Aggressive offseason

[ShawnAntoski]

Hope Aquaman, JB and the rest of the front office will look into the history of other teams that had chosen to go on a spending spree in the off season at the cost of unknow lottery tickets in the form of prospects & picks.  Some had said that it takes drafted players 3 - 5 years to be fully NHL ready but there are also the chance a drafted player can buck the the trend and give the org an impactful player on the cheap with out overpaying for it through trades or FA - I get it, it is about the percentages. 

 

The Laffs seasons under Burkie till now can perhaps offer a glimpse of how this offseason will eventually end up in full (organizational) rebuild in the end; although, the teams young cores will probably be able to buck the trend (?) and keep it inline with JBs' timeline cause just as the case, with the Canucks when Burkie came in the Laffs prospects pool was bare and there was no young core to build around.   

 

Sidenote: One of Burkies' first move was to trade two first for Kessel (21 yr old at the time) which resulted in a #2 in 2010 (Seguin) and #9 in 2011 (Hamilton) as major parts.  The Bruins team that made that trade (also) included JB as one of AGM, perhaps he can look back at that transaction and see how it benefitted the Bruins roster long term.

 

Just hoping a for a balance offseason; and I understand that there is already a very similar post but would like to see others take - given my post.

[Drakrami]

Yeah, we are going to be aggressive alright. Benning will look for big named players to add to bolster this team - his job is on the line. Let's hope it looks more like Hamonic, and Schmidt instead of Beagle, Roussel, Ferland, and Holtby. 

[J-P]

Trading our first two picks for LE and for Seattle to take Holtby and trading Schmidt for a physical RD at 2-3 mil and get a 2nd pick back maybe? Not saying we should do that but it's an example of being aggressive without dismantling the team.

 

I do understand where the worries are coming from though...

[JustABandwagoner]

39 minutes ago, J-P said:

Trading our first two picks for LE and for Seattle to take Holtby and trading Schmidt for a physical RD at 2-3 mil and get a 2nd pick back maybe? Not saying we should do that but it's an example of being aggressive without dismantling the team.

 

I do understand where the worries are coming from though...

wtf no... why would u trade the 9th overall away to get rid of eriksson. he only has 1 more year left... just be patient

[J-P]

34 minutes ago, DontMessMe said:

wtf no... why would u trade the 9th overall away to get rid of eriksson. he only has 1 more year left... just be patient

I agree and I don't say we should do it, but trading LE for a 1st and a 2nd for Seattle to take Holtby and dealing Schmidt for a 2nd + a RD at half the price gives us a net loss of a 1rd pick and (maybe) a downgrade on Schmidt (while adding a needed RD) + 1 mil needed for a backup goaltender. That leaves 12 mil in cap room for FA.

 

Again - not saying we should do this but it's an example of being aggressive while not being reckless. I agree that we should stay patient. If we can get rid of Holtby and trade Schmidt for something valuable I'm all for it, but paying to get rid of LE, Roussell, Beagle etc. is a no no in my book.

Edited May 25, 2021 by J-P

[Angry Goose]

Miller EP BB

TP BH NH

Motte xxx Podzkolzin

MacEwan Beagle ? Highmore

Lind or Roussel?

 

Hughes Hamonic

Schmidt xxx

Rathbone Meyers

Xxx

 

Demko

Holtby ? 

 

So this is the line up I'm projecting so far.  So 3rd line C, and possibly a 4th line C as well as two defenseman seem to be the major holes. I'm guessing Hamonic will return-seems to be a great fit.   I think the Canucks are happy with Highmore, but with Mottes injury status and MacEwans inconsistent ice time are the Canucks looking to make changes there?  I like both and would even like to see Motte get a Burrows like contract if possible 

 

 

[24K PureCool]

Jim is in a no win situation here.

 

Do nothing and let the bad contract run out will have the fanbase up in arms over 2 playoffs in 8 years.

 

Be aggressive and have the fanbase up in arms about mortgaging the future, cap space, no plan, asset management, etc. 

 

Unless the team wins the cup, not even a conference final will satisfy a good portion of the fanbase with complaints of one and done.

 

[J-P]

2 minutes ago, 24K PureCool said:

Jim is in a no win situation here.

 

Do nothing and let the bad contract run out will have the fanbase up in arms over 2 playoffs in 8 years.

 

Be aggressive and have the fanbase up in arms about mortgaging the future, cap space, no plan, asset management, etc. 

 

Unless the team wins the cup, not even a conference final will satisfy a good portion of the fanbase with complaints of one and done.

 

Don't agree, making the playoffs and being competitive until the last minute without being dominated in the first round and then building from there would be a result most of the fanbase would accept.

[24K PureCool]

6 minutes ago, J-P said:

Don't agree, making the playoffs and being competitive until the last minute without being dominated in the first round and then building from there would be a result most of the fanbase would accept.

Hence a good portion. 

[komodo0921]

2 hours ago, Drakrami said:

Yeah, we are going to be aggressive alright. Benning will look for big named players to add to bolster this team - his job is on the line. Let's hope it looks more like Hamonic, and Schmidt instead of Beagle, Roussel, Ferland, and Holtby. 

This is, exactly, my fear.

JB's put a timeline on success and knows he has to deliver.

There are a lot of holes to fill in this lineup and a two year deadline to fill them.

Could be disastrous.

[Nuxfanabroad]

Remember the Jets about 2 yrs back? Everything seemed to be snowballing badly. Guys wanted out, & their D-core was being gutted.

 

There were complaints Chevy sat on his hands. Then the Hayes deal blew up in his face. Things could've gotten even worse for Wpg, but they had many nice, young resources, from some yrs of some pretty slick drafting. They managed to turn over their D to a much younger cast, & it appears Morrissey has emerged.

 

So they could deal the rest of the malcontents, & PLD is starting to reveal his value, as Spring reverts to trench-warfare.

 

Seems the best lesson we can extract here is to time deals right(patience), & don't rush the proper development of our talented youth.

 

Btw, hope the post fits the thread..just waking up with 1st cup of the day...

[Dazzle]

38 minutes ago, 24K PureCool said:

Jim is in a no win situation here.

 

Do nothing and let the bad contract run out will have the fanbase up in arms over 2 playoffs in 8 years.

 

Be aggressive and have the fanbase up in arms about mortgaging the future, cap space, no plan, asset management, etc. 

 

Unless the team wins the cup, not even a conference final will satisfy a good portion of the fanbase with complaints of one and done.

 

This is very true.

 

I think the whole idea of 'rebuilding' wasn't really a popular idea among fans. Yet revisionist history would tell you that Benning "should've" done it. When Benning assumed this job, he was handcuffed with a whole lot of poor assets, though the memories of the cup loss was still relatively fresh among fans. Was there really an appetite to sell off fan favourite assets? I don't think so.

When Benning made a promise about a 'quick rebuild'/retool, he underestimated how poorly he'd do it. And it's not entirely his fault. He was given a crap sandwich, no matter what Gillis sympathizers think. There was nothing in the cupboards, and a clear declined core. If there's ever any argument to this, Edler is STILL around because Gillis was unable to develop a single defenseman from his time period. But Benning is responsible for making promises he couldn't keep.

 

Now he's shoe-horned himself into this situation. He absolutely has to guarantee a playoff entrance (which probably isn't that hard to to do). I don't know if Benning can do it with Green, but if the players support him, then maybe it's possible.

 

 

 

 

[Johnny Torts]

3 hours ago, Drakrami said:

Yeah, we are going to be aggressive alright. Benning will look for big named players to add to bolster this team - his job is on the line. Let's hope it looks more like Hamonic, and Schmidt instead of Beagle, Roussel, Ferland, and Holtby. 

i agree. But the Ferland situation, to me, is sad. Hope he can figure his head out. Would have been such a stud for us.

[wallstreetamigo]

1 hour ago, Dazzle said:

This is very true.

 

I think the whole idea of 'rebuilding' wasn't really a popular idea among fans. Yet revisionist history would tell you that Benning "should've" done it. When Benning assumed this job, he was handcuffed with a whole lot of poor assets, though the memories of the cup loss was still relatively fresh among fans. Was there really an appetite to sell off fan favourite assets? I don't think so.

When Benning made a promise about a 'quick rebuild'/retool, he underestimated how poorly he'd do it. And it's not entirely his fault. He was given a crap sandwich, no matter what Gillis sympathizers think. There was nothing in the cupboards, and a clear declined core. If there's ever any argument to this, Edler is STILL around because Gillis was unable to develop a single defenseman from his time period. But Benning is responsible for making promises he couldn't keep.

 

Now he's shoe-horned himself into this situation. He absolutely has to guarantee a playoff entrance (which probably isn't that hard to to do). I don't know if Benning can do it with Green, but if the players support him, then maybe it's possible.

 

 

 

 

There have not been many times in Canucks history where the fan base seemed actually willing to accept a true rebuild and still support the team.

 

There was a strong sense of support for it prior to Gillis getting fired and after Benning was hired though. Probably the most support I have seen in my time as a fan.

 

Benning clearly misjudged just how broken that core was after losing to the Bruins and getting trashed by LA and SJ in the subsequent years. Fan favorites and good, if declining players for sure. But the team core was broken.

 

I think ownership and Benning were both responsible for the band aid on a broken leg approach during the Sedins last few years. The last several years though have been similar quick fix type moves that have not panned out.

 

I am ok with Benning signing some vets to 1 year terms without trade protection. As long as he is realistic if it even looks like the team could miss the playoffs and sells off those players at the deadline.

 

This is not the time for him to panic sign a bunch of vets with term and ntc. 

[IBatch]

The only thing JB needs to be - is continue the theme he went with last off season.   Be aggressive on patience and and only divert if a good opportunity presents itself again like it did with Miller and Schmidt.   Hell no to trading this years first.   Last years draft left a hole in our pool and we are not ready to keep that trend going.   Back to the basic's.   Yes to JV buyout - no to the rest.   Let it shed naturally and stay the course.  

Edited May 25, 2021 by IBatch

[wallstreetamigo]

On a further note, what I am really hoping for is him using his available cap space to pick off some good players ahead of the expansion draft via trade instead.

[wallstreetamigo]

1 minute ago, IBatch said:

The only thing JB needs to be - is continue the theme he went with last off season.   Be aggressive on patience and and only divert if a good opportunity presents itself again like it did with Miller and Schmidt.   Hell no to trading this years first.   Last years draft left a hole in our pool and we are not ready to keep that trend going.   Back to the basic's.   Yes to JV buyout - no to the rest.   Let it shed naturally and stay the course.  

As minimal as the impact of a JV buyout is, it still uses up a spot and pushes some dollars out into next year.

 

I would much prefer they use buyouts on others and simply terminate his contract for cause. They would certainly not have much problem winning that argument imo.

[IBatch]

3 minutes ago, wallstreetamigo said:

As minimal as the impact of a JV buyout is, it still uses up a spot and pushes some dollars out into next year.

 

I would much prefer they use buyouts on others and simply terminate his contract for cause. They would certainly not have much problem winning that argument imo.

 Sure 500k left over.   That's 2.0 million in cap space.   And sure the team will cancel if they are legally allowed to.   If not his buyout, compared to anyone else's, comes with the least consequence.   I'm not a fan of any other buyout including Holbtys.   A player has to come in and replace.   Podz IS JV's replacement, plus if he's good enough Hogs can switch to his natural LW spot. 

Edited May 25, 2021 by IBatch

[Alflives]

1 minute ago, wallstreetamigo said:

As minimal as the impact of a JV buyout is, it still uses up a spot and pushes some dollars out into next year.

 

I would much prefer they use buyouts on others and simply terminate his contract for cause. They would certainly not have much problem winning that argument imo.

Trouble terminating Jake’s contract for cause right now though, as there is no criminal charge.  If a criminal charge comes soon, then imo there would be cause.  I see Jake being bought out unless the Crown lays charges.  

[Alflives]

2 hours ago, Angry Goose said:

Miller EP BB

TP BH NH

Motte xxx Podzkolzin

MacEwan Beagle ? Highmore

Lind or Roussel?

 

Hughes Hamonic

Schmidt xxx

Rathbone Meyers

Xxx

 

Demko

Holtby ? 

 

So this is the line up I'm projecting so far.  So 3rd line C, and possibly a 4th line C as well as two defenseman seem to be the major holes. I'm guessing Hamonic will return-seems to be a great fit.   I think the Canucks are happy with Highmore, but with Mottes injury status and MacEwans inconsistent ice time are the Canucks looking to make changes there?  I like both and would even like to see Motte get a Burrows like contract if possible 

 

 

I like your line up ideas.  Could Lind of Gads play wing, thus allowing Miller to play centre?  Or is it best to resign ?Sutter for two years providing the cap hit is 2.5 or less?