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

3 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

It's possible, but it's also possible that we got two coaches in a row that aren't doing things properly. I suppose the conclusions one will reach will be determined by what one thinks is more likely. Given that the team has started horribly with two different coaches now, that could point to something about the players as more likely being the cause.

 

It may be that my read of the "on paper" team might just be totally off and in fact, they just aren't very good, and it's not a coaching issue. Do our forwards suck at playing defense and thus we need to change it up there? Is our defense just way too thin and we need to focus there? Is Demko a bad goalie now from whom we should move on? It does seem clear that defense is the issue, but even there, that can be the fault of forwards, defensemen, or goaltending or any combination of those three.

 

It's hard for me to accept the fact that our core isn't good, but at some point, I can't argue with the results--unless, again, coaching is causing the team to underperform, though given two consecutive coaches with the same results, it might point more likely to the players.

All of the above? :lol:

 

This team has been missing a legit 3C (and defense supporting forwards in general) for a couple years now. It's why I wasn't as mad as some about the Mik signing (we need more guys like him in our top 9). But then you can't ALSO go and extend Miller AND Boeser/don't move Garland and not address the equally glaring issues on D.... which are just as huge of an issue.

 

Myers is an ill fit in our top 4 and expires after next season. Schenn should be a 6/7 guy and is playing on our top pair. He also expires this season. We have no succession plan for either of those guys. No assets or cap space to replace them either.

 

And no, Demko has not been good this year. But he's at least illustrating to the more stubborn among us, how badly we leaned on him the last couple seasons.

 

But the biggest problem is that this group seems incapable of actually playing like a TEAM. They SHOULD be better "on paper" than how they've performed this year. Management needs to figure out who's part of the solution for that...and who's not.

 

 

  • Cheers 3
  • Tanks a lot 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ilduce39 said:

I hate the idea of Tanking but if there’s any year to do it, it’s this one.  Even if we go full sell mode at the deadline we’ll be adding Bedard (or whoever) to a fairly *talented* lineup even if they’re playing like dog poop.  


Honestly, this feels like how contender-level teams materialize.  Years of futility get you a decent young / prime core, they have a crappy year and land that generational talent, and poof you have a team that probably shouldn’t be drafting 1 OA adding the icing to the cake.

Exactly... 

This is the year to suck big time...

 

We need top top players....

wish somebody would explain to Owners/management that there are huge financial gains available in merchandise alone, if Canucks draft home boy Bedard.

The new face of Vancouver Canucks, and possibly a Cup winning/challenging star available... 

We simply can not let the opportunity of being in on the Bedard sweepstakes vanish into thin air for nowt... happened to often in the past.

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

2 hours ago, Warhippy said:

Let's speak of the ducks and Sharks.

 

Both teams are currently or potentially worse than us in the standings.  But, unlike us.  Both teams have engaged in multi year sell offs of assets and have signalled this year that their entire rosters by and large are available for the right price.

 

Ducks have 5 picks in the first 3 round this year and Sharks have 3 currently.  In the last 2 drafts the ducks have drafted 8 times in the first 3 rounds with three 1st, three 2nd and two 3rd round picks.  The sharks have drafted drafted 6 times with two 1sts, two 2nds and two 3rds.  The sharks are currently only better than the Ducks based on the play of Karlsson.  If he dips or gets injured it's a two horse race to last place.  Without mentioning of course the Yotes who could fall apart at any time.

 

I do not mention Columbus or St Louis as being worse than us because they are in fact better faster harder teams than us and have played less games.  They both also have more cap space and assets to fix their issues.

 

In comparison, the Canucks have drafted 3 times in the first 3 rounds of the last two drafts and in fact 4 times only in the last 3 total drafts.  We've no real assets to speak of and have a management team that has stated they are in fact ready to compete now and don't think this team is as bad as they appear.  This suggests the potential trade of yet more picks and remaining prospects.  We currently hold our first 3 draft picks this year but that could change at any time.

 

We are in a position to tank as hard as we want with some smooth trades.  We could in fact be as bad as the Sharks, Ducks, Yotes.  But without a strong motion and push by Management to actually achieve that; we're not going to see anything but a push for the middle again.  

 

So the dream of Bedard is just that.  Next year for Cellibrini, just that.  Unless we actually have an owner and management team that admits it's just not good enough we're not going anywhere and Bedard/Fantilli are more likely than not going to end up in our division forcing us to face off against McDavid, Bedard and Fantilli for the next decade 5+ times a year while we pretend that if we can trade an underperforming player for an underperforming player with more term we can magically compete

I hope management rips the band-aid off, I really do. But yeah, we could very well see two of the top three of this draft in our division sooner than later. 

 

I hope management embraces being bad and sells players off, even if they've gotta take cap back to do it. I'm open to moving both Horvat and Miller and bringing stopgaps in. I'd take calls on everyone, JR and Al should be.

 

I don't wanna go on a run and finish high enough to draft 11th. 

 

1 hour ago, -AJ- said:

Yeah, it's weird--I feel the same as last year with Green. On paper, I feel like our team is good (though maybe not .650+ good), but for whatever reason, we're seriously underperforming. Do we blame it on poor coaching again or do we determine that the common denominator is the players? It's a tough situation to figure out.

How many coaches do we gotta fire and plug in before management clues in to the fact that this team, as a group, doesn't play well together? That this team sucks? 

 

We suck, we've been one of the biggest losers on a losses to wins ratio for most of the past decade despite Benning's continuous goal being to make the playoffs. Right now it's looking like more of the same from JR and Al. Spinning our wheels. 

 

I hope they dismantle this group and start fresh. If we keep anyone it should be Pettersson, Hughes, and Podz. 

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

7 minutes ago, ilduce39 said:

I wonder if moving out Bo, Garland and Myers is enough to upgrade the D while bringing in a guy like Ryan O’Reilly to play 3C.
 

Haha I’ll never rebuild! Hahahahaha

If we do end up having to move Bo, I'd hope we focus on getting someone like Drury as part of the package coming back. Between that and a hopefully top 5 pick this year (Bedard/Fantilli/Yager etc), we could do worse going forward with Pettersson/Top 5 C guy/Drury as our top 9 C depth.

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

58 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Yeah, I by no means want to throw babies out with bathwater here. But management needs to figure out which guys we can win with, real quick. Then start moving our whoever doesn't fall in that category.

 

And they best start being more pragmatic about which of those guys will still be those guys when we are more competitive. They missed that part this summer.

Fun fact. The idiom "don't throw the baby out with the bathwater" can be traced back to the early 1500s where a German carver had illustrated a woman doing this and equated the idea to not being foolish. Cause obviously chucking your baby out the window is foolish.

 

It was then re-popularized in the 1850s in America and associated with negative racial connotation towards the Black population, who were at that time still slaves. This phrase (while I don't find inherently negative since it has a very innocent origin) along with others like "Masters bedroom" are starting to be phased out slowly in some parts of the world.

 

To be perfectly clear, this is not me harping on you for using the phrase. At all. As someone who struggles with dyslexia I just find researching the origin of words and phrases interesting to help me understand our language better. I had previously researched this one and found it interesting.

 

Far more interesting then the majority of Canucks games this year, at least.

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

6 minutes ago, Shayster007 said:

Fun fact. The idiom "don't throw the baby out with the bathwater" can be traced back to the early 1500s where a German carver had illustrated a woman doing this and equated the idea to not being foolish. Cause obviously chucking your baby out the window is foolish.

 

It was then re-popularized in the 1850s in America and associated with negative racial connotation towards the Black population, who were at that time still slaves. This phrase (while I don't find inherently negative since it has a very innocent origin) along with others like "Masters bedroom" are starting to be phased out slowly in some parts of the world.

 

To be perfectly clear, this is not me harping on you for using the phrase. At all. As someone who struggles with dyslexia I just find researching the origin of words and phrases interesting to help me understand our language better. I had previously researched this one and found it interesting.

 

Far more interesting then the majority of Canucks games this year, at least.

No worries mate. I agree, this is probably the most interesting "Canuck-related" thing I've read this year :lol:

 

Excuse my naivety, but I have no idea how this relates to African American slaves though...?

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

1 hour ago, -AJ- said:

It's possible, but it's also possible that we got two coaches in a row that aren't doing things properly. I suppose the conclusions one will reach will be determined by what one thinks is more likely. Given that the team has started horribly with two different coaches now, that could point to something about the players as more likely being the cause.

 

It may be that my read of the "on paper" team might just be totally off and in fact, they just aren't very good, and it's not a coaching issue. Do our forwards suck at playing defense and thus we need to change it up there? Is our defense just way too thin and we need to focus there? Is Demko a bad goalie now from whom we should move on? It does seem clear that defense is the issue, but even there, that can be the fault of forwards, defensemen, or goaltending or any combination of those three.

 

It's hard for me to accept the fact that our core isn't good, but at some point, I can't argue with the results--unless, again, coaching is causing the team to underperform, though given two consecutive coaches with the same results, it might point more likely to the players.

I tend to look at what is happening when we lose. Yes Demko is not himself this year and last year it was Petey and Bo who struggled for awhile. 

When we lose, our opponents have their way with us and we seem out of sync, out of position and unable to do the simple things such as out fight our opponent for the puck or complete a check. We have been caught running around in our own end for many seasons now. 

When we look at our roster, we are filled with offensive minded players who are not very strong on defense. This goes for our forwards and our Dmen. When we look at our special teams the same thing, good on the PP and not so well on the PK. 

Our PK is comprised of many of our offensive forwards. 

I see mental toughness issues and too many offensive minded players on this team. 

Either the players we have become more mentally strong and better have defensive awareness, or we move on from them and find players who are willing to pay the price to win.

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

13 minutes ago, aGENT said:

No worries mate. I agree, this is probably the most interesting "Canuck-related" thing I've read this year :lol:

 

Excuse my naivety, but I have no idea how this relates to African American slaves though...?

Not naive at all, this one is very insidious and likely, outside of pockets of effected communities, wouldn't be known to most.

 

It was a quote used by (didn't remember his name, had to look it up again) Thomas Carlyle in the 1850s when slavery discussions were at a peak since it would end later in the mid 1860s. It was the first record of the phrase being translated from German to English, and Carlyle was using it in a pro-slavery essay. 

 

AGAIN, this is not a shaming or telling you to not use it, AT ALL. I just find language powerful and like to know the origins of the phrases we use. This phrase has not effected me in anyway, so I don't have an opinion on it one way or the other.

 

Edited by Shayster007
  • Tanks a lot 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Issue with generational players like Bedard is that the argument will be any team that has success with them in the line up will be seen as a "crutch" and not a legitimate contender.

 

There is a lot to be said about someone using a cheat code in a video game or a hand down of a trust fund to do well and that can be said of generational picks. As a fan I want the Canucks to win a cup without a single #1 first over all pick, it be too easy to contest any team that wins with a #1 pick because it's a given you'll win the cup eventually (Crosby, Ovi) etc.

 

I rather see a well constructed team rather than a super star young pick that others can tare down.

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

1 hour ago, Shayster007 said:

Not naive at all, this one is very insidious and likely, outside of pockets of effected communities, wouldn't be known to most.

 

It was a quote used by (didn't remember his name, had to look it up again) Thomas Carlyle in the 1850s when slavery discussions were at a peak since it would end later in the mid 1860s. It was the first record of the phrase being translated from German to English, and Carlyle was using it in a pro-slavery essay. 

 

AGAIN, this is not a shaming or telling you to not use it, AT ALL. I just find language powerful and like to know the origins of the phrases we use. This phrase has not effected me in anyway, so I don't have an opinion on it one way or the other.

 

Interesting. So it was referenced in something deplorable and racist, but it's not actually racist itself. 

 

I mean if we were never allowed to utter words a racist happened to use at some point, none of us would be able to say much of anything any more :lol:

 

Actually the irony of this situation is perfectly fitting! We have a baby (the phrase) and we have bathwater (a racist essay). Hilarious!

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

5 minutes ago, Fred65 said:

What I find amusing is Chicago have pretty well oppenly suggested they're going to tank and rebuild the season  are O/A 8 spots above Vcr who have stated their intendt is to make the play-off  :lol:

I find it amusing that people think a player or coach can, or will even try, to tank the season while it’s happening.

 

 Tanking is on the management with moves towards that first at the trade deadline then the following summer. to set up the tank for the new season. 
that’s the ideal time. A GM could still try and begin the process in mid season but it would be more difficult for other teams to take on the size of contracts you are offering with their own rosters and cap set.

 But either way it’s up to JR and owners to tank, it has nothing to do with the players. And if management had wanted that for this season, they kinda missed the boat

 

 Players and coaches will never purposely tank. No matter how much a message board pleads then to. Players and coaches are playing for the next contract. As well most athletes that make it to this level are highly competitive and want to win every game.

 

 Why would a player purposely play like crap only to be sent to the minors or have his next contract reduced all so the team who used to value him gets to pick a couple of spots higher at the draft? Maybe even get a young stud that will make his own job redundant?

 Not gonna happen

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

18 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Interesting. So it was referenced in something deplorable and racist, but it's not actually racist itself. 

 

I mean if we were never allowed to utter words a racist happened to use at some point, none of us would be able to say much of anything any more :lol:

 

Actually the irony of this situation is perfectly fitting! We have a baby (the phrase) and we have bathwater (a racist essay). Hilarious!

Right! The phrase itself as innocent it's it's usage that could be considered questionable by some. We actually have a ton of words and phrases that follow that exact situation. Languages is fascinating with how it evovles. I started taking interest in it as a teenager after I got my diagnosis. It was my way of leaning into a flaw.

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

This is the only shot at a retool or reload. If we pick Top 3 and can move players to get another Top 15, we may be able to salvage the prime years of Petey, Demko, Hughes, and make good on Horvat. If JR/PA want to make good on competing in 2-3 years, this is the fastest way imo, and sets us for the future without spending another 8 years losing. 

 

If we do land #1, that can be a reload or the start of a rebuild. Either way ... this is the year to bottom out to get the talent we need. 

 

And really, it should also be a year JR and PA pull off bold aggressive Burke-esque moves at the draft. 

  • Cheers 1
  • Huggy Bear 1
  • There it is 1
  • Tanks a lot 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CanuckRookieFan said:

Issue with generational players like Bedard is that the argument will be any team that has success with them in the line up will be seen as a "crutch" and not a legitimate contender.

 

There is a lot to be said about someone using a cheat code in a video game or a hand down of a trust fund to do well and that can be said of generational picks. As a fan I want the Canucks to win a cup without a single #1 first over all pick, it be too easy to contest any team that wins with a #1 pick because it's a given you'll win the cup eventually (Crosby, Ovi) etc.

 

I rather see a well constructed team rather than a super star young pick that others can tare down.

You must truly be a rookie fan.  I would happily like to see the Canucks crutch their way to their first ever Stanley Cup win.

  • Haha 2
  • There it is 1
  • 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...