appleboy Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 21 hours ago, CanadianRugby said: Maybe that Kakko kid slips to 10th. He seems OK at hockey. If Hughes struggles at this tournament he might slip a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 4 minutes ago, Horvat is a Boss said: Again, that Hamonic deal happened after the ED. And like you said, any point before the ED would have gotten us that return, but we didn't cash in on it. Here's a list of some of the AHL caliber players who has spent time in the NHL with the Canucks over the last number of years: Boucher Leipsic Archibald Burmistrov Chaput Megna Jokinen Cramarossa Grenier LaBate Larsen Molino Shore Skille Zalewski Cracknell Etem Friesen Kenins Pedan Here's a list of guys who were pretty much NHL regulars on the Canucks but would have been on the first list if we had an NHL team (at least most of them): Gudbranson Biega Granlund Motte Pouliot Schaller Spooner/Gagner Dowd Sbisa Bartkowski Fedun Vey Y. Weber What can be way worse than varying doses of all that combined with declining vets in an NHL lineup? Counting something that didn't actually happen because it would've happened is cheating. Someone could get 35% on an exam, but saying they would've gotten 80% if this this and this happened doesn't change what they actually got. Nobody forced Benning to call Gaudette up when those injuries happened, it could've been Gagner or Kero or another center he should've signed. Pyatt and Kero are fine players, I was saying that naming 2 AHL centers you could comfortably call up in a pinch without rushing young players is pretty bad. We could've signed players like Lindholm in the summer (who was vet exempt), but Benning has shown multiple times that addressing Utica's needs are not something he cares about. You're listing 3rd rounders (Lockwood and Brisebois) when I'm talking about 2nd rounders. A more accurate question would be 2-3 more Woos, Demkos, McKeowns, Anderssons, etc, but you specifically went with a lower tier of players to put words in my mouth. And if you want to chalk it up to luck, then we can do the same for the 1st round as well. And nobody is saying the rebuild would be complete if we ad 2-3 more 2nds, you're just making that up. We'd just likely be in a better spot. 1st rounders are the ones that GM's are most involved in, but that doesn't mean they are involved a lot. They likely just provide preferences for which type of player they would prefer if there are two equally ranked players. If the GM is doing more than that, that's a recipe for disaster (possibly what could've happened in 2016, but there's no evidence). Don't believe me? How about Stan Bowman, since he's an actual NHL GM: at 3:05 in the video: "At the end of the day, you have to trust the process. There's some things I have to question them on, what they observed, and if they have good answers for why they like a player or don't like him, then usually I'll just go with what they say. There has to be faith in the process and the group you have." No we wouldn't have gotten that before the ED and yes, Tanev's been hurt, even in the summers after the ED, and with lower trade value because of it. What could be worse? It being entirely the first list. Where are all these extra 2nd's coming from? Our valuable players like Bartowski? I think we're done here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kootenay Gold Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 In the case of trading Hansen; the Canucks actually got a prospect who was taken in the 1st round 27th overall by SJ. (Goldobin) and a 4th round draft pick but I guess by your post, getting just a 2nd rounder ( who has about a 20% chance of becoming an NHL'er ) was a much better option. JB has made a few mistakes as have most other GM's, but the Hansen trade was not one of them. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noble 6 Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 2 hours ago, aGENT said: No we wouldn't have gotten that before the ED and yes, Tanev's been hurt, even in the summers after the ED, and with lower trade value because of it. What could be worse? It being entirely the first list. Where are all these extra 2nd's coming from? Our valuable players like Bartowski? I think we're done here. You're mind is locked on the Tanev thing. There were multiple stretches of time where he was healthy and the ED wasn't looming over the horizon. I'm not even talking about extra 2nds. Im talking about the 2nds Benning traded. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kootenay Gold Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 34 minutes ago, The 5th Line said: Stop taking other teams failed prospects The jury is still out on whether Goldy is a failed prospect or not but it is no secret that Hansen did not fare very well in SJ and has since retired. If, by your methodology you only want to rebuild the team via the draft; the Canucks would likely still be 3 years away from making the playoffs as any players drafted in the last few years that were not in the first round would probably be still cutting their teeth in the AHL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 3 hours ago, The 5th Line said: Like I haven't laid it out already? Roman Polak signed as FA then moved for two 2nds, Daniel Winnik signed and moved for a second, twice. These are not high caliber players but moved at the right time they can bring back decent returns. Those are just two examples. Hamhuis and Hansen both should of gotten 2nds. If we don't have the assets for these picks then it is the GM's job to find those assets in free agency OR take back someone else's bad contract, instead of signing your own bad contracts like we did with Gagner, Eriksson, etc. That's what rebuilding gms do, they look for ways to bring in extra youth not find ways to get rid of extra youth by giving picks away in trades. We ALWAYS end up throwing in a sweetener. Even in the Sutter, Kesler Gudbranson deals we ended up throwing away extra sweeteners. We lost all of those trades. Sweeteners thrown in with Pedan, Jensen, Kassian.. All those trades sucked too. None of our FA signings get moved for anything decent, meanwhile it's happening around the league every year right in front of us. @fakenews you had Shane Prince in your fantasy league? Did he have good analytics or something? You are so desperately saddened by even good hockey moves that one has to wonder if this isn't a bad place for you. Find a team where you don't have a pathological dislike of the management as the Vancouver Canucks have decent management and if they change it and it gets worse you will likely need to be kept away from sharp things. Why not follow the Oilers for example? Maple Leafs? Flames? Pick one and go crazy with how superior their management is and perhaps the colour in your sky will lighten a few shades. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rekker Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 4 hours ago, Kootenay Gold said: In the case of trading Hansen; the Canucks actually got a prospect who was taken in the 1st round 27th overall by SJ. (Goldobin) and a 4th round draft pick but I guess by your post, getting just a 2nd rounder ( who has about a 20% chance of becoming an NHL'er ) was a much better option. JB has made a few mistakes as have most other GM's, but the Hansen trade was not one of them. Yip. Do we know if any other offers even materialized for Hansen? That's the thing, one can say JB should of got this or should of got that but only those in management know what trade options were even there. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 11 hours ago, rekker said: Yip. Do we know if any other offers even materialized for Hansen? That's the thing, one can say JB should of got this or should of got that but only those in management know what trade options were even there. Yup, as I keep repeating, Benning can't just force other GM's to give him picks they don't want to. And he hasn't exactly been swimming in leverage. Either for signing UFA's or moving pending ones. Especially when you add in NTC's. And all the people clamoring to 'get anything' for guys like Hamhuis... Fatal mistake. You start selling low and GM's will just low ball you and wait you out until you 'get anything' for all your trade assets. You get fair value or you tell them to pound sand. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 32 minutes ago, The 5th Line said: The problem is it seems like other teams have no problems getting picks. Benning was quoted saying picks are like gold, and then in the following weeks leading up to the deadline, over 30 picks were traded. He might of just overvalued Hamhuis, like you and others said we don't know the exact details, both sides of this argument are just guesses. At the end of the day, something is still better than nothing and I'm sure whatever the deal was for Hamhuis still would of had a good chance to help us. It's not a fatal mistake, GM's have to take what they can get sometimes, it's not uncommon. And maybe he got lowballed because he had taken so many bad deals in the past already...again, who's fault is that? Whatever happened before TDL 2017 I give JB a pass. Our owner was all over those moves, or not moves. Since the trade of Burr and Hansen, JB is on the hook. Mare you at all surprised that no experienced management guy has been hired under this owner? Clearly those guys with experience are staying away for a good reason. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
appleboy Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 17 hours ago, Kootenay Gold said: In the case of trading Hansen; the Canucks actually got a prospect who was taken in the 1st round 27th overall by SJ. (Goldobin) and a 4th round draft pick but I guess by your post, getting just a 2nd rounder ( who has about a 20% chance of becoming an NHL'er ) was a much better option. JB has made a few mistakes as have most other GM's, but the Hansen trade was not one of them. The point is that this club has done better by using their picks. They made a decision to find the twenty something player instead of drafting and waiting. Many of see this as a big mistake. We feel that they would have been better off to keep any picks they had and acquired . Then they should have filled the holes with lower end UFA's with the hopes of trading them for more picks latter. Moving assets for players like Goldy has not worked. It has not supplied us anything that could not have been found on the lower end UFA market. We still have a depth issue in our organization. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
appleboy Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 3 minutes ago, Alflives said: Whatever happened before TDL 2017 I give JB a pass. Our owner was all over those moves, or not moves. Since the trade of Burr and Hansen, JB is on the hook. Mare you at all surprised that no experienced management guy has been hired under this owner? Clearly those guys with experience are staying away for a good reason. You aren't suggesting that this management micromanages things are you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kootenay Gold Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 42 minutes ago, appleboy said: The point is that this club has done better by using their picks. I think that statement is highly speculative. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
appleboy Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 1 hour ago, Kootenay Gold said: I think that statement is highly speculative. Jim's strength has been drafting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
appleboy Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 2 minutes ago, The 5th Line said: That's the thing, everybody here thinks Bennings best attribute is drafting but yet they are okay with him throwing so many picks away in trades. It doesn't make sense to defend both sides of this argument especially now that we have seen so many picks turn in to nothing when used in trades. Using picks to acquire waiver fodder caliber players has done nothing but hurt us, It shouldn't even up for debate. I had put together a list of all of the draft picks that Jim has had his hands on since being here. He has acquired around 12 picks and has traded around the same. What if he had of just kept them all? What would Utica look like? What would our NHL club look like? What game changer has been acquired with those picks? 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 34 minutes ago, appleboy said: I had put together a list of all of the draft picks that Jim has had his hands on since being here. He has acquired around 12 picks and has traded around the same. What if he had of just kept them all? What would Utica look like? What would our NHL club look like? What game changer has been acquired with those picks? It's especially the second and third round picks lost that I have difficulty with during the rebuilding phase. Just think of the game changing D men that are currently playing that are second or third round picks? We certainly could be missing a very important piece to our finished rebuild. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salacious Crumb Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 36 minutes ago, Alflives said: It's especially the second and third round picks lost that I have difficulty with during the rebuilding phase. Just think of the game changing D men that are currently playing that are second or third round picks? We certainly could be missing a very important piece to our finished rebuild. Drafting is a gamble though bud. You can’t win if you don’t throw your chips in the middle. Win some, lose some. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted May 16, 2019 Share Posted May 16, 2019 On 5/13/2019 at 7:19 PM, The 5th Line said: @Rob_Zepp. You're a proven liar. You have no credibility here. Dude, you have issues. If you think anyone on an internet chat site needs or craves credibility it does explain a bit about you but your fixation with a few things, like the obsession with false narratives about some really good hockey people that are associated with the Vancouver Canucks, is borderline (across the line more likely) pathological. Seriously - find a time to follow that doesn't have people you want to go postal on. Put me on ignore if you don't want observations from someone who actually follows the game versus someone here to stalk Canuck management. Get out and watch some hockey games as apparently that is missing in your life a bit. Take a flight - get over here and see what you are missing. Other than having to bring a few extra charge cables and connectors for your laptop, it isn't that big of a deal with watch here. Who knows, you may even find a team to follow and enjoy and put away the stalking gear you have in the closet. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted May 16, 2019 Share Posted May 16, 2019 (edited) On 5/14/2019 at 11:32 AM, Alflives said: It's especially the second and third round picks lost that I have difficulty with during the rebuilding phase. Just think of the game changing D men that are currently playing that are second or third round picks? We certainly could be missing a very important piece to our finished rebuild. I guess you can look back that way but then who would we have passed on in the 2nd round? 2014 - we picked Demko, wouldn't want to change that, but 2015 - missed out on Aho 2016 - missed out on Debrincat and Girard 2017 and 2018 we used our 2nd. Sure we missed out on 2 of these 3 guys but so did a lot of other teams... but yeah it would be nice to have 1 of them. I do think the 'rebuild on the fly' thing was risky and this was the risk. But was it devastating like some posters like to suggest? no. Edited May 16, 2019 by Jimmy McGill 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Where'd Luongo? Posted May 16, 2019 Share Posted May 16, 2019 9 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said: I guess you can look back that way but then who would we have passed on in the 2nd round? 2014 - we picked Demko, wouldn't want to change that, but 2015 - missed out on Aho 2016 - missed out on Debrincat and Girard 2017 and 2018 we used our 2nd. Sure we missed out on 2 of these 3 guys but so did a lot of other teams... but yeah it would be nice to have 1 of them. I do think the 'rebuild on the fly' thing was risky and this was the risk. But was it devastating like some posters like to suggest? no. In retrospect it's too bad nobody listened to Tortorella, he knew the core was stale and wanted to do a full-on rebuild. Would have loved to see what we could have brought back after trading the Sedins back then, and how much ahead or behind we would be now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted May 16, 2019 Share Posted May 16, 2019 7 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said: I guess you can look back that way but then who would we have passed on in the 2nd round? 2014 - we picked Demko, wouldn't want to change that, but 2015 - missed out on Aho 2016 - missed out on Debrincat and Girard 2017 and 2018 we used our 2nd. Sure we missed out on 2 of these 3 guys but so did a lot of other teams... but yeah it would be nice to have 1 of them. I do think the 'rebuild on the fly' thing was risky and this was the risk. But was it devastating like some posters like to suggest? no. Aho was drafted 35th - the only way they could have drafted him was using the Boeser pick. 2016 - Benning talked about how they really liked Dahlen - he went 42nd so that might have been their pick. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now