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

Attn..The Patience-Queue Starts Here

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, Provost said:

Wow... trading way a bunch of high draft picks is what a rebuilding organization looks like?

 

You should tell that to basically everyone else in hockey that think differently.

 

There is a reason why everyone outside the market thinks we lack direction 

Provost ... i live back east the entire time JB being in charge.    For sure there was some teasing and queries about what the heck he was doing until around 2018.     Since then "outside the market" the props started to come in, and then more props and culminated with his Bubble playoff.   Before that his peers ranked him in the top ten.  After i'm sure that he'd have moved up five or so spots.     This season- haven't read anything negative about him - BACK  East.   Eastern Bias and all that.    They like him, can see like some fans, why things went the way they did, and understand that he wasn't planning this team to be this good this fast.   One year off.   Post Sedin 2.   17 playoff type games, 13 real ones.   

 

IF i find any negative things i will post them ok.    Don't assume.   I don't follow any local Vancouver media but sure hear a lot of the fallout on here.   Bieksa is right, they are ruthless, have no patience, and make up things that aren't even real (QHs on an IV drip!).    

 

Sorry, that is wrong.   Eastern media at least, doesn't think badly of JB anymore, and hasn't really since we traded Burrows and Hansen (2017) and officially went from re-tool to rebuild.   And even the re-tool, THN did an article about how that was his only choice.   Sedins, Edler untradeable.   Kesler yes.    Hansen, Burrows and Bieksa waived eventually.    He did get some flak the first three years but that was it.   BB, EP, QHs, Demko stopped that dead in its tracks. 

 

As far as TG haters.   TG would have had three job offers within a week if not days had he not re-signed.    Horvats comments said it all.   

Edited by IBatch
  • Hydration 3
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Provost said:

Wow... trading way a bunch of high draft picks is what a rebuilding organization looks like?

 

You should tell that to basically everyone else in hockey that think differently.

 

There is a reason why everyone outside the market thinks we lack direction 

you should start watching and thinking for yourself instead of having wannabe analysts try to tell you what's going on. 

  • Hydration 1
  • Haha 1
  • Vintage 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, stawns said:

When did he trade a bunch of high draft picks, outside of the pick for Miller?

A 1st round pick and three 2nd round picks moved out from a "rebuilding" team.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, tas said:

you should start watching and thinking for yourself instead of having wannabe analysts try to tell you what's going on. 

Provost isn't so bad at all.   I'm glad he's a regular on this site.   And you know what, he was right about us not making the playoffs.   Analysts sometimes actually get it right too, and some of the wannabee's do a better job then the ones actually getting paid to do it.    I respect his viewpoint.   

 

JB is not God.   And he's certainly not terrible or trash either.    Very hard working, and he's actually part of the team.   So is TG.   Alignment counts for a lot in this industry - just go and look at what can happen when it isn't over in CLB.   That could be us very very quickly.   Thankfully, TG never lost the room, his players think very highly of him and respect him (Horvat and Myers comments being a recent validation of that).   AF made a public statement to calm some of the noise down.    I think the Vancouver media is terrible.   Just makes sh!t up sometimes - and focuses on the negatives.   

  • Hydration 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Provost said:

A 1st round pick and three 2nd round picks moved out from a "rebuilding" team.

Miler is legit.   Good move.   Seconds for Vey and Bear were because the team had zero tweeners in the system, as result of 9 years of pathetic drafting going all the way back to Edler.   Sure Horvat worked out, but look who was traded.   

 

We also gained seconds and thirds back.   And a first.   Overall, the team had all there picks with the exception of one i think second or third rounder, and that includes the Miller cost.    For me at least, i'm completely glad the re-tool only worked for one more year.   Seemed a little by design too with the exception of LE that was brutal.  Because of the length of Miller's contract, and it coincided with trading Bieksa, Burrows, Hansen and losing Hamhuis.    Under those metrics, not a lot was thrown away, several seconds and thirds were recovered and not used as well.   

 

For reference go look at SJ.   They went completely all-in on a re-tool.   It worked!  Made the final.   Re-upped with EK, lost Pavelski for nothing.   And like Vancouver, now have the worst pool in the league, and EK's contract to suffer through (not as bad as two Sedins though).     It is what it is.   Rebuild started in the Spring of 2017.   Four years later here we are. 

  • Like 1
  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Patience is a virtue and it's still true today.  A quick fix will not do it.  Even with McDavid, you still need to build your team or else, you'd be swept away.  We don't want that to happen when our young players getting better and better each year with drafting seems to be the key nowadays. We don't want to be like Oilers that went a decade without a playoffs then getting knocked out early in the playoffs due to lack of depth.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, IBatch said:

Miler is legit.   Good move.   Seconds for Vey and Bear were because the team had zero tweeners in the system, as result of 9 years of pathetic drafting going all the way back to Edler.   Sure Horvat worked out, but look who was traded.   

 

We also gained seconds and thirds back.   And a first.   Overall, the team had all there picks with the exception of one i think second or third rounder, and that includes the Miller cost.    For me at least, i'm completely glad the re-tool only worked for one more year.   Seemed a little by design too with the exception of LE that was brutal.  Because of the length of Miller's contract, and it coincided with trading Bieksa, Burrows, Hansen and losing Hamhuis.    Under those metrics, not a lot was thrown away, several seconds and thirds were recovered and not used as well.   

 

For reference go look at SJ.   They went completely all-in on a re-tool.   It worked!  Made the final.   Re-upped with EK, lost Pavelski for nothing.   And like Vancouver, now have the worst pool in the league, and EK's contract to suffer through (not as bad as two Sedins though).     It is what it is.   Rebuild started in the Spring of 2017.   Four years later here we are. 

Sure a retool "could" potentially work... ours objectively hasn't, and we really haven't even tried that.  Now that basically all our prospects have graduated to the team we will again have one of the worst prospect pools in the league... basically DiPietro and this year's 1st rounder as likely to become material NHL calibre and the rest just hopefuls and depth pieces.  We will still have a bad roster as well even with all those high picks playing.  We can hope for internal improvement from enough of them to make the team better.  Based on his history of signings and inefficient contracts... I have zero faith in Benning being able to build around that core effectively.

Miller is a good player... but if we are a losing team his entire tenure under club control here (as Benning even suggests we likely will be... that he hopes we are competitive in Miller's last contract year), then making that move was premature and it was a bad decision.  If he didn't think we were ready to compete, you don't trade away a 1st round pick for a veteran to be on a losing team.  We had plenty (too many) veterans already to "insulate" the kids. 

We didn't need "tweeners" in the system so spending futures to get them didn't make sense, especially when you were also signing a bunch of veterans as well.  What does an "age gap" mean if you are rebuilding and those players will be over the hill by the time you are ready to compete?  That was the management marketing line, but it made no sense.  There are always veteran players left without a good contract offer as free agency goes along... you don't need to give up important rebuilding assets to trade for "tweeners" who aren't any better but just happen to be 2-3 years younger.  Signings like Vanek, Vrbata, Schaller were ideal "rebuilding" signings.  Short term, market value or less, solid veteran presence... can be flipped for assets (like Motte) at the deadline if we are still bad that year.  Staying with that as a plan and repeating that until we crept out of the cellar (Toronto did it like that) would be totally defensible.  Signings like Ferland, Roussel, Sutter, Holtby, Beagle to more money and term than other teams were willing to spend put us backwards because we needed to insulate the kids were just bad decisions that cost us a chance to build on any successes.

We then have Toffoli, Stecher, and Tanev could have been signed to efficient under market contracts.  If you really need to have veteran "pro's" to help guide the kids, why let Tanev go who was referred to by all the kids as "Dad" and was absolutely the key veteran leadership on defence?  How about Stecher who was trotted out to the media after losses as one of our key young leaders and would chew through a wall to win?  Signing the most expensive veteran backup possible (even though his stats were already poor), a perennial project in Virtanen, and chasing OEL was worth not signing any of those guys? 

The veteran character leadership is only a line they trot out when it suits them... they turn around the next time it suits them and say we had to let other veterans go because we need to get younger.... sometimes in the same interview.  It is absolutely inconsistent.  Heck this year he says we need more speed in our forward group, but used almost all his available cap space (after extensions to the kids) on Pearson who does not have speed and isn't going to be getting faster as he ages to the wrong side of 30.  The line was that he is good in the dressing room... well that wasn't very important 6 months before when players who were publicly touted by their team mates as being key in the dressing room weren't even given the courtesy of a contract offer to consider.

In the end the lack of vision has left us with bad results.

I actually really like Green as a head coach.  He says he wants to play a relentless forechecking aggressive speed game.  He wants players that love to play the game and "want to be here". That is why players like Hoglander and Motte can excel under his systems... it is also why the bottom 6 veterans and guys like Eriksson get destroyed, they just don't fit that style.  They don't have the wheels and can't make the passes to transition quickly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh.  Just come up with a plan and stick by it.  None of this wishy-washy stuff that ends up in excuses and would/should/could stuff.

 

We've been told by mgmt that they plan to be aggressive to make the playoffs next year.  Great.  Now, go out there and bring in actual talented players to make it happen.  No more running out of time, no more splurging on bottom six guys with no ceilings.  Go out and get proven guys.

 

If it works, great, well done, big kudos.  More importantly, if it doesn't, then own up to it.  That means mgmt saying they screwed up and ownership making changes.  This organization is void of any accountability at the moment and its impacts are quite corrosive.

 

Hope this helps.

  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Building a team is 4 parts skill (draft, trade, free agents and cap management) and 2 parts luck (team chemistry - sum of the whole becomes greater than the parts, and how well your competition does at the same time - e.g. to get past Colorado you need to be better than Colorado). The path is not linear and there is no science as per se. 

 

I am in this for as long as it take. I have invested 45 years into being a Canucks fan and I am not pulling the plug on that. I don't think this team is a contender but it has the pieces to become one. I think Benning's time runs out and the next GM gets to see if they can manage the parts into being greater than just the individual pieces. But that is a few years down the road.

 

My bigger fear is Benning tries to push it. I really believe that the message should be "21/22 is a let it ride year". Do not do anything, let the bad contracts expire, let Seattle take who they take and just let it be. I think there are a lot of fans that can agree with that direction. 22/23 is when the real fixing can occur. I am patient and I can get on board with that. Making more bad moves - signing free agents to bad contracts, trading away picks or prospects to offload bad contracts, buying out players and hurting future cap space, trading picks or prospects to add that better player (e.g. Seth Jones) and trading picks or prospects to get Seattle to take a bad contract - should not be done for 21/22.

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, drofssalg said:

My bigger fear is Benning tries to push it. I really believe that the message should be "21/22 is a let it ride year". Do not do anything, let the bad contracts expire, let Seattle take who they take and just let it be. I think there are a lot of fans that can agree with that direction. 22/23 is when the real fixing can occur. I am patient and I can get on board with that. Making more bad moves - signing free agents to bad contracts, trading away picks or prospects to offload bad contracts, buying out players and hurting future cap space, trading picks or prospects to add that better player (e.g. Seth Jones) and trading picks or prospects to get Seattle to take a bad contract - should not be done for 21/22.

 

 

I'll agree that we shouldn't force the issue. But I don't feel like we should just 'let it ride' either. Always improve.

 

IMO Virtanen is the only 'sure thing' buyout (or termination). Eriksson could be 50/50 and Holtby is 50/50. Don't have a problem with any of those.

 

Don't want us targeting Jones (the player would be great, the person is not a fit here. AT ALL.) But Mayfield(NYI)/Manson(ANA)/Jensen(WAS)...? I Target those guys all day long.

 

Can we scoop Jenner out of CBJ? Can we swap Ferland (LTIR) for Killorn + from Tampa to help them clear cap?

 

Not making knee jerk moves or signings, doesn't mean we can't improve the team.

  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, aGENT said:

I'll agree that we shouldn't force the issue. But I don't feel like we should just 'let it ride' either. Always improve.

 

IMO Virtanen is the only 'sure thing' buyout (or termination). Eriksson could be 50/50 and Holtby is 50/50. Don't have a problem with any of those.

 

Don't want us targeting Jones (the player would be great, the person is not a fit here. AT ALL.) But Mayfield(NYI)/Manson(ANA)/Jensen(WAS)...? I Target those guys all day long.

 

Can we scoop Jenner out of CBJ? Can we swap Ferland (LTIR) for Killorn + from Tampa to help them clear cap?

 

Not making knee jerk moves or signings, doesn't mean we can't improve the team.

I guess my bigger fear is I see Benning overpaying to make any of those moves. Keeping the first this year and next is critical to keeping the cupboards stocked. I always support a real hockey trade. In a flat cap world those won't be easy. I agree there are moves that can be made and should be if they are good value deals. I should have said that in my original post. Trading Ferland is an excellent idea but oddly enough I suspect the Canucks will need that LTIR cap space themselves thus missing out on an opportunity to turn it into something. At the very least Pettersson and Hughes need to be signed before he makes moves - Benning needs that cap certainty otherwise he will create the same problem he is helping another team with. 

 

Also buying out LE doesn't work - his bonus makes it a pointless endeavour (minors saves 1 million, buy out saves 2 so only 1 million difference). Virtanen can be bought out (negligible cap impact and a must do for the obvious reason). Holtby is a maybe to me. Good savings for 21/22 but 1.9 hit the year after plus you still need to sign another backup. Other than Virtanen I still believe just let it go on the bad contracts. I think Holtby can be a "better" goalie next season - assuming Ian Clark is back there is more time to work on his game plus you can pick his starts better. 

 

I am not a betting man but I think there will be a Virtanen buyout, a sweetener (one or two of Lind, Gadjovich, Lockwood?) to Seattle to take Roussel or Holtby and some sort of a "hockey" trade (involving Miller or Schmidt?) - possibly getting one of the players you mention. While I don't wish a career ending injury for Beagle, I wonder his status as well. It will be an interesting off season. I just hope for moves at the "safer" end of the spectrum - controlled UFA spending and don't mortgage the future in any trade (keep the firsts). 

 

 

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

I guess my bigger fear is I see Benning overpaying to make any of those moves. Keeping the first this year and next is critical to keeping the cupboards stocked.

None of those moves require a first.

 

9 minutes ago, drofssalg said:

I always support a real hockey trade. In a flat cap world those won't be easy. I agree there are moves that can be made and should be if they are good value deals. I should have said that in my original post. Trading Ferland is an excellent idea but oddly enough I suspect the Canucks will need that LTIR cap space themselves thus missing out on an opportunity to turn it into something.

If we can do something like Ferland for Killorn, we'll be fine.

 

9 minutes ago, drofssalg said:

At the very least Pettersson and Hughes need to be signed before he makes moves - Benning needs that cap certainty otherwise he will create the same problem he is helping another team with. 

He just needs his 'walk away' number. Which he likely already has.

 

9 minutes ago, drofssalg said:

Also buying out LE doesn't work - his bonus makes it a pointless endeavour (minors saves 1 million, buy out saves 2 so only 1 million difference).

$1m is another player. That's not nothing. It also finally closes the book on Eriksson. I'm 50/50 on that one as there's pluses and minuses to either route.

 

9 minutes ago, drofssalg said:

Virtanen can be bought out (negligible cap impact and a must do for the obvious reason). 

Yup, or voided.

 

9 minutes ago, drofssalg said:

Holtby is a maybe to me. Good savings for 21/22 but 1.9 hit the year after plus you still need to sign another backup.

I'm 50/50 on Holtby for those exact reasons.

 

9 minutes ago, drofssalg said:

Other than Virtanen I still believe just let it go on the bad contracts. I think Holtby can be a "better" goalie next season - assuming Ian Clark is back there is more time to work on his game plus you can pick his starts better. 

Tend to agree.

 

9 minutes ago, drofssalg said:

I am not a betting man but I think there will be a Virtanen buyout, a sweetener (one or two of Lind, Gadjovich, Lockwood?) to Seattle to take Roussel or Holtby and some sort of a "hockey" trade (involving Miller or Schmidt?) - possibly getting one of the players you mention. While I don't wish a career ending injury for Beagle, I wonder his status as well. It will be an interesting off season. I just hope for moves at the "safer" end of the spectrum - controlled UFA spending and don't mortgage the future in any trade (keep the firsts). 

Agreed.

  • Hydration 2
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Provost said:

I have been following the team long before Benning and will be long after (probably a lot less than 5 years).  Don’t conflate one GM with the team... that is just objectively wrong.

 

That also doesn’t change the fact you were just making stuff up to invent a false narrative.

 

I guess I just like the team more than you do because I actually want it to be better.

But it suuuure ain't Disney! Ya don't get to WISH these happy endings.

 

As a wise man uttered..."It's a process!" :^)

Edited by Nuxfanabroad
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Provost said:

A 1st round pick and three 2nd round picks moved out from a "rebuilding" team.

You SHOULD note how many recent picks are already ON the team, or soon to arrive.

 

When in this team's 5 decades has there been this much high level, home-grown?

 

This thread is about PATIENCE. Thank PuckGawds that our ownership has the requisite amount, to allow JB to see his vision through. Notwithstanding the angst & stress you(& perhaps valued HF cohorts?) must endure!

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

honestly, the whole "he traded picks so it's not a rebuild!" narrative is ridiculous. rebuilding teams should never trade any picks? how many picks can a rebuilding team trade away before they're no longer considered rebuilding?

 

here's what matters: the team is entirely different than the one benning inherited, it has a new, young, promising core, and that core was put together with homegrown talent acquired through the draft. 

 

that is the definition of a rebuild. 

Or study the teams that DID acquire extra picks over that specific period, & I bet JB STILL landed more elite quality.

Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, tas said:

honestly, the whole "he traded picks so it's not a rebuild!" narrative is ridiculous. rebuilding teams should never trade any picks? how many picks can a rebuilding team trade away before they're no longer considered rebuilding?

 

here's what matters: the team is entirely different than the one benning inherited, it has a new, young, promising core, and that core was put together with homegrown talent acquired through the draft. 

 

that is the definition of a rebuild. 

Except it is not ridiculous at all.

If you are rebuilding, sending out a bunch of 1st and 2nd round picks for immediate help that won't be there when you have "rebuilt" is absolutely counter productive to the process.  You making absurdist extreme arguments doesn't change that.  Nobody every said that a rebuilding team should never trade any picks... you literally made that up on your own.

Trade picks for young players who will be club controlled for long term, trade picks for prospects, trade late picks in packages for better picks/prospects.  Fine... go wild.  Trade picks for immediate short term help?  Entirely counter to the rebuilding through the draft "plan" that occasionally gets stated by Benning... when he isn't arguing the opposite of course.

It isn't a one off, it has been a pattern of consistently trading away high end picks for diminishing assets.  If you look at rebuilding teams they accrued EXTRA picks, not trade away 1st, 2nd, and 3rd rounders regularly.  Then add in trading away cheap young prospects on top of that?  Sorry man, that isn't "rebuilding" that way any rational person would look at it.. as much as you stamp and hold your breath saying it is so.

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Provost said:

Except it is not ridiculous at all.

If you are rebuilding, sending out a bunch of 1st and 2nd round picks for immediate help that won't be there when you have "rebuilt" is absolutely counter productive to the process.  You making absurdist extreme arguments doesn't change that.  Nobody every said that a rebuilding team should never trade any picks... you literally made that up on your own.

Trade picks for young players who will be club controlled for long term, trade picks for prospects, trade late picks in packages for better picks/prospects.  Fine... go wild.  Trade picks for immediate short term help?  Entirely counter to the rebuilding through the draft "plan" that occasionally gets stated by Benning... when he isn't arguing the opposite of course.

It isn't a one off, it has been a pattern of consistently trading away high end picks for diminishing assets.  If you look at rebuilding teams they accrued EXTRA picks, not trade away 1st, 2nd, and 3rd rounders regularly.  Then add in trading away cheap young prospects on top of that?  Sorry man, that isn't "rebuilding" that way any rational person would look at it.. as much as you stamp and hold your breath saying it is so.

it's great that you, mcdonald's swing manager by day, cdc poster by night, have a theory on how a proper rebuild should be done -- according to, uh, I guess videogames, forum arguments, fantasy league, and your own delusions of grandeur. it's cute.

 

jim benning, highly paid nhl executive with roughly 4 decades experience in and around the business, well-respected by his peers, has his own, different, better theory on how best to rebuild. 

 

one of the two of you has put together one of the better young cores in hockey, that has already bagged two playoff series wins worth of confidence and experience, and that has a very bright future.

 

which one should I trust?

 

I'd rather have the canucks' problems than the oilers' problems, or flames' problems, or leafs' problems, or red wings' problems, or sabres' problems, or ducks' problems, or sharks' problems, or, or, or ...

 

managing a hockey team is a lot more challenging when the managers running the other teams don't have to comply with your fantasies. 

  • Hydration 1
  • Vintage 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...