Seven years without a clear plan from Canucks brass.

[knucklehead91]

58 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Not really. If you look at the hypothetical lineup I posted, Gaudette was in it rather than being traded for Highmore.

 

Your reading comprehension is what failed bud.

I guess I cant comprehend how a player not on our roster is on our protected list =S 

And you cant comprehend sarcasm or a joke. 

Reality is your brilliant protected list has a sh*tcago player that was traded over a month ago. Catch up with the times BUD

[knucklehead91]

54 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Our leading goal scorer is Boeser with 20.

 

28 goals is on the decline though...derp

 

And the funniest part is you say our team is better by letting Toffoli go but in the next breath say he is only tearing it up in goals because he has feasted on our $&!#ty team.

 

Comedy gold bud. You are Benning's favorite kind of fan. Bends in knots to justify anything he does even when your argument makes no logical sense at all.

You are clueless to reality. Get a grip. Try a reading class or comprehending “short term sacrifice for LONG TERM GAIN”

[Alflives]

This fighting in the posts might be better than tonight’s game!  

We are gonna win, and that’s all that matters!  Douse those Flameroos.  

[wallstreetamigo]

26 minutes ago, knucklehead91 said:

I am not your buddy, pal.

You are okay with letting Gadjovich go, before finding out what he is capable of? Or for that matter any player under 25??? Thats the Gillis approach that left us in this mess.

You’d happily expose potential and retain regression? Toffoli is on the inevitable downward trajectory. This is not a great year to use as a measuring stick, the scheduling was horrendous, the level of competition was down due to divisional restrictions.

Assuming that Benning did the Highmore for Gaudette trade, one of Lind or Gadjovich could still be protected bud. And we won't really need both anyway under my Toffoli assumption.

 

There is no one else the Canucks have to expose that I would lose any sleep over losing to Seattle. 

[wallstreetamigo]

27 minutes ago, knucklehead91 said:

You are clueless to reality. Get a grip. Try a reading class or comprehending “short term sacrifice for LONG TERM GAIN”

What long term gain is that exactly?

 

Trading a 2nd and a good prospect to let a ufa slam dunk re-signing walk because you are chasing OEL?

 

Ya seems like a solid long term plan.

 

Losing Toffoli was short term pain for no gain bud.

[wallstreetamigo]

41 minutes ago, knucklehead91 said:

I guess I cant comprehend how a player not on our roster is on our protected list =S 

And you cant comprehend sarcasm or a joke. 

Reality is your brilliant protected list has a sh*tcago player that was traded over a month ago. Catch up with the times BUD

Re-read my post bud.

 

Look at the roster I suggested. It was based on what we could have had if Benning had kept Toffoli and not traded Gaudette for scraps. Hence why under my hypothetical scenario I responded to the person who asked who my protected list based on that would be.

 

Reading is your friend, reading comprehension though is even more important.

[lmm]

4 hours ago, IBatch said:

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. 

you are such a twit

Mathias was the first , Pearson was the most recent

there are more 

Mostlyt he has signed untradable contracts  its a different kind on MNC

terrible GM

and I don't ever play video games

[knucklehead91]

48 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

What long term gain is that exactly?

 

Trading a 2nd and a good prospect to let a ufa slam dunk re-signing walk because you are chasing OEL?

 

Ya seems like a solid long term plan.

 

Losing Toffoli was short term pain for no gain bud.

Im going to spell this out for you simply.

When this team is competitive...TWO THOUSAND TWENTY TWO, TWO THOUSAND TWENTY THREE, TWO THOUSAND TWENTY FOUR FREE AGENT CLASSES. YOUNGER AND BETTER IMPROVEMENTS ON A 32 YEAR OLD TOFFOLI. You can keep your 29 year old Toffoli now.... But im going to go after one of the big fishes in those FA classes...Larkin, Point, Seth Jones, Cernak, Forsberg, Hertl, Barkov, Meier, Barzal (nice home town kid).... But dont worry, Toffoli will make the team better in 3 years.

 

Edit: IF anyone of these players are available, Im going to want to have that 4 and a quarter  to throw at one of these players along with whatever kinda cap space we have to help acquire the big fish

 

If you wanna stick to doin things the Gillis way, you can to take those ideas with you to Toronto and tell them to resign Jumbo Joe because hes the highest scoring over 40 player in the league.

 

Toronto is going to make an example of bad contract management in the next 3 years if they do not win the cup. Matthews is going to be laughing his way to some big US city life.

Edited May 14, 2021 by knucklehead91

[knucklehead91]

3 hours ago, wallstreetamigo said:

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

 

27 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Re-read my post bud.

 

Look at the roster I suggested. It was based on what we could have had if Benning had kept Toffoli and not traded Gaudette for scraps. Hence why under my hypothetical scenario I responded to the person who asked who my protected list based on that would be.

 

Reading is your friend, reading comprehension though is even more important.

Read it again. Roster you suggested still shows Gaudette who is loooooong gone. Toffoli had nothing to do with Gaudette. That is not a hypothetical situation, that is a "wasnt signed" in the offseason and a "get the f*** out" in the middle of the season. IF we kept Toffoli we would not be able to afford Schmidt. So now your shakey defense is without a top 4. Great work bud. Comprehending and mindreading some bass ackward time travelling protection list requires rocket appliances

 

 Wallstreet aint for you amigo.

Edited May 14, 2021 by knucklehead91

[wallstreetamigo]

20 minutes ago, knucklehead91 said:

 

Read it again. Roster you suggested still shows Gaudette who is loooooong gone. Toffoli had nothing to do with Gaudette. That is not a hypothetical situation, that is a "wasnt signed" in the offseason and a "get the f*** out" in the middle of the season. IF we kept Toffoli we would not be able to afford Schmidt. So now your shakey defense is without a top 4. Great work bud. Comprehending and mindreading some bass ackward time travelling protection list requires rocket appliances

 

 Wallstreet aint for you amigo.

Ok bud, I get it. You dont know how people could make 2 valid assumptions at once when posting a hypothetical lineup we could have had if our GM was able to multi task.

 

Lol I am semi-retired, under 50, and only work now because I would be bored sitting home and enjoy dealing with sports professionals. 

 

I think wallstreet did me just fine bud. Do you pay rent for your mom's basement?

Edited May 14, 2021 by wallstreetamigo

[wallstreetamigo]

31 minutes ago, knucklehead91 said:

Im going to spell this out for you simply.

When this team is competitive...TWO THOUSAND TWENTY TWO, TWO THOUSAND TWENTY THREE, TWO THOUSAND TWENTY FOUR FREE AGENT CLASSES. YOUNGER AND BETTER IMPROVEMENTS ON A 32 YEAR OLD TOFFOLI. You can keep your 29 year old Toffoli now.... But im going to go after one of the big fishes in those FA classes...Larkin, Point, Seth Jones, Cernak, Forsberg, Hertl, Barkov, Meier, Barzal (nice home town kid).... But dont worry, Toffoli will make the team better in 3 years.

 

Edit: IF anyone of these players are available, Im going to want to have that 4 and a quarter  to throw at one of these players along with whatever kinda cap space we have to help acquire the big fish

 

If you wanna stick to doin things the Gillis way, you can to take those ideas with you to Toronto and tell them to resign Jumbo Joe because hes the highest scoring over 40 player in the league.

 

Toronto is going to make an example of bad contract management in the next 3 years if they do not win the cup. Matthews is going to be laughing his way to some big US city life.

If Benning can stop signing bums to longer term deals at horrendous cap hits, guess what? Having Toffoli now on a bargain contract would have no bearing at all on signing future free agents. 

 

Literally none of those players are likely to make it to UFA status bud. Smart GM's dont plan based on the hope they can get players 3 years from now as ufa.

 

How are you going to feel about a 32 year old Pearson? Let me guess, you thknk Benning signing him mid season was a stroke of genius?

[Bertuzzipunch]

The obsession with Benning is absolutely insane. 

[knucklehead91]

1 hour ago, wallstreetamigo said:

So because you choose to believe there is no truth to a rumor verified by several sources to be true, we should just magically pretend Benning isnt the dimbulb who lost out on Toffoli because he was too busy chasing maybe the only contract left in the nhl that will wind up worse than Eriksson's?

 

Sure bud.

 

He was chasing OEL hard. The only oneleft who doesnt believe that is you.

Sure he pursued OEL but for how long? Free agency began on Oct 9th correct? Toffoli signed on Oct 12th. Playoffs ended Sept 28th. Doesnt sound like Toffoli was very patient and Benning did not have much time.

OEL chose to remain in Arizona prior to free agency. Soooo no I’m not buying the OEL situation interfering with Toffoli.

 

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.nucksmisconduct.com/platform/amp/2020/10/9/21509467/vancouver-canucks-oliver-ekman-larsson-no-trade

[knucklehead91]

35 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Ok bud, I get it. You dont know how people could make 2 valid assumptions at once when posting a hypothetical lineup we could have had if our GM was able to multi task.

 

Lol I am semi-retired, under 50, and only work now because I would be bored sitting home and enjoy dealing with sports professionals. 

 

I think wallstreet did me just fine bud. Do you pay rent for your mom's basement?

Okay Doc, lets hop in the Delorean.
Can you read the bolded section again and decipher those hieroglyphics?? How does one comprehend a time travelling projected line up with protected players that are not on the team but I should be able to comprehend your forethought protected roster based on knowing we are losing Gaudette because of not signing Toffoli but we coulda kept Gaudette if we signed Toffoli and then no trades would have happened!!!!!!.... Sound confusing? Yea its meant to confuse you.

 WOW thats amazing, we shoulda kept Toffoli and we’d still have Gaudette. WALLSTREET FOR GM!

 

P.S. GAUDETTE WAS TRADED. As of today our roster WITH Toffoli would not include Gaudette. Did you not comprehend that I was automatically excluding Gaudette from our roster and hypothetically slotting Toffoli in as you would have had him on our team. But I dont need to tell you things Im thinking, you should just know.

 

edit: Bud.
 

Edited May 14, 2021 by knucklehead91

[wallstreetamigo]

12 minutes ago, knucklehead91 said:

Sure he pursued OEL but for how long? Free agency began on Oct 9th correct? Toffoli signed on Oct 12th. Playoffs ended Sept 28th. Doesnt sound like Toffoli was very patient and Benning did not have much time.

OEL chose to remain in Arizona prior to free agency. Soooo no I’m not buying the OEL situation interfering with Toffoli.

 

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.nucksmisconduct.com/platform/amp/2020/10/9/21509467/vancouver-canucks-oliver-ekman-larsson-no-trade

If you were a UFA, how long would you wait for a contract offer? According to Toffoli, who signed with Montreal on the 4th day of free agency, he had not even received an offer from the Canucks. 

 

The OEL situation absolutely did hamstring Benning with Toffoli, Tanev (who likewise received no offer) etc.

 

Benning was counting on that cap space being taken by OEL's anchor contract. So he didnt bother even exploring keeping Toffoli. He had months to negotiate a new deal with him yet didnt. 

[wallstreetamigo]

1 minute ago, knucklehead91 said:

Okay Doc, lets hop in the Delorean.
Can you read the bolded section again and decipher those hieroglyphics?? How does one comprehend a time travelling projected line up with protected players that are not on the team but I should be able to comprehend your forethought protected roster based on knowing we are losing Gaudette because of not signing Toffoli but we coulda kept Gaudette if we signed Toffoli and then no trades would have happened!!!!!!.... Sound confusing? Yea its meant to confuse you.

 WOW thats amazing, we shoulda kept Toffoli and we’d still have Gaudette. WALLSTREET FOR GM!

 

P.S. GAUDETTE WAS TRADED. As of today our roster WITH Toffoli would not include Gaudette. Did you not comprehend that I was automatically excluding Gaudette from our roster and hypothetically slotting Toffoli in as you would have had him on our team. But I dont need to tell you things Im thinking, you should just know.
 

Omg you might be the biggest clown I have ever encountered on here.

 

If you read my original post, i made a hypothetical lineup based on keeping Toffoli and Gaudette. Keeping one has nothing to do with keeping the other.

 

Gaudette was in that lineup to show a line where he could have fit going forward. The biggest justification for trading him for a healthy scratch guy was he didnt fit on a checking line. So I posted a potential roster where the 3rd line was not a straight checking line but more of a secondary offense line.

 

I dont expect you to follow along bud.

 

But lets follow the progression. A what if lineup where those 2 guys fit in and would be far better offensively than the garbage offense we now have.

 

Its really not that hard. Posting an alternative lineup we could havd had is pretty common prsctice on this forum.

 

 

 

[CanadianRugby]

On 5/12/2021 at 10:57 AM, oldnews said:

Serious question - giving you the benefit of hindsight - what would your plan have been? 

when would you have started your re-whatever-you-want-to-call-it?

 

Personally I'd prefer to hear what you would have done - from the point Linden took over - for obvious reasons - the parameters of what the present management group had to work with - should be judged by.

It's too easy to pretend a teardown was possible - and pre-date the Tortorella misadventure.

Specifics would be good - ie 'just dump all the veterans, bottom out and win the lottery' for me is not good enough to qualify your easy, negative take.  I'd be interested to hear what you'd do with all those veterans - and contracts - post Tortorella season.

We can leave out what ownership would have wanted / their interests / their financial take - that doesn't matter / isn't as tangible as the simple player moves proposed.   'Don't sign LE = is obvious enough as well - we can take that for granted - and we get it - you didn't want Linden Vey.  Beyond that, I'm interested in your re-take / re-plan - what you propose.

I put this to you - because you're not simply one of those one-note posters here - yeah - you have your share of these kind of frustrated, dismissive posts - but you've also seemed to engage at times - have a discussion (as do guys like 189lbs, in spite of the entertaining exchanges we have at times that aren't particularly substantive).  Interested in an actual, thought-out counterpoint / discussion here.

 

 

 

 

Sure.

 

My first step would have been to trade any vet of value that waived their clauses and could fetch a decent return.  That means try to trade Kesler, Bieksa, Higgins, Burrows, Hansen, Matthias, Hamhuis, Richardson and Tanev before they lost their value due to age.  I think the Sedins wanted to stay and if you were to pick any vets to teach youngsters how to be pros, they were perfect for that job.  So keep them, but tank.  

 

I would also not have traded any picks to "fill an age gap" which means Benning would have had a lot of 2nd.. 3rd round picks to work with.  His track record in the 2nd and late 1st round is very good so I imagine our bottom 6 would have some good young players hitting their prime about now.  As well as some D possibly.  

 

I wouldn't have spent big money on free agents unless it was on short term contracts.  With the old vets traded away, there'd be cap room to (in the short term) bring in character guys to teach/protect prospects.  As well as "weaponize" the cap by adding bad contracts for draft picks.  If any of those vets really worked out then they too could be flipped for picks, thanks to them having short contracts.  

 

The Canucks were destined to be bad when Benning took over.  So really the rebuild should have been embraced right away.  The high picks might have been higher, and the cap situation would be a lot better because it would be drafted players instead of expensive past their prime vets on the bottom 6.  The rebuild would also be complete faster because there'd be a bigger influx of talent coming in, and it coming in much sooner than it ultimately did.  

 

At the end of the day.  I feel management tried to avoid a rebuild, even in the middle of multiple bottom feeder seasons.  Instead of hoarding draft picks, they were traded to improve faster.  This didn't work so there were no on ice results as well as any rebuild being hamstrung by lack of draft picks.  In fact, this "rebuilding" team had one less draft pick than they started with over Benning's tenure.  

 

So while the Canucks have ended up with some good top end players due to being terrible.  The supporting cast is straight up bad because of foolish contracts and the fact that more draft picks were traded away than brought in when the team should have been rebuilding.  None of this is hindsight.  Most media and "experts" were saying this would happen the whole time.  

 

Of course you need to do other things too.  Win some trades, have some luck, develop well, hire good staff and so on.  

 

I'm not gonna get in a back and forth, we've done that enough over the years on this topic.  But that would have been my plan.  

Edited May 14, 2021 by CanadianRugby

[knucklehead91]

17 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Omg you might be the biggest clown I have ever encountered on here.

 

If you read my original post, i made a hypothetical lineup based on keeping Toffoli and Gaudette. Keeping one has nothing to do with keeping the other.

 

Gaudette was in that lineup to show a line where he could have fit going forward. The biggest justification for trading him for a healthy scratch guy was he didnt fit on a checking line. So I posted a potential roster where the 3rd line was not a straight checking line but more of a secondary offense line.

 

I dont expect you to follow along bud.

 

But lets follow the progression. A what if lineup where those 2 guys fit in and would be far better offensively than the garbage offense we now have.

 

Its really not that hard. Posting an alternative lineup we could havd had is pretty common prsctice on this forum.

 

 

 

Now follow me on this, the question was who do you protect if you signed Toffoli. There was zero mention of Gaudette. We are HYPOTHETICALLY talking of the upcoming expansion draft. Toffoli is “on” the roster, Gaudette is NOT as he was traded. You made no mentions of not making that AG For Highmore trade. I cracked a joke (something you couldnt comprehend) you spend enough time on these forums, you should understand what a joke is by now.
You made it all serious and say I should be able to know your algebraic calculations without you giving me the formula of keeping Gaudette and signing Toffoli. Someones a little sensetive.

 

Thats great to hear you are semi retired and work because you are bored, im sure you killed it on wallstreet, but it doesnt sound like you have much of a family or home life.

PS its my mother AND fathers basement.

 

[wallstreetamigo]

22 minutes ago, knucklehead91 said:

Now follow me on this, the question was who do you protect if you signed Toffoli. There was zero mention of Gaudette. We are HYPOTHETICALLY talking of the upcoming expansion draft. Toffoli is “on” the roster, Gaudette is NOT as he was traded. You made no mentions of not making that AG For Highmore trade. I cracked a joke (something you couldnt comprehend) you spend enough time on these forums, you should understand what a joke is by now.
You made it all serious and say I should be able to know your algebraic calculations without you giving me the formula of keeping Gaudette and signing Toffoli. Someones a little sensetive.

 

Thats great to hear you are semi retired and work because you are bored, im sure you killed it on wallstreet, but it doesnt sound like you have much of a family or home life.

PS its my mother AND fathers basement.

 

Ummm someone responded to my post asking me who I would protect based on my post.

 

Since Gaudette was included in my post, I also would have protected him in that scenario.

 

Haha.....I have 7 kids man, 6 still at home and I get to spend lots of time with them, coach them in hockey, and have a great family and home life. But thanks for your concern....

Edited May 14, 2021 by wallstreetamigo

[knucklehead91]

40 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

Omg you might be the biggest clown I have ever encountered on here.

 

If you read my original post, i made a hypothetical lineup based on keeping Toffoli and Gaudette. Keeping one has nothing to do with keeping the other.

 

Gaudette was in that lineup to show a line where he could have fit going forward. The biggest justification for trading him for a healthy scratch guy was he didnt fit on a checking line. So I posted a potential roster where the 3rd line was not a straight checking line but more of a secondary offense line.

 

I dont expect you to follow along bud.

 

But lets follow the progression. A what if lineup where those 2 guys fit in and would be far better offensively than the garbage offense we now have.

 

Its really not that hard. Posting an alternative lineup we could havd had is pretty common prsctice on this forum.

 

 

 

Gaudette provided nearly 0 offence. He struggled. He spent more than half a season and didnt bury his chances so i can “hypothetically” say with certainty nothing would have changed in this clusterf**k of a season. Had we got in the delorean and kept Gaudette. He struggled in the first half where it was a pretty heavy schedule... he would have drown in the last 19 game stretch.

Toffoli realistically would have brought more offence to our top 6, yes. But does that translate into him having the same goal total??
 

You are in the mindset that if he scored 28 in Montreal, he automatically scores 28 in Vancouver. Or he gets 50 because omg he would make us SOOOO much better.

 

The reality you need to account for is

1) hes not going to score 1/3 of his goals against us, so now hes down to 18-20 goals

2) The scheduling we had prior to COVID

3) The month off mid season

4) we have had like no practice time all season from what Green insinuated in his interview the other day the way the scheduling went for us and with COVID

5) The injuries up and down the line up

6) the scheduling after COVID.

 

 

Lastly if you actually read my posts earlier or atleast could comprehend them.... KEEPING TOFFOLI or hell tell ya what, KEEPING TOFFOLI AND GAUDETTE STILL DOES NOT MAKE US BETTER THAN VEGAS. That was my main point and my biggest point to start. Next we have the Expansion draft, we need to prioritize identifying the actual CORE of the team, we also have to deal with up coming contracts where all the CORE players need raises. Toffoli is not a core player, hes puzzle piece 3-4 year contract for when you are going for it all. Core players are 6+ Year keepers. We are not ready to compete for the cup, so keeping Toffoli  does not complete the puzzle and push us over the edge to win a cup. We are only in the 3rd year of our rebuild, we are going to acquire another high end draft pick to help build on this core. And keep us competitive for more than a few years. When we are in that window to win, THAT is when you hypothetically sign Toffoli. Letting Marky, Tanev and Toffoli walk was the short term sacrifice, for the long term gain of high draft picks, prospect development, a young core and timely UFA signings. Not just signing a UFA because hes good and helps us in a losing season, especially one who is going to be 30 next season and the decline will become inevitable