Benning's Window of Opportunity

[JamesB]

This is the second time I have started a thread with "Window of Opportunity" in the title. The last time was, I think, back in 2010 after the 2009-10 season when there was a lot of media speculation about the Canucks window of opportunity. There has not been much reason to think seriously about a Window of Opportunity in recent years. But maybe things have changed.

 

At any given time there are maybe 5 or 6 teams in a window opportunity (WO). I would say that any team in the top 4 or 5 in the regular season plus any other teams that make it to the SCF are in a window of opportunity. But the precise definition does not matter. The question is, when will the Canucks have another legitimate shot at a Cup?

 

History.

Back in 2010 a lot people thought the Canucks were in a WO and were speculating about when the team would peak -- reaching their best chance to win the Cup, and about how long the WO would last.

 

There were of course some CDC optimists who refused to think about possible decline. I think the most popular comment in the thread was something to the effect that "We don't need to worry about any f***ing windows. We going to kick down the f***ng door."

 

But more realistic assessments look at how old the team's elite players are, how old the other core players are, the Cap situation, and a team's young players and prospects.

I think the media consensus was about right in 2010. The Canucks were 5th in the league in 2010, were the best regular season team in 2011 when they went to the SCF, were the best regular season team again in 2012 (when the lost in the first playoff round to LA, who ultimately won the Cup), and were still good in 2013. That was pretty much it -- a solid 4-year WO that did everything but actually produce a Cup. After that, their elite players (the Sedins) were passed their prime. Same with other core players like Burrows, Hammer and Kesler, and Salo had retired, and the team had cap issues and a weak pipeline of prospects and young players. (Remember when Brendan Gaunce, the Canucks 2012 first round pick, was the top prospect in the system.)

 

The Linden Plan.

It has been well-known for a while that part of the conflict between Linden and Aquilini (FA) was over timing. I saw an offhand remark in a Ben Kuzma article recently that Linden wanted a 4-year plan -- 4 years until they could open another WO, as of last summer. I don't know if this is what Linden proposed but, whether Linden actually said this or not, it is a widely held view that is worth thinking about. The Canucks had some good pieces in place -- Horvat, Boeser, EP, Hughes, along some other good prospects. But, arguably, they needed a couple more high drafts of comparable quality along with a bunch more other picks that would hopefully yield a few good players. 

 

The Benning Plan

The Benning plan was to contend for the playoffs as soon as possible, bringing in UFAs to give the team a quick boost. This is allegedly what FA wanted. Last year's team showed some improvement but was still not very good. But Benning has gone "all-in" for 2019-20, bringing in expensive UFAs and trading away a future first round pick (which is very rare for a rebuilding team except as part of deal to bring in other good young players) -- 2 years earlier than what I have called the Linden plan.

 

Benning has been doing this to some extent all along, but this summer he went further.

 

Will the Benning Plan Produce a WO

 

Personally, I have always favored what I describe above as the Linden Plan -- go through an all-out rebuild and try to build a Cup contender, even if it takes a while.

The problem with the Benning plan is that it might get you to the playoffs but is less likely to build an actual Cup contender.

 

However, it is certainly possible that the Benning plan will open a new WO. That is what this threada is about -- not just about the playoffs, but about building an actual Cup contender.

 

Here are some considerations:

 

1. The big names Benning has brought in -- Myers, Miller, Benn, Pearson, Ferland -- not to mention Beagle, Sutter, Eriksson, and Roussel, are veterans. Realistically we cannot expect any of those guys to improve with age beyond what happens this year (2019-20). So if the Canucks don't open a WO this year, those guys will, in a sense, have peaked too early and, as time goes on, will be less valuable and will take up a lot of cap room.

 

2. The Canucks had "loads of cap room". Now, looking ahead two years, they are going to have cap problems when EP and Hughes need to be resigned.

 

3. There are still some hopeful signs in the pipeline. Juolevi could still turn out be good. Woo could be very good. Tryamkin might come back in  2020-21, Podkolzin (who could be available as early as late in the 2020-21 season) looks very good and there are bunch of other prospects who have some chance of developing into helpful NHL players.

 

4. And the biggest question is: what is the ceiling for EP, Boeser, and Hughes? Will they be like the Sedins and just keep getting better, carrying the team along with them. Or will they plateau as good core players but not reaching the elite status needed to create a Cup contender.

 

My personal view is that this team is likely to peak in 2020-21. Guys like Horvat and Boeser should be in their peak and EP will be close and I expect Hughes to be an "early bloomer". The UFAs and Miller should still be pretty good. Tryamkin and Podkolzin should help the team and it will be before the EP/Hughes cap crunch. That is one year earlier than under the Linden plan.

 

Anyway, I would appreciate any comments.

 

Edited July 19, 2019 by JamesB

[Alflives]

We make the playoffs spring 2020.  We win the Stanley Cup spring 2021.  

[Nuxfanabroad]

An interesting aspect is we might have THREE separate chances of this occurring.

 

1- The team as currently composed, unexpectedly blows the doors off, & starts climbing consistently

2- The youth in the pipeline progress rapidly(many hitting ceilings), beyond what the optimists projected

3- A combination of 1 & 2(to whatever varying degree)

 

Mostly why I'm optimistic now. Can visualize a number of different scenarios where this team starts steady progression. Importantly, in any of these outcomes, we should be able to keep it within cap-reality, due to the quality of recent drafting(abundance of incoming ELC's)

[EB43]

28 minutes ago, Alflives said:

We make the playoffs spring 2020.  We win the Stanley Cup spring 2021.  

And every year after until the end of time

[JM_]

33 minutes ago, JamesB said:

Here are some considerations:

 

1. The big names Benning has brought in -- Myers, Miller, Benn, Pearson -- not to mention Beagle, Sutter, Eriksson, and Roussel, are veterans. Realistically we cannot expect any of those guys to improve with age beyond what happens this year (2019-20). So if the Canucks don't open a WO this year, those guys will, in a sense, have peaked too early and, as time goes on, will be less valuable and will take up a lot of cap room.

 

2. The Canucks had "loads of cap room". Now, looking ahead two years, they are going to have cap problems when EP and Hughes need to be resigned.

 

I don't know that we can say they'l be less valuable, maybe just "as" valuable as they are now. We've got them for some prime playing years. Myers is the most likely to drop off in production for sure, but he may still be a solid defensive presence. 

 

We won't have an insurmountable cap problem either in two years. In two years these come off the books: Sutter, Edler, Pearson, Baer and Benn - thats 19.8 mil right there for big contracts, and the cap space for 21-22 is currently at just over 30 mil with all the other contracts clearing before now and then.

 

So 30 mil for Petey, Hughes, Brock, one of Demko or Marky. Its doable, particularly if we have guys like Woo, Podkolzin and one of two others on ELCs. 

 

But... someone out of the good roster players probably has to go. 

 

I see Jim looking at the ELCs year of Petey and Hughes as ones he wants to have a playoff team for, and I like that plan. 

 

 

 

Edited July 14, 2019 by Jimmy McGill

[coastal.view]

a lot has been made of the secondary draft picks by jb

and he has been given a lot of kudos for those selections

 

currently only gaudette appears to have progressed to the cusp of making the team

there are many other prospects not picked in the first round who seem to have faded a bit from consideration

as good as jb's drafting in the 1st round has been his guru drafter status will fail/succeed based on these lower picks

and they will take a little longer to fully progress to where we know what we really have

 

that will directly influence where this team goes

and when the window of opportunity really may be present

the veteran players signed or acquired (particularly before this off season)

have most value to help guide and develop the young core of prospects

and when they arrive the secondary prospects who will be replacing these veterans (or not)

 

i think it is still too soon to project when the real future window of opportunity will arrive

 

[Nuxfanabroad]

Interesting thread, JamesB..sorry, my first reply I'd hardly skimmed thru, & just read more closely now.

 

Gotta say with this general notion (WOOppor) I'm a little skeptical. Recent Caps Cup for example, I would've figured their window was almost closed. Maybe Pens too.

 

All the way back to our '94 run, is a good example of things just 'coming together' at the right way/moment. Although of course, pre-cap times.

 

**************************************************************::

 

The greatest indicator of coming success, might be a superb(perhaps 4 or 5 yr period??) of drafting, where you accumulate resources to potentially(near future) stock half the roster of a quality team. It's too early to call, but I think JB(& crew) might've just done this.

 

Within the constraints/parity of a strict cap system, I'd reckon this is the best barometer of what's to come.

[JM_]

re: cap - I think Seattle is going to help clear out a decent player at a mid-sized cap hit as well, so we should be fine. 

[sonoman]

22 minutes ago, EliasBoeser said:

And every year after until the end of time

 

[HOFsedins]

58 minutes ago, JamesB said:

This is the second time I have started a thread with "Window of Opportunity" in the title. The last time was, I think, back in 2010 after the 2009-10 season when there was a lot of media speculation about the Canucks window of opportunity. There has not been much reason to think seriously about a Window of Opportunity in recent years. But maybe things have changed.

 

At any given time there are maybe 5 or 6 teams in a window opportunity (WO). I would say that any team in the top 4 or 5 in the regular season plus any other teams that make it to the SCF are in a window of opportunity. But the precise definition does not matter. The question is, when will the Canucks have another legitimate shot at a Cup?

 

History.

Back in 2010 a lot people thought the Canucks were in a WO and were speculating about when the team would peak -- reaching their best chance to win the Cup, and about how long the WO would last.

 

There were of course some CDC optimists who refused to think about possible decline. I think the most popular comment in the thread was something to the effect that "We don't need to worry about any f***ing windows. We going to kick down the f***ng door."

 

But more realistic assessments look at how old the team's elite players are, how old the other core players are, the Cap situation, and a team's young players and prospects.

I think the media consensus was about right in 2010. The Canucks were 5th in the league in 2010, were the best regular season team in 2011 when they went to the SCF, were the best regular season team again in 2012 (when the lost in the first playoff round to LA, who ultimately won the Cup), and were still good in 2013. That was pretty much it -- a solid 4-year WO that did everything but actually produce a Cup. After that, their elite players (the Sedins) were passed their prime. Same with other core players like Burrows, Hammer and Kesler, and Salo had retired, and the team had cap issues and a weak pipeline of prospects and young players. (Remember when Brendan Gaunce, the Canucks 2012 first round pick, was the top prospect in the system.)

 

The Linden Plan.

It has been well-known for a while that part of the conflict between Linden and Aquilini (FA) was over timing. I saw an offhand remark in a Ben Kuzma article recently that Linden wanted a 4-year plan -- 4 years until they could open another WO, as of last summer. I don't know if this is what Linden proposed but, Linden actually said this or not, it is a widely held view that is worth thinking about. The Canucks had some good pieces in place -- Horvat, Boeser, EP, Hughes, along some other good prospects. But, arguably, they needed a couple more high drafts of comparable quality along with a bunch more other picks that would hopefully yield a few good players. 

 

The Benning Plan

The Benning plan was to contend for the playoffs as soon as possible, bringing in UFAs to give the team a quick boost. This is allegedly what FA wanted. Last year's team showed some improvement but was still not very good. But Benning has gone "all-in" for 2019-20, bringing in expensive UFAs and trading away a future first round pick (which is very rare for a rebuilding team except as part of deal to bring in other good young players) -- 2 years earlier than what I have called the Linden plan.

 

Benning has been doing this to some extent all along, but this summer he went further.

 

Will the Benning Plan Produce a WO

 

Personally, I have always favored what I describe above as the Linden Plan -- go through an all-out rebuild and try to build a Cup contender, even if it takes a while.

The problem with the Benning plan is that it might get you to the playoffs but is less likely to build an actual Cup contender.

 

However, it is certainly possible that the Benning plan will open a new WO. That is what this threada is about -- not just about the playoffs, but about building an actual Cup contender.

 

Here are some considerations:

 

1. The big names Benning has brought in -- Myers, Miller, Benn, Pearson -- not to mention Beagle, Sutter, Eriksson, and Roussel, are veterans. Realistically we cannot expect any of those guys to improve with age beyond what happens this year (2019-20). So if the Canucks don't open a WO this year, those guys will, in a sense, have peaked too early and, as time goes on, will be less valuable and will take up a lot of cap room.

 

2. The Canucks had "loads of cap room". Now, looking ahead two years, they are going to have cap problems when EP and Hughes need to be resigned.

 

3. There are still some hopeful signs in the pipeline. Juolevi could still turn out be good. Woo could be very good. Tryamkin might come back in  2020-21, Podkolzin (who should join the team in 2020-21) looks very good and there are bunch of other prospects who have some chance of developing into helpful NHL players.

 

4. And the biggest question is: what is the ceiling for EP, Boeser, and Hughes? Will they be like the Sedins and just keep getting better, carrying the team along with them. Or will they plateau as good core players but not reaching the elite status needed to create a Cup contender.

 

My personal view is that this team is likely to peak in 2020-21. Guys like Horvat and Boeser should be in their peak and EP will be close and I expect Hughes to be an "early bloomer". The UFAs and Miller should still be pretty good. Tryamkin and Podkolzin should help the team and it will be before the EP/Hughes cap crunch. That is one year earlier than under the Linden plan.

 

Anyway, I would appreciate any comments.

 

Ive said this in another post. We will not have cap troubles when it is time to sign EP and Hughes in 2 years. A lot of contracts are coming off the books. 

[Pears]

We’ll be playoff teams for the next couple years, there’s no doubt in my mind about that. 2022 is when we’ll really start making that ascent to an elite team. 

[-AJ-]

I think a primary difference between this opening and the last one is that in 2010, the twins were 29 years old, and turned 30 prior to the start of the 2010-11 season. While we have many supporting players in their late 20s, our core players are all 24 or younger. A counter-point would be that we're still not as good as we were in 2009-10, so the case could be made it would take another two or three years for our team  to become a 100+ point team as we were back then, meaning our core players would be a bit older.

[189lb enforcers?]

EP needs to stay healthy or JB’s “plan” will be... 

 

... Nope, can’t even bring myself to have these thoughts anymore. 

 

Canucks will contend beginning this season and the window will be as long as EP is healthy! 

[kloubek]

I insist we make the playoffs, and I think we have enough vets as to not need much more time to grow.  The question is whether we have enough skill in this lineup as a whole and whether or not our prospects will develop well enough to put us over the top.

 

Our issue in recent past is that we had a glut of 3rd liners. Now we have too many 2nd liners too.  What we don't have an entire line of 1st line quality guys.  Maybe we have prospects to properly fill that role in 1-2 years? Or trade in packages for it?

 

Then our d.  As much as it has improved, I feel it needs more scoring. 

 

But all in all I think this team will surprise many next season.  If we remain remotely healthy, of course.

[kanucks25]

You should have used "WOO" as the acronym for "window of opportunity" so it would read like Ric Flair wrote it.

[Arrow 1983]

I believe Benning open the window on July 1st and with the Ferland signing including the trade for Miller and blew it wide open on draft day with his draft picks that should be NHL ready in the next 2 years. The Canucks window is now and the next 5-8 years to come.

Benning I believe Knew there was no one else in the pipeline to come along in these next 2 years and therefore, made the signings he had to.

[kanucks25]

1 hour ago, Jimmy McGill said:

We won't have an insurmountable cap problem either in two years. In two years these come off the books: Sutter, Edler, Pearson, Baer and Benn - thats 19.8 mil right there for big contracts, and the cap space for 21-22 is currently at just over 30 mil with all the other contracts clearing before now and then.

 

So 30 mil for Petey, Hughes, Brock, one of Demko or Marky. Its doable, particularly if we have guys like Woo, Podkolzin and one of two others on ELCs. 

You realize that when those contracts come off the books, they need to be replaced, right? Your list has a 3rd line center, top-4 D-man, two middle-6 wingers and a bottom-pair D. They aren't free.

 

Pettersson, Boeser and Hughes alone could conceivably be making close to 30M combined in 2 years.

[kanucks25]

This team probably can make some real noise in two years. Some of our best prospects (hopefully) will make an impact on their ELCs, a few of our bad contracts will be off the books and our young core will all be in their primes.

 

But that's if everything goes to plan. It's not a matter of when, but if. Two big "if"s, in fact:

1) Is Demko going to be a true #1 goalie in 2 years?

2) Are we going to be able to find two quality top-4 D-men to replace Edler and Tanev?

Edited July 14, 2019 by kanucks25

[Arrow 1983]

In last 4 years Benning drafted the players he need now, drafted the players he needs in the future and signed the players he now to keep the window open for a very long time

[Arrow 1983]

3 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

You realize that when those contracts come off the books, they need to be replaced, right? Your list has a 3rd line center, top-4 D-man, two middle-6 wingers and a bottom-pair D. They aren't free.

 

Pettersson, Boeser and Hughes alone could conceivably be making close to 30M combined in 2 years.

And younger cheaper players that Benning has and will draft will fill those spots.