The two year plan (discussion)

[IBatch]

16 hours ago, kingofsurrey said:

Interesting.  3  changes to your plan i would like to see. 

 

How about we move Hank and Danny this year at the TDL     ( for a 1st and a 2nd )  

How about we move Dorset this year at the TDL  ( this is in the sell assets that have inflated value ) for a 2nd or a Turd 

How about we do not ever sign Evander Kane as he  is probably not the kind of guy we want on our club. ?  

Nobody would give a first or second for the Sedins, and as they have said a thousand times they won't play anywhere else.  Most have been guilty of suggesting we should trade them over the years, but they've been so adamant about retiring as Canucks that it's time to give up on that idea.

 

It's almost impossible to trade them even if they wanted to given the salary constraints and the most we could retain, not many teams have the cap, especially the ones looking to buy for a playoff run. 

 

The time to do this if we could would have been before or around 2013.  It sucks not recycling them into prospects, but having them retire as a one team only player is something that almost never happens anymore and that's something we can be proud of.

[grumpworsley]

4 hours ago, alfstonker said:

One of the things imo that happens when you are on the down slope is an inability to process a situation.

 

The Sedins are illustrating that almost on a nightly basis. Even Hank's decision to stay out in the 3 on 3 was an error of judgement and that is why I question people who say "they will know when it's time" Well Hank didn't know when it was time to get off the ice and get a fresh replacement on and that was worrying.

 

[TheGuardian_]

The expiration of the CBA will and likely is dictating team plans.

[Boudrias]

3 hours ago, IBatch said:

Nobody would give a first or second for the Sedins, and as they have said a thousand times they won't play anywhere else.  Most have been guilty of suggesting we should trade them over the years, but they've been so adamant about retiring as Canucks that it's time to give up on that idea.

 

It's almost impossible to trade them even if they wanted to given the salary constraints and the most we could retain, not many teams have the cap, especially the ones looking to buy for a playoff run. 

 

The time to do this if we could would have been before or around 2013.  It sucks not recycling them into prospects, but having them retire as a one team only player is something that almost never happens anymore and that's something we can be proud of.

The Blueberry Kid returns! 

If the Twin had really wanted to do Van a favor they would have waived their NTC's for the Vegas expansion draft. Vegas would not have taken one of them and Benning could have protected Sbisa and Gaunce. 

 

Agree that unless a CUP contender had a serious injury problem the Twins would not likely garner much in a TDL deal. 2013 bang on. 

[TheGuardian_]

2 hours ago, Boudrias said:

Agree that unless a CUP contender had a serious injury problem the Twins would not likely garner much in a TDL deal. 2013 bang on. 

That is not exactly true, even now they can be effective. They are still a "line" and in the east they could still make a difference to teams like Florida or NJ that need to get into the playoffs or teams like Washington, Tampa or Islanders that could use a little bump.

 

They still have "rental" value and teams would need only a couple of mil in cap space with the Nucks retaining half of one Sedin's salary. Maybe take on a bad contract in return for a high end prospect or targeted young role  player.

[Crabcakes]

On 11/3/2017 at 1:45 PM, alfstonker said:

With respect it shouldn't be up to them, legends or not. It's not like they are the owners. I also question that train of thought too, because it is not borne out by their post game statements, where they seem reluctant to take personal responsibility for their mistakes or slow play. They love playing, they love being in the NHL and they love Vancouver, so we have to ask just how slow and unexceptional they have to get before they think "they are done"

 

They are 37 and will be 38 at the start of next season. So we haven't pushed them out of the team, many clubs part company with their "legends" a lot earlier  - Iginla 35, Jagr 28, Datsyuk 37, Owen Nolan 30. etc

 

it's not, as I have said before, about whether they could still play a lesser role, I'm sure they could but that is not imo what this should be about. This is about moving on, moving forward, changing our style and our identity. - 4 lines running the opposition ragged.

 

They are slow and no matter who is on their line that line will still be slow. You can't have 3/4 of your team playing a fast game, if you want to be a FAST TEAM.

 

On 11/3/2017 at 2:08 PM, PhillipBlunt said:

I agree with you sentiment, alfstonker. I hope that the Sedins are realizing that it's time for them to hang them up. Green's deployment of them this season should be a clear message to them of their place on the team.

 

While they have been great for the team, so were Hamhuis, Bieksa, Burrows, and Hansen. All were moved because, as players, they offered dwindling returns to the team as far as ability. Treating the Sedins as untouchables at this point is a faulty idea. They were no more important to the 2011 team than Hamhuis, Bieksa, Kesler, Luongo, Burrows, or Hansen. All those players are no longer Canucks, for various reasons. The Sedins are no different.

I think the Sedins will retire this year.  I think that they are pretty objective and critical of their own performances.  It's a small sample size to this point this season and I think that they consider that as do I.  They have been making plays and look ok a lot of the time the way they are being deployed by Green.  Having said that, there is little of the old finish to this point playing against lesser 3rd line opposition. 

 

Hank 12 games 0-3-3 -4       extrapolates to 0-21-21 for the season

Dan   12 games 2-3-5 -4       extrapolates to 13-21-34 for the season

[Kurt Nirvanagut]

 

[hammertime]

I too am on the sign E Kane train he would fit the high tempo style we are creating here.

 

I think Pettersson has spaghetti arms and would have the worst FO% in the NHL and may well be better suited to playing LW which isn't a travesty as he likely makes a great fit with Horvat.

 

Loui E needs to go to Robidas island

 

I think JB's priority should be a PP QB. That I think is the thing that is the difference between this team being just fun to watch and actually being a real threat.

[48MPHSlapShot]

I think we maybe need to start considering all of our options when talking about landing a Top Dman. I know it's early, and the bottom could still fall out, but if we're able to be a middle of the pack team this year based almost solely on the strong play of our young guns, and with a slew of high end prospects close to ready to make the jump (Pettersson, Demko, Juolevi, Dahlen, Goldobin, Lind etc...) and contribute pretty much right off the bat, we could theoretically be closer than we realize to being good again.

 

So, assuming we don't bottom out and land Dahlin, are there any young, top level Dmen in the league that could be available via trade? It's still a piece that we very much so need, but with our young guys already making an impact and making us better, tanking for a high draft pick and landing our future no 1 D could conceivably be a scenario that's out of the equation now.

 

So yeah, who might be available via trade in the next couple of years?

[oldnews]

On 11/3/2017 at 1:30 PM, skategal said:

I am not a proponent of advanced analytics at all, I don't pretend to understand them to any great degree, but am trying to learn more.  I was looking at the Corsica.com website last night and looking at the Canucks defense.  Gudbranson is notably lower in almost every category than any of the other d players on the team.  I haven't dug into the definitions of each stat to better understand why that might be but found it interesting as I've seen comments regarding his stats referenced in a couple of recent articles I've read.  He's big and tough, I hope that isn't masking underlying issues with his play that we should be considering?   I love watching him play, love watching him crush opposing players but before we offer him a significant long term contract we should be sure what we're signing on for.  

His role/usage dictates that he'll be lower than the other D in most categories.

 

I don't know if you're old enough to remember Manny Malhotra - but he's a very good example of why corsi alone / or plus minus can be completely meaningless (corsi is really just the plus/minus of shot attempt differential with a player on the ice) 

 

When you have a player like Malhotra - whose job was to play a shutdown role - usually starting in his own end of the ice (high defensive zone starts / low ozone starts) - and was facing the opposition's best players / in a matchup role (not unlike the one Sutter now plays) - when you have players in these roles, their 'advanced' stats or 'underlying numbers' are going to look worse than their team-mates, sometimes significantly worse.  But they are also misleading, particularly if you take them out of context. 

 

On the other hand, players like the Sedins who have traditionally had very high ozone starts - because scoring is their strength - nevertheless have their 'possession'/shot differential numbers inflated, because they are deployed in advantageous situations to capitalize on their strengths.

 

A guy may have a corsi of 40% - or may have a game where he was a -10 corsi (the opposition attempted 10 more shots 5 on 5 than his team did, while he was on the ice) - and yet that alone doesn't really tell you anything - doesn't tell you how effective they were.

 

Tonight for example - Gudbranson had a -7 corsi.  But what does that really mean?   He also had only 22% offensive zone starts, meaning he was almost exclusively starting in his own end of the ice - at least on stoppages.   His corsi % was considerably higher than his ozone starts, and he spent the night contending with Malkin and starting on his side of the blueline - no easy task.   So corsi alone really doesn't tell you much, and many of the other stats you'll find the same thing. Del Zotto had a lower corsi than Gud tonight, but similar circumstances - a shutdown role against a couple of the NHL most lethal lines. 

Tanev's corsi was only 42% tonight - as were his zone starts - doesn't really indicate his effectiveness.

 

Bottom line -  I don't like our chances as much of coming away with a 4-2 win tonight without Gudbranson in the lineup.  Is there someone else on our blueline that could handle Malkin?  Keep in mind that Tanev is already dealing with Crosby.....

 

 

[spook007]

7 hours ago, oldnews said:

His role/usage dictates that he'll be lower than the other D in most categories.

 

I don't know if you're old enough to remember Manny Malhotra - but he's a very good example of why corsi alone / or plus minus can be completely meaningless (corsi is really just the plus/minus of shot attempt differential with a player on the ice) 

 

When you have a player like Malhotra - whose job was to play a shutdown role - usually starting in his own end of the ice (high defensive zone starts / low ozone starts) - and was facing the opposition's best players / in a matchup role (not unlike the one Sutter now plays) - when you have players in these roles, their 'advanced' stats or 'underlying numbers' are going to look worse than their team-mates, sometimes significantly worse.  But they are also misleading, particularly if you take them out of context. 

 

On the other hand, players like the Sedins who have traditionally had very high ozone starts - because scoring is their strength - nevertheless have their 'possession'/shot differential numbers inflated, because they are deployed in advantageous situations to capitalize on their strengths.

 

A guy may have a corsi of 40% - or may have a game where he was a -10 corsi (the opposition attempted 10 more shots 5 on 5 than his team did, while he was on the ice) - and yet that alone doesn't really tell you anything - doesn't tell you how effective they were.

 

Tonight for example - Gudbranson had a -7 corsi.  But what does that really mean?   He also had only 22% offensive zone starts, meaning he was almost exclusively starting in his own end of the ice - at least on stoppages.   His corsi % was considerably higher than his ozone starts, and he spent the night contending with Malkin and starting on his side of the blueline - no easy task.   So corsi alone really doesn't tell you much, and many of the other stats you'll find the same thing. Del Zotto had a lower corsi than Gud tonight, but similar circumstances - a shutdown role against a couple of the NHL most lethal lines. 

Tanev's corsi was only 42% tonight - as were his zone starts - doesn't really indicate his effectiveness.

 

Bottom line -  I don't like our chances as much of coming away with a 4-2 win tonight without Gudbranson in the lineup.  Is there someone else on our blueline that could handle Malkin?  Keep in mind that Tanev is already dealing with Crosby.....

 

 

Thank ON... brilliant explanation.... 

Gudbransson has been a real stalwart in our defence this year, and is one of the few, who can handle the bigger players physically...

[EdgarM]

7 hours ago, oldnews said:

His role/usage dictates that he'll be lower than the other D in most categories.

 

I don't know if you're old enough to remember Manny Malhotra - but he's a very good example of why corsi alone / or plus minus can be completely meaningless (corsi is really just the plus/minus of shot attempt differential with a player on the ice) 

 

When you have a player like Malhotra - whose job was to play a shutdown role - usually starting in his own end of the ice (high defensive zone starts / low ozone starts) - and was facing the opposition's best players / in a matchup role (not unlike the one Sutter now plays) - when you have players in these roles, their 'advanced' stats or 'underlying numbers' are going to look worse than their team-mates, sometimes significantly worse.  But they are also misleading, particularly if you take them out of context. 

 

On the other hand, players like the Sedins who have traditionally had very high ozone starts - because scoring is their strength - nevertheless have their 'possession'/shot differential numbers inflated, because they are deployed in advantageous situations to capitalize on their strengths.

 

A guy may have a corsi of 40% - or may have a game where he was a -10 corsi (the opposition attempted 10 more shots 5 on 5 than his team did, while he was on the ice) - and yet that alone doesn't really tell you anything - doesn't tell you how effective they were.

 

Tonight for example - Gudbranson had a -7 corsi.  But what does that really mean?   He also had only 22% offensive zone starts, meaning he was almost exclusively starting in his own end of the ice - at least on stoppages.   His corsi % was considerably higher than his ozone starts, and he spent the night contending with Malkin and starting on his side of the blueline - no easy task.   So corsi alone really doesn't tell you much, and many of the other stats you'll find the same thing. Del Zotto had a lower corsi than Gud tonight, but similar circumstances - a shutdown role against a couple of the NHL most lethal lines. 

Tanev's corsi was only 42% tonight - as were his zone starts - doesn't really indicate his effectiveness.

 

Bottom line -  I don't like our chances as much of coming away with a 4-2 win tonight without Gudbranson in the lineup.  Is there someone else on our blueline that could handle Malkin?  Keep in mind that Tanev is already dealing with Crosby.....

 

 

Very well put Oldnews. There are so many pieces to the puzzle to make a team successful you have to consider "ALL OF THE PIECES TOGETHER" to get a clear picture. Gudbranson is obviously a piece of the puzzle and you have to look at how well he does his "Role" in gauging his effectiveness. He does his job very well by the way. The Sedins on the other hand, who are strictly "Offensive" players, are faultering a bit in their roles on the team. If they had checking or PK abilities or some foot speed they could be effective in other areas and contribute in "Other" ways to the team. Unfortunately, they do not possess these attributes and so their contributions are limited.

[10pavelbure96]

Why on earth would you trade Gudbranson? He is Willie Mitchell and Kevin Bieksa's love child... in their prime.

[skategal]

Thanks Oldnews for the perspective and for the comment about "not sure if you're old enough to remember Manny Malhotra".  Best compliment I've had in awhile....I"m old enough to remember Orland Kurtenbach   

[189lb enforcers?]

Regardless of where they are in the standings, they need to capitalize on anyone who is playing well and focus on finding a core for this team.

There is no reason to trade Horvat or Boeser, but nearly every other player is tradable if the return is there.

 

I've seen the repeatedly mentioned hope and optimism on here stating that the plethora of Canuck prospects is set to make the jump and be impactful. The odds of them all making it, never mind being impact or core players, is negligible. The odds of a few doing this are small. It goes on like this. To inject a bit of reality here, these Canuck prospect aren't even all that young. To be so "up on them", while their peers are regulars elsewhere in the NHL, is nice to read, but gets a bit much when speculating on the future successes of the team.

 

I would expect a few to make it and I don't see too much to get excited about in top end talent or any other characteristic. What I do see is a decent crop of mid-tier, not-so-young prospects coming into a roster of similar, young NHLers. I am not sure if the HoBo duo will be enough to build around at this point, so I don't hope the best for this current UFA and vet-laden roster this year, but do hope JB keeps this team in lotto contention by cashing in on any player who might be over-achieving and trades the majority of the tradable players, provided they are tearing it up. I am only interested in building a new core by sacrificing the present. The meanwhile is just fluff; a place-holder, like the spare parts he brought in to bridge this step.

 

But damn, look at them go! Exceeding expectations and playing with heart and desire. Pretty tough to cull this roster, but IMO, JB must capitalize on this good fortune and trade what he can for a successful future. Aside from the new core of HoBo, the team is in an ideal position to sell high, for once.

 

Can the fans actually survive, "Pain" or will there be a call to placate ticket sales instead? 

[Frogger009]

I would take another year of the Sedin's over signing Kane to any sort of long term deal. We need cap space for Boeser, Baertschi, Granlund, Stecher, future contracts for Demko, Pettersson or Juolevi if they become the superstars we hope. No need for another albatross FA signing hanging around our necks.