If you were wondering what the difference is between a rebuild and a retool, it's this.

[DSVII]

I wouldn't say that this is what a retool is, it's just what poor execution looks like along some serious misjudgments on the UFA contract front and pro scouting.

[kanucks25]

9 hours ago, ilduce39 said:

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. 

 

 

9 hours ago, DarkIndianRises said:

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.    

Never said veteran presence, sheltering kids, etc. isn't important. Just that you shouldn't be spending 2nd round picks and 6 year UFA contracts to do it.

 

Quality NHL vets that you can rely on to play a consistent NHL shift are available for pennies on the dollar every summer.

 

The rebuttal I always get to this is: "Well, we don't want to sign just any vets, we need at least somewhat good players so we don't have a toxic losing environment and turn into Edmonton."

 

Well look at the standings between 2016 and 2019 and tell me how that turned out. We weren't exactly very competitive, in fact we were pretty much the worst team in the league over that time. And when you look at the cap spent vs points earned in the standings ratio, it's even uglier.

 

During this time is when we should have been playing to the alleged drafting strength of this management team, not plugging holes with veterans that we're trying to get rid of now.

Edited January 25, 2021 by kanucks25

[kanucks25]

1 hour ago, DarkIndianRises said:

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.    

Never said this either, just that there's a time and a place.

 

The time is when you have a surplus of cap and assets and your team is ready to push. Like Chicago when they signed Hossa, or the Kings when they traded extra youth assets for Richards and Carter.

 

These teams ended up needing to offload their bloated vets after their Cup wins, not before like us.

Edited January 25, 2021 by kanucks25

[DownUndaCanuck]

I think this is more of a rebuild since the Sedins left and this season is just a big step back or hiccup after trying to retool, but it's only because of the ED and Covid. If the cap were rising and there wasn't an expansion draft, you know JB would have tried to keep Toffoli, Tanev and Marky, or at least a couple of them. We just can't afford to keep our in-prime players because they'll burn us long-term and expose someone in the ED, hence the regression which I'm not surprised about.

 

This off-season will shake up the NHL completely with a lot of 1 year contracts coming off the books and the expansion draft, and JB is one of the few managers who is putting that into his plans. We might suck this season but long-term it'll be worth it, while the Flames get absolutely shredded in 2-3+ years time for putting 10M into Marky and Tanev.

 

Toffoli's the one I would have tried to make it work with but clearly JB wanted to give JV/Gaudette that opportunity. I think Virtnan has worn their patience too thin now, but JB clearly decided to go that route. If I were him I would have gotten rid of JV + Benn/Baertschi somehow (even cap dump) to sign Toffoli because Tyler's still got his best years ahead of him, arguably 3 years of 30-goal scoring ability, and we really could have used that instead of the nothing that Virtanen brings, but of course that's a big swallow of pride and not many teams will cap dump a 6th overall pick.

 

Tough one for JB but as much as it hurts to see, I agree with his moves. He couldn't re-sign Marky to that deal or we'd lose Demko to Seattle. He couldn't sign Tanev to that 4.5 x 4 year deal or we'd have to expose another defenceman and surely Tanev won't play most of that contract, and now have an even better Schmidt. We couldn't really sign Toffoli without making a difficult trade to move away JV or Sutter and I'm not sure whether those moves were on the cards or not.

 

So yes, a regression, but it's only a short year. Seattle will come in and ravage some teams but we're well-primed for the ED and flat cap going forward now. 

[appleboy]

15 hours ago, DarkIndianRises said:

Please provide an example of a team that successfully rebuilt, and how long it took said team to do it.

Montreal.

This year they had the cap space to add depth.

 

[Bad_BOI_pete]

18 hours ago, Got the Babych said:

IMHO, this is what you get when you try the retool route rather committing to a full rebuild. The fun thing is, the last 6 years have been just as painful as if we did go full rebuild. 
So, are there any examples of a team that successfully pulled off a "retool on the fly" similar to ours?

 

To clarify, this is how I define a rebuild versus whatever we have been doing:

Rebuild:
    -trade valuable players on the verge of decline for picks/ NHL calibre prospects
    -save money/ cap space. Pick up bargains as they come, take advantage of other teams' cap issues
    -develop prospects in the minors
    -play with what you got. Fill holes with cheap, quality "character guys"
    -suck for a few years
    -draft high, draft well
    -hire cheap unproven coaching staff for the interim
    -hopefully start to compete after 3-4 years and be set up to stay competitive for another 5-7 years

Lots of examples of successful rebuilds (and some unsuccessful ones), but the most recent would be the 'Lanche. Current roster is by all accounts a powerhouse on the verge of long term greatness, while still having a prospect pool that could probably compete with our NHL roster.

 

Our "retool":
    -keep valuable but aging players until they go to another team during free agency
    -sign middling to bad free agents every year above market value and to term
    -play the hell out of the best players until injuries occur
    -blame injuries for team failure (see above)
    -make it rain/ spend to the cap
    -shove any prospect with NHL potential onto the roster as soon as they arrive
    -trade away picks and prospects
    -trade for rental players while hoping to attain a wildcard playoff berth
    -strive to be a playoff bubble/ wildcard team each year (unfortunately, even with the points above, we did not compete and were one of the worst teams for 4-5 years)
    -suck for a few years (didn't appear to be the plan, but happened anyway)
    -pick high/ draft OK. Nailed a few picks, but as bottom feeders consistently picking top 10 it'd be hard not to
    -hire cheap unproven coaching staff as long term plan

We have a handful of great players and some bright spots, but through trading away picks the prospect pool is now back to depleted (OK, there's still Podz) and I don't see a way to get to the next level. By not committing to a rebuild we now seem to be built for a window of mediocrity, probably followed by a real rebuild.

Happy Sunday!

i dont think you know what you're talking about, it's really quite simple. Instead of Jake Virtanen and OJ we should have drafted <INSERT BEST AVAILABLE PLAYER HERE> the only reason we Didn't was because Benning Didn't listen to Judd Bracket. What a God Judd Bracket is, Too bad Benning Let the wayne Gretzky of scouts go because of him being a selfish GM in wanting a say in his Draft picks.

 

That being said Jim Missed the boat this off Season, he should have known that the plague of Covid-19 was Coming and would create a great oppurtunity to get Value contracts on cheap 1 year deals. I mean literally the next pandemic has been known about for years, But we wouldn't have had that problem if he was smart enough to now you only sign free agents  to 1 year deals, if the player doesn't like it then who cares ill just sign another one EZ . There's always players available that have had bad years and will want to sign 1 year prove me deals on the cheap. at trade deadline after thier career year we can trade them for draft picks (no free Agent's will walk away for free), you have to do that because you can't lose a player for nothing, free value!!! then we insert our draft picks <INSERT BEST AVAILABLE PLAYER HERE> AND last years <INSERT BEST AVAILABLE PLAYER HERE> AND WIN THE CUP.

[Bad_BOI_pete]

9 hours ago, kanucks25 said:

 

Never said veteran presence, sheltering kids, etc. isn't important. Just that you shouldn't be spending 2nd round picks and 6 year UFA contracts to do it.

 

Quality NHL vets that you can rely on to play a consistent NHL shift are available for pennies on the dollar every summer.

 

The rebuttal I always get to this is: "Well, we don't want to sign just any vets, we need at least somewhat good players so we don't have a toxic losing environment and turn into Edmonton."

 

Well look at the standings between 2016 and 2019 and tell me how that turned out. We weren't exactly very competitive, in fact we were pretty much the worst team in the league over that time. And when you look at the cap spent vs points earned in the standings ratio, it's even uglier.

 

During this time is when we should have been playing to the alleged drafting strength of this management team, not plugging holes with veterans that we're trying to get rid of now.

I hate these attitudes. we were one of the worst teams when benning took over, if we didn't sign sutter we probably would have been the worst. How often do you see the cream of the crop free agents signing to bottom feeders? Sutter was a highly sought after free agent and in his prime.He was having disussions with many teams more desirable than ours. if Jim doesn't sign him we don't get any better, and He's fired before the end of the season. i mean seriously do you really believe that Jim wanted to sign a 3rd liner for 5 years? All of the signings were completed with the goal of getting to the playoffs as soon as possible, we targeted all of these players because they were the best available at thier position and filled our positional needs.we quite literally have to offer a year or 2 longer than we wanted and maybe slightly overpay because our team blew chunks, canadian market and it was the only way to level up as quick as possible. 

 

as for our cap troubles, we never really had any until this year, and we wouldn't have had any if it weren't for covid, and cap recapture didn't help.

 

If you were hired to be gm you would probably have tons of cap space available, and we would also be one of the worst team in the league,  because when you saved up space to go after the big fish, you would fail to sign them because we are the worst team in the league filled with replacement level plugs signed to value deals, and if they did want to sign you would be getting the big fish to sergei bobrovsky deals. But more importantly you would be fired first, because you would be going against the owner's wishes of being as competitive as possible, every year. In this situation you can't have your cake and eat it too. 

 

5 years ago if you were given the option to either continue the path or teleport to 2021 95% would choose teleport.

 

 When literally nothing is in the depth coming up and your looking to improve as quick as possible without sacrificing picks its through the Free agency. when your literally handcuffed by the owners expectations, you make due with what you have. 

[kanucks25]

14 minutes ago, Petey_BOI said:

I hate these attitudes. we were one of the worst teams when benning took over,

We made the playoffs in Benning's first year, 90% of that team was inherited.

 

19 minutes ago, Petey_BOI said:

How often do you see the cream of the crop free agents signing to bottom feeders? Sutter was a highly sought after free agent and in his prime.He was having disussions with many teams more desirable than ours. if Jim doesn't sign him we don't get any better, and He's fired before the end of the season

We talking Brandon Sutter or Sidney Crosby?

 

And Sutter was traded for, not a free agent. At this point I'd like to point out that Benning gave him a long-term extension before he ever played a game for us, including an unprecedented retroactive NTC... for a third line grinder. Great work here lol (not)

 

22 minutes ago, Petey_BOI said:

All of the signings were completed with the goal of getting to the playoffs as soon as possible, we targeted all of these players because they were the best available at thier position and filled our positional needs.

Yeah I know. That's why the plan was doomed from the start.

 

23 minutes ago, Petey_BOI said:

When literally nothing is in the depth coming up and your looking to improve as quick as possible without sacrificing picks its through the Free agency. when your literally handcuffed by the owners expectations, you make due with what you have. 

Benning knew what the deal was when he took the job. He knew what the owners wanted and he pitched them a plan that was in line with the owners' vision. That's on Benning for thinking he could make it work.

 

And thank you for enlightening me on how my tenure as the GM of the Vancouver Canucks would go. Very informative.

[Pickly]

31 minutes ago, Petey_BOI said:

I hate these attitudes. we were one of the worst teams when benning took over, if we didn't sign sutter we probably would have been the worst. How often do you see the cream of the crop free agents signing to bottom feeders? Sutter was a highly sought after free agent and in his prime.He was having disussions with many teams more desirable than ours. if Jim doesn't sign him we don't get any better, and He's fired before the end of the season. i mean seriously do you really believe that Jim wanted to sign a 3rd liner for 5 years? All of the signings were completed with the goal of getting to the playoffs as soon as possible, we targeted all of these players because they were the best available at thier position and filled our positional needs.we quite literally have to offer a year or 2 longer than we wanted and maybe slightly overpay because our team blew chunks, canadian market and it was the only way to level up as quick as possible. 

 

as for our cap troubles, we never really had any until this year, and we wouldn't have had any if it weren't for covid, and cap recapture didn't help.

 

If you were hired to be gm you would probably have tons of cap space available, and we would also be one of the worst team in the league,  because when you saved up space to go after the big fish, you would fail to sign them because we are the worst team in the league filled with replacement level plugs signed to value deals, and if they did want to sign you would be getting the big fish to sergei bobrovsky deals. But more importantly you would be fired first, because you would be going against the owner's wishes of being as competitive as possible, every year. In this situation you can't have your cake and eat it too. 

 

5 years ago if you were given the option to either continue the path or teleport to 2021 95% would choose teleport.

 

 When literally nothing is in the depth coming up and your looking to improve as quick as possible without sacrificing picks its through the Free agency. when your literally handcuffed by the owners expectations, you make due with what you have. 

[Bad_BOI_pete]

18 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

23 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

1.We made the playoffs in Benning's first year, 90% of that team was inherited.

 

2.We talking Brandon Sutter or Sidney Crosby?

 

3.Benning knew what the deal was when he took the job. He knew what the owners wanted and he pitched them a plan that was in line with the owners' vision. That's on Benning for thinking he could make it work.

 

4.And thank you for enlightening me on how my tenure as the GM of the Vancouver Canucks would go. Very informative.

 

1. Bad choice of words, we were trending to be on of the worst.

 

2. Was sydney available in 2016? imagine having to play your scenario of having only 3-4 players locked up. and having to resign 20 players every year.

 

3.Yup, and the owner thought he did so good he resigned him. Unlike if you were GM, you playing the waiting/tanking/do nothing off season plan, would be fired.

 

4. NP, i try to help out people and animals in need. if I see a crash I stop, I help the old lady cross, I help the fallen drunk up off the street, and I help friends/neighbours move. I hope this helps

[Bad_BOI_pete]

11 hours ago, kanucks25 said:

Never said this either, just that there's a time and a place.

 

The time is when you have a surplus of cap and assets and your team is ready to push. Like Chicago when they signed Hossa, or the Kings when they traded extra youth assets for Richards and Carter.

 

These teams ended up needing to offload their bloated vets after their Cup wins, not before like us.

27/31 GM's have less than 5 million dollars of cap space. it's a cute idea, just not a very popular one among GM's and owner's.

 

 

 

 

[kanucks25]

2 minutes ago, Petey_BOI said:

27/31 GM's have less than 5 million dollars of cap space. it's a cute idea, just not a very popular one among GM's and owner's.

Has nothing to do with our team. We should doing whatever is best for our organization.

 

It's clear the Aquilinis like to spend, they think it's what's required to give the average casual fan hope. But the GM needs to be able to stand up to the owner and educate him on why spending doesn't always make your team better.

 

Either Benning doesn't know it, or isn't able to convince the owners of it. Either way, some of that blame falls on Benning.

[oldnews]

[oldnews]

23 hours ago, Got the Babych said:

 the prospect pool is now back to depleted and I don't see a way to get to the next level.

By not committing to a rebuild we now seem to be built for a window of mediocrity, probably followed by a real rebuild.

drama much?

 

 

 

Edited January 25, 2021 by oldnews

[Bad_BOI_pete]

35 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

Has nothing to do with our team. We should doing whatever is best for our organization.

 

It's clear the Aquilinis like to spend, they think it's what's required to give the average casual fan hope. But the GM needs to be able to stand up to the owner and educate him on why spending doesn't always make your team better.

 

Either Benning doesn't know it, or isn't able to convince the owners of it. Either way, some of that blame falls on Benning.

27/31 teams dont agree with you, Your opinion is just not popular, and not a guarantee to even work. for every ying you give thier is a yang.

 

Losing breads negativity, negativity breeds toxicity. toxic players are traded for next to nothing or other toxic player's.

 

Free agents won't sign knowing they will be traded at the first chance at value. think about it? why arent even 50% of free agents traded then let walk.

[kanucks25]

14 minutes ago, Petey_BOI said:

Losing breads negativity, negativity breeds toxicity. toxic players are traded for next to nothing or other toxic player's.

Aggregate standings in the 4 seasons between 2016 and 2019:

 

 

So we beat the mighty Buffalo Sabres by a massive 1 point. The only other team below us played half the games.

 

We didn't really avoid much losing.

[Gurn]

17 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

Aggregate standings in the 4 seasons between 2016 and 2019:

 

 

So we beat the mighty Buffalo Sabres by a massive 1 point. The only other team below us played half the games.

 

We didn't really avoid much losing.

does that chart have a section on goals for and against?

[oldnews]

Apologies for the 'shortness' of my responses - but this is such a tired/overkilled discussion, beaten to death countless times around here. 

For me - the 'bottom line' is that it's nowhere near as simplistic as these binary conceptions / semantics - no #proper-rething form exists (certainly not in the typical tank nation vs 'retool' , either/or conception of the process) - and I don't know the future, tank nations don't know the future - and the idea that some of you know the #proper way to rething - is where you simply don't hold water, nor have you really tracked various successes and failures of various approaches - (because if we do that, we see that there a numerous ways to get to contention.

[kanucks25]

12 minutes ago, gurn said:

does that chart have a section on goals for and against?

 

 

[kanucks25]

14 hours ago, DarkIndianRises said:

your home base (HF Canucks)

And, FWIW: IMO it's childish whenever someone puts this in their argument lol.

 

And I've been on this board since '07 (join date and majority of my post count lost when the board changed), long before I even knew HF was a thing

Edited January 25, 2021 by kanucks25