Aquilini’s intentions with JB

[oldnews]

On 2/10/2018 at 2:56 PM, cory40 said:

Aqualini’s would be out of his mind to change direction.

 

This team needs to stay with the plan. The management team is gaining experience. We don't need Ken Holland. What has he done for Detroit lately. Detroit has drafted poorly and hasn't won in a decade. https://www.tsn.ca/radio/vancouver-1040-i-1410/burke-canucks-are-desperate-for-fresh-views-in-their-management-1.993807

We need to be patient and stay with this prospect pool. Jim Benning is doing fine, just wait until the picks start coming. The Canucks looked better this year than last until Bo Horvats injury. 

Stay with the plan.

Not sure how the link fits in your perspective. I' m assuming that is JD Burke (not going to bother with it tbh - the canucksmarmy campaigns against Benning have been so predisposed that it's embarrassingly predictable - but worse, poorly qualified

He's been as intent upon regime change here as they were in Florida where Rowe et al managed to get the ear of ownership and convince them to fix what wasn't broken - and we all saw how that played and worked out.

 

Is Burke putting these words in the "Canucks" ownership mouths?  Their desperation for new age 'analytics'?

What is the source of that claim?

 

So much opportunism out of those types - believing the future of the NHL belongs to them - and promise to deliver superior player assessments - but the reductive and oversimplified analysis they offer is so unconvincing.  I'm in favour of due dilligence and using the best tools available - but completely unconvinced of JD Burke's own toolbox.  What a fatal error it would be to turn the franchise over to those young minds that don't see the limits of their simplistic 'analysis' - passing it off as "analytics".  It's just branding of a 'product' that is not particularly good relative to it's competition.  A 'Teen Burger' is just a Teen Burger - it's not a monopoly on the burger industry.

[oldnews]

On 2/11/2018 at 10:06 AM, 189lb enforcers? said:

If TL or JB we’re fired, I’d hope they would offer up some clarity on the popular opinion concerning Aquaman interference in the team’s direction.

I think there was some clarity offered up last cycle - when the bizarre marriage of Gillis and Tortorella came to the predictable and abrupt end - for both of them  - one virtually no one could buy in the first place as a Mike Gillis decision. 

 

"Trevor will make all of the decisions on hockey-related personnel, coaches, players, free agents," Aquilini said. "Trevor will in be charge of all hockey operations and make all the decisions."

 

Does it need to be clarified again....?

I have patience for a necessary transition - patience for the compromise, the approach - but hockey decisions need to be made by hockey people.

Linden appears to have indicated his intention to re-sign Benning - if that doesn't happen - do we really need more 'clarity' and what would that be worth?

[189lb enforcers?]

15 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I think there was some clarity offered up last cycle - when the bizarre marriage of Gillis and Tortorella came to the predictable and abrupt end - for both of them  - one virtually no one could buy in the first place as a Mike Gillis decision. 

 

"Trevor will make all of the decisions on hockey-related personnel, coaches, players, free agents," Aquilini said. "Trevor will in be charge of all hockey operations and make all the decisions."

 

Does it need to be clarified again....?

I have patience for a necessary transition - patience for the compromise, the approach - but hockey decisions need to be made by hockey people.

Linden appears to have indicated his intention to re-sign Benning - if that doesn't happen - do we really need more 'clarity' and what would that be worth?

There were some managerial head-scratchers in the beginning of their tenure. If there really was owner meddling, I’d like to think that is why things turned out like they did, rather than assume incompetence of Linden or Benning. It’s not required, but I’d be satisfied with some insight into why they made those first few roster decisions which still carry an impact on today’s roster. 

 

Personally, I’d like to know why the team loaded up with ‘Millers’ when it did and why even Boston managed to outpace the Canucks on acquisition of top draft picks early in Benning era. I doubt it would happen, but that’s what I’d like to know as a paying fan. This, more than a token, rote-like, affirmation of the Roles and Responsibilities of Orca staff. 

 

[oldnews]

3 hours ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

 why even Boston managed to outpace the Canucks on acquisition of top draft picks early in Benning era. I doubt it would happen, but that’s what I’d like to know as a paying fan.

simple.

 

Boston had Dougie Hamilton to deal - and did.  Lucic.  A couple firsts and Martin Jones - flipped for another 1st - so three 1sts and two x 2nds out of those two assets alone. Well done - and would be better if they'd done what most people expected - take Barzal with one of those picks.....but no one is perfect.

On the other hand....

The Canucks had an "old and stale" core, a whack of limiting clauses, and a coach that wasn't helping the pump and dump by any stretch of the imagination lol.

I'm fine with the returns on what they did realistically have to sell.   The Kesler list of two turned out pretty well imo.   Bieksa, Garrison....not sure much more than 2nd round picks could have been expected.  Luo's "contract sucks".   Hamhuis broke his face at an inopportune time.  Vrbata doesn't seem to care much about playing in the playoffs. 

 

And in the end - Boston still had Bergeron, Krejci, Marchand  - their core was younger when they won Cups - than the Sedins, Luongo, Bieksa, etc were when they lost.

I don't expect to 'remain competitive' to the extent that Boston did - I'm not sure that's a realistic look at the two teams' trajectories.

 

 

[spook007]

37 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I think there was some clarity offered up last cycle - when the bizarre marriage of Gillis and Tortorella came to the predictable and abrupt end - for both of them  - one virtually no one could buy in the first place as a Mike Gillis decision. 

 

"Trevor will make all of the decisions on hockey-related personnel, coaches, players, free agents," Aquilini said. "Trevor will in be charge of all hockey operations and make all the decisions."

 

Does it need to be clarified again....?

I have patience for a necessary transition - patience for the compromise, the approach - but hockey decisions need to be made by hockey people.

Linden appears to have indicated his intention to re-sign Benning - if that doesn't happen - do we really need more 'clarity' and what would that be worth?

Nailed it. 

[Gaudette Celly]

40 minutes ago, oldnews said:

"Trevor will make all of the decisions on hockey-related personnel, coaches, players, free agents," Aquilini said. "Trevor will in be charge of all hockey operations and make all the decisions."

Concerned to a degree that his relationship with the Sedins may have already determined them returning.

[oldnews]

2 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said:

Concerned to a degree that his relationship with the Sedins may have already determined them returning.

Speculation HW - and who knows about that?   Is it the crux of some pivotal decisions?  I sure hope not - but really, that is/should be Benning's decision, and Linden has fairly clearly endorsed Benning's work - so I'm focusing on what I've heard, not what I have not.

[The Lock]

3 hours ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

There were some managerial head-scratchers in the beginning of their tenure. If there really was owner meddling, I’d like to think that is why things turned out like they did, rather than assume incompetence of Linden or Benning. It’s not required, but I’d be satisfied with some insight into why they made those first few roster decisions which still carry an impact on today’s roster. 

 

Personally, I’d like to know why the team loaded up with ‘Millers’ when it did and why even Boston managed to outpace the Canucks on acquisition of top draft picks early in Benning era. I doubt it would happen, but that’s what I’d like to know as a paying fan. This, more than a token, rote-like, affirmation of the Roles and Responsibilities of Orca staff. 

To be honest, I think the answer to this has already been told to us: they thought we could go through things without having to suck at all. They even said it themselves at the beginning. They also even admitted to the press a couple of years later that things changed and they've looked at things differently since.

 

Is it necessarily bad what's happened? One could possibly argue that, but it can also be argued that they're new at their jobs and reality needed to hit them or something.

 

But I think, while it's easy to get into over-thinking what happened, sometimes we just have to take things at face value with what we're told because there are actually people like that... who will tell you as it is....

[cory40]

6 hours ago, oldnews said:

Not sure how the link fits in your perspective. I' m assuming that is JD Burke (not going to bother with it tbh - the canucksmarmy campaigns against Benning have been so predisposed that it's embarrassingly predictable - but worse, poorly qualified

He's been as intent upon regime change here as they were in Florida where Rowe et al managed to get the ear of ownership and convince them to fix what wasn't broken - and we all saw how that played and worked out.

 

Is Burke putting these words in the "Canucks" ownership mouths?  Their desperation for new age 'analytics'?

What is the source of that claim?

 

So much opportunism out of those types - believing the future of the NHL belongs to them - and promise to deliver superior player assessments - but the reductive and oversimplified analysis they offer is so unconvincing.  I'm in favour of due dilligence and using the best tools available - but completely unconvinced of JD Burke's own toolbox.  What a fatal error it would be to turn the franchise over to those young minds that don't see the limits of their simplistic 'analysis' - passing it off as "analytics".  It's just branding of a 'product' that is not particularly good relative to it's competition.  A 'Teen Burger' is just a Teen Burger - it's not a monopoly on the burger industry.

I was upset when I listened to that. I 100 agree with your post.http://theprovince.com/sports/hockey/nhl/vancouver-canucks/willes-musings-canucks-cant-sell-another-season-of-playing-old-slow-guys

But not as upset as when I read ED (should be fired) Willes column above.

[CanadianRugby]

5 hours ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Personally, I’d like to know why the team loaded up with ‘Millers’ when it did and why even Boston managed to outpace the Canucks on acquisition of top draft picks early in Benning era.

Management said they liked the old core, and could be competitive with a quick retool.  Nothing was said about acquiring draft picks/prospects.

 

 

Sign quality vets: Miller, Vrbata

Trade non-NHL youth for NHL ready youth: Baertschi, Granlund

Draft guys with an NHL ready body: Virtanen, Tryamkin

There's your quick retool.

 

Acquiring draft picks wasn't the goal, so we didn't load up on them.  Getting high draft picks was definitely not the goal, yet luckily the retool plan fell apart so badly that we got them anyway. 

[CanadianRugby]

9 minutes ago, cory40 said:

I was upset when I listened to that. I 100 agree with your post.http://theprovince.com/sports/hockey/nhl/vancouver-canucks/willes-musings-canucks-cant-sell-another-season-of-playing-old-slow-guys

But not as upset as when I read ED (should be fired) Willes column above.

Why were you so upset about that column?  

[cory40]

3 minutes ago, CanadianRugby said:

Why were you so upset about that column?  

Just his comments about the prospects.

[Alflives]

11 minutes ago, CanadianRugby said:

Management said they liked the old core, and could be competitive with a quick retool.  Nothing was said about acquiring draft picks/prospects.

 

 

Sign quality vets: Miller, Vrbata

Trade non-NHL youth for NHL ready youth: Baertschi, Granlund

Draft guys with an NHL ready body: Virtanen, Tryamkin

There's your quick retool.

 

Acquiring draft picks wasn't the goal, so we didn't load up on them.  Getting high draft picks was definitely not the goal, yet luckily the retool plan fell apart so badly that we got them anyway. 

So is Aqualini, after being sold by JB, that the team could be turned around quickly via the retool, going to fire JB?  

[CanadianRugby]

2 minutes ago, cory40 said:

Just his comments about the prospects.

You should re-read the article.  He rated our prospects positively and is relaying an email he got from a fan.  

 

Or maybe you think our prospects are terrible and think Ed should be fired for defending them?   I dunno.

[cory40]

5 minutes ago, CanadianRugby said:

You should re-read the article.  He rated our prospects positively and is relaying an email he got from a fan.  

 

Or maybe you think our prospects are terrible and think Ed should be fired for defending them?   I dunno.

I think he should have left the email from the fan off his column. Why post garbage. Haters can do that I expect more from professional journalists.

[CanadianRugby]

3 minutes ago, Alflives said:

So is Aqualini, after being sold by JB, that the team could be turned around quickly via the retool, going to fire JB?  

Only he knows that.  

You're also assuming that Benning sold him on this idea.  I think it's more likely Aqualini was on a mission to find a GM that could turn this core into a contender again.  It wasn't that far removed from back to back top of the league finishes.  

[CanadianRugby]

2 minutes ago, cory40 said:

I think he should have left the email from the fan off his column. Why post garbage. Haters can do that I expect more from professional journalists.

I think you're nitpicking.  First you say he should be fired because he trashed our prospects.  Then when you find out he wasn't trashing them, that he shouldn't include what fans write to him. 

 

I wrote a weekly Canuck column way back in the day, it's hard to come up with new things to write about all the time.  It's not always going to be compelling stuff, to everyone. 

[cory40]

1 minute ago, CanadianRugby said:

I think you're nitpicking.  First you say he should be fired because he trashed our prospects.  Then when you find out he wasn't trashing them, that he shouldn't include what fans write to him. 

 

I wrote a weekly Canuck column way back in the day, it's hard to come up with new things to write about all the time.  It's not always going to be compelling stuff, to everyone. 

Maybe I am. I think He always runs the Canucks down even if he doesn't directly. My apolagies

[Solinar]

On 30/01/2018 at 4:15 PM, Silky mitts said:

Jake looks nothing like a top draft pick should . OJ still is a good pick imo, but virtanen is a huge blunder when he was clearly the inferior player to who was available 

  I'm not usually high on Jake, and wasn't particularly pleased when we took him over Ehlers.  Some days, I'm still not happy.  But I look at how he played last game vs Dallas, and a quite a few more this season, and I truly believe that he's being marinated slowly in the NHL, and that his amazing hand eye coordination and ability to steal pucks as well as his superior skating will eventually get him over the hump.  I just hope we can extend him to a multi-year extension on the cheap and laugh at it all in the future.  He's big, he's fast, and has a good shot.  If he can continue to develop, he'll probably get it all by the time he's 24 and he'll have a superior centreman to play with in Pettersson.  I want you all to imagine, Virtanen Pettersson Gadjovich.  An elite speed guy to get the puck, an elite passer/shooter in Pettersson at centre, and Gadjovich brings the snarl, and net front presence needed to complete the line.

[pomorick]

I like Jake, but it was full retard to take him ahead of Ehlers!