(Proposal) Ignore the Noise

[Rob_Zepp]

If your Canucks are going to have the best chance to return to a competitive team, they are going to have to disappoint the vast majority of the active posters on CDC based upon what one reads on here.  That is - NO trading of any draft picks for the next few years....period.   Only trade current assets IF they come with a younger prospect and/or draft pick and with the former, that prospect needs to have a projectable ceiling equal to or greater than the asset moved.   

 

Sign undrafted and/or college Free Agents that have pace to their game when there are contracts to be used up and work at having your minor league system become the best in the business.   

 

Draft as well as you can and avoid trends, projects and all other outside noise that will detract from building from the ground up.   

 

Won't be sexy but will be best chance at being effective.   Trades can come later when you are in a position of strength.   Only exception would be if you find a CAP strapped team and the move makes way too much sense - but even then, never including a draft pick in what goes the other way.   Treat the picks like sacred gifts.

 

Slam away.   This is indeed boring and media will hate as will all the armchair GMs.    

[IBatch]

11 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

If your Canucks are going to have the best chance to return to a competitive team, they are going to have to disappoint the vast majority of the active posters on CDC based upon what one reads on here.  That is - NO trading of any draft picks for the next few years....period.   Only trade current assets IF they come with a younger prospect and/or draft pick and with the former, that prospect needs to have a projectable ceiling equal to or greater than the asset moved.   

 

Sign undrafted and/or college Free Agents that have pace to their game when there are contracts to be used up and work at having your minor league system become the best in the business.   

 

Draft as well as you can and avoid trends, projects and all other outside noise that will detract from building from the ground up.   

 

Won't be sexy but will be best chance at being effective.   Trades can come later when you are in a position of strength.   Only exception would be if you find a CAP strapped team and the move makes way too much sense - but even then, never including a draft pick in what goes the other way.   Treat the picks like sacred gifts.

 

Slam away.   This is indeed boring and media will hate as will all the armchair GMs.    

I think you would be pleased at how many of us would be totally on board not trading any picks and just drafting well.  On top of that trading veterans like last deadline with Burrows and Hansen.  Out prospect pool is better than its looked it the last decade now, and two more year of the same is the medicine this team needs to create the next young core.

[goalie13]

21 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Slam away.   This is indeed boring and media will hate as will all the armchair GMs.    

Nothing to slam.  I've said before that I am willing to wait while this team develops.  I feel they are headed in the right direction, no need to screw it up with stupid deals.

[Solinar]

  I agree with you that drafting and development is the way to go.  We need to invest in the youth, and start developing one of the best AHL systems that has been.  You look at Pittsburgh and Detroit.   They are always turning up gems that aren't from the first round, and giving the big team the players it needs to succeed.  Sometimes it isn't about drafting a superstar, but developing him from a prospect with a few warts, rounding out their game, giving them the skills, confidence, and tools to succeed.

  That being said, you can't be Winnipeg and just sit on your hands.  Sometimes you draft a few extra d-men to develop so that you can trade to fill in holes in the system.  If you have a knack for developing a certain type of player that is useful for other teams, you exploit that to fill in gaps that happen when a player doesn't turn out.  And never be afraid to trade an asset you acquired for nothing but cash to get a couple of useful players.

  The next few years are going to be important.  For the first time I envision us actually having a full farm team made up of all of our picks.  Competition within the ranks of actual Canucks draftees, instead of constantly having to fill in the vacancies with ahl free agents that are made up of guys that used to be, never were, or never will be's.  A team that grows up together, trends forward together, and will play for one another because they've been part of the system and know they can move up the ranks.

  

[Wilbur]

11 minutes ago, Solinar said:

  I agree with you that drafting and development is the way to go.  We need to invest in the youth, and start developing one of the best AHL systems that has been.  You look at Pittsburgh and Detroit.   They are always turning up gems that aren't from the first round, and giving the big team the players it needs to succeed.  Sometimes it isn't about drafting a superstar, but developing him from a prospect with a few warts, rounding out their game, giving them the skills, confidence, and tools to succeed.

  That being said, you can't be Winnipeg and just sit on your hands.  Sometimes you draft a few extra d-men to develop so that you can trade to fill in holes in the system.  If you have a knack for developing a certain type of player that is useful for other teams, you exploit that to fill in gaps that happen when a player doesn't turn out.  And never be afraid to trade an asset you acquired for nothing but cash to get a couple of useful players.

  The next few years are going to be important.  For the first time I envision us actually having a full farm team made up of all of our picks.  Competition within the ranks of actual Canucks draftees, instead of constantly having to fill in the vacancies with ahl free agents that are made up of guys that used to be, never were, or never will be's.  A team that grows up together, trends forward together, and will play for one another because they've been part of the system and know they can move up the ranks.

  

Heh, the Canucks lately have a pretty good track record of developing goalies...too bad they aren't worth anything in the trade market.  But yeah, having too many centres and defensemen is never a bad problem.

[elvis15]

33 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

...

Slam away.   This is indeed boring and media will hate as will all the armchair GMs.    

The only thing I'll slam is that you're lumping a lot of CDC in together. Plenty of us don't want to trade picks unless we can get better ones back (or high end prospects/young players) and are happy to move a few current assets that might not be a part of the future core to get more picks/youth.

 

But then, you never really put yourself out there with some specifics on how that could be possible. All you've said is a lot of generic things to be held to no matter what, when sometimes you have to break the rules for the right deal. If you have some ideas - which is the point of a proposal - then feel free to come back and add them to this thread. Otherwise we've all heard this before.

[Solinar]

Was also thinking of churning out high quality gritty 2 way centers/wingers that could play in a good teams bottom 6 and bottom pairing defensemen.  The kind you trade at the tdl for more picks.  So you don't get any busts or long in the tooth prospects.  The key is to continually have turn over, either to the main team or to the league.

[Rob_Zepp]

2 minutes ago, elvis15 said:

The only thing I'll slam is that you're lumping a lot of CDC in together. Plenty of us don't want to trade picks unless we can get better ones back (or high end prospects/young players) and are happy to move a few current assets that might not be a part of the future core to get more picks/youth.

 

But then, you never really put yourself out there with some specifics on how that could be possible. All you've said is a lot of generic things to be held to no matter what, when sometimes you have to break the rules for the right deal. If you have some ideas - which is the point of a proposal - then feel free to come back and add them to this thread. Otherwise we've all heard this before.

Fair points - just gets so monotonous reading angst among those expecting to trade with parties who would frankly need to be insane to make the proposed deals.   This coupled with a few relentless trollers who must be so insecure in their own favourite team that they have to spend time polluting CDC with their proclamations that every single Canuck prospect will underachieve and every single move made by management is the "worst ever".   

 

It has been more than a decade since this franchise had a consistent course and now that the prospect pool is actually showing both depth and potential, it could be a very strong attribute of the franchise as early as two or three years from now building towards a consistent contender.    Once the prospect pool is solidified,and restocked on the fly, it can turn a franchise into a perpetual contender and all it takes is some draft luck, some chemistry and a deft trade here and there and contender status upgrades - look at Nashville for one example.   

[Toews]

1 hour ago, Rob_Zepp said:

If your Canucks are going to have the best chance to return to a competitive team, they are going to have to disappoint the vast majority of the active posters on CDC based upon what one reads on here.  That is - NO trading of any draft picks for the next few years....period.   Only trade current assets IF they come with a younger prospect and/or draft pick and with the former, that prospect needs to have a projectable ceiling equal to or greater than the asset moved.  

I have been saying from the beginning that the team needs to retain picks. I think too many picks have been traded in the past few years in order to bring guys that have not worked out at the pro level. IMO the current management's strength seems to be amateur scouting, so not just retaining picks but acquiring picks should also be a priority going forward. But with that said if I had my way I would not enforce any hard and fast rule saying that draft picks are absolutely off the table. In the end the value of a pick is best determined by your scouts. If your scouts are dissatisfied with the talent available at the pick and another team values that pick more than you do, then you need to make that move.

 

1 hour ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Sign undrafted and/or college Free Agents that have pace to their game when there are contracts to be used up and work at having your minor league system become the best in the business.  

Currently Utica is not up to par with the top farm clubs in the NHL. Its not enough to simply own the farm team, you need to have a dedicated GM for your farm club that is capable of making the moves to strengthen the team. Organizations like Wilkes-Barrie, Toronto, Rockford, Syracuse etc are well ahead of the Comets. That needs to change.

 

People cite the reason that injuries are the downfall of this team every year. Tampa had half their lineup filled with players from Syracuse, they just missed the playoffs by a few points and their farm club still finished first in their division. Once injuries hit the Canucks, the talent from Utica got depleted. Signings like Chaput and Megna who were supposed to bolster the farm club ended up playing NHL games as a result. A depleted Utica lineup limped to the finish line missing the playoffs by just a couple of points. Tampa under Yzerman have taken the time to draft and develop their own talent. They have a pipeline of talent in their organizations that it doesn't matter to them when a couple of them get claimed on waivers. For the Canucks even losing a guy like Corrado was a blow because of lack of depth in the organization.

 

1 hour ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Draft as well as you can and avoid trends, projects and all other outside noise that will detract from building from the ground up.  

Disagree with this. You need to pay attention to the trends in the current NHL. The game is constantly changing. We are seeing a trend in the past few years where teams are emphasizing speed and mobility. If you cannot keep up because your skating is not up to par then you are not going to be in the league very long.

 

You need to pay attention to what other teams around you are doing. You cannot live in your bubble. This means you judge your scouting staff on their competency. Constantly evaluating how your scouts are doing in respect to other organizations is how you manage to stay ahead. This means cutting any dead weight. If a particular scout has a good eye then they should be retained. If another is constantly suggesting duds then let that person go. Too many teams in the past have stuck by individuals for loyalty and it only leads to staleness.

 

I also see nothing wrong with 'project' picks. The late rounds are a crap shoot, if your scouts think a player is worth taking a chance on then you make that happen.

 

Some here will likely tell me I am being critical. Others will get upset that I am criticizing individuals that have been involved in the game longer than I have been alive. They will likely tell me that my opinion doesn't mean much. They are probably right. I am critical and ultimately my opinion doesn't mean much but that doesn't mean I will stop voicing it. If you choose to look at things in a glass half-full way then that is your prerogative. I personally have always approached things in a glass half-empty way, its the way I approach everything in life. If you are not actively trying to adapt your methods to a competitive environment then you will lag behind. If you aren't picking faults within yourself then you aren't doing everything you can to improve. Its almost a conditioned response for me at this point. So yes Rob you can call me a troll if it pleases you but I am not going to stop being critical just because it annoys you, mostly because I cannot stop even if I tried.

[TheGuardian_]

Draft picks can be a crap shoot, this team needs too much to try to build through the draft. Think on it, IF every first rounder and half the 2nd rounder are good enough, the shear numbers needed it could take 5 to 6 years to fill in all the spots needed and then guys on the team now will be so expensive if still here.

 

The word MAKE, when talking about trades usually indicates that one side wants a player/prospect more than the other side wants to give him up.

There are ways and times to entice a team into making a deal.

[TheGuardian_]

24 minutes ago, Toews said:

Some here will likely tell me I am being critical. Others will get upset that I am criticizing individuals that have been involved in the game longer than I have been alive. They will likely tell me that my opinion doesn't mean much. They are probably right. I am critical and ultimately my opinion doesn't mean much but that doesn't mean I will stop voicing it. If you choose to look at things in a glass half-full way then that is your prerogative. I personally have always approached things in a glass half-empty way, its the way I approach everything in life. If you are not actively trying to adapt your methods to a competitive environment then you will lag behind. If you aren't picking faults within yourself then you aren't doing everything you can to improve. Its almost a conditioned response for me at this point. So yes Rob you can call me a troll if it pleases you but I am not going to stop being critical just because it annoys you, mostly because I cannot stop even if I tried.

Being happy to get the participation ribbon isn't good enough, the goal should be the blue one. Some posters won't even know what that means.

 

1rst, 2nd & 3rd, this is a professional team and the goal should be the Stanley Cup, not hoping to lose competitively. Of course Linden's job is to sell tickets first, no tickets, no job.

 

Benning's job is to get players to sell hope, hence long term draft picks, power forwards, defence men, goalies, good for 2 to 3 years of development/hope at each spot.

 

You are not a troll if your posts demand tangible improvement or logical trades/signings/contracts.

 

You make several good points although even with a good farm team TO still sucked big time before their purge.

 

Retaining picks in good draft years is very important unless player/prospects traded for are for targeted positions that said THIS year picks should be traded except for the #1 and 2 overall and at that those two are equal to #4 down in the previous 3 years.

 

Draft picks should not traded  for players just because they are under 26 years old, that is a really dumb excuse when you considered the best (most productive) forwards on the team are over 35, that allows for a range of 19 to 32, the team just needs to be better at signing vets to reasonable contracts, so far this group fails badly at that.

[Rob_Zepp]

29 minutes ago, Toews said:

I have been saying from the beginning that the team needs to retain picks. I think too many picks have been traded in the past few years in order to bring guys that have not worked out at the pro level. IMO the current management's strength seems to be amateur scouting, so not just retaining picks but acquiring picks should also be a priority going forward. But with that said if I had my way I would not enforce any hard and fast rule saying that draft picks are absolutely off the table. In the end the value of a pick is best determined by your scouts. If your scouts are dissatisfied with the talent available at the pick and another team values that pick more than you do, then you need to make that move.

 

Currently Utica is not up to par with the top farm clubs in the NHL. Its not enough to simply own the farm team, you need to have a dedicated GM for your farm club that is capable of making the moves to strengthen the team. Organizations like Wilkes-Barrie, Toronto, Rockford, Syracuse etc are well ahead of the Comets. That needs to change.

 

People cite the reason that injuries are the downfall of this team every year. Tampa had half their lineup filled with players from Syracuse, they just missed the playoffs by a few points and their farm club still finished first in their division. Once injuries hit the Canucks, the talent from Utica got depleted. Signings like Chaput and Megna who were supposed to bolster the farm club ended up playing NHL games as a result. A depleted Utica lineup limped to the finish line missing the playoffs by just a couple of points. Tampa under Yzerman have taken the time to draft and develop their own talent. They have a pipeline of talent in their organizations that it doesn't matter to them when a couple of them get claimed on waivers. For the Canucks even losing a guy like Corrado was a blow because of lack of depth in the organization.

 

Disagree with this. You need to pay attention to the trends in the current NHL. The game is constantly changing. We are seeing a trend in the past few years where teams are emphasizing speed and mobility. If you cannot keep up because your skating is not up to par then you are not going to be in the league very long.

 

You need to pay attention to what other teams around you are doing. You cannot live in your bubble. This means you judge your scouting staff on their competency. Constantly evaluating how your scouts are doing in respect to other organizations is how you manage to stay ahead. This means cutting any dead weight. If a particular scout has a good eye then they should be retained. If another is constantly suggesting duds then let that person go. Too many teams in the past have stuck by individuals for loyalty and it only leads to staleness.

 

I also see nothing wrong with 'project' picks. The late rounds are a crap shoot, if your scouts think a player is worth taking a chance on then you make that happen.

 

Some here will likely tell me I am being critical. Others will get upset that I am criticizing individuals that have been involved in the game longer than I have been alive. They will likely tell me that my opinion doesn't mean much. They are probably right. I am critical and ultimately my opinion doesn't mean much but that doesn't mean I will stop voicing it. If you choose to look at things in a glass half-full way then that is your prerogative. I personally have always approached things in a glass half-empty way, its the way I approach everything in life. If you are not actively trying to adapt your methods to a competitive environment then you will lag behind. If you aren't picking faults within yourself then you aren't doing everything you can to improve. Its almost a conditioned response for me at this point. So yes Rob you can call me a troll if it pleases you but I am not going to stop being critical just because it annoys you, mostly because I cannot stop even if I tried.

Easily the most well thought out, mature and positive post I have ever seen you make.  I agree with the majority (you didn't understand what I was saying about trends...it wasn't about type of player, it was more the "believe external scouting" trend that seems to have taken the place of good scouting in several organizations) of what you have to say and there isn't anything remotely trollish in your post.

 

I also agree 100% that Utica and beyond has a LONG way to go and strong coaching and management are essential components at that level - perhaps as much or moreso than the window dressing positions in Vancouver.   

 

Credit due where it is due - and your post and response was outstanding.  Well done.

[TheGuardian_]

2 hours ago, IBatch said:

I think you would be pleased at how many of us would be totally on board not trading any picks and just drafting well.  On top of that trading veterans like last deadline with Burrows and Hansen.  Out prospect pool is better than its looked it the last decade now, and two more year of the same is the medicine this team needs to create the next young core.

How do you figure that? They are prospects not NHL players. Utica sucked, Green coached them, scoring has been mirroring the Canucks, declining.

What "prospect" could play in the playoffs you are watching now? Baerstchi is one hit from another concussion, Granlund could take the grind, could Horvat take being "targeted" by Getslaf or Kesler for 7 games? Who on the team would stand up to Maroon? The only "home grown prospects" that made a dent last season were home town boy Stecher or Tryamkin and they lost him

 

Watch the games now, they are nothing like the regular season, slashing, hooking, mucho hitting, cross checking. Fans of the Canucks would be howling at unfair reffing.

 

This team is dainty, small and frail. Dahlen might not be here at all, Goldoblin won't like Green's defensive style, OJ might need another year, Virtanen.....well Green thought Guance was better in Utica, Cassels might be okay when Sutter gets hurt, Subban? Who else? Which Benning picks?

 

The last decade has seen Tanev, Hutton, Horvat, Burrows, Hansen, Schnides, multiple Utica playoff appearances. The last three years has seen a decline.

 

You want to watch NHL trends, bad teams start the season near the top of the standings and after the big ticket push they start to decline near the middle/end of November.

[Rob_Zepp]

41 minutes ago, TheGuardian_ said:

How do you figure that? They are prospects not NHL players. Utica sucked, Green coached them, scoring has been mirroring the Canucks, declining.

What "prospect" could play in the playoffs you are watching now? Baerstchi is one hit from another concussion, Granlund could take the grind, could Horvat take being "targeted" by Getslaf or Kesler for 7 games? Who on the team would stand up to Maroon? The only "home grown prospects" that made a dent last season were home town boy Stecher or Tryamkin and they lost him

 

Watch the games now, they are nothing like the regular season, slashing, hooking, mucho hitting, cross checking. Fans of the Canucks would be howling at unfair reffing.

 

This team is dainty, small and frail. Dahlen might not be here at all, Goldoblin won't like Green's defensive style, OJ might need another year, Virtanen.....well Green thought Guance was better in Utica, Cassels might be okay when Sutter gets hurt, Subban? Who else? Which Benning picks?

 

The last decade has seen Tanev, Hutton, Horvat, Burrows, Hansen, Schnides, multiple Utica playoff appearances. The last three years has seen a decline.

 

You want to watch NHL trends, bad teams start the season near the top of the standings and after the big ticket push they start to decline near the middle/end of November.

wow, you have issues with this team so why be a fan?   You have nothing positive to contribute, you think we can trade 2nd pairing Dmen for first round picks and you slam every single move made by this management team.   Seemingly you are living in hell being a fan so why bother?   Pick another team to follow that doesn't get you so riled up that you post nonsense.  Perhaps go outside, get out of the basement and see that there is a world out there.   Wow.

[TheGuardian_]

1 minute ago, Rob_Zepp said:

wow, you have issues with this team so why be a fan?   You have nothing positive to contribute, you think we can trade 2nd pairing Dmen for first round picks and you slam every single move made by this management team.   Seemingly you are living in hell being a fan so why bother?   Pick another team to follow that doesn't get you so riled up that you post nonsense.  Perhaps go outside, get out of the basement and see that there is a world out there.   Wow.

Issues I have are denial by management, they only said rebuild because they wanted the heat off from the media. Horvat is a really good player, many on the team are decent NHL players.

 

All the players on the team have sacrificed much to be in the show. Even if I denounce the spoon fed blather from the team, this group is just not good enough, being good starts from the top and this management group is not improving the team, they say they want to build through the draft, but trade away more picks and got less back with less improvement than the previous regime did in 8 years, they state how profound scouting skills are but draft players that can't (exception for European scouts) make the show unless they have 3 or 4 years to develop, really, if they can see a players progression four years from now why didn't they draft a guy that was closer to being ready? But they want you to buy tickets based on that, IF they can really foresee what they sell, why all the mistakes? Or are they mistakes, maybe they just didn't want to be obvious in their 3 year tank, I hear Foote in 2019 now....

 

Many posters ridiculed the Oilers for ineptitude for years but can't see that this management group almost is identical to the failed one Edmonton had, I don't want to see that happen here but why should I wait to say it until 4 years from now. if they can see player progression 4 years from now most fans should be able to see the trend the team is PRESENTLY on, soon only up will be left.

[Rob_Zepp]

42 minutes ago, TheGuardian_ said:

Issues I have are denial by management, they only said rebuild because they wanted the heat off from the media. Horvat is a really good player, many on the team are decent NHL players.

 

All the players on the team have sacrificed much to be in the show. Even if I denounce the spoon fed blather from the team, this group is just not good enough, being good starts from the top and this management group is not improving the team, they say they want to build through the draft, but trade away more picks and got less back with less improvement than the previous regime did in 8 years, they state how profound scouting skills are but draft players that can't (exception for European scouts) make the show unless they have 3 or 4 years to develop, really, if they can see a players progression four years from now why didn't they draft a guy that was closer to being ready? But they want you to buy tickets based on that, IF they can really foresee what they sell, why all the mistakes? Or are they mistakes, maybe they just didn't want to be obvious in their 3 year tank, I hear Foote in 2019 now....

 

Many posters ridiculed the Oilers for ineptitude for years but can't see that this management group almost is identical to the failed one Edmonton had, I don't want to see that happen here but why should I wait to say it until 4 years from now. if they can see player progression 4 years from now most fans should be able to see the trend the team is PRESENTLY on, soon only up will be left.

you just proved my point - you hate everything about this - clearly you cannot be enjoying this.  Why do you torment yourself so?   The chances of there being the changes you want are zero - go and find a team that aligns with your view of how things are done as clearly this isn't the team for you and may never be.

[TheGuardian_]

12 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

you just proved my point - you hate everything about this - clearly you cannot be enjoying this.  Why do you torment yourself so?   The chances of there being the changes you want are zero - go and find a team that aligns with your view of how things are done as clearly this isn't the team for you and may never be.

I want my father to see a cup here before he dies. Me to for that matter

[Rob_Zepp]

3 minutes ago, TheGuardian_ said:

I want my father to see a cup here before he dies. Me to for that matter

I hope you are 10 and your father is 30 else you may have picked the wrong bucket list items.   In a 30 plus team league with salary cap, winning is as much about luck as anything else (e.g. lottery luck, injury luck etc.).    If you can only be a fan if your team wins, then are you really a fan?   I always like playing for those who simply were a fan of the game and cheered us no matter as long as we tried.   In a team sport, so much has to go right to win a championship - like your 2011 Canucks - a couple of fewer injuries, better calls from zebras and more clutch goaltending in games 6 and  7 and your cup is yours.    

 

I am intrigued by this "win a cup or why bother" mentality.   It must make following ANY team excruciating as you can never enjoy it unless a mathematically improbable event occurs.    Is it more fun to see the team(s) you cheer for win?  Of course but is it the only reason to watch/follow?   Really?

[Toews]

29 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

I hope you are 10 and your father is 30 else you may have picked the wrong bucket list items.   In a 30 plus team league with salary cap, winning is as much about luck as anything else (e.g. lottery luck, injury luck etc.).    If you can only be a fan if your team wins, then are you really a fan?   I always like playing for those who simply were a fan of the game and cheered us no matter as long as we tried.   In a team sport, so much has to go right to win a championship - like your 2011 Canucks - a couple of fewer injuries, better calls from zebras and more clutch goaltending in games 6 and  7 and your cup is yours.    

 

I am intrigued by this "win a cup or why bother" mentality.   It must make following ANY team excruciating as you can never enjoy it unless a mathematically improbable event occurs.    Is it more fun to see the team(s) you cheer for win?  Of course but is it the only reason to watch/follow?   Really?

While I do not necessarily agree with everything The Guardian says, he is still a fan and as such has a right to voice his opinion. You sir do not get to decide what being a fan actually entails. If someone has invested years into watching this team then they have every right to complain about the team if they choose to. If you have never once complained about the team then congrats you are a beacon of positivity but that does not mean that everyone has to follow your example.

 

The ultimate goal is winning the Cup and that is what every team should be striving to achieve. Also while there are soon to be 31 teams in the NHL, not all are on an equal footing. The Canucks have a decisive advantage over a team like the Coyotes. You might have different expectations but that doesn't make you a better "fan".

[Where'd Luongo?]

5 hours ago, elvis15 said:

The only thing I'll slam is that you're lumping a lot of CDC in together. Plenty of us don't want to trade picks unless we can get better ones back (or high end prospects/young players) and are happy to move a few current assets that might not be a part of the future core to get more picks/youth.

 

But then, you never really put yourself out there with some specifics on how that could be possible. All you've said is a lot of generic things to be held to no matter what, when sometimes you have to break the rules for the right deal. If you have some ideas - which is the point of a proposal - then feel free to come back and add them to this thread. Otherwise we've all heard this before.