rychicken Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 2 hours ago, nux4lyfe said: On paper, I honestly think that we have a great team. It could be our system or coaching but the players change so much that there's no time to make any chemistry..It'll work out once they gel or someone come's in that knows how to utilize this awesome talent and that is one thing you cannot deny. Uhm, I will deny it - we do not have a great team 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadianRugby Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 39 minutes ago, ImConfused said: But Vrbata was a machine and Miller was pretty okay too lol Well worth it IMO Yeah they were good players. That was the problem. Chasing a playoff spot instead of rebuilding. A couple of years later all our vets had lost their value or walked for zero returns. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Got the Babych Posted January 25, 2021 Author Share Posted January 25, 2021 52 minutes ago, ImConfused said: But Vrbata was a machine and Miller was pretty okay too lol Well worth it IMO GMJB? Just kidding, but that pretty much sums up the argument for a retool vs rebuild. And here we are now. Yes, they were good, but our run was over. They helped to reach a final playoff appearance, and a quick first round exit. Who knows, maybe they had a chance, I'm not going to pretend I wasn't pumped that season. But the more important part, which succinctly makes my point (thank you), is that they were two valuable pieces that were past their prime and sure to decline. The downward spiral really gained speed the following year and it was clear it was time to start over. Guess what we did with these guys? Rode them hard in a futile cause, let them walk in free agency. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris12345 Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 I am a big believer in the top 100 picks. First round picks are great but you get some gems in the top 100. I don't think the Canucks accumulated enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldoescobar Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 Marination of youg guys for 8-10 years and playoff suceesssess will come in the future! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patel Bure Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 (edited) I’ll respond more a little later but let’s look at our current roster: Miller-Pettersson-Boeser Pettersson and Boeser were picks, and Miller was acquired with a 1st rounder. Pearson-Horvat-Hoglander Hoglander was a pick, Pearson was basically had for McCann, a 2nd, and a 4th, while Horvat was drafted by the previous regime yet developed by the current one. Roussel-Gaudette-Virtanen Gaudette and Virtanen were selected by the current regime. Roussel-Beagle-Motte Motte, a young player, was had for Thomas Vanek Edler-Schmidt Hughes-Myers (Hughes = draft pick) Juolevi-Hamonic (OJ = pick) Holtby Demko (draft pick) Coming in April = Podkolzin (pick) + likely coming next year = Tryamkin (pick). Rathbone and Dipietro (pick) are also in our system. So for all this talk about the Canucks having “bled picks,” we sure do have a ton of players that were drafted and developed within our system that have successfully made the team (or will be debuting in the not so distant future). Perhaps Benning and management knew that our drafting was a strong suit? And that the way to build teams is to have an appropriate balance of kids and vets? Seriously - what team in the league is exclusively built with draft picks and/or has a roster full of 18-20 year olds? This whole notion that Benning has “bled picks” to the point of detriment is a ridiculous one. Look at our roster! And yes - while I concede that some of our current vet contracts have hindered us, all/most of these contracts will be off the books in two years.....and we will still have guys like Pettersson, Horvat, Hughes, Boeser, Podkolzin, Miller, Hoglander, Demko, etc., all entering their prime years. We can talk about the negatives of the contracts of Ryan Miller, Gudbranson, Sutter, Beagle, Roussel, Eriksson, Ferland, Myers, etc., but the truth of the matter is their presence allowed for the kids in our system to either play lower in the line-up (which aided in their development) or play on the farm for a longer period of time (which aided in their development). The presence of these vets allowed for the kids to not be thrown into the fire.......unless they were ready right away (ie Petey, Brock, Hughes). Edited January 25, 2021 by DarkIndianRises 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c00kies Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 Vancouver should have re-signed Toffoli, because even if you have a replacement in the future, he's a cost friendly top 6 forward in his prime, and the elite teams have more options than needed (7 top 6 players, 3 2nd pairing dmen, etc...). When Chicago was starting to be competitive, they signed Hossa, who probably wasn't looked at as a must have, but gave Chicago options and depth. Vancouver simply doesn't have depth anywhere! We have 4 solid top 6 forwards (petey, Miller, boeser, and Horvat), 3 top 9 (pearson, virtanen, and hoglander), and depth forwards lacking speed and skill. On defense, we potentially have 2 top line dmen (Schmidt, Hughes), a couple 2nd pairing (edler, myers), and a bunch of mysteries in the bottom pairing. The biggest issue on defense might be the top 4 not playing well, but the depth is questionable too! For goalies, we potentially have 2 good goalies, but one is still untested and the other one is trying to regain his former game. I think if our top guys play better, then we don't look nearly as bad as we have, but the depth needs an overhaul. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Convincing John Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 I don’t think the plan matters. The manager does. Good management is the key to a rebuild. One could say Montreal and Dallas retooled, they did a nice job because they had a good plan. Philly and Col did a rebuild, they also did a great job because they executed their vision. Edmonton, Phx, Fla. failed at both because they had crappy management. you need a good manager who surrounds himself with the right people. Doesn’t matter how you do it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patel Bure Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 1 hour ago, c00kies said: Vancouver should have re-signed Toffoli, because even if you have a replacement in the future, he's a cost friendly top 6 forward in his prime, and the elite teams have more options than needed (7 top 6 players, 3 2nd pairing dmen, etc...). When Chicago was starting to be competitive, they signed Hossa, who probably wasn't looked at as a must have, but gave Chicago options and depth. Vancouver simply doesn't have depth anywhere! We have 4 solid top 6 forwards (petey, Miller, boeser, and Horvat), 3 top 9 (pearson, virtanen, and hoglander), and depth forwards lacking speed and skill. On defense, we potentially have 2 top line dmen (Schmidt, Hughes), a couple 2nd pairing (edler, myers), and a bunch of mysteries in the bottom pairing. The biggest issue on defense might be the top 4 not playing well, but the depth is questionable too! For goalies, we potentially have 2 good goalies, but one is still untested and the other one is trying to regain his former game. I think if our top guys play better, then we don't look nearly as bad as we have, but the depth needs an overhaul. From what I gather, the Canucks actually were trying to sign Toffoli. They wanted to move Brock for a 1st and a prospect to not only clear cap space but to also recoup the pick and prospect lost in the Miller and Toffoli deal. Unfortunately, the Canucks didn’t receive the type of offers that they thought for Brock. Hence, their path. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilduce39 Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 5 hours ago, Ghostsof1915 said: Team's old vets, or boat anchors, have zero value. Unless you are willing to part with 1st round picks no one is interested. Gone at the end of this year: Edler Benn Sutter Pearson Hamonic Baertschi Spooner buyout End of Next Season: Luongo Holtby Motte Beagle Roussel Eriksson Regardless of what happens. A lot of the contracts that are hamstringing this franchise will be gone. And that's just the UFA's. There's RFA's as well. Options to keep Elder maybe on a two year cap friendly deal? Not even sure Pearson should stay. Assuming the play on the ice figures itself out - this is exactly it. If you think Pettersson/Hughes/Horvat/Miller/Boeser/Schmidt can make a run with the right supporting cast the stage is set to make that happen over the next 2 offseasons. Schmidt is the oldest of that bunch at 29 (and I guess Myers is locked up too at 30) but they both skate well so should be serviceable for the mid-near future. It’s actually a decent situation considering Hoglander and Podkolzin should help up front. The real issue will be finding a 3C, a goalie and an elite, preferably RH shutdown D man. There should be some wiggle room even after new contracts to find most of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kanucks25 Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 1 hour ago, DarkIndianRises said: So for all this talk about the Canucks having “bled picks,” we sure do have a ton of players that were drafted and developed within our system that have successfully made the team (or will be debuting in the not so distant future). https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/teams/dr00008756.html 7 drafts, average would be 49 picks (7x7). Picks made by Benning = 48. So not a huge deficit, but still a deficit for a rebuilding team (not one in win-now mode). However, also important to note that Benning has made the average 7 1st round picks but only 5 2nd round picks. So the deficit is not only overall but also in the 2nd round. Would "bleeding picks" be the right phrase to describe this? Probably not. Is it ideal for a rebuilding team that's desperate for young, controllable assets? Probably not. 1 hour ago, DarkIndianRises said: Perhaps Benning and management knew that our drafting was a strong suit? And that the way to build teams is to have an appropriate balance of kids and vets? Seriously - what team in the league is exclusively built with draft picks and/or has a roster full of 18-20 year olds? I don't disagree about the balance and that the draft isn't the only thing required to build a team, but if drafting is really a strong suit of this management team (debatable), then shouldn't they be playing to it? It makes no sense to identify a strength and then not take advantage of it. If Benning knows he can draft gems, then he should be gobbling up as many picks as he can, developing them into good players, and then flipping them into win-now assets. Signing said win-now assets to bloated contracts when you're not even ready to win now? Nonsensical. 1 hour ago, DarkIndianRises said: We can talk about the negatives of the contracts of Ryan Miller, Gudbranson, Sutter, Beagle, Roussel, Eriksson, Ferland, Myers, etc., but the truth of the matter is their presence allowed for the kids in our system to either play lower in the line-up (which aided in their development) or play on the farm for a longer period of time (which aided in their development). The presence of these vets allowed for the kids to not be thrown into the fire.......unless they were ready right away (ie Petey, Brock, Hughes). Can't believe people are still going on about this lol not even going to bother 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilduce39 Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 I also don’t think the rebuild vs retool discussion is worth the effort to have. Obviously it hasn’t been a perfect tenure for management but that’s an unrealistic discussion. The question should be simply: is there still a path to contention given the roster JB has assembled. As I’ve said, still think there is. If you don’t believe that, you should be advocating selling anyone Boeser age or older. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Got the Babych Posted January 25, 2021 Author Share Posted January 25, 2021 12 minutes ago, ilduce39 said: I also don’t think the rebuild vs retool discussion is worth the effort to have. Obviously it hasn’t been a perfect tenure for management but that’s an unrealistic discussion. The question should be simply: is there still a path to contention given the roster JB has assembled. As I’ve said, still think there is. If you don’t believe that, you should be advocating selling anyone Boeser age or older. Obviously I think the discussion is completely worthwhile, but participation is totally optional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathancanuck Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 I think we simply didn't have the players for a full rebuild. I mean 2011 and 2012 we won the Presidents Trophy. 2013 was a shortened season and we still won our Division. (Also traded Schneider to draft Bo) So really the first year to think of a rebuild was during/after the 2013/14 season.. We traded Kesler for Bonino, Sbisa and a first Traded Loungo for Markstrom and Mathias Garrison for a second Bieksa for a second Sedins had a NMC and wanted to end their careers in Vancouver Burrows got some kind of return back but honestly he didn't have much value since 2014 and a NTC or something too Traded Lack for a third (Brisebois) Traded Hansen for Goldobin Vanek for Motte So who should we have traded then? And when? Mathias in 2015 but we were 2nd in the Division and honestly should have made it to the second round Playoffs at least. And honestly no one was offering a first or even second for Mathias.. Tanev didn't have that much value either until like 2-3 years ago and even last year it was maybe a second rounder Edler wanted to stay and also his value was low during the time we would have wanted to trade him (2014-2017) Markstrom? Only really has value since last year and we went to the Division Finals Game 7 so not trading him was the right decision. Also if not for the Luongo recapture Penalty we could have kept Tanev or Toffoli this year. Not saying some of the contracts Benning handed out aren't bad BUT even with those contracts we could have kept one of the two if not for the recapture penalty which isn't Bennings fault. I even think he signed Eriksson before we got the penalty.. so thats just really unfortunate but on the bright side in 1.5 years we should be in a very good position cap wise. The Problem is that our first line from when we dominated the league Daniel - Henrik - Burrows never really had value. In a way that no one knew how only one Sedin would perform on a team, then they also wanted to stay together and in Vancouver (so basically untradeable Assets) and Burrows was always a 3rd liner who overperformed at times and most GM's knew that. Last but not least..the past 6-7 years haven't even been that bad! Until 2013 Playoffs 2013/14 well.. Torts but it was entertaining at times 2014/15 was a lot of fun and I still can't believe we didn't beat Calgary 2015/16 SUCKED 2016/17 SUCKED 2017/18 SUCKED a little less 2018/19 was already pretty fun again, stayed in the hunt for playoffs almost the full season 2019/20 By far the best and most fun Season since 2011, Division Finals Game 7 (to me thats better than Presidents Trophy and a first round loss..) 2020/21 Yes maybe a little step back, maybe we will miss the Playoffs but we will still be in the hunt and only take this little step back to make the next big steps in the years to come. Overall lm very happy how things went for us and I think the future is bright. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Got the Babych Posted January 25, 2021 Author Share Posted January 25, 2021 1 hour ago, Convincing John said: I don’t think the plan matters. The manager does. Good management is the key to a rebuild. One could say Montreal and Dallas retooled, they did a nice job because they had a good plan. Philly and Col did a rebuild, they also did a great job because they executed their vision. Edmonton, Phx, Fla. failed at both because they had crappy management. you need a good manager who surrounds himself with the right people. Doesn’t matter how you do it. You might be right, MTL might be an example of a successful retool, bit early to tell. Haven't followed them closely for awhile, I feel like they've been quietly making moves, but no real rebuild. Will do some research. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crabcakes Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 I'm not sure why the OP thinks that any definition of rebuild vs retool should be made any more clear by his shining light of an intellect than any number of discussions which have gone on ad nauseum over the past 6 years. It seems like so much longer. Rebuild - find a new core Retool - replace the supporting players around the core (already established) 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilduce39 Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 51 minutes ago, kanucks25 said: Can't believe people are still going on about this lol not even going to bother I think it’s foolish to outright dismiss the impact of leadership / internal competition and team culture especially when, up until the start of this year, we’ve been on a fairy steady upwards trend integrating young talent into the lineup - culminating with a nice little run in the playoffs. For discussions sake I think you can pick and choose guys who we could’ve done without - maybe walk from Beagle given the length - or who’ve fallen off due to injury (Roussel, Ferland) or point to the penultimate mistake in Loui.. but that’s more an issue of acquiring guys who can keep up a level of play rather than avoiding them altogether. I’d still want to have enough experienced hard working players to carry the culture. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patel Bure Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 45 minutes ago, kanucks25 said: https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/teams/dr00008756.html 7 drafts, average would be 49 picks (7x7). Picks made by Benning = 48. So not a huge deficit, but still a deficit for a rebuilding team (not one in win-now mode). However, also important to note that Benning has made the average 7 1st round picks but only 5 2nd round picks. So the deficit is not only overall but also in the 2nd round. Would "bleeding picks" be the right phrase to describe this? Probably not. Is it ideal for a rebuilding team that's desperate for young, controllable assets? Probably not. I don't disagree about the balance and that the draft isn't the only thing required to build a team, but if drafting is really a strong suit of this management team (debatable), then shouldn't they be playing to it? It makes no sense to identify a strength and then not take advantage of it. If Benning knows he can draft gems, then he should be gobbling up as many picks as he can, developing them into good players, and then flipping them into win-now assets. Signing said win-now assets to bloated contracts when you're not even ready to win now? Nonsensical. Can't believe people are still going on about this lol not even going to bother Here’s the thing though Kanuck: Draft pick deficit is only a relevant issue IF no one from the system is graduating to the big stage. That’s clearly not an issue for us. Guys like Gaudette, Hoglander, Demko, and Tryamkin (who will likely be with us next season) are proving that the Canucks aren’t just reliant on first round lottery picks in terms of cracking our team. Lastly - I know “veteran presence” is often met with scoff and ridicule at your home base (HF Canucks), but veteran presence is a thing. The presence of Ryan Miller for example, forced Markstrom into the minors where he was able to get back to basics and develop his game. While I wasnt fond of guys like Beagle and Schaller being signed, it allowed for guys like Gaudette and McEwen to get more ice-time and development in Utica. Guys like Pettersson last season avoided tougher match ups due to our veteran presence. All cup winning teams have a strong mix of vets and young guys. This whole idea or notion of stockpiling on all of these picks and having a team full of 19-21 year old kids is an impractical pipe dream. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Convincing John Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 6 hours ago, Ghostsof1915 said: Team's old vets, or boat anchors, have zero value. Unless you are willing to part with 1st round picks no one is interested. Gone at the end of this year: Edler Benn Sutter Pearson Hamonic Baertschi Spooner buyout End of Next Season: Luongo Holtby Motte Beagle Roussel Eriksson Regardless of what happens. A lot of the contracts that are hamstringing this franchise will be gone. And that's just the UFA's. There's RFA's as well. Options to keep Elder maybe on a two year cap friendly deal? Not even sure Pearson should stay. I hope that we don’t replace departing contracts with new UFA’s. This has been the trend with JB. The problem with UFA signings is that you’re paying a player based on what he has done in the past. Nobody factors in the decline of a 28 year old player over a 6 year contract. You might get the first half of the contract at value but almost always carry negative value towards the end. Signing a RFA to a big contract is hedging his potential, these are usually the most valued contracts in the League. There is never a hedge to the downside on UFA contracts over 4 years which makes them fundamentally flawed. If our window is +\- 3 years away we should be banking cap space for that timeframe to exploit a team in cap trouble and get great value on a piece that could take us over the top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wai_lai416 Posted January 25, 2021 Share Posted January 25, 2021 lol looks like we are following the footprint of the laffs and coilers.. great top end skill.. 1-2 good/great defenseman.. questionable goaltending and the rest of the defense 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