Is the Current Ownership Failing this Team?

[Watchincanucks]

Ok give me a break I have been watching Goldobin play. I like him, I don’t want to lose him on waivers. I saw Leipsic play and I don’t want to lose him. I could not care less about Granlund or Gagner or Eriksson, Gaunce Archibald Kero Motte Boucher, they will not contribute to this team by the time we are good imo. So the question is, is Benning going to trade one of Greens pet vets (first 3) or do we end up waiving them (Goldobin Leipsic) to make room for Pettersson Gaudette Dahlen Palmu or any rookie that earns it. Maybe Benning will surprise me, but he has been saying he will make room but has never actually made a trade to do it. Juolevi could also earn a spot but again would he actually trade Del Zotto or anyone else to make room. I’ll believe it when I see it, but history shows we will wait for injury or poor play before he does anything. I don’t want to waste 10-20 games first. Part of a GMs job is to know who is or is not ready. If he thinks 3 are ready you clear 2 spots and trade 1 if all 3 make team. If they aren’t ready you plug in Archibald Motte or Gaunce or however does earn it. What you don’t do is jam up the 4th line, that good teams use to develop young players, for next 4 years in a win now/mentor ship role on a rebuilding team.

[Viper007]

7 minutes ago, Watchincanucks said:

Ok give me a break I have been watching Goldobin play. I like him, I don’t want to lose him on waivers. I saw Leipsic play and I don’t want to lose him. I could not care less about Granlund or Gagner or Eriksson, Gaunce Archibald Kero Motte Boucher, they will not contribute to this team by the time we are good imo. So the question is, is Benning going to trade one of Greens pet vets (first 3) or do we end up waiving them (Goldobin Leipsic) to make room for Pettersson Gaudette Dahlen Palmu or any rookie that earns it. Maybe Benning will surprise me, but he has been saying he will make room but has never actually made a trade to do it. Juolevi could also earn a spot but again would he actually trade Del Zotto or anyone else to make room. I’ll believe it when I see it, but history shows we will wait for injury or poor play before he does anything. I don’t want to waste 10-20 games first. Part of a GMs job is to know who is or is not ready. If he thinks 3 are ready you clear 2 spots and trade 1 if all 3 make team. If they aren’t ready you plug in Archibald Motte or Gaunce or however does earn it. What you don’t do is jam up the 4th line, that good teams use to develop young players, for next 4 years in a win now/mentor ship role on a rebuilding team.

Unfortunately just because you like the 2 players doesn't mean they're guaranteed spots on the team.  If they earn it great.  If they don't, no big loss.  But they have to EARN it.  Unfortunately in the coaches eyes those 3 players you mention are all ahead of both Leipsic and Goldobin.  So no point in whining about it until we watch how preseason unfolds.  Hey maybe JB makes a trade, you never know ... but why waste time on whining about the situation until it comes around.  It might not even happen.

[Where'd Luongo?]

1 hour ago, Viper007 said:

Unfortunately just because you like the 2 players doesn't mean they're guaranteed spots on the team.  If they earn it great.  If they don't, no big loss.  But they have to EARN it.  Unfortunately in the coaches eyes those 3 players you mention are all ahead of both Leipsic and Goldobin.  So no point in whining about it until we watch how preseason unfolds.  Hey maybe JB makes a trade, you never know ... but why waste time on whining about the situation until it comes around.  It might not even happen.

Sometimes betting on someone who has some work to do but has more potential is better than going with the guy who is consistent but plateaued as a bottom guy. 

[Baggins]

4 hours ago, canucksnihilist said:

He probably can - but a call up here and there isn't usually enough - or it just takes a long time.  And I'm not saying he deserves to be on the team even - but if he does how does it actually work?   Would the team have a choice between trading a UFA they just signed and keeping him in the minors.

 

I mean maybe a lot of teams are that way - they are so deep that their minor league teams are stoked full of prospects that could be playing in the NHL.  I think that would be great - I just think that right now the budding AHL team would be way more fun to watch than the NHL team.  haha!

With all the significant injuries we've had the past three years you don't see any benefit to having decent call ups?

 

It's not just a matter of being able to play in the NHL, it's a matter of actually being the best option. And you do need injury replacements. So maintaining some depth does have a role.

[Gaudette Celly]

9 hours ago, Baggins said:

You don't think he can develop further in the AHL with a call up here and there? He could certainly use some work on faceoffs.

So could Granlund, still.
 

5 hours ago, canucksnihilist said:

my question is:  how would gaudette make the team in the next few years?

1. Watch training camp and the preseason
2. Read my sig

[Watchincanucks]

2 hours ago, Viper007 said:

Unfortunately just because you like the 2 players doesn't mean they're guaranteed spots on the team.  If they earn it great.  If they don't, no big loss.  But they have to EARN it.  Unfortunately in the coaches eyes those 3 players you mention are all ahead of both Leipsic and Goldobin.  So no point in whining about it until we watch how preseason unfolds.  Hey maybe JB makes a trade, you never know ... but why waste time on whining about the situation until it comes around.  It might not even happen.

I gave 12 options in place of those 3, upside matters. We had options, now we are relying on a trade. I can tell you how it unfolds, we plug in a bunch of vets, cause that’s what green wants, and we waste 10,20,30 games watching boring hockey, that could be used seeing what Goldobin or Leipsic is. We would have decent call ups regardless whether it be Lind, Gadjovich, Palmu, Dahlen, Boucher, Gaunce, Motte, Kero, Archibald, Demko, Biega, Juolevi, Brisebois. I mean does anyone think Pettersson does not make the team? Cause we need to waive or trade a player if he does. Why wait till value is low to do something. A good Gm knows who is or is not going to make the team with a few question marks, meaning 1 or 2. Benning said he will look to players like Pettersson and Gaudette to provide offence lost from Sedins and Vanek, but no clear path for either to make the team.

 

Why whine or worry about it now? Cause good Gms maximize return, that is not when a player fails to make the 26th place team from a year earlier. If Goldobin or Leipsic go on to score 20-30 goals with another team will it still be ok we waived them? Is that really unrealistic to think they could? I’ll tell you Beagle scoring 20-30 goals is unrealistic. Is it really unrealistic to think Goldobin Leipsic Pettersson and Gaudette make the team? If they do, we need to trade 2 players and waive 4. If Juolevi makes the team, that’s 3 trades. When Gaunce came back from injury last year he was automatically inserted into the lineup. What did he ever do to deserve that? 

[kingofsurrey]

3 minutes ago, Watchincanucks said:

When Gaunce came back from injury last year he was automatically inserted into the lineup. What did he ever do to deserve that? 

I dunno. How about the fact that Gaunce was the best centre on our AHL team ..... ?

Maybe that is why he was called up to the big club....

 

Don't blame Gaunce that our club is really weak at C.    

Gaunce has alot of potential ... thats why he was a first round pick...  26th overall....  Great skater...

[Watchincanucks]

4 minutes ago, kingofsurrey said:

I dunno. How about the fact that Gaunce was the best centre on our AHL team ..... ?

Maybe that is why he was called up to the big club....

 

Don't blame Gaunce that our club is really weak at C.    

Gaunce has alot of potential ... thats why he was a first round pick...  26th overall....  Great skater...

Brendan Gaunce career statistics 114 games played 5 goals 7 assists 12 points -11

Ahl 129 games played 32 goals 41 assists 73 points +13

 

Nikolai Goldobin career statistics 61 games played 12 goals 7 assists 19 points -13

AHL 148 games played 52 goals 73 assists 125 points -4

 

Clearly Goldobin has higher upside

[Watchincanucks]

Oh and Gaunce did not play centre much at all.

[kingofsurrey]

8 minutes ago, Watchincanucks said:

Brendan Gaunce career statistics 114 games played 5 goals 7 assists 12 points -11

Ahl 129 games played 32 goals 41 assists 73 points +13

 

Nikolai Goldobin career statistics 61 games played 12 goals 7 assists 19 points -13

AHL 148 games played 52 goals 73 assists 125 points -4

 

Clearly Goldobin has higher upside

Goldy doesn't play properly defensively...  Hockey is more  than  just offensive points..

Goldy is a top 6 player...  Gaunce can play bottom 6 role.

[Watchincanucks]

1 minute ago, kingofsurrey said:

Goldy doesn't play properly defensively...  Hockey is that just offensive points..

If he was so good defensively why did we need Beagle?

[kingofsurrey]

1 minute ago, Watchincanucks said:

If he was so good defensively why did we need Beagle?

Always need more help at the C position.  Depth at C is critical. 

 

Until Goldy learns how to play without the puck consistently ..... he is not going to crack the Canucks...

Hopefully he figures it our real quick as if not... I think he jumps back to the KHL 

[aGENT]

Nobody is this obtuse. Don't feed the troll. 

[kingofsurrey]

7 minutes ago, Watchincanucks said:

If he was so good defensively why did we need Beagle?

Is there a team in the NHL with a worse group of Centres than the Canucks

 

First line Centers  - Bo Horvat

Second line Centres -  zero 

Third line centres . - Sutter

4th line Centres . -  Beagle,Schaller, Gaunce

[kingofsurrey]

1 minute ago, aGENT said:

Nobody is this obtuse. Don't feed the troll. 

why not.

[canucksnihilist]

6 hours ago, aGENT said:

The likelihood of that happening isn't very realistic. If you want to pin your entire argument on an unrealistic straw man, that's your perogative. It's just not a very smart one.

 

And who exactly in our prospects is competing with Beagle as a hard minutes, match up 4C anyway? Have we got a bunch of hard minutes/3rd line pest/occasional fighter guys competing with Roussel too? Who are they? Because I'm not seeing them.

 

Now a more realistic argument would be that a kid outplays say a Gagner. Or Goldobin didn't in fact figure it out this summer and gets beat out by Leipsic/Dahlen/Gaudette for his spot. Or Goldobin/Dahlen/Gaudette/Leipsic come in like gangbusters and start making Baer and/or Granlund look awfully expendable. 

Ok point taken.   Why couldn’t one of the FAs we just signed be beat out?  Do you think that is a realistic possibility?   Or is it only last years FAs that are expendable?

 

it's about finances, not ability.  It’s about who can be sent down and not waived, not if they have earned a spot.  It’s about contracts not skill.  It’s about showcasing for a trade.  It’s not about player development at the bigs.

 

thats the bottom line.  All the other trash we talk about is meaningless - except when there is no contract issue dictating the situation.   Which a based on the last 2 years FA (and before really) is a real issue.  Anyone have a wet paper bag and a pen?

 

 

[canucksnihilist]

3 hours ago, Viper007 said:

Unfortunately just because you like the 2 players doesn't mean they're guaranteed spots on the team.  If they earn it great.  If they don't, no big loss.  But they have to EARN it.  Unfortunately in the coaches eyes those 3 players you mention are all ahead of both Leipsic and Goldobin.  So no point in whining about it until we watch how preseason unfolds.  Hey maybe JB makes a trade, you never know ... but why waste time on whining about the situation until it comes around.  It might not even happen.

Impossible to earn a spot from Erikkson.  Gaunce.  Gudbranson.    Those players are gifted spots no matter how poorly they play.   Why not mention them when we are talking about who should be waived?

 

because it’s not about making the team.  It’s always about $

[canucksnihilist]

2 hours ago, Baggins said:

With all the significant injuries we've had the past three years you don't see any benefit to having decent call ups?

 

It's not just a matter of being able to play in the NHL, it's a matter of actually being the best option. And you do need injury replacements. So maintaining some depth does have a role.

I agree it’s great.   If our team is so good that the all team could beat the nhl team on a good night - or bad night - or even close - and that’s great.

 

finances....  

[EdgarM]

10 hours ago, canucksnihilist said:

Ok point taken.   Why couldn’t one of the FAs we just signed be beat out?  Do you think that is a realistic possibility?   Or is it only last years FAs that are expendable?

 

it's about finances, not ability.  It’s about who can be sent down and not waived, not if they have earned a spot.  It’s about contracts not skill.  It’s about showcasing for a trade.  It’s not about player development at the bigs.

 

thats the bottom line.  All the other trash we talk about is meaningless - except when there is no contract issue dictating the situation.   Which a based on the last 2 years FA (and before really) is a real issue.  Anyone have a wet paper bag and a pen?

 

 

FA's were brought in because we lacked "skills" lost with the departure of the Sedins and from what they lacked. We needed a veteran presence with speed, character and push back. We needed this without impeding our young players development. We also have "bubble" players who will need to show they belong or they will be let go or traded.

The Sedins were impeding our young guys because they were "gifted" top line and #1 PP shifts. They were also very slow and not strong defensively and they definitely didn't have any pushback.  

 

[aGENT]

11 hours ago, kingofsurrey said:

why not.

http://theconversation.com/dont-feed-the-trolls-really-is-good-advice-heres-the-evidence-63657

 

11 hours ago, canucksnihilist said:

Ok point taken.   Why couldn’t one of the FAs we just signed be beat out?  Do you think that is a realistic possibility?   Or is it only last years FAs that are expendable?

 

it's about finances, not ability.  It’s about who can be sent down and not waived, not if they have earned a spot.  It’s about contracts not skill.  It’s about showcasing for a trade.  It’s not about player development at the bigs.

 

thats the bottom line.  All the other trash we talk about is meaningless - except when there is no contract issue dictating the situation.   Which a based on the last 2 years FA (and before really) is a real issue.  Anyone have a wet paper bag and a pen?

 

 

Schaller likely has the biggest likelihood of being outplayed. And if he is, don't think for a second they won't waive or trade him. His contract is hardly an impediment to that. That said, he's an upgrade on the likes of Gaunce etc and I'd imagine he's on the roster (being that he's a better player, which is kind of the point, no? You want better players on the team, right?).

 

Why couldn't someone outplay Beagle/Roussel? Well in theory 'anything' is possible but we have literally no one else to play those roles, and they're both arguably elite examples with proven NHL track record in their given roles (elite face off winning/pk'ing/hard minute and usage 4C and elite 3rd line pest/2 way winger with tertiary scoring). Gagner on the other hand we can easily replace with some of our skilled W'ers  now that they're actually approaching being NHL ready and MDZ is going to likely get moved towards the TDL and replaced with Juolevi. The latter are warm bodies until replacements are ready. The former are actual 'needs' or would otherwise be holes in the lineup without them. We don't have replacement prospects at all or if we do, not close to being ready.

 

Some of those things (contracts, trades, waiver eligibility etc) will certainly factor in to any decision making but it's nowhere near as black and white as you're making it. Does that mean maybe a player gets traded a month in to the season instead of after camp or a prospect waits for an injury? Maybe. I'm not sure what the rush is?

 

And no, there is no issue. Healthy competition is not only good but vital to a healthy and improving franchise. Only the strong will survive (even if it's not as fast of a process as you may prefer). That our trash media has somehow managed to spin it as a negative goes far beyond 

 

11 hours ago, canucksnihilist said:

Impossible to earn a spot from Erikkson.  Gaunce.  Gudbranson.    Those players are gifted spots no matter how poorly they play.   Why not mention them when we are talking about who should be waived?

 

because it’s not about making the team.  It’s always about $

Eriksson, despite his abhorrent lack of offensive production, particularly for the $ thus far, is still a pretty damn good 2 way player even when he's not producing up to his contract. That's not as easily outplayed as you seem to assume. And who knows, maybe playing with some of the kids, he rekindles some of that offense *fingers crossed*. A bad contract does not equal a bad player.

 

Gudbranson had the lowest goals against per 60 on our D last year despite playing largely harder minutes (dzone/PK) and playing injured (again!). If he can manage to stay remotely healthier, we get an even better player than that. Sorry, the largely media driven, elementary analytics noise doesn't actually equate to a 'bad player' in reality. Add that we're not exactly over flowing with right D depth (or toughness) and he's not going anywhere.

 

Gaunce is likely waived and in Utica short of him outplaying some of the other guys at/near the bottom of the totem pole. Competition.