New management worries me

[Gurn]

If Miller's and Bo's deal expired this year, and neither would sign an extension, they would both be traded prior to the deadline.

 

The team does not have the depth to just let players play out their deals, even 4rth line deals.

[The Lock]

33 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

For every Motte taken in the 4th round there are 50 other guys that never even make the NHL.  But besides that I go back to my original point that JR publicly admitted that he didn't trade Miller because he wanted to try and make the playoffs.  You don't trade your best 4th liner who was carrying that line if you are trying to make the playoffs.  Don't care if he's a UFA in the summer.  Lots of teams that actually made the playoffs have guys that are going to be UFA's, some even traded for rentals.

 

The name of the game is to make the playoffs, not collect 4th round picks.  Anything can happen when you make the playoffs.  Canucks fans should know this from the bubble as well as from 1982 and 1994 when we barely made it and went to the finals.  We had the best team in 2011 and didn't win it either, which tells you it's never a sure thing.

 

In order to win a Stanley Cup you need to take some risk.  There is a time and a place for "asset management".  Trading Motte at a time when you had a shot to make it was not the right time and place to be collecting 4th round picks.

You seem intent on ignoring the actual statistics chart I gave you. For every Motte taken in the 4th round, there are 9 other guys that will play over 99 games in the NHL. There's over a 10% chance of a 4th round pick succeeding. This alone already is proving what you're saying as being incorrect. What you're saying doesn't even apply to the 7th round. You're that inaccurate in your assumptions here.

 

The name of the game is to win is to make the playoffs, I'll give you that; however, picks play a vital part in that, whether it's a 1st round pick or a 4th round pick.

Edited May 10, 2022 by The Lock

[Elias Pettersson]

8 minutes ago, gurn said:

The object of the game is to win the Stanley Cup.

If you can trade an often injured 4th line player, that has already turned down an extension you do it.

So you're going to win Stanley Cups collecting 4th round picks?

[The Lock]

1 minute ago, Elias Pettersson said:

So you're going to win Stanley Cups collecting 4th round picks?

Collecting picks in general is part of it yes. The more players you have on an entry level contract contributing to your team, the better. Picks will always be a shot in the dark, but the more you have the better your chances.

[Gurn]

4 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

So you're going to win Stanley Cups collecting 4th round picks?

Yah, that's exactly what I said. 

[Elias Pettersson]

3 minutes ago, The Lock said:

You seem intent on ignoring the actual statistics chart I gave you. For every Motte taken in the 4th round, there are 9 other guys that will play over 99 games in the NHL. There's over a 10% chance of a 4th round pick succeeding. This alone already is proving what you're saying as being incorrect. What you're saying doesn't even apply to the 7th round. You're that inaccurate in your assumptions here.

 

The name of the game is to win is to make the playoffs, I'll give you that; however, picks play a vital part in that, whether it's a 1st round pick or a 4th round pick.

I think you are missing MY point.  I'd rather take a shot at the playoffs, which is why you actually play the games, versus collecting 4th round picks in the hopes that one of them will become an NHL player.  A 10% chance at a 4th round player succeeding also means that there is a 90% of that same 4th round player failing.  Those aren't great odds.  But regardless, if you have a shot at the playoffs, you take it and run with it.  I'm not saying as a fact Motte would have guaranteed us making the playoffs, but he would have given us a much better chance than with Petan or Dries in the lineup.

[Elias Pettersson]

1 minute ago, gurn said:

Yah, that's exactly what I said. 

Yes, I know...  

[The Lock]

Just now, Elias Pettersson said:

I think you are missing MY point.  I'd rather take a shot at the playoffs, which is why you actually play the games, versus collecting 4th round picks in the hopes that one of them will become an NHL player.  A 10% chance at a 4th round player succeeding also means that there is a 90% of that same 4th round player failing.  Those aren't great odds.  But regardless, if you have a shot at the playoffs, you take it and run with it.  I'm not saying as a fact Motte would have guaranteed us making the playoffs, but he would have given us a much better chance than with Petan or Dries in the lineup.

And these moves will help long term with making a shot at the playoffs. Keeping Motte will give us LESS of a shot long-term if we lose him for nothing. A 4th rounder is better than nothing.

[-DLC-]

7 minutes ago, The Lock said:

Collecting picks in general is part of it yes. The more players you have on an entry level contract contributing to your team, the better. Picks will always be a shot in the dark, but the more you have the better your chances.

So quantity over quality?

[higgyfan]

7 hours ago, RU SERIOUS said:

While I think we all can agree that Demko, Quinn and Petersson are keepers, I think they are the only ones that are SAFE from being traded or let go.  JR clearly stated early on in his tenure and again recently that this team is too slow, not big enough, lacks grit and has a long list of grievences on the way this team plays, so I strongly suspect that there will in fact be wholesale changes.   They obviously won't all happen this coming year but will - over the next 2-3 years, as he begins "The Purge" and attemps to right this sinking Canucks ship that has not been a threat to anyone for over a decade and keeps missing the playoffs.   Don't even be surprised if Horvat is let go, if he decides this team needs new leadership and of course "One dimensional" players like Brock B are likely not to be kept - especially at $8.5 Million.

There's no way the trade Podz.

 

Nothing new here for Canuck fans.  But for a handful of players, this team has had massive turnovers of players in

each of the past 3 years.  Obviously there will have to be some movement of a couple of the top earning players to 

free up cap space, as well as the usual outgoing of lower level players.

 

Horvat is a significant player, who is in his prime now.  I don't see him being traded; especially if they  move Miller.

 

There's no way Brock gets $8.5m.  Not even close.

[lmm]

13 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

For every Motte taken in the 4th round there are 50 other guys that never even make the NHL.  But besides that I go back to my original point that JR publicly admitted that he didn't trade Miller because he wanted to try and make the playoffs.  You don't trade your best 4th liner who was carrying that line if you are trying to make the playoffs.  Don't care if he's a UFA in the summer.  Lots of teams that actually made the playoffs have guys that are going to be UFA's, some even traded for rentals.

 

The name of the game is to make the playoffs, not collect 4th round picks.  Anything can happen when you make the playoffs.  Canucks fans should know this from the bubble as well as from 1982 and 1994 when we barely made it and went to the finals.  We had the best team in 2011 and didn't win it either, which tells you it's never a sure thing.

 

In order to win a Stanley Cup you need to take some risk.  There is a time and a place for "asset management".  Trading Motte at a time when you had a shot to make it was not the right time and place to be collecting 4th round picks.

you seem to moving your argument to "THE CANUCKS WOULD 100% MADE THE PLAYOFFS IF MOTTE WASN'T TRADED"

which is ironic because you are using stats to prove the low value of a 4th rounder, stats below provided by  The Lock

while ignoring the low statistical chance the Canucks had of making the playoffs ( think a 4th round pick has a better chance of playing in the playoffs than the Canucks did on March 20, 2022) 

I might also add that the Canucks went 4-0-1 in the games following Mottes departure

but went 1-2-1 after Bo Horvat got injured, maybe that was a larger factor in the Canucks demise

 

I would suggest that the time for "Asset Management" would be early in a new managements tenure

As I mentioned, your argument assumes the Canucks made the playoffs if Motte was not traded. How does Management look if they did not traded Mottebut stll missed the playoffs?

 

And I have to ask you this, in terms of the great deals and mistakes made by Canuck GMs, do you think anyone will be talking about trading Tyler Motte in 5-10-20 years time?  

1 hour ago, The Lock said:

A 4th round pick is not that much less of a chance than a 3rd or even a late 2nd round pick:

 

You only have a 3% difference between a 3rd rounder and a 4th rounder in terms of getting a player to play more than 99 NHL games. I think either you're underestimating a 4th round pick or overestimating higher picks. For the record, I'm not saying it wouldn't have been nice to get a high pick for Motte, but a 4th rounder isn't worth nothing. It absolutely is an asset if you consider higher picks an asset as well.

 

[The Lock]

5 minutes ago, -DLC- said:

So quantity over quality?

Not necessarily. You can also collect too many picks as well arguably. There is also the argument that if you're "too good" you end up maxing out your contract limit, letting potentially good picks go.

 

Therefore, it's not about quantity over quality as is it increasing the chance of quality through quantity (provided you don't go too overboard for the above reasons I mentioned). Drafting well obviously also plays a part along with player development.

 

That's at least how I see it anyway. 

Edited May 10, 2022 by The Lock

[Drewman]

7 hours ago, RU SERIOUS said:

While I think we all can agree that Demko, Quinn and Petersson are keepers, I think they are the only ones that are SAFE from being traded or let go.  JR clearly stated early on in his tenure and again recently that this team is too slow, not big enough, lacks grit and has a long list of grievences on the way this team plays, so I strongly suspect that there will in fact be wholesale changes.   They obviously won't all happen this coming year but will - over the next 2-3 years, as he begins "The Purge" and attemps to right this sinking Canucks ship that has not been a threat to anyone for over a decade and keeps missing the playoffs.   Don't even be surprised if Horvat is let go, if he decides this team needs new leadership and of course "One dimensional" players like Brock B are likely not to be kept - especially at $8.5 Million.

Where the hell are you getting $8.5 mill for Brock from? That's WAY over his qualifying offer. Makes it hard to take what you say seriously when you throw those kind of numbers around.

[Elias Pettersson]

11 minutes ago, The Lock said:

And these moves will help long term with making a shot at the playoffs. Keeping Motte will give us LESS of a shot long-term if we lose him for nothing. A 4th rounder is better than nothing.

When you have the shot, you take it.  There is no guarantee you will get there again.  "The Chance May Never Come Again".  Just ask Ray Bourque...

 

 

[c00kies]

Just now, The Lock said:

Not necessarily. You can also collect too many picks as well arguably. There is also the argument that if you're "too good" you end up maxing out your contract limit, letting potentially good picks go.

 

Therefore, it's not about quantity over quality as is it increasing the chance of quality through quantity (provided you don't go too overboard for the above reasons I mentioned).

 

That's at least how I see it anyway. 

I want quality in early rounds 1-2, then quantity in later rounds (3-7).

 

So get more picks in the later rounds (trade a 3rd for 2 4ths), but get more quality picks (trade 2 3rds for a 2nd and a 5th) and higher quality picks (a top 10 pick versus the 29th and 31st pick).

 

I think you need a balance though, as simply having top 10 picks with few picks later won't be helpful either (2 great players, and then no help, so if one player busts you are screwed), but drafting 13 players from round 3-7 will also be harder to find key core players.

[The Lock]

Just now, Elias Pettersson said:

When you have the shot, you take it.  There is no guarantee you will get there again.  "The Chance May Never Come Again".  Just ask Ray Bourque...

 

This season wasn't that season though. I would love that to be incorrect, but we didn't make the playoffs let alone the stanley cup.

 

You want the above to be true here? Well you need to think long term as opposed to just this season.

[The Lock]

Just now, c00kies said:

I want quality in early rounds 1-2, then quantity in later rounds (3-7).

 

So get more picks in the later rounds (trade a 3rd for 2 4ths), but get more quality picks (trade 2 3rds for a 2nd and a 5th) and higher quality picks (a top 10 pick versus the 29th and 31st pick).

 

I think you need a balance though, as simply having top 10 picks with few picks later won't be helpful either (2 great players, and then no help, so if one player busts you are screwed), but drafting 13 players from round 3-7 will also be harder to find key core players.

Seems like a sound thought process to me. The main thing then is to understand that if you want quantity in the lower rounds, you need to trade assets to get that quantity. I would have loved for Motte to have stayed but if he wasn't going to resign, these are the moves that need to be made to get that quantity.

[Elias Pettersson]

8 minutes ago, lmm said:

you seem to moving your argument to "THE CANUCKS WOULD 100% MADE THE PLAYOFFS IF MOTTE WASN'T TRADED"

which is ironic because you are using stats to prove the low value of a 4th rounder, stats below provided by  The Lock

while ignoring the low statistical chance the Canucks had of making the playoffs ( think a 4th round pick has a better chance of playing in the playoffs than the Canucks did on March 20, 2022) 

I might also add that the Canucks went 4-0-1 in the games following Mottes departure

but went 1-2-1 after Bo Horvat got injured, maybe that was a larger factor in the Canucks demise

 

I would suggest that the time for "Asset Management" would be early in a new managements tenure

As I mentioned, your argument assumes the Canucks made the playoffs if Motte was not traded. How does Management look if they did not traded Mottebut stll missed the playoffs?

 

And I have to ask you this, in terms of the great deals and mistakes made by Canuck GMs, do you think anyone will be talking about trading Tyler Motte in 5-10-20 years time?  

 

If the Canucks had such a low statistical probability of making the playoffs then why didn't JR trade Miller and a few others to load up on draft picks and prospects?  The reason why is because there was a chance to make it, so he ran with it.  Trading your best 4th round player when you've made the decision to go for the playoffs is s dumb move.  

 

Again, I will say it one more time.  JR publicly admitted he didn't trade Miller at the deadline because he was trying to make the playoffs.  If that is the case then not only should he have kept Motte he should have made at least one more move to improve the team to give them that shot...

[The Lock]

2 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

If the Canucks had such a low statistical probability of making the playoffs then why didn't JR trade Miller and a few others to load up on draft picks and prospects?  The reason why is because there was a chance to make it, so he ran with it.  Trading your best 4th round player when you've made the decision to go for the playoffs is s dumb move.  

 

Again, I will say it one more time.  JR publicly admitted he didn't trade Miller at the deadline because he was trying to make the playoffs.  If that is the case then not only should he have kept Motte he should have made at least one more move to improve the team to give them that shot...

Again, a 4th liner doesn't mean we make the playoffs. Miller is FAR more of an impact player than Motte. Motte's good, but he's not Miler.

Edited May 10, 2022 by The Lock

[c00kies]

1 minute ago, Elias Pettersson said:

If the Canucks had such a low statistical probability of making the playoffs then why didn't JR trade Miller and a few others to load up on draft picks and prospects?  The reason why is because there was a chance to make it, so he ran with it.  Trading your best 4th round player when you've made the decision to go for the playoffs is s dumb move.  

 

Again, I will say it one more time.  JR publicly admitted he didn't trade Miller at the deadline because he was trying to make the playoffs.  If that is the case then not only should he have kept Motte he should have made at least one more move to improve the team to give them that shot...

It could also be because the value wasn't there and they are under contract for another season, so they didn't have to sell them.

 

Motte was a pending FA due for a substantial raise that would make him hard to keep, and with the unlikelihood of playoffs, it made sense to get something for him rather than let him go for nothing.