[Rumour] Canucks exploring possibility of trading Brock Boeser

[Dazzle]

24 minutes ago, Tre Mac said:

That's bull, I gave Benning credit for drafting, Miller trade was good and he's looking good on a couple of other transactions and the Luongo recapture is straight up horse$hit.  But/However/On the contrary I have no faith in him handling the team going forward, simple as that - and you know why, it's those points I keep rehashing. 

 

Your 'wait and see' approach(other post) is where I was at two offseasons ago.  I honestly felt like this team was flaming out before the pandemic and they would've missed the playoffs yet again.  Who knows who was responsible for drafting whom but who can honestly say losing Brackett is good for the team?  A lot of questionable decisions lately by a team that has every right to be criticize by its fanbase, that's sports.  For all we know a lot of those decisions are coming from ownership, which I am also not a fan of.

 

If this is irrationality, so be it.  In the end neither of us are getting medals if we're right but for the record:

 

Ownership: Bad

Management: Bad

Green: Generational Coach

Brown: Keepable

Baumer: Uhhhh?

Medical Staff: Needs to improve.

Pipeline: Promising

 

Only way I see Benning succeeding is if they bring in an absolute lvl.99 cap wizard with a plethora of intellect potions to tackle this unhealable debuff that is the salary cap.  This same wizard will then cast a fireball at Benning every time he is approached with an asinine free agent proposal.  And if ownership butts out then maybe,  just maybe we might have something here.  Problem is I don't see any lvl.99 cap wizards floating around you know with Covid and everything.

 

This concludes my thesis.

 

 

 

 

Everyone has the ability to criticize. But criticizing for the sake of criticizing is not productive, nor is it persuasive.

 

Ownership - bad. Why? In what way are you measuring bad? These value statements don't provide much value without a proper explanation. This is no different than squamfan saying "FIRE BENNING!!!".

 

Aquilini has spent a lot of money over the years to keep this team competitive. Now competitive can mean many things, but for the sake of simplicity, I am referring to the fact he is/was willing to spend money to TRY and improve the team. We can all agree that Eriksson's presence on the team is a failure, but it isn't a complete failure. Eriksson is still contributing to the team, although he is overpaid at what he does. Keep in mind Lucic and Neal are the other two 'bad' contracts that were signed in the same year, for the exact same amount. It was just a deal that didn't work out for all three Pacific Division Teams.

 

By that token, bad ownership would be like Ottawa Senator's owner, Eugene Melynk. If Aquilini is considered 'bad' to you, where does Melynk stand? He is heavily despised by the fanbase for not spending enough. Do you see the problem with your overly simplistic value-based statements?

 

Management. Bad. Why? We've already talked about this aspect in quite a lot of detail in the other post. Simply put, Benning isn't the worst GM, nor is he the perfect GM. He has made mistakes, but he's done several good things too, one of which you named was drafting and this transfers into the concept of player development as well. As Benning is the architect of this team, he deserves credit for the team going in this direction, surely.

 

Yet that also contradicts your current position. You say you have now abandoned the "wait and see" approach. What is the proof that he is doing worse than what you originally thought about Benning? It's difficult to argue that Benning has done WORSE than what he was originally given. That Canucks team was at the bottom of the league. These past two years, the Canucks have improved substantially. Surely, Benning's efforts have paid off, yes?

 

Green is not a generational coach. Give me a break. Your value on Green is clearly over the top. What has he done to earn this title? Mind you, I am not saying he is a bad coach, but these value-based statements MAKE NO SENSE. Your liberal use of it basically questions what it means to be a generational coach. What does this make Scotty Bowman or Quenneville or the other legendary coaches with multiple Stanley Cups?

 

Also, the concept of "level 99" is absurd in the real world. No one is a "level 99". The fact that you think such a concept exists tells me your expectations are not realistic. People DO NOT perform like robots. That is a fantasy. There are many factors that can make someone look good, as well as factors that make them look bad. Nonis could have been a level 99 GM but when picks don't go your way (i.e. injuries, and other factors you cannot control), it really doesn't matter what your "level" is. That is why the GM position is so hard. And why so many posters like you think it's so easy.

 

Your thesis is not done - you still need a lot of revision.

 

I give your grade a D because you don't put up a very persuasive case for your points.

 

 

 

 

Edited July 11, 2020 by Dazzle

[Nuxfanabroad]

Interestingly over on HF proposals page, there already are 10 pages of offers/discussion on this topic.(from Sekeras spec)

 

Seems Jersey, Ottawa & Minny fans are the most determined...

[DeNiro]

Only after Benning has exhausted all salary dump options and we have Toffoli signed do we even consider this.

 

Even then I see Brock as part of the core. We are not in the position to be trading 23 year old players that haven’t even hit their peak yet. That’s just a bad idea.

 

Trade Pearson or Virtanen if you absolutely have to dump a winger.

 

[King Heffy]

The more I think about it, the more Boeser seems like a fair price to get rid of LE if Benning can't convince him retirement is better than being a Black Ace in Utica.  Dumbass gave up a first to get rid of an actual NHLer who was a good influence in the room, with only one year left pre-covid.  While it was obviously a stupid trade, it does set rough expectations for what it would cost to get rid of our 6 million dollar floater.

Edited July 11, 2020 by King Heffy

[BlastPast]

1 minute ago, King Heffy said:

The more I think about it, the more Boeser seems like a fair price to get rid of LE

Keep thinking.

[Nuck1991]

5 hours ago, theo5789 said:

First, Dahlen was considered Petey's best friend. Now the rumour is BB may be traded. Perhaps the moral of the story is don't be Petey's best friend!

louie eriksson is also petey is best friend

[J-23]

9 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

Only after Benning has exhausted all salary dump options and we have Toffoli signed do we even consider this.

 

Even then I see Brock as part of the core. We are not in the position to be trading 23 year old players that haven’t even hit their peak yet. That’s just a bad idea.

 

Trade Pearson or Virtanen if you absolutely have to dump a winger.

 

Well said. Pearson may get us something decent as well.

[KoreanHockeyFan]

50 minutes ago, Tre Mac said:

That's bull, I gave Benning credit for drafting, Miller trade was good and he's looking good on a couple of other transactions and the Luongo recapture is straight up horse$hit.  But/However/On the contrary I have no faith in him handling the team going forward, simple as that - and you know why, it's those points I keep rehashing. 

 

Your 'wait and see' approach(other post) is where I was at two offseasons ago.  I honestly felt like this team was flaming out before the pandemic and they would've missed the playoffs yet again.  Who knows who was responsible for drafting whom but who can honestly say losing Brackett is good for the team?  A lot of questionable decisions lately by a team that has every right to be criticize by its fanbase, that's sports.  For all we know a lot of those decisions are coming from ownership, which I am also not a fan of.

 

If this is irrationality, so be it.  In the end neither of us are getting medals if we're right but for the record:

 

Ownership: Bad

Management: Bad

Green: Generational Coach

Brown: Keepable

Baumer: Uhhhh?

Medical Staff: Needs to improve.

Pipeline: Promising

 

Only way I see Benning succeeding is if they bring in an absolute lvl.99 cap wizard with a plethora of intellect potions to tackle this unhealable debuff that is the salary cap.  This same wizard will then cast a fireball at Benning every time he is approached with an asinine free agent proposal.  And if ownership butts out then maybe,  just maybe we might have something here.  Problem is I don't see any lvl.99 cap wizards floating around you know with Covid and everything.

 

This concludes my thesis.

 

 

 

 

 

Are we really trying to turn Travis Green into the next Dallas Eakins or something? Generational? My goodness. Relax.

Edited July 11, 2020 by KoreanHockeyFan

[King Heffy]

Just now, BlastPast said:

Keep thinking.

I don't want to get rid of Boeser, but we'd be looking at giving up multiple firsts to get rid of trash like Eriksson.  We NEED to unload that bum and while the price is high, it might be better than the alternatives.

[Squamfan]

15 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

The more I think about it, the more Boeser seems like a fair price to get rid of LE if Benning can't convince him retirement is better than being a Black Ace in Utica.  Dumbass gave up a first to get rid of an actual NHLer who was a good influence in the room, with only one year left pre-covid.  While it was obviously a stupid trade, it does set rough expectations for what it would cost to get rid of our 6 million dollar floater.

Lol which player your taking about

[King Heffy]

Just now, Squamfan said:

Lol which player your taking about

Eriksson.  He simply has to go by whatever means necessary.

[Silky mitts]

48 minutes ago, J-23 said:

You are okay with letting Toffoli walk? 
 

Madden and a second for someone to only play 10 regular season games with us. 
 

Tofolli should be a priority. He fits well in our top 6. Brock and Toffoli as our 1 and 2 RW.

Yep  absolutely. Can you imagine if Tyler go backs to LA. That would be .. something.

 

I think/ hope they will keep him here. Vancouver is still a great city with a good team going forward.  Losing him though would be another blemish of many from Jim.

[Toews]

43 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

Everyone has the ability to criticize. But criticizing for the sake of criticizing is not productive, nor is it persuasive.

 

Ownership - bad. Why? In what way are you measuring bad? These value statements don't provide much value without a proper explanation. This is no different than squamfan saying "FIRE BENNING!!!".

 

Aquilini has spent a lot of money over the years to keep this team competitive. Now competitive can mean many things, but for the sake of simplicity, I am referring to the fact he is/was willing to spend money to TRY and improve the team. We can all agree that Eriksson's presence on the team is a failure, but it isn't a complete failure. Eriksson is still contributing to the team, although he is overpaid at what he does. Keep in mind Lucic and Neal are the other two 'bad' contracts that were signed in the same year, for the exact same amount. It was just a deal that didn't work out for all three Pacific Division Teams.

 

By that token, bad ownership would be like Ottawa Senator's owner, Eugene Melynk. If Aquilini is considered 'bad' to you, where does Melynk stand? He is heavily despised by the fanbase for not spending enough. Do you see the problem with your overly simplistic value-based statements?

Ownership I think has more to do than just spending money. Vancouver is also one of the bigger markets in the league so its easier to spend to the cap. Lets take the Pegulas for instance who have spent millions not only on the roster but also in developing the land around the arena, the new facilities they have built. Sabres fans were initially floored by the financial might that the Pegulas were displaying but its gone the other way for them since. I am just saying that "willing to spend money" would have been nice when we could have used a compliance buyout on Luongo. Other than that the franchise had a day of mourning when Gagner passed through waivers, Benning had to call and console the owner. 

 

I think you have to look at ownership as the one that sets the direction the franchise heads in and the previous GM is on the record stating that he advised the owner that the best course moving forward was to rebuild. The coach at the time made public remarks about the core of the team being "stale". One of the core players (Kesler) wanted out and the owner vetoes a trade at the deadline, then you hire a new GM and put him in a spot where he has to get what he can. Bob Murray later admits that he had a much better offer on the table at the deadline. Next we sign Vrbata and Miller, trade Garrison for a pick, trade that pick and 3rd for Vey and Dorsett. Instead of getting futures for Kesler, we get Bonino and Sbisa, signalling that we have no intention of rebuilding.

 

I firmly believe Aquilini is more responsible for this franchise's missteps than Benning in large part because he was the one setting the course.

Edited July 11, 2020 by Toews

[stawns]

5 hours ago, -Vintage Canuck- said:

 

[BertaNuck]

Maybe, just maybe with hockey coming back they needed to throw out a crazy rumour spice it up so they have something to talk about until puck drop 

 

 

[Coconuts]

If they're not exploring the option they're not doing their jobs. Exploring an option and actively shopping a guy are two different things.

 

Anyone who wants Brock ain't gonna get him cheap, he won't be a cap dump. If anything he'd be moved in a hockey trade to upgrade our back end. 

[theo5789]

38 minutes ago, Nuck1991 said:

louie eriksson is also petey is best friend

[Lancaster]

It will depends on his playoff performances.

If he is like Alex Semins in the post-season.... hopefully we can fleece some team in a trade.

If he plays like John Leclaire.... keep him.  

[Dazzle]

22 minutes ago, Toews said:

Ownership I think has more to do than just spending money. Vancouver is also one of the bigger markets in the league so its easier to spend to the cap. Lets take the Pegulas for instance who have spent millions not only on the roster but also in developing the land around the arena, the new facilities they have built. Sabres fans were initially floored by the financial might that the Pegulas were displaying but its gone the other way for them since. I am just saying that "willing to spend money" would have been nice when we could have used a compliance buyout on Luongo. Other than that the franchise had a day of mourning when Gagner passed through waivers, Benning had to call and console the owner. 

 

I think you have to look at ownership as the one that sets the direction the franchise heads in and the previous GM is on the record stating that he advised the owner that the best course moving forward was to rebuild. The coach at the time made public remarks about the core of the team being "stale". One of the core players (Kesler) wanted out and the owner vetoes a trade at the deadline, then you hire a new GM and put him in a spot where he has to get what he can. Bob Murray later admits that he had a much better offer on the table at the deadline. Next we sign Vrbata and Miller, trade Garrison for a pick, trade that pick and 3rd for Vey and Dorsett. Instead of getting futures for Kesler, we get Bonino and Sbisa, signalling that we have no intention of rebuilding.

 

I firmly believe Aquilini is more responsible for this franchise's missteps than Benning in large part because he was the one setting the course.

A decision made at the time is a decision revisited in hindsight.

 

It is possible that Bonino and Sbisa could have helped the Canucks. Bonino was on a very good contract - and Sbisa could have been this physical defencemen that might have rounded his game nicely here. No one could have foreseen they would have been 'meh' type players, otherwise the decisions wouldn't have been made in the first place. In other words, Aquilini was HOPING to extend the shelf life of the Sedins, or perhaps try to give them more supporting pieces. But guess what? 29 other teams (this is before Vegas) are trying to the do the same thing. Only 16 teams are technically "successful" at least from the playoff point of view. But then much of those teams in that category 'fail', and some may have given up huge pieces to make that 'push'.

 

It's easier to criticize a decision after the fact - much like many fans here have done than it is to criticize a decision at the moment. This has always been a theme for all hockey boards, but this is particularly true for CDC.

 

Here's reality: Rarely is an owner "hands off". They have a DIRECT interest in what happens on the team. They paid for the team. They EXPECT profit. However, if people aren't doing the job that he wants (realistic or not), he may feel the need to interject. Perhaps Aquilini interjected by forcing the hiring of Tortorella.

 

Since then, Aquilini has noticeably been less handsy. He sees a confidence, perhaps. He realizes maybe he has to wait. What you see is that he is human and he is learning.

 

There are so many moving parts to running a business. Posters have almost no liabilities to worry about. They make a dumb post and they get called out. Big deal. You screw up a team, you have a difficult time turning it around. The recovery may happen (NYI for example were a really bad team for many many years) - or they may not (Atlanta Thrashers).

 

I think people need more perspective before they go around putting in value-based statements like "Omg owner is so bad".

[theo5789]

5 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

If they're not exploring the option they're not doing their jobs. Exploring an option and actively shopping a guy are two different things.

 

Anyone who wants Brock ain't gonna get him cheap, he won't be a cap dump. If anything he'd be moved in a hockey trade to upgrade our back end. 

They complain about JB's work and yet when he's doing the job of GM which includes planning all scenarios, then it's also a problem.

 

They automatically assume Boeser is a cap dump when even the original rumour didn't state so, but rather some anti-Benning crowd started this and it has carried on.

 

Some are already setting the value of Boeser extremely high, so if it does come down to a trade happening, they're already going to be disappointed and ready to dump on Benning no matter what happens.