Francesco Aquilini says "I have no plans to make changes."

[stawns]

Just now, Tony Romo said:

Not saying you are wrong. I just think the best way to get 4 complete lines is to pay for stars in the top 6 and top 4, and build in the rest of the roster under those constraints, rather than pay for bottom 6 guys and try and fit in the stars.

 I agree you have to have some game changers, no doubt.  But even the most dominant fwds only play a third of the game, you need to spend money in the bottom 6

[RogersTowell]

6 hours ago, dank.sinatra said:

 

Sounds like something a fan who has become accustomed to a never ending cycle of bad hockey teams would say.

 

Rebuilding a team can and should have a timeline. Look at the Leafs. If there's no timeline you get what we are seeing with the Canucks, a very bad team for a very long time with no end in sight.

 

And oh, btw, if you ask Benning, this team was still never rebuilding. The whole fact he failed to admit this team needed to be rebuilt and tried to pass off a "retool" on the fly will go down as one of the biggest blunders in Vancouver sports history.

 

"Happy for promising progress" sounds a lot like accepting futility. Winners are never happy about progress.

Sounds like a troll who's been brainwashed by the negative nellie media in this town.  Sure, if you ignore last season it's been six seasons since we made the playoffs.  What?  You just discount any season we make the playoffs because it doesn't fit your sad sack narrative?  Look at the Leafs?  I did look at the leafs.  They've been rebuilding since 2004/5.  Are you suggesting a 16 year timeline or are you suggesting the Canucks are on a 16 year timeline (either way, the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit).  In fact the Leafs haven't made the SCF since '67.

 

As to your criticisms of Benning's signings and non signings, sure, in hind sight some of it is valid.  However, you cherry pick an awful lot to come up with your tenuous narrative.  The Tanev deal I agree with you on to some extent.  A 4 year contract is pretty long but 4.5 million in cap is reasonable.  I'd prefer Tanev to Schmidt based on their performance this season, but Schmidt has a lot more upside if he returns to the form he's demonstrated for several seasons.  Your assessment of Beagle is a bit off.  While he's a bit over paid for his role, he's probably the top PK forward in the league.  I can already hear you whining about the period of about 4-5 games this season where the pk was bad, but it's 4-5 games and irrelevant on the larger scale so don't bother.  When you say "would you rather have Beagle and Virtanen or Toffoli" that is cherry picking in the extreme.  There was a short timeline on signing Toffoli and it takes time to move players (for which you should expect a reasonable return).  Other GMs recognised the cap issues in Vancouver and low balled, making trading a much more difficult job in addition to having their own cap issues to deal with.  In the end, your whole position is a bunch of 'what if'.  If you were a cowboy, we'd say you're all hat and no cattle.  You remind me of KoS, an old poster who whined all the time.

 

 

[Tony Romo]

1 minute ago, stawns said:

 I agree you have to have some game changers, no doubt.  But even the most dominant fwds only play a third of the game, you need to spend money in the bottom 6

I dont think you necessarily have to spend a ton on bottom 6 guys to have a good bottom 6.  Our best bottom 6 guy is Tyler Motte, a fast skilled guy who works hard and kills penaltys, and he has one of our cheapest players. 

 

Just my opinion, at the end of the day we both want what is best for our team. There is a differing of opinions on how to get there and I think discussing it can lead to both of us learning and developing better ideas.  

 

 

[Ghostsof1915]

14 minutes ago, stawns said:

disagree, you win Cups with 4 complete lines

Bingo.

Edmonton has two of the best forwards in the NHL. How much closer are they to winning a Stanley Cup? 

[stawns]

1 minute ago, Tony Romo said:

I dont think you necessarily have to spend a ton on bottom 6 guys to have a good bottom 6.  Our best bottom 6 guy is Tyler Motte, a fast skilled guy who works hard and kills penaltys, and he has one of our cheapest players. 

 

Just my opinion, at the end of the day we both want what is best for our team. There is a differing of opinions on how to get there and I think discussing it can lead to both of us learning and developing better ideas.  

 

 

he won't be when it cmes time for his next contract.  The only bottom 6 players that JB has spent money on is Beagle and Sutter, both key faceoff guys and PK'ers.  Sutter was borught in as a bridge player and Beagle as a defensive specialist, both have been important players

[RogersTowell]

2 minutes ago, stawns said:

he won't be when it cmes time for his next contract.  The only bottom 6 players that JB has spent money on is Beagle and Sutter, both key faceoff guys and PK'ers.  Sutter was borught in as a bridge player and Beagle as a defensive specialist, both have been important players

Well said.  Motte is building a resume for a bigger contract for sure.  Beagle and Sutter have done their thing, albeit at a bit of a hefty cost.  I think we could add Roussel in as another moderately large contract on the bottom six.

[Tony Romo]

3 minutes ago, stawns said:

he won't be when it cmes time for his next contract.  The only bottom 6 players that JB has spent money on is Beagle and Sutter, both key faceoff guys and PK'ers.  Sutter was borught in as a bridge player and Beagle as a defensive specialist, both have been important players

When it comes to his next contract we will have to see what is available, but from what I see it easier to find players like that, for example Wayne Simmonds, Brad Richardson, Tomas Nosek, Jimmy Veasey, Corey Perry, Josh Leivo, to name a few, all signed relatively cheap contracts this year. 

 

Sutter and Beagle have been fine, I just believe we can get similar production for cheaper. 

[Gurn]

3 minutes ago, Tony Romo said:

When it comes to his next contract we will have to see what is available, but from what I see it easier to find players like that, for example Wayne Simmonds, Brad Richardson, Tomas Nosek, Jimmy Veasey, Corey Perry, Josh Leivo, to name a few, all signed relatively cheap contracts this year. 

 

Sutter and Beagle have been fine, I just believe we can get similar production for cheaper. 

going into next year the Canucks get about $22.5 mill of cap space, but need to sign 10 players.

This will be the time to sign those cheap, covid  money deals.

Much like they signed Hamonic this year, next year it will be more cheap forwards as well.

[NewbieCanuckFan]

37 minutes ago, stawns said:

disagree, you win Cups with 4 complete lines

or have the league in your back pocket.

 

[IBatch]

40 minutes ago, stawns said:

 I agree you have to have some game changers, no doubt.  But even the most dominant fwds only play a third of the game, you need to spend money in the bottom 6

Just look at Vegas and TB... Vegas had Stastny in their bottom six, often the fourth line ... Tyler Johnson was waived and JT Miller played 3 C and PP 14 minutes a game in TB before that...there is a reason why TO and EDM haven't managed a round win yet with their new cores (well EDM did win one round during McDavids elc)...

 

For me i'm a little worried who's replacing Sutter, Beagle and Pearson etc coming up (yes i know Pearson is top six, but not on a lot of teams).    Edler too when it comes that.    4 million isn't out of line for a good 3C...  yes, at times our bottom six is over costly.   But not by much when you really look at it - and i don't mind the premium at all aside from LE.    

[DefCon1]

56 minutes ago, gurn said:

going into next year the Canucks get about $22.5 mill of cap space, but need to sign 10 players.

This will be the time to sign those cheap, covid  money deals.

Much like they signed Hamonic this year, next year it will be more cheap forwards as well.

I rarher have the Canucks sign their own prospects before spending money on FA even with more cap space available. I dont want to see Benning make the same mistakes like he did with Myers, Ericksson,  Roussel etc. We should see what we have in Podkolzin, Lockwood, Lind, Mckewan, Bailey. Extend Motte, and maybe sign Beagle to a cheap 1 million dollar deal. Get rid of Sutter, Roussell and trade Virtanen for maybe a young bottom 6 D or a young D.

 

Miller-Pettersson-Boeser

Podkolzin-Horvat-Hoglander

Pearson-Gaudette-Lind

Lockwood-Beagle-Motte

 

I hope that will be our forward group going forward. I rather not want to see any FA signings by Benning unless its for a clear #1D that is pietrangelo level.

[CaptKirk888]

18 hours ago, Fred65 said:

The Spanish have a nice way of saying that " hasta manana "  ... until tomorrow. There's been a lot of hast manana in Vancouver hockey. Some fans have been told hasta manana for 30-40 years. Now if you're new to the table I can understand but for long time fans hasta manana excuse is growing thin

How do they say that in Italian? As the Aquilinis are not Spanish and may not get it.

[DefCon1]

48 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Just look at Vegas and TB... Vegas had Stastny in their bottom six, often the fourth line ... Tyler Johnson was waived and JT Miller played 3 C and PP 14 minutes a game in TB before that...there is a reason why TO and EDM haven't managed a round win yet with their new cores (well EDM did win one round during McDavids elc)...

 

For me i'm a little worried who's replacing Sutter, Beagle and Pearson etc coming up (yes i know Pearson is top six, but not on a lot of teams).    Edler too when it comes that.    4 million isn't out of line for a good 3C...  yes, at times our bottom six is over costly.   But not by much when you really look at it - and i don't mind the premium at all aside from LE.    

We should re-sign Beagle to a 1 million dollar deal. I also like to keep Pearson because he is productive and can be a good depth player. Sutter is redundant and can be replaced with Gaudette unless we trade Gaudette for a 2 way 3rd line C that can PK. I see Hoglander and Podkolzin pushing their way into the team as regulars so we should be fine with our forward group as we also have Lind and Lockwood too. I only see a good 2 way 3rd line C being added via trade not the free agency. Our biggest problem is D since we have Hughes and Schmidt in our long term plans while Myers should be exposed for Seattle to take. Edler should not be re-signed unless he wants a 2 million per year contract for 1 or 2 years. Joulevi should be a regular now since he is NHL ready and will be better the more he plays for us. Rathbone also will be pushing his way to our team. I hope Benning Can sign Tryamkin. 

[DefCon1]

2 hours ago, stawns said:

He used that cap space to keep the pressure of a franchise off the shoulders of a couple 20 year olds.  

By giving 6 mil to Ericksson and 3 mil to Roussell? If you are going to overpay players, might as well get an elite player that can potentially earn it. Think of John Tavares, Pietrangelo etc. Now I hope Benning doesnt repeat his mistakes if he is here next season.

[butters]

18 hours ago, Fred65 said:

The Spanish have a nice way of saying that " hasta manana "  ... until tomorrow. There's been a lot of hast manana in Vancouver hockey. Some fans have been told hasta manana for 30-40 years. Now if you're new to the table I can understand but for long time fans hasta manana excuse is growing thin

you must have slept through some of those years. 2011 was a pretty damn good year for example.

[spur1]

I have to hand it to FA for coming out and telling it like it is. 
Nobody is going anywhere. 
After last year everyone was patting Green and JB on the back. Why would you fire them because of a bit of a rough start. 

[stawns]

21 minutes ago, DefCon1 said:

By giving 6 mil to Ericksson and 3 mil to Roussell? If you are going to overpay players, might as well get an elite player that can potentially earn it. Think of John Tavares, Pietrangelo etc. Now I hope Benning doesnt repeat his mistakes if he is here next season.

Roussel, I agree.  LE was done to give the twins the send off they deserved and to provide a bridge until good yougn players came in to replace him, it just didn't work out that way.  He never got his groove and the young players were impact players earlier than anticipated.  Still, in the grand scheme of things, LE's contract isn't going to have a aby effect when this young core comes into their own.  

 

The difference, for me, is that too many fans look at the short game where JB looks at the long game.

[CaptKirk888]

2 hours ago, kanucks25 said:

The words of a beaten down fan with no expectations.

 

This is pretty much why Benning has lasted as long as he has.

 

I honestly find it hilarious when people say how toxic and erratic this fan-base is. We're snowflakes.

Careful, you may be melting............

down

[Fred65]

19 hours ago, UKNuck96 said:

The dreaded vote of confidence. In the EPL usually means a manager is gone within a few weeks. However I genuinely hope that he means what he wrote, as stability is key 

My first thought. Really there is no benefit to firing JB or TG at this point. You never get the chnace to have a broad selection of candidates there are few benefits, thing can only improve ( they can't get worse ) and your're throwing good money after bad. Now ... come the summer 

[The Lock]

The forum is one giant overreaction at the moment full of people who think they know more than everyone else. I'm not at all surprised with FA's comments.