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

Tank Hard for Bedard - Playoff chances are already Slim

Rate this topic


Provost

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, AlwaysACanuckFan said:

We would have to out lose Ducks pretty badly 

I'm not sure that's possible, if you at their capfriendly page their D is a mess

 

They're injured, their team doesn't score much, and they'll likely end up flipping Klingberg

 

I'll be shocked if they don't finish last

 

But hey, if we can draft top 5 we'll get a fantastic player, it's more likely we don't get Bedard than we do anyway

Edited by Coconuts
  • Tanks a lot 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, spook007 said:

Just on a side note... with the draft being loaded, could it be difficult to get first round picks in trades this season?

Allvin doesn't seem to have the creativity & balls to make such a move and/or he has his hands tied cause he has one more year left on his deal.

 

4 more years of the OEL show or LE 2.0 - ugh !   OEL and LE = 12 years of wasted money & opportunities 

Edited by ShawnAntoski
  • Cheers 1
  • Tanks a lot 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, King Heffy said:

Literally every roster player should be available, including Pettersson.  We will have a tough time keeping him here if we are doing a full rebuild; he will likely sign his QO and put us in a bind.  Moving him now gets us a better return.  I love the guy but I'd rather avoid what happened in Cahlgary this offseason.

I had a few untouchables during the summer, not sure I do anymore 

 

Because you're right, if we're bad for the next few years and that's more likely that not imo, there's no guarantee he'll want to stay

 

I'd rather keep him, but if a GM ain't listening on everyone he's not doing his job

  • Upvote 1
  • Tanks a lot 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

I'm not sure that's possible, if you at their capfriendly page their D is a mess

 

They're injured, their team doesn't score much, and they'll likely end up flipping Klingberg

 

I'll be shocked if they don't finish last

And yet we are only 2 points ahead of them with on paper better defense 

  • Tanks a lot 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Provost said:

Well here, goes... I am doing this one game early (at least mathematically) in hopes that I am made to look foolish by a string of Canucks wins.

The standard from a whole crap ton of historical data is that by the 20 games mark (around American Thanksgiving), any team that is either under .500 or more than 4 points out of  a playoff berth has pretty low odds to make the playoffs.  One more loss in the next 5 games and we can't make .500 by the 20 game mark.

The difficulty in making up ground is a function of a couple of things.  One main one is that the winning % range between a bad team and a good team is really quite small which makes it a lot harder of a road to make up ground than it looks.  Aside from a few outliers, a really good team over a season plays at .650 (106-107 points) and with the loser points, a REALLY bad team still plays at about .400 (65-66 points).  This was really illustrated last year when the Canucks played just lights out for half a season and still fell well short of a playoff spot.  That really reflected a best case scenario as a couple of teams we were chasing also faltered badly.  Still not good enough because when you fall behind the math is really against you.  Lots of teams between you and a playoff spot that you have to outplay, and a lot of guaranteed points between them for at least one of them to stay ahead of you.  It is almost a mathematical impossibility for a whole bunch of teams ahead of you to play sub .500 for the rest of the season.  Someone has to win games and get points out of each given game, and unless we win most of our in-conference games; they split all in-conference games between each other about 50/50; and then lose most of their games against the East... some teams will just stay ahead of us.  It is just math.  It isn't being negative.

What that means is when you look at 67 games left to play... if the Canucks played lights out at a .650 rate from here on out.. they end up with 98 points which is enough to squeak into a playoff spot with the historic cut off being about 96 points.  If the Canucks play really bad for the rest of the season at a .400 rate, they end up at 64-65 points.   That range doesn't give a lot of runway for the Canucks to actually make it, and a whole lot of possible outcomes that mean missing the playoffs.   The most likely outcome will be in the 73-83 point range for the season now, which already assumes the Canucks start playing quite a bit better than they have to start the season.

The odds of the Canucks making the playoffs on various websites as of 13th Nov:
MoneyPuck 8.5%
Playoff Status 21%
Hockey Reference 16.5%
Power Rankings 19.1%
Five Thirty Eight 24%

So basically a 1 in 5 chance of making the playoffs... which we always forget isn't actually the goal.  The odds of actually winning the Cup are vastly more insignificant than that.

The Team President keeps slagging off the coach who has to know by now that his contract isn't going to be renewed... the players have to know that too now, which is a super shitty thing to do to a coach who is trying to hold players accountable for poor play.  It also means that there is zero motivation for Boudreau to play the kids since his job is to win games in the short term and not to develop players for a roster he won't be coaching.  Injuries have already piled up, and the team wasn't performing well even when healthy.  There isn't a lot to suggest a massive turnaround for the team playing at an elite level for the remainder of the season.

More folks seem to be more onboard with the idea of trading away and rebuilding this time around, which seems like a good idea right now to me instead of chasing fairly long odds to make the playoffs.  There is no realistic path for this roster to get much better over the next couple of years.  No prospects to speak of along with cap issues that would make filling the holes possible via the UFA route.  Making big trades creates other holes, as we have relatively few areas of organizational strength (Our main strength being overpaid 3rd pairing D... which aren't the best trade assets).  It is hard to make big deals mid season, but hopefully some teams are facing injuries or want to keep up with their divisional rivals and will pay the price... and even more hopefully the Canucks brass are open for business.

The exception for a shorter term turnaround would be if they still managed to trade Miller for some D help and futures, and were able to sign Bo for reasonable dollars.  That could allow the cap space to fix some D issues and be more competitive in a year or two when some expensive contracts come off the books.  Barring that, I don't see a roadmap for becoming a contender that doesn't involve literally tearing it down and starting from scratch.  That includes Petterson, Hughes, and Demko to me, as a rebuild means we won't be contending any time soon while they are under club control.  They are also basically the main attractive trade pieces that would net us a ton of players, picks, and prospects that would form the basis of a rebuild.  Some folks keep mentioning just casting off our undesirable players and somehow getting assets in return that turn into the cheap, high end ELC contributors we need coming through the system... I don't know how you see that working, we would have to give up the futures we need to rebuild to get rid of those contracts.

From my "homer" side, 1 in 5 playoff chances mean at least every once in a while the team will actually manage it.  Maybe this is the year?  That is very Canucks like to improve enough to just make our draft position worse, yet make no noise in the playoffs.

 

tank.png

Your last paragraph is another definition for NHL Purgatory.  My version: not good enough to make the playoffs and not bad enough to draft a difference maker.

 

I really dare, the FO to double down on Aquamans' plan and be his next scapegoat.

  • Tanks a lot 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

I had a few untouchables during the summer, not sure I do anymore 

 

Because you're right, if we're bad for the next few years and that's more likely that not imo, there's no guarantee he'll want to stay

 

I'd rather keep him, but if a GM ain't listening on everyone he's not doing his job

Mine are Petey, Hughes, Podkolzin and Demko still. We’re in a position right now where we need to be trading/listening to offers on everyone else. 

  • Tanks a lot 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, AlwaysACanuckFan said:

And yet we are only 2 points ahead of them with on paper better defense 

Aye, but we're much more likely to score goals than they are

 

Ducks are 28th in goals, 32nd in goals against, their powerplay is 31st, their PK is 31st, they're 24th in shots on goal, and they're 25th at faceoffs 

 

That's a tough team to outlose 

 

1 minute ago, Pears said:

Mine are Petey, Hughes, Podkolzin and Demko still. We’re in a position right now where we need to be trading/listening to offers on everyone else. 

That was mine for a while, I've wavered on Demko though because I don't see us contending sooner than later anyway

 

He'd bring a great return from a team like Buffalo who could use stability in net as they take the next step 

 

Seems unlikely we'll be taking it any time soon

  • Tanks a lot 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Coconuts said:

Aye, but we're much more likely to score goals than they are

 

Ducks are 28th in goals, 32nd in goals against, their powerplay is 31st, their PK is 31st, they're 24th in shots on goal, and they're 25th at faceoffs 

 

That's a tough team to outlose 

 

That was mine for a while, I've wavered on Demko though because I don't see us contending sooner than later anyway

 

He'd bring a great return from a team like Buffalo who could use stability in net as they take the next step 

 

Seems unlikely we'll be taking it any time soon

I agree with that, but as bad as he’s been and not the Demko we’ve come to know I think there’s some kind of lingering injury/issue he’s dealing with that we don’t know about. If someone seriously overpays for him then I’d probably do it.  

  • Tanks a lot 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

Aye, but we're much more likely to score goals than they are

 

Ducks are 28th in goals, 32nd in goals against, their powerplay is 31st, their PK is 31st, they're 24th in shots on goal, and they're 25th at faceoffs 

 

That's a tough team to outlose 

 

That was mine for a while, I've wavered on Demko though because I don't see us contending sooner than later anyway

 

He'd bring a great return from a team like Buffalo who could use stability in net as they take the next step 

 

Seems unlikely we'll be taking it any time soon

We are near the top in league with pp and decent team scoring. Still we should be miles ahead. What we have to do is outscore our problems and most likely it's a mental thing. 

  • Tanks a lot 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Pears said:

I agree with that, but as bad as he’s been and not the Demko we’ve come to know I think there’s some kind of lingering injury/issue he’s dealing with that we don’t know about. If someone seriously overpays for him then I’d probably do it.  

He's better than he's shown and most of us know it, I reckon other teams do too

 

His play, while on him to a degree, is also indicative of the team in front of him and we've been pretty awful 

  • Cheers 1
  • Tanks a lot 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, AlwaysACanuckFan said:

We are near the top in league with pp and decent team scoring. Still we should be miles ahead. What we have to do is outscore our problems and most likely it's a mental thing. 

We're a glass cannon, score goals but bleed them

  • Tanks a lot 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Provost said:

I don't actually think we would (hence the link I included).  A top 5 pick is still more than likely to turn into a top of the lineup player.  A couple more mid or later 1st round picks from sending out players would also likely be decent NHLers at the very least.

Just the centres:
Bedard, Fantelli, Leo Carlsson, Yager, Benson, Dvorsky, Stenberg, Ritchie

There are a ton of D ranked in the mid/late 1st round who would immediately be our best prospects in that position.

If they actually followed the player profile that JR talks about (big and fast), then you can actually draft to that identity.

I have never been a part of the "Tank" mentality, but I see how this current roster is not composed of the correct players that would thrive in the playoffs. I hope this is what the game plan is, the playoffs and hopefully a Cup someday.

I was surprised how Vegas was so successful playing with no superstars in their first season, but they had components in their lineup which are needed to compete in the post season. They were "Big and Fast", and they had character players.

I am so tired of the prima donna players who play for the paycheck and consider a Championship, secondary. 

I have said before, I believe the players that last played for the right reasons (the team first) were Burroughs and Hansen. 

I will be glad to follow a team that is comprised of players such as these two with Schenn as the Captain. ::D

  • Tanks a lot 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

He's better than he's shown and most of us know it, I reckon other teams do too

 

His play, while on him to a degree, is also indicative of the team in front of him and we've been pretty awful 

Yup. As amazing as he was during that run last year that high level of play wasn’t sustainable and it’s showing. 

  • Cheers 1
  • Tanks a lot 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Provost said:

The OP was before the Boston game... to show how short the runway is for making the playoffs, even this early on in the season a loss makes a big difference to the odds.  At this extreme of being bad, winning a game doesn't increase our odds that dramatically to offset that.

We are currently in 30th place in the standings by winning percentage, with Columbus being two points behind with two games in hand.  The Ducks with one game in hand and two points behind.

Shockingly bad when you consider we have four players right at about the PPG scoring rate.

Before Boston Game:
MoneyPuck 8.5%
Playoff Status 21%
Hockey Reference 16.5%
Power Rankings 19.1%
Five Thirty Eight 24%

After Boston game:
Moneypuck 8.2%
Playoff Status 18.5 (tied for dead last in NHL)
Hockey Reference 12.2%
Power Rankings 16.2%
Five Thirty Eight 20%


 

Even if they do squeak in the playoffs, being bounced in the first round is worse than missing IMO. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Tanks a lot 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

It's interesting how many didn't see it then, we were never as good as that run indicated 

 

If you need your tender to give you Vezina caliber goaltending most nights to even have a chance your team simply isn't very good

 

How many times did we see him hold us in last season as the team took a period or two to wake up? Seemed to happen a fair bit 

 

His having struggled the way he has is being scapegoated to a degree, but what it's really done is show people just how bad we are when our goalie isn't standing on his head 

I’m praying this is an eye opener for management. As demoralizing as this is, this kind of revelation was needed. And I expected us to at least be a lock for a wild card. 

  • Tanks a lot 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Pears said:

This. This is why part of me hopes those allegations against him are true for the sake of the team and he’s forced to sell. We’re gonna continue being in the same situation until this money hungry prick is gone. 

I don't disagree.  I think the defining reason our organization has been in a state of perpetual mediocrity is 100% because of ownership directives to management to stay competitive a push for PO when all logical reasoning went against that plan. 

 

That said, I think his mentality is more because he wants his father to witness another 'run' like 2011 and he wants the stands full, not simply because of money but more because to him - that represents a successful franchise.  Also, to his credit, he's spent to the cap almost every single season, and invested in the franchise in many ways (bought farm team, remodelled the facilities for the players, ect....) so one can't really say he isn't putting his money back into the team.  Now where his philosophies on how to build a successful franchise lie, that's another story altogether. 

  • Tanks a lot 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Pears said:

I’m praying this is an eye opener for management. As demoralizing as this is, this kind of revelation was needed. And I expected us to at least be a lock for a wild card. 

I hope so too. The baffling bit is I recall Rutherford mentioning back in the early parts of this year that we were too reliant on Demko, so it's not as if he wasn't aware. I'm pretty sure he knew, which means Al probably knew too. And yet here we are, off to an even worse start than last season, and how we were last season shocked a lot of fans and media. 

 

I don't see quick fixes working, and we're limited in what we can do. The prospect pool is shallow and we shouldn't be moving out picks of prospects as a bottom feeder. The D is a mess, we were always going to need two top 4RD sooner than later, we don't draft D often enough with higher picks, we don't really draft RD, and there's no succession plan in place. It's not going to be an easy or quick fix with the defense.

 

We haven't had a proper 3C sort since Sutter. Trying to run Pettersson, Horvat, and Miller down the middle was never going to work. The roster is too forward heavy, and we made a mistake in holding on to Miller when we should have taken a step back to build around the youth as early as the last trade deadline. Now that taking a step back, or more, will likely happen whether management wanted to or not. 

  • Tanks a lot 1
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...