Honest Conversation With Those Who Still Support Management

[4petesake]

2 hours ago, Alflives said:

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Alf.  

Not all alien life forms are nice.

 

 

[nergish]

I think it's finally time to let Jimbo go, but I will remain a fan of his for the young talent he brought to this organization. 
He was a fantastic player in his day, almost ahead of his time, and I genuinely felt that carried over to the types of players he targeted when drafting.

 

All these "bad contracts" he brought in were simply to help insulate our super young star players with seasoned veterans, but he should have known that older players of the bottom 6 variety tend to drop off steeply and quickly. 

 

Gillis was a good GM, Benning was a good GM. We're ready for a great GM.
I know it doesn't work this way, but I'd be happy to keep Benning on as a draft guru. 

A run of Demko, Boeser, Rathbone, Pettersson, Hughes, Hoglander, and Podkolzin is just something we haven't seen in our organization's history, and we simply can't go back to the abysmal drafting of previous eras.

Edited May 17, 2021 by nergish

[Josepho]

2 minutes ago, stawns said:

mapleleafshotstove is your source?  Yikes

 

we wrren't talking about his post draft year, the debate was on who button would have drafted instead.  

 

I thought he was taking MT, but I am very glad that he passed

The website literally calculated the average rankings of 10 different popular draft ranking sources, you can literally calculate these things yourself to reach the same conclusion if you don't believe the website.

 

You said Juolevi's poor development was "completely injury related", I responded by saying that his development in his +1 was looking rough before his injuries hit. I think that's a relevant point when people say "but injuries" in response to the Juolevi pick.

[stawns]

2 minutes ago, Josepho said:

The website literally calculated the average rankings of 10 different popular draft ranking sources, you can literally calculate these things yourself to reach the same conclusion if you don't believe the website.

 

You said Juolevi's poor development was "completely injury related", I responded by saying that his development in his +1 was looking rough before his injuries hit. I think that's a relevant point when people say "but injuries" in response to the Juolevi pick.

his post draft season was 42 points in 58 games, +26 on a knights team that was rebuilding.........how is that "looking rough"?

 

https://www.hockey-reference.com/players/j/juoleol01.html

[JohnTavares]

12 minutes ago, stawns said:

mapleleafshotstove is your source?  Yikes

 

we wrren't talking about his post draft year, the debate was on who button would have drafted instead.  

 

I thought he was taking MT, but I am very glad that he passed

You are very glad he passed on Matthew Tkachuk for Juolevi?

 

You're either related to Benning or have done a masterful troll job. Bravo either way.

[stawns]

Just now, JohnTavares said:

You are very glad he passed on Matthew Tkachuk for Juolevi?

 

You're either related to Benning or have done a masterful troll job. Bravo either way.

do you have any other reply?  You need a new schtik

[JohnTavares]

43 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

JB is good. He has drafted very well. 

 

I think that completely explains my opinion in great detail. 

Great. Drafting is one part of the job.

 

What about his trades and signings?

 

Would you buy a car with a really nice exterior but a broken engine?

[Patel Bure]

30 minutes ago, ShawnAntoski said:

Just based on the handle of the poster he seems to be just trolling this forum - must be boring in the Laffs (echo chamber) of a forum.  Go Habs !; and I wonder who the Zebras will prefer in this original 6 series ?

 

I wonder what his take is on the Laffs performance in last years playoffs were they were once again fodder in the first round ?

What people like him (ie 650 Sportsnet, HF Canucks, etc.,) don’t realize is that nothing matters unless it’s backed by results.  Period.  From a results point of view, the Canucks are no different than Edmonton and Calgary these last few years because we also got to the 2nd round.   The Jets are above us because they got to the 3rd round, while the Leafs are below all of those teams because they have yet to make the 2nd round (although that will likely change this season).   It’s that simple.

 

If we are talking about the Canucks’ “7 years,” then the Leafs 17 years (no playoffs since 2004) also needs to be considered.  This whole “7 years thing” annoys the $&!# out of me because it disregards our 1st year under Benning when we made the playoffs (Benning brought in Ryan Miller, Vrbata, Dorset, and the assets from the Kesler deal), while we made the 2nd round last season.  So this whole “7 years” thing is just nonsense.  We missed the playoffs four 4 straight seasons, and seem to be extremely well positioned for 2022-2023.  

[JohnTavares]

Just now, stawns said:

do you have any other reply?  You need a new schtik

Tell Jim I said hi.

No reasonable person can argue that you would have Olli Juolevi over Matthew Tkachuk.

 

Not even the GOAT Benning shills.

[stawns]

1 minute ago, Patel Bure said:

What people like him (ie 650 Sportsnet, HF Canucks, etc.,) don’t realize is that nothing matters unless it’s backed by results.  Period.  From a results point of view, the Canucks are no different than Edmonton and Calgary these last few years because we also got to the 2nd round.   The Jets are above us because they got to the 3rd round, while the Leafs are below all of those teams because they have yet to make the 2nd round (although that will likely change this season).   It’s that simple.

 

If we are talking about the Canucks’ “7 years,” then the Leafs 17 years (no playoffs since 2004) also needs to be considered.  This whole “7 years thing” annoys the $&!# out of me because it disregards our 1st year under Benning when we made the playoffs (Benning brought in Ryan Miller, Vrbata, Dorset, and the assets from the Kesler deal), while we made the 2nd round last season.  So this whole “7 years” thing is just nonsense.  We missed the playoffs four 4 straight seasons, and seem to be extremely well positioned for 2022-2023.  

technically, they got to round 3 last year.  

[JohnTavares]

32 minutes ago, Fanuck said:

The main issue I have with these supposed 'honest conversations' is that rarely - and this thread is a perfect example - is it mentioned or thoroughly acknowledged that throughout JB's tenure its been clear he hasn't been 100% free to build the team his own way - Aquaman has been in the background giving him directives and we have no idea what JB would've/could've done if he had complete discretion.  Yes, it's Aquaman's team, but the word 'disingenuous' has been used many times in this thread and I fully believe Aquaman has been disingenuous with this fan base in the sense that he's severely limited JB,s decision making by asking him to do the impossible which is to make payoffs every year starting from a point in time when this franchise was essentially gutted of any meaningful young prospects save for maybe 2 .

Why would JB take the job if he wasn't allowed to build the team his own way?

Obviously his vision was in line with AQ's.

[CanucksJay]

36 minutes ago, stawns said:

I was just going off the list he provided

Yeah sorry I should have quoted his post not yours.

[stawns]

Just now, JohnTavares said:

Tell Jim I said hi.

No reasonable person can argue that you would have Olli Juolevi over Matthew Tkachuk.

 

Not even the GOAT Benning shills.

that's your side B?

 

[4petesake]

14 minutes ago, Josepho said:

When I said Juolevi wasn't projecting well, I was referring to the 2016-2017 season after he was drafted. 

 

I don't care if it's been well documented that JB wasn't going to pick Tkachuk, that's his problem. If he's this "super scout", he should be able to identify the best players for the franchise.

 

https://mapleleafshotstove.com/2016/06/22/2016-nhl-draft-rankings-june-22/

 

Aggregate rankings had Tkachuk substantially above Juolevi in the rankings -- it was definitely a reach at the time, especially since the top 5 was considered in their own tier. 

 

The best player for a franchise woefully thin on defensive prospects? Your own source suggests that would be Juolevi.

 

Olli Juolevi: The best all-around defenceman available in this draft. Some guys are bigger, faster, stronger. Some guys are better offensively. Some guys are better defensively. But nobody has the complete package of Juolevi.

I’ll say it again, I wanted Sergachev but was neither surprised nor disappointed with Juolevi being picked. His injuries are unfortunate but he may yet turn out for us.

[stawns]

2 minutes ago, JohnTavares said:

Why would JB take the job if he wasn't allowed to build the team his own way?

Obviously his vision was in line with AQ's.

and I have zero issues with him not taking MT.  MT is a "me" player and I have no interest in having those players on the Canucks and I'll bet my bottom dollar he's gone as a UFA first chance he gets

[Josepho]

4 minutes ago, stawns said:

his post draft season was 42 points in 58 games, +26 on a knights team that was rebuilding.........how is that "looking rough"?

 

https://www.hockey-reference.com/players/j/juoleol01.html

Relative to other picks in the draft, it's absolutely looking rough to basically have an identical P/G clip in your draft year and +1 year.

 

Matthew Tkachuk was contributing in an NHL role, Clayton Keller was killing it in the NCAA, Sergachev was producing better in the OHL. Nylander (while not great) transitioned to the AHL decently. Juolevi easily had the worst post-draft year of any of these players.

[Bad_BOI_pete]

3 hours ago, Brad Marchand said:

Without getting too much into the complex politics of the current management/ownership dynamic, I think the current state of the team hammers home the point that acquiring young talent is a distinct process from building a truly competitive team around that talent. JB and company have done a good job at the first thing, but haven't demonstrated quite yet that they're capable of doing the second.

 

Again without getting too much into detail, the current team is not good enough at consistenly carrying the play, often relying far too much on their goaltending to bail them out. There are good enough core pieces to build around, I just have doubts about whether the current management team is the one that can make the next step with this group of players.

not to be a thorn on a rose, but didn't LE, Roussel and Beagle sign before EP40 and Quinn Hughes even played a game?

[JohnTavares]

1 minute ago, Josepho said:

Relative to other picks in the draft, it's absolutely looking rough to basically have an identical P/G clip in your draft year and +1 year.

 

Matthew Tkachuk was contributing in an NHL role, Clayton Keller was killing it in the NCAA, Sergachev was producing better in the OHL. Nylander (while not great) transitioned to the AHL decently. Juolevi easily had the worst post-draft year of any of these players.

There's no point in "discussing" with him. He thinks Juolevi is a better pick than Tkachuk.

There might be something wrong up there with him - hard to tell.

[Josepho]

7 minutes ago, 4petesake said:

 

The best player for a franchise woefully thin on defensive prospects? Your own source suggests that would be Juolevi.

 

Olli Juolevi: The best all-around defenceman available in this draft. Some guys are bigger, faster, stronger. Some guys are better offensively. Some guys are better defensively. But nobody has the complete package of Juolevi.

I’ll say it again, I wanted Sergachev but was neither surprised nor disappointed with Juolevi being picked. His injuries are unfortunate but he may yet turn out for us.

The Canucks weren't exactly loaded with LW prospects either. But you should never pick by need. RW wasn't considered our biggest position of need in 2015, should we have passed on Boeser then?

 

Also, given that the arguments are about how Benning is some great scout, he should be able to identify the best options for his team himself. A GM shouldn't simply get credit as a great scout for picking what the lists say.

Edited May 17, 2021 by Josepho

[stawns]

3 minutes ago, JohnTavares said:

There's no point in "discussing" with him. He thinks Juolevi is a better pick than Tkachuk.

There might be something wrong up there with him - hard to tell.

what I said was that I had zero issues not picking MT, which I absolutely do not.