Seven years without a clear plan from Canucks brass.

[IBatch]

3 minutes ago, lmm said:

Fair enough

but I find the concept of his turning the team around hyperbolic

As I said, you are splitting hairs

it was not a true turn around but a blip on an otherwise continuous downward trend

THe Canucks were hot in March, but you cannot say they had a successful season

101 points in 2014-15 is the March of this teams 2012-2021 stretch

Be honest.   What were your actual expectations after MG?    We're your excited about a return to the playoffs two years removed from a presidents trophy, or did you have the godlike wisdom to believe the team should be torn down to the studs with ... wait for it...all of Hutton and Horvat coming up?  

 

There is a reason Aquaman has a lot of money, and a reason why JB is still our GM.   Because they understand the process.   Sure if we had a whole pile of guys coming up, and a few trades we could make things would have and should have been done differently.   The only bad taste i have left from the re-tool phase was LE and Linden.   LE last gasp waste of money, and Linden for being a deflector shield and used as such.   

 

I don't mind change.   Think we needs a president posthaste and hope Aqua hires Davidson before somebody else goes.    JB shouldn't be in "daily" conversations with the owners.   Also would be fine with a new GM coming in to wrap things up in a bow at this point.   We can't afford much more as it is if Podz comes in as advertised. 

 

But will say the team can't afford, during the cap era, anything but the drafting and Milford all-time have delivered on.   Quin was ok at best, Burke maybe a little better, Nonis had one epic draft and a couple complete duds, and MG is so far back in the kind he's barely noticeable ...

[alt kilgore]

7 minutes ago, Silky mitts said:

Benning has ruined this team , and will continue to do so. 

I agree with the sentiment.  But he hasn't "ruined" it yet thank gawd.  He has tied his own hands. And continues to, like gifting Pearson a million more off the cap than what he was worth on the open market.....astounding at a time when players were being had for COVID bargains.  Looks like he lost Tryamkin as well. But we don't need more size I guess. Any new GM will have to deal with a crapload of issues, and it will require a very smart and deft GM to walk that tightrope. No, that does not describe the dollar short and a day late, reactive style of James Benning.

Just please please, before he does any more damage, take his keys away and call him a taxi.....................to the airport.

[knucklehead91]

30 minutes ago, runtzguy said:

For all the Benning lovers, this article should convince you Benning needs to be fired.

 

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/toffoli-disappointed-canucks-didnt-offer-contract

As much as it would have been helpful to have Toffoli on the team. Longterm and cap wise it hurts us. 

We would still be the 2019-20 Canucks who couldnt beat Vegas and relied heavily on an outstanding performance from Demko (one that will be long remembered throughout Demko’s career) this year we had to take a step back and retool for next year, especially with so many important contracts coming up. We just locked up Demmer, We have Horvat, Boeser and Miller to re-up in the next couple years and then we have Petey and Hughes. I think Benning made the tough choices that hurt us now, but help us down the road.

[Gurn]

11 minutes ago, kilgore said:

gifting Pearson a million more off the cap than what he was worth on the open market.

I have not seen prices listed on the open market, can you provide a link?

[lmm]

42 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Be honest.   What were your actual expectations after MG?    We're your excited about a return to the playoffs two years removed from a presidents trophy, or did you have the godlike wisdom to believe the team should be torn down to the studs with ... wait for it...all of Hutton and Horvat coming up?  

 

There is a reason Aquaman has a lot of money, and a reason why JB is still our GM.   Because they understand the process.   Sure if we had a whole pile of guys coming up, and a few trades we could make things would have and should have been done differently.   The only bad taste i have left from the re-tool phase was LE and Linden.   LE last gasp waste of money, and Linden for being a deflector shield and used as such.   

 

I don't mind change.   Think we needs a president posthaste and hope Aqua hires Davidson before somebody else goes.    JB shouldn't be in "daily" conversations with the owners.   Also would be fine with a new GM coming in to wrap things up in a bow at this point.   We can't afford much more as it is if Podz comes in as advertised. 

 

But will say the team can't afford, during the cap era, anything but the drafting and Milford all-time have delivered on.   Quin was ok at best, Burke maybe a little better, Nonis had one epic draft and a couple complete duds, and MG is so far back in the kind he's barely noticeable ...

tbh

I had "god like wisdon"

I think the writing was on the wall in 2012

the writing for Jim was on the wall when he didnot trade Mathias in 2015

that to me signalled that we would always be keeping all assetts to push for the playoffs (Running scared as it were)  I think I am now justified in that call

I have seen other teams trade off players while in a playoff hunt, but not Jim

there seem to be a desparation about his game that I find unsettling and unproductive, much like Green playing the vets when the team needs to win 10 straight and Montreal to lose out to make the playoffs. I think there is something to be said for not quitting, but there is also something to be said for facing reality. This team was never going to run the table with 10 games left.  It seem to be a failure of team (and by that I mean mangement) attitude.

Did you see Darrell Sutter yesterday? He said he did not believe that team was top of the division. the Reporter did what many fans claim the Vancouver media does and ttried to back him into a postable headline " Darrell say flames suck"

BUt Darrell handled it well imo

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/video/flames-sutter-gets-heated-question-teams-expectations/

 this is the kind of honesty I wish our team had

Edited May 13, 2021 by lmm

[lmm]

continuing with the Darryl Sutter comparison

I think Darryl is what many Canuck fans think Jim is, a slow talking horse trader

they both talk slowly

but Darryl can give an honest assessment of the Flames and then dodge the reporters attempt to trap him

Jim seems to believe that the Canucks are always 1 piece away from contending, he does not seem to be able to be honest with himself let alone the Canuck fan base

I mentioned Mathias above, the same scenerio is true of Pearson this year

 

I have to say, I really do like that interview by Sutter yesterday

that is a man who can speak the truth and not get backed into a corner by media

"Who are the top 3 teams in the North?" that was gold

[kanucks25]

Claiming Benning was successful in turning the team around because of that first season where the majority of the team wasn't even his is like saying Marek Malik was successful in changing his playstyle from defensive D-man to dangler because of that one shootout goal.

 

If you want to absurdly ignore all context and disregard that it's obvious that Benning's idea of "turning it around" was not getting booted out in the first round and then being a dumpster fire for a handful of seasons afterwards but instead coming out of the rebuild quicker than others may think. But it's not surprising how far people have to reach now; logic has almost completely left the building. Only thing left to do is grasp at straws.

Edited May 13, 2021 by kanucks25

[IBatch]

47 minutes ago, lmm said:

tbh

I had "god like wisdon"

I think the writing was on the wall in 2012

the writing for Jim was on the wall when he didnot trade Mathias in 2015

that to me signalled that we would always be keeping all assetts to push for the playoffs (Running scared as it were)  I think I am now justified in that call

I have seen other teams trade off players while in a playoff hunt, but not Jim

there seem to be a desparation about his game that I find unsettling and unproductive, much like Green playing the vets when the team needs to win 10 straight and Montreal to lose out to make the playoffs. I think there is something to be said for not quitting, but there is also something to be said for facing reality. This team was never going to run the table with 10 games left.  It seem to be a failure of team (and by that I mean mangement) attitude.

Did you see Darrell Sutter yesterday? He said he did not believe that team was top of the division. the Reporter did what many fans claim the Vancouver media does and ttried to back him into a postable headline " Darrell say flames suck"

BUt Darrell handled it well imo

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/video/flames-sutter-gets-heated-question-teams-expectations/

 this is the kind of honesty I wish our team had

Man maybe you should run the team.  Not one of us is privy to what goes behind the scenes.    Last NHL video game i played was the 92-93 version.   Heard traded were added lol... so i'm sure if it works there then it should of happened.   One guy?  Mathias ?  Lol wow.   Terrible GM as a result. 

[alt kilgore]

50 minutes ago, gurn said:

I have not seen prices listed on the open market, can you provide a link?

 

I like Tanner.  But he's a third line winger on a good team. He's 29. And he's declining in production, already, to start his shiny new three year contract.

No list. Just the ramblings I saw at the time from hockey pundits estimating what they thought he could be potentially extended here for.  Perhaps the contract is not a million over, but if you also include term, its a very sweet sweet deal in a flat cap era. No home team discount.  A few overpriced contracts are expected on any team. But its the cumulative effect of almost every contract JB signs being an overpayment, and/or overextension no matter how small.

 

I hope this writer is wrong....I really do....

 

https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/canucks-hockey/canucks-cant-stop-making-the-same-mistake-re-sign-pearson-to-3-year-975-million-deal-3616488

A return of the Sea of Granlunds

Unfortunately, Pearson’s new contract bears a striking resemblance to past mistakes by Benning. 

There’s the three-year deal he gave Sam Gagner worth $3.15 million per year. After just one year, Benning buried Gagner in the minors. Then there’s Sven Baertschi, given a three-year deal worth $3.37 million per year after finding a home on the Canucks’ second line. A year later, Baertschi was buried in the minors too.

That’s not to say that Pearson will face the same fate as Gagner and Baertschi. The Canucks have a couple of other examples of forwards signed to multi-year deals worth around $3 million per year that have managed to stay in the lineup, even when they haven’t performed up to their cap hit: Jay Beagle and Antoine Roussel.

The late Jason Botchford referred to the Canucks' obsession with bland middle-six forwards as the "Sea of Granlunds." Perhaps we'll need to refer to this in the future as the Profusion of Pearsons.

The Canucks have some bad contracts coming off the books after this season and the next, including those belonging to Beagle and Roussel, but it doesn’t matter if bad contracts expire when you keep signing new bad contracts.

The truth is that Pearson is unlikely to be a second-line calibre forward during his three-year contract. His play has declined over the past few seasons and he will be 29 before the start of his contract. From studies done on ageing curves, players typically decline in their late 20’s and get steadily worse after the age of 30. 

On a good team, Pearson is likely a third-line forward as of this season and he’s likely to get worse in the coming years.

 

 

 

[Fred65]

18 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Actually, its not how top teams stay top teams. Its one part of the process.

 

Drafting a good core, yes. Drafting other players to come in, sure. But knowing when and how to trade veterans for more picks or young players who arent a fit before you bottom out their value is a key to every good team. Signing the right free agents. Managing the salary cap effectively. Those are all things that good teams do well.

Yeah Gilman was unfortunately to smart for his bosses, they didn't like being contradicted  There was an interesting article ( I wish I had saved it ) that said the reason TO is doing as well as it is was the maximising the use of the Cap rules ... which of course was Mr Gilman role

[wallstreetamigo]

1 hour ago, knucklehead91 said:

As much as it would have been helpful to have Toffoli on the team. Longterm and cap wise it hurts us. 

We would still be the 2019-20 Canucks who couldnt beat Vegas and relied heavily on an outstanding performance from Demko (one that will be long remembered throughout Demko’s career) this year we had to take a step back and retool for next year, especially with so many important contracts coming up. We just locked up Demmer, We have Horvat, Boeser and Miller to re-up in the next couple years and then we have Petey and Hughes. I think Benning made the tough choices that hurt us now, but help us down the road.

4 years at 4.25 per for Toffoli would not cripple the team. Just had to wait for some bad contracts to end and not replace them with more (a big ask from Benning, I know).

 

Not re-signing Virtanen and letting Pearson go or re-signing him to a reasonable deal after the expansion draft woujd have cleared enough for Toffoli.

 

Miller-EP-Toffoli

Hoglander-Horvat-Boeser

Gaudette-3rd line 2 way C-Podkolzin

Motte-4th line 2 way C (even Sutter on a cheap 1 yr deal)-MacEwan

 

3 lines that can score, can shelter the 3rd line more to minimize their defensive drawbacks, rely more heavily on the 4th line and free up Horvat to be on an actual scoring line, not a 100% shutdown one.

 

No one will ever convince me that lineup would not have been far better than what we have now.

[IBatch]

1 hour ago, lmm said:

tbh

I had "god like wisdon"

I think the writing was on the wall in 2012

the writing for Jim was on the wall when he didnot trade Mathias in 2015

that to me signalled that we would always be keeping all assetts to push for the playoffs (Running scared as it were)  I think I am now justified in that call

I have seen other teams trade off players while in a playoff hunt, but not Jim

there seem to be a desparation about his game that I find unsettling and unproductive, much like Green playing the vets when the team needs to win 10 straight and Montreal to lose out to make the playoffs. I think there is something to be said for not quitting, but there is also something to be said for facing reality. This team was never going to run the table with 10 games left.  It seem to be a failure of team (and by that I mean mangement) attitude.

Did you see Darrell Sutter yesterday? He said he did not believe that team was top of the division. the Reporter did what many fans claim the Vancouver media does and ttried to back him into a postable headline " Darrell say flames suck"

BUt Darrell handled it well imo

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/video/flames-sutter-gets-heated-question-teams-expectations/

 this is the kind of honesty I wish our team had

Pretty funny coming from Sutter.   Back when they barely made the playoffs ... down to the last couple of games ... not one "expert" had them winning the cup or of course not a contender but they did.    Both Bettman's balls must have emptied.   Exactly the design.   The fact they did it again wasn't much fun either, and entire new "reason" was invented as a result ... until PIT came in and made that look kind of stupid...Sutter's are great i grew up when they were playing. 

[IBatch]

2 hours ago, kilgore said:

I agree with the sentiment.  But he hasn't "ruined" it yet thank gawd.  He has tied his own hands. And continues to, like gifting Pearson a million more off the cap than what he was worth on the open market.....astounding at a time when players were being had for COVID bargains.  Looks like he lost Tryamkin as well. But we don't need more size I guess. Any new GM will have to deal with a crapload of issues, and it will require a very smart and deft GM to walk that tightrope. No, that does not describe the dollar short and a day late, reactive style of James Benning.

Just please please, before he does any more damage, take his keys away and call him a taxi.....................to the airport.

Yep that's how i feel too.   Damn good thing he actually created something to "ruin in the first place as well" 

[iinatcc]

1 hour ago, kilgore said:

 

I like Tanner.  But he's a third line winger on a good team. He's 29. And he's declining in production, already, to start his shiny new three year contract.

No list. Just the ramblings I saw at the time from hockey pundits estimating what they thought he could be potentially extended here for.  Perhaps the contract is not a million over, but if you also include term, its a very sweet sweet deal in a flat cap era. No home team discount.  A few overpriced contracts are expected on any team. But its the cumulative effect of almost every contract JB signs being an overpayment, and/or overextension no matter how small.

 

I hope this writer is wrong....I really do....

 

https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/canucks-hockey/canucks-cant-stop-making-the-same-mistake-re-sign-pearson-to-3-year-975-million-deal-3616488

A return of the Sea of Granlunds

Unfortunately, Pearson’s new contract bears a striking resemblance to past mistakes by Benning. 

There’s the three-year deal he gave Sam Gagner worth $3.15 million per year. After just one year, Benning buried Gagner in the minors. Then there’s Sven Baertschi, given a three-year deal worth $3.37 million per year after finding a home on the Canucks’ second line. A year later, Baertschi was buried in the minors too.

That’s not to say that Pearson will face the same fate as Gagner and Baertschi. The Canucks have a couple of other examples of forwards signed to multi-year deals worth around $3 million per year that have managed to stay in the lineup, even when they haven’t performed up to their cap hit: Jay Beagle and Antoine Roussel.

The late Jason Botchford referred to the Canucks' obsession with bland middle-six forwards as the "Sea of Granlunds." Perhaps we'll need to refer to this in the future as the Profusion of Pearsons.

The Canucks have some bad contracts coming off the books after this season and the next, including those belonging to Beagle and Roussel, but it doesn’t matter if bad contracts expire when you keep signing new bad contracts.

The truth is that Pearson is unlikely to be a second-line calibre forward during his three-year contract. His play has declined over the past few seasons and he will be 29 before the start of his contract. From studies done on ageing curves, players typically decline in their late 20’s and get steadily worse after the age of 30. 

On a good team, Pearson is likely a third-line forward as of this season and he’s likely to get worse in the coming years.

 

 

 

I really miss Jason Botchford he help no punches with his comments and criticisms to the team when it was warranted. 

 

My hope for Pearson is that his career trajectory is that of Chris Higgins. Which means his sharp decline starts once his contract expires. 

[iinatcc]

58 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

4 years at 4.25 per for Toffoli would not cripple the team. Just had to wait for some bad contracts to end and not replace them with more (a big ask from Benning, I know).

 

Not re-signing Virtanen and letting Pearson go or re-signing him to a reasonable deal after the expansion draft woujd have cleared enough for Toffoli.

 

Miller-EP-Toffoli

Hoglander-Horvat-Boeser

Gaudette-3rd line 2 way C-Podkolzin

Motte-4th line 2 way C (even Sutter on a cheap 1 yr deal)-MacEwan

 

3 lines that can score, can shelter the 3rd line more to minimize their defensive drawbacks, rely more heavily on the 4th line and free up Horvat to be on an actual scoring line, not a 100% shutdown one.

 

No one will ever convince me that lineup would not have been far better than what we have now.

Yeah and if Toffoli was in the team the Canucks could actually have 3 scoring lines with Pettersson, Miller, and Horvat all taking center and Pearson, Höglander, Boeser, Toffoli, and maybe Podkolzin or an untraded Gaudette as line mates 

[knucklehead91]

1 hour ago, wallstreetamigo said:

4 years at 4.25 per for Toffoli would not cripple the team. Just had to wait for some bad contracts to end and not replace them with more (a big ask from Benning, I know).

 

Not re-signing Virtanen and letting Pearson go or re-signing him to a reasonable deal after the expansion draft woujd have cleared enough for Toffoli.

 

Miller-EP-Toffoli

Hoglander-Horvat-Boeser

Gaudette-3rd line 2 way C-Podkolzin

Motte-4th line 2 way C (even Sutter on a cheap 1 yr deal)-MacEwan

 

3 lines that can score, can shelter the 3rd line more to minimize their defensive drawbacks, rely more heavily on the 4th line and free up Horvat to be on an actual scoring line, not a 100% shutdown one.

 

No one will ever convince me that lineup would not have been far better than what we have now.

Who do you protect in the expansion draft

[iinatcc]

2 hours ago, knucklehead91 said:

As much as it would have been helpful to have Toffoli on the team. Longterm and cap wise it hurts us. 

.

4 years isn't exactly long term plus if there was a player to spend 4.25 million it would be a player that can score 25 to 30 goals and not Jay Beagle, Antoine Roussel, or Brandon Sutter 

[knucklehead91]

Just now, iinatcc said:

4 years isn't exactly long term plus if there was a player to spend 4.25 million it would be a player that can score 25 to 30 goals and not Jay Beagle, Antoine Roussel, or Brandon Sutter 

Okay so sign Toffoli and who do you protect and who is exposed at the expansion draft. 
The long term choice of not resigning Toffoli is going to pay more dividends than signing Toffoli for the short term, when we still are the team who barely made it to a game 7 vs Vegas.

We cant keep icing the same team and expect to be magically better than Vegas and cup contenders. We need to make some short term sacrifices for long term success. We signed Loui Eriksson right around the same age as Toffoli. Do we want to keep throwing contracts at 29-30 year old players and expect to be cup contenders? Or do we draft and develop players at a young age and keep our core intact for much longer.

If we were competitive and we were potential contenders. Then yes sign Toffoli. But the reality is we arent there yet, we have the expansion draft to prepare for and we have contracts to juggle. You’d had to see Toffoli’s extension get in the way of resigning Boeser, Miller and Horvat in the next couple years.

[iinatcc]

3 minutes ago, knucklehead91 said:

Okay so sign Toffoli and who do you protect and who is exposed at the expansion draft. .

For towards ? I would protect Pettersson, Horvat, Boeser, Miller,  Pearson, Toffoli, and either Motte or Lind. 

[wallstreetamigo]

36 minutes ago, knucklehead91 said:

Who do you protect in the expansion draft

EP-Horvat-Miller-Toffoli-Boeser-Gaudette-Motte/Lind/Gadjovich for forwards in that fictional scenario. 

Edited May 13, 2021 by wallstreetamigo