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

[Report] Canucks announce coaching staff updates

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, DIBdaQUIB said:

If it was ownership that intervened to bring Clark back, does that not cause you concern about management? 

My guess, owners wanted to bring up Sanford as a cheaper option and then Demko had his glowing support for Clark...Basically the owner was backed into a corner, they already gave Demko 5m x 5 years, best be keeping the goalie coach he likes otherwise 2 things could happen. 1. Trade request 2. His play falls off and we are left with Martin Jones type situation, overpaid G no team will touch with years on his contract.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BlastPast said:

Has it ever occurred to certain know-it-alls in here that the financial uncertainty surrounding the league played a role in the delay of getting some contractual things done ? Surely knowledge of things that will affect revenue forecasts is relevant to both sides understanding what constitutes a fair deal, right? Or maybe they did drag their heels; either way it is something to at least take into consideration.

Everything gets blown out of proportion in a Canadian market. Coaches contracts or scout contracts have never been such hot topics years ago, wonder what has changed since then??

 

The internet and social media platforms have given an outlet to any person in the world to spew whatever kind of hot garbage they want. After this past season, if it was a normal year where fans were in the stands I think a lot more changes would have happened...meaning all new coaches and likely managerial changes too. 

 

Pretty sad after last off seasons debacle that JB still has a job after not even trying to sign Toffoli cause he had such a boner over trying to acquire an over priced OEL. Not to mention our other players who left that probably felt disrespected by the team not even approaching them till after FA started. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, lmm said:

Hey I got two bags for asking that question

I appreciate an honest/earnest answer

Booze comes in paper bags.  Booze is good, so bags are good. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Bertuzzipunch said:

Good. Lets see if he keeps up his 40-45 goal seasons for the next 3 years. 
 

i want young players on this team not 30+ yr olds

we missed having a quality top 6 capable F in Toffoli this year. His contract is fair for the team and the player imo given the flat cap world, TT did quite well considering.

 

We have maybe Podz in the pipeline who could score 20g for us in the next 3 years and that is it...our prospect depth is weak cause the only ones that have panned out are on our roster now. Canucks needed more picks over the last 7 years, we needed more hits after round 1 and just didn't get them

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Chickenspear said:

And don't forget the most important philosophy of all:

 

EwuH7KaVgAAXfep.jpg.f1e24688720da61aaa8dce3b2477373c.jpg

Thing is, it's often that simple.  The team that's skating versus the team that's not.

 

So while it's a cute meme and all....there's really something to it. 

  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Canuckster86 said:

we missed having a quality top 6 capable F in Toffoli this year. His contract is fair for the team and the player imo given the flat cap world, TT did quite well considering.

 

We have maybe Podz in the pipeline who could score 20g for us in the next 3 years and that is it...our prospect depth is weak cause the only ones that have panned out are on our roster now. Canucks needed more picks over the last 7 years, we needed more hits after round 1 and just didn't get them

Yeah THIS year. This year was a mess. 
 

also without toffoli we were able to see what hog was able to do. Did pretty good.

 

our prospect depth is weak cause all our good prospects made the team.

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

I agree with this principle except when it involves taking a goalie in the top half of the first round. 

 

it's too easy to find them in later rounds and their trade value is always too low because there's always a dozen serviceable goalies on the market. 

We’re not going to hit a Top 2 dman or Top 6 forward but it would be trading an expendable piece for a depth piece in a position of need.
 

Could be a homerun Higgins type trade for a needed depth piece without disrupting affecting the team in the short term.

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

We’re not going to hit a Top 2 dman or Top 6 forward but it would be trading an expendable piece for a depth piece in a position of need.
 

Could be a homerun Higgins type trade for a needed depth piece without disrupting affecting the team in the short term.

i dont see that as a better option than drafting a different player in the first place. 

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

i dont see that as a better option than drafting a different player in the first place. 

A better player than the Best Player Available? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, canuck73_3 said:

A better player than the Best Player Available? 

... a better player than you're going to acquire by trading that best player available 5 years later, yes. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did Clark talk about any details of the goaltending department?

 

What would that look like? Is it just more cohesion between the Canucks and their farm team?

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sean Monahan said:

Well, I think I was the first one to mention Woodley’s comments re: Clark in this topic which was also (I believe) the first time I’ve mentioned Woodley in any topic. I don’t think we’ve seen any of the people who may have criticized Woodley in the past now using his words to prop up Benning. 
 

I have previously mentioned Friedman’s words on Clark (things he said during an intermission a couple weeks ago). The gist of what he said re: Clark was that Clark was his own guy who marches to the beat of his own drum. Said Clark was well aware of how sought after he’d be and that if he left it would be because it’s what he wanted to do (from memory).
 

 

At the end of the day I think there’s just way more griping about this particular news bit than there needs to be or really should be. I know there’s some information on the topic that I haven’t read but I think Benning was probably over the moon to sign Clark for 5 years. 
 

And a certain somebody being the objective one on these boards? The guy who said the Toffoli trade was worse than the Sergachev trade? There’s legitimate criticisms to be made of the Toffoli trade but cmon. 

I didnt say the Toffoli trade was worse than the Sergachev trade. If they had re-signedToffoli the trade would have been fine. But unfortunately the trade doesnt live in that world of no other context to consider.

 

I said the end result of the cost of the original trade added to letting him walk for nothing was worse. Because as bad as the Sergachev trade was the habs did at least have someone playing on their roster more than a handful of games at the end of the day. The Canucks ended up with nothing longer term to help the roster while giving up 2 solid assets. Thats worse than a bad hockey trade all day every day, especially for a rebuilding team.

 

I find it interesting that regarding Clark, Sid said essentially the same things I did. Most of you agreed with him, even the ones who flamed me for saying the same things, because he is widely (and rightfully) seen as a smart, insightful, objective poster and is completely worthy of that respect.

 

But it also shows its more the messenger you object to, not actually the message. I guess I dont see the need to prove anyone else wrong as a personal thing. If I disagree with your opinion, I say so. I dont disagree with one person who says it and agree with another who says the same thing. Seeing that here made me laugh. Question my credibility all you want, but many of you just torpedoed your own credibility a lot.

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Bertuzzipunch said:

Good. Lets see if he keeps up his 40-45 goal seasons for the next 3 years. 
 

i want young players on this team not 30+ yr olds

I dont care if they have some 30+ year olds as long as they are the right ones who can actually move the needle for the team.

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...