Elias Pettersson | #40 | C

[SamJamIam]

2 hours ago, Boudrias said:

Thomas Gradin should be more recognized for what he has done for the organization than he is. Take Naslund's sweater from the rafters and put him in the ROH and put Gradin's in the rafters. He took his team to the '82 finals which Naslund never got close to. Gradin has had a scouting career with the Canucks since he retired. His input brought the Twins, Edler, Granlund, Joulevi and EP to Vancouver. Also very positive on Holm who I believe will play games in Van yet this year.  

Absolutely.  Gradin was an amazing player but has gone so far beyond that once his playing career ended.  Retiring his number would only barely start to recognize how much he's done for the Canucks.

[ruilin96]

7 minutes ago, aGENT said:

At the risk of being a broken record... a future 1st line of Kane, Pettersson, Boeser , Kane adding some size and snarl (as well as shooting) would help with any size concerns (that and Bosers, while not exactly a bruiser, is also not a waterbug or wilting flower either). Also, IIRC, Boeser (RH'd) actually has a decent record on faceoffs. Him and EP (LH'd) could take turns on draws on their strong sides as well. Just a thought...

 

I love this post so much I want to make out with it.

 

Forget all the nebulous, periphery stuff of 'culture' etc (though I do largely agree that it is in fact, important, if not the entire reason teams continue to perform poorly).  I agree that 'management' is indeed likely the largest and most key factor to a successful team (along with a healthy dose of luck). Good trades, good scouting, good development and yes 'culture' included etc, etc are far more important factors than simply where one happens to pick (which isn't a terribly controllable factor these days).

 

It's why I'm a proponent of the relentless pursuit of improvement by any means that I believe our present management is following. There's no room for 'tanking' in that philosophy. You become a better team by simply taking every opportunity to become a better team. That includes trades, UFA's, drafting, development etc. Constant pursuit of improvement. You don't forego signing/trading for a good player because you hope to do poorly to maybe get a lotto pick. You take any and every opportunity to add/improve assets (granted with age, cap etc as qualifiers and a view to the long term of where you're team is headed). 

 

 

I've always been a fan of that system. 17th place team gets 1st OA, 18th 2nd  OA etc until you get down to 31, then back to the 16th team, 15th etc. It's simple and would reward teams on the bubble actually making an effort while still giving crappy teams relatively high picks to rebuild with. It rewards competent management and 'try'. Would also give players on those 17-31 teams a reason to keep playing after they're eliminated from playoffs for a better product all around.

The problem of this is that some teams who are legitimately bad and doesn't tank on purpose may never get the reward of drafting a top player in the top 3. And potentially, a cup contender may slip to #17 because of injuries and bad luck (e.g. Tampa Bay last year) gets to add another franchise player for at with an ELC for the next 3 years. As much as I hate the Canucks being screwed by the new draft lottery system, at the very least, it gives everyone a chance to draft top 3 and the worst 3 teams still have a shot at drafting top 6.

[higgyfan]

2 hours ago, Boudrias said:

Thomas Gradin should be more recognized for what he has done for the organization than he is. Take Naslund's sweater from the rafters and put him in the ROH and put Gradin's in the rafters. He took his team to the '82 finals which Naslund never got close to. Gradin has had a scouting career with the Canucks since he retired. His input brought the Twins, Edler, Granlund, Joulevi and EP to Vancouver. Also very positive on Holm who I believe will play games in Van yet this year.  

That would be an incredibly classless thing for our team to do.  I would be truly ashamed.

 

If Gradin is deserving of having his jersey in the rafters, then just put it up there.  Leave Naslund's where it is.

[aGENT]

24 minutes ago, ruilin96 said:

The problem of this is that some teams who are legitimately bad and doesn't tank on purpose may never get the reward of drafting a top player in the top 3. And potentially, a cup contender may slip to #17 because of injuries and bad luck (e.g. Tampa Bay last year) gets to add another franchise player for at with an ELC for the next 3 years. As much as I hate the Canucks being screwed by the new draft lottery system, at the very least, it gives everyone a chance to draft top 3 and the worst 3 teams still have a shot at drafting top 6.

The cup contender angle I'll give you. But so be it, they're a good team that had a bad year and should be rewarded for their efforts and quality management. I'd imagine there'd still be a lottery (TV ratings/$$$!) so those 17th, 18th and 19th place teams could still slip to 4th, 5th and 6th picks in theory.

 

Teams aren't 'legitimately bad' by accident. Manage better. I loath incompetence (or tanking and mocking the spirit of competition that should be inherent in all sport) being rewarded.

[spook007]

27 minutes ago, ruilin96 said:

The problem of this is that some teams who are legitimately bad and doesn't tank on purpose may never get the reward of drafting a top player in the top 3. And potentially, a cup contender may slip to #17 because of injuries and bad luck (e.g. Tampa Bay last year) gets to add another franchise player for at with an ELC for the next 3 years. As much as I hate the Canucks being screwed by the new draft lottery system, at the very least, it gives everyone a chance to draft top 3 and the worst 3 teams still have a shot at drafting top 6.

Agree on this... Detest seeing teams tanking for better players, but the other system makes it even harder for poor teams to improve....

however, not sure which would be the correct way of doing it, as regardless of which system you choose, there are a traps and faults...

[SergioMomesso]

17 minutes ago, higgyfan said:

That would be an incredibly classless thing for our team to do.  I would be truly ashamed.

 

If Gradin is deserving of having his jersey in the rafters, then just put it up there.  Leave Naslund's where it is.

The only way in heck that is ever happening is if Naslund was Harvey Weinsteins co-conspirator. 

[Ghost-M]

14 hours ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

Creating a losing environment is a "bad management decision".

You dont intentionally create a losing environment, nobody does, but an understanding that you are going to build and look to the future rather then sign high priced players and compete right now because you dont have the pieces in place to win a cup and the only way to acquire those pieces is through the draft. And that includes not rushing prospects into the nhl either just to fill out your roster.

 

You are looking at things in such a narrow view as if one plans to just be terrible for the sake of being terrible. There has to be an end game or long term goal in mind to bring success and a cup to the franchise. But tanking can involve some poor years to reach that goal because you wont be signing free agents who want big money to long term contracts, and you wont be rushing your prospects,  and you may even trade your veterans to acquire more picks and prospects, you will be developing for the future rather then trying to compete for the now. And just so were clear I dont condone players ever not giving it their all either. Nobody is saying that.

Edited November 24, 2017 by Ghost-M

[Warhippy]

2 hours ago, aGENT said:

 

I've always been a fan of that system. 17th place team gets 1st OA, 18th 2nd  OA etc until you get down to 31, then back to the 16th team, 15th etc. It's simple and would reward teams on the bubble actually making an effort while still giving crappy teams relatively high picks to rebuild with. It rewards competent management and 'try'. Would also give players on those 17-31 teams a reason to keep playing after they're eliminated from playoffs for a better product all around.

Actually spoke to someone who had a refreshing idea about this.

 

Extend the break between regular and post season by 3 to 5 days and have the non playoff teams scrap it out for the top 3 picks.  All teams from 17th to 31st would play in a tournament style format for the top 3 spots.  It would give fans something to absolutely cheer for, give the playoff teams 3-5 extra days to rest and ensure that no teams were simply shoving players out the door in order for better lottery odds.

 

In essence you play your way to a top 3 pick over a week.  I actually kinda liked the idea

[aGENT]

24 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Actually spoke to someone who had a refreshing idea about this.

 

Extend the break between regular and post season by 3 to 5 days and have the non playoff teams scrap it out for the top 3 picks.  All teams from 17th to 31st would play in a tournament style format for the top 3 spots.  It would give fans something to absolutely cheer for, give the playoff teams 3-5 extra days to rest and ensure that no teams were simply shoving players out the door in order for better lottery odds.

 

In essence you play your way to a top 3 pick over a week.  I actually kinda liked the idea

They'd play for that week but it doesn't make those teams keep playing in the regular season after they're eliminated , leading to a poorer product. Still prefer 'my' system. Most of these guys also already play enough hockey.

Edited November 24, 2017 by aGENT

[thrago]

Personally I think it should be a weighted draft based on performance but it should be broken up.  So lets say the bottom 6 teams get weighted based on position and a draw is made so that any team can draft 1-5 so lets say it goes something like this 31st team 25% chance of being picked 30th 20%, 29 15% etc  so you could end up with any of the bottom 5 teams picking first 2nd goes to any of the remaining 4, 3rd to any of the remaining 3 etc.  do that again for pick 5-10 and again for 11-15.  

 

Or you could make it so every team has a chance to move forward up to  3 picks so lets say team 15 hits and moves up 3 spots unless team 14 also hits and pushes them back one spot.  this would be a little complicated but really with computers not really.  The thing that has to be avoided is letting a good team pick first. Lets say for example if the current draft rules applied the year after the Kings won the Cup and they missed the playoffs they somehow won the lottery which is possible with the current system and picked first overall.  The fact that this is even a possibility shows how incredibly wrong the current system is.

 

[spook007]

2 hours ago, aGENT said:

The cup contender angle I'll give you. But so be it, they're a good team that had a bad year and should be rewarded for their efforts and quality management. I'd imagine there'd still be a lottery (TV ratings/$$$!) so those 17th, 18th and 19th place teams could still slip to 4th, 5th and 6th picks in theory.

 

Teams aren't 'legitimately bad' by accident. Manage better. I loath incompetence (or tanking and mocking the spirit of competition that should be inherent in all sport) being rewarded.

Totally agree... Detest it with a passion. 

But it to keep the league/NHL hockey relevant... Can't even believe the discussions on here about how to lose on purpose... Hate it. 

It makes me sick, when all 'experts' advocate how 'smart' it was by Laughs...

[spook007]

58 minutes ago, Ghost-M said:

You dont intentionally create a losing environment, nobody does, but an understanding that you are going to build and look to the future rather then sign high priced players and compete right now because you dont have the pieces in place to win a cup and the only way to acquire those pieces is through the draft. And that includes not rushing prospects into the nhl either just to fill out your roster.

 

You are looking at things in such a narrow view as if one plans to just be terrible for the sake of being terrible. There has to be an end game or long term goal in mind to bring success and a cup to the franchise. But tanking can involve some poor years to reach that goal because you wont be signing free agents who want big money to long term contracts, and you wont be rushing your prospects,  and you may even trade your veterans to acquire more picks and prospects, you will be developing for the future rather then trying to compete for the now. And just so were clear I dont condone players ever not giving it their all either. Nobody is saying that.

Get what your saying, but unfortunately I believe teams actually does.

Believe Sabres actually stated they had been tanking for McD, when they 'lost' him in the Draw...

That did sound like intentional tanking. 

[ForsbergTheGreat]

1 hour ago, Warhippy said:

Actually spoke to someone who had a refreshing idea about this.

 

Extend the break between regular and post season by 3 to 5 days and have the non playoff teams scrap it out for the top 3 picks.  All teams from 17th to 31st would play in a tournament style format for the top 3 spots.  It would give fans something to absolutely cheer for, give the playoff teams 3-5 extra days to rest and ensure that no teams were simply shoving players out the door in order for better lottery odds.

 

In essence you play your way to a top 3 pick over a week.  I actually kinda liked the idea

Except most players could care less about there team drafting another player that is likely going to be competeting with them for a job. And the upcoming ufas have little invested to try and risk injury which could cost them $ in July first. As JR mentioned the quality wouldn’t be worth it. We see how bad the product is for teams out of the post season in the final weeks leading up to summer. Most players are already checked out and have there summer vacations booked. 

Edited November 24, 2017 by ForsbergTheGreat

[Nuxfanabroad]

League's done their job on the "Lotto" to perfection. They've likely gotten a shy*e-load of cash from addicted, obsessive Cdn fans(like most of us).

 

Created a system, for the media to drone on about. Most folks are too busy/dumb to know when a deck is rigged. US fans will 'buck-up', whenever their local team goes on a run. With this imbalanced system, should be 8~10 US cities, annually.

 

Passionate Cdn fans are mostly distracted by slinging regional-mud at each other. Divide & conquer; call the cut-up spoils "Revenue sharing"!

 

Meanwhile, most of us will dream up equitable alternatives that'll never be implemented!

 

You'll never find a billion dollar industry that's honest. Especially not when a certain country has their fingers messin in the pie.

[Canuck Surfer]

17 hours ago, Rick Blight said:

In the past 10 drafts (2008 - 2017) the following teams have had the most top 5 picks.

1. Edmonton - 6

2. Islanders - 5

3. Colorado - 4

4. Toronto - 4

5. Florida - 4

6. Winnipeg/Atlanta - 3

7. Columbus - 3

8. Tampa - 3

 

How many Stanley Cups are in there?

@Alf  ?

[WeneedLumme]

18 hours ago, Rick Blight said:

You know, I will even give you that one.

In the past 10 drafts (2008 - 2017) the following teams have had the most top 5 picks.

1. Edmonton - 6

2. Islanders - 5

3. Colorado - 4

4. Toronto - 4

5. Florida - 4

6. Winnipeg/Atlanta - 3

7. Columbus - 3

8. Tampa - 3

 

How many Stanley Cups are in there?

Excellent post. It is unfortunate that the tankers (like the one you responded to) will choose to ignore these obviously relevant facts since they conflict with the tanking agenda.

[canuckistani]

18 hours ago, Rick Blight said:

The NHL effective centres are typically at 200 lbs or more with the odd exceptions. Coaches value size in their centres to offset others teams larger centres and for them to withstand the punishment down low in the offensive zone. They also value the size for face-offs as strength is instrumental to winning face-offs for most.

Wingers can certainly be big and physical as well but your smaller skilled wingers are quite often converted from being natural centres. Smaller wingers like Gudreau and Kane (as examples) can play more on the periphery while still being very effective. They don't have to go to the dirty areas in front of the net to be successful but there are very few centres that can get away with that.

I think it is fair to say that Pettersson has been below average in the face-off circle but he is not taking that many either.

 

 

Well that poses a problem. A big one for the Canucks. 

Because if Pettersson is too small to play centre, we end up having 3 top line LWs in the system : Baer, Elias and Dahlen, with only one top level centre (Horvat) between them.

Now, one of those 3 LW/potential LWs is going to be wasted on the third line. 
So it'd seem, we have a very good reason to make Elias stick as a centre-man and if not, trade one of these three to get a top flight centre-man.

 

[Phat Fingers]

16 minutes ago, canuckistani said:

 

Well that poses a problem. A big one for the Canucks. 

Because if Pettersson is too small to play centre, we end up having 3 top line LWs in the system : Baer, Elias and Dahlen, with only one top level centre (Horvat) between them.

Now, one of those 3 LW/potential LWs is going to be wasted on the third line. 
So it'd seem, we have a very good reason to make Elias stick as a centre-man and if not, trade one of these three to get a top flight centre-man.

 

Just want to point out that Morrison was never considered to be a top NHL Center and wasn’t 200lbs but Morrison, Bert and Naslund were dominant until ‘the incident’. 

Edited November 24, 2017 by Eastcoast meets Westcoast

[aGENT]

22 minutes ago, canuckistani said:

 

Well that poses a problem. A big one for the Canucks. 

Because if Pettersson is too small to play centre, we end up having 3 top line LWs in the system : Baer, Elias and Dahlen, with only one top level centre (Horvat) between them.

Now, one of those 3 LW/potential LWs is going to be wasted on the third line. 
So it'd seem, we have a very good reason to make Elias stick as a centre-man and if not, trade one of these three to get a top flight centre-man.

 

Assuming both Pettersson and Dahlen turn out as our 2 top LWs, Baer likely gets traded. 

 

Wouldn't be the end of the world if we ended up with something like:

 

Pettersson, Horvat, Boeser 

Dahlen, Gaudette, Lind/Virtanen

[Gaudette Celly]

Not sure how having "three top-line LWs" could ever be considered a "big problem".  Wish we had 4-5 more of those kind of problems.