Next Season Adjustments

[Pete M]

On 9/5/2020 at 4:56 PM, DeNiro said:

@Outsiders

 

Agree with everything you said.

 

These are tough decisions but every team trying to build a contender must make them at some point. At the end of the day the core are the only ones you need to make sure you keep. The rest is managing the cap and trying to find upgrades.

 

Tanev and Marky have been great warriors and leaders for us, but locking players in to big deals when their prime years are fading is not good team building. Especially when you have depth to replace them.

 

Bennings biggest goal this offseason should be to maintain our top 6 (Miller, Pettersson, Toffoli, Pearson, Horvat, Boeser) and upgrade our defense (more puck movement). And anything left over can be used to tweak the bottom 6.

 

To do this we gotta cut salary though. The easiest way to do that without paying other teams or gutting our depth is to let Marky and Tanev go. That’s around 11 million dollars that can be used to retain Toffoli and seriously upgrade the D.

 

I don’t think this team does what it did this season with the same D core. We’re constantly one injury away from collapsing as a team. It’s not sustainable.

 

Likely some tough choices ahead. I hope JB sticks to his guns and has a clear vision.

 

 

Lessons learned from the experience with LE and even the Sedins in their later years....players do fade when they get older.

[Pete M]

On 9/5/2020 at 8:22 PM, 189lb enforcers? said:

Or... or... a defensive strategy to match the players the GM brings in.

 

the D's puck handling was horrible...it could have been because of lack of strategy, but the execution was bad.

Even the forwards couldn't get the puck out when they were standing two feet from the blue line...a lot of games are lost and won at the blue lines.

[nux_win]

On 9/5/2020 at 1:20 PM, PetterssonOrPeterson said:

2011 was the "Boston-model"

 

2020 is the "Vegas-model" 

 

lol

In the military it's a common saying that "Generals always want to fight the last war" (and that strategy rarely works).  Seems to happen in hockey too.  Instead of trying to fight the last war again we have to prepare to fight the next one.  We need to learn from the past but we need to be our own team instead of trying to copy others.  Go Canucks Go!

[Pete M]

the key going forward is the young "D" who are ready to take the next step need to take over from Tanev and Edler in order to make them the 3rd pairing guys. or push them out all together...we need the younger guys like OJ, Rafferty, Tryamkin, Brisebois and Rathbone to make this happen....however, a trade to get Dobson would help.

Edited September 7, 2020 by Pete M

[stawns]

13 hours ago, BarnBurner said:

He did struggle but by the third game was gaining confidence. 

 

I'm not sure how much more pressure you could subject him to than what he just faced and surpassed everyone's expectations. 

 

If Marky is willing to sign a team friendly deal, fine. But you protect Demko.

I love Demko and have been on his bandwagon from day one.  However, he struggled to be the every day starter when Marky went down.  I have zero questions about his ability to do so, just that I don't think he's quiite ready to be the everyday goalie and signing Marky to a deal with no ED protection would probably be the best move

[DeNiro]

10 minutes ago, stawns said:

I love Demko and have been on his bandwagon from day one.  However, he struggled to be the every day starter when Marky went down.  I have zero questions about his ability to do so, just that I don't think he's quiite ready to be the everyday goalie and signing Marky to a deal with no ED protection would probably be the best move

I think that’s what everyone is hoping for. That is the best case scenario here.

 

However Marsktroms camp is not likely to go for that. That’s basically saying to him that they’re not sure if he’s their guy yet. Unless they offer him more than market value there’s no motivation to both take less and not get expansion protection.

 

Thats why you either sign him with a NMC and trade Demko, or let him walk. I don’t see any in between. Holding onto Demko through the season is too risky and would lead to us having to pay Seattle to not take him.

[stawns]

Just now, DeNiro said:

I think that’s what everyone is hoping for. That is the best case scenario here.

 

However Marsktroms camp is not likely to go for that. That’s basically saying to him that they’re not sure if he’s their guy yet. Unless they offer him more than market value there’s no motivation to both take less and not get expansion protection.

 

Thats why you either sign him with a NMC and trade Demko, or let him walk. I don’t see any in between. Holding onto Demko through the season is too risky and would lead to us having to pay Seattle to not take him.

I agree, it's a longshot.  However, there's no guarantee that Seattle picks him and if they do, it's close to the city he has called home.  Still, longshot for sure

[JM_]

20 minutes ago, stawns said:

I love Demko and have been on his bandwagon from day one.  However, he struggled to be the every day starter when Marky went down.  I have zero questions about his ability to do so, just that I don't think he's quiite ready to be the everyday goalie and signing Marky to a deal with no ED protection would probably be the best move

It sure looks like Demko got over that though. His confidence going into next season should be quite high after his 3 game gem.  The whole team was struggling as well. 

 

[stawns]

Just now, Robert Long said:

It sure looks like Demko got over that though. His confidence going into next season should be quite high after his 3 game gem.  The whole team was struggling as well. 

 

I dn't disagree and no one needs to sell me on TD. However, this was three games.......if it turns out that he still struggles then it's going to be tough on a young team.  I don't think they can afford ro take a step back

[JM_]

9 minutes ago, DeNiro said:

I think that’s what everyone is hoping for. That is the best case scenario here.

 

However Marsktroms camp is not likely to go for that. That’s basically saying to him that they’re not sure if he’s their guy yet. Unless they offer him more than market value there’s no motivation to both take less and not get expansion protection.

 

Thats why you either sign him with a NMC and trade Demko, or let him walk. I don’t see any in between. Holding onto Demko through the season is too risky and would lead to us having to pay Seattle to not take him.

it is possible that we trade Demko just prior to the expansion draft next year if we end up keeping both guys.

 

I do see other teams offering Marky protection, more money and more term than we can, particularly if Loui can't be moved. 

 

I'm hoping some kind of Loui resolution happens soon, that &^@#ing contract is in the way of so many other moves. 

[JM_]

1 minute ago, stawns said:

I dn't disagree and no one needs to sell me on TD. However, this was three games.......if it turns out that he still struggles then it's going to be tough on a young team.  I don't think they can afford ro take a step back

for me it was the mental toughness he showed more than anything. Some guys choke under pressure, he didn't. Once you've proven that to yourself i think you reach a new confidence level.

 

Demko isn't ready for something like 65 games but I do think he's ready for something closer to an even split around ~50 with a veteran. 

[NewbieCanuckFan]

5 minutes ago, Robert Long said:

for me it was the mental toughness he showed more than anything. Some guys choke under pressure, he didn't. Once you've proven that to yourself i think you reach a new confidence level.

 

Demko isn't ready for something like 65 games but I do think he's ready for something closer to an even split around ~50 with a veteran. 

They'll be a significant drop-off in performance if you're going with a veteran & cheap journeyman goalie to handle 40 games imho.  Might end up costing up the playoffs to be honest unless we score a ton of goals.

Edited September 7, 2020 by NewbieCanuckFan

[JM_]

3 minutes ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

They'll be a significant drop-off in performance if you're going with a veteran & cheap journeyman goalie to handle 40 games imho.  Might end up costing up the playoffs to be honest unless we score a ton of goals.

depends on what else we bring in tho. If letting Marky walk allows us to significantly upgrade the d group then its not a step back. Its risky tho, but so is a long term Marly deal. Either way has risks. 

 

Edited September 7, 2020 by Robert Long

[Gurn]

7 minutes ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

They'll be a significant drop-off in performance if you're going with a veteran & cheap journeyman goalie to handle 40 games imho.  Might end up costing up the playoffs to be honest unless we score a ton of goals.

Depends on which vet and which "journeyman" goalie you have.

[NewbieCanuckFan]

6 minutes ago, gurn said:

Depends on which vet and which "journeyman" goalie you have.

Even Demko would himself would be hard pressed to match Marky's performance this past regular season over the course of a long year.  A number of teams will be looking for goalies making good ones scarcer.  Markstrom carried the team many nights (much like Demko did in the Vegas series).  An average starting goalie couldn't do that let alone a platoon'd goalie.  We couldn't offer that veteran much money (which makes the job for Benning even harder).

Edited September 7, 2020 by NewbieCanuckFan

[189lb enforcers?]

2 hours ago, Pete M said:

the D's puck handling was horrible...it could have been because of lack of strategy, but the execution was bad.

Even the forwards couldn't get the puck out when they were standing two feet from the blue line...a lot of games are lost and won at the blue lines.

Execution of what, passes? 

The flip pass 50/50 play... 

Minor hockey-like exit strategy.

 

I know what you are saying and appreciate you coming to this side of the discussion.
 

In a thread meant to capture our armchair GM recommendations or adjustments, I was starting to wonder if coaching was part of it. 

 

First, I give Vegas full credit as being a nearly perfect enemy for the Canucks to matchup against. 
 

However, once the dust settles, I think analytics will quantify the claims of my *expert eye test, concerning how and where the Canucks’ coaching systems require improvement. 
 

It’s easy to state that goaltending, EP and QH, plus timely Horvat and Miller snipes, was the chewing gum used to hold together the team’s successes, but I’ll leave that for others to pick up through the offseason discussion in here. 
 

Neither fans nor the media will allow anyone to forget how incredibly lopsided some shifts, periods and games were in favour our opponents, which narrative will be soon quantified by stat geeks out there looking to expose the Canucks’ Coach of the Year crap for what it is. 
 

I remember Crawford’s entertaining offensive system having surrendered many odd man rushes against, only to have one of the worst goalies at side to side movement in the net being absolutely destroyed, and Crow not figuring that out, nor did the GM. Same goes for the players, deployment and coaching of our players today, just different.
 

For years now, many on here recognized various coaching issues, with the defensive structure being the typical whipping boy, with sprinklings of Newell in there to spell of the Baumer bombs. Where did that all go? I assume the answer has to do with how far the team came, having exceeded expectations, etc. 
 

IMO, it’s interesting to now see claims which first seek new roster pieces, instead of examining coaching. 

 

IMO, yes, definitely it was the luck of having our kid stars and the goaltending which pulled this often dominated team through several series, which may have briefly disguised a lot of the failed tactics of the structure. I don’t believe that upgrading our players is enough to overcome the shortcomings witnessed throughout these playoffs. I believe analytics will show most of what I’m trying to present here, but the coaching will make players look pretty bad, not the other way around, which is a shame not to be able to have a proper venue to fully examine and discuss. 
 

Fix the plan, then bring in players to execute or expect similar results. 

Edited September 7, 2020 by 189lb enforcers?

[Pete M]

Imagine if JB signed Eric Staal instead of LE...Staal would have been the exact player we needed to get us past Vegas...considering LE didn't even play the last few games....opportunity cost is what this is...Staal was available the same year LE signed and Staal signed for 3.5M for 3 years with Minny...coulda, shoulda, woulda.

[189lb enforcers?]

Just now, Pete M said:

Imagine if JB signed Eric Staal instead of LE...Staal would have been the exact player we needed to get us past Vegas...considering LE didn't even play the last few games....opportunity cost is what this is...Staal was available the same year LE signed and Staal signed for 3.5M for 3 years with Minny...coulda, shoulda, woulda.

Staal was still an excellent 1B or 2A C at the time too.

Love his game, all the way back to the beginning. 
Great guy too, 

[ruilin96]

4 minutes ago, Pete M said:

Imagine if JB signed Eric Staal instead of LE...Staal would have been the exact player we needed to get us past Vegas...considering LE didn't even play the last few games....opportunity cost is what this is...Staal was available the same year LE signed and Staal signed for 3.5M for 3 years with Minny...coulda, shoulda, woulda.

I think Eric Staal was looking to sign with a playoff team at the time and Vancouver was not on his radar. If we signed Eric Staal, we would've had better records in 2016-17 and that could be enough to drop us to a spot where EP won't be available and the following season, it could've been enough to drop us out of QH's draft position as well.

[DeNiro]

40 minutes ago, Robert Long said:

it is possible that we trade Demko just prior to the expansion draft next year if we end up keeping both guys.

 

I do see other teams offering Marky protection, more money and more term than we can, particularly if Loui can't be moved. 

 

I'm hoping some kind of Loui resolution happens soon, that &^@#ing contract is in the way of so many other moves. 

Yea but what if Demko outplays Marsktrom and we’re still forced to trade him?

 

Also what if teams call our bluff and lowball us because they know it’s their offer or nothing? We’re not going to get more value for him next offseason if we’re going to trade him.
 

Edited September 7, 2020 by DeNiro