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

What will happen now in the new era?

Rate this topic


alucard

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, iceman64 said:

seriously? one player (Odjick or Brash or Ryp)  1 player doesn't make your whole team tougher... it's by committee.. 

Not bias, and do we have a cup and I missed one or something?! The 2 shots we did have, were with decent sized rosters. 

Yet we didn't depth when injuries happened so another no cup reason..  

 

You are also forgetting the third shot, where they got to the final in 1982 largely on the toughness of Snepsts, Smyl, Fraser, Tiger Williams, Rota, Delorme, Campbell and others.

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

The Canucks were one of the toughest teams to play physically for the entire 1980s.  Tiger, Snepsts, Smyl, Fraser and then right into Coxe, Odjick, Momesso, Hunter, etc.  They were also fairly tough in the 70s and very tough in the 90s.  That started to disappear with the Naslund and Sedin led teams and has stayed that way since, but the creampuff Canucks is a late appearance in their history and actually contrary to everything that came before.

yeah we had tougher teams in the past but not much on depth and not skilled enough but decent..  for us, it's usually been one or the other, and never quite balanced enough and the depth to go along with it to not only win a cup but stay in the hunt every year. Goes to show the best balanced teams aren't soft, nor big pylons win cups. I cringed after Anson left and the twins never quite found a big linemate to police for them after that, if we had Burr in a bigger body by a few inches and 20-30 pounds would have been amazing but he did great despite that, however getting that perfect balance is the hardest thing to do as a team and a GM to pull it off is equally as hard to find.

Do we have that in JR? no idea but hopefully he gets it 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, iceman64 said:

yeah we had tougher teams in the past but not much on depth and not skilled enough but decent..  for us, it's usually been one or the other, and never quite balanced enough and the depth to go along with it to not only win a cup but stay in the hunt every year. Goes to show the best balanced teams aren't soft, nor big pylons win cups. I cringed after Anson left and the twins never quite found a big linemate to police for them after that, if we had Burr in a bigger body by a few inches and 20-30 pounds would have been amazing but he did great despite that, however getting that perfect balance is the hardest thing to do as a team and a GM to pull it off is equally as hard to find.

Do we have that in JR? no idea but hopefully he gets it 

 

Yeah that 1982 team actually made it to the final with both of their top offensive defensemen (Lanz and McCarthy) out for the entire playoffs.  Who knows what that lineup could have done with two 50-point defensemen not missing from the roster.

 

It was actually pretty unreal that they made it to the final.  No Canuck ever scored 100 points until the 1990s.  Meanwhile in the 1980s, every single other team in the Smythe had at least one 130 point player, and all had multiple 100 point players.  The Canucks' team record was a steady crawl from 86-91 points until Pavel Bure came along.

 

The Oilers had three 130 point players and one 129 point player.

 

Also every team the Canucks played in the 1982 playoffs had at least one 130 point player.  The Canucks' team record at that point was Gradin with 86.

Edited by Kevin Biestra
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

Yeah that 1982 team actually made it to the final with both of their top offensive defensemen (Lanz and McCarthy) out for the entire playoffs.  Who knows what that lineup could have done with two 50-point defensemen added to the lineup.

 

It was actually pretty unreal that they made it to the final.  No Canuck ever scored 100 points until the 1990s.  Meanwhile in the 1980s, every single other team in the Smythe had at least one 130 point player, and all had multiple 100 point players.  The Canucks' team record was a steady crawl from 86-91 points until Pavel Bure came along.

 

The Oilers had three 130 point players and one 129 point player.

 

Also every team the Canucks played in the 1982 playoffs had at least one 130 point player.  The Canucks' team record at that point was Gradin with 86.

you do realize your making me feel old here right? lol 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Things will get really interesting when we win the cup in a few months.  Then, instead of rebuilding now, we'll be rebuilding around 2024 or 2025.  I'm expecting a one and done Raptors 2019-type outcome (with making some noise in the 2022-23 playoffs but not a 2-peat).  So, where we go after that will be fascinating.  And what we do with the Boesser QO if he helps us win a cup will be equally riveting.  Will he be our Kahwi Leonard?  Ever since the Boudreau/Rutherhord hire, my instincts have been screaming Stanley Cup.:canucks:

Edited by CanucksFan8353
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Me_ said:

That’s just not happening. Not if the Canucks go for the playoff. With Demko shutting the door, watch that team go far.

 

This is a more balanced team than the bubble team with Toffoli, Tanev and Markstrom.

 

You just don’t get rid of your best player if you’re going for the playoffs if not this year, next, unless you’re rebuilding.

 

The Canucks are not rebuilding. They’re evolving.

we either have to shed a bunch of medium salaries or one big salary to improve. So who will it be?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, iceman64 said:

except for 94 and 2012, we have been nothing but a cream puff team with no pushback... unless this gets solved it won't ever change, like it or not. Cream puff teams never get a cup, get beaten up in the early rounds and no top tier depth to step in when injuries etc happen. Sound familiar?! 

Except the 2012 team was still kind of cream puffy wasn't it?  The 1980-2004ish teams we're tough and big.   After that - like the entire league, it started to change and by 2010 or so it had changed completely.   I never thought our peak Sedin teams were that tough even compared to the rest of the league which also weren't that tough aside from a few like McGratton, Carkner, Orr etc.  Which were mostly done as well.   League is nothing at all like it used to be...first punch that connects the refs come in like they've got bees in the bonnets.    No more 1-4 minute long bouts.   Lucic lol.  He'd cry fighting the tougher guys back then, he did when Orr put his nose sideways.  And Orr would have been destroyed by a guy like Brown, Probert, Behn, Gillies etc in their primes. 

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

JR said he wanted to make a few changes, which would probably mean letting go of some older guys, getting the group more-tightly together age-wise, making some cap room, and stocking up on youth and picks.

He also said it would be difficult to make moves right now, except for player-for-player deals, due to our cap situation.

Last, he said that new management wanted to get a good look at the team as currently structured before making changes.

 

This, to me, adds up to nothing happening right away, and we have seen this to be true so far.

Covid has made everything more difficult, except getting to see what the team would be like without certain players, and how all the 'minor' players that have subbed in are progressing.

 

I think the success since Boudreau's arrival has been pleasantly surprising for everyone and JR & Co are perhaps re-evaluating JB's collection of players and prospects in light of their performances under the new coach.

One thing is for certain: this team is a hell of a lot better than it was before Boudreau, so I believe they may be re-evaluating timelines for playoff successes.

 

In other words, this team is pretty damn good, and if we make the playoffs this year, our opponents are going to wish they were facing some other team.

We still have quite a bit of time until the TDL, and if we keep winning, there will be no reason for a big tear-down.

 

Because of JR's statement v/v getting 'tighter', I have compiled a list of the oldest team members from capfriendly.com:

 

Halak 36

Hunt 33

Sutter 32

Schenn 32

Hamonic 31

Myers 31

Chiasson 31

Dowling 31

O.E.L. 30

Ferland 29

Pearson 29

 

I know some of them are gone anyway, but that is 10 players older than Miller as the team stands right now.

JT Miller is exactly what we need to Win The Cup, an outstanding player on an outstandingly-underpaid contract, and he will still be exactly what is needed, even with his new contract.

We need more players like this, not less.

There are 10 players I would lose on this list before Miller, and others who are younger.

 

As many have said, unless the return is absolutely ridiculous, I do not think we trade Miller.

With some playoff success this year, and improvements for next year, why wouldn't JT re-sign?

 

We have to quit planning to compete in another 3, 4, 5 years down the road as it takes away our chances to Win The Cup in the present.

We have a good team that will be made better; but hopefully not by trading away the very players that will Win Those Cups for us.

 

We have a chance to make the playoffs, and once we do, we will beat some of these teams who started strong and are just limping in.

Maybe we win it all this year; either way, we will be 'super-keen' (see, I was an adult in the 70's) to get back at it.

 

And hopefully, we will still have Miller at 29 and at only 5 and a quarter mill, Bo at 5.5m, and Demko at 5.0m.

What the hell is wrong with that?  Reload for another run; and another; and another (until we have more cups than spit, spit Montreal).

 

You don't Win The Cup with unproven prospects and draft picks.

You win them with proven warriors and excellent coaching/management.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Goal:thecup said:

JR said he wanted to make a few changes, which would probably mean letting go of some older guys, getting the group more-tightly together age-wise, making some cap room, and stocking up on youth and picks.

He also said it would be difficult to make moves right now, except for player-for-player deals, due to our cap situation.

Last, he said that new management wanted to get a good look at the team as currently structured before making changes.

 

This, to me, adds up to nothing happening right away, and we have seen this to be true so far.

Covid has made everything more difficult, except getting to see what the team would be like without certain players, and how all the 'minor' players that have subbed in are progressing.

 

I think the success since Boudreau's arrival has been pleasantly surprising for everyone and JR & Co are perhaps re-evaluating JB's collection of players and prospects in light of their performances under the new coach.

One thing is for certain: this team is a hell of a lot better than it was before Boudreau, so I believe they may be re-evaluating timelines for playoff successes.

 

In other words, this team is pretty damn good, and if we make the playoffs this year, our opponents are going to wish they were facing some other team.

We still have quite a bit of time until the TDL, and if we keep winning, there will be no reason for a big tear-down.

 

Because of JR's statement v/v getting 'tighter', I have compiled a list of the oldest team members from capfriendly.com:

 

Halak 36

Hunt 33

Sutter 32

Schenn 32

Hamonic 31

Myers 31

Chiasson 31

Dowling 31

O.E.L. 30

Ferland 29

Pearson 29

 

I know some of them are gone anyway, but that is 10 players older than Miller as the team stands right now.

JT Miller is exactly what we need to Win The Cup, an outstanding player on an outstandingly-underpaid contract, and he will still be exactly what is needed, even with his new contract.

We need more players like this, not less.

There are 10 players I would lose on this list before Miller, and others who are younger.

 

As many have said, unless the return is absolutely ridiculous, I do not think we trade Miller.

With some playoff success this year, and improvements for next year, why wouldn't JT re-sign?

 

We have to quit planning to compete in another 3, 4, 5 years down the road as it takes away our chances to Win The Cup in the present.

We have a good team that will be made better; but hopefully not by trading away the very players that will Win Those Cups for us.

 

We have a chance to make the playoffs, and once we do, we will beat some of these teams who started strong and are just limping in.

Maybe we win it all this year; either way, we will be 'super-keen' (see, I was an adult in the 70's) to get back at it.

 

And hopefully, we will still have Miller at 29 and at only 5 and a quarter mill, Bo at 5.5m, and Demko at 5.0m.

What the hell is wrong with that?  Reload for another run; and another; and another (until we have more cups than spit, spit Montreal).

 

You don't Win The Cup with unproven prospects and draft picks.

You win them with proven warriors and excellent coaching/management.

 

 

From your list..

 

Halak 36 - UFA next year

Hunt 33 - UFA next year

Sutter 32 - on LTIR and UFA next year

Schenn 32 - cheap contact for 1 more year

Hamonic 31- an enigma - LTIR - trade please 

Myers 31 - 3 more years at $6M - keep/trade

Chiasson 31 - UFA next year 

Dowling 31 - cheap (can be waived to minors)

O.E.L. 30 - big long contact - keep/trade

Ferland 29 - LTIR

Pearson 29 - $3.25 for 2 more years- keep/trade

 

So really it’s down to Hamonic, Myers, OEL, and Pearson that can be moved to keep Miller.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, BPA said:

From your list..

 

Halak 36 - UFA next year

Hunt 33 - UFA next year

Sutter 32 - on LTIR and UFA next year

Schenn 32 - cheap contact for 1 more year

Hamonic 31- an enigma - LTIR - trade please 

Myers 31 - 3 more years at $6M - keep/trade

Chiasson 31 - UFA next year 

Dowling 31 - cheap (can be waived to minors)

O.E.L. 30 - big long contact - keep/trade

Ferland 29 - LTIR

Pearson 29 - $3.25 for 2 more years- keep/trade

 

So really it’s down to Hamonic, Myers, OEL, and Pearson that can be moved to keep Miller.

Yeah, well, plus the under 30-year olds we can do without; just because they are under 30 doesn't mean we have to keep them.

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Goal:thecup said:

Yeah, well, plus the under 30-year olds we can do without; just because they are under 30 doesn't mean we have to keep them.

People get very fixated on age but it isn't "a rule", it's a likelihood that players will decline significantly once they cross the 30 threshold.  But not all do and there are exceptions to that rule if that's what some see it as. Sure, the trend is that players will age out after 30 but you have to assess on an individual basis, not just look at the numbers.  Physical conditioning and lifestyle come into play a great deal. A married guy with a young family isn't out there whooping it up every night and can focus on strength and nutrition, training/fitness/rest and recovery to offset some of what the younger guys can bring. 

 

Plus, factor in "experience" and maturity because those traits also are in their favour. They may know how to pace themselves a little better and not get caught up in mental hurdles that come with sometimes underperforming and the pressures of that.

 

I see proposals for players close to the same age as JT (within a year or two).  Does 12-24 months really make that much of a difference and is it worth "upgrading" based on that factor?  I know looking into his next contract, it could factor in. Or, possibly, couldn't.  We're always wanting to look "in the future" but sometimes the future's now/current and you have to also transition without restarting.

 

JT's game is very much a determined one...he pounces on (and yes, creates them for the other guys too) opportunities and goes without hesitation. He thrusts himself into the play and is hard to push off it.  Instinct and impulse, and sometimes it does backfire for him with the costly turnovers.  But he's a guy running on all cylinders (when he's fully engaged, which is most of the time lately as he seems inspired with new coaches in place).  Sheer will and determination and it's not a matter of him having to rely (only) on speed and skill. He's a force out there and when he goes to the net with a head of steam, even if you can catch him he still can one arm protect the puck through his strength and will.  Age isn't that much of a factor except that guys may slow down and take longer to recover as they get older. Over 30 now comes with health/nutrition and lifestyle education and products that can help sustain optimum performance.  

 

The average age in the NHL is 27.3 (from 2020, so not sure if that's changed much).   30+ doesn't = "done". You really have to look at more than that.

 

I don't discount the fact that those advocating for a deal for JT are looking at his value and what he can bring right now.  AND the possibility that he could walk away for nothing...but he has to be having a pretty good time right now. After a game like last night. Seeing the potential in our team and how he'd also be giving up on that...the what if's, as we contend with some of the league's best and do not look out of place lately.

 

I think the prospect of what he would bring in a trade sometimes ignores what he brings to our team in relation to his contributions in the room and on the ice. It's a double edged sword.

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Goal:thecup said:

Yeah, well, plus the under 30-year olds we can do without; just because they are under 30 doesn't mean we have to keep them.

Yup.  Dickinson has been underwhelming to say the least.

 

Then you have a decision to make with EP/Boeser/Bo.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, IBatch said:

Except the 2012 team was still kind of cream puffy wasn't it?  The 1980-2004ish teams we're tough and big.   After that - like the entire league, it started to change and by 2010 or so it had changed completely.   I never thought our peak Sedin teams were that tough even compared to the rest of the league which also weren't that tough aside from a few like McGratton, Carkner, Orr etc.  Which were mostly done as well.   League is nothing at all like it used to be...first punch that connects the refs come in like they've got bees in the bonnets.    No more 1-4 minute long bouts.   Lucic lol.  He'd cry fighting the tougher guys back then, he did when Orr put his nose sideways.  And Orr would have been destroyed by a guy like Brown, Probert, Behn, Gillies etc in their primes. 

Yeah making Probert mad was a bad idea, was surprised when we signed him but even if he was older (I think) at the time, he could still fight ok but in his prime he was a beast that a team did not want to wake up! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BPA said:

Yup.  Dickinson has been underwhelming to say the least.

 

Then you have a decision to make with EP/Boeser/Bo.

 

 

That wouldn't be hard, it would be flow, Bo has a lot of time in and the C on his jersey, Petey is getting back to where he normally is so probably not him, so that leaves Flow out again. However Garland is also not worth chump change either but I still haven't bothered to look at the contract details of guys we could dump as in hunt, lammiko, etc. plus Lou is off the books so that will help too finally but not until next year but we can live with that. However partially because of that JR might wait until next year before he pulls of a multiplayer deal IF that becomes available OR use some of it to re-up Bo and bank the rest. 

 However, who knows... lots of options... the only priority is making sure there is money in the bank for when it comes time to re-up JT because like i said before in the last 2 weeks of the trade rumours, only a fool would trade him. Even considering his value on the market. You don't trade a guy that scores game winning goals as much as he does AND like last night.. basically wins the game for us by his efforts. No way do you ever let that go.

Horvat needs to play like JT, in other words, not streaky.

Anyway seems like a lot of roads we could take but all we can do is hope JR gets on the right one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, iceman64 said:

Yeah making Probert mad was a bad idea, was surprised when we signed him but even if he was older (I think) at the time, he could still fight ok but in his prime he was a beast that a team did not want to wake up! 

Probert is and always will be the reigning heavyweight champ IMO.   Fought the best of the best for nearly two decades ... can't blame him for losing/winning/drawing to our very own huggy bear - even mentions in his book how it pissed him off he'd never just open up and fight him (although did say Brashear and Laraque were strong boys)... Probert was what an enforcer should be - embodied it, same as Willams, McSorely, Manson and a ton of other guys - that could take a regular shift and wouldn't hurt you.     Goons ... well Probert fought a lot of those all the time, especially later in his career - but don't remember him being part of our team.   Because he wasn't.   But we've had others that did his job and did it well.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, iceman64 said:

Yeah making Probert mad was a bad idea, was surprised when we signed him but even if he was older (I think) at the time, he could still fight ok but in his prime he was a beast that a team did not want to wake up! 

Ever look up the fight between Cox and Probert. I think they said 70+ blows llanded, just toe to toe. But the toughest IN my opinion was Boogard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, IBatch said:

Probert is and always will be the reigning heavyweight champ IMO.   Fought the best of the best for nearly two decades ... can't blame him for losing/winning/drawing to our very own huggy bear - even mentions in his book how it pissed him off he'd never just open up and fight him (although did say Brashear and Laraque were strong boys)... Probert was what an enforcer should be - embodied it, same as Willams, McSorely, Manson and a ton of other guys - that could take a regular shift and wouldn't hurt you.     Goons ... well Probert fought a lot of those all the time, especially later in his career - but don't remember him being part of our team.   Because he wasn't.   But we've had others that did his job and did it well.  

hmmm trying to think of who it was then, 42 years becomes a blur looking back, ok I'll put some thought into it.. you know how someone mentions a Band and a song you know but can't remember the name.. ok Google here I come. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...