Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Seven years without a clear plan from Canucks brass.

Rate this topic


appleboy

Recommended Posts

On 3/26/2021 at 10:05 AM, apollo said:

Name 1 GM in the history of sports that's drafted his team the rookie of the year or the runner up 3 years in a row. I'll wait...

(calder in this case)

 

The Office Waiting GIF

 

23rd overall, 5th overall, 7th overall... this is not a video game. You should respect his vision and trust his process.

 

I'm begging you Canucks nation, stay positive and trust Jim's process. I had many doubts in him, you can go back to his first 5 years... I often questioned him and said he should be fired on these forums... but he's made amends and I'm confident that he is the man that will bring us our rightful cup.

 

Long live Lord Benning!

 

Edit: fixed... Rookie of the year or runner up without a single top 3 pick. No other GM has done this in all sports.

OMG.............................RU SERIOUS ?

(is this really what they're saying at the Flat-Earth Conferences ???)

Continuity is important Stay the course - titanic | Meme Generator

Edited by RU SERIOUS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/28/2021 at 4:19 PM, Tom Sestito said:

Don't have to explain my thoughts to a guy who thinks Gudbranson and Tanev are equal level players

Straw nonsense Tom, that I know you're capable of better than.

 

I can see why you'd avoid the question, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Tom Sestito said:

Are you hurt pal

 

I’d be pretty embarrassed if I thought Gudbranson and Tanev were equivalent

you go ahead and quote that Tom.

I'm sure we're capable of a better 'conversation' than this - so if you don't have an answer to your claim Motte plays "sheltered minutes" - or can't explain that loopy chart you rely on, we're probably best off calling it curtains.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, oldnews said:

you go ahead and quote that Tom.

I'm sure we're capable of a better 'conversation' than this - so if you don't have an answer to your claim Motte plays "sheltered minutes" - or can't explain that loopy chart you rely on, we're probably best off calling it curtains.

image.thumb.png.59703c60c37c348151e2dfe10c0fcab0.png

 

Might be the funniest post I’ve ever seen

 

 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Tom Sestito said:

image.thumb.png.59703c60c37c348151e2dfe10c0fcab0.png

 

 

 

Well done.  You finally made the effort to quote something - and it borderline resembles your claim.   

Referring to Motte's minutes as 'sheltered' however - is an actual, factual error/falsehood - not simply a matter of opinion.

You continue to obsess over Gudbranson is literally every thread you engage in - derailing the topic - but I'll oblige you - once again.

Mind you that was 2016 - the Gudbranson that Willie Mitchell was talking about - before the 30 game and 52 game seasons here  - ie M.A.S.H. unit seasons - with repeated injuries/playing at a fraction of health constantly (not unlike Sutter), on  gongshow M.A.S.H. teams with partners that needed sheltering, while playing a shutdown role...

Would I consider Gudbranson to have sustained his Florida trajectory - obviously not.

At the same time - he was just traded once again - at postive value - returned a pick - on a 4 million cap hit.

The thing that folks like yourself are unable to deal with - are what his outcomes look like when he plays for a team like Pittsburgh.  Difficult to understand for casual highlight reel types - but shutdown players - forwards and defensemen - tend to not look very good on bad teams.

And if you weren't cherry picking something without context - the evidence there is clear - Tanev's possession numbers were often unimpressive in this context - his numbers dragged down considerably by the context in which he played.

Gudbranson -Florida took him 3rd overall.

Vancouver

Pittsburgh (numbers there were very good, actually - if you're able to look objectively at anything).

Anaheim

Ottawa

All acquired him at positive market value. 

Doesn't quite jive with the take of people like you - who tend to believe he was an unmoveable cap dump anchor, etc.  The facts repeatedly - of actual real world market value - don't support you.  At the same time, Gudbranson has arguably underperformed at times since - whereas Tanev remains on the leagues' premier dedicated shtudown D.....and I was having some fun at the time/ a measure of sarcasm/embellishment - when I call someone a "gd 21st century dream beast" - you should take that with a grain of salt -  but you can assign whatever degree of wrong to that post that you see fit (idc).

 

But clearly the truth lies closer to Gudbranson being an NHL asset than it does the opinion of folks like yourself - who work in one-liners and 'the worst defenseman in the world' kind of pointless nonsense (the same kind of things we've heard endlessly relative to Edler, Sbisa, Gudbranson - really anyone that has been caught in an unflattering shutdown role on this team in transition).

 

So - fill your boots with your obsession with Gudbranson - but it does not somehow qualify the false claims you've made in this thread.

 

You clearly don't know what even "sheltered" means - refer to Motte as sheltered - so having a discussion about 'analtyics' is an obvious waste of time.

 

Relying on silly charts you can't explain doesn't make  your point. 

 

If you're game to engage in this actual thread - have a go at explaining the repeated questions you sidestep.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/26/2021 at 10:55 PM, Aladeen said:

For sure I don’t disagree with any of that at all but I feel like the reason the offer wasn’t tabled was because JB was trying to shore up the most important position lacking on the team and that was top pairing D man. 

Yes, that's likely true.  I had mixed feelings about a trade for Ekman-Larsson.  That would've been an upgrade to our D for sure but I didn't like his long term contract.  To me, that was a bridge too far.  $8.25 million to the end of 2025-26 was too much of an investment for a 29 year old; especially, when we had Hughes and EP to sign (and Demko).  I would've cut bait earlier in the negotiations and moved on.  I really liked Benning's trade for Schmidt which was a good consolation prize. 

 

I just wish we were further along in our rebuild and/or had more assets at our disposal; but we have definitely had worse GMs.  Mind you, I've heard a hockey commentator say that the Canucks do have a plan and it's called "The no plan plan".  That's pretty funny but I hope we do have a plan going forward.  I think we need to be sellers this year as we have virtually no chance of making the playoffs.  I'll be disappointed if we don't accumulate a few assets (trades and young prospects).

Edited by sockeye
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, sockeye said:

Yes, that's likely true.  I had mixed feelings about a trade for Ekman-Larsson.  That would've been an upgrade to our D for sure but I didn't like his long term contract.  To me, that was a bridge too far.  $8.25 million to the end of 2025-26 was too much of an investment for a 29 year old; especially, when we had Hughes and EP to sign (and Demko).  I would've cut bait earlier in the negotiations and moved on.  I really liked Benning's trade for Schmidt which was a good consolation prize. 

 

I just wish we were further along in our rebuild and/or had more assets at our disposal; but we have definitely had worse GMs.

And what if there was $2m in cap retention and/or a contract like Eriksson going back?

 

Doesn't seem so bad in that case, does it?

 

I'm quite happy with the Schmidt 'consolation' prize as well. Imagine if Jim had managed both...

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will be interesting to see how they deal with their cap issues for next year. 

 

They have  $61,901,879 on the books for  15 bodies.     This includes LE and Ferland.

 

$61,901,879   -   1,125,000 ( Not playing LE)  -  3,500,000 (Ferland on LTIR)   =      $57,276,879    For 13 bodies.

 

Two goal tenders, Two defense and 9 forwards.

 

$81,500,000 - $57,276,879  =   $24,223,121  cap to acquire 10 bodies.

 

Hughes $7,500,000    +    Petey   $7,500,000   =  $15,000,000   This leaves  $9,223,121  to sign 4 defense and 4 forwards. They may also need to cover some performance bonuses. As much as 3.9 mil.   Ouch 

 

This means that they can only add players that are around the mil price tag. Will Edler and Hamonic sign for a mil? We may also see them cut back to 21 players.

 

I personally think that they will be looking to move out some cap. We may also see them do a buyout or two. Not sure how many of those they are allowed to do. Don't expect an improved hockey club for next year.

 

You can see the long term planning, right!         LOL

 

 

Edited by appleboy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, appleboy said:

It will be interesting to see how they deal with their cap issues for next year. 

 

They have  $61,901,879 on the books for  15 bodies.     This includes LE and Ferland.

 

$61,901,879   -   1,125,000 ( Not playing LE)  -  3,500,000 (Ferland on LTIR)   =      $57,276,879    For 13 bodies.

 

Two goal tenders, Two defense and 9 forwards.

 

$81,500,000 - $57,276,879  =   $24,223,121  cap to acquire 10 bodies.

 

Hughes $7,500,000    +    Petey   $7,500,000   =  $15,000,000   This leaves  $9,223,121  to sign 4 defense and 4 forwards. They may also need to cover some performance bonuses. As much as 3.9 mil.   Ouch 

 

This means that they can only add players that are around the mil price tag. Will Edler and Hamonic sign for a mil? We may also see them cut back to 21 players.

 

I personally think that they will be looking to move out some cap. We may also see them do a buyout or two. Not sure how many of those they are allowed to do. Don't expect an improved hockey club for next year.

 

You can see the long term planning, right!         LOL

 

 

buying out Loui and Holtby saves them 5.8 mil next year, adds 2.9 the next. So that covers the bonus problem if need be. Stick Rous in the AHL, another 1.025. They'll be fine.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jimmy McGill said:

buying out Loui and Holtby saves them 5.8 mil next year, adds 2.9 the next. So that covers the bonus problem if need be. Stick Rous in the AHL, another 1.025. They'll be fine.

 

 

They will find a way but their defense, after Schmidt, Hughes and Myers will be filled out will low cost solutions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, appleboy said:

It will be interesting to see how they deal with their cap issues for next year. 

 

They have  $61,901,879 on the books for  15 bodies.     This includes LE and Ferland.

 

$61,901,879   -   1,125,000 ( Not playing LE)  -  3,500,000 (Ferland on LTIR)   =      $57,276,879    For 13 bodies.

 

Two goal tenders, Two defense and 9 forwards.

 

$81,500,000 - $57,276,879  =   $24,223,121  cap to acquire 10 bodies.

 

Hughes $7,500,000    +    Petey   $7,500,000   =  $15,000,000   This leaves  $9,223,121  to sign 4 defense and 4 forwards. They may also need to cover some performance bonuses. As much as 3.9 mil.   Ouch 

 

This means that they can only add players that are around the mil price tag. Will Edler and Hamonic sign for a mil? We may also see them cut back to 21 players.

 

I personally think that they will be looking to move out some cap. We may also see them do a buyout or two. Not sure how many of those they are allowed to do. Don't expect an improved hockey club for next year.

 

You can see the long term planning, right!         LOL

 

 

Long term plan does not equal next season. That is the definition of a short term plan. Look at the offseason after this one for the actual plan. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, appleboy said:

They will find a way but their defense, after Schmidt, Hughes and Myers will be filled out will low cost solutions.

I'm pretty excited about Tryamkin tho, if you've been following the thread he's made some nice strides so I'd be pretty happy for him to fill in a 5/6 role next year, should come in under 3 aav. Hamonic on a similar deal. Juolevi should be playing now imo to get him ready for the bottom 6 too. 

 

Hey its not ideal, but there will be incremental improvements for next year, I don't see a step back scenario as a sure thing. 

Edited by Jimmy McGill
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, appleboy said:

They will find a way but their defense, after Schmidt, Hughes and Myers will be filled out will low cost solutions.

Outlined this s couple days ago.

 

On 3/30/2021 at 11:29 AM, aGENT said:

@Kootenay GoldI outlined this yesterday in another thread.

 

After differed bonuses and re-signing Petey, Hughes and Demko ($18m) etc, we have about $10m. Add an (all but certain) Eriksson buyout and we're up to about $12m.

 

Plus we're going to lose someone's cap in the ED.

 

Add Rathbone, Podkolzin, likely Lind or similar and that's around $3m. Tryamkin around $2m.

 

I'm hoping we can trade (Virtanen + ?) for the 3C we need adding about $500k-$1m.

 

My math shows about $5-$6m left to re-sign one of Edler or Hamonic.

 

Buyout Roussel as well and we gain another $1.2m (minus his replacement). Someone like Boyd or Hawryluck on a $700-$800k deal saves another half million.

 

We have plenty of space.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Toyotasfan said:

In Gudbranson’s defence I think he could win a fight against anyone in the Canadian division.

I think he would wipe the floor with Lucic. 

Lot of hate for Guddy on here but he had that one thing that we haven’t replaced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/26/2021 at 10:05 AM, apollo said:

Name 1 GM in the history of sports that's drafted his team the rookie of the year or the runner up 3 years in a row. I'll wait...

(calder in this case)

 

The Office Waiting GIF

 

23rd overall, 5th overall, 7th overall... this is not a video game. You should respect his vision and trust his process.

 

I'm begging you Canucks nation, stay positive and trust Jim's process. I had many doubts in him, you can go back to his first 5 years... I often questioned him and said he should be fired on these forums... but he's made amends and I'm confident that he is the man that will bring us our rightful cup.

 

Long live Lord Benning!

 

Edit: fixed... Rookie of the year or runner up without a single top 3 pick. No other GM has done this in all sports.

its almost as if NO GM IN HISTORY HAS EVER WON A CHAMPIONSHIP. NAME ONE?!

 

who cares about drafting good players if your team still completely sucks ass... ??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, aGENT said:

Outlined this s couple days ago.

 

 

0 wiggle room.  You have not allowed anything for the bonus recapture. Like I said ,they will get it done but there is no cash to improve. There was a chance to make a deal for some talent before the expansion draft. They have not planned this out. No cap space to do anything creative.

 

Why would you buy out LE.  You get $1,125,000 by just waiving him. They get more by buying out Jake. Buying out Holtby also gives them more for next year.  Jake and Holtby's deals are cash heavy for next year. They may have designed those deals for potential buy outs. Oh my god, actual planning. Could that be?

 

Buying out Jake and Holtby would clear 6.3 mil.   It would slide 2.4 mil to 22/23 but they get LE and Lou off the books.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...