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

Severe Cap Issues Next Year

Rate this topic


AK_19

Recommended Posts

51 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)?

We're fans of the team first, but we are also fans of the sport. I mean, just take a look at all the Edmonton, Buffalo, Toronto bashing that goes on here. Everyone absolutely does have a judgement on the moves other teams make. 

 

I'm pretty sure if we dredge up the Demko extension thread and find the same people applauding it.

 

Besides, it's always good to see what your opponents make of your moves. It's a fresh perspective to draw from. And if an Oilers fan or Buffalo fan sees a pattern in our moves that they have seen before, that's something that can make you ask, 'is everything truly alright here'?

 

I can also admit I have my biases, so it's interesting to get opinions from people who don't have an agenda concerning the team. (Hockey guy on YT is my happy neutral). Of course, keeping in mind media (the 2011 hate is still annoying real)

Edited by DSVII
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

Take the L and move on, champ :P

 

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.

Nah dude.  There's no loss here on my end.

 

Ya post something that is essentially nothing but "fans" of other teams that still suck ripping on our team, in a forum full of angst filled whiners complaining we suck and crapping on management no matter what I'm gonna call it out

 

Negativity breeds negativity and if you want to sit in a cess poll filled with angst filled whiners who want to crap on our team here's the link you're looking for

 

https://hfboards.mandatory.com/forums/vancouver-canucks.36/

 

As for my opinion, it's a messed up year and a half in the world of hockey and NOTHING makes sense so I am not about to sit and crap on everything this team does or give it all a green light.  Crapping on everything isn't gonna help

Edited by Warhippy
  • Cheers 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Warhippy said:

Nah dude.  

 

Ya post something that is essentially nothing but "fans" of other teams that still suck ripping on our team, in a forum full of angst filled whiners complaining we suck and crapping on management no matter what I'm gonna call it out

 

Negativity breeds negativity and if you want to sit in a cess poll filled with angst filled whiners who want to crap on our team here's the link you're looking for

 

https://hfboards.mandatory.com/forums/vancouver-canucks.36/

 

 

Don’t forget to read Arty over in SN comments. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 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

I think it's convenient you left out the Pens and Habs, but I'll bite, since 2014 to 2020.....

 

Regular season

                    W L T Win %
Rangers 250 180 50 52.1%
Canucks 211 213 55 44.1%
Oilers 210 216 55 43.7%
Senators 207 213 61 43.0%
Devils 201 211 56

42.9%

 

Playoffs

Rangers - 3 playoff appearances, 1 second round exit, 1 third round exit

Sens - 2 playoff appearances, 1 third round exit

Canucks -  2 playoff appearances, 1 second round exit

Oilers - 2 playoff appearance, 1 second round exit

Devils - 1 playoff appearance 


I guess the only difference is....we don't draft top 3 and are consistently sucking with them. We haven't done that much better than the teams you're dismissing so casually.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Nah dude.  There's no loss here on my end.

 

Ya post something that is essentially nothing but "fans" of other teams that still suck ripping on our team, in a forum full of angst filled whiners complaining we suck and crapping on management no matter what I'm gonna call it out

Well first you thought it was the notorious Canucks fans that are allegedly the worst in the league and have never "laced them up"...

 

And now some of those opinions are invalid because they are fans of teams that aren't great right now? So if I, a Canucks fan, said the Jeff Skinner contract sucks, my opinion would be invalid because I'm a fan of another team that sucks?

 

Doesn't really make any sense. I'm not saying any of those people are experts, I don't know who they are, and I don't even visit r/hockey on a regular basis. Just pointing out what the league-wide consensus is... but maybe everyone else is wrong? :sadno:

 

13 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Negativity breeds negativity and if you want to sit in a cess poll filled with angst filled whiners who want to crap on our team here's the link you're looking for

 

https://hfboards.mandatory.com/forums/vancouver-canucks.36/

I post on HF, but it's just not as entertaining as CDC. :bigblush:

Edited by kanucks25
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, spur1 said:

Don’t forget to read Arty over in SN comments. 

haha that guy is a full on Oilers fan just creeping Canucks articles. It's like the equivalent of someone here trolling Calgary puck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Fred65 said:

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

Agreed that Gillis did a lot of good while he was here (although his amateur scouting was absolutely atrocious).   
 

My point being that Burke and Nonis also played a very big role in the successful years of 2008-2013.  It’s not like Gillis just took over an organization in shambles and turned them into Gold one year later.

 

By contrast, Benning took over an organization that was clearly headed downwards.  An aging and declining core + very little in the way of prospects due to the previous regimes’ abject failure in amateur scouting (sans Horvat whom they gave up Schneider for, and Markstrom who they gave up Luongo for.......to which the Benning regime developed Markstrom in the correct way).

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

11 minutes ago, kanucks25 said:

Take the L and move on, champ :P

 

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.

Maybe your not aware of the sometimes condescending tone of your comments and takes? I don’t know.
 

I certainly appreciate your energy towards trying to educate the “dumbfounded minority” and I see most of it as good natured. I, for one, have never been particularly dumbfounded by the reaction of many in our fan base however. The impatience and histrionic over reactions swirl around in this market and, to be honest, always have. We all feel owed something when we become Canuck fans and clearly, on these pages, we witness many posters at a breaking point waiting and hoping for the payout. Maybe you are someone at that point or perhaps you just like to stir the crap.

 

As much as I am in the “minority”, I’m happy here, letting things unfold naturally and not stressing too much even when I’m faced with maneuvers that at first glance don’t always please me.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, zimmy said:

Maybe your not aware of the sometimes condescending tone of your comments and takes? I don’t know.

Noooo... me?

 

:bigblush:

 

Just now, zimmy said:

As much as I am in the “minority”, I’m happy here, letting things unfold naturally and not stressing too much even when I’m faced with maneuvers that at first glance don’t always please me.

:metal:You do you, my man.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, DarkIndianRises said:

Agreed that Gillis did a lot of good while he was here (although his amateur scouting was absolutely atrocious).   
 

My point being that Burke and Nonis also played a very big role in the successful years of 2008-2013.  It’s not like Gillis just took over an organization in shambles and turned them into Gold one year later.

 

By contrast, Benning took over an organization that was clearly headed downwards.  An aging and declining core + very little in the way of prospects due to the previous regimes’ abject failure in amateur scouting (sans Horvat whom they gave up Schneider for, and Markstrom who they gave up Luongo for.......to which the Benning regime developed Markstrom in the correct way).

The pieces were there, but it took Gillis identifying and acquiring quality veterans to take it to the next level. Something Nonis seemingly wasn’t generally able to do (see: Chouinard, Isbister, Carney, Ritchie, etc).

 

Benning has drafted very well, but his attempts to identify and acquire veteran talent have been very Nonis-like. That’s why I don’t think he has what it takes to build a true contender.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

coyotes  in big troubke moneywise  i feel like oel deal is back on  we take him at 7mill per for 7yrs they  pay 1.25 for  7  and they take on eriksson roussel and beagle  and hotlby   16.3mill off cap next yr and  12 mill real money and we owe oel 49 mill for 7 yrs and seattle  takes myers     literally clears 22.3 more in cap 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, D-Money said:

The pieces were there, but it took Gillis identifying and acquiring quality veterans to take it to the next level. Something Nonis seemingly wasn’t generally able to do (see: Chouinard, Isbister, Carney, Ritchie, etc).

 

Benning has drafted very well, but his attempts to identify and acquire veteran talent have been very Nonis-like. That’s why I don’t think he has what it takes to build a true contender.

acquiring veteran talent (via signings) on a downward trending team will always be a difficult task.    Hence, why unfavorable term and money are often given to these types of players by downward trending teams (otherwise why would they choose us over a better team, or a team that has a better travel schedule and/or pays far less in taxes, etc.).    You either select this option, OR, you push kids into roles that they aren’t ready for and risk ruining them.  
 

As a team progresses towards their peak, it becomes easier to sign players to more favorable term and money.    That’s the stage that the Canucks were at when Gillis took over, and also keep in mind that Gillis enticed players with some very significant riders in order to keep their cap hits relatively low.    

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, canuktravella said:

coyotes  in big troubke moneywise  i feel like oel deal is back on  we take him at 7mill per for 7yrs they  pay 1.25 for  7  and they take on eriksson roussel and beagle  and hotlby   16.3mill off cap next yr and  12 mill real money and we owe oel 49 mill for 7 yrs and seattle  takes myers     literally clears 22.3 more in cap 

Kudos to Benning for not acquiescing this past off season in trying to bring in OEL by giving up precious young pieces.   Canucks might get to deal with Arizona from an even greater position of strength in this off season should it go this route.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Butters Stoch said:

Are there any other GMs who manage to spend as much as Benning does every year and still have a bottom 10 team?

I didn’t realize that the Canucks had a bottom 10 team last season as a 2nd round appearance puts them in the top 5-8 category.

  • Cheers 1
  • Haha 1
  • Vintage 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, DarkIndianRises said:

Agreed that Gillis did a lot of good while he was here (although his amateur scouting was absolutely atrocious).   
 

My point being that Burke and Nonis also played a very big role in the successful years of 2008-2013.  It’s not like Gillis just took over an organization in shambles and turned them into Gold one year later.

 

By contrast, Benning took over an organization that was clearly headed downwards.  An aging and declining core + very little in the way of prospects due to the previous regimes’ abject failure in amateur scouting (sans Horvat whom they gave up Schneider for, and Markstrom who they gave up Luongo for.......to which the Benning regime developed Markstrom in the correct way).

 

I wish someone would have informed him of that.  Because, clearly, the owner and GM thought we were still contenders.

 

If only Benning saw the light then.  We were only 2 years removed from back to back President's Trophies, so we still had good performing players, on the back half of their careers, who would have brought in a lot of picks and prospects. 

 

You'd think if what I bolded above was what he truly believed, filling up that prospect cupboard would be his #1 priority. Especially when he still had valuable trading pieces.  If not in year one, then at least after getting beaten by the Flames first round in '15.  At the very least, during the off season of '16 after we did miss the playoffs.   But no, that was the summer of Louie.  And Benning will go down as losing more picks than he gained during his tenure even after, as you point out, Gillis left the cupboards bare.

 

Gillis managed the team during a peak contender window.  No one blamed him for loading up then. We were one game away from it all paying off.  Drafting was not good, I agree with that.  But having such a good team it also meant we picked lower.

 

My point is that if our prospect pool was so depleted, and we had "an aging and declining core".....and this was a new GM with a built in honeymoon period with a knowledgeable fan base, why not take advantage of the moment? Make an announcement like the Rangers did, and roll up your sleeves and start building.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, DarkIndianRises said:

I didn’t realize that the Canucks had a bottom 10 team last season as a 2nd round appearance puts them in the top 5-8 category.

It takes a special kind of denial to state that the Canucks were a top team last year.

 

This is sports.  The better team doesn't always win.  Hockey is particularly random in that the better team will sometimes even get swept.  We went on a mini-cinderella run but don't let an underdog performance delude you into thinking we are contenders.

 

Either way, we are a bottom 10 team THIS year, and it makes absolute sense.  We lost more than we gained, and bringing us back to topic, we are about to lose even more this off-season.  The Pearson contract is vintage recklessness from Benning.  VINTAGE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, kilgore said:

 

[b]I wish someone would have informed him of that.  Because, clearly, the owner and GM thought we were still contenders. [/b]

 

If only Benning saw the light then.  We were only 2 years removed from back to back President's Trophies, so we still had good performing players, on the back half of their careers, who would have brought in a lot of picks and prospects. 

 

You'd think if what I bolded above was what he truly believed, filling up that prospect cupboard would be his #1 priority. Especially when he still had valuable trading pieces.  If not in year one, then at least after getting beaten by the Flames first round in '15.  At the very least, during the off season of '16 after we did miss the playoffs.   But no, that was the summer of Louie.  And Benning will go down as losing more picks than he gained during his tenure even after, as you point out, Gillis left the cupboards bare.

 

Gillis managed the team during a peak contender window.  No one blamed him for loading up then. We were one game away from it all paying off.  Drafting was not good, I agree with that.  But having such a good team it also meant we picked lower.

 

My point is that if our prospect pool was so depleted, and we had "an aging and declining core".....and this was a new GM with a built in honeymoon

No they didn’t.  
 

They knew where the team was at when they took over and they wanted to give our aging core one last kick at the can.

 

This is why guys like Bieksa, Garrison, and Higgins were shipped out relatively early in the process (while significant changes were made after our playoff loss to Calgary in 2015).   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Bob.Loblaw said:

It takes a special kind of denial to state that the Canucks were a top team last year.

 

This is sports.  The better team doesn't always win.  Hockey is particularly random in that the better team will sometimes even get swept.  We went on a mini-cinderella run but don't let an underdog performance delude you into thinking we are contenders.

 

Either way, we are a bottom 10 team THIS year, and it makes absolute sense.  We lost more than we gained, and bringing us back to topic, we are about to lose even more this off-season.  The Pearson contract is vintage recklessness from Benning.  VINTAGE.

2nd round.  Game 7 loss.  Defeated the cup champs in the first round.    Defeated the Wild to qualify for the playoffs.   Ps - I never said we are contenders.   What I have said however, is that progression isn’t usually a linear process.   What happened after the Canucks made the 2nd round in 06-07?   They missed the playoffs.  What followed after that?

 

ps - If the Canucks really had wanted to, they would have been able to sign all of Markstrom, Tanev, and Toffoli fairly easily by using sweeteners to get rid of bad contracts.    Gee, I wonder why he didn’t?   Perhaps Benning is thinking far more long term than people like you give credit?

Edited by DarkIndianRises
  • Like 1
  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DarkIndianRises said:

2nd round.  Game 7 loss.  Defeated the cup champs in the first round.    Defeated the Wild to qualify for the playoffs.   Ps - I never said we are contenders.   What I have said however, is that progression isn’t usually a linear process.   What happened after the Canucks made the 2nd round in 06-07?   They missed the playoffs.  What followed after that?

 

ps - If the Canucks really had wanted to, they would have been able to sign all of Markstrom, Tanev, and Toffoli fairly easily by using sweeteners to get rid of bad contracts.    Gee, I wonder why he didn’t?   Perhaps Benning is thinking far more long term than people like you give credit?

I'm trying to remember.... oh yes!  The GM got fired!  Good.  I want the deja vu NOW!

 

I could not care less what happened in 2007.  This is not some Mayan calendar where history repeats itself.  Even if I wish it did in this case.

 

As for this past summer, it was poor.  The fans were pissed.  Pundits were boggled.  The hockey community as a whole was amused.  If Benning tried to trade away bad contracts, they would've been ones that HE signed.  Most fans are sick and tired of Jim Benning.  He is an embarrassment that has turned the Canucks into a management laughingstock.  And now we are losing games and nobody is watching.

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...