The Rebuild Kicked Off With Acquiring Bo, & Was Completed at 2019 Draft!

[PhillipBlunt]

Just now, The Great 8 said:

Brady is a very unique player. There aren’t many that compare to him in the nhl. He has more offence than backes had in his prime, and he reminds me a lot of Getzlaf. If we don’t get Dahlin the other undersized PMD are more commonly found in the nhl and the draft. I think his unique combination gives is exactly what cup contending team needs in the top 6. With him, horvat, gadjovich, Virtanen, gaudette we would have a feisty intimidating yet skilled forward group to go up against. I also look at a team like Pittsburgh which one the cup twice with a decent defence Corp but a filthy forward group, all while missing letang, their PMD.

That is a good point. Pittsburgh didn't really have a defense that screamed dominant during that time.

[THINKER]

Stealth rebuild?  There's never been a rebuild.  Management incompetence has led to the Canucks picking high in the draft.  Benning tried to build a playoff team but was so bad at his job that the team sunk, finishing bottom 3 in back to back seasons.  This team will not improve until we get new management.  

 

I am excited about Boeser, and Pettersson, and I think Horvat will eventually slide in as a very good 2C on a team that's a contender.  We still need a 1C, and to completely rebuild our defense.  We also need to find a way to get out from some of Benning's awful contracts (Eriksson, Sutter, Gagner).

[Nuxfanabroad]

8 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

It's the haiku style that draws me in.

PB, glad that've raised the haiku

Just 17 notes, & yer through

Hear the limerick's 'in'

Hey, where ya'bin?

Sheep-sacrifice, now good luck too!

 

[PhillipBlunt]

15 minutes ago, Nuxfanabroad said:

PB, glad that've raised the haiku

Just 17 notes, & yer through

Hear the limerick's 'in'

Hey, where ya'bin?

Sheep-sacrifice, now good luck too!

 

My pleasure. Credit must be given to coastal view, as well.

 

[Canuck Surfer]

On ‎12‎/‎30‎/‎2017 at 10:20 AM, EdgarM said:

I guess everyone see's the same thing differently and this is no different. What I seen was a coach (Torts) trying to make his players accountable including the superstars. What I seen was the team doing pretty good until about xmas time when the team decided they were no longer going to play the game with any kind of effort. Coincidentally this is when the Sedins numbers declined as well.

What I saw was a team that absolutely tuned out the coach after his antics started in abundance. A coach that lost the plot...

 

Sestito was suddenly our MVP. As JT deployed him & others to resort / retort to a message of matching toughness mano a mano' with teams like LA, Anaheim & San Jose. Calgary's coach saw it. Knew we did not really have the toughness. Then got in our heads by deploying his own antics. The season was lost from the Calgary game onwards.

 

Then the coach, justifiably, was thrown onto his own sword! 

[Canuck Surfer]

On ‎12‎/‎28‎/‎2017 at 6:23 PM, janisahockeynut said:

Well, I understand that a team should always pick the BPA

But! I have the feeling that we should get another couple of early picks....late 1sts/2nds and pick all dmen this year...........(in the 1st and 2nd rounds)

I know it does not happen often with Dmen, but it does with forwards

 

So either Edler or Gudbranson nets us a late 1st, and Vanek the 2nd, and we take the plunge.........all Dmen

 

Then next year (2019), we can be in the position to pick BPA, as we should be set at both positions

 

The 2020 pick could then be used to either move back into the 2019 or move for a roster up grade

 

What ever, after you have built a prospect pool......you have flexibility, and that matters

When there is a clear BPA, yeah I agree. D-Mo below has some pretty good current day examples. 

 

I was going to bring up, of course you don't pass on Eichel or Laine? But I am not that disappointed, even though he has been solid, we passed on Tkachuk? Who is solid, even effective, but not a compelling talent nobody can match up against. That should be the line that never gets crossed when you ''skip'' a BPA.

 

Except when a BPA is obvious, I  espouse a balanced drafting. D men make up 1/3rd, or two out of six players on the ice.  To my thinking every 3rd year we should draft a D in each of the first or 2knd round.  Not that you count on a clock, this is the 3rd year, we're going to pick D!

 

What you absolutely cannot do is have runs of 7 or 10 years where you do not invest high picks of any sort in any D men.  There is just too much pressure to make top pairing D men of guys like Subban and Hutton. Both were very good picks at the level they were drafted. Who were, and are, missing key attributes or they would have been drafted higher.

 

On ‎12‎/‎29‎/‎2017 at 5:08 AM, D-Money said:

There are only 2 situations where I'd agree with this:

1. We have 2nd overall - Svechnikov is far-and-away BPA
2. We have 5th or 6th, and both Boqvist and Dobson are taken

Other than those specifics, there won't be enough difference between the forwards and D available to justify not taking a D-man.

 

Also, if we do land 2nd overall, even though I wouldn't select Boqvist over Svech, I'm all for trading down to get Boqvist/Dobson+.

 

That would be my thoughts at #5.  Zadina at number 3???

[D-Money]

41 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said:

Except when a BPA is obvious, I  espouse a balanced drafting. D men make up 1/3rd, or two out of six players on the ice.  To my thinking every 3rd year we should draft a D in each of the first or 2knd round.  Not that you count on a clock, this is the 3rd year, we're going to pick D!

 

What you absolutely cannot do is have runs of 7 or 10 years where you do not invest high picks of any sort in any D men.  There is just too much pressure to make top pairing D men of guys like Subban and Hutton. Both were very good picks at the level they were drafted. Who were, and are, missing key attributes or they would have been drafted higher.

Fully agree. Before Juolevi, the last D-man the Canucks took with a 1st round pick was Bourdon! Heck, until Juolevi, we hadn't even used a 2nd round pick on a D-man since Yann Sauve in 2008! Perhaps management is superstitious?

 

You don't hit on every one, but the more you make, the more you hit. Since 2008, Nashville has used seven 1sts and 2nds on D, and hit on as many as six of them: Roman Josi (38th overall), Ryan Ellis (11th), Seth Jones (4th), Jack Dougherty (51st), Dante Fabbro (17th), and Samuel Girard (47th). They found so many, that they were able to parlay 2 of them into acquiring both their top-6 centers!

 

The Anaheim Ducks have drafted nine 1st and 2nd round D-men since 2008. And despite getting screwed out of the first two (Jake Gardiner and Justin Schultz), they still got Cam Fowler, Hampus Lindholm, Shea Theodore, and Brandon Montour and Jacob Larsson with those picks.

 

That's why our blueline currently is a wasteland. And that is why we have to make up for lost time at this draft, and focus primarily on defensemen.

 

41 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said:

That would be my thoughts at #5.  Zadina at number 3???

Looks pretty fantastic so far. Then again, so did Zacha at that age. So Jersey took him, and the next 2 picks were Provorov and Werenski.

 

Again...part of me would be tempted to trade down - ideally just 2-3 spots down to grab another top defenseman. Especially if the extra was a solid D prospect. I'm not sure what team would be in that position though, who doesn't need D (most of the teams at the bottom of the league seem to need defense...sensing a pattern?). Maybe Detroit? They took NINE D-men in the last 2 drafts. Arizona also took nine, and have a decent D-core right now. If they lose the lottery, and are picking 4th, they may be willing to shed a guy like Pierre-Olivier Joseph to move up one spot and get a big forward like Zadina who is ready to contribute right away.

 

[Phat Fingers]

2 hours ago, THINKER said:

Stealth rebuild?  There's never been a rebuild.  Management incompetence has led to the Canucks picking high in the draft.  Benning tried to build a playoff team but was so bad at his job that the team sunk, finishing bottom 3 in back to back seasons.  This team will not improve until we get new management.  

 

I am excited about Boeser, and Pettersson, and I think Horvat will eventually slide in as a very good 2C on a team that's a contender.  We still need a 1C, and to completely rebuild our defense.  We also need to find a way to get out from some of Benning's awful contracts (Eriksson, Sutter, Gagner).

Thinker, 

 

 

Think you may be off the mark. JB and co have almost completely rebuilt this team. We have young players leading the team and our prospect pool is 100x better than it was when JB took over. 

 

It is not without mistakes, but I see way more positives than negatives. 

 

BTW without any solid prospects beyond Horvat, how fast can you rebuild, that’s one top six player, JB has found at least one more by trade (Baer, Goldy, Dahlen and Granlund) and likely drafted 3 more between Boeser, Pettersson, Virt, Lind, Gadjovich and Gaudette. 

 

Our defence will hopefully have all its pieces by this year’s draft. That’s OJ, Trymakin (he’s coming back) Pouliot, Stecher, Guddy, this year’s pick and good younger players developing on the farm. 

 

Goalie depth is a currently a problem with the parent club, but our goalie prospects are solid with Demko leading the way. 

 

Othe than the Vey Trade, the Eriksson signjngand his biggest mistake was Keeping Hamhuis and getting a few more points and losing out on Mathews,

what has JB messed really messed up? 

 

EmW

[Phat Fingers]

38 minutes ago, D-Money said:

Fully agree. Before Juolevi, the last D-man the Canucks took with a 1st round pick was Bourdon! Heck, until Juolevi, we hadn't even used a 2nd round pick on a D-man since Yann Sauve in 2008! Perhaps management is superstitious?

 

You don't hit on every one, but the more you make, the more you hit. Since 2008, Nashville has used seven 1sts and 2nds on D, and hit on as many as six of them: Roman Josi (38th overall), Ryan Ellis (11th), Seth Jones (4th), Jack Dougherty (51st), Dante Fabbro (17th), and Samuel Girard (47th). They found so many, that they were able to parlay 2 of them into acquiring both their top-6 centers!

 

The Anaheim Ducks have drafted nine 1st and 2nd round D-men since 2008. And despite getting screwed out of the first two (Jake Gardiner and Justin Schultz), they still got Cam Fowler, Hampus Lindholm, Shea Theodore, and Brandon Montour and Jacob Larsson with those picks.

 

That's why our blueline currently is a wasteland. And that is why we have to make up for lost time at this draft, and focus primarily on defensemen.

 

Looks pretty fantastic so far. Then again, so did Zacha at that age. So Jersey took him, and the next 2 picks were Provorov and Werenski.

 

Again...part of me would be tempted to trade down - ideally just 2-3 spots down to grab another top defenseman. Especially if the extra was a solid D prospect. I'm not sure what team would be in that position though, who doesn't need D (most of the teams at the bottom of the league seem to need defense...sensing a pattern?). Maybe Detroit? They took NINE D-men in the last 2 drafts. Arizona also took nine, and have a decent D-core right now. If they lose the lottery, and are picking 4th, they may be willing to shed a guy like Pierre-Olivier Joseph to move up one spot and get a big forward like Zadina who is ready to contribute right away.

 

JB has managed to pick some great young d men, we need more of that. 

 

The only way we dont draft a top d man is if a guy like Pettersson is available and JB can’t resist taking another gem. 

 

Really hope we are out of the running by the TDL.  I think teams will want to pick up players like Vanek, Edler, Hutton and possibly Guddy if there is no deal signed. 

 

That could garner a good good mix of picks and prospects.  Would love to land a d prospect like Foote and possibly some top 60 picks. 

[aGENT]

42 minutes ago, D-Money said:

Again...part of me would be tempted to trade down - ideally just 2-3 spots down to grab another top defenseman. Especially if the extra was a solid D prospect.

Probably nab a decent prospect and their early 2nd if you played your cards right. 

[granpappy]

7 hours ago, THINKER said:

Stealth rebuild?  There's never been a rebuild.  Management incompetence has led to the Canucks picking high in the draft.  Benning tried to build a playoff team but was so bad at his job that the team sunk, finishing bottom 3 in back to back seasons.  This team will not improve until we get new management.  

 

I am excited about Boeser, and Pettersson, and I think Horvat will eventually slide in as a very good 2C on a team that's a contender.  We still need a 1C, and to completely rebuild our defense.  We also need to find a way to get out from some of Benning's awful contracts (Eriksson, Sutter, Gagner).

yeah i dont mind if jb is in charge of scouting. he did hav e a different view of the team he inherited than many which is strange given his so called ability to identify talent which led to your point of incompetence =higher picks. he is almost enigmatic. he traded many picks off, picking being his strongest suit. he did return baertch out of it all so im not complaining. 

[RogersTowell]

23 hours ago, THINKER said:

Stealth rebuild?  There's never been a rebuild.  Management incompetence has led to the Canucks picking high in the draft.  Benning tried to build a playoff team but was so bad at his job that the team sunk, finishing bottom 3 in back to back seasons.  This team will not improve until we get new management.  

 

I am excited about Boeser, and Pettersson, and I think Horvat will eventually slide in as a very good 2C on a team that's a contender.  We still need a 1C, and to completely rebuild our defense.  We also need to find a way to get out from some of Benning's awful contracts (Eriksson, Sutter, Gagner).

Well, aren't you just Mr. Happy.  What I think I hear you saying is that the Canucks should have gone full Coilers or full Laffs and stank for a decade or more until they finally got lucky and got a franchise player in the draft.

 

What I think you are missing is that they are doing things better than both these teams did in a lot of ways.  They are trying to win every year without emptying the prospect cupboard.  Eriksson so far looks like a bit of a bust, but you are dead wrong on Sutter.  He's an excellent shut down center with some decent offensive upside.  He's like a more productive Malholtra while being better on d at the same time.  Not as good on FO.  Gagner was a gamble, but could show his worth at the trade deadline.  I like how you only mention the bad here regarding contracts..  What about Vanek?  What about hiring Green?  At least you mention some positives with drafting.  I agree with you about Horvat to a certain extent, but he can fill in 1C if nobody else fits.  

 

The only thing making this forum cranky right now is the insane injury problems experienced again this year.  If there's one thing that needs to be looked at this is it.  Why are the Canucks taking so many injuries?  I'm still optimistic that we'll get a good pick this year as long as we don't get too healthy and go on a tear.  Don't forget about Gaudette, Lockwood, Lind, Dahlen, Demko and many more waiting in the wings.

[Rob_Zepp]

On 2018-01-05 at 12:58 PM, THINKER said:

Stealth rebuild?  There's never been a rebuild.  Management incompetence has led to the Canucks picking high in the draft.  Benning tried to build a playoff team but was so bad at his job that the team sunk, finishing bottom 3 in back to back seasons.  This team will not improve until we get new management.  

 

I am excited about Boeser, and Pettersson, and I think Horvat will eventually slide in as a very good 2C on a team that's a contender.  We still need a 1C, and to completely rebuild our defense.  We also need to find a way to get out from some of Benning's awful contracts (Eriksson, Sutter, Gagner).

You don’t give up do you!    Gotta admit you have stamina.

 

Please explain again how inheriting essential zero prospect depth and a stale aged line up is management incompetence.    

[Canuck Surfer]

So, there is a very noticeable attitude shift here on CDC. In comparison to, say, 2013? Refreshing as well...

 

Specifically there is somewhat wide scale acceptance of the need to be drafting defenceman. You can see it in the posts even on this page.

 

Circle back to 2013 draft position posts? There was rampant demand to draft high scoring forwards. Who were always stoked as BPA.  With a misconception / belief you could always draft D in the 2knd, 3rd or 4th. ''Oh, there will be Norris D at that stage in the draft!'' ''Look at PK Subban, Duncan Kieth, Nik Lidstrom, Chara?'' ''You can get a Tanev, a DeKeyser out of college...''

 

And there is also growing recognition of the need to balance LHD / RHD. As opposed to a belief you could just find a Jason Garrison, and play him on his off side? 

 

 

 

I looked at our D depth. And we are in a world of hurt still on defence. Specifically RHD! We are ok, to encouraging on the left with Brisbois, Holm, Juolevi, McEneny, Brisbois & Rathbone, Gunnarson. Even have one of every ''type?''  A puck mover in Juolevi, big shot in Rathbone, mobile 2 way D in Brisbois & Holm, bone cruncher in Gunnarson. But man, passed on 2 straight years in the draft, but ''developing nicely,'' Jalen Chatfield is our best right handed D prospect! Matt Brassard, drafted in the 7th round really our only other RHD prospect.  That is a big problem, and they are both 20 years old. Those expecting a 7th rounder and undrafted D to be ready to step in right away are not clued in IMO?

 

Yet every idiot journo, and still too many on CDC, think we have all the D depth in the world. And depending who, should be trading either A Tanev, or B Gudbranson???

 

21 hours ago, Eastcoast meets Westcoast said:

JB has managed to pick some great young d men, we need more of that. 

We need a lot more... 

 

D and specifically right handed D are a big concern!

 

[The Lock]

43 minutes ago, Canuck Surfer said:

So, there is a very noticeable attitude shift here on CDC. In comparison to, say, 2013? Refreshing as well...

 

Specifically there is somewhat wide scale acceptance of the need to be drafting defenceman. You can see it in the posts even on this page.

 

Circle back to 2013 draft position posts? There was rampant demand to draft high scoring forwards. Who were always stoked as BPA.  With a misconception / belief you could always draft D in the 2knd, 3rd or 4th. ''Oh, there will be Norris D at that stage in the draft!'' ''Look at PK Subban, Duncan Kieth, Nik Lidstrom, Chara?'' ''You can get a Tanev, a DeKeyser out of college...''

 

And there is also growing recognition of the need to balance LHD / RHD. As opposed to a belief you could just find a Jason Garrison, and play him on his off side? 

 

 

 

I looked at our D depth. And we are in a world of hurt still on defence. Specifically RHD! We are ok, to encouraging on the left with Brisbois, Holm, Juolevi, McEneny, Brisbois & Rathbone, Gunnarson. Even have one of every ''type?''  A puck mover in Juolevi, big shot in Rathbone, mobile 2 way D in Brisbois & Holm, bone cruncher in Gunnarson. But man, passed on 2 straight years in the draft, but ''developing nicely,'' Jalen Chatfield is our best right handed D prospect! Matt Brassard, drafted in the 7th round really our only other RHD prospect.  That is a big problem, and they are both 20 years old. Those expecting a 7th rounder and undrafted D to be ready to step in right away are not clued in IMO?

 

Yet every idiot journo, and still too many on CDC, think we have all the D depth in the world. And depending who, should be trading either A Tanev, or B Gudbranson???

 

We need a lot more... 

 

D and specifically right handed D are a big concern!

I think if you look back to 2013, that's when Horvat was drafted. I remember everyone getting excited about Gaunce and Jensen because really, they were all we had at that point. Schroeder and Hodgson were supposed to be studs for us, but they obviously didn't work out and I think that's when then desperation kicked in with us needing, someone, anyone, to step up and be who Hodgson was supposed to be. We had a bunch of aging vets on a has been team with Gillis turning into what seemed to be a psychopath going "you're either with me or against me".

 

Fast forward to now and we have a prospect pool with a number of exciting forwards: Horvat, Boeser, Baertschi, Petterson, etc. We had none of that back in 2013 (and fanboys of Schneider were hesitant on Horvat amounting to anything at all). The days of being desperate for a Hodgson replacement are long over and those people seem to now realise we need defence (which we always did but yeah....)

[aGENT]

19 hours ago, Canuck Surfer said:

So, there is a very noticeable attitude shift here on CDC. In comparison to, say, 2013? Refreshing as well...

 

Specifically there is somewhat wide scale acceptance of the need to be drafting defenceman. You can see it in the posts even on this page.

 

Circle back to 2013 draft position posts? There was rampant demand to draft high scoring forwards. Who were always stoked as BPA.  With a misconception / belief you could always draft D in the 2knd, 3rd or 4th. ''Oh, there will be Norris D at that stage in the draft!'' ''Look at PK Subban, Duncan Kieth, Nik Lidstrom, Chara?'' ''You can get a Tanev, a DeKeyser out of college...''

 

And there is also growing recognition of the need to balance LHD / RHD. As opposed to a belief you could just find a Jason Garrison, and play him on his off side? 

 

 

 

I looked at our D depth. And we are in a world of hurt still on defence. Specifically RHD! We are ok, to encouraging on the left with Brisbois, Holm, Juolevi, McEneny, Brisbois & Rathbone, Gunnarson. Even have one of every ''type?''  A puck mover in Juolevi, big shot in Rathbone, mobile 2 way D in Brisbois & Holm, bone cruncher in Gunnarson. But man, passed on 2 straight years in the draft, but ''developing nicely,'' Jalen Chatfield is our best right handed D prospect! Matt Brassard, drafted in the 7th round really our only other RHD prospect.  That is a big problem, and they are both 20 years old. Those expecting a 7th rounder and undrafted D to be ready to step in right away are not clued in IMO?

 

Yet every idiot journo, and still too many on CDC, think we have all the D depth in the world. And depending who, should be trading either A Tanev, or B Gudbranson???

 

We need a lot more... 

 

D and specifically right handed D are a big concern!

 

Not that I disagree, we do need more D and especially right side D (one of which I hope we pick up this coming draft).

 

But we do have Tanev and Gudbranson, neither of which are terribly old (we'll see what hapens with re-signing or moving Guddy - I prefer re-signing).

 

We also have Stecher and both Pouliot and Tryamkin (if the latter comes back) appear to be quite comfortable on the right side even if that's certainly less ideal.

 

And then yes, we basically have Chatfield in Utica (who actually looks pretty promising if not 'blue chip'/top pair). We do need more prospect depth there but the overall organizational depth there isn't DIRE.

 

With how Benning had been able to shore up other positions in the last few years, I'm pretty confident he can do the same addressing that issue. 

Edited January 7, 2018 by aGENT

[Canuck Surfer]

 

34 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Not that I disagree, we do need more D and especially right side D (one of which I hope we pick up this coming draft).

 

But we do have Tanev and Gudbranson, neither of which are terribly old (we'll see what happens with re-signing or moving Guddy - I prefer re-signing).

 

We also have Stecher and both Pouliot and Tryamkin (if the latter comes back) appear to be quite comfortable on the right side even if that's certainly less ideal.

 

And then yes, we basically have Chatfield in Utica (who actually looks pretty promising if not 'blue chip'/top pair). We do need more prospect depth there but the overall organizational depth there isn't DIRE.

 

With how Benning had been able to shore up other positions in the last few years, I'm pretty confident he can do the same addressing that issue.

Jalen Chatfield, at 21 years old wi 3 points in 31 games in his first AHL season looks promising or possibly ''blue chip / top pair?'' I'm not that optimistic. Promising, in the context of a undrafted UFA looking like he has a chance, sure... And for the record I was expressing concern that really only having Chatfield as a legit RHD prospect was where I thought our prospect pool looked dire. Not the entire prospect pool, or team outlook.

 

My own opinion is that with Tanev, Gusbranson & Stecher, we have our best NHL roster RHD situation in some time. But it has not stood up when guys get injured. And all three have been injured. Chatfield is not ready. He would have been up here when injuries occurred if he was? And if he were called up, there is not even a guy drafted, ready to take his AHL spot NEXT year. Never mind step in now. Or have a compliment of guys competing in Utica for an NHL job. Which is when you have the position of strength to trade an NHL D for prospects.  While wolves are happy to trade a Tanev, the whiners dismiss and get rid of a Gudbranson?  

 

At least we agree we need to add RHD prospects. Prefer to keep Guddy.

 

And look, you seem to be one of the opinions here on CDC happy to have D play on their off side.  A debate I have long argued against. 

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, Canuck Surfer said:

Jalen Chatfield, at 21 years old wi 3 points in 31 games in his first AHL season looks promising or possibly ''blue chip / top pair?''

 

2 hours ago, aGENT said:

And then yes, we basically have Chatfield in Utica (who actually looks pretty promising, if not 'blue chip'/top pair).

Nope, I see him as hopefully bottom 4 some time down the line. 

 

1 hour ago, Canuck Surfer said:

And look, you seem to be one of the opinions here on CDC happy to have D play on their off side.  A debate I have long argued against. 

Nope again. I very much agree. But league wide, it's harder to find right side D and especially top 4 ones. Most teams have at least one guy playing on their off side because of it and we're not unique in that regard. Both Pouliot and Tryamkin have shown ability to do just that. 

Edited January 7, 2018 by aGENT

[Nice guy eddy]

Let's say we suck the rest of way & get another top 5 pic , or even the #1 pic . Then this has to be it for loosing, time to compete, because if this team has a long commitment to loosing guys like Boeser are going to take there talents else where , also take in the fact this city is super expensive to live in even if your making 6-7 mil , that would hardly buy you a crapy house , & rent here is like a mortgage to any mansion in the states & guys want to drive to games & not take there 10speeds, Tryamkin left cause he didn't like it here nothing to do with ice time, something about this city people either love it or they really really hate it there's no in between , I love it as long as I can afford it but some guys don't , so long story short a winning team is going to play a huge factor in keeping good talent here .

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, Nice guy eddy said:

Let's say we suck the rest of way & get another top 5 pic , or even the #1 pic . Then this has to be it for loosing, time to compete, because if this team has a long commitment to loosing guys like Boeser are going to take there talents else where , also take in the fact this city is super expensive to live in even if your making 6-7 mil , that would hardly buy you a crapy house , & rent here is like a mortgage to any mansion in the states & guys want to drive to games & not take there 10speeds, Tryamkin left cause he didn't like it here nothing to do with ice time, something about this city people either love it or they really really hate it there's no in between , I love it as long as I can afford it but some guys don't , so long story short a winning team is going to play a huge factor in keeping good talent here .

Interesting points.  For Tryamkin, his family seems to come ahead of hockey.  That’s likely the biggest reason he went home.  We are losing a lot right now, and have been horrible for more than three seasons now.  Guys with character will come out of the losing stronger.  Bo, Boeser, and other younger guys we have will be fine.  We need this top five pick, and (maybe?) one more.