What Are Your Thoughts of What A Rebuild Is?

[MrCanuck94]

1 hour ago, philtbc829 said:

well they need to do MORE....!!! and the reason the fans are impatient is because of the lack of a clear direction with this rebuild...

Direction is clear, Get younger while staying competitive. Competitive doesn't mean setting out a playoff team every year at the expense of a rebuild, it's icing a team that can compete at a NHL level that doesn't get slaughtered 9-2 every game, while rebuilding.

 

1 hour ago, kingofsurrey said:

I would rather be on the road to a high pick with a bunch of younger players that show up every game and give 100 % in both ends of the rink. 

What's the point of drafting a lot of A-B grade prospects if you rush them and turn them into B-C prospects? If they're ready, then definitely, but no point in rushing to diminish a players' ability.

 

1 hour ago, CanadianRugby said:

An old team becoming younger?  Not a rebuild if all those young players added are fringe top 6 forwards or top 4 d.  

The only way for this type of 'rebuild' to be successful is if Benning drafts better than almost any other GM.  Maybe long term it could prove to be true, but so far only Tryamkin and Boeser have shown NHL quality talent in 4 years of drafting.  I gave

 

Virtanen, McCann, Demko, Tryamkin, Forsling, Boeser, Brisebois, Gaudette, Juolevi, Lockwood, Pettersson, Lind, Gadjovich, DiPietro, Palmu. All these who are on good trajectory to become NHL players, not even naming the long shots like Zhukenov, Jasek and Gunnarson.

 

From the 2014, we have Virtanen, McCann, Tryamkin and Forsling who have all made the NHL, with Demko who will be up here soon.

From 2015 we have Boeser, Gaudette should be here near season's end.

 

From the first two drafts, there's already 5 NHL ready players with two who should be here soon. That's really good drafting.

 

Yeah we missed out on Ehlers/Nylander with a high pick, and I was on the draft Ehlers train during the draft, but every team has hits and misses. We missed on that but hit on Boeser, and Jake will still be a useful top 9 player.

 

And yes we traded a couple prospects and picks, but we ended up with Baertschi, Granlund and Gudbranson, all young enough to be considered part of the rebuild. Also, players that aren't top 6/top4 still count as part of a rebuild, we're building a team/organization, not just 10 positions.

[shazzam]

51 minutes ago, Remy said:

 

1) It's staying competitive so you don't foster a losing culture (like Edmonton's for many years). 

 

2) It's not trading away veterans if there's no deal to be made. Particularly when the veteran has some control over when or if they're traded. 

 

3, 4, 7) It's protecting your young players, not throwing them to the wolves. Let them develop properly or you end up with #1 - a losing culture. 

 

5) I agree that the Torts signing was a nightmare. 

 

6) It's trading high risk, low-round picks for high-reward prospects like Baertschi and Granlund. 

 

I rather have a culture where players work hard, play with their heart and the right way. It's okay to lose games. It's a rebuild and it's going to happen often. What I don't want to see is what's happening now. Our vets are here on vacation. They give half ass efforts and that is not a healthy culture. 

 

[Remy]

34 minutes ago, shazzam said:

 

I rather have a culture where players work hard, play with their heart and the right way. It's okay to lose games. It's a rebuild and it's going to happen often. What I don't want to see is what's happening now. Our vets are here on vacation. They give half ass efforts and that is not a healthy culture. 

 

 

Honestly, I see your point. Some of our vets definitely do need to play better. 

[Riviera82]

12 hours ago, ilduce39 said:

Except they didn't - Kadri, Bozak, JVR, Gardiner, Reilly, Komarov... most of those are guys in their mid to late 20s or early 30s who have long ties to the team. 

 

The Leafs jettisoned Kessel, Phaneuf and some riff raff but they kept a solid group of players.

Yes, the leafs cut out the overpriced crap and kept what good younger players they had.

 

The Canucks held on to many of their older players and acquired even more older players each year since Jim and Trevor were hired.

 

Toronto has done the rebuild right, regardless of getting lucky and drafting Matthews. The Canucks I'm afraid are currently doing the Toronto rebuild "pre-Shannaplan". Trying to integrate what youth they can into the lineup (mediocre or otherwise) while keeping and acquiring overpriced, washed-up veterans in an attempt to make the playoffs.

 

Unfortunately for the leafs, and probably the Canucks as well, that only resulted in having an 80 to 90 point team and no playoffs and no high picks year after year. 

Until a team fully commits to a rebuild like the leafs did a few years ago, that's what you get. Hopefully whoever is running the Canucks figures that out soon.

[cripplereh]

We signed UFA's this off season to be traded at the TDL to draft more younger players and give the ones we have time to mature into regular NHL players.

 

 

Next year after the twins retire or after another year after at most we will have way more in the line up which means we are rebuilding and if people do not see this look closer!

[Riviera82]

10 hours ago, kingofsurrey said:

Lets look at our vets.. forwards -  31 milllion in cap space allocated to them...

4 games played.    Our vet forwards have combined for 4 goals. 

Simply not good enough and Travis sooner or later will HAVE to hold them ACCOUNTABLE. 

Last 3 Loui E, Gagner, and Vanek simply were not good signings..

 

I would have rather signed Tanner Glass and  Cracknell..... at least they show up every night. 

 

Loui E  -  6 Mil    32 yr old

Hank  -  7 Mil   37 year old

Danny -  7 Mil  -  37 yr old     1 goal

Sutter  -  4.3 Mil   28 yr old  1 goal

Gagner  3.1  mil   28 yr old

Vanek   2 mil    33 yr old    1 goal

Dorset   2. 6  mil   28 yr old  1 goal

That's 32 million in dead cap right there. We'd probably do better as a floor team and yet we're at the ceiling.

[Butters Stoch]

5 hours ago, Sedintwinpowersactivate said:

I know we have beaten the JV and OJ picks to death, but Ehlers and Tkachuk were more consensus picks by the so called experts at the time and to date Benning missed those 6th overall and 5th overall opportunities.  I get everyone develops at there own pace... especially D men and power forwards.  I would also argue that D men and power forwards are also the riskiest picks and hardest to predict their development.  I'd only pick a D man in the top five if they were a sure thing... like Ekblad, Hedman, Doughty and soon to be Rasmus Dahlin.  There is no excuse for the OJ pick.  Tkachuk was far and away the better prospect... at the time of the draft and today and likely in the future as well.

 

I do like lots of moves Benning has done... but I'm not blown away by his top ten picks so far.

 

Odd that JB went with those picks that would take longer to develop when he evidently wants a "speeded up" rebuild where he trades prospects and picks for players a bit further along in development.

[thrago]

Personally I think that a quick rebuild is a pipe dream. We are still probably 7-8 years away from truly thinking the Cup is an option.  The key will be keeping the prospect pool full so the next rebuild is quicker. 

Benning started basically with nothing and has to build this team from the ground up it's going to be awhile.  

Keep all our 1sts most of the rest of the picks unless a deal we can't pass up comes along. Gain assets keep trying to get better assets by whatever means available.

You can't turn a team in as bad of shape as we were around in 4-5 years unless of course you have insane luck at the draft. Which so far we don't.

Got to be patient it's gonna be a long ride. Like really really patient.

[ilduce39]

5 hours ago, Riviera82 said:

Yes, the leafs cut out the overpriced crap and kept what good younger players they had.

 

The Canucks held on to many of their older players and acquired even more older players each year since Jim and Trevor were hired.

 

Toronto has done the rebuild right, regardless of getting lucky and drafting Matthews. The Canucks I'm afraid are currently doing the Toronto rebuild "pre-Shannaplan". Trying to integrate what youth they can into the lineup (mediocre or otherwise) while keeping and acquiring overpriced, washed-up veterans in an attempt to make the playoffs.

 

Unfortunately for the leafs, and probably the Canucks as well, that only resulted in having an 80 to 90 point team and no playoffs and no high picks year after year. 

Until a team fully commits to a rebuild like the leafs did a few years ago, that's what you get. Hopefully whoever is running the Canucks figures that out soon.

Your whole post is a common narrative on CDC and beyond but there's a huge problem:

 

it assumes that "rebuilding" and "committing to a rebuild" are simply a choice to swallow a bitter pill, move forward with youth and reap the rewards down the road.

 

What it doesn't consider is maybe the "pre-shannaplan" moves, rather than aimless meandering,  enabled the Leafs to act on the "shannaplan."  That is, having a stable of quality players across the lineup who are good but not good enough to carry a team on their own enabled the Leafs to cut ties with certain veterans to make room for new top talent when they were ready. 

 

They still kept players who were pros, had seen playoff action and knew how to play well enough to get there. Some core, some support, some depth.

 

Then and only then you add high skill in Marner/Nylander and elite talent in Matthews - into a situation where they can do their thing while properly supported.  

 

Oh and they shelled out big cash to bring in Babcock to ensure it didn't blow up in their faces.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

13 hours ago, ilduce39 said:

These guys are good at griping about the moves they don't like but I haven't seen a realistic, comprehensive alternative put forth that doesn't sound like the 2010 Oilers.  

 

"Finish as low as possible" and "stockpile picks" sound nice until you have to weigh it against your NHL/AHL rosters and prospect development.

 

As always, it's a lot easier to throw stones at others than build your own idea.

There's been plenty of other ideas thrown out.  Personally I think there are somethings canucks have done good, where other things I would have done differently

 

Step one

Build an overflowing prospect pool through draft, as well as with trades from expendable assets:

 

1a ) Not trade away picks.

Gudbranson, Pedan, Dorsett, Baertschi, Vey, Larsen, Prust, Etem

Vs

McCann + 3x 2nd round picks + 2x 3rd round picks + 2x 5th round picks + 6th round pick

 

Imagine our pool if JB had another full years’ worth of draft picks…

 

1b ) acquire more picks and young prospects:

Like canucks did with Burrows and Hansen getting us Dahlen and Goldobin.

 

....and Not letting UFA’s walk for nothing..  “A” pick (even if it’s a late round pick) is better than no pick.

On March 5, 2014, Diaz was traded to the New York Rangers for a 5th round pick in the 2015 NHL Entry Draft, that pick became Adam Gaudette.

 

Now before someone goes on about  “stockpilizing picks”, consider, Horvat, Gaudette, Gadjovich, Lockwood, Brisebois, McCann, and McKenzie are all results of canucks acquiring an extra pick

 

 

Step Two

2a ) Fill stop gaps with cheap UFA contracts, aim after younger players with potential.  (etc. Pirri, Connelly, Burmistrov, Del Zotto) and the occasional vet with experience that could be flipped (for a pick) at another date.

2b ) Do not sign UFA’s to long term deals with potential to backfire.

2c ) Go after NCAA free agents. 

 

Step Three

Focus on player development.  There’s a fine line between earning ice/ being awarded an opportunity.   If a players not ready, send them back.  If a player is, put them in an opportunity to succeed. 

[GreyHatnDart]

8 hours ago, Riviera82 said:

Yes, the leafs cut out the overpriced crap and kept what good younger players they had.

 

The Canucks held on to many of their older players and acquired even more older players each year since Jim and Trevor were hired.

 

Toronto has done the rebuild right, regardless of getting lucky and drafting Matthews. The Canucks I'm afraid are currently doing the Toronto rebuild "pre-Shannaplan". Trying to integrate what youth they can into the lineup (mediocre or otherwise) while keeping and acquiring overpriced, washed-up veterans in an attempt to make the playoffs.

 

Unfortunately for the leafs, and probably the Canucks as well, that only resulted in having an 80 to 90 point team and no playoffs and no high picks year after year. 

Until a team fully commits to a rebuild like the leafs did a few years ago, that's what you get. Hopefully whoever is running the Canucks figures that out soon.

For the 19th millionth time, the overpriced vets ie the Sedin’s do not want to be traded. They have NMC’s, so they can’t be moved unless they so choose. Edler is in the same boat as far as I know. Tanev is an effective player and I’m happy he’s here. 

 

Those are the ONLY 4 players remaining from 2012. Whether people choose to see that as a “rebuild”, or only see what Toronto has done as a “rebuild” I suppose is their business. 

 

Also, Toronto has the fan base to continue to support a poor team, evidenced by years of suckage with high attendance. We do not, proven by the last 2-3 seasons. Anyone who says “I don’t go cuz of clouded rhetoric from management” is full of crap. People don’t go because Vancouver doesn’t like watching a struggling team. I’d agree that ticket prices are still too high relative to the quality on the ice, but that’s another story. 

 

The second bolded point has been beaten to death... Toronto had a solid young base of players to work around as they drafted high and developed new prospects. We did not. We had Bo, who at that time was a complete question mark AND a rookie. Without pulling Mathews out of Bettman’s butt, Toronto likely wouldn’t be much further along than we are.

[Gollumpus]

22 hours ago, TheGuardian_ said:

It would be interesting to see what fans beleive a rebuild should be, I tried to do a poll but it kicked me back out to here.

 

IMO the Canucks are only doing what any team not needing to rebuild would do, draft players that might make the team, the same as any of the teams mentioned, some of their drafted players make the team.

 

Let's examine what the Canucks are doing to see if it is any different than what lets say Columbus, Nashville or Chicago is doing now.

 

Each of those team have drafted players over the last three years that are now in their line ups, each of those is not in the same situation as the Canucks they are playoff teams drafting higher or missing the first round all together.

 

Each of those teams have more younger playing in the last 3 years than the Canucks.

 

The Canucks have signed more UFA's than most teams, is that rebuilding or replacing?

 

Most of the above mentioned teams have traded to get "star" level impact players, the Canucks don't have one playing yet.

What are my thoughts on what a re-build should be? Pretty much as it is going on right now with the Canucks seems pretty good to me.

 

Lord knows, the team could have tried the deliberate tank route and gone for a lottery pick in the last couple of drafts, but I like this approach rather than doing something so disgusting as the Toronto or Edmonton route. Are they doing well atm? Sure, because they got lucky, and Edmonton didn't even have to be the worst team in the NHL to get McDavid. 

 

                                                                regards, G.

[Gollumpus]

50 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

There's been plenty of other ideas thrown out.  Personally I think there are somethings canucks have done good, where other things I would have done differently

 

Step one

Build an overflowing prospect pool through draft, as well as with trades from expendable assets:

 

1a ) Not trade away picks.

Gudbranson, Pedan, Dorsett, Baertschi, Vey, Larsen, Prust, Etem

Vs

McCann + 3x 2nd round picks + 2x 3rd round picks + 2x 5th round picks + 6th round pick

 

Imagine our pool if JB had another full years’ worth of draft picks…

 

1b ) acquire more picks and young prospects:

Like canucks did with Burrows and Hansen getting us Dahlen and Goldobin.

 

....and Not letting UFA’s walk for nothing..  “A” pick (even if it’s a late round pick) is better than no pick.

On March 5, 2014, Diaz was traded to the New York Rangers for a 5th round pick in the 2015 NHL Entry Draft, that pick became Adam Gaudette.

 

Now before someone goes on about  “stockpilizing picks”, consider, Horvat, Gaudette, Gadjovich, Lockwood, Brisebois, McCann, and McKenzie are all results of canucks acquiring an extra pick

 

 

Step Two

2a ) Fill stop gaps with cheap UFA contracts, aim after younger players with potential.  (etc. Pirri, Connelly, Burmistrov, Del Zotto) and the occasional vet with experience that could be flipped (for a pick) at another date.

2b ) Do not sign UFA’s to long term deals with potential to backfire.

2c ) Go after NCAA free agents. 

 

Step Three

Focus on player development.  There’s a fine line between earning ice/ being awarded an opportunity.   If a players not ready, send them back.  If a player is, put them in an opportunity to succeed. 

Well, Benning did pick up 1 1st, 2 2nd, 3 3rd, 1 4th, 1 5th, 2 7th in trades since he's been here. Imagine our pool if JB had actually used those picks...

 

                                                                           regards,  G.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

Just now, Gollumpus said:

Well, Benning did pick up 1 st, 2 2nd, 3 3rd, 1 4th, 1 5th, 2 7th in trades since he's been here. Imagine our pool if JB had actually used those picks...

 

                                                                           regards,  G.

I don't see how that justifies trading away picks.  The goal during a rebuild isn't to remain even, it's to come out positive. 

 

I brought a 2 stocks as investments, one stock i lost $500, the other one I made $500, at the end of the year i came out even.  Should I go around bragging about my how good of an investor i am?

[smithers joe]

this is our team right now.

sedin sedin vanek

baertschi horvat boeser

granlund sutter ericksson

gagner burmistrov dorsett

virtanen

edler tanev

delzotto gudbranson

hutton stecher

pouliat biega

markstrom nilsson 

 

who do we get rid of and who do we replace them with.?

who can rebuild this team today? 

 

[JM_]

Just now, smithers joe said:

this is our team right now.

sedin sedin vanek

baertschi horvat boeser

granlund sutter ericksson

gagner burmistrov dorsett

virtanen

edler tanev

delzotto gudbranson

hutton stecher

pouliat biega

markstrom nilsson 

 

who do we get rid of and who do we replace them with.?

who can rebuild this team today? 

 

maybe not today but maybe Goldy later this year. I heard Cull on the radio this morning talking about how happy he his with Goldy, and he's now trying him on the PK as well so it sounds very promising for him to get back up here. 

 

I also feel like the whole thing over using the twins on different lines is silly not to try. We can have so many more line combinations if we can think about fitting each Sedin to a different line vs. who fits with them, which is now a very hard task to accomplish. 

 

 

[aGENT]

29 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

I don't see how that justifies trading away picks.  The goal during a rebuild isn't to remain even, it's to come out positive. 

 

I brought a 2 stocks as investments, one stock i lost $500, the other one I made $500, at the end of the year i came out even.  Should I go around bragging about my how good of an investor i am?

Positive in what though? Draft picks? Pretty short sighted IMO.

 

The point is to come out positive in NHL players. You hope draft picks turn in to NHL players but a draft pick is just a draft pick until it isn't.

 

IMO, Benning is doing just fine at adding current and potential NHL players. And that's all that really matters. He's kept all his high picks where he stands the biggest chance of getting high impact players and has added a tonne of depth both professional and prospect that overall look promising to have potential NHL careers. 

 

People arguing in countless threads for countless pages on their personally preferred route of getting to the destination is frankly, silly. All that particularly matters is that we're getting there, which only the most obtuse would still bother arguing we aren't.

 

Do we still need some pieces? Yup. Good things there's still a couple more years of rebuilding to go.

 

[smithers joe]

Just now, Jimmy McGill said:

maybe not today but maybe Goldy later this year. I heard Cull on the radio this morning talking about how happy he his with Goldy, and he's now trying him on the PK as well so it sounds very promising for him to get back up here. 

 

I also feel like the whole thing over using the twins on different lines is silly not to try. We can have so many more line combinations if we can think about fitting each Sedin to a different line vs. who fits with them, which is now a very hard task to accomplish. 

 

 

the truth is, we have players that can replace the old core, they are just not ready right now. some fans want the moves to happen right now. they won't. it's the old, we should have drafted kopitar threads. what we see is what we're getting.  we all have opinions but so does benning and linden. 

[DrJockitch]

I am a little torn on how to respond to this.  I am one who feels that what Buffalo and Toronto did in intentionally tanking from the start of the year to maximize the chance of top overall pick was wrong.  They started the year trying to be dad and did everything they could to get worse as the year went on.  I am glad that McDavid didn't go to Buffalo who intentionally tanked but to Edmonton who was bed because of managerial incompetence.  Yeah, rewarding incompetence.  

 

Don't forget Toronto flexed a lot of financial muscle to aide their rebuild.  They essentially have a unlimited budget and used it to there advantage.  They took on bad contracts for draft pics and payed a fortune for best coach in the game and then took on another top GM at top dollar.  I said in another thread last offseason, if we are comparing ourselves to Toronto we are really only at the drafting Morgan Reilly faze of the rebuild, okay now maybe we have added our version of Nylander or Marner in Petterson.  This would probably put us with a few more years to grow.

 

I like the moves this year, Gagner got 3 years but with no Hank we will be really thin at the NHL level for centres.  MDZ and Burmistrov fine, short traceable or useful inexpensive pieces that don't really improve the team much but let your prospects ripen.  Vanek is not the type of player you want around Brock and Jake, especially when they are sitting so that they can learn not to play like that guy, but hey if he can be unloaded for an asset (there is a sucker born every minute).

 

I see with our prospect group, some nice pieces but still lacking in quite a bit.  This prospect pool is not balanced to produce a cup contender and for the most part are still a few years off of being NHL regulars.  Too much on the wing, not enough depth of prospects at centre and not nearly enough quality depth of prospects on D.  Dahlin or the young Russian would go a great way to improving either of those positions, but that takes luck in the lottery which really is something we have lacked since the Canucks came into the league.  That being said things have improved greatly in the last 3 years.  Lind, Gaudette, Gadjovich, Lockwood, Petterson, Dahlen, Goldobin, Demko, Chattfield and Holm have all looked very good in their leagues to start.  OJ has lots of time and hopefully turns into a top 4 D man.  

 

With Sedins gone after this year the real rebuild begins, going to be a rough road with a lot of empty seats.

[Gollumpus]

24 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

I don't see how that justifies trading away picks.  The goal during a rebuild isn't to remain even, it's to come out positive. 

 

I brought a 2 stocks as investments, one stock i lost $500, the other one I made $500, at the end of the year i came out even.  Should I go around bragging about my how good of an investor i am?

If we add up all the picks traded away and brought in, the Canucks are down something like 2 picks in that time period (IIRC) while having an edge in higher value picks, as well as being up quite a few good assets (players and prospects), who are better than what has been moved out (IMHO).

 

As to your stock investing, maybe you should get some professional help. Your perspective suggests that the team should invest more in the $500 loss stocks on the grounds that it just might pay off. This doesn't seem to be a very high success rate plan.

 

                                                                                regards,  G.