Allvin & Rutherford Press Summary

[MrCanuck94]

1 hour ago, fanfor42 said:

Allvin is a total yes man to JR.  He said nothing that didn't start with  well as Jim just said..

 

Not impressed with him. At all.

 

Rutherford has refused to give BB his props for a great year. I didn't like that. 

 

My question is what have Allvin and JR done so far? Not much.

 

Ok guess we will see but I think it's a big miss to say BB didn't earn an extension.  Ya right says the two guys who have done nothing yet...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

51 minutes ago, 73 Percent said:

I'm glad this was said. I'm not overly thrilled with what management has done so far. All I hear is a lot of "we tried".

 

I liked hamonic, but the players didn't so it's a fair move to get a 3rd I guess. But then to dump a third for Dermott... Very questionable. Then to come out and say we've been trying to get Rathbone up for months... Uhhhh what? This sounds a lot like the JB "we ran out of time" to me.

 

They're not impressed with the success this team had since Bruce came in... Yet they couldn't find him a decent backup even if one was in their own back yard.h They wasted even more money next year by starting halak through his bonus games played. 

 

This management group seems like they like to sit in a circle and talk about their feelings rather than improve this hockey team. Looking back at it now it's pretty evident that's the case with all of their management PR hirings. 

 

I'm going to come out right now and say it. 

 

I don't see this management team having much success here if this is a sign of things to come.

?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

 

Are we really criticizing management over a crucial evaluation period that takes time to properly know your players and staff? They've created a plan and the Dermott and Hamonic moves are a template of what that means, getting younger and creating value in cap. Rathbone was injured for a while and we ran into injury issues after. Letting him get #1 minutes was probably the best thing to do than bouncing him up and down between leagues.

 

There's already so many external things in motion like tournaments, development camps, in-house renovations, new practice rink, etc.

 

Maybe they're not impressed because mediocrity doesn't impress a management group that just came off winning 3 Stanley Cups over the last decade.

 

They're setting a standard, they're setting new expectations and they're not making knee jerk moves for short term success.

 

This is the most confident I've been in a group of individuals running the Canucks.

[ilduce39]

I don’t see the benefit in playing hardball with Boudreau.  It’s pretty baffling, actually.  That said, maybe there’s more going on behind the scenes.
 

Then it sounds like they’re trying to bring back Miller and Brock.  It’s nice to say they want to revamp the defence but I don’t see how they accomplish this without selling a forward.. even if you can find a taker for Myers.  
 

I really don’t put a ton of stock into the wordplay… management has some crucial decisions coming up and that’s where we’ll see how they really feel about this team.

[Crabcakes]

3 hours ago, Curmudgeon said:

Uhhhh....Benning. Every year. And I'm glad somebody else noticed. Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.

 

Sounds to me like they really want to find defencemen who are better puck movers. I'm looking at you, Myers.

And, btw, Jack Rathbone is extremely adept at moving the puck from his own zone. I really believe there is a spot for him in Vancouver next season. I don't understand all those who want to throw him in as a sweetener in any trade; wouldn't you want to see if he can make a difference in Vancouver before you trade him away?

 

No, it sounds like JR wants them to play a more structured game.  No more winging it.  OMG it's about time!!

[wai_lai416]

7 minutes ago, tas said:

it's also been made clear that the senators players have been dispatched to evangelize and recruit players, telling them all about how great the senators organization is. not to mention, the senators are in the exact same place now that the canucks were when myers signed with them; they are a very promising, up and coming team. their core has a very bright future.

 

myers could be convinced.

lol they are up and coming sure.. but they ain't up and coming in the next 2 years of his contract.. they have some good pieces but they are still light years away from being competitive/contender. when myers was signed.. the canucks were on the rise and suppose to be a borderline playoff team.. ottawa are no way a borderline playoff team next couple years he won't be part of the future

[tas]

1 minute ago, ilduce39 said:

I don’t see the benefit in playing hardball with Boudreau.  It’s pretty baffling, actually.  That said, maybe there’s more going on behind the scenes.
 

Then it sounds like they’re trying to bring back Miller and Brock.  It’s nice to say they want to revamp the defence but I don’t see how they accomplish this without selling a forward.. even if you can find a taker for Myers.  
 

I really don’t put a ton of stock into the wordplay… management has some crucial decisions coming up and that’s where we’ll see how they really feel about this team.

it's not hardball with bruce, it's honesty. jim's not comfortable extending the coach currently until he knows if the results were real and not just the reality check of getting your coach fired and if bruce can adapt and implement the structure that management wants. it's exactly the shrewd management this fanbase has been demanding. 

[tas]

1 minute ago, wai_lai416 said:

lol they are up and coming sure.. but they ain't up and coming in the next 2 years of his contract.. they have some good pieces but they are still light years away from being competitive/contender. when myers was signed.. the canucks were on the rise and suppose to be a borderline playoff team.. ottawa are no way a borderline playoff team next couple years he won't be part of the future

agree to disagree I guess. 

[ilduce39]

Just now, tas said:

it's not hardball with bruce, it's honesty. jim's not comfortable extending the coach currently until he knows if the results were real and not just the reality check of getting your coach fired and if bruce can adapt and implement the structure that management wants. it's exactly the shrewd management this fanbase has been demanding. 

That doesn’t make sense. If it’s about structure and management then they should just let him go instead of expecting a 67 year old to learn new tricks.  They don’t like the structure but they’re going to leave the decision in Boudreau’s hands whether he wants to come back? I don’t see anything “shrewd” about it.  Cheap, maybe.

[Chris12345]

19 minutes ago, wai_lai416 said:

100% sure myers will have all the lottery teams on his m-ntc

I would guess that too....but he did sign in Van.

[Claiborne55]

It is just a setup job by JR... they know what they are going to do and know the team will take a step back next year.

 

BB can be the fall guy for next years results and then bring in their guy,

 

BB is as good as gone.   He'll get a 3 year deal from someone.

 

BB is basically a Free Agent 

Edited May 4, 2022 by Claiborne55

[tas]

7 minutes ago, ilduce39 said:

That doesn’t make sense. If it’s about structure and management then they should just let him go instead of expecting a 67 year old to learn new tricks.  They don’t like the structure but they’re going to leave the decision in Boudreau’s hands whether he wants to come back? I don’t see anything “shrewd” about it.  Cheap, maybe.

they believe he's earned the opportunity to prove it. if he can show that the results are still there and that he can get the team playing a more structured game, the job is his. they're happy to have him back and are open-minded about the future, but they also want to give him the opportunity to choose security if that's his preference and he has an offer. 

Edited May 4, 2022 by tas

[BigTramFan]

7 minutes ago, MrCanuck94 said:

That stat does not count for the amount of defensive breakdowns and high danger chances against that Demko was covering up. He was easily the reason we won a lot of the games just from an eye test.

 

JR went on S650 and even said we won about 50% of our games because of our goaltending.

No SV% doesn't show that, but HDsc SV% (high danger scoring chance save percentage) does.

 

Again Demko was good at 0.837 SV% on 283 HD shots, but certainly not top of the league for that stat. Some examples of other goalies from some top teams that had higher HDsc SV%:

 

Shesterkin NYR 0.850 (260 HD shots)

Markstrom CLG 0.838 (253 HD shots)

Andersen CAR 0.841 (232 HD shots)

Husso STL 0.840 (200 HD shots)

 

So although Demko faced more HD chances than these goalies, his SV% wasn't better. He wasn't a superstar in this area. And this also means that a fair share (46 HD goals from 283 HD chances) actually went in, and Demko's play therefore was not wholly responsible for the Canucks winning record.

 

Please don't think I am running down Demko here. He is a very good goalie and he is also young and likely to get even better. He could have had a much lower HDsc SV% and the Canucks would have lost more games.

 

My main point is that you cannot say that Demko's play was "superstar" level and hence he was responsible for the Canucks winning 32 out of 57 games. He played his part and he played it well.

 

Regarding JR's comment about winning 50% due to goaltending, I think you could say the same about most teams in the league, i.e. good goaltending is responsible for about 50% of your wins. What our defense needs to work on is reducing those HD chances to a much lower level. That, along with scoring more goals for, would make Demko's job easier and reduce our dependence on the goalie to win it for us.

[Chris12345]

43 minutes ago, Gollumpus said:

People want to get rid of Myers? Okay, two things:

 

1.) How do you get rid of him? Well, a trade is the most likely option. If he is as bad/inconsistent as some folks make him out to be, and his cap hit is so high, then another team isn't going to be that interested in acquiring him, at least not without some incentive (cap retention and/or a player/pick/prospect). Further, I don't see another team wanting to include a good RD prospect in exchange for Myers, unless he is part of a package with something really good (1st round pick and/or one of Boeser or Miller etc). Any ideas of a team that might be interested in Myers, and if so, for how much? 

 

2.) Who do you bring in to replace Myers, or just someone who could be brought in regardless of whether Myers is moved or not? Getting a less expensive UFA is one option. Here's the list for this year 

I think if Myers goes it's part of an integrated plan. Myers doesn't get traded as a stand alone deal.

 

In other words, can you sign a UFA or trade a forward for a RHD that is less expensive than Myers and then move him?

 

 

[tas]

6 minutes ago, BigTramFan said:

No SV% doesn't show that, but HDsc SV% (high danger scoring chance save percentage) does.

 

Again Demko was good at 0.837 SV% on 283 HD shots, but certainly not top of the league for that stat. Some examples of other goalies from some top teams that had higher HDsc SV%:

 

Shesterkin NYR 0.850 (260 HD shots)

Markstrom CLG 0.838 (253 HD shots)

Andersen CAR 0.841 (232 HD shots)

Husso STL 0.840 (200 HD shots)

 

So although Demko faced more HD chances than these goalies, his SV% wasn't better. He wasn't a superstar in this area. And this also means that a fair share (46 HD goals from 283 HD chances) actually went in, and Demko's play therefore was not wholly responsible for the Canucks winning record.

 

Please don't think I am running down Demko here. He is a very good goalie and he is also young and likely to get even better. He could have had a much lower HDsc SV% and the Canucks would have lost more games.

 

My main point is that you cannot say that Demko's play was "superstar" level and hence he was responsible for the Canucks winning 32 out of 57 games. He played his part and he played it well.

 

Regarding JR's comment about winning 50% due to goaltending, I think you could say the same about most teams in the league, i.e. good goaltending is responsible for about 50% of your wins. What our defense needs to work on is reducing those HD chances to a much lower level. That, along with scoring more goals for, would make Demko's job easier and reduce our dependence on the goalie to win it for us.

half the guys you just compared him to are going to be vezina finalists this year and he's right there with them. 

[TheRussianRocket1994]

As far as their concerns re: structure / systems…there's nothing wrong with learning / changing and improving on aspects of what you do, but if I was management, I wouldn’t get too nit picky…Bruce’s record speaks for itself. Plus, even the best coaches aren’t perfect…they all have strengths & weaknesses / pros & cons. The grass isn’t always greener! Sure, get a different coach that uses more structure, but then there will be something else…maybe they’re not the motivator / players coach Bruce is or maybe they have other flaws. All you should ask for is a great coach that wins, beyond that it’s all about picking your battles. I think it’ll be a huge mistake if this approach pushes him out the door or is only short term. Hopefully he stays and the extend him part way through next year. 

[CaptKirk888]

1 hour ago, tas said:

how 'bout them playoffs?

Irrelevant. Neither you nor I know if they would have made it with BB if he had had the whole season.

Weak answer, discuss

[tas]

1 minute ago, CaptKirk888 said:

Irrelevant. Neither you nor I know if they would have made it with BB if he had had the whole season.

Weak answer, discuss

I meant how did his previous teams perform in the playoffs. 

[Tinky-Winky]

SIGH

Have a feeling BRUCE there it is wont be back im sure he will get some great offers elsewere

[BigTramFan]

7 minutes ago, tas said:

half the guys you just compared him to are going to be vezina finalists this year and he's right there with them. 

Yes he is a very good goalie. He's just not the only reason we won 32 out of 57.

[mll]

.

Edited May 4, 2022 by mll

[aGENT]

56 minutes ago, Gollumpus said:

People want to get rid of Myers? Okay, two things:

 

1.) How do you get rid of him? Well, a trade is the most likely option. If he is as bad/inconsistent as some folks make him out to be, and his cap hit is so high, then another team isn't going to be that interested in acquiring him, at least not without some incentive (cap retention and/or a player/pick/prospect).

Further, I don't see another team wanting to include a good RD prospect in exchange for Myers, unless he is part of a package with something really good (1st round pick and/or one of Boeser or Miller etc).

I want to get rid him him because he's a bit of a square peg in our lineup. Doesn't really fit with Hughes or OEL and that's a decent cap hit to not have playing (fitting) in your top 4. Otherwise I think he's actually undervalued on here by many and not nearly the anchor many make him out as. I also think he's got real trade value with only 2 years left on his manageable $6m deal.

 

56 minutes ago, Gollumpus said:

Any ideas of a team that might be interested in Myers, and if so, for how much? 

Dallas has Klingberg expiring (and Myers is from Texas), Washington has Schultz expiring and Pittsburgh has Letang expiring. All teams in their last gasps that might have interest in a big, good skating, 2 way RHD with only 2 years of term left to replace guys that might potentially walk. Are we going to get a top prospect and a first? Probably not. But maybe a guy like Ty Dellandrea from Dallas and a 2nd or 3rd? While clearing cap.

 

56 minutes ago, Gollumpus said:

 

2.) Who do you bring in to replace Myers, or just someone who could be brought in regardless of whether Myers is moved or not? Getting a less expensive UFA is one option. Here's the list for this year (unless I've missed someone). 

 

https://www.capfriendly.com/browse/free-agents/2023/caphit/all/defense/all/desc/right?status=active-roster 

 

Letang, Manson, Miller, Rutta, Stone and Wideman might be a fit, with an outside chance for Bear. There's term/cap hit and age factors to consider with all of these.

 

As I see it, the only way that the Canucks get a new RD with all of the wants/needs being asked here, is if he is a part of a return for the often spoken of trade of Miller/Horvat/Boeser/etc.

 

                                                          regards,  G.

I think you only move Myers if you have something in the works moving say Garland (or Boeser, though I think he's staying) for a D. Something along the lines of the rumoured Boeser-Marino trade. Get a guy like Marino and it makes it a lot easier to move Myers, while also shaving cap.

 

I'd happily take Bear or Lyubushkin as UFA's personally.