gameburn2 Posted October 8, 2017 Share Posted October 8, 2017 2 hours ago, TheYjUstMaKeYoUwooZy said: 1.) This logic only works if Rebuilds are done purely through drafting and they are not. Trading picks for rental players are counter productive but rolling the dice on prospects that have hit a wall somewhere else and still show promise is not. Though some didnt work out.... Vey.... others like Sven did. 2.) How is this any different than a draft pick? By this logic trades should also only be for picks in a rebuild, . So no Granny, Sven, Dahlin, Goldy . You even concede the point in the next sentence which means your entire argument is based on a preconceived notion that drafting is the only way to rebuild a team. 3.) Sven and Granny say hi. So does Bertuzzi, how about Naslund. Lots of people need a change in scenery.... or cant find the time to develop in a championship team. Not to mention Drafting skill is only talent evaluation.... WHICH IS NOT ONLY GOOD FOR DRAFTING. I don't say drafting is the only way to build a championship team, only that it cannot take second place to bringing in projects. My worry is that the Canuck have gone for a quicker fix than ideal. Moreover, recent teams that have won have been built around their draft picks: Crosby, Malkin, Letang; Keith, Toews, Kane; Doughty, Quick, Kopitar -- basically, all the teams recently. Also, we got further when the team was built around Sedin, Sedin, Kesler, Bieksa, Tanev, Edler and Burrows (not a draftee, I know, but not a trade either), All drafted by the Canucks. Even with this team, it is Horvat, Tanev, Pettersson, Juolevi, Demko, Boeser, and maybe Hutton who will bring home the bacon. And maybe this year's pick... I'm hoping for Dahlin, like most of us here. I'm not hoping for a stalled prospect in someone else's system. It's a little bit more practical and lot more fun to center around the draft as the primary way to build a team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted October 8, 2017 Share Posted October 8, 2017 4 hours ago, gameburn2 said: I don't say drafting is the only way to build a championship team, only that it cannot take second place to bringing in projects. My worry is that the Canuck have gone for a quicker fix than ideal. Moreover, recent teams that have won have been built around their draft picks: Crosby, Malkin, Letang; Keith, Toews, Kane; Doughty, Quick, Kopitar -- basically, all the teams recently. Also, we got further when the team was built around Sedin, Sedin, Kesler, Bieksa, Tanev, Edler and Burrows (not a draftee, I know, but not a trade either), All drafted by the Canucks. Even with this team, it is Horvat, Tanev, Pettersson, Juolevi, Demko, Boeser, and maybe Hutton who will bring home the bacon. And maybe this year's pick... I'm hoping for Dahlin, like most of us here. I'm not hoping for a stalled prospect in someone else's system. It's a little bit more practical and lot more fun to center around the draft as the primary way to build a team. Thing is though - they've kept and used all their higher picks - and have balanced out recovering what they spend (pretty break even, not simply going with a cookie cutter teardown stockpile of picks) - so not only do they have Juolevi, Pettersson, Virtanen, Boeser to show for their high picks - their higher end guys - but they've also done alright with a number of later picks (Demko, Gaudette in particular). Drafting isn't taking second place to bringing in older prospects - it's just that they've closed the gap on lost years - and fairly well imo. A 2nd, 3rd or 4th here or there isn't going to sink the prospect pool by any stretch, particularly when they've flipped Juice, Garrison, Kesler for picks - and Burrows, Hansen for prospects.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicklas Bo Hunter Posted October 8, 2017 Share Posted October 8, 2017 Ian cole will be out for awhile. They could have used pouliott Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gameburn2 Posted October 8, 2017 Share Posted October 8, 2017 9 hours ago, oldnews said: Thing is though - they've kept and used all their higher picks - and have balanced out recovering what they spend (pretty break even, not simply going with a cookie cutter teardown stockpile of picks) - so not only do they have Juolevi, Pettersson, Virtanen, Boeser to show for their high picks - their higher end guys - but they've also done alright with a number of later picks (Demko, Gaudette in particular). Drafting isn't taking second place to bringing in older prospects - it's just that they've closed the gap on lost years - and fairly well imo. A 2nd, 3rd or 4th here or there isn't going to sink the prospect pool by any stretch, particularly when they've flipped Juice, Garrison, Kesler for picks - and Burrows, Hansen for prospects.... I hope you're right. I think we're both in agreement on the need to be younger and to have a range of ages. Having everyone at 28 to 30 yrs of age during the Cup run made a magnificent team, but not sustainable. At least not without a lot of trading/moving of players, which we didn't do quickly enough. It also isn't healthy -- even for an intentional Tank job -- to have the entire team age 24 or younger. Some balance is part of what keeps a team healthy, maintains its culture. I think we can also agree that seeing Gagner and Vanek out there last night in the first game of the year... when Boeser is benched: that was painful. Allthough early, it seemed significant to me that none of the UFAs played as well as the new core, including even Gudbranson, who I think a lot of us were having doubts about. By Fall of 2019 we won't even remember that Gagner and Vanek were here. Or Miller or Del Zotto probably. And none of the new UFAs are in the class of what Vrbata had to offer. Can players develop without NHL ice time? Can teams develop without a lot of prospects? Do we have enough prospects yet? Time will tell. And this year's draft along with the year after is going to be critical, certainly as important as Benning's first two years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted October 8, 2017 Share Posted October 8, 2017 1 hour ago, gameburn2 said: I hope you're right. I think we're both in agreement on the need to be younger and to have a range of ages. Having everyone at 28 to 30 yrs of age during the Cup run made a magnificent team, but not sustainable. At least not without a lot of trading/moving of players, which we didn't do quickly enough. It also isn't healthy -- even for an intentional Tank job -- to have the entire team age 24 or younger. Some balance is part of what keeps a team healthy, maintains its culture. I think we can also agree that seeing Gagner and Vanek out there last night in the first game of the year... when Boeser is benched: that was painful. Allthough early, it seemed significant to me that none of the UFAs played as well as the new core, including even Gudbranson, who I think a lot of us were having doubts about. By Fall of 2019 we won't even remember that Gagner and Vanek were here. Or Miller or Del Zotto probably. And none of the new UFAs are in the class of what Vrbata had to offer. Can players develop without NHL ice time? Can teams develop without a lot of prospects? Do we have enough prospects yet? Time will tell. And this year's draft along with the year after is going to be critical, certainly as important as Benning's first two years. Yeah I agree with the first paragraph for sure. I don't have a problem with last night's lineup - it was one game - one where I thought it was clear what Green was doing - and he himself pointed out that he wanted to dress two capable shutdown lines for that matchup - and ease some pressure off Boeser, whose play did tail off at the end of the preseason. He'll be in soon enough though. I also don't necessarily agree regarding Gagner or Gudbranson - I think Gud is a big factor and will prove to be more and more. He's not perfect (no player is) - but he's something this team needs. I also think Gagner, while different, brings as much to the table as Vrbata - who was a one and done, a pouter, relatively lazy and had a negative effect on this team after his initial season here. Gagner isn't a pure sniper, but he's a more complete player imo than Vrbata, he's younger, and he comes at a better cap hit, and I'd be willing to bet he's a better presence from a teammate standpoint. Vrbata's public whining about having to play with Horvat, and his mail-it-in as a result really disgusted me. I don't really look at anything in the present in terms of 'who we'll remember'. I love the MDZ signing - he's become a very good two way D that I think people will love in due course. The point I agree most with regards Vanek - he can be painful to watch at times. I don't think he was last night - he noticeably worked hard - but I'm not sure he's a fit for the Sedins - at all. Good powerplay guy, but 5 on 5 I don't see them being effective - they're all too slow. You could see it very clearly last night - opposition attacks them when they gain possession, because there's no transition threat - they can afford to jump all over the Sedins time and space and not pay a price for it, which means the twins have to win constant battles and complete passes in tight spaces repeatedly just to gain the ozone, and it's an uphill battle. I'm not against the Vanek signing - I have no problem with them bringing guys like that in on one year deals - and if it doesn't work, who cares? Press box, waive, limited minutes, flip for pick - whatever - doesn't matter much to me. Green will play who earns it. I think Green might get more out of Boeser by sitting him one game - we'll see. I think it's about trying to keep the young player's trajectory onwards and upwards - and he's shown signs of fatigue or plateau recently (may not even be 100% healthy - who knows). I think Boeser makes Vanek redundant in a sense, but this team is also uncharacteristically heallthy in the present (knock on wood). I'd probably get Boeser into the lineup - and switch the lines up - despite how effective they were for the most part last night (specific matchup). Without a particular opponent in mind (because Green is always going to gameplan for particular opponents) - I think I'd lean towards giving Virtanen a shot with the Sedins. The twins are playing reduced minutes - and Vanek simply doesn't have the speed, forecheck game they need in a linemate imo. A guy like Virtanen, who is fast, hits hard and poses a real transition threat could open the ice up for them, make teams think twice about jumping/pressuring the hell out of the Sedins - and I think Virtanen is a strong enough board/cycle player and has grown his game defensively enough to ride 12 to 14 minutes on their wing. Liked the Burm Gagner Virtanen line, but the Sedin line needed work. Baertschi Horvat Boeser (Green had Eriksson here last night to form a second shutdown capable line, but I believe that was situational - a matchup thing specifically for Edmonton and the Draisaitl/McD line). Granlund Sutter Dorset Sedin Sedin Virtanen Burmistrov Gagner Eriksson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucklehead73 Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 Yeah I think i recall the finals between the pens and preds they showed the ratios for both teams and they were pretty similar. something along the lines of 55% drafted 40% trades and 5% ufa (I cannot recall the numbers exactly...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 Well, if Edler's out, Pouliot likely gets in next game. I'd wager: MDZ, Gudbranson Hutton, Tanev Pouliot, Stecher Wonder who gets the recall, Wiercioch? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coryberg Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 13 hours ago, aGENT said: Well, if Edler's out, Pouliot likely gets in next game. I'd wager: MDZ, Gudbranson Hutton, Tanev Pouliot, Stecher Wonder who gets the recall, Wiercioch? We have 8 D no need to recall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 Just now, coryberg said: We have 8 D no need to recall They'll likely recall another so we maintain 8D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coryberg Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 1 minute ago, aGENT said: They'll likely recall another so we maintain 8D. If edler is out is month to month? Yes If elder is week to week? Maybe If edler is day to day? No Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 Just now, coryberg said: If edler is out is month to month? Yes If elder is week to week? Maybe If edler is day to day? No Haven't heard any reports on how long he's out/what the malady is but I'm guessing something which would be longer than a day or two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 nice to have Wiercioch cleared under the circumstances. hard to want to vault Pouliot into the lineup after 10 days. Not sure how many practices he's had, but not likely that much. in any event, good to have them both with Edler down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peaches5 Posted October 13, 2017 Share Posted October 13, 2017 On 10/7/2017 at 6:59 PM, gameburn2 said: I don't say drafting is the only way to build a championship team, only that it cannot take second place to bringing in projects. My worry is that the Canuck have gone for a quicker fix than ideal. Moreover, recent teams that have won have been built around their draft picks: Crosby, Malkin, Letang; Keith, Toews, Kane; Doughty, Quick, Kopitar -- basically, all the teams recently. Also, we got further when the team was built around Sedin, Sedin, Kesler, Bieksa, Tanev, Edler and Burrows (not a draftee, I know, but not a trade either), All drafted by the Canucks. Even with this team, it is Horvat, Tanev, Pettersson, Juolevi, Demko, Boeser, and maybe Hutton who will bring home the bacon. And maybe this year's pick... I'm hoping for Dahlin, like most of us here. I'm not hoping for a stalled prospect in someone else's system. It's a little bit more practical and lot more fun to center around the draft as the primary way to build a team. LA? really? LA won because of trades not drafting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruilin96 Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 2 hours ago, peaches5 said: LA? really? LA won because of trades not drafting. They drafted the most important players for their team: Kopitar, Doughty and Quick. Though the trades to bring in Richards and Carter (2012) and also Gaborik (2014) were also keys. But the most important players for the team on the years they won the cup were all drafted by the Kings. The trade for Justin Williams in 2009 was also in hindsight a big trade for them as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noseforthenet Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 If we are talking about giving up picks for prospects, here, it could be that JB doesn't/didn't trust our scouts to make the right decision on choosing players at those times with those picks and figured "I have seen this guy or that guy play. I know what he should be capable of. Maybe let's waste a pick getting this guy instead of relying on the unreliable scouting system we have had for many years." Kind of a situation of "Better the devil you know than the devil you don't." Is what I'm saying. Fact of the matter is, not everything works out. No matter what you do as any GM in the league. Dean Lombardi got fired. Dale Tallon got removed from his position with the Hawks. Ray Shero is now trying to rebuild the Devils and is not winning Cups with Pittsburgh. You assess the risk and you take the better odds. Always. Oh and let's not forget Peter Chiarelli who is now in Edmonton and had Connor McDavid fall into his lap. He so got fired from Boston. That about cover all the winners of the so-called builders of teams thru the draft from the past 10 years or so?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrJockitch Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 Problem with that is JB's youth drafting/scouting seems to be much better than his pro scouting seems to be. Where we have seen the glaring mistakes seems to be in his trading for and signing of established pros either in AHL or NHL. Overvalued contracts for Sbisa, Sutter, Erikkson and to a lesser extent Gudbranson. Then there is Vanek, a disinterested player that has burned every bridge he has crossed. He also seems to show a better ability to draft once gets out of the top parts of the draft. His real successes are people like Gaudette, Lind, Forsling, Lockwood and Brock, kids taken out of the early part of the draft. His early draft picks are the ones that seem to draw the most questions with Jake, OJ and Petterson (who I think probably is the best but riskiest of those choices). Really is quite remarkable following how good some of these kids are doing this year. There also seems to be a theme of some developmental mistakes recurring with young men putting on too much weight too quickly and struggling because of it. I really feel that JB is an asset to the organization, just not sure he is in the correct job. This is a dangerous time for the Canucks team, with the Sedins retiring I am very worried what will happen to that cap space especially since, if JB is still here, he will be swinging for the fences to keep his job after another tough year. Time to bring in an experienced VP hockey ops to run the pro team and have JB more in the drafting and development side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 54 minutes ago, DrJockitch said: Problem with that is JB's youth drafting/scouting seems to be much better than his pro scouting seems to be. Where we have seen the glaring mistakes seems to be in his trading for and signing of established pros either in AHL or NHL. Overvalued contracts for Sbisa, Sutter, Erikkson and to a lesser extent Gudbranson. Then there is Vanek, a disinterested player that has burned every bridge he has crossed. He also seems to show a better ability to draft once gets out of the top parts of the draft. His real successes are people like Gaudette, Lind, Forsling, Lockwood and Brock, kids taken out of the early part of the draft. His early draft picks are the ones that seem to draw the most questions with Jake, OJ and Petterson (who I think probably is the best but riskiest of those choices). Really is quite remarkable following how good some of these kids are doing this year. There also seems to be a theme of some developmental mistakes recurring with young men putting on too much weight too quickly and struggling because of it. I really feel that JB is an asset to the organization, just not sure he is in the correct job. This is a dangerous time for the Canucks team, with the Sedins retiring I am very worried what will happen to that cap space especially since, if JB is still here, he will be swinging for the fences to keep his job after another tough year. Time to bring in an experienced VP hockey ops to run the pro team and have JB more in the drafting and development side. I wonder if the “Peter Principle” applies to JB as GM? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 On 10/6/2017 at 2:48 AM, Baggins said: Compare what Benning inherited to what Rutherford inherited. Look at how Rutherford won his first cup with the Canes....Justin Williams takes out the eye of the heart & soul (and Captain) of the Habs with a high stick. Zero suspension. Playoff series momentum shifts & the Canes take the series (and the rest is history). Dan Hamhuis throws a hipcheck on Lucic & injures himself (and takes him out of the series). Most Cup winning teams need an element of luck. We had it (it was just bad luck). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coryberg Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 3 hours ago, DrJockitch said: Overvalued contracts for Sbisa, Sutter, Erikkson and to a lesser extent Gudbranson. Then there is Vanek... Sbisa's contract been beaten to death on here over the years and everytime it comes up the comparables are pretty much bang on. That contract was damn close to market value. Sutters contract was signed in hopes that if given a bigger role he could improve his numbers. That didn't happen but a 20 goal defensive specialist center goes for 4 million all day in the NHL. Errikson has flopped here but was a proven player coming in. If you compare his contract to any of the other big free agents that offseason its nearly a carbon copy. Why you would complain about giving a 1 year low cost deal for a player who is tied for the team lead in points and we can flip at the deadline for assets is a mystery to me. Gudbranson at 3.5 million is a great number. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted October 14, 2017 Share Posted October 14, 2017 3 hours ago, coryberg said: Sbisa's contract been beaten to death on here over the years and everytime it comes up the comparables are pretty much bang on. That contract was damn close to market value. Sutters contract was signed in hopes that if given a bigger role he could improve his numbers. That didn't happen but a 20 goal defensive specialist center goes for 4 million all day in the NHL. Errikson has flopped here but was a proven player coming in. If you compare his contract to any of the other big free agents that offseason its nearly a carbon copy. Why you would complain about giving a 1 year low cost deal for a player who is tied for the team lead in points and we can flip at the deadline for assets is a mystery to me. Gudbranson at 3.5 million is a great number. Yes. Sbisa's 'contract' was selected by Vegas in the expansion draft, something that's working out pretty well for them thus far. Too much halfwit "analytics" have seriously skewed people's perspective of the value of a player like Sbisa. Sutter- again, too much moronic Travis Yost 'analytics' out there - that completely whiff on the player's value. Nothing wrong with his terms whatsoever. Loui has not lived up to his terms - not even close. Gudbranson - or Vanek's one year deal - are absurd to complain about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.