Jonah Gadjovich | LW

[flickyoursedin]

20 minutes ago, RogersTowell said:

It's nice to see Gadjovich finally making some noise.  He played way down the depth chart for the last two seasons.

It’s awesome to see the progress! He’s still got a long ways to go yet. I believe he’s still only getting 3rd line minutes on the Comets. If he keeps producing and doing the little things hopefully he can move up the lineup! None the less it’s great to see his hard work paying off early into this year!

[Ray_Cathode]

On 2/27/2021 at 1:06 PM, Nuxfanabroad said:

& everyone questions the mediocrity we've had taking up bottom-6 slots(in recent yrs).

 

But they bought us time. It's great we haven't had to rush many of these young fwds, who would've wound up damaged & discarded, cannon fodder.

Time for what? To be mediocre? To make a mess of our cap space and lose players we wanted to keep? To end up two spots higher in the draft so we end up worse draft position? So that we can trade picks to get players to make us marginally better now, but at enormous cost to the future? Do you really enjoy watching the likes of Beagle, Roussel, Sutter, Benn, Fantenberg, Vey, Kassian, Dorsett, Megna, and the like so much that you were willing to sacrifice picks, cap space, draft position, development time, in order to watch finish where they finished? How did that ‘buy us time’? It made real progress SLOWER - short run ‘solutions’ always do.

 

It’s like the kid who spends every nickel he makes smoking and getting drunk instead of getting an education, telling you it bought him time to improve his lot in life.

[Dazzle]

1 hour ago, Ray_Cathode said:

Time for what? To be mediocre? To make a mess of our cap space and lose players we wanted to keep? To end up two spots higher in the draft so we end up worse draft position? So that we can trade picks to get players to make us marginally better now, but at enormous cost to the future? Do you really enjoy watching the likes of Beagle, Roussel, Sutter, Benn, Fantenberg, Vey, Kassian, Dorsett, Megna, and the like so much that you were willing to sacrifice picks, cap space, draft position, development time, in order to watch finish where they finished? How did that ‘buy us time’? It made real progress SLOWER - short run ‘solutions’ always do.

 

It’s like the kid who spends every nickel he makes smoking and getting drunk instead of getting an education, telling you it bought him time to improve his lot in life.

Rushing prospects when they're clearly not ready is how you waste their potential. They learn bad habits, lose confidence, and don't play the 'right way'. None of these AHL calibre players should be in the NHL so soon. Let them brew and everything will pay off. It wasn't Benning's fault that Gillis left next to nothing in the system. There wasn't anyone dominating the AHL who was ready for the Canucks.

Edited March 8, 2021 by Dazzle

[lmm]

2 hours ago, Ray_Cathode said:

Time for what? To be mediocre? To make a mess of our cap space and lose players we wanted to keep? To end up two spots higher in the draft so we end up worse draft position? So that we can trade picks to get players to make us marginally better now, but at enormous cost to the future? Do you really enjoy watching the likes of Beagle, Roussel, Sutter, Benn, Fantenberg, Vey, Kassian, Dorsett, Megna, and the like so much that you were willing to sacrifice picks, cap space, draft position, development time, in order to watch finish where they finished? How did that ‘buy us time’? It made real progress SLOWER - short run ‘solutions’ always do.

 

It’s like the kid who spends every nickel he makes smoking and getting drunk instead of getting an education, telling you it bought him time to improve his lot in life.

I agree with you Ray,

except Megna

at 1 year  and $.6m we needed more Megnas and less of the other guys

besides, he was a good sign to the Sedins , 

that it was over

Edited March 8, 2021 by lmm

[Ray_Cathode]

3 hours ago, Dazzle said:

Rushing prospects when they're clearly not ready is how you waste their potential. They learn bad habits, lose confidence, and don't play the 'right way'. None of these AHL calibre players should be in the NHL so soon. Let them brew and everything will pay off. It wasn't Benning's fault that Gillis left next to nothing in the system. There wasn't anyone dominating the AHL who was ready for the Canucks.

No need for creating strawmen, using things I never said.  Who said to rush the prospects? Accumulate prospects by not trading away picks for guys like Dorsett or Vey, or surrender cap space in long-term, expensive deals when you can fill with short term deals to less expensive free agents. Overpaying old farts to play here on expensive, long term deals is not the way to preserve assets. Trading our old guys for picks and prospects is. Bennings first move should have been to move out the Sedins for something - give them a chance to play on a contender - when he first got here they were worth something. When Kesler tried to handcuff us by only being acceptable for a trade to Anaheim, he should have told him to rot then, stay home till hell freezes over. If you give in to that kind of blackmail, it sets a bad example. See who gives in first, a guy who has a limited career, or a team that lasts basically forever - see who can wait the longest.

Edler, too, should have been moved while he still had value in a trade. Moving aging assets for young ones is what well run teams do.  The reason Toronto is rich with assets is because that is what they did.  The reason the Bruins are perennial contenders is because they are not afraid to trade aging assets - they are in a constant process of renewal. When you have a rich core and a preserved cap, you can target quality free-agent assets to acquire to fill one or two spots - but the rest is built internally or through judicious trades and always demanding and never giving up picks.

 

[204CanucksFan]

47 minutes ago, Ray_Cathode said:

No need for creating strawmen, using things I never said.  Who said to rush the prospects? Accumulate prospects by not trading away picks for guys like Dorsett or Vey, or surrender cap space in long-term, expensive deals when you can fill with short term deals to less expensive free agents. Overpaying old farts to play here on expensive, long term deals is not the way to preserve assets. Trading our old guys for picks and prospects is. Bennings first move should have been to move out the Sedins for something - give them a chance to play on a contender - when he first got here they were worth something. When Kesler tried to handcuff us by only being acceptable for a trade to Anaheim, he should have told him to rot then, stay home till hell freezes over. If you give in to that kind of blackmail, it sets a bad example. See who gives in first, a guy who has a limited career, or a team that lasts basically forever - see who can wait the longest.

Edler, too, should have been moved while he still had value in a trade. Moving aging assets for young ones is what well run teams do.  The reason Toronto is rich with assets is because that is what they did.  The reason the Bruins are perennial contenders is because they are not afraid to trade aging assets - they are in a constant process of renewal. When you have a rich core and a preserved cap, you can target quality free-agent assets to acquire to fill one or two spots - but the rest is built internally or through judicious trades and always demanding and never giving up picks.

 

You do realize that all these players that you say should have been the first that Benning moved out had No Movement Clauses and were completely unwilling to waive them. Also if the Bruins are such a smart, savy team that doesn't hold on the aging vets why was Chara there until he was 42? Why were Chara and Krug allowed to just walk away with no return? Why haven't they traded a 35 year old Bergeron? Why haven't they traded a 33 year old Rask that is the worst of there 2 goalies?

Edited March 8, 2021 by 204CanucksFan
Additional info

[WeneedLumme]

2 hours ago, 204CanucksFan said:

You do realize that all these players that you say should have been the first that Benning moved out had No Movement Clauses and were completely unwilling to waive them. Also if the Bruins are such a smart, savy team that doesn't hold on the aging vets why was Chara there until he was 42? Why were Chara and Krug allowed to just walk away with no return? Why haven't they traded a 35 year old Bergeron? Why haven't they traded a 33 year old Rask that is the worst of there 2 goalies?

You know that when you are debating with someone who suggests that a team should "just move" players with NMCs and should force unhappy players to sit home and "rot" rather than trading them, you are attempting to be reasonable with someone who chooses to believe that keeping your (written) word is stupid and that one maximizes the value of assets by destroying them, right?

 

Do you really expect to get an honest response from someone like that?

 

 

[Kootenay Gold]

32 minutes ago, WeneedLumme said:

You know that when you are debating with someone who suggests that a team should "just move" players with NMCs and should force unhappy players to sit home and "rot" rather than trading them, you are attempting to be reasonable with someone who chooses to believe that keeping your (written) word is stupid and that one maximizes the value of assets by destroying them, right?

 

Do you really expect to get an honest response from someone like that?

 

 

I think it comes down to what exactly that particular poster is really knowledgeable about such as evaluating skating, positioning etc. and what they obviously have no clue about such as the management side of the business.

 

JB had very few options at his disposal when he took over the reigns from Mike Gillis. He inherited an aging team with some players on NMC or NTC clauses that had made a push for the cup in 2010 -11 and had very few NHL calibre prospects down on the farm.

 

JB's initial year as GM was not without mistakes but he has become a much better GM over the last few years. Acquiring J.T. Miller turned out to be a very shrewd move and plucking Nate Schmidt out of Vegas for a 3rd is borderline theft. His drafting and development of those draft picks has, IMO, been top notch. His signing of Sutter and Beagle, while a bit pricey, was a good move as it surrounded a young core with seasoned veterans that were the character guys you need to help smooth the transition to the NHL for young players just starting out in the league.

 

This management of players is not easy  and the unexpected flat cap due to Covid and also the expansion draft certainly had a major effect on the ability to retain or resign some players. The numbers just were not do able to balance both cap and expansion protection issues and many players just did not fit under those limiting parameters so hard decisions had to be made and they were.

 

This team has a bright future ahead of it and the next two years and beyond look very promising especially with all of the top notch prospects coming down the pipeline in those years.

 

[WeneedLumme]

1 hour ago, Kootenay Gold said:

I think it comes down to what exactly that particular poster is really knowledgeable about such as evaluating skating, positioning etc. and what they obviously have no clue about such as the management side of the business.

 

JB had very few options at his disposal when he took over the reigns from Mike Gillis. He inherited an aging team with some players on NMC or NTC clauses that had made a push for the cup in 2010 -11 and had very few NHL calibre prospects down on the farm.

 

JB's initial year as GM was not without mistakes but he has become a much better GM over the last few years. Acquiring J.T. Miller turned out to be a very shrewd move and plucking Nate Schmidt out of Vegas for a 3rd is borderline theft. His drafting and development of those draft picks has, IMO, been top notch. His signing of Sutter and Beagle, while a bit pricey, was a good move as it surrounded a young core with seasoned veterans that were the character guys you need to help smooth the transition to the NHL for young players just starting out in the league.

 

This management of players is not easy  and the unexpected flat cap due to Covid and also the expansion draft certainly had a major effect on the ability to retain or resign some players. The numbers just were not do able to balance both cap and expansion protection issues and many players just did not fit under those limiting parameters so hard decisions had to be made and they were.

 

This team has a bright future ahead of it and the next two years and beyond look very promising especially with all of the top notch prospects coming down the pipeline in those years.

 

I agree with most of what you say here. But when someone suggests that honouring your contract/ keeping your word (to 2 of your loyal franchise icons) is optional, or that the best way to deal with a valuable (recent Selke winner) but distressed asset is to trash the asset "to show 'em who's the boss" rather than just moving on for whatever you can get, IMO the issue is not knowledge or ignorance, it is character.

[Kootenay Gold]

27 minutes ago, WeneedLumme said:

I agree with most of what you say here. But when someone suggests that honouring your contract/ keeping your word (to 2 of your loyal franchise icons) is optional, or that the best way to deal with a valuable (recent Selke winner) but distressed asset is to trash the asset "to show 'em who's the boss" rather than just moving on for whatever you can get, IMO the issue is not knowledge or ignorance, it is character.

I was trying to be kind in my characterization of that person as he is very knowledgeable as far as determining the skill set of various players but you are right; he is very ignorant about the importance of honouring a players contract and not throwing them under the bus so to speak and also on just how difficult it can be to actually manage a team.

 

[Ray_Cathode]

9 hours ago, 204CanucksFan said:

You do realize that all these players that you say should have been the first that Benning moved out had No Movement Clauses and were completely unwilling to waive them. Also if the Bruins are such a smart, savy team that doesn't hold on the aging vets why was Chara there until he was 42? Why were Chara and Krug allowed to just walk away with no return? Why haven't they traded a 35 year old Bergeron? Why haven't they traded a 33 year old Rask that is the worst of there 2 goalies?

You are pointing only to the things they didn’t do, not to the things they did do in rebuilding their team. You do realize that they have returned to the Stanley Cup final since we lost to them, and you do realize that teams find their way around no movement clauses. You also seem to ignore Benning’s awful signings of Eriksson and Ferland, and his spineless acquiescence to Kesler’s demands, then overpaying of Sutter, Roussel, and Beagle all in a pointless desire to not confront ownership on the need to rebuild.

[WeneedLumme]

19 hours ago, Kootenay Gold said:

I was trying to be kind in my characterization of that person as he is very knowledgeable as far as determining the skill set of various players but you are right; he is very ignorant about the importance of honouring a players contract and not throwing them under the bus so to speak and also on just how difficult it can be to actually manage a team.

 

I know what you mean. His disgusting attitudes on a number of points would have him on my ignore list, if it weren't for the fact that he does sometimes provide useful info about our prospects.

[204CanucksFan]

16 hours ago, Ray_Cathode said:

You are pointing only to the things they didn’t do, not to the things they did do in rebuilding their team. You do realize that they have returned to the Stanley Cup final since we lost to them, and you do realize that teams find their way around no movement clauses. You also seem to ignore Benning’s awful signings of Eriksson and Ferland, and his spineless acquiescence to Kesler’s demands, then overpaying of Sutter, Roussel, and Beagle all in a pointless desire to not confront ownership on the need to rebuild.

By 'things they did do in rebuilding their team' are you referring to trading for 3 consecutive first round picks and then immediately whiffing all of them? And you want to talk about Bennings bad signing of Eriksson but what about Bostons signings of Coyle, Debrusk and Grzelcyk. Myers has as many points as Coyle and Debrusk combined. They are an incredibly overrated team at this point. They are exactly 1 line deep. With one defenseman and two decent goalies. Demko has a worse GAA than Halak or Rask but a better save percentage. The biggest thing they have is they are much better coached team that plays a better structure. They also have one of the worst prospect pools in the entire NHL, so much for building from within. 

 

I still can't figure out why signing Ferland was a bad signing to people, sure it didn't work out because of his concussions but at this point all it costs is the owners money, doesn't count against the cap and doesn't take a roster spot either so it's a nothing signing at this point. And if it wasn't for the injuries he would be something that this team is sorely missing. Hopefully in the near future Gadj can fill that hole

 

 

Edited March 9, 2021 by 204CanucksFan

[dpn1]

I know it is early and all but Inspector Gadget has made huge improvements in his game.  For a bit there I was wondering if Jonah was going to be good enough for the NHL but he has total changed the narrative.  He is tied with Kole for the team lead in points and he leads the team in goals.  That is a huge turn around for him.  Big and capable of playing in your bottom 6 on the left side. 

[Maniwaki Canuck]

Gadjovich is definitely back on the radar as a prospect:  great to see.  Maybe a Pearson replacement in a year or two?  Not sure if he's suited to a bottom 6 role unless he becomes an average skater at the NHL level.  But he's plenty smart enough.  Would love to have his net-front presence and fists in the lineup.

[Kootenay Gold]

30 minutes ago, dpn1 said:

I know it is early and all but Inspector Gadget has made huge improvements in his game.  For a bit there I was wondering if Jonah was going to be good enough for the NHL but he has total changed the narrative.  He is tied with Kole for the team lead in points and he leads the team in goals.  That is a huge turn around for him.  Big and capable of playing in your bottom 6 on the left side. 

I agree it is still a bit early for him to be in the big show but with continued improvement in his overall skating, he could find a spot in the bottom 6 as early as next year. Bottom 6 but also possibly a net front presence on the PP.

 

Nice to see the big man taking strides in improving his game.

[CRAZY_4_NAZZY]

 

Big Rig G stays sizzling hot!

 

Edited March 11, 2021 by CRAZY_4_NAZZY

[DeNiro]

Just now, CRAZY_4_NAZZY said:

 

Big Rig G stays sizzling hot!

Now tied for first in the league in goals.

 

What a turnaround for him!

[-Vintage Canuck-]

Clip:

 

 

[Ray_Cathode]

On 3/8/2021 at 7:22 AM, WeneedLumme said:

You know that when you are debating with someone who suggests that a team should "just move" players with NMCs and should force unhappy players to sit home and "rot" rather than trading them, you are attempting to be reasonable with someone who chooses to believe that keeping your (written) word is stupid and that one maximizes the value of assets by destroying them, right?

 

Do you really expect to get an honest response from someone like that?

 

 

You realize that what you are proposing is having players dictate to the team where they can be traded, under what conditions and for whom? When being blackmailed, one should not just roll over and surrender - which is what Benning did. If players are unhappy, then they should not play - it just brings down the entire team. If a player wants out, it should be on the terms of the team that has invested so much in him - not just to be bandaid to some spoilt brat's 'feelings'. The real world does not give a damn about one's feelings, nor should it. There is nothing in a team's 'written' word that says how it should bow to blackmail from players.

Not playing players who are unhappy is not 'destroying' them - they are destroying themselves by being unwilling to play. It also does not 'destroy' a player by being unwilling to acquiesce to his demands - is the average Joe being 'destroyed' because his employer won't pay him more than he is worth? 

One maximizes return on players by increasing the number of teams available to bid for his services, rather than being forced to only deal with a single team, as in the case of Kesler.