Buyers Or Sellers? Should Not Even Be A Question.

[JM_]

Just now, Slegr said:

Couldn’t agree more. We already have a first round pick and 2nd round this draft. 

Anyone who we draft won’t be ready for another two years. We’ve turned the corner and need to start nurturing the young guns and that doesn’t mean selling anyone over the age of 25 like the Oilers of years past. You need a balance on a team.

If Juolevi hadn't lost this season to injury and he was able to show he's ready, maybe we could be talking about moving Hutton, maybe Edler if OJ came in and looked great. But at this point we need to keep Edler and Tanev for next year imo to facilitate development. As much as another 25-31 pick would be nice, as you say these guys are at best 2 years out if you're lucky, probably more. 

[Tre Mac]

As was said on the radio yesterday.  Oilers got impatient, made a trade to acquire Griffin Reinhart, probably thinking "Oh no one good ever gets drafted 8-16 so lets trade our first to bolster our D."  Passed on Barzal, Connor, Boeser, etc. for a player that's not even in the league.  Their GM, like it or not, and our GM come from the same ilk, so I wouldn't be surprised if Benning made a similar error.  Hope he doesn't. 

 

 

GONNA NEED A LIL' PATIENCE, YE-----------AH

[TheGuardian_]

14 minutes ago, 48MPHSlapShot said:

The OP is correct about whether or not we should be buying or selling, but he just has this way about his posting that I find so patronizing and irritating.

Ya I know, that comes from years of "prove it" and the stubborn resistance that this team was in trouble from a few fanatics with blinders on, actually I believe they were employees hired to astro surf anything even close to factual and drive those posters away so they could have their "koombya" forum. Sometimes I had to get to grade two level of explanations about things like the standings and how being 29th was not good.

 

[naslund.is.king]

This is by far your best topic to date

[aGENT]

Highly depends on what any potential trade is for. Stop falling victim to black and white. There's a whole spectrum of options for the Canucks that can and likely will include both buying and selling.

 

I think they view Leivo as an upgrade on Granlund and we don't have the roster space for both next year even without giving a shot to the likes of Gaudette (or potentially a spot to Goldobin).

 

So I think they look at 'selling' a nice cheap, versatile, expiring (but club controlled) RFA in Granlund. Hed be a good, cheap add for a contender.

 

Agree with @Jimmy McGill that if something makes sense for Ferland, you look at 'buying' him (but not at the cost of our 1st or any top prospects).

 

 

[Rob_Zepp]

20 minutes ago, TheGuardian_ said:

I shouldn't be but....they should be sellers if their words mean anything.

You can only sell if there are buyers.   I don't disagree the focus should be on status quo or amassing more potential for the future but I find it distasteful how anyone can find fault with management of a professional sports team that makes no moves as if it is as simply as wanting to do something.   To make a move you need a dance partner - so few teams want spare pieces and even fewer want to give up youth/picks anymore.   If you look at the movement of players/picks over the past five years, the movement of prospects/picks falls into two large categories of the selling teams being either on the verge of winning it all and then only a few times moves made OR where an idiot for a GM was involved and most of those get weeded out of their jobs and/or have their wings clipped so they are disconnected from their phones/email by owners during TDL and time leading up to....or whatever they have to do to protect their franchise from their GM.

 

The recent NHL is, and will be for some time, a buyer's market.   At least 1/2 the teams want to do what Vancouver does - move some veteran players for prospects/picks.    It is not a failure if you cannot do what isn't there.    

 

I see deals like with Archie where a later round pick comes back.   Those situations will and can happen but to think that Vancouver can end up with more 1st, 2nd or even 3rd round picks just because people can dream up ways of turning "insert name here' into such things doesn't make it a reality OR that it wasn't tried by the Canucks and nothing was out there.   Also remember that Vancouver is viewed in the NHL by many as an up and coming team - other GMs know their prospect pool ranking and are not apt to want to simply improve a rising team that may be in their own Division/Conference IF another similar deal is for a lesser team or one that has peaked or about to.   

 

Your basis premise is sound but the embedded implication that if they don't make moves they are failing OR if the only moves out there were vet for vet tweaks that such is also failing.   Neither is and both can still be part of the overall rebuilding plan.

[Zigmund.Palffy]

[Jester13]

1 minute ago, aGENT said:

Highly depends on what any potential trade is for. Stop falling victim to black and white. There's a whole spectrum of options for the Canucks that can and likely will include both buying and selling.

 

I think they view Leivo as an upgrade on Granlund and we don't have the roster space for both next year even without giving a shot to the likes of Gaudette (or potentially a spot to Goldobin).

 

So I think they look at 'selling' a nice cheap, versatile, expiring (but club controlled) RFA in Granlund. Hed be a good, cheap add for a contender.

 

Agree with @Jimmy McGill that if something makes sense for Ferland, you look at 'buying' him (but not at the cost of our 1st or any top prospects).

 

 

Agreed on this. If there is a good move to make then you take it. If not, then don't. I'd personally like to see the priority be offloading some guys for picks, but it's always easier said than done. But if something like Baer/Granny/Goldie + Gadj + 2nd for a signed Ferland on a decent contract comes along I say take it. We have some great core pieces and some unproven guys still to make the team, but we also have some holes to fill, so JB & Co. should, and I'm sure will, be listening to all kinds of moves. Nothing is ever black and white this time of year. 

[HerrDrFunk]

2 hours ago, TheGuardian_ said:

This is not a bubble team and the top six "core" how many points do they have? 

Canucks are right in the thick of it for the final western wildcard. They're a bubble team. 

 

Those 3 core players that I'm talking about have 108 points between them in 119 man games played. Not quite elite but none too shabby for a young core. 

 

Quote

Most of the vets are all near or in their 30's and other than Gaudette who was called up only because of injury, none of the other prospects have had a cup of coffee in Vancouver. That is at least 9 more positions needed to be replaced with superior players than the team has now.

You make it sound like it goes Horvat, Petterson, Boeser, then it's all vets near or over 30. That's simply not true: https://www.quanthockey.com/nhl/teams/vancouver-canucks-players-2018-19-nhl-stats.html

 

2 hours ago, TheGuardian_ said:

Tryamkin needs more evaluation.

 

This Jimbo thing always leaves me baffled, what gold is on the team? Not Boeser, he was ranked at 25, BPA at the Nuck spot.

 

Apologies, got off topic.

Why are you always trying to spin tails when it comes to draft rankings? You did the same thing when Hughes was drafted.

 

 http://www.mynhldraft.com/2015-draft/prospect-rankings/

 

For those of you who don't feel like looking, the Canucks drafted 23rd that year. Boeser was ranked at 8th in one, 14th in another, 25th once, 26th twice, 27th 3 times and wasn't even in the top 30 on the final two (the 12th list on that page is for international players, which Boeser obviously wouldn't have been on). So no, I wouldn't say there was consensus that he was BPA at #23 when the pick was made. I remember there was quite a lot of discussion on how left field a pick it was on CDC though. 

 

35 minutes ago, TheGuardian_ said:

Ya I know, that comes from years of "prove it" and the stubborn resistance that this team was in trouble from a few fanatics with blinders on, actually I believe they were employees hired to astro surf anything even close to factual and drive those posters away so they could have their "koombya" forum. Sometimes I had to get to grade two level of explanations about things like the standings and how being 29th was not good.

 

I'm still waiting for my cheques from Canucks Sports & Entertainment. 

 

In all seriousness, good Lord, get over yourself. 

[Angry Goose]

Its only the media that speculates the Canucks as buyers.  Id wager the organization is happy the young guys have a chance to play meaningful games and if they make the playoffs itll have to be with the horses they have.

IF the Canucks were to trade for a guy like Ferkland I think it would be because they REALLY like him and have a deal in place to get him signed to an extension.  

 

I still think they trade some of their moveable guys for picks at this years draft

[-DLC-]

4 hours ago, TheGuardian_ said:

Judging how good this team is by how bad other teams are is misleading

I'm a bit perplexed by this.  We beat some good teams this year so I'm not sure why you think we're comparing against 'bad teams'.   \

 

I'm judging this team on a few things....their level of compete.  How they manage when there are injuries or, for instance, when EP (as a star player) is out. 

 

Goaltending.   Good teams get good goaltending...and we are currently.  Will it last forever?  No.  But consistency is the key.  

Quote

this team needs star players in the NHL, those are most likely through the draft and while there are always players that can be shown as stars in later picks they are a very low percentage picked in those ranges.

ALL teams need star players and that's the problem...only so many to go around.  I feel our scouts have been excellent at finding potential beyond the hype and the "noted" star players.  You have to be because only the top teams picking get the bonafide "stars.

Quote

It might be fun to imagine this team winning the Stanley Cup or even making a dash in the playoffs but accomplishing that may come at a huge expense for one blip of one season delaying true rebuilding for another 2 to 3 years.

This sounds like a promo for team tank to me.   

 

Not aiming for the playoffs may come at a huge expense because this team wants to win and that's what you want in a team.  You don't want to look down the road beyond them without considering them (too).  That does a huge disservice to the guys in place now as part of the rebuild, who are developing (a winning attitude).  That's more important than getting a guy a little higher up (if that even happens).   It's a lottery, not a guarantee.

 

Bonafide stars is determined after they arrive, not before.  Sure, it can be predicted and quite accurately.  But it isn't always as it's supposed to be.

 

You try your hardest, as a team, to win every game.

 

That's what I know to be a formula for success.  

 

 

Quote

I could hope they stick to a plan that saw them get younger with depth and used the assets they have accumulated and veterans to get top level selections/prospects, like Montreal used to do, trade vets for better picks and players.

 

Trouble is...most teams want the picks these days not the players.  They're not trading "top picks" away.

[VegasCanuck]

For the most part, we are neutral this deadline. There's not a whole lot of players that it makes sense to move.

 

What I'd like to see is the following:

 

Del Zotto moved to another team needing some depth. This would open up a spot for Quinn to join the Canucks, sometime in March

 

Edler moved for 1st round and prospect, if he's willing to be moved. Would happily resign him in July for 1 or 2 years to help mentor Quinn etc.

 

 

[Toyotasfan]

Pettersson should at the very least have a big guy on his line in a 7 game playoff series . If you could upgrade Goldolbin the Canucks could win a round.  I think they still have a lot of hockey to play before they make any decision . 

[189lb enforcers?]

Rebuild through the draft or by trade, but go for it, not match the rebuilding pace of contenders. 

 

[TheGuardian_]

1 hour ago, Rob_Zepp said:

You can only sell if there are buyers

True, so true.

 

So make an offer they can't refuse. Trade Edler and Tanev together retaining half salary, a playoff experienced shut down pair that can play over 20 mins a game. That would be two top 4 dmen for 1.5 mil this year and 2.25 mil next year with retention. Think the Oilers, TO or just about any playoff team would say no for a pair that already know how to play together, well US teams needing to show good for marketing, make the playoffs and go a couple of rounds. They would only be adding to an already good team.

 

Maybe get 2 1rst's and 2 good prospects, maybe even more if a contract comes back plus conditions. Adding them to a team would enhance the odds greatly, more so on some teams than others

 

[TheGuardian_]

1 hour ago, Rob_Zepp said:

The recent NHL is, and will be for some time, a buyer's market.   At least 1/2 the teams want to do what Vancouver does - move some veteran players for prospects/picks.    It is not a failure if you cannot do what isn't there. 

It is for this very reason that more teams tank than ever before, not for sure things but the chance at a sure thing, a fluke where a decent team like Chicago lands another #1 overall.

 

Colorado was just like Vancouver, rebuilding, they got a couple (3) good forwards and one decent but young dman and made the playoffs, they looked great after rebuilding for 4 years. Then the playoffs followed by another rebuild of 3+ ongoing yet for a total of 8 + years and counting just for the sake of one playoff round. Edmonton ditto. Is this the plan to follow? A playoff game at any expense? At the cost of the future?

 

On the back of a single rookie that would be targeted, in playoff games, not like these nice regular season games. So many forget what playoff games are like, 100 hits in one game, 100. Do you think they didn't go after the best players on the other team? Why did Wilson get a big raise in pay? Why are a lot of teams rumoured to want Ferland you know the kid that ran the Canucks out of the rink all by himself, in the last one and done.

 

Playoffs are not regular season games, the only regular season in the playoffs is "open" season and the Canucks just don't have enough to stop Ovechkin from running over Pettersson. Is that what posters want? Have the kid get destroyed, the target, the kid that the offence counts on, that every team knows, without him the Nucks are XX

 

[Dr. Crossbar]

5 hours ago, TheGuardian_ said:

The Plan. A Plan. Do they have one?

 

The team is rebuilding, it is the first year without two hall of fame players, the team still only has maybe 3 NHL quality top six players under 25, the team has two to three older defencemen that can have a huge impact on a rebuild as tradeable assets. EP is a huge surprise, I think they expected him to be very good but no one expected him to be "Gretzky II".

 

Judging how good this team is by how bad other teams are is misleading, this team needs star players in the NHL, those are most likely through the draft and while there are always players that can be shown as stars in later picks they are a very low percentage picked in those ranges. Players on this team in the top six, some of them, do not belong as top six by most playoff teams. This team has been the worst over 3 1/2 years now so if a player is that good, why has the team been so bad?

 

It might be fun to imagine this team winning the Stanley Cup or even making a dash in the playoffs but accomplishing that may come at a huge expense for one blip of one season delaying true rebuilding for another 2 to 3 years. That is right, one dash, this year and the rebuild is delayed twice the amount of time. Instead of picking a top 7 player this year that can step into the NHL Immediately or the next year, they select a 15th that is an NHL player, just not a top six player for most NHL teams.  

 

Hopefully management has a plan for rebuilding that doesn't include demented hopes of stardom from 30th - to 145th overall picks as sure things or cornerstone players, hopefully they can see that this team is artificially being bumped up in the standings because other teams decided to rebuild and are doing what they have to get star players, go for the top 7 picks at the draft.

 

One bit of a plan can be guessed at by the type of FA's signed, defensive specialists. Over paid with term to take them to 2021, three years and they may be done as they age out.

 

I could hope they stick to a plan that saw them get younger with depth and used the assets they have accumulated and veterans to get top level selections/prospects, like Montreal used to do, trade vets for better picks and players.

 

The question of buyers or sellers should have been answered before the puck was dropped.

 

 

In regard to the very first question - a plan, do they have one - it's worth noting that years ago on here, many people said the success of any "plan" would be contingent on how well JB replaces the Sedins. At that time,  no one could see how that would evolve. A lot of negative energy was expended simply because that "plan" wasn't apparent.

 

But just because we couldn't see it in front of us doesn't mean there wasn't a plan or that the Sedins wouldn't be replaced. 

 

There were a lot of players in our top six, top nine that are gone. Just like there are players now in our top six, top nine who won't be here in 2-3 years.

 

Like others have said, it's not that black and white. It's not like we're going to be terrible and then all of a sudden be a contender. We have to allow the team to get better because we can't prevent that process from happening.

 

What we're seeing is the team actually getting better because of both draft picks and key signings over a period of time. It's unrealistic to think our guys aren't going to be motivated to push for a playoff spot and would rather sit back and lose instead of having something to play for. 

 

I don't think we're ready to be buyers just yet. I do think we're at a place of competing, seeing how well we do on a week to week basis, see where we're at by the deadline, all to see what we need. 

 

Re: the Gretzky II comment ... contrary to popular belief, there are people who saw the potential of just how good Pettersson could be.

 

Of course there's no guarantee, but the evidence was Pettersson breaking SHL records and topping names like Nilsson, Forsberg, Sundin, Naslund, the Sedins, Gradin, Sandstrom, etc. And he was doing it against older players in that league. A lot of people just chose not to see what was right in front of them the entire time. I don't think in some circles it's as much of a surprise as it is confirmation of what we saw in him that others overlooked. 

 

[Tomatoes11]

6 hours ago, HerrDrFunk said:

It isn't but I'm pretty familiar with where these discussion go and it's always something along the line of "if we don't have a first overall, we'll never be contenders. So if we're not a contender this year, aim for 1st overall". Repeat for the next 3 years and soon you're wasting prime years. 

 

Why write off the season when they're still in the hunt for a wildcard spot? By Bo's own words, having something to play for at this time of the year has given the team a much different attitude than previous years. 

I just gave you some very good reasons why. You just chose to ignore them in favour of a meaningless playoff push. 

 

Cutting your losses now is ideal. We just aren’t ready. 

 

But next year we might be, we can make the playoffs then.

[spur1]

7 hours ago, TheGuardian_ said:

The Plan. A Plan. Do they have one?

 

The team is rebuilding, it is the first year without two hall of fame players, the team still only has maybe 3 NHL quality top six players under 25, the team has two to three older defencemen that can have a huge impact on a rebuild as tradeable assets. EP is a huge surprise, I think they expected him to be very good but no one expected him to be "Gretzky II".

 

Judging how good this team is by how bad other teams are is misleading, this team needs star players in the NHL, those are most likely through the draft and while there are always players that can be shown as stars in later picks they are a very low percentage picked in those ranges. Players on this team in the top six, some of them, do not belong as top six by most playoff teams. This team has been the worst over 3 1/2 years now so if a player is that good, why has the team been so bad?

 

It might be fun to imagine this team winning the Stanley Cup or even making a dash in the playoffs but accomplishing that may come at a huge expense for one blip of one season delaying true rebuilding for another 2 to 3 years. That is right, one dash, this year and the rebuild is delayed twice the amount of time. Instead of picking a top 7 player this year that can step into the NHL Immediately or the next year, they select a 15th that is an NHL player, just not a top six player for most NHL teams.  

 

Hopefully management has a plan for rebuilding that doesn't include demented hopes of stardom from 30th - to 145th overall picks as sure things or cornerstone players, hopefully they can see that this team is artificially being bumped up in the standings because other teams decided to rebuild and are doing what they have to get star players, go for the top 7 picks at the draft.

 

One bit of a plan can be guessed at by the type of FA's signed, defensive specialists. Over paid with term to take them to 2021, three years and they may be done as they age out.

 

I could hope they stick to a plan that saw them get younger with depth and used the assets they have accumulated and veterans to get top level selections/prospects, like Montreal used to do, trade vets for better picks and players.

 

The question of buyers or sellers should have been answered before the puck was dropped.

 

 

Lol. “ A plan. Do they have one?”  

I am sure they have a better one than you. 

From what I have seen JB has this well under control. 

Sit back crack brew, spark up a fatty and enjoy the ride. 

[Tomatoes11]

Wow! A whole lot of hoopola about making the playoffs being some kind of magic elixir that will turn EP into Gretzky and Boeser into Jagr here. I have total faith in their talent that they don’t need to make the playoffs this year in order to keep on the right development path. They can do damage in the playoffs next year. 

 

Right now we have some great depreciating assets that I feel we do not need that can potentially fetch us some great assets that won’t depreciate or depreciate less quickly. Now is the perfect time to do it and standing pat will quickly erode that opportunity. I am sure with some effort this can be done but I do not believe management is trying to shop these people unfortunately because they have a misguided notion that making the playoffs can cure what ails this team better than the concrete better pick. We may not get first overall or even second. But picking 3rd to 6th is surely better than picking 9th no?