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

Seven years without a clear plan from Canucks brass.

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, flat land fish said:

We are trending in the right direction.  Like we could be Buffalo how does that sound?  The players that matter most will be here for years to come and we will be in a great position to build around them.  Top 15 pick this year to add to the depth will only help.  

Buffalo is trending to be one of the worst teams ever, is that really who we should be comparing ourselves to?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dumb Nuck said:

Buffalo is trending to be one of the worst teams ever, is that really who we should be comparing ourselves to?

Yup. Quite possibly the dumbest argument I've seen, yet people here throw it around here consistently.

 

Have some expectations, FFS. It's as if people are content as long as we aren't "historically" terrible. Apathy has set in.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Convincing John said:

So you are ok with him insulating a core before he even had a core? And now half that “insulation” is rotten and not keeping the heat in. Like that’s ok? 

Hell yes I am. See: Buffalo or Edmonton as alternatives to not supporting your future core as they enter the league. And half is a bit dramatic. Guys like Sutter, Beagle Pearson, Dorsett when he was here, Roussel before his knee injury, Ryan Miller etc may have had a touch too much cap and/or term but they were/are solid players. They're all also gone over the next two years and not remotely long term issues. Pretty sure Bo was happy to have them here so all that weight didn't land solely on his shoulders in the early days.

 

1 hour ago, Convincing John said:

I just will not accept any kind of scenario in which Jim Benning has handled the situation he is in the best that he could.

Show me any GM who has. Mistakes, things that don't work out are a cost of doing business at this level. You take chances to get ahead, some don't work out.

 

1 hour ago, Convincing John said:

As I mentioned before. If he never signed a single UFA contract. We would have the exact same quality of core at the minimum but we would have infinite cap space to insulate them with.

And potentially a BUF/EDM situation where nobody took all the hard match ups, situations and performance expectations off their shoulders or taught then how to become pros. The same core/prospects =\= the same development results. Pretty sure we don't get that valuable playoff experience for our core last year without them.

 

1 hour ago, Convincing John said:

He did everything backwards. I also don’t want to hear this “ ownership made him spend to the cap” narrative. I have an extremely hard time believing ownership wouldn’t be on board if Jim said, “I’m going to just hang around the cap floor for a few years until I draft a core to insulate” or how about “I’m going to bring in some veterans on 1-2 year deals to insulate our guys as we go.” Your Thornton type players. To show these kids how to be pros. How about More of the JT Miller/ Schmidt trades, weaponizing your cap space to get good players on good contract. The guy absolutely kills all the good things he does by his idiotic UFA signings. I don’t even care that he blew picks on tweeners, I’m ok with that risk and reward. These contracts have got to stop though, seriously. Someone needs to kidnap him and lock him up from the day after the draft till the day before the preseason we would be so much further ahead. 

The only bad contract of any significance is Eriksson. I'd happily travel back in time and re-sign all three of Sutter, Beagle and Roussel to the exact same deals vs one Skinner contract.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

Yup. Quite possibly the dumbest argument I've seen, yet people here throw it around here consistently.

 

Have some expectations, FFS. It's as if people are content as long as we aren't "historically" terrible. Apathy has set in.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, kanucks25 said:

Well it's all we have left.

 

The only alternative is results, but we haven't got much of that over the past 7 years.

oh come on. We have a great young base and a decent playoff run since Linden left. 

  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Canuckfanforlife82 said:

It’s part of the reason why our depth is so bad. Letting ufas walk for nothing that’s why.

tell it to Gillis and his NMC/NTCs, he gave those out like candy. 

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jimmy McGill said:

oh come on. We have a great young base and a decent playoff run since Linden left. 

I guess one good round of playoffs (not taking anything away from the STL win) gifted by a COVID shortened season is enough results for you.

 

Perhaps my expectations are too high.

 

Or perhaps, yours too low.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

I guess one good round of playoffs (not taking anything away from the STL win) gifted by a COVID shortened season is enough results for you.

 

Perhaps my expectations are too high.

 

Or perhaps, yours too low.

I think for year 3 of a rebuild thats pretty good. Also looking ahead to an improved team for next year, there's lots of reason for optimism for an improved roster. 

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

I think for year 3 of a rebuild thats pretty good. Also looking ahead to an improved team for next year, there's lots of reason for optimism for an improved roster. 

I agree with the bolded but year 3?

 

The funny thing is about the "other side" is that they can't even come to a consensus as to when the plan started or what the plan even is. Some people think it's been "clear" from day 1 of Benning's tenure, others think they shifted the plan at that Burrows/Hansen deadline (but the Eriksson contract was before, and the Myers contract was after, so who knows).

 

Sometimes it's difficult to keep track of what plan I'm arguing is garbage, but "all of them" works, I guess.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

I agree with the bolded but year 3?

 

The funny thing is about the "other side" is that they can't even come to a consensus as to when the plan started or what the plan even is. Some people think it's been "clear" from day 1 of Benning's tenure, others think they shifted the plan at that Burrows/Hansen deadline (but the Eriksson contract was before, and the Myers contract was after, so who knows).

 

Sometimes it's difficult to keep track of what plan I'm arguing is garbage, but "all of them" works, I guess.

yes year 3. 

 

You're being dishonest if you don't see 1-4 as Sedin retool on the fly, that was not a rebuild. Just a bad idea. 

 

Its very easy to know when the plan changed to a rebuild, when Linden left. 

 

 

Edited by Jimmy McGill
  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

Your being dishonest if you don't see 1-4 as Sedin retool on the fly, that was not a rebuild. Just a bad idea. 

mk let's run with that.

 

Why wasn't the GM fired in years 1-4 then?

 

and yeah + the below

Edited by kanucks25
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jimmy McGill said:

yes year 3. 

 

Your being dishonest if you don't see 1-4 as Sedin retool on the fly, that was not a rebuild. Just a bad idea. 

 

Its very easy to know when the plan changed to a rebuild, when Linden left. 

so why did they fire linden who wanted to rebuild for another four years (according to imac) and then go out and sign a bunch of ufas in 2018 and then make a bunch of win now short sighted moves in 2019 (miller toffoli myers ferland) if those were rebuilding years?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, kanucks25 said:

mk let's run with that.

 

Why wasn't the GM fired in years 1-4 then?

well... that is a good question. I suspect Jim sold Aqua on a faster version than Linden? hard to say for sure. 

 

I just think you have to look at this as two distinct Benning eras to understand it correctly. I guess it sucks if you hate both tho :lol:

 

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Tom Sestito said:

so why did they fire linden who wanted to rebuild for another four years (according to imac)

dunno why it went so sour with Linden and Aqua. Only they know for sure. 

 

3 minutes ago, Tom Sestito said:

 

and then go out and sign a bunch of ufas in 2018 and then make a bunch of win now short sighted moves in 2019 (miller toffoli myers ferland) if those were rebuilding years?

 

 

they wanted the kids to have the veteran support to be competitive. 

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Hell yes I am. See: Buffalo or Edmonton as alternatives to not supporting your future core as they enter the league. And half is a bit dramatic. Guys like Sutter, Beagle Pearson, Dorsett when he was here, Roussel before his knee injury, Ryan Miller etc may have had a touch too much cap and/or term but they were/are solid players. They're all also gone over the next two years and not remotely long term issues. Pretty sure Bo was happy to have them here so all that weight didn't land solely on his shoulders in the early days.

 

Show me any GM who has. Mistakes, things that don't work out are a cost of doing business at this level. You take chances to get ahead, some don't work out.

 

And potentially a BUF/EDM situation where nobody took all the hard match ups, situations and performance expectations off their shoulders or taught then how to become pros. The same core/prospects =\= the same development results. Pretty sure we don't get that valuable playoff experience for our core last year without them.

 

The only bad contract of any significance is Eriksson. I'd happily travel back in time and re-sign all three of Sutter, Beagle and Roussel to the exact same deals vs one Skinner contract.

Who mentioned Buffalo and Edmonton? Jeff Skinner? Lol. Like why is this always the counter argument? The saddest thing about using Edmonton or Buffalo to validate our ghetto bottom 6 on a back to back Stanley Cup championship budget is Buffalo and Edmonton actually sucked on purpose. We legitimately tried to win every single year and failed miserably. If you want to start comparing Rebuilds/tools why don’t you guys pull up the best possible comparison imaginable? Our appointment in the 2011 SCF. They rebuilt on the fly. What about the Canadians? They used a similar method to Jim Benning, they got it done. I have absolutely no problem with signing vets. I have no problem with trading picks for the risk reward either. I have a problem with a manager who can’t properly execute his vision. Drafting. A+ Trading went from a D to a B- UFA signings and cap utilization. F- put those all together and you got a very average GM. You aren’t building a dynasty with an average GM. I’m sorry man. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Convincing John said:

Who mentioned Buffalo and Edmonton? Jeff Skinner? Lol. Like why is this always the counter argument? The saddest thing about using Edmonton or Buffalo to validate our ghetto bottom 6 on a back to back Stanley Cup championship budget is Buffalo and Edmonton actually sucked on purpose. We legitimately tried to win every single year and failed miserably. If you want to start comparing Rebuilds/tools why don’t you guys pull up the best possible comparison imaginable? Our appointment in the 2011 SCF. They rebuilt on the fly. What about the Canadians? They used a similar method to Jim Benning, they got it done. I have absolutely no problem with signing vets. I have no problem with trading picks for the risk reward either. I have a problem with a manager who can’t properly execute his vision. Drafting. A+ Trading went from a D to a B- UFA signings and cap utilization. F- put those all together and you got a very average GM. You aren’t building a dynasty with an average GM. I’m sorry man. 

Serious question with no disrespect. How many great GMs would you say are out there looking for work?

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kanucks25 said:

Yup. Quite possibly the dumbest argument I've seen, yet people here throw it around here consistently.

 

Have some expectations, FFS. It's as if people are content as long as we aren't "historically" terrible. Apathy has set in.

We had a poor start after an excellent post season run.  The team had a short training camp which was followed by a compressed schedule with minimal practice time to right the ship.  It’s not apathy it’s reality and having expectations that sometimes in team sports you will have volatility of result.  Playing within the pacific division next season we are a playoff team even with status quo roster.  Our best players haven’t peaked yet best days yet to come.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, debluvscanucks said:

Not complex?  No one, including you, could have predicted:

 

1.  COVID - the cap was supposed to go up and that was part of the "planning".   So this is a big complexity.   

2.  The schedule that's been caused by that (crazy...ours is the worst in the league)

3.  Tryamkin falling in love/bolting (thanks for nothing)

4.  Ferland getting ko'd and basically being a one and done (sure, you could predict uncertainty with him, but had he not he would have been a HUGE asset in relation to toughness).  Was a roll of the dice.

5.  Etc.

 

When you have moving parts to deal with and a lot is based on history that doesn't always pan out, it IS complex.

 

You're right...we didn't have a core to insulate.  This was 6 years ago.  A pretty big "to do" list and when you look at where we are now, we have a core and the future looks bright (even if those expecting a cup YESTERDAY don't see it).  Seems that's been kind of successful...even if the supporting cast isn't/hasn't been.  All teams will have guys who come/go and aren't huge difference makers.  Yes, some at a cost because this league works that way.  Supply/demand.

 

Again...it certainly hasn't been perfect but we're in fairly good shape in the near future.  Could be MUCH worse.

 

Not sure how you feel our progress has been impeded...guys who were just inserted in the line up over the past few years are flourishing.  They gave it a good go last year...doesn't matter the "why's and how's" of how they got there.  What matters is they did. 

 

Goaltenders ARE huge and the fact that we've hidden behind some stellar goaltending is our blessing, not a curse.  Gives us a buffer to work within.  

 

This team needs a bit more patience/time before people lose their minds.  The 6-7 year timelines is Benning's, not the pieces he's put in place....some of that's fairly recent.  Let's see how the dust settles as they do find their place in the league/on the team and start to work toward some normality.

 

16 games with 4 back to backs and 4 days off out of 27?  That's a complex schedule to work with.

 

image.png

  

So you want to base on 6 years but we swapped out the entire core....Bo and Jake were the only ones even part of that 6 years ago.  That, up there ^ is what the starting point was.   I'd say we're doing ok.

 

A work in progress, for sure...but you have to allow for that.   You have to see how/if chemistry develops and tweak on the fly.

 

It's been the past 2-3 years that the core has been set into place and is just now really establishing itself as such.  Give them time to settle in?

 

The instant gratification just isn't reasonable no matter how you try to dumb it down.

I actually didn’t like the Ferland signing because of his concussion history. 
When you are emerging from 6 years of bottom 5 finishes the only Cap issues you should have is reaching the floor, therefore Covid would be an advantage in that theoretical situation. 
 

Instant Gratification is something Jim longs for every time he signs another 27 year old to a long term deal. Instant gratification is why we are in cap trouble.  I myself don’t want instant gratification. I want Jim to use his strengths to build this team and that’s drafting and development. Ironically, if he would’ve just kept or acquired picks those potential players would be ready for the NHL today, organically. Instead, he wagered futures (today) and signed UFA’s with contracts that overlapped (today) to finish at the bottom of the league. All that wishy washy veteran insulation was a washy wishy lol. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...