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

Canucks fans fly #FireBenning banner over Vancouver

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, kilgore said:

Just one example of IMO below average GM, when you weigh everything.  He's not terrible, its just that I think Canucks fans deserve better.  Its funny to take seriously his status with some here when this GM's only point of praise seems to be almost exclusively for his amateur drafting, even though a GM's main focus would be pro scouting, trades, and contracts, and travelling with the team. Of course Jim is aware of potential prospects and has accumulated knowledge of a lot of them, but there are hundreds, playing in different leagues and universities,  most of that work is done by the amateur scouting dept.  But sure, he knew enough to agree with them. Good job there Jim.

It's the GMs job to consolidate the viewpoints from different scouts, all of whom contain bias, and make a good selection.  Benning is good at that.

 

5 minutes ago, Laoag said:

kind of a shallow thing to do... I don't care for Benning but reality is this:

Letting Travis Green and the coaching staff walk will put us further back than firing Benning will push us ahead.

If there is any outrage from the Fan base, if there is any unified message we should be flying from airplanes, it should be that we want Travis Green, Ian Clark and the Coaching staff back.

Sign them now!

What have Brown and Baumgartner done to prove they are capable of coaching at any level, let alone the NHL?

  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Josepho said:

Sorry, I was comparing Pearson/Toffoli's production at the time of their contracts.  

 

 

 

Yes, but your arguments have been talking about a limited sample of Pearson declining, while conveniently ignoring the other seasons with Pearson. It seems as if you subscribe to the idea of him 'declining' as a trend, which is nonsensical because his record of production is maybe best described as up and down.

 

Furthermore, what do you actually expect for a player being paid 3.25? Iafallo is the best recent comparison, and Pearson has much better stats than him overall. Yet plenty of people ignored aspect of that deal and doubled down on their irrational 'hate' on Pearson's contract.

 

So people will twist the argument to say that because of last season, he is 'declining', but will scramble to defend Iafallo's signing at every turn. I'm pretty sure THAT signing is gonna turn out to be overpaid.

 

In summary, the same people looking to criticize Pearson's contract will make hypocritical positions about another player with inferior stats, under the false impression that Pearson is 'declining' (without the facts/evidence to support this). They are almost hoping Pearson will fail just to prove a 'point'.

I find that very distasteful as a fan.

 

 

Edited by Dazzle
  • Hydration 3
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, bree2 said:

real fans don't do something so stupid like that!!! but it is not about Benning. it doesn't matter if we got a new coach or GM  nothing would change with these people

Do you feel the same way about Oilers fans who bought a newspaper ad to remove Lowe or Sens fans who bought a billboard ad to remove Melnyk? Do you feel the same way about people who chanted “Fire Gillis” and paraded outside Rogers Arena with Gillis head on a stick? 

 

If you think these people are also not real fans, I’ll believe you are consistent. I still won’t agree that these people are not “real” fans. 

 

“Those people” want to win a cup. They disagree with the current path ownership and front office are taking them down and their seven years of previous work. 

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, bree2 said:

real fans don't do something so stupid like that!!! but it is not about Benning. it doesn't matter if we got a new coach or GM  nothing would change with these people

Gatekeeping isn't cool dude. 

 

Besides, nothing changed, no one got hurt. Benning still has his job, Charities got extra money, fans got to express their frustrations.  What's the big deal with this again?

  • Haha 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, kilgore said:

 

Its not even a terrible signing IMO.   Pearson is a useful forward. But its another example of a cut of a thousand knives.   ie..In a year when there is a glut coming for players that could do the same job, at a younger age, and way more cap friendly terms. And Pearson is a player that most pundits said no one was asking about, and he could have been had for 2.5. On a good team, Tanner would be on the third line.  And when we get there hopefully, we may be using 3.5 of cap, for another bottom six position.   It all adds up these extra millions and term years that Jim caves to.  And its an accumulation of years of that BS.  What happens this summer when Tryamkin asks for 2.5, and Jim says he can't afford more than 1.5, take it or leave it. And we lose another promising, and IMO important, prospect...over that unnecessary million given away?

 

Its when you add up all his mistakes the big ones like LE, and include all the smaller ones, that extra year here, or that extra million on a declining vet there, the lack of communication, as told by ex-players, the haphazard "day to day" brand of management, instead of thinking ahead. ie. Make up his mind earlier on Demko vs Markstrom and make a hard decision, same with Tanev, and move on to the next contract... Tofolli...Stecher (who would be third D in points on the Canucks, was tied with Schmidt but Nate barely pulled ahead with 12 over Stech's 11 last game). 

 

Just one example of IMO below average GM, when you weigh everything.  He's not terrible, its just that I think Canucks fans deserve better.  Its funny to take seriously his status with some here when this GM's only point of praise seems to be almost exclusively for his amateur drafting, even though a GM's main focus would be pro scouting, trades, and contracts, and travelling with the team. Of course Jim is aware of potential prospects and has accumulated knowledge of a lot of them, but there are hundreds, playing in different leagues and universities,  most of that work is done by the amateur scouting dept.  But sure, he knew enough to agree with them. Good job there Jim.

 

I trust JB at this point, about as much as I trust the Canucks now with a 1 goal lead going into the third.  Always optimistic and hopeful, but biting my nails based on game history this season.  A team can lose a game through one bad mistake...LE scoring into his own net...or an accumulation of small "little things" mistakes.  I hope some things fall into Jim's lap, and he has some luck (Beagle, or LE retires would help), and he makes good decisions with who and how he will rebuild the final pieces to take us to the next level.  JB is still family, if we are all Canucks, and you can't pick your family members.  Go Jim Go!

 

 

 

JB got some props by his peers last year with awards..wonder where he will end up this year.   Get that patience is running out.    This was the first off season he did everything i hoped he'd do.    The next two years will determine the future of the club and absolutely understand why fans are worried about it so am I.     Fortunately his RFA deals going back to each and every one, seemed fair at the time, and most were happy with it.    People need to understand that to acquire a UFA to a bottom team costs a little more.   Or a lot more.  Framed like that i'm not to worried going forward.  The core is 90% drafted.   The secondary support players too.   Sure we need some tweaks.   We are still years away from peaking.   Factually we have two windows.   And no i don't have all the answers but know enough to understand where we are now , and why he did what he did in the past.   

 

He'd already of lost his job if we didn't have a great young core to work with.  1-3 in team history depending on how things work out (early 80's, early 90's and now).   Milford and Quin and JB are the only ones to do that for us ever.    It removes a lot of mistakes (Milford and Quin also had some doozies).    It's too easy to say "I want a cup i've waited x number of years for one".   Funny thing is i'd bet everything I own, the ones screaming the loudest have only watched hockey since the WCE era and beyond.   Don't have any perspective.   Or patience.   We are still  3-4 years away from EP and QHs peak.   Won't have the same D.  Horvat and Miller?  Sure we have a small window before that but really this teams about EP and QHs isn't it? And Podz.   Fully expect a couple years of tuning up, do our best maybe have some magic, and then a re-set like COL.   It's coming.  That's the cycle folks.   Like it or not it is what it is, and the main metric controlling this entire thing is : drafting - cap.   Why throw out a main metric for whomever? 

  • Hydration 2
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

Yes, but your arguments have been talking about a limited sample of Pearson declining, while conveniently ignoring the other seasons with Pearson. It seems as if you subscribe to the idea of him 'declining' as a trend, which is nonsensical because his record of production is maybe best described as up and down.

 

Furthermore, what do you actually expect for a player being paid 3.25? Iafallo is the best recent comparison, and Pearson has much better stats than him overall. Yet plenty of people ignored aspect of that deal and doubled down on their irrational 'hate' on Pearson's contract.

 

So people will twist the argument to say that because of last season, he is 'declining', but will scramble to defend Iafallo's signing at every turn. I'm pretty sure THAT signing is gonna turn out to be overpaid.

 

In summary, the same people looking to criticize Pearson's contract will make hypocritical positions about another player with inferior stats, under the false impression that Pearson is 'declining' (without the facts/evidence to support this). They are almost hoping Pearson will fail just to prove a 'point'.

I find that very distasteful as a fan.

 

 

No one is hoping Pearson would fail. The concern is the thought process behind that valuation. And it's implications when Jim has another $20 mil of cap to fill. 

 

The evidence as you say, can be his time in Pittsburgh, when he was scratched and on the fourth line. His production so far in the last 40 games, and the opinion fans formed when they watched him in the past his game definitely doesn't age as well as Toffoli's and relies on playing with good playmakers. Even watching back when they were on the 70s line in the 2014 cup run. Again, it's an opinion. You can look at Pearson scoring on Rittich and conclude 'he's a producer' or 'Big Siege Dave strikes again'. Everyone's allowed that.

 

Has any poster actually said 'I hope Pearson will fail just so I can show you I'm right?'?

 

He's signed. He's done. We have to hope that he lives up to the contract. Same mindset people had with Roussel, Beagle, Myers. etc... (and people have gotten very used to praying these contracts work out over the last six years)

 

I don't like the Myers signing, and I'm praying to god everyday that he can maintain his top 4 level of play for the majority of his contract and not crater like Loui. I can hope he does well and also hold the opinion that signing and contract were overvalued.

 

Fans more nuanced than you give them credit for.

 

Here's some minutia....as some people love to call it. Even if we extend Pearson, why now? Why promise to protect him at the expansion draft? Why use up a slot that could have gone to Lind or Gadjovich? Extend Pearson sure, but sign him after Seattle does the expansion draft.. Give ourselves the flexibility to do swing some deals. Benning has done gentlemen's agreements before (like promising to protect Pearson in this instance), why not now?

 

You say this is irrelevant. But it's not the first time Management has hamstrung themselves. And as we saw with the cap blow up last offseason. Disasters are not often attributed to one decision, but a series of small failures building up over time. You don't get fat the next day by binging popcorn all night, but by eating maybe a bag of chips each day for a long time. And Jim has shown no aptitude to change how he approaches the way he's done his work in this arena. The same thought process that thought Eriksson at 6x6 and Beagle at 3x4 still seems like it's in play here.

 

And that is where the main concern is. 

Edited by DSVII
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, DSVII said:

No one is hoping Pearson would fail. The concern is the thought process behind that valuation. And it's implications when Jim has another $20 mil of cap to fill. 

 

The evidence as you say, can be his time in Pittsburgh, when he was scratched and on the fourth line. His production so far in the last 40 games, and the opinion fans formed when they watched him in the past his game definitely doesn't age as well as Toffoli's and relies on playing with good playmakers. Even watching back when they were on the 70s line in the 2014 cup run. Again, it's an opinion. You can look at Pearson scoring on Rittich and conclude 'he's a producer' or 'Big Siege Dave strikes again'. Everyone's allowed that.

 

Has any poster actually said 'I hope Pearson will fail just so I can show you I'm right?'?

 

He's signed. He's done. We have to hope that he lives up to the contract. Same mindset people had with Roussel, Beagle, Myers. etc... (and people have gotten very used to praying these contracts work out over the last six years)

 

I don't like the Myers signing, and I'm praying to god everyday that he can maintain his top 4 level of play for the majority of his contract and not crater like Loui. I can hope he does well and also hold the opinion that signing and contract were overvalued.

 

Fans more nuanced than you give them credit for.

Well you don't like the Myers signing.   That says a lot right there.   You don't like a top four RHD added at below market value for less term.   Maybe you'd prefer Trouba at 8 x 8.   Or Dumba trade for BB plus a first and JV that was floating around last year.   These guys don't grow on trees.  There at 50% less RHDs in the league then LHD.   If Myers was 5 x 5 would you be happier?   One million.   Every basic stat supports Myers at 6 x 5 is a fair-good signing.   Burke thought it was awesome.    All he's done is come in and do his thing and perform against the best in the world day i day out.   Personally feel that the Edler bashers just found a new target.   Would you prefer Guddy at 4.5 this year?   Ballard got paid more cap percentage wise to be our 7th D.   Did you know that?    Ugh without Myers this next phase of our core would be completely wasted.    Think about it for a minute.   Myers and Miller and Schmidt were all massive coupes, without all three this teams early window wouldn't exist at all.   Please educate me on who else was available and how we'd acquire them for free? 

 

Edit:  Don't take the lords name in vain lol ... praying to god really.  LE cratered his first year.  Myers is the only D we have with snarl and penache ... elevates his game every time it's needed.   Did it all playoffs. Anyone who doesn't see the value of Myers to me is completely delusional or just hasn't watched hockey long enough yet.   He's got three more years left ... in his prime because that's simply what happens with blue chippers like him 90% of the time.    Guys need to calm down around Myers, we need more like him not less. 

 

Also Myers would have to be 7 x 6 to compare with LE cap percentage wise even with flat cap. 

Edited by IBatch
  • Hydration 3
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jimmy McGill said:

the same people that booked the plane think that Gillis and Gillman will be re-hired. 

Well they did ride a tonne of talent they never drafted all the way to the cup finals....lol...maybe they're onto something!? (I jest)  I've always said Gillis must have thanked Dave Nonis and Brian Burke day after day at his job. He come into a team flush with talent. Gillis and Co. then proceeded to suck our pipeline dry of talent till Benning took it over.

 

Not to take away from Gillis and Gillman, they were shrewd businessmen and knew the contract side of things well. And Gillis did find some good reclamation gems along the way via trade...but the drafting was horrid during that period.  

Edited by Attila Umbrus
  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

Yes, but your arguments have been talking about a limited sample of Pearson declining, while conveniently ignoring the other seasons with Pearson. It seems as if you subscribe to the idea of him 'declining' as a trend, which is nonsensical because his record of production is maybe best described as up and down.

 

Furthermore, what do you actually expect for a player being paid 3.25? Iafallo is the best recent comparison, and Pearson has much better stats than him overall. Yet plenty of people ignored aspect of that deal and doubled down on their irrational 'hate' on Pearson's contract.

 

So people will twist the argument to say that because of last season, he is 'declining', but will scramble to defend Iafallo's signing at every turn. I'm pretty sure THAT signing is gonna turn out to be overpaid.

 

In summary, the same people looking to criticize Pearson's contract will make hypocritical positions about another player with inferior stats, under the false impression that Pearson is 'declining' (without the facts/evidence to support this). They are almost hoping Pearson will fail just to prove a 'point'.

I find that very distasteful as a fan.

 

 

Iafallo is actually not a good comparison at all, let alone the best one. He is a year and a half younger, plays 4 min more per game on their 1st line, is 2nd among their forwards in pk ice time, has increased his point totals every year in the nhl including on pace to get much higher than Pearsons career best, and has no ntc in hiscontract. 

 

He also plays for a bottom feeding team that, unlike the Canucks, does not operate right at the cap.

 

LA is betting on him to continue progressing the way he has. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Well you don't like the Myers signing.   That says a lot right there.   You don't like a top four RHD added at below market value for less term.   Maybe you'd prefer Trouba at 8 x 8.   Or Dumba trade for BB plus a first and JV that was floating around last year.   These guys don't grow on trees.  There at 50% less RHDs in the league then LHD.   If Myers was 5 x 5 would you be happier?   One million.   Every basic stat supports Myers at 6 x 5 is a fair-good signing.   Burke thought it was awesome.    All he's done is come in and do his thing and perform against the best in the world day i day out.   Personally feel that the Edler bashers just found a new target.   Would you prefer Guddy at 4.5 this year?   Ballard got paid more cap percentage wise to be our 7th D.   Did you know that?    Ugh without Myers this next phase of our core would be completely wasted.    Think about it for a minute.   Myers and Miller and Schmidt were all massive coupes, without all three this teams early window wouldn't exist at all.   Please educate me on who else was available and how we'd acquire them for free? 

I said this before, but I'm not married to the idea of paying premium for RHD just for the sake of having RHD. We are happy now to accept Schmidt as a LHD playing on the right side. Why not explore and see if there are some market inefficiencies where talented LHD are being undervalued just because they are not slotted in on the right side on a stacked roster? Going back to Bieksa's take that a same handed D pairing can shoot off faster one timers (ala Ovie/Carlson).  It's kind of my own take on this, and hockey being super conservative may not do this ever, but players like Schmidt make me reconsider it. 

 

I don't consider 6x6 below market value for a RHD defenseman that didn't consistently play top 4 minutes in Winnipeg, was never relied on as the 1PP guy. The market was inflated by virtue of him being the only one out there at the time. It was not a good buy imo.

 

We had an in house RHD stable in Tanev and Stetcher that was cheaper if it came to it. Every basic stat supports Tanev being a better defensive D than Myers at suppressing opponent shots and danger close chances. I think we should acknowledge that when we signed Myers, we essentially handed Tanev his walking papers. 

 

Burke also thought Hughes was too small a player. 

 

Miller and Schmidt are great additions. And I didn't like Gudbranson the day that trade was made (and who made that trade and singing?) Again Guds is what made me think maybe pursuing folks just because they are RHD isn't worth it. 

 

The only thing i'll bash Edler about is his propensity to take bad penalities, but it comes with age. No complaints on him from me.

 

Yes, 5x5 would make me happier. $1 mil alone doesn't make a difference. But if you overpay by 1 mil as a pattern over a multitude of contracts. it adds up. $1 million is certainly huge right now, and is one of the reasons we traded out Gaudette. 

 

And if we are to accept the two year timeline now as a window, then the timing of Myers makes even less sense to me. Yes, these guys don't grow on trees, but I  think there are times you need to show restraint and not make a big splash to  unbalance your entire cap situation and upset the timing of your plans just to pursue them (OEL, or  in a more bigger example, Toronto and Tavares) 

 

Edited by DSVII
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, DSVII said:

I said this before, but I'm not married to the idea of paying premium for RHD just for the sake of having RHD. We are happy now to accept Schmidt as a LHD playing on the right side. Why not explore and see if there are some market inefficiencies where talented LHD are being undervalued just because they are not slotted in on the right side on a stacked roster? Going back to Bieksa's take that a same handed D pairing can shoot off faster one timers (ala Ovie/Carlson).  It's kind of my own take on this, and hockey being super conservative may not do this ever, but players like Schmidt make me reconsider it. 

 

I don't consider 6x6 below market value for a RHD defenseman that didn't consistently play top 4 minutes in Winnipeg, was never relied on as the 1PP guy. The market was inflated by virtue of him being the only one out there at the time. It was not a good buy imo.

 

We had an in house RHD stable in Tanev and Stetcher that was cheaper if it came to it. Every basic stat supports Tanev being a better defensive D than Myers at suppressing opponent shots and danger close chances. I think we should acknowledge that when we signed Myers, we essentially handed Tanev his walking papers. 

 

Burke also thought Hughes was too small a player. 

 

Miller and Schmidt are great additions. And I didn't like Gudbranson the day that trade was made (and who made that trade and singing?) Again Guds is what made me think maybe pursuing folks just because they are RHD isn't worth it. 

 

The only thing i'll bash Edler about is his propensity to take bad penalities, but it comes with age. No complaints on him from me.

 

Yes, 5x5 would make me happier. $1 mil alone doesn't make a difference. But if you overpay by 1 mil as a pattern over a multitude of contracts. it adds up. $1 million is certainly huge right now, and is one of the reasons we traded out Gaudette. 

 

And if we are to accept the two year timeline now as a window, then the timing of Myers makes even less sense to me. Yes, these guys don't grow on trees, but I  think there are times you need to show restraint and not make a big splash to  unbalance your entire cap situation and upset the timing of your plans just to pursue them (OEL, or  in a more bigger example, Toronto and Tavares) 

 

It was 6 x 5 ... but yes 6 x 6 is for sure a fair price for a proven RHD in his prime UFA deal.   Especially one like Myers.   And yes Byfuglien and Trouba pushed him down.   How's Trouba doing anyways with his 8 x 8 deal so far?   Not easy to score at a higher rate the  Edler managed with PP1 minutes as a third pairing D is it?    QHs took his spot, and Myers took his other spot - for a reason.  I watch as many games as i can and it's not hard to wonder why Myers took over last December when Edler was out and kept it.   

 

 Myers has the IT factor.   Game seven down a goal and he was the ONLY D including our budding star, that could take the puck out of our zone safely, enter their zone and create anything.   To me at least, he matches up as a Babych (who also amped his game up) or a Bieksa or a Jovo for RHDs we've had.   Wish we had him earlier and that we had him for longer.   You either have it or you don't.   Myers has had IT since his rookie year,  yes he got buried in WNP.  I'd take Myers at his contract every single time over Trouba wouldn't you?

 

Edit:  And i'd definitely take him just for cap space and free over Dumba for BB a first and JV which was last years Raymond Ballard and a second. 

Edited by IBatch
  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Attila Umbrus said:

Well they did ride a tonne of talent they never drafted all the way to the cup finals....lol...maybe they're onto something!? (I jest)  I've always said Gillis must have thanked Dave Nonis and Brian Burke day after day at his job. He come into a team flush with talent. Gillis and Co. then proceeded to suck our pipeline dry of talent till Benning took it over.

 

Not to take away from Gillis and Gillman, they were shrewd businessmen and knew the contract side of things well. And Gillis did find some good reclamation gems along the way via trade...but the drafting was horrid during that period.  

All GM's ride talent they didnt draft though. Gillis drafting was indeed horrid and his decimation of the farm system undeniable.

 

But where he excelled was taking a team that needed tweaking to get over the hump and adding the right pieces and managing the cap.

 

Benning has drafted a good core. He has not been good surrounding it with the right players or managing the cap though.

 

I feel like it will take the next GM that is more like Gillis to get this team over the hump. And better coaching.

  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, tas said:

typical of a large swath of the canucks fan base, particularly as represented online. too much information, not enough brain power to understand. 

 

benning is focused on team building, not asset management. 

Yep. That’s about as succinctly stated as I’ve ever seen it.  

  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tom Sestito said:

“Those people” want to win a cup. They disagree with the current path ownership and front office are taking them down and their seven years of previous work. 

Current path that has our core players of Bo, Petey, Hughes, Brock, and Demko, with potentially elite supporting players of Hoglander, Podkolzin, OJ, Rathbone, etc., and two years away from having everyone locked up with lots of cap room to spare? 

 

Please give me a different path that we should/could be down compared to this current one?

 

Bill Hader Popcorn GIF by Saturday Night Live

  • Hydration 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, IBatch said:

It was 6 x 5 ... but yes 6 x 6 is for sure a fair price for a proven RHD in his prime UFA deal.   Especially one like Myers.   And yes Byfuglien and Trouba pushed him down.   How's Trouba doing anyways with his 8 x 8 deal so far?   Not easy to score at a higher rate the  Edler managed with PP1 minutes as a third pairing D is it?    QHs took his spot, and Myers took his other spot - for a reason.  I watch as many games as i can and it's not hard to wonder why Myers took over last December when Edler was out and kept it.   

 

 Myers has the IT factor.   Game seven down a goal and he was the ONLY D including our budding star, that could take the puck out of our zone safely, enter their zone and create anything.   To me at least, he matches up as a Babych (who also amped his game up) or a Bieksa or a Jovo for RHDs we've had.   Wish we had him earlier and that we had him for longer.   You either have it or you don't.   Myers has had IT since his rookie year,  yes he got buried in WNP.  I'd take Myers at his contract every single time over Trouba wouldn't you?

 

Edit:  And i'd definitely take him just for cap space and free over Dumba for BB a first and JV which was last years Raymond Ballard and a second. 

Myers took over last December because his competition on the right side left the team and we couldn't afford to have him just sit on the third pairing anymore. (Tanev/Stetch) So right now it's sink or swim and it's mixed results IMO. I think Myers is doing a decent job so far holding his head above water so hoping he can take his game to the next level.

 

I'm glad we didn't pursue him. Again, I don't think being RHD makes someone a god that we need to overpay at all costs.

 

I think the only player on the team right now who has the IT factor is Horvat. Formerly Tanev too. Myers, I guess we are seeing different things in his game. Heh, Trouba was a trap and glad we didn't pursue, but just because someone made a bigger mess than us doesn't mean our valuation is still correct. (see 2016 free agency class)

 

Anyways I appreciate these takes. I do hope you are right about Myers!

 

 

 

Edited by DSVII
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, IBatch said:

Lol.  Pearson since his signing - plus three the first game and two goals the following one.    He's not "nose diving", he's playing like he has since he got here, he's this teams version of Geoff Courtnall/Adams  lite - a streaky player.   Or Samuelson or Higgins if you weren't around back then.    I didn't like the signing because i didn't think we had the cap space.   As far as the actual contract goes it's just fine.   For sure Pearson is 2/3 of what TT is, and one less year.    Zero issue with the actual terms and money.    Only fans with zero insight into what these guys cost would say that.    And look at our team.   We have JT Miller (who if we were good enough would be our 3C),  and after Pearson Motte.   Who is in the pipe that will replace him?   Lind?  lol no he's a RW.  Podz?  No he's a RW potential C.   Sooo...what would a smart GM do?   He'd re-sign him to a fair contract (which it is) and make sure it's a tradeable contract (which it is) and that he can be exposed in the ED if something interesting comes along (which it is) to play in our middle six waiting for cap space to open up and better opportunities.   This team no longer wants to tank.   Those days are over.   Suggest you spend some time and look at all the LWs, and actually learn a few things about them too.    Pearson owes his career to TG, and rewards the team with his play night in night out, whether he's on the scoresheet or not.   

 

Edit:  On some fans love affair with TT.   It's got to stop already.   He was barely here.    Watching ALL those games he was often invisible except for the exact right time, his goals were smart garbage goals for the most part.    For sure there valuable, but away from the puck meh at best.  JV actually works hard and does more work along the boards.   Aside from one garbage goal against Vegas he was virtually hiding invisible - didn't notice any of this "great two-way play" and certainly didn't notice any "size and toughness ".    Having a career year or close to one right now.    Doubt its sustainable.   And doubt this will be brought up other then the occasional "i told you so" in two or three years either. 

 

One more tiny detail.   Who would you rather have right now.   Hogs on his 3 year ELC, or TT at 4.5 x 4?  Be honest.   Not to mention Podz...who's a Right Winger. 

You seem to ignore that Pearson has a full ntc in year 1 and a partial one in year 2. He also apparenyly has a verbal agreement from Benning to be protected in the expansion draft.

 

Those add ons are far worse than the dollars and term. They make the dollars and term worse because they reduce any flexibility should Pearson's 2 of the 3 last years be his new norm rather than him performing at the best case scenario of last years career year.

 

This contract only makes sense if Pearson os in the top 6 and getting pp time for the next 3 years. A true contender though doesnt have Pearson riding shotgun for a guy like Bo through his prime years.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, ilduce39 said:

Yep. That’s about as succinctly stated as I’ve ever seen it.  

Good teams stay together to build because of good asset management. 

 

You can't have one without the other. Both are needed.

  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Attila Umbrus said:

Well they did ride a tonne of talent they never drafted all the way to the cup finals....lol...maybe they're onto something!? (I jest)  I've always said Gillis must have thanked Dave Nonis and Brian Burke day after day at his job. He come into a team flush with talent. Gillis and Co. then proceeded to suck our pipeline dry of talent till Benning took it over.

 

Not to take away from Gillis and Gillman, they were shrewd businessmen and knew the contract side of things well. And Gillis did find some good reclamation gems along the way via trade...but the drafting was horrid during that period.  

all true, but the really angry folks on CDC seem to be hanging on to an idealized past of the Gillis-age. 

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

Good teams stay together to build because of good asset management. 

 

You can't have one without the other. Both are needed.

I was about to post this.

 

Proper asset management encompases team building. They arent two separate things a gm should be choosing between.

 

Maybe we should just get a GM who can do all the parts of the job effectively.

 

When all these guys retire without a cup I am sure they will be satisfied that they had a bunch of besties that could perpetually lose together.

 

This rationalization is spoken like someone who has never actually spoken to an nhl player in their life. They arent only there to play with their friends. Its not atom rep. They want to win. And sometimes they are ok with a douche or two on the team if that player helps them win.

 

Far too often, "team building" is used as an excuse for signing a bunch of bad contracts that hinder the teams chance to improve and win.

 

If Pearson, Sutter, Roussel, Beagle, Edler, and Myers were all traded tomorrow, the culture of the team would not suddenly crater. The leadership would not suddenly crater. All decent players but what have they actually done to suggest that losing them and having a winning culture are mutually exclusive?

  • Thanks 1
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...