. The Canucks defence still has a long way to go before it's anything to brag about. 

 

How about 'promising' then? The youngest D in the NHL and missing their top pair isn't a recipe for looking good now. It's not really about the 'now' though, is it?

[CeeBee51]

1 minute ago, J.R. said:

 

How about 'promising' then? The youngest D in the NHL and missing their top pair isn't a recipe for looking good now. It's not really about the 'now' though, is it?

Some people want the first overall draft pick AND the now.

[Oliewud]

some people just want competent managing. Not a rookie gm, a rookie president, and a rookie coach.

[chickenman92]

3 minutes ago, Oliewud said:

some people just want competent managing. Not a rookie gm, a rookie president, and a rookie coach.

Nailed it!

[Alflives]

5 minutes ago, Oliewud said:

some people just want competent managing. Not a rookie gm, a rookie president, and a rookie coach.

That's all this owner will hire, or only rookies will work for him?  I really can't see an experienced GM working for this owner.

[chickenman92]

26 minutes ago, J.R. said:

 

How about 'promising' then? The youngest D in the NHL and missing their top pair isn't a recipe for looking good now. It's not really about the 'now' though, is it?

Well according to Jim and Trev it is. "The Canucks are a competitive team that is only a few points back of a playoff spot" 

There is no need to rebuild. 

[aGENT]

Just now, chickenman92 said:

Well according to Jim and Trev it is. "The Canucks are a competitive team that is only a few points back of a playoff spot" 

There is no need to rebuild. 

 

You need to learn how to decipher PR vs reality.

[xereau]

+1 for not using the word intangibles, not even once.

[apollo]

11 hours ago, Oliewud said:

Mike Gillis traded away 12 picks over a 6 year period. Jim Benning has traded away 12 picks over a 2.5 year period.

But... JIMBO KNOWS HOCKEY! 

 

It's not a far stretch to call Jimbo the worst GM in hockey. 

 

In before @oldnews grills me! 

[Tajun]

17 minutes ago, apollo said:

But... JIMBO KNOWS HOCKEY! 

 

It's not a far stretch to call Jimbo the worst GM in hockey. 

 

In before @oldnews grills me! 

I miss the old apollo 

[JamesB]

1 hour ago, oldnews said:

 

His best cap value players - Tanev and Hansen - haven't been in the lineup.

 

MIller is expiring - really a non-issue in the transitional phase.

 

The Sedins are playing with the youngest blueline in the NHL - sorry, but 36yr olds that aren't particularly fleet-footed or gritty - need some solid backup on the back-end, and as good as the young D are, they're green.  I don't expect a lot more of them until they have a top pairing to work with - without that, they get killed in their own end of the ice.

 

Gudbranson isn't playing a "shutdown" role - he's playing a complementary role to Hutton. That much should be patently obvious from his deployment and should be clear to anyone that considers themself an 'analytlics' guy - look at possession numbers, pdo, deployment reality, and not +/-.

Yeah, they're essentially the top pairing in the present - far from ideal - but they're also both very good young D that will be better than fine, they'll be an excellent pair for a long time.

 

Sutter is playing a dual role - shutdown minutes and pp - so focusing on points alone (which have been fine) or +/- is misleading, and I suspect an analytics guy knows that.   These kind of one-liner reviews don't really stand up - I think you should dig deeper for the more complicated truth there.  The shutdown aspect of his role is coming without a shutdown pairing - of course he's going to be a 'green jacket' in that context - and likewise, even when he's playing with the Sedins, it's in front of the NHL's youngest blueline, so the math isn't hard to do.

 

The prospect pool - people that run it down imo miss some key facts.

First, and probably most important - is that the tank teams they're competing with on uptick - have all their premier prospects in their lineups - the Coil have the McDavids, JPuls, etc in their lineup.  The Leafs have all their babyfaces (Matthews, Marner, Nylander) in their lineup.  Etc.  The non-tankers - Calgary have their Tkackuk and "18 yr old' in their lineup....

The Canucks best young prospects - Boeser, Juolevi, Demko - are in the system, but on the way.  Imo that represents better uptick than you're likely to see than from outside those teams we're supposed to envy.  Key point imo.  In addition - attempting to cap guys like Lockwood, Gaudette, Brisebois, Neill or whomever is pointless - we have no idea who will or won't emerge in two or three years time.

 

Anyhow, those are my counterpoints - the OP was pretty imbalanced and leaning toward the usual CDC sky is falling dynamic, so there's a counter dose of homer for you.

Pretty fair counter-argument to my OP but, as oldnews notes in the last sentence, is definitely a "homer" perspective.

 

I don't think the sky is falling. I just want the team to do the right thing from here on out. Given the structure of the draft class this year there is no point in "tanking". There is a point in accumulating draft picks and trying to build up the pipeline. If it were up to me I would trade any vet for whom there is a market if good combination of draft picks and prospects could be obtained. That does not mean trading all the vets but I would like to trade a few. I agree we need some veteran leadership but I also think that younger leaders are emerging, especially Horvat, obviously. I also think that Stecher is potential leader. Frankly, I think those two guys are showing the vets how to play.

[JamesB]

1 hour ago, chickenman92 said:

Can we drop the "Benning has done an amazing job with the defence" talk?

While there does appear to be some decent talent, the Canucks Defence sucked last year and they are pretty much just as bad this season. 

- 4 defencemen in the bottom 50 +/-

- 27th in GAA at 3.10 goals given up per game

 

That's not a good defence. The Canucks defence still has a long way to go before it's anything to brag about. 

 

55 minutes ago, J.R. said:

 

How about 'promising' then? The youngest D in the NHL and missing their top pair isn't a recipe for looking good now. It's not really about the 'now' though, is it?

 

Good posts. Putting these thing together, Benning has done enough to restore hope in the D. The D is now young instead of old. Prospects like Juolevi, Brisebois, and Neill provide some possibility of a good D down the road. And the current young guys on the roster - Stecher, Hutton, and Tryamkin -- also provide hope for the future.

 

But right now the D is struggling, as chickenman indicates. JR points out that having Tanev and Edler out hurts a lot, but there has also been disappointing performance from other players. Obviously way too much was expected of Hutton and Gudbranson and the extra pressure has hurt them instead of letting them rise to the occasion. Larsen was a failed experiment even before being injured (but I certainly wish him the best).

 

Sbisa is not bad. You are happy to have him in the bottom pair, but if he is in your top 4 that means you are struggling.

 

But there is a real hole in the pipeline for future scoring. We need more promising young forwards in the system, starting with this year's draft.

 

 

[Alflives]

3 minutes ago, JamesB said:

 

 

Good posts. Putting these thing together, Benning has done enough to restore hope in the D. The D is now young instead of old. Prospects like Juolevi, Brisebois, and Neill provide some possibility of a good D down the road. And the current young guys on the roster - Stecher, Hutton, and Tryamkin -- also provide hope for the future.

 

But right now the D is struggling, as chickenman indicates. JR points out that having Tanev and Edler out hurts a lot, but there has also been disappointing performance from other players. Obviously way too much was expected of Hutton and Gudbranson and the extra pressure has hurt them instead of letting them rise to the occasion. Larsen was a failed experiment even before being injured (but I certainly wish him the best).

 

Sbisa is not bad. You are happy to have him in the bottom pair, but if he is in your top 4 that means you are struggling.

 

But there is a real hole in the pipeline for future scoring. We need more promising young forwards in the system, starting with this year's draft.

 

 

Agree with all you post except: the future forwards should have started when Benning first got here, but he missed.  Larkin and Pasternak from his first draft would be helping out.  Boeser looks good though.  And Tkatchuk last draft would have been better than what's his name.  That's three young forwards we missed on.  JB can't afford to miss.  He just doesn't have enough picks to miss like that.

[oldnews]

17 minutes ago, JamesB said:

Pretty fair counter-argument to my OP but, as oldnews notes in the last sentence, is definitely a "homer" perspective.

 

I don't think the sky is falling. I just want the team to do the right thing from here on out. Given the structure of the draft class this year there is no point in "tanking". There is a point in accumulating draft picks and trying to build up the pipeline. If it were up to me I would trade any vet for whom there is a market if good combination of draft picks and prospects could be obtained. That does not mean trading all the vets but I would like to trade a few. I agree we need some veteran leadership but I also think that younger leaders are emerging, especially Horvat, obviously. I also think that Stecher is potential leader. Frankly, I think those two guys are showing the vets how to play.

Well as I've said elsewhere, I think they've reached a point of existing youth and depth to the point that it's at a 'next stage' point of their remaking of this team, where they need to focus less on shorter term youth and can shift to longer.  I doubt you'll see any moves at all for veterans, and if there are any more 'retool' moves, I have no problem with the Sutter, Gudbranson, Granlund type mold.  Still, I see that as a possibility, but not necessarily a likelihood. 

 

So I think people protesting about trading picks are both not paying that close attention to where the team was vs where it is, and maybe not listening to what Benning is saying - and he's been pretty straight up about the kinds of moves he intends or does not intend to make.

That said, dealing roster veterans will be exceptionally difficult this year for any player with term - heading into the expansion draft - so you're really limited to Miller or Burrows and what they want to do. 

I think you're most likely to see most teams playing the hand they currently hold, with perhaps some rentals.  It'd be nice if we could rent one of them for a pick, but don't get your hopes up.

In any event, I think Benning has enough volume of picks in hand to continue to make a solid impact at the draft.