Canucks End of Season Media Availability @ Noon

[khay]

4 hours ago, MikeyD said:

There's a difference between the defensive style that AV and other defensive coaches implement to what the Canucks did. We literally had no forecheck for 55 minutes of hockey games. It's not like we were playing the trap. We didn't even do that. It looked as if we half-assed a good defensive strategy. 

I'd rather us play the trap game than give up the offensive zone and keep them to the perimeter.

 

That bit where JB compliments the team for playing hard in the defensive zone and keeping them to the outside, well it sounds like that was by design. It was truly a bitter thing to hear. The coaches kind of gave up I guess?

 

 

[runtzguy]

2 hours ago, khay said:

But if we lose all 3, we are not making the playoffs next season.

 

We barely made the playoffs this season with Tanev and Markstrom playing at their best and with Toffoli replacing Boeser's production.

 

Can't afford all 3 anyways, but we gotta sign at least Tanev. Replacing a top4 RHD is going to be extremely difficult.

 

 

Tbh, I think even with those 3 we will barely make the playoffs and probably not make the playoffs IMO

Edited September 9, 2020 by runtzguy

[PhillipBlunt]

This team is a dangerous one. They’ve a taste of the combat that the playoffs is, and they’re hooked. 

[peaches5]

I don't understand why JB keeps opening his mouth and telling the whole damn world what he plans to do. He just takes any leverage he may have by making these public comments...

[AlwaysACanuckFan]

2 hours ago, PhillipBlunt said:

This team is a dangerous one. They’ve a taste of the combat that the playoffs is, and they’re hooked. 

Got anymore of them playoffs?

[theo5789]

1 hour ago, peaches5 said:

I don't understand why JB keeps opening his mouth and telling the whole damn world what he plans to do. He just takes any leverage he may have by making these public comments...

And if he doesn't, then fans will complain that he has no direction. Even with his big mouth, he was still able to acquire JT Miller (at good trade value) and Tyler Myers (speculation was he was looking for more money and term than he got) last year. Leverage didn't seem to be an issue.

[theo5789]

3 hours ago, khay said:

I'd rather us play the trap game than give up the offensive zone and keep them to the perimeter.

 

That bit where JB compliments the team for playing hard in the defensive zone and keeping them to the outside, well it sounds like that was by design. It was truly a bitter thing to hear. The coaches kind of gave up I guess?

 

 

By design where we took a heavy favourite to 7 games, knocked out the defending champs and won another tough series. It's not giving up, it's making do with what we have and with the scheduling and we pushed this team to the limit. Many didn't even think we would make the playoffs this year, let alone have the success that we did.

 

The system we played gave up 2 goals in 3 games (2 more were added on an empty net in game 7) with a goalie that hadn't played for months prior to his first. We were a Brock Boeser grade A chance away from potentially winning 3 games in a row against a strong Vegas team up 3-1 wanting to "step on our necks". Doesn't sound like any giving up to me from the players, coaching nor management.

[peaches5]

36 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

And if he doesn't, then fans will complain that he has no direction. Even with his big mouth, he was still able to acquire JT Miller (at good trade value) and Tyler Myers (speculation was he was looking for more money and term than he got) last year. Leverage didn't seem to be an issue.

He overpaid for Myers and gave him a pretty damn good NTC as well. He has lowered the value of Virtanen and basically told Markstrom's agent we want two goalies we aren't going to roll with one.. which takes away bargaining to get Markstrom to sign cheaper or without a NMC. If he gives Markstrom a NMC for this expansion and we lose Demko because of it he should lose his job. He keeps saying we are going to sign Markstrom.. like no. If he isn't going to come to terms with what fits with this team he is out. He throws 6m+ at Markstrom with a full NMC after what Demko just did for this team.. just no. 

[Angry Goose]

Some good questions and some candid responses by JB and TG on SN650.  Neither guy sounded complacent.

 

 

 

 

[Angry Goose]

2 hours ago, peaches5 said:

I don't understand why JB keeps opening his mouth and telling the whole damn world what he plans to do. He just takes any leverage he may have by making these public comments...

It's not really anything more than what people already generally know.  

[189lb enforcers?]

1 hour ago, theo5789 said:

By design where we took a heavy favourite to 7 games, knocked out the defending champs and won another tough series. It's not giving up, it's making do with what we have and with the scheduling and we pushed this team to the limit. Many didn't even think we would make the playoffs this year, let alone have the success that we did.

 

The system we played gave up 2 goals in 3 games (2 more were added on an empty net in game 7) with a goalie that hadn't played for months prior to his first. We were a Brock Boeser grade A chance away from potentially winning 3 games in a row against a strong Vegas team up 3-1 wanting to "step on our necks". Doesn't sound like any giving up to me from the players, coaching nor management.

Well, that’s one way of looking at it. 

By design, wasn’t it around the 12 minutes left in the 3rd mark in game 7, and after a few PPs and a 5 minute major, that the Canucks registered their 6th shot of the game? 
 

By design, was Demko expected to stop 500 shots?

 

We came within a hair of winning, sure, but inversely Vegas had exponentially more opportunity-hairs to win that game, but Demko put on a show which will most likely not be duplicated by a Canuck goalie. 
 

While I agree that zero players on the Canucks quit, I emphatically disagree where coaching is concerned.
 

The Canucks were strategically exploited by Vegas, but Vegas apparently found it difficult to eliminate EP and QH and a few Miller snipes. Horvat winning draws made this series as close as it was, but on the next pass or two were on TG, as plays died or we were hemmed in. 6 shots registered, half way through the 3rd, says all there is to say to dispel “how close we came” deflections to optimistic ifs and buts. 
 

It was an ass kicking, statistically... by design, I assume. Can’t have it both ways. 

[WestCoastDave]

Benning also said “We have a lot of money to work with.We’re going to just have to decide what players that we want to sign here going forward. And other players maybe can move on and recover draft picks. That’s the circle of life in our business.” Also, “We’re going to have to make some tough decisions maybe even on some young players to make sure we give ourselves the best chance next year to be competitive and to keep growing as a franchise.”

 

So it sounds like Benning wants to use a chunk of  our 17 million available cap space to resigning Markstrom, Toffoli, and Tanev while trading away some of our young roster players like Virtanen, Stecher, Gaudette, etc. for draft picks. while replacing them with cheaper prospects as part of the solution.  Trading RFAs for draft picks mean less contracts that need a raise.  It might work if the those 3 agree to a reasonable/discount deal.

Edited September 9, 2020 by WestCoastDave

[theo5789]

7 hours ago, peaches5 said:

He overpaid for Myers and gave him a pretty damn good NTC as well. He has lowered the value of Virtanen and basically told Markstrom's agent we want two goalies we aren't going to roll with one.. which takes away bargaining to get Markstrom to sign cheaper or without a NMC. If he gives Markstrom a NMC for this expansion and we lose Demko because of it he should lose his job. He keeps saying we are going to sign Markstrom.. like no. If he isn't going to come to terms with what fits with this team he is out. He throws 6m+ at Markstrom with a full NMC after what Demko just did for this team.. just no. 

This "overpaid" thing is the constant debate. Overpaid in comparison to what? How much do top 4 dmen in UFA cost? You could choose to forget, but the speculation prior to him signing was he was going to get 7.5 for like 6 years (at this point, I was hoping we wouldn't do it). So by that metric, he signed for under. His NTC is a modified one where he can only choose 10 teams he wouldn't go to and he doesn't need protection from the expansion (we may still but it's our choice), so that's hardly unmoveable. Myers plays the most 5v5 minutes and we are a better team with him in the lineup than when he's not.

 

Lowered Virtanen's value how? It doesn't take a genius to see that more was expected of Jake. If JB said anything remotely like he was satisfied with Jake's play, he would also get crucified for thinking so. If we plan on keeping Jake, then this could lower his next contract and he will probably sign a 1 year cheap deal to prove himself. I don't think it lowers his trade value at all by what he said, Jake's play did that on its own (to be clear, I was okay with his play, but I was hoping he would step up in the playoffs).

 

As for Markstrom/Demko, most teams now run with two good goalies, a lot of good teams do. Saying so gives confidence to Demko and hopefully gets Marky to agree to take less. Losing Demko was always going to be a risk, that also hasn't changed. Demko had a good stretch there in a time of need, but he hasn't proven anything over a long season. Those 3 games don't take away that Marky has been our MVP for the last season and a half and playoffs up until his injury. No contract has been thrown at Marky yet. Benning in February or so said that they hope Marky signs a fair contract and if they can't get it to work, then they are comfortable with going with Demko (not blatantly said like that, but pretty much the point). So seems like a lot of complaint over not much.

[Goal:thecup]

I think it is premature to think Jake is going to be traded.

JB's comments translate directly to negotiations with Jake's agent now and arbitration if they break down.

His comparison with Tuch is the prime example, of course, but talking of draft picks, and other young players at similar points in their careers, seem to be adding to Big Jim's negotiating arsenal.

I believe it is the wrong time to trade Jake as he had a pretty good year and made progress, even if he is a frustrating player for fans.

It would be a mistake, imo, to get very little back for Jake, when we can re-sign him (he is a RFA w/arb rights) on a tight contract, perhaps for less than market, at this point.

Jake might be available for a 2 - 3 year deal, at double his last salary (i.e. 2 x $1,250,000 = $2,500,000); gives him a nice raise but also lets him know that he has to continue to improve to land his next (big?) deal.

[mll]

10 minutes ago, Goal:thecup said:

I think it is premature to think Jake is going to be traded.

JB's comments translate directly to negotiations with Jake's agent now and arbitration if they break down.

His comparison with Tuch is the prime example, of course, but talking of draft picks, and other young players at similar points in their careers, seem to be adding to Big Jim's negotiating arsenal.

I believe it is the wrong time to trade Jake as he had a pretty good year and made progress, even if he is a frustrating player for fans.

It would be a mistake, imo, to get very little back for Jake, when we can re-sign him (he is a RFA w/arb rights) on a tight contract, perhaps for less than market, at this point.

Jake might be available for a 2 - 3 year deal, at double his last salary (i.e. 2 x $1,250,000 = $2,500,000); gives him a nice raise but also lets him know that he has to continue to improve to land his next (big?) deal.

Those comments have no impact in arbitration.  It's a neutral arbitrator who might not even have any kind of hockey knowledge.  The two sides state their case and he decides which arguments he prefers.  Often it ends up being a compromise where it's close to the half-way point.  

[peaches5]

1 hour ago, theo5789 said:

This "overpaid" thing is the constant debate. Overpaid in comparison to what? How much do top 4 dmen in UFA cost? You could choose to forget, but the speculation prior to him signing was he was going to get 7.5 for like 6 years (at this point, I was hoping we wouldn't do it). So by that metric, he signed for under. His NTC is a modified one where he can only choose 10 teams he wouldn't go to and he doesn't need protection from the expansion (we may still but it's our choice), so that's hardly unmoveable. Myers plays the most 5v5 minutes and we are a better team with him in the lineup than when he's not.

 

Lowered Virtanen's value how? It doesn't take a genius to see that more was expected of Jake. If JB said anything remotely like he was satisfied with Jake's play, he would also get crucified for thinking so. If we plan on keeping Jake, then this could lower his next contract and he will probably sign a 1 year cheap deal to prove himself. I don't think it lowers his trade value at all by what he said, Jake's play did that on its own (to be clear, I was okay with his play, but I was hoping he would step up in the playoffs).

 

As for Markstrom/Demko, most teams now run with two good goalies, a lot of good teams do. Saying so gives confidence to Demko and hopefully gets Marky to agree to take less. Losing Demko was always going to be a risk, that also hasn't changed. Demko had a good stretch there in a time of need, but he hasn't proven anything over a long season. Those 3 games don't take away that Marky has been our MVP for the last season and a half and playoffs up until his injury. No contract has been thrown at Marky yet. Benning in February or so said that they hope Marky signs a fair contract and if they can't get it to work, then they are comfortable with going with Demko (not blatantly said like that, but pretty much the point). So seems like a lot of complaint over not much.

No one was saying Myers was getting 7.5m absolutely no one. It was rumoured all along Vancouver was giving him 6 and no other team was going over 5 and Myers wanted to come home and play here... JB overpaid for a journeyman dman that will likely cost us in the future similar to Eriksson except that Myers is at least serviceable. He has to stop the bad contracts. You can get away with it when you are a non playoff team but now that has to end. 

 

He didn't need to say anything. He could have just said with the cap changes will come he didn't need to be like we tried everything with Jake blah blah.. he could have just said we gotta make changes. Telling everyone you are giving up on a player basically... is diminishing the players value. 

 

If you run with two goalies then one can't be making 6m+ and you can't give them a NMC going into the expansion draft when you have a young stud who is very likely to be picked up. People need to stop referring to Markstrom as if he is some established goaltender... He only just became a starter and his first playoffs were pretty meh. That is my issue right there... Demko came in had an unreal playoffs and Markstrom had plenty of games to find his game and he was shaky he did not look comfortable in the playoffs.. I've said it before but even the games he ended up playing well in he battled.. and got very fortunate in them... That is concerning to me, He whiffed on a wrist shot from the blueline with no screen that went off the post in game 6 against St.Louis.. It looked like Vegas and St.Louis were both exposing his glove hand which looked weak and maybe that is a common theme moving forward as teams start to break down his game now that he has become a starter.. He is a good goalie but I am not losing Demko over him. We can easily sign a veteran goalie to share the load next year. If this team relies on Markstrom or Demko to carry them into the playoffs then they aren't good enough.  

 

The point is that with the signings like Eriksson the holes on this team can't be filled that easily if you sign Markstrom.  If you go with Demko and a vet for cheap you can probably get another top 4 dman and re-sign Toffoli and if you can find a way to dump a contract you can improve even more. I have a feeling he is going to end up sending a guy like Juolevi, a top prospect, to Seattle in order to keep Demko. It is going to be another Theodore like trade and JB will be like oh well we had other guys to fill his spot blah blah when it all can be avoided. or he will just lose Demko...  It is not smart management with the expansion draft/cap. 

 

We will see though.. I won't pass judgement until we see what Markstrom gets but there better not be a NMC.

 

[theo5789]

7 hours ago, 189lb enforcers? said:

Well, that’s one way of looking at it. 

By design, wasn’t it around the 12 minutes left in the 3rd mark in game 7, and after a few PPs and a 5 minute major, that the Canucks registered their 6th shot of the game? 
 

By design, was Demko expected to stop 500 shots?

 

We came within a hair of winning, sure, but inversely Vegas had exponentially more opportunity-hairs to win that game, but Demko put on a show which will most likely not be duplicated by a Canuck goalie. 
 

While I agree that zero players on the Canucks quit, I emphatically disagree where coaching is concerned.
 

The Canucks were strategically exploited by Vegas, but Vegas apparently found it difficult to eliminate EP and QH and a few Miller snipes. Horvat winning draws made this series as close as it was, but on the next pass or two were on TG, as plays died or we were hemmed in. 6 shots registered, half way through the 3rd, says all there is to say to dispel “how close we came” deflections to optimistic ifs and buts. 
 

It was an ass kicking, statistically... by design, I assume. Can’t have it both ways. 

Don't look at it in a singular game view. Look at through the entire playoffs. Yes we were dominated on the shot clock and possession time, but how many goals did they have until around the 6 minute mark of the 3rd period? Up until that point, they had 1 goal in since the start of Game 5. It was a strategy that was needed based on the circumstances and it was working. If Boeser scored on his grade A chance, it could've been a whole different story.

 

When you look at the bigger picture, everyone knew Vegas was the dominant team even for the playoffs and even during the season. Everyone thought St Louis was going to destroy us (given how many people wanted us to face Dallas instead). We were actually favoured against Minni, but after game 1, everyone was writing us off again. Now factor in the schedule where the schedule was more compact (there's never back to back in the playoffs and we had played an unprecedented 4 these playoffs) and had to jump from one series win right into the next series despite finishing our St Louis series in 6 rather than 7. It's no surprise that this would be a gassed team. So we had to alter the strategy to conserve energy and capitalize on the breakthrough chances that we do get against a better opponent. We were also playing down 3-1, so we had to expel comeback energy over 3 games.

 

The players on the team didn't quit because Green gave them a plan that made them believe in themselves that they had a chance. The resiliency that they showed was not just through the players, but through coaching as well. EP/QH/Miller finished their opportunities, but they were significant because the team had put them in a position to make their goals significant. Horvat's faceoff abilities were a positive, but it's on Green to maximize that effectiveness. People were questioning why didn't Jake play more, well he didn't display the same drive as those players that were mentioned, so Green gave the minutes to those players (even if it meant not balancing out the minutes more, but he wants the players out there that want to win).

 

You look at the regular season and the numbers for Vegas against any team is pretty much the same. They've averaged more shots for than against. Green knew what was coming and was weathering the storm and got the team to buy into pushing their shots outside the best the could and sacrificing the body. It is not a system that should be deployed for an entire regular season, but it was a system that was needed for the given situation and like I said, it nearly worked and pushed us into a game 7 we likely shouldn't have played. Even as optimistic as I am, I never thought we were going to push the series as far as we did. I am so proud of this team for what they've accomplished despite not achieving the ultimate goal (although the goal this year I imagine was to just make the playoffs and with no burden of expectations beyond that). If anything, this shows that Green is able to adapt and strategize to try and get wins based on different scenarios (including the other series), something many seem to harp on about him not being able to do so.

 

The ass kicking was always going to be there, it was a strategic one that lasted until 6 minutes left in game 7. Hearing the whining and complaining all year about this team/coaching, I imagine many never even thought we would get to even that point.

[theo5789]

6 minutes ago, peaches5 said:

No one was saying Myers was getting 7.5m absolutely no one. It was rumoured all along Vancouver was giving him 6 and no other team was going over 5 and Myers wanted to come home and play here... JB overpaid for a journeyman dman that will likely cost us in the future similar to Eriksson except that Myers is at least serviceable. He has to stop the bad contracts. You can get away with it when you are a non playoff team but now that has to end. 

 

He was not a journeyman dman. If you think so, then you don't know what a journeyman is. And like I said, he only got 5 years and he only has modified trade protection. He is paid to be a top 4 dman for us and has been (which eases Tanev's minutes, so by effect allows him to stay healthier along with playing with Hughes).

 

6 minutes ago, peaches5 said:

He didn't need to say anything. He could have just said with the cap changes will come he didn't need to be like we tried everything with Jake blah blah.. he could have just said we gotta make changes. Telling everyone you are giving up on a player basically... is diminishing the players value. 

When did he say he was giving up on him? He said he expected more from Jake and he said changes will need to be made which may involve moving some young players. Just because some people are trying to piece it together doesn't mean JB said anything about giving up on him.

 

6 minutes ago, peaches5 said:

If you run with two goalies then one can't be making 6m+ and you can't give them a NMC going into the expansion draft when you have a young stud who is very likely to be picked up. People need to stop referring to Markstrom as if he is some established goaltender... He only just became a starter and his first playoffs were pretty meh. That is my issue right there... Demko came in had an unreal playoffs and Markstrom had plenty of games to find his game and he was shaky he did not look comfortable in the playoffs.. I've said it before but even the games he ended up playing well in he battled.. and got very fortunate in them... That is concerning to me, He whiffed on a wrist shot from the blueline with no screen that went off the post in game 6 against St.Louis.. It looked like Vegas and St.Louis were both exposing his glove hand which looked weak and maybe that is a common theme moving forward as teams start to break down his game now that he has become a starter.. He is a good goalie but I am not losing Demko over him. We can easily sign a veteran goalie to share the load next year. If this team relies on Markstrom or Demko to carry them into the playoffs then they aren't good enough.  

 

The point is that with the signings like Eriksson the holes on this team can't be filled that easily if you sign Markstrom.  If you go with Demko and a vet for cheap you can probably get another top 4 dman and re-sign Toffoli and if you can find a way to dump a contract you can improve even more. I have a feeling he is going to end up sending a guy like Juolevi, a top prospect, to Seattle in order to keep Demko. It is going to be another Theodore like trade and JB will be like oh well we had other guys to fill his spot blah blah when it all can be avoided. or he will just lose Demko...  It is not smart management with the expansion draft/cap. 

 

We will see though.. I won't pass judgement until we see what Markstrom gets but there better not be a NMC.

 

Demko has yet to prove what he can do over a full season being the main go-to guy. Marky has proven he can play a heavier load. Let's not forget that Demko looked shaky when Marky went down during the regular season. Marky's been the team MVP, 6 million a year is hardly superstar goalie numbers league-wide. Markstrom was a big part of us winning 2 series, Demko played well in his 3 games (in our bunkered down system), so we are going to throw Marky away for nothing because of this? All Demko did was take away some leverage that Marky's agent could've used, not make Marky obsolete.

 

Having two good goalies is a luxury to have and knowing every night we can trust our netminder. We will see what happens during expansion, but no point fretting about that now. We want to have the strongest team we can get with what we have and make another run next season. You're just expecting the worst (sounding like the people that were dumping on the Miller trade) and projecting it on management. Eddie Lack looked promising in some games and fizzled, Cory Schneider looked very promising and fizzled. Both had injuries that hampered them, but let's not forget that Demko has had a couple of concussions already as well, so you never know with goaltending. If for some reason we do lose Demko, we have DiPietro who looks very promising as well. We are in a good situation.

[Goal:thecup]

1 hour ago, mll said:

Those comments have no impact in arbitration.  It's a neutral arbitrator who might not even have any kind of hockey knowledge.  The two sides state their case and he decides which arguments he prefers.  Often it ends up being a compromise where it's close to the half-way point.  

Thanks for the clarification.

I was thinking more of the negotiations leading up to a possible arbitration than the arb process itself.

JB's comments seem more intended for Jake and his agent than for possible trade targets for Jake.

Cheers!

[tas]

2 hours ago, Goal:thecup said:

I think it is premature to think Jake is going to be traded.

JB's comments translate directly to negotiations with Jake's agent now and arbitration if they break down.

His comparison with Tuch is the prime example, of course, but talking of draft picks, and other young players at similar points in their careers, seem to be adding to Big Jim's negotiating arsenal.

I believe it is the wrong time to trade Jake as he had a pretty good year and made progress, even if he is a frustrating player for fans.

It would be a mistake, imo, to get very little back for Jake, when we can re-sign him (he is a RFA w/arb rights) on a tight contract, perhaps for less than market, at this point.

Jake might be available for a 2 - 3 year deal, at double his last salary (i.e. 2 x $1,250,000 = $2,500,000); gives him a nice raise but also lets him know that he has to continue to improve to land his next (big?) deal.

it was obvious Jake would be traded the second he didn't make the roster out of covid camp. no more chances.