Long Contracts and Cap Space

[IBatch]

4 hours ago, TheGuardian_ said:

Hamhuis was Chicago and Dallas, Kesler's agent shopped, Garrison got a 2nd round pick, that's better than Miller and Vrbata.

 

Done is done, the last 4 years were a waste, the rebuild is starting, as the prospects get graded, either in or out, the pool rating will go down. Boeser, IMO, should get the same types of contracts as Horvat, a bridge deal and then a term deal. 

Sooo, what your saying is an a year or two you get to complain about our prospect pool going way down?

[oldnews]

7 hours ago, EdgarM said:

Thanks for that great response. Some ideas I would like to add are that I believe it is important to hang on to all of our picks no matter how well or bad the team is doing and also drafting players who are "Cup Hungry". They would be able to see when the team is ready to be revamped and so they would be willing to move to a contender thereby giving the team the added  ability to acquire more picks then they would normally get. If players are still needed, then the UFA route would be the way to go and would not cost us any picks at all.

This would be a much more viable approach then to gut the team every few years and then "Tank" and pray to win the lottery.

This, I believe, would keep the team competitive for years to come as Detroit did and how Anaheim has been able to sustain lately.

Yes - agree completely.  I'm not a fan and never have been, or renting players.  One thing I will credit Gillis with, was not overspending on rentals in his contending years.  He tended to acquire guys like Ehrhoff, Higgins, Lapierre, who had term and were with the team for years.   However, regardless of the fact they retained most of their picks (they did spent some 2nds on a few rentals) they nevertheless didn't draft or develop very well.  It's no easy task however, to come into the situation he was in and focus on the more groundwork aspects of the franchise - they were more focused on the prize, understandably.  Perhaps if he'd been here longer those parts of the franchise may have upticked, but at the point he was replaced with Benning, it really was time for someone more geared to a transition - and I really like what Benning has done from top to bottom - scouting, coaching and development all seem considerably improved (I really liked Vigneault as a coach, and he assembled a great set of systems to suit the personnel in the contending years, but from top to bottom I think they're a stronger group now, and better geared to developing young players).

I think they're building enough criitical mass of youth that they may be able to use surplus prospects to refurbish any picks (whereas they've moved veterans the past number of years to recover those they've spent on players/prospects).  If they can keep a relatively consistent stream of drafted players incoming, that solves the problems of most franchises, gives them flexibility where contracts are concerned (having ELCs and RFAs in the mix consistently can keep teams from crashing into teardowns).

My philosophy is that even when a team is on the uptick and in a situation like the Canucks hopefully face in the next few years, teams shouldn't fundamentally alter their course too heavily towards 'win now' approach - if you have a homegrown base/core, and can keep refurbishing your youth depth, it reduces the need imo to shop for expensive tweaks.  I'm probably more conservative in this sense than most, but I think the object should be to try to remain focused on the long game even when your team rises.

[Baggins]

14 hours ago, TheGuardian_ said:

4 years rebuilding, do really believe that?

Absolutely. The moves made certainly indicate a rebuild.

 

14 hours ago, TheGuardian_ said:

 If so then this will be an epic Edmonton rebuild, there are only two of his draft picks playing and one of Gillis's.

Actually there's two Gillis picks playing: Horvat & Hutton. Without a single top 3 pick and dropping in every draft lottery just how many do you think should be playing? TO only has three in the same timeline and one of theirs was a 1st overall. So big freakin' deal.

 

14 hours ago, TheGuardian_ said:

NJ and NYR started last year and this year.

So what?

 

14 hours ago, TheGuardian_ said:

How long do you think a rebuild should take? 7 years, 10?

You tell me. How long does it take to replace 23 players when starting with a virtually empty prospect pool? Keep in mind there's only three second round picks from 2014 with enough games to call a season. And as I pointed out TO only has 3 draft picks with significant games and one of them was a 1st overall pick. Did you actually think the rebuild would be done in a couple of years considering what we started with?

 

15 hours ago, TheGuardian_ said:

The prospect pool doesn't win games and with the 35 possible draft picks in the system and not on the team the pool should be good, TO is a playoff contender in 4 years. Sure they got lucky with Mathews but the Sedins outscored him combined or even Horvat was only a handful of points behind. If TO kept Marner, Nylander, Mathews or Reilly in the minors they would have a much better prospect pool.

 

A good prospect pool equals a bad NHL team and a good NHL team equals a poor prospect pool.

Well at least you've figured something out.

 

15 hours ago, TheGuardian_ said:

They are rebuilding but going into year one, the CBA will breakup the rebuild and may help.

Rubbish. They been rebuilding since they took over. You need something to rebuild with though and that doesn't happen over night. Did our top of the league prospect pool just magically appear all of a sudden? No. They've been working at it since they took over.

 

 

 

[Baggins]

11 hours ago, IBatch said:

Sooo, what your saying is an a year or two you get to complain about our prospect pool going way down?

I doubt it will be as drastically bad as under Gillis. Benning has already hit with later 1st round picks with Boeser and McCann. He's also hit with some later picks like Tryamkin and Forsling. That's in just his first two drafts and is more than Gillis managed in his entire tenure.

[TheGuardian_]

What story do you wish to believe, the one THEY were saying for 3 1/2 years that they were NOT rebuilding or the one just at the end of last year where they say they are saying they are starting to rebuild? Is Linden a liar then because of the story he gave about not tearing it down (rebuilding) because it would be unfair to the Sedins? 

 

I never complained about the prospect pool being bad, I have always stated that they are ONLY prospects and not proven good enough for impact assignments in the NHL until they are tried in the NHL. I also never posted anything about comparing particular missed players in the draft as many others have, but as an overall selections they have not been as good as a lot of posters want to believe.

 

I have not posted about "instant" gratification of the rebuild, I know it will be years before this team is competitive and that I want to see more of the much crowed about star prospects that are going to lead this team and that are as good as other teams top 6 forwards and top 4 dmen by comparison. I expect the team to struggle and hope that the delay in getting top prospects good enough to play doesn't end up with the players learning how to cope with losing.

 

The team does not have to draft 23 replacements and that is a good thing because at the success rate in the draft so far it may take over 10 years to get another 8 players onto the team. While I happen to like Virtanen and his skill set, even though I believe he is being groomed for a role a lesser player should be doing, the way the team is using him makes his selection at #6 a decisive failure, the same with OJ at #5, that is 2 years of failed top 6 picks, Boeser was drafted pretty much where he was ranked so he was BPA at his slot, no skill or special insight needed for his selection, Pettersson appears to be a smashing success with a small sample size used so far. Still there are almost none of the other draft picks, around 35, that have cracked the lineup, in a nut shell my negativity surrounds the false assertions that Benning is better at drafting than 30 other GM's that have had picks later and resulted with more players already playing in the NHL and/or making an impact for their teams. I often state the team is too small and not being built for the playoffs, presently if the two 6'6" goalies and Gudbranson are not counted in the line up this is team of pygmies smaller than the league average considerably, even Horvat is below league average, but he is a horse. 

 

As far as recent games I haven't made any threads, comments or posts regarding the much ballyhooed prospects being crushed by AHL teams. I don't expect the Canucks will continue to get PP at a rate of 2 and 3 to one, but then that is called "game management" and is common that stronger teams often don't get as many "timely" PP's as the weaker teams.

[oldnews]

33 minutes ago, TheGuardian_ said:

What story do you wish to believe, the one THEY were saying for 3 1/2 years that they were NOT rebuilding or the one just at the end of last year where they say they are saying they are starting to rebuild? Is Linden a liar then because of the story he gave about not tearing it down (rebuilding) because it would be unfair to the Sedins?

Neither of those weak paraphrases reflect reality - so sorry, but your either/or options are a fail.

[coastal.view]

 

 

 

On 9/18/2018 at 1:27 PM, EmilyM said:

Yeah, it's absolutely ridiculous that we can be penalized for something that was done according to

what was within league rules at the time. It's more comical than anything for now.

um .. well these ongoing suggestions are simply silly

 

do you know what a cba is

it's an agreement made between employer and employee

and can cover any relevant issue

when all terms are agreed to

the parties sign off on the agreement

 

so in this particular instance

the canuck team agreed with the league desired penalties

for those cap circumvention contracts

even though the penalties applied retroactively

 

so yes, the canucks agreed to this

and that is evidenced by their signature on the agreement

so how is this now unfair?

and how can the cba be possibly challenged in court, and on what basis ?

 

canucks had a team of lawyers to review this cba

and they knew what they were signing

and they signed it

so i really fail to see any unfairness here

and these ongoing complaints by some fans

simply shows a lack of understanding of how a cba operates

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Baggins]

On 20/09/2018 at 3:51 PM, TheGuardian_ said:

What story do you wish to believe, the one THEY were saying for 3 1/2 years that they were NOT rebuilding or the one just at the end of last year where they say they are saying they are starting to rebuild? Is Linden a liar then because of the story he gave about not tearing it down (rebuilding) because it would be unfair to the Sedins? 

 

Provide a direct quote stating this. I'll save you time - you can't because it was never said. They said from day one they were going to "transition to a younger team". Out with the old, in with the young is rebuilding. They've done nothing different from year to year since taking over: inserting NHL ready youth and signing veterans to fill gaps and help.

[Dr. Crossbar]

I'd give guaranteed Dirk Diggler term and bones to Boeser and Pettersson.

[Nuxfanabroad]

13 hours ago, Dr. Crossbar said:

I'd give guaranteed Dirk Diggler term and bones to Boeser and Pettersson.

Just no studio time if they decide to cut a pop hit! :^)