Next 5 years and prospects....

[vannuck59]

Hanging on to the past at the expense of future. Sedin's  cost us lots but was it worth it I say yes get over it . Now we are moving in the right direction, move a couple of players for picks and move on manage your assets. Trade for picks. Out Virtanen, Markstrom, Goldobin, Hutton, Granlund, Sutter, Stecher Spooner, Pouliot, Schaller Tanev. Some of these should get a second ,third, maybe a first. Package for a young D man if you can.

[CaptainLinden16]

On 4/16/2019 at 10:28 PM, The 5th Line said:

 I'm looking at every team that didn't make the playoffs this year and what they have in their arsenal in regards to extra draft picks and yep you guessed it, the Canucks have the worst total when it comes to overall pick value by round.  You could argue Minnesota has it worse.  A lot of these teams have extra picks in future drafts already as well.  

 

We need someone to help start steering the ship in the right direction.  Our youth movement stinks, outside of our top guys.  Knee deep in a rebuild, hosting the draft and this is what we have to work with?  And yes I know deals can be made prior, but every team can make a deal prior if they want to.

 

I will mention "zero" unless the original picks are still there.

The 2019 draft...

 

Vancouver has three 6th's.   3 in the top 100

 

Anaheim has two 1st's, zero 3rd's, two 6th's, zero 7th's.  3 in the top 100

 

Arizona has two 3rd's, zero 5th's and two 6ths.  4 in the top 100.  

 

Buffalo has two 1st's, three 6th's, zero 5th and 7th's.  3 in the top 100

 

Chicago has two 4th's and two 7ths.   2 in the top 100

 

Detroit has three 2nd's and two 5th's.  6 in the top 100

 

Coilers have just 6 picks because they suck.  Zero 5th's.  4 in the top 100.  And sorry If you don't like the fact that I will not boast about having more picks than this joke of a franchise.  That's like watching Svechnikov fight Ovie..just not fair, man.

 

Florida has three 4th's, plus extra 3rd and 5th in 2020.  3 in the top 100

 

L.A has two 1st's, two 3rd's and two 4th's. 6 in the top 100

 

Minnesota has zero 4th's, two 5th's and two 6th's.  3 in the top 100.  Pretty much a wash here.  Our pick collection is equally as good I think?  No need to split hairs, not taking the time to compare by actual draft slot/pick.  Minnesota is the definition of "meh".

 

Montreal has two 2nd's and three 5th's.  4 in the top 100

 

New Jersey has three 2nd's and two 3rds.  7 in the top 100

 

New York has three 1sts and two 2nds.  6 in the top 100

 

Ottawa has 19 picks in the next two years.  5 in the top 100 this year

 

Philly has two thirds, two 6ths and two 7ths.  4 in the top 100

 

#rebuild

 

Mind you, I could of done this every year and it would look equally the same.

 

I enjoy going through drafts and future drafts picks and all the info I've posted in this thread really grinds my gears.  When we hired a team to rebuild this mess, I was expecting a massive influx of picks and prospects to be able to track, but with our young studs graduating to the top club immediately, we are left with diddly squat to be genuinely excited about.  Our AHL system sucks and it's not going to get better waiting around for an average amount of draft picks to turn out.  Most picks don't turn out...that's why you need more. And I don't wanna hear the we didn't have the assets excuse. Guys like petrovic and Brandon Davidson garner 3rd rounders.  And if we didn't have the assets, we have had  the time to find those assets and then move them for picks but havent.

 

@Warhippy

 

You mentioned McEneny earlier, after saying THN doesn't account for those types of prospects.  Go look at the hockeyDB AHL rosters I posted a few days ago ^.  Every team has a McEneny or two + more.

  

 

@Toews

@ForsbergTheGreat

You boys may enjoy the read.  I know others don't as it disrupts fantasy-land time.

 

@CaptainLinden16Don't accuse me of not doing research ever again.

 

Why does every other team get more picks?  Is Benning some innovative genius?

If have completely ignored and proceeded, you just doubled down on your argument without addressing any of your points.

 

Please tell me about these leafs players playing for the NHL club picked in rounds 2-7.

 

Please tell me the probabilities of these picks making the NHL.

 

Please tell me know many key players were acquired with picks 2-7 through trade.

 

What research have you done?  You simply said other bad teams have more bad picks.  

 

If the probability of a 7th rd pick is 1% to be a meaningful NHL hockey player then you could add 30 of them and it would still be an absolutely meaningless exercise because of the contract slot limitation.

 

I know that somehow this was supposed to be the big got ya post.  But the content in it is absolutely meaningless.  I am absolutely stocked that the Canucks are not being run like some of these other teams with more picks.  Now if they had more 1st picks I would be jealous.

[ButterBean]

It’s crazy how many people worship every little thing JB does and thinks he can do no wrong. Fact is he has never been dedicated to a full rebuild. He hangs on to veterans too long until their value is diminished and he doesn’t trade for picks. It’s time to get rid of the dead weight and get draft picks. Don’t get me wrong, he’s a really good drafter but he is not perfect. 

[Maniwaki Canuck]

To put all of this in perspective:

1.  If a club can add 2 drafted players per year to its lineup, that would fully renew a 23 man roster in 11.5 years.  Most NHL careers don't last that long so you do have to find more players somehow, but that's just from the draft, without any free agents.  This past year we added 4:  Petey, Hughes, Gaudette and Demko.  The previous year we added Brock and the one before that Tryamkin.  So over the past 3 years, we're averaging 2 drafted players added to the lineup per year.  Again, that's without FAs from college or junior like Stecher, MacEwan, Sautner, and Rafferty who have either made the team or are knocking on the door.  Once you add those in, we're closer to adding 3 players per year via amateur scouting.  In short, we are doing just fine at finding and developing NHL-caliber players. 

2.  Many others have said it but it bears repeating:  Utica is not the only or even the main place where those players are developing.  Increasingly, US college hockey is where the real development stories are happening.  Of all the first-rounders from the Benning era, only Jake and Juolevi have played in Utica:  McCann, Brock, Petey and Hughes went straight to the NHL in their draft + 1 years.  Mostly it's second-rounders and lower who spend time in Utica.  That means we're doing well with our first-rounders, not that Utica sucks at development.  We'd all have liked better rookie years from Lind and Gadjovich and a better pipeline of developing second-round picks, but Benning traded several of those away to get Vey, Baertschi and Gudbranson.  That's the single biggest reason why the cupboard looks bare in Utica but it's hardly the club's fault.  But the picture is way brighter once you look at how Madden, Rathbone and Lockwood are doing in college.  All three of those guys have a decent shot at the NHL.  Our players are also developing in Sweden and Finland.  So we really do have to look beyond Utica to assess our prospects.  Bottom line:  Utica has only been getting a small proportion of our good prospects and has done a decent job with what little they've had to work with.  

3.  None of this means that Benning is above criticism.  With the benefit of hindsight, I'd prefer to have Rasmus Anderson (taken with the second-round pick we gave up) over Baertschi and a re-do on several of our draft picks.  But that's true of any GM's record and those were still reasonable moves at the time, whether or not we agree with them.  None of it is any reason to freak out about Utica like the 1040 crowd does.  Getting all mad and mixing up separate issues might raise ratings over there, but the conversation here is usually better for being less apocalyptic. 

[Maniwaki Canuck]

51 minutes ago, The 5th Line said:

There is only a very few blaming Utica, in reality it's the lack of prospects and quality prospects we've been giving them to work with that is the problem.  

Glad to hear you're not blaming Utica but it does seem like you're focussed on it pretty exclusively below.  I agree that it's not great, but it isn't the whole picture.

On 4/15/2019 at 3:27 AM, The 5th Line said:

More rosters far superior to Utica, with many more young players than us.

 

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/seasons/teams/0039912019.html

 

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/seasons/teams/0076012019.html

 

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/seasons/teams/0073902019.html

 

Utica

 

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/seasons/teams/0070412019.html

 

We are so behind it's actually worrisome, the results are in plain view and when I sit and watch playoff hockey it's even more clear.  Whether it's not giving young guys a good supporting cast in Utica or the prospects are just not that good and we don't have enough of them, it's not nearly good enough.  It's brutal.  If you put a player in a productive atmosphere, it will help maximize his potential

 

Players 21 and under from the 2017 draft all out producing our guys.  Only a small fraction of that class are eligible for the AHL at this point in time but I had a hard time finding any playing in the league that have produced less than Gadjovich and Lind in their first seasons.  

 

 

Lind and Dad

 

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=177566

 

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=179938

 

The Field

 

Without ignoring position played and draft slot

 

 

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=172640

 

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=177026

 

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=187433

 

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=172776

 

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=186230

 

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=195106

 

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=180687

 

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=171870

 

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=195919

 

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=177082

 

Late 1st rounders

 

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=187581

 

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=196298

 

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=191102

 

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=196744

 

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=177091

 

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=195511

 

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=192054

 

@UticaHockey. Not directing anything at you specifically, just showing you some results.  And I do know that one season isn't the be all and end all.  I actually really like Linds overall package and think he can become a solid NHL player one day but again, we are not maximizing the probability of success by putting them in these types of low productivity atmospheres.  Something's gotta give, we need to see more out of Utica without hearing the same old injury excuses year after year

 

I think I found two players that played at least 30 games and produced less than our boys.  One was a 6'2 208 pound defenceman .  http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=177558 I

may have missed some but I would be surprised if anyone found more than 2.  There was another d man with lower production but I can't find him again, there are a few instances that players get sent to the ECHL if they are unproductive.. http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=177605

 

Now someone please tell me we are developing players properly in Utica.  

 

Shout out to Lukas Jasek.. progressing well especially considering his draft position.  Same with Juolevi, if only he could stay healthy.  And our biggest success story to date, last but not least...The Big Mac, Zack MacEwen

 

 

[oldnews]

The Canucks need to start drafting for Utica as opposed to the NHL club.

 

Wasting all these picks on Swedes, USHLer/college players, Fins, Russians...is hurting the Comets.

 

Benning needs to get his priorities straight.

[kingofsurrey]

Watching this years playoffs combination of speed and toughness... only makes me realize how far are Canucks are away from being a competitive playoff team...

 

Sad face. 

[FutureFilm]

I think the issue the last couple of years in Utica is not the prospects but how they are being deployed. Players not playing or not getting the minutes a prospect needs esp when the team isnt even in the playoff picture. U think they would want the young guys to get the ice time down the stretch. 

 

JB also needs to keep the draft picks...no trading it for mid level players until we are in cup contention.  

[kingofsurrey]

3 minutes ago, FutureFilm said:

I think the issue the last couple of years in Utica is not the prospects but how they are being deployed. Players not playing or not getting the minutes a prospect needs esp when the team isnt even in the playoff picture. U think they would want the young guys to get the ice time down the stretch. 

 

JB also needs to keep the draft picks...no trading it for mid level players until we are in cup contention.  

I guess it is the old  - play the young kids  to develop their skills regardless of merit  or do you make them learn the full 200 ft game to earn their minutes even in the AHL.

Gifting young kids ice time may only be encouraging bad habits....... 

 

Never given always earned is kinda what we want are young canucks to develop within......

[iceman64]

On 4/5/2019 at 8:25 AM, canucksnihilist said:

Ok we all are super happy this team is making strides - and should be challenging for a playoff spot next year.

 

however we all know that - let’s analyze what the difficulties are in the coming 5 years.  And what you think they are.  And what you think we should do about it.

 

Problem:  the prospect cupboard in Utica is bare.  We have been lucky in that he last few years (3 counting the upcoming year assuming QH makes the team - I would say he is a lock) we haven’t needed Utica to develop anyone.  Players have gone straight to the bigs.  But unless we win a top-3 lottery spot(15% chance now?) this is coming to an end.  

 

History - this is just my take, correct me if you think otherwise, im not trying to make 100% accurate statements but looking at trends. I’m not saying I know this better than anyone else:

 

1. MG drafted poorly and developed poorly and left virtually no top or mid level prospects in the system. 

 

2. JB took over and was forced to get a team to compete for the playoffs with the Sedins.  He did that.  Playoffs first year.  And then that plan continued for a few years.   But the way to do that was to trade picks for active players - who although still relatively young had a lower ceiling than draft picks.  And go heavy into FA.   We can say this strat worked for the first year but then we had a few years of failures.

 

3. Last year/2 of the Sedins the team switched tactics and started a more traditional rebuild.  But the team still had no mid level prospects being developed on the farm - so FA was still the focus.

 

4. The team hasn’t developed anyone in Utica of any real quality.  It seems all the good prospects and not playing at Utica.  This means the team has zero depth.  So the team  still goes to FA  for mid level players - who are older and in the long run aren’t as good as young hungry talented players.  Stress “long run”.  The issue is there aren’t enough quality draft picks making it to Utica to develop any depth.  All those players people are keen on should most of the time just be depth call ups - most prospects don’t make the bigs.

 

5 years:  it will take years to develop any real depth in Utica.  And to actually use players from Utica on the team.  The team had to make this the next focus - as the aged FA are great but the last part of contracts really hurts the team - not saying there was much choice so far...

 

All the talk about Gadjovich and woo and all the players that were great 2nd round picks - they need to be in Utica building a winning environment there.   Without this - and the ability to call up a decent defense man for instance if you get an injury in a playoff run, at least one that can potentially even help the team and not have a huge drop off - the team can never win a cup.

 

Problem:  I’m worried that young players and picks will continue to be traded away - to augment the budding core we see - and this development depth that we could have had (if we weren’t trying to win with the last few years of the Sedins) will never arrive.  It’s not too late to start building it - but the clock is close to midnight, we need that depth NOW cause the next core is ready to compete NOW.

 

the problem of always being injured and using that as an excuse for failure - is not acceptable.  Every team is injured all the time.  The only way to combat this is depth on the farm.  Real depth.  That you don’t trade away cause you have glaring holes on your big league team.  

 

So... prove me wrong, PLEASE!!!   The real proof will be if we see great strides are made in Utica.

 

/peace

 

 

Are you on drugs? 

[189lb enforcers?]

Anyone want to take a shot at an objective analysis of our prospects as they relate to the OP’s claims? 

 

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Anyone want to take a shot at an objective analysis of our prospects as they relate to the OP’s claims? 

 

Want some objective truth? This team isn't another Brisebois, Lockwood or two away from fixing the black hole of organizational depth Benning was saddled with fixing, as much as people want to decry about 'picks! '. Nothing's going to 'fix' that but more time.

 

And chances are, that extra 'Lockwood' or two could just as easily as the real one, be developing in college (or Europe or Junior) and not be in Utica as well. People have this odd fixation with only looking at Utica as 'the prospect pool'. Never mind that the vast majority of draft picks take 2-3 years of development in Junior/college/Europe to even get to the point of possibly making it to Utica and that means we only have roughly half Benning and Co's picks even having Utica as an option at this point (and a good many of them have already graduated to the NHL ).

 

Top to bottom organizational depth isn't rebuilt overnight. Yet we're MILES ahead of where we were even 4 years ago. We're only just now getting to what might be considered an organizational 'tipping point' of actually having anything close to resembling depth. Fortunately, that should continue to improve as we actually start having saleable assets to move out for picks/prospects (Tanev, Sutter, Granlund, Baer, Hutton etc) as kids come in and supplant them and they're no longer required to scrape together ANY depth and shelter the few kids we have had up to this point.

 

 

 

 

Edited April 23, 2019 by aGENT

[189lb enforcers?]

8 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Want some objective truth? This team isn't another Brisebois, Lockwood or two away from fixing the black hole of organizational depth Benning was saddled with fixing, as much as people want to decry about 'picks! '. Nothing's going to 'fix' that but more time.

 

And chances are, that extra 'Lockwood' or two could just as easily as the real one, be developing in college (or Europe or Junior) and not be in Utica as well. People have this odd fixation with only looking at Utica as 'the prospect pool'. Never mind that the vast majority of draft picks take 2-3 years of development in Junior/college/Europe to even get to the point of possibly making it to Utica and that means we only have roughly half Benning and Co's picks even having Utica as an option at this point.

 

Top to bottom organizational depth isn't rebuilt overnight. Yet we're MILES ahead of where we were even 4 years ago. We're only just now getting to what might be considered an organizational 'tipping point' of actually having anything close to resembling depth. Fortunately, that should continue to improve as we actually start having saleable assets to move out for picks/prospects (Tanev, Sutter, Granlund, Baer, Hutton etc) as kids come in and supplant them and they're no longer required to scrape together ANY depth and shelter the few kids we have had up to this point.

 

 

 

 

I’ve enjoyed observing your evolution in objectivity concerning the management of this roster. 

 

You might not realize this, but under old usernames in the past, you and I have disagreed on the management aspects of rosters which Gillis once sent to be slaughtered in the playoffs and have long been on opposite sides of the fence regarding most of this regeims vision, execution and results. You’re very slowly coming around, I will leave it at that. 

Edited April 23, 2019 by 189lb enforcers?

[aGENT]

5 minutes ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

I’ve enjoyed observing your evolution in objectivity concerning the management of this roster. 

 

You might not realize this, but under old usernames in the past, you and I have disagreed on the management aspects of rosters which Gillis once sent to be slaughtered in the playoffs and have long been on opposite sides of the fence regarding most of this regeims vision, execution and results. You’re very slowly coming around, I will leave it at that. 

Stop dancing around a point and actually attempt to make one.

[oldnews]

16 hours ago, The 5th Line said:

Why not draft for both? 

Because it does not mean a goddamn thing.  You draft the best players period - not a single consideration should go to whether they will make Utica more competitive or not.

[JM_]

4 hours ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Anyone want to take a shot at an objective analysis of our prospects as they relate to the OP’s claims? 

 

maybe in principle. When looking at our depth, how many guys have real separation in skills between the guys in Uitca and/or guys they could take a job from in the NHL? 

 

Hughes was one easily penciled in. Juolevi will be given the opportunity (he's probably the 1st injury call up). Gaudette maybe wasn't without all the injurues but he did OK. 

 

And then we have a lot of guys that its hard for me to say separate themselves from the pack. Is MacEwan showing better than any of our other Fs? who's job does he take? I'd say Schaller or Spooner but anyone else? probably not. 

 

Just have to wait and see who steps up and takes a job.

[oldnews]

3 minutes ago, The 5th Line said:

I'm not saying draft a player specifically for Utica. Come on now.

 

I'm saying accumulate picks, fill the farm and the cream with rise to the top.  Since when is acquiring as many picks as you can a bad idea?  

 

What if, just what if, Benning thought he could skip the draft process by acquiring more "established prospects"/ cast offs in attempt to speed things up, it didn't work, so now he's scrambling, signing a bunch of college free agents for the farm, and now is going to hit free agency hard July 1st in attempt to save his job?  Building through free agency...it's only been the worst strategy for like, ever.

I'm not playing straw games and chasing tails on this stuff over and over again - it's why I stop responding in general to this stuff.

What if your concept of a "speed up" is a fundamental misread of the point?   What if the draft plus years of a player's development, which a team has the advantage of assessing over an 18 yr old draftee, is an increased odds of landing an NHL player - and that is the point - of taking risks to maximize their asset value over mid round hopes of outliers.  It's not as simple as you suggest - to assume they'd be better off with picks than Baertschi, Granlund, Motte, Vey, Pedan, whomever - in the end I think you'd find that the median of draft value was exceeded in those deals - and if not, it's not a 'bad idea' either - in the end you have to execute whether you're scouting draft plus prospects or 18 year olds.

The team has targetted college free agents - actually were part pioneers of the no-brainer - since Tanev.  Burrows is another example of "the worst strategy, like ever"....

And I think you're absolutely dramatizing it - the 'building through free agency' claim is absurd.

Sorry but this stuff is oversimplified and binary - you clearly have no intention of understanding what they're doing, and proceeding with your criticisms from that point - in which case their may be some validity to them.

[Viper007]

33 minutes ago, The 5th Line said:

I'll say again, since Benning took over we have drafted 34 players, during this time the league wide average has been 35. 5x7 As a rebuilding team, we have used less than the average amount of picks used.  When the hell has a rebuilding/retooling team ever done that, let alone gone on to be successful? 

 

Did anybody here actually think that this was going to be the case?  "Oh hey we just signed a gm who is good at drafting, hopefully we draft less than average"  

Why are you comparing his whole tenure?  Isn't it only been 3 years since they basically went full rebuild?  The first couple years the nucks were retooling, therefore not really acquiring picks.  Whether that was the right decision, that's up for debate, but you can't start from the beginning, counting all the draft picks, when they're not rebuilding from the start of Benning's tenure.

[oldnews]

2 hours ago, The 5th Line said:

@fakenews

 

how original of you.   kudos on parroting willful ignorance, it's telling.

[PuckYa]

On 4/5/2019 at 10:03 AM, janisahockeynut said:

Here is another thing that will help, if it happens...……….

 

If Benning goes out and signs 2 above average UFA's...………...it will strengthen our club

 

but what else it does is fill in those holes, that our young guys would go into...………..so again, it creates a log jam and keeps guys down

 

It would be nice at some point that we did not have to count on adding our D+1 year players directly into the NHL

 

And could give them that time to adjust and develop into the pro game...….

 

I have been a Canuck fan since before they were in the NHL...……...and I can tell you

 

This is an exciting time...…..I personally can not remember so much young skill on our team ever

 

It just needs time to mature...………..

94/95 Team was pretty good too... But you are right...

Bure 22

Linden 23

Peca 19*

Odjick 22

Gelinas 23

Hedican 23

D. Ward 24