Severe Cap Issues Next Year

[Patel Bure]

8 hours ago, D-Money said:

That’s simply not true. For instance, when Buffalo signed Jeff Skinner to that monstrous contract, many including myself thought it was ridiculous. Guess what? We were absolutely right. From day 1 that contract has been a natural disaster.

 

And when Benning signed multiple free agents to seemingly large contracts, many (including numerous industry insiders) said it was a bad idea, as it could affect our ability to retain more talented players down the road. Guess what? We all watched that play out exactly as predicted last free agency, when we had to let Toffoli walk for only $1M more than we just gave Pearson. And for only $1.25M more than we previously gave Roussel and Beagle. Toffoli is significantly more talented than those 3, but Benning shot himself in the foot, as predicted.

 

And what exactly has the team gained from signing all of these players? With the exception of a few weeks in the bubble, we have been a bad team, period. Even last season, we were one of the worst teams in the league in the weeks leading up to COVID, and seemed destined to miss the playoffs yet again. The brief success we had was the outlier.

 

The collective opinion of the vast majority on the Pearson signing, from simple fans to analytic observers to industry insiders, is: “Decent player, but why?” Are they all wrong? Or are you suggesting that the front office with a history of making similar decisions that have all gone poorly must be right, simply because they must be?

1) Re - Skinner.   I'll give you Skinner as there's no way he should have been paid that much, but the Sabres have also misused him horribly.   Instead of playing Skinner with one of their many talented centres (i.e. Eichel, Reinhart, and Staal when he was there), they put Skinner with twits like Curtis Lazar and basically started to use Skinner in completely different roles for god knows what reason.    

 

2)  I myself don't understand the Toffoli thing but my guess is that the Canucks brass are/were VERY high on Hoglander and/or Podkolzin and didn't expect our Top 6 prowess to be a long term problem.   We already saw significant things from Hoglander this year in his rookie year.      

 

3) re 2020 season:   Completely ridiculous comment on your part.    We came within a game of making the 3rd round in the playoffs last season and were very impressive for most of the season.    Even during our slump pre-covid (which was largely due to a hectic travel schedule in which our home games basically felt like an extended part of a monstrous road trip), the Canucks won their final 2 of 3 games against two very respectable opponents (Islanders and Avs).    The Canucks were playing much tighter and Demko was starting to acclimate to the #1 role.    As much of a possibility as it was that we would have continued slumping, there was just as much evidence to support the notion that we were coming out of it.   We then qualified for the playoffs fairly and squarely by defeating the Wild, and then took out the cup champs.

 

4) And yes - those industry insiders are wrong when it comes to Pearson (although I do side with them that we shouldn't have let Toffoli walk).    Pearson is a good 3rd line calibre player and should bring enough elements to a 3rd line to make it a decent threat at the 3rd line level.  His defensive savviness should help a guy like Gaudette, and he has just enough offensive prowess to give a guy like Virtanen or Podkolzin some offensive support down there.   Furthermore, Pearson should be able to play on a top 6 incase of injuries.   

[Provost]

17 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Loui must be retiring and Aquilini must have given the green light on some buyouts, specifically Holtby.  That's the only thing that makes sense to sign Pearson so early and at that deal.  Aquilini had to approve this deal, no way Benning signs Pearson to a 3 year deal prior to the summer without Aquilini's approval.  Which tells me Benning isn't going anywhere.

... how many years have people been excusing moves because of some wishful future thinking?  The Loui must be retiring idea has been around for a couple of offseasons already.  A Holtby buyout makes sense... but so did some buyouts last offseason, and they didn't happen.  We can't just assume they will this year too.  Even the idea of Ferland and Beagle being on LTIR for the entire of next season is wishful thinking... they haven't announced their medical retirement and there really isn't any incentive to do so on their end.  If they aren't ruled out for the entirety of next season really soon, we can't use that money to sign players because we can't count on the LTIR money being available.

Even if all of those things end up being true, it doesn't make the Pearson signing any better simply because there are certainly going to be better deals out there for the money AND he would likely have garnered a decent asset at the deadline.  Reports from outside the market were suggesting that he was high on a number of teams lists as a trade target.  There is an opportunity cost for the loss of the cap dollars and we have simply shut the door on even considering some of those opportunities.  Is there another Nate Schmidt type deal out there to get a good player with pennies on the dollar just because you are willing to take on their whole cap hit?  Almost assuredly considering the flat cap.

[Provost]

3 hours ago, IBatch said:

 

But correct.   I learned awhile ago to wait and see when it comes to JB, he rarely does what i think he will do, and somehow comes out smelling like roses when digging around the pile of manure he's both created for himself and from previous management. 

 

I am not sure how having the combination of the longest serving GM with one of the worst winning percentages of any active GM... and having a team producing worse results after 7 years of his tenure despite having a mitt full of top 10 picks and spending to the cap each year translates into smelling like roses.

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

1 hour ago, SNuck said:

 

Phew, no problem, can close thread. 

Makes me wonder if Benning has had some preliminary conversations with Francis, and expects to be able to make a deal to have Seattle take Holtby or Myers in expansion?

 

Or possibly the white whale of a Loui Eriksson mutual contract termination?

 

(Although the cards Eriksson’s agent is showing in the media recently suggests this is never happening.)

[D-Money]

2 minutes ago, DarkIndianRises said:

3) re 2020 season:   Completely ridiculous comment on your part.    We came within a game of making the 3rd round in the playoffs last season and were very impressive for most of the season.    Even during our slump pre-covid (which was largely due to a hectic travel schedule in which our home games basically felt like an extended part of a monstrous road trip), the Canucks won their final 2 of 3 games against two very respectable opponents (Islanders and Avs).    The Canucks were playing much tighter and Demko was starting to acclimate to the #1 role.    As much of a possibility as it was that we would have continued slumping, there was just as much evidence to support the notion that we were coming out of it.   We then qualified for the playoffs fairly and squarely by defeating the Wild, and then took out the cup champs.

Our record for the last 5 weeks of the 2019-20 season was 6-9-1. We were falling in the standings, and in the last game prior to the COVID shutdown Tanev suffered an injury and would have missed most of the rest of the season.

 

We beat Minnesota, who had goaltending troubles. Then we came up against a Blues team that was still recovering from multiple cases of COVID, and whose starting goalie was majorly off. Then we got absolutely steamrolled on the ice by Vegas, but hung on for dear life all the way to game 7 because of some epic (read: unsustainable) goaltending. It was a nice little run, but considering all of the regular season results for the last few years, it was a definite outlier. Suggesting that this is ridiculous is what is ridiculous.

 

I don't want to be a team that has a surprise run simply due to goaltending. I want both the goalie and the team in front of them to be excellent. I want the Canucks to be steamrolling the other teams on the ice, like Vegas did to us in the bubble, and like Vancouver did to other teams in 2010-11.

[xereau]

15 hours ago, canuktravella said:

no way Tryamkin  signs at a mill he's gonna want 2.25-2.75

Pearson signing is baffling he's a third line winger   

Roussel better be bought out, Eriksson better retire, beagle better be taken by Seattle.

Thats a extra 10.5 mill in cap.

Myers, Sutter, Edler, Virtanen, Gaudette, Miller traded at deadline  frees another 24.5

We still don't have a decent 3rd line center.

I hope benning is fired if this doesn't happen.

Predicting Jim signs RNH in offseason.

[Patel Bure]

2 minutes ago, D-Money said:

Our record for the last 5 weeks of the 2019-20 season was 6-9-1. We were falling in the standings, and in the last game prior to the COVID shutdown Tanev suffered an injury and would have missed most of the rest of the season.

 

We beat Minnesota, who had goaltending troubles. Then we came up against a Blues team that was still recovering from multiple cases of COVID, and whose starting goalie was majorly off. Then we got absolutely steamrolled on the ice by Vegas, but hung on for dear life all the way to game 7 because of some epic (read: unsustainable) goaltending. It was a nice little run, but considering all of the regular season results for the last few years, it was a definite outlier. Suggesting that this is ridiculous is what is ridiculous.

 

I don't want to be a team that has a surprise run simply due to goaltending. I want both the goalie and the team in front of them to be excellent. I want the Canucks to be steamrolling the other teams on the ice, like Vegas did to us in the bubble, and like Vancouver did to other teams in 2010-11.

“Whenever we experienced success last season, it was due to a fluke, but whenever we struggled last season, it was a sign of deep underlying issues and symptoms,”

 

Gotchya.  
 

Anyways, I am of the opinion that our 2008-2013 window will start at or shortly after the 2022-2023 season, and that we are currently in our 2007-2008 formative period (which may extend to next season as well).    
 

Speaking of which, I don’t seem to recall too many “fans” complaining or being irritated by the fact that we undeservedly defeated Dallas in the first round of 2006-2007 while making an unexpected 2nd round appearance.  I don’t recall Canucks fans joking about our playoff qualification in (1991?) when we qualified despite being way below .500.   In both those instances, what happened a few years later?

 

Let’s sit back and watch things unfold.

 

[kanucks25]

37 minutes ago, DarkIndianRises said:

 

1) Insulate incoming youth with veteran players that can play in the tougher roles while the kids develop

2) Roster spots and positions and roles on the team were to be EARNED by the youth and not given.    Make sure the kids are ready or close to being ready for certain roles before they supplant a vet .   

3) Veterans with renowned leadership skills and/or veterans that were successful in the past can 'show the ropes' to the kids and help create good on ice and off-ice habits even if these vets aren't quite at the same level that they once were.   

4) Get the kids to compete hard every night regardless of where they are in the standings.   PUSH for a playoff spot and come into each season expecting to PUSH and COMPETE (which is NOT the same thing as "trying to compete for a cup" or "be a lock for the playoffs" like so many of the dolts at HF Canucks and media members seem to believe).   

 

Guys like Markstrom, Demko, Pettersson, Boeser, Horvat, Gaudette, Virtanen, Motte, MacEwen, Hughes, Juolevi, Stecher, and Hutton all benefitted from the presence of veterans in terms of their development (either in the form of being kept on the farm a little longer, or playing in protected minutes/certain roles at the NHL level while the vets took on tougher match-ups).   

So just to confirm, it was an 8-9 year plan from the start?

[D-Money]

1 minute ago, DarkIndianRises said:

“Whenever we experienced success last season, it was due to a fluke, but whenever we struggled last season, it was a sign of deep underlying issues and symptoms,”

 

Gotchya.  
 

Anyways, I am of the opinion that our 2008-2013 window will start at or shortly after the 2022-2023 season, and that we are currently in our 2007-2008 formative period (which may extend to next season as well).    
 

Speaking of which, I don’t seem to recall too many “fans” complaining or being irritated by the fact that we undeservedly defeated Dallas in the first round of 2006-2007 while making an unexpected 2nd round appearance.  I don’t recall Canucks fans joking about our playoff qualification in (1991?) when we qualified despite being way below .500.   In both those instances, what happened a few years later?

 

Let’s sit back and watch things unfold.

 

"This 17 game sample under never-before-seen circumstances shows who the real Canucks are - not the 37 games this year, or the hundreds of games prior to it."

 

Gotchya.

 

What happened the year after that playoff win over Dallas? We missed the playoffs, and then hired a new GM who identified inefficiencies and problems with the team, and made a series of moves to surround the young core players with better talent and leadership. Exactly what I wish would happen this year.

[cuporbust]

17 hours ago, NUCKER67 said:

They must have a plan.

We live day to day

[Patel Bure]

3 minutes ago, D-Money said:

"This 17 game sample under never-before-seen circumstances shows who the real Canucks are - not the 37 games this year, or the hundreds of games prior to it."

 

Gotchya.

 

What happened the year after that playoff win over Dallas? We missed the playoffs, and then hired a new GM who identified inefficiencies and problems with the team, and made a series of moves to surround the young core players with better talent and leadership. Exactly what I wish would happen this year.

So the fact that Burke drafted the twins, Kesler, etc, etc, while Nonis traded for Luongo didn’t play a significant role in propping up Gillis’ record here?  Don’t get me wrong - I like a LOT of what Gillis did here (sans amateur scouting), but it’s not like Gillis came here and he magically took us to the next level.  The Canucks were clearly headed that way regardless.  

[kanucks25]

29 minutes ago, SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME said:

Makes me wonder if Benning has had some preliminary conversations with Francis, and expects to be able to make a deal to have Seattle take Holtby or Myers in expansion?

 

Or possibly the white whale of a Loui Eriksson mutual contract termination?

 

(Although the cards Eriksson’s agent is showing in the media recently suggests this is never happening.)

Well even if we did have upcoming cap problems, I don't know if he'd outright admit it.

 

That said, I do agree with you; it seems as though it's already been decided they'll be shedding more cap this time around than they've been willing to in the past.

 

If Eriksson can't be moved, I imagine he'd be bought out. I hope the latter just to give Benning less money to play with during free agency

Edited April 9, 2021 by kanucks25

[Warhippy]

12 hours ago, kanucks25 said:

Do people here realize that only a portion of the Canucks fan base supports these dumbs moves whereas the majority (aka the other portion of Canucks fans + the rest of the hockey world) is either very confused or just laughs at our misfortune...

 

 

(just a small example)

There's a clear and concise reason why Canucks fans are lauded league wide as having never laced them up in their life or being the worst possible fans going.

 

Thanks for the visual reminder of the accuracy of those statements

[kanucks25]

Just now, Warhippy said:

There's a clear and concise reason why Canucks fans are lauded league wide as having never laced them up in their life or being the worst possible fans going.

 

Thanks for the visual reminder of the accuracy of those statements

Those are not Canucks fans, they are from all over the league. Look at the little logos.

[Patel Bure]

17 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

So just to confirm, it was an 8-9 year plan from the start?

Show me a rebuild that takes a shorter time than that.  Seriously - look at the top teams in the league right now.   Tampa, Colorado, Florida, Carolina, etc., etc.  These teams also struggled for YEARS on end before becoming elite.  Progression was not always linear.  Lots of peaks and valleys.  
 

Study Colorado from 2007 onwards.   What was Tampa’s journey like from 2004?   What was Carolina’s journey like since 2006?   
 

The Leafs and Oilers look poised to win a couple of rounds this season, but what has their journeys been like up until this point?  (Edmonton since 2006 + Toronto since 2004).

What about teams like Pittsburgh, Washington, and Chicago from about 1996 (Hawks), 1997 (Pens), and 1998 (Caps) onwards?   Were they rebuilt overnight?   How long were the LA Kings irrelevant for before they had their 2012-2014 window?

 

Dallas Stars the last 15 years?    
 

The Canucks’ rebuild has been pretty typical of most teams.   Like Calgary, Edmonton, and Winnipeg, we made the 2nd round and then had an expected dip.

Edited April 9, 2021 by DarkIndianRises

[DSVII]

10 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

There's a clear and concise reason why Canucks fans are lauded league wide as having never laced them up in their life or being the worst possible fans going.

 

Thanks for the visual reminder of the accuracy of those statements

Who ever said that? Look at any Canadian market team, we aren't super unique. 

 

Also these are comments from Devils, Habs, Rangers, Oilers, Pens, Sens fans

Edited April 9, 2021 by DSVII

[zimmy]

3 minutes ago, DSVII said:

Who ever said that?

 

Also these are comments from Devils, Habs, Rangers, Oilers, Pittsburgh fans

I’m wondering if I should even care about comments coming from part time observers from outside markets ? I’m curious if anybody on these forums ever feels the need or considers themselves expert enough to make pithy remarks about moves other teams make (aside from doing so within the relative anonymity of the CDC)?

[Fred65]

6 minutes ago, DarkIndianRises said:

So the fact that Burke drafted the twins, Kesler, etc, etc, while Nonis traded for Luongo didn’t play a significant role in propping up Gillis’ record here?  Don’t get me wrong - I like a LOT of what Gillis did here (sans amateur scouting), but it’s not like Gillis came here and he magically took us to the next level.  The Canucks were clearly headed that way regardless.  

A lot of truth there but Gillis did bring in a number of important additions. Does the Erhoff ring a bell, how about Samuelsson, Lapierre, Malhotra, Higgins. How about the trade which brought us Markstrom. Winning is as much about the right mix as the right skills. Gillis is not just the product of BB and DN. He added and the team did well. This much I know I enjoyed being a fan in the Gillis era than currently go to games and almost expecting to loose

[Warhippy]

14 minutes ago, DSVII said:

Who ever said that? Look at any Canadian market team, we aren't super unique. 

 

Also these are comments from Devils, Habs, Rangers, Oilers, Pens, Sens fans

 

18 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

Those are not Canucks fans, they are from all over the league. Look at the little logos.

Devils

Rangers

Oilers

Sens

 

I'll take what are teams drafting top 3 or better consistently yet still sucking for $500 Alex

[kanucks25]

8 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

 

Devils

Rangers

Oilers

Sens

 

I'll take what are teams drafting top 3 or better consistently yet still sucking for $500 Alex

Take the L and move on, champ

 

12 minutes ago, zimmy said:

I’m wondering if I should even care about comments coming from part time observers from outside markets ? I’m curious if anybody on these forums ever feels the need or considers themselves expert enough to make pithy remarks about moves other teams make (aside from doing so within the relative anonymity of the CDC)?

I mean, you really shouldn't care what anyone says. Find the facts and make your own opinion.

 

I'm just pointing out for the people that are dumbfounded whenever most of Benning's moves are crapped on, you're very much in the minority. Mind hives can get out of control, makes it difficult to analyze the circumstances without severe bias.